From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 00:02:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA31851; Wed, 30 Sep 1998 23:59:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 23:59:33 -0700 Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 09:00:56 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"IclQ9.0.Rn7.KXo4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22892 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 30 Sep 1998, Scott Little wrote: > At 10:01 9/30/98 +0200, britz wrote: > > >Still playing Devil's advocate here: Dick, your main thrust seems to > >be that you want the experimenters, who claim interesting results, to > >also devise theories to explain them, before you'll accept the > >results. I think this is a bit unfair. > > I agree with Dieter here...but I also bet that Dick is not really demanding > that valid theories accompany anomalous observations. > > The real problem is that cold fusion observations are not reproducible and > hence cannot be studied. McKubre, for example, has tried valiantly to [...] My post might have been slightly frustrating to you permanent residents. I just signed on again after a long break, and so I don't know all that has been thrashed out here. Sorry. I agree, of course, that a random sequence of rare successes does not constitute reproducibility, and does not prove an effect. Good luck to Ed. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 00:05:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA00338; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 00:02:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 00:02:22 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 23:08:43 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? Resent-Message-ID: <"IdsDj.0.35.zZo4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22893 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:05 PM 9/30/98, David Dennard wrote: [snip] >> > (d) Actively performing experiments or doing quantitaive theory >> > in an energy related field. >> >> Yes, little gets done if no fingers are lifted. > > > >But Einstein said a thought is worth more than an invention That doesn't sound accurate. Do you have a source on that? >and look at Hawkings >for goodness sakes. Theoretical physics is very hard work, and very quntitative. Just because Hawkings wrote some pop-science books does not mean he didn't do the hard stuff. Edison said invention is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration. It appears to me that Edison very generously rounded up. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 00:16:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA03206; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 00:15:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 00:15:52 -0700 Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 09:16:51 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: CF debate 9.30.98 In-Reply-To: <3612FD76.34E5 earthlink.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"t38sN1.0.xn.cmo4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22894 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 30 Sep 1998, Rich Murray wrote: (actually, he was only quoting others, like Ed Storms [...] > I agree, the deuterium nucleus is, for all practical purposes, identical > in D2, D+ or dissolved in Pd. However, the environment surrounding the > nucleus is much different. The question is: Can this environment > influence the rate at which a fusion reaction can occur? Of course, if This triggers my memory of a few Russian papers, that invoke the tails of energy distributions in the PdD lattice. I think the idea is that some centres of high energy jostle deuterons together sufficiently often, that they fuse at a measurable rate. It is true that this lattice is not a static structure, so average d-d distances don't tell the whole story. I have no idea how reasonable this idea is. As well, it points at conventional hot fusion, which would imply all the emissions you get from that. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 02:29:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA23636; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 02:28:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 02:28:34 -0700 Message-ID: <078301bded1d$a8225a20$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: "David Dennard" , Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 05:21:27 -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: <"q1QWR3.0.En5.2jq4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22895 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >My college experience, in fact all my life experience in my younger years was an >attempt to hide something. I joined the Army, I skipped classes in college, got >into the independent study program, to try and hide my disability. I was not >going to let it stop me. I am extreamly narcoleptic. Don't they have medication for that? Didn't einstein suffer from sleeping abnormally long? I feel asleep cleaning peoples teeth all the >time. Funny thing they were always already asleep, so we would just sit there >motionless. Talk about Still Life With Woodpecker. Yes, I'm redheaded. HAHA! >So I probably went to college longer that some of you with PhD's and I am a >veteran to boot. How I hated those boots. HEHE! >Even wider than Edward Maesen's graphic. I kept saying wider Edward wider. >Guess it comes from being a hygienist. HOHO! Stop it, you are killing me! >longer. Now I sleep all I want. Somethimes 15 to 20 hours a day. 20 hours a day! Have you tried looking at some of those machines that cause sleep in people, delta machines, perhaps if you ran them in reverse you could stay awake longer. Design a moblie one that you can wear during the day. I wonder what narcolepsy patients have done in history, perhaps there is a pattern? I can do >anything I want, totally lucid. That is an amazing power, you can tap that other 95% the rest of us cannot get to consciously and apply that brainpower to physics problems. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 03:11:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA29064; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 03:08:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 03:08:21 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981001100246.2e07acc4 aapi.co.uk> X-Sender: jcollins aapi.co.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Collins Subject: Typo errors OFF_TOPIC Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:12:01 +0100 Resent-Message-ID: <"cqb-9.0.167.KIr4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22896 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I know this isn't a legitimate subject for Vortex but I've just seen some wonderful typos here, and I blundered if anyone evarr reads wot thay have ritten b4 sending utt. Cheeeeers John Author of 'Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?' - for more information and details on ordering, visit my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 03:23:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA02863; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 03:22:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 03:22:41 -0700 Message-ID: <009701bded25$7560e860$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Over-Unity Bacon? Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 04:21:52 -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: <"Sd0Cf.0.di.nVr4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22897 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Note that Bacon microwaved at 2.45 Gigahertz gets hotter than a pistol. A Carboxylic Acid: R(CXY)n-COOH, where R,X, and Y can be Hydrogen, saturated or unsaturated groups etc.,n may be 0 to over 100, ie., Pigfat. :-) These are highly polar molecules as can be observed by noting that Hogs tend to align with the Earth's magnetic field and avoid power lines. I think this where the expression "Polling Hogs" comes from, but I'm not sure. Enjoy your breakfast. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 05:31:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA31550; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 05:28:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 05:28:12 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001082919.0071b108 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 08:29:19 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ej5QX1.0.si7.RLt4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22899 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> At 10:01 9/30/98 +0200, britz wrote: >> >> >Still playing Devil's advocate here: Dick, your main thrust seems to >> >be that you want the experimenters, who claim interesting results, to >> >also devise theories to explain them, before you'll accept the >> >results. I think this is a bit unfair. >> >> I agree with Dieter here...but I also bet that Dick is not really demanding >> that valid theories accompany anomalous observations. >> >> The real problem is that cold fusion observations are not reproducible and >> hence cannot be studied. McKubre, for example, has tried valiantly to >[...] > >My post might have been slightly frustrating to you permanent residents. >I just signed on again after a long break, and so I don't know all that >has been thrashed out here. Sorry. I agree, of course, that a random >sequence of rare successes does not constitute reproducibility, and does >not prove an effect. Good luck to Ed. > >-- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db A point contact like a galena crystal and a lead (producing a primitive diode) is well known to be "a random sequence of rare successes" and it led to semiconductor electronics. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 05:31:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA31467; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 05:27:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 05:27:56 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 08:28:58 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: <199810010402.VAA13327 smtp2.asu.edu> References: <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"_Nu223.0.Sh7.BLt4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22898 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:03 PM 9/30/98 -0700, Lynn wrote: >>>Little: ... problem is that cold fusion observations are not reproducible >>> and hence cannot be studied. >> >> They are increasingly reproducible. Scott apparently doesnt >> even want to LOOK if the excess heat is less than a kilowatt. ;-) >> > >If my memory serves me well, I believe that I recall that Scott has a >standing offer to test a working CF cell at no charge. Nobody has provided >one for him to test. Do you have a working CF cell? Good point Lynn. Scott has a apparently flawed calorimeter, and questionable technique which he - so far - has not been interested in fixing. We use controls including thermal reconstruction, and chemical controls which he so far does not use. We measure noise, control ambient interference and suggest he does the same. We also control zero input offset and he does not in some of his expts. We have offered these suggestions to Scott including WHERE TO LOOK, and have published some of this in ICCF-7 and elsewhere. If Scott WANTED to see excess heat he would correct his misstakes and go back to his KS beads at the correct power levels. If he is serious he will. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 06:11:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA14591; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 06:10:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 06:10:38 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001081411.00de08b4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 08:14:11 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> References: <199810010402.VAA13327 smtp2.asu.edu> <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"jXmJb2.0.vZ3.Dzt4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22900 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:28 10/1/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >At 09:03 PM 9/30/98 -0700, Lynn wrote: >>Do you have a working CF cell? > Good point Lynn. > Scott has a apparently flawed.... Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that Mitchell ALWAYS responds to questions about his own CF cells by attacking the work of others? >calorimeter, and questionable technique... I wonder if the fact that my measured Pout signal never ventures significantly above (or below) the Pin signal is the "flaw" that Mitchell is talking about? Questionable technique? Maybe he objects to the fact that my calorimeter collects and accurately measures virtually all of the heat released by the experiment leaving no room for creative empirical corrections. 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 Oct 1 06:24:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA19605; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 06:23:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 06:23:19 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001082651.00de61e0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 08:26:51 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: <199809301749_MC2-5B28-D755 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NP5iw3.0.Eo4.69u4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22901 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 17:46 9/30/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Materials are the key to cold fusion. >Look at the dramatic distribution of results reported by Miles: >Source Success Ratio (excess heat / total tests) >NRL Pd-B alloy 7/8 >Johnson-Matthey (J-M) Pd 13/24 >J-M from Fleischmann 4/4 Impressive LOOKING stats, Jed, but something is still wrong with this picture. Miles is apparently just another isolated guy who got a lot of apparently positive results. If NRL Pd-B alloy really works that well, why don't we all have CF demo kits based upon it now? Same story as Fleischman's J-M Pd, "They can't make the good stuff anymore."? 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 Oct 1 06:39:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA25976; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 06:37:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 06:37:09 -0700 Message-Id: <199810011337.JAA16574 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 09:30:43 -0400 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: <"Z2dU-.0.gL6.4Mu4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22902 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > At 12:54 AM 9/30/98 -0400, "Bill Wallace" wrote: > >>logic is faulty if you think anyone is sitting around here waiting for an > >idea. > >>No matter how significant you think yours is, we already have our own > >>favorites. > >I would be interested in what a poll of the vortex list would show as the > >top 5 ideas or theories members are interested in or working on? > > At Infinite Energy Magazine's Laboratory, New Energy Research Laboratory, we are in the position of investigating the claims of excess energy which seem most credible and providing the service of such information to our subscribers. At present, we are continuing work on the Kinetic Furnace, with help from inventor, Ralph Pope. We are also continuing work on the Mizuno-Ohmori "boiled lightening" light water cell, the DW Research underwater arc reactor, Aquafuel calorimetry, and the Griggs Hydrosonic Pump. There are numerous other projects is various stages of thought. Ed Wall NERL From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 07:13:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA10052; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 07:12:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 07:12:41 -0700 Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:10:10 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810011012_MC2-5B45-55B2 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"kXVLJ.0.tS2.Ntu4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22903 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Rich Murray writes: Thanks, Jed for your information about the statistics of Pd cathode material and excess heat results. May I repost this to my CF discussion list and SPF (where Britz can read it)? Thanks for asking! I prefer to steer clear of spf, but since you asked, go ahead and post if you want. You can add this message as a postscript. Dieter Britz writes: I agree, of course, that a random sequence of rare successes does not constitute reproducibility, and does not prove an effect. Good luck to Ed. I would agree too if this was random. There is nothing random about the heat events in cold fusion. As I said, they are correlated with a few well-defined control parameters. Instrument artifacts would not be so closely correlated with cathode material conditions by coincidence, at random, in the lifetime of the universe. Scott Little mentioned 23 years. 23 billion years would not be long enough. While I'm on the subject, here is something else I meant to say. Scott wrote: That's 23 YEARS worth of experiments running 24 hours a day!!! Most of those years do not count, because most of the time McKubre's instruments show the cathode is not sufficiently loaded. Palladium does not produce excess heat unless it is highly loaded. If the excess heat appeared at random times over those 23 years, with no correlation to loading, Scott would have a valid point. Suppose you do an ion beam cold fusion experiment at Osaka U. You leave the accelerator power supplies turned on continuously for two weeks, but you only operate the beam for a half hour, so you only see nuclear effects for an hour during and after the run. The other 10,079 hours do not count. You do not expect any results the rest of the time. You know that nothing is happening, and nothing can happen. Most of the time McKubre knows the cathode cannot produce heat, and indeed he never sees heat. (In real life I doubt the people at Osaka U. leave those accelerator power supplies charged up. The power supplies are bigger than my house. I suppose it would cost a lot of money to leave them humming.) Lynn Kurtz addressed a message from Mitch Swartz: If my memory serves me well, I believe that I recall that Scott has a standing offer to test a working CF cell at no charge. Nobody has provided one for him to test. Do you have a working CF cell? I know little about Swartz's cells, and nothing about the sonofusion techniques. I do not know whether Swartz could supply a cell to Scott Little, or whether it would work with Little's calorimeter. It might be the wrong size or power level. It might be too difficult for Little to operate. I cannot comment on Swartz's devices, but I know a great deal about the conventional bulk palladium and thin film palladium cells used by people like Storms, Mizuno and McKubre. I can state categorically that it would impossible to "provide" one of these cells to Scott Little for testing. The chance of success would be insignificant. Storms or Mizuno will not devote months of hard work to make a device for someone who will almost certainly botch the experiment and destroy the material. Scott Little knows a lot about Storms because he visited him, observed the experiments, and learned some of the techniques firsthand. As I recall he told me it looked too difficult for him. It's too difficult for me! Little has superb calorimeters, but he has no skill or training in the electrochemical techniques. He has never tried to measure loading, OCV, expansion or the other critical parameters. The calorimeter is only one of the tools needed to perform this experiment; calorimetry is only one of the skills you must master. Scott Little has a good scalpel but that does not make him a surgeon. This is no mere analogy; Mizuno wears surgical gloves and a mask or he uses a glove box when the cathode is exposed to air. Bockris told me that the cleaning and contamination monitoring techniques they use are so sensitive that in the old days when people smoked, a person at one end of the lab would exhale cigarette smoke and within seconds the electrochemical experiment at the other end would register the contamination. The problem here is the state of the art of CF cells. Making one cathode requires sorting, sifting and testing samples, which takes months. The electrochemical preparations, which must be done by hand, are extremely tedious time-consuming. It took Mizuno eight months to prepare *one* cell. If he had given the cell to Scott Little, Scott might have destroyed 8 months of labor in 20 minutes. (I definitely would have destroyed it.) Suppose we had millions of dollars to automate the procedures on a production line, and improve the materials. Storms or Mizuno could churn out a cell every week, or every day. They could seal it up and hand it to someone like Scott, and he could practice on it. If he screwed up . . . no harm done. The only way Scott can do the experiment today is to master the techniques and spend six months or maybe two years building his first cell. There is no expert assistance available. A CF cell is a precision-made electrochemical device, similar to a Nicad battery. It is somewhat like a computer chip or a hard disk, because it is fragile and allergic to dirt and abuse. CF workers do not have the budget to buy even rudimentary machinery to automate their work. Ed Storms often says he works with a shovel when he needs a bulldozer. Prof. Smullin told me about a similar situation during WWII at the MIT radiation lab. They assembled prototype radar tubes by hand. This took days and days, and if a cathode was accidentally exposed to air for a few minutes, it would start to change color as it oxidized, and it would be ruined. It was a painstaking process. After they debugged the tube, they would hand over the blueprints and prototypes to the factory. The production line would ramp up and churn out thousands of tubes with ease. By the way, just because CF cells are allergic to dirt and abuse, that does not preclude their use as energy sources. Not at all! It means they must be sealed permanently at the factory, like batteries, hard disks, fission reactor cores, the radar vacuum tubes of yesteryear, and other high-tech devices. The handmade MIT prototype radar tubes were fragile, but the tubes churned out by the Raytheon factories were installed on airplanes and warships and used in front-line battle conditions, which is the most abusive environment imaginable. To get a sense of how it worked, read Arthur Clarke's book "Glidepath," which is a fictionalized account of how one MIT prototype was tested. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 07:14:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA10185; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 07:13:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 07:13:06 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001101407.0070eacc world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:14:07 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981001081411.00de08b4 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> <199810010402.VAA13327 smtp2.asu.edu> <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"R006P.0.-U2.ntu4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22904 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:14 AM 10/1/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that Mitchell ALWAYS responds to >questions about his own CF cells by attacking the work of others? Forgive me, Scott. But some of our data is also up on the web (http://world.std.com/jet.html and a LOT of it has been published, including through peer review. So your ad hominem is false -- but typical since you don't address the issues about your calorimeter (again). ;-)X Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 07:18:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA13264; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 07:16:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 07:16:28 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001101727.00711800 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:17:27 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2Df9v3.0.8F3.xwu4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22905 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: (resent because of defective format in the prev post, please excuse) At 08:14 AM 10/1/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that Mitchell ALWAYS responds to >questions about his own CF cells by attacking the work of others? Forgive me, Scott. But some of our data is also up on the web (http://world.std.com/jet.html and a LOT of it has been published, including through peer review. So your ad hominem is false -- but typical since you don't address the issues about your calorimeter (again). ;-)X Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 07:26:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA14634; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 07:19:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 07:19:31 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001102034.007145f4 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:20:34 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms - url corrected Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"_9YWJ3.0.Za3.ozu4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22906 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mea culpa. Sorry about the wrong url. The url is http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 08:46:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14596; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 08:44:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 08:44:46 -0700 Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:42:44 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810011145_MC2-5B33-BBC0 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"3DFeU1.0.-Z3.kDw4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22907 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little attended ICCF conferences, but he is surprisingly ignorant about basic electrochem and the biographies of the leading workers. He writes: Impressive LOOKING stats, Jed, but something is still wrong with this picture. Statistics are either impressive or they are not. They cannot appear impressive without actually being impressive, unless they misrepresent reality, that it, unless Miles is not reporting the truth. Examine the data and show us why his positive experiments are actually negative. Miles is apparently just another isolated guy who got a lot of apparently positive results. He is not "just another isolated guy." He is a professor of electrochemistry, and a Fellow of the Naval Air Warfare Center, China Lake, which is one of finest and best equipped laboratories on earth. That makes Miles one of the top fifty electrochemists on earth. That short table of statistics summarizes nine years of work by Miles and his coworkers and collaborators at China Lake, NRL, U. Texas and elsewhere. They employed the best helium detection instruments on earth at Rockwell and other labs. They invented new helium collection flasks and techniques, and they invented and applied for a patent for improved calorimetry. They performed exhaustive single-blind tests with and did a sophisticated statistical analysis to confirm the "apparently positive results." In other words, what you see in that table cost a terrific amount of money and it could only be reproduced by a handful of experts, taking perhaps 20 man years. This is a major research project. This is not one isolated guy who "apparently" got results, it is a distinguished group of America's best scientists who repeatedly confirmed results for each sample using standard textbook techniques (blind tests and so on) at Rockwell and three other labs. They published those results in the leading peer-reviewed chemical and electrochemical journals, in spite of rabid opposition from the establishment. Since you attended the lectures and read the papers, Scott, you know these details as well as I do. I cannot understand why you characterize a major, multi-year, peer-reviewed research project as "another isolated guy." That's absurd. If NRL Pd-B alloy really works that well, why don't we all have CF demo kits based upon it now? That's a dumb question. Think about those lectures and papers. First of all, there is no more NRL Pd-B, and there will be no more because the Navy ordered Miles and his coworkers to stop all cold experiments. Second, let's figure the cost of one cathode in one cell, taking into account the salaries and the test equipment needed to run the experiments. You want a kit? Okay, we'll sell you a China Lake Kit. It comes with a team of world-class experts and a million dollars mass spectrometer, and you have to work on it for six months before you get result #1, and nobody on earth but those experts is capable of operating it. You cannot use the NRL Pd-B alloy without the experts and the equipment. Its like buying a Pentium chip with no computer. I repeat: none of this is news to you, Scott, unless you slept through ICCF. You have seen how the experiments are run and why it took nine years for Miles to do 24 positive runs. You are not one of these ignorant people who thinks that CF is supposed to be "easy." (I wish they would go after the hot fusion program instead, and demand a tokamak reactor kit for home use.) You are, I hope, aware of the scale of R&D that will be required to automate cathode selection and processing. So you will agree that a $10 million down payment for the kit is reasonable. Will that be check or credit card? Same story as Fleischman's J-M Pd, "They can't make the good stuff anymore."? They do not, in fact, make the Type A palladium any more, they will not sell you any, and they will not sell any to McKubre or the Japanese. This is the result of a horrendous political turf war spread over many years. I do not know the gory details but apparently there is enough blame for all parties. This is about politics, money and patents, not science. I have been trying to break this logjam myself, without success. MITI has infinitely more influence with J-M than I do. They helped build the logjam, so you can imagine what I am up against. It is a bit like showing up unannounced in Moscow as a private citizen, and telling them you want to straighten out the Russian banking laws. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 09:21:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28915; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 09:19:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 09:19:33 -0700 Message-ID: <36139EDF.4E8E earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:25:19 -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: Sarfatti: QM negative temperatures 9.30.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xEwL33.0.b37.Jkw4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22908 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: [q-mind] Reply to Wynar on negative temperatures -- Jack Sarfatti: Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 16:04:00 +0000 From: Saul-Paul Sirag From: Jack Sarfatti Subject: Sarfatti to Roahn Wynar re. George Ryazanov on negative temperatures (q-mind: 29 Sep 1998) [Wynar] Ryazanov mentions some "contrary" pairs of mathematical and physical concepts that will become an important part of his theory: [Ryazanov] Retarded and advanced particles. Causal and anticausal waves and particles. Two signs of temperature. Lorentz and anti-Lorentz transformations. Expanding and contracting Universe. Dissipating and pumped Universe. Dynamics and chaos. [Wynar] I am quite concerned about his notion of two signs of temperature and his balancing of Dynamics with Chaos. Having not been made available his entire theory, I am already very worried that he does not fully understand the thermodyamic construction of the notion of temperature, which is never negative. I suppose he can give away the second law, under certain circumstances, but a temperature unbounded below would be new and interesting physics indeed! When he posts his theory to the list I hope he supplies LOTs and LOTS and LOTS of good reason to abandon the second law of thermodynamics. [Jack Sarfatti] Are you in the physics department at the University of Texas? Probably not. In fact "negative temperature" has a standard meaning in quantum statistical mechanics. It is an effect of the quantization of energy. An effective negative temperature corresponds to population inversion (as in masers and lasers) with more particles in a higher energy level than in a lower one. You can see this from the Boltzmann factor e^-E/kT. Charlie Kittel's little book on solid state physics has a good chapter on this. There is also a little Dover book Temperatures High and Low by a famous thermodynamicist that actually shows how a Carnot heat engine operates between two negative temperatures. Strangely enough, he did not consider a reversible Carnot engine between a negative and a positive absolute temperature. All negative temperatures are hotter than any positive temperature. -.000000000000000000.....0000001 degree Kelvin is hotter than infinite positive temperature. Infinite positive temperature means equal populations in a set of two-level systems. Clearly microtubules can have negative temperature in the dimer configurations. The Level 1 second law of thermodynamics here is Work/Hot Heat Flow = 1 - T(cold)/T(hot) This give 100 % efficiency between any positive temperature and absolute zero. The third law of thermodynamics tells us we can never achieve absolute zero but we do get real close these days. Now this formula also works at Level 2 where T(cold)/T(hot) < 0. Therefore, we have a "cold fusion" type of "over unity" quantum thermodynamic efficiency. I published this in Sept 1991 Physics Essays. I also mentioned it at several physics meetings. I was told a few years ago that some group at Oak Ridge was testing my idea on this. I do not know what they came up with. So for a reversible Carnot engine operating between a hot negative Level 2 quantum temperature and a cold positive Level 1 temperature we get Work out/Hot heat flow in = 1 + |T(cold)/T(hot)| > 1 That is, random heat energy flows from both the hot and the cold reservoirs and is converted to ordered energy. This is not a contradiction of the Level 1 second law of thermodynamics, but is a necessary counter-intuitive surprising result of it when combined with the Level 2 quantum principle. Oh strange Alchemy that has such wonders in it. Now this effect that I discovered has apparently been ignored so far unless it is being applied in secret at Oak Ridge? Japan? Nick Herbert objected to it, but I never understood the logic of his objection. Apparently some people at Oak Ridge thought otherwise. http://www.hia.com/pcr From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 10:19:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA14643; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:14:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:14:25 -0700 Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:15:44 -0700 (MST) From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-reply-to: <3.0.1.32.19981001101727.00711800 world.std.com> X-Sender: kurtz general5.asu.edu To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"sEa-G2.0.ea3.mXx4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22909 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 1 Oct 1998, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > At 08:14 AM 10/1/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > > >Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that Mitchell ALWAYS responds to > >questions about his own CF cells by attacking the work of others? > > > So your ad hominem is false -- but typical since > you don't address the issues about your calorimeter (again). ;-)X > > Mitchell Swartz > And you didn't answer my question: Do you have a working CF cell? --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 10:40:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA23446; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:37:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:37:32 -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: <3613BC13.4029AEB1 css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 12:29:55 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sk29f2.0.pj5.Rtx4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22910 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David Dennard wrote: > > Bill writes, > > Some choices so far: > > Aether concentration and capture > > Cold Fusion > > Whirl Power > > Whirlpower makes the cut? I was about to sign off. David- No one ever said it didn't. It's just that talking about it and doing something about it are two different things. IMO, the above three are very closely related, almost identical. A rose by any other name...... My particular terminology "du jour" for it is macro-scale quantum resonance structures through frequency coupling. Same difference, just puts my efforts more inline with other mainstream research and mathamatical constructs out there already. No sense reinventing the wheel..... Frequency coupling of resonant systems is not a revolutionary concept by any means, but accomplishing it with base natural harmonic frequencies on a macro-scale is what I suspect most reported o/u devices are doing. The starting point for my hypothesis and subsequent experiments is rotational systems and vortex contructs. I think they are the fundamental mechanism behind all of them. I have plenty of examples to illustrate my arguments, but they are useless unless I can proove the correlation. Whirlpower, IMO is just another name for the same thing in a long line of other names. Life is full of set backs and delays. Patience, your dream will be realized eventually. The only thing I can't promise is 'when'....... 8^) -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Who watches the watchmen?" - The Comedian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 10:47:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA27287; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:43:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:43:41 -0700 Message-ID: <00e901bded63$0ca7a320$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Over-Unity Bacon Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:43:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"u4K7J.0.Eg6.Czx4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22911 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To; Vortex The Triglycerides in fats (lard) and oils (canola): H2COC(O)-C16H33 | HCOC(O)-C12H25 | H2COC(O)-C16H33 are loaded with Hydrogen. Could it be that the 2.45 Gigahertz microwave frequency is doing ZPE pumping in this? ZPE, or in the case of Lard Zee-Pigee? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 10:49:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA28744; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:46:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:46:47 -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: <3613BFB9.5F4AEFE css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 12:45:29 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: CF Driven Both Electrolytically and by Sound References: <3.0.1.32.19980930221434.00706a48 world.std.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"WqpM2.0.w07.60y4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22912 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > At JET Energy Technology we are examining cold fusion > systems driven both electrolytically and by sound Are you loading the cathodes with sonics? or are you activating in the latice with sonics? both? neither? It's been a while since this approach was discussed. Have you had any possitive results that you can share? -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Who watches the watchmen?" - The Comedian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 11:45:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA20290; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:40:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:40:56 -0700 Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 14:38:01 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Where old cathodes go to die Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810011441_MC2-5B4E-901C compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"zipIW3.0.ty4.toy4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22913 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex A question may have occurred to readers, as it did to me years ago. Why aren't cathodes reused? In other words, since it is a struggle to prepare a good CF cathode, why did Miles use 94 cathodes and 28 good ones, instead of using 1 good one repeatedly? Why doesn't Ed Storms find a good cathode and send it to Scott Little. Even if Little accidentally roaches it, Storms could take it back and repair it using methods he describes in the literature. I asked Miles, Storms et al. about this ("Et al." is my buddy Al, or Etowa Albert as his friends in Etowa Georgia call him. People wonder who wrote all those papers. It's Al and his songwriter friend Anon B. Wigglesworth.) They give two reasons: 1. Even good cathodes degrade slowly. They gradually develop cracks, and they get covered with gunk so you have to scrape away surface layers. This would be a problem in a commercial device, but I think it could be handled. Any machine degrades. 2. Most cathodes are destroyed in post-experiment analysis. They are sectioned and vaporized and exposed to various destructive analyses. I think the tests to find layers of transmuted elements require that the cathode be sputtered away one layer at a time. In an earlier message I wrote: "McKubre himself did not follow Fleischmann's advice." That's a little unfair. I should say he did not *always* follow advice regarding operating temperature, calorimeter design, and the cell wall material. McKubre himself described the reasons. Fleischmann told me he thinks glass cell walls are better. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 11:51:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA24525; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:46:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:46:21 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:52:40 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Over-Unity Pigs and Magnetars Cc: "George" Resent-Message-ID: <"f9nOe3.0.1_5.yty4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22914 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:21 AM 10/1/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: [snip] > Hogs tend to align with the Earth's magnetic field and avoid power >lines. I think this where the expression "Polling Hogs" comes from, but I'm >not sure. Maybe pigs pointed themselves at constellation Aquila on August 27, 1998? From: NASANews hq.nasa.gov Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 1998 2:10 PM To: undisclosed-recipients:; Subject: TREMENDOUS GAMMA-RAY FLARE BLASTS EARTH Donald Savage Headquarters, Washington, DC Sept. 29, 1998 (Phone: 202/358-1547) Tim Tyson Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL (Phone: 256/544-0994) RELEASE: 98-172 TREMENDOUS GAMMA-RAY FLARE BLASTS EARTH An intense wave of gamma rays, emanating from a catastrophic magnetic flare on a mysterious star 20,000 light years away, struck the Earth's atmosphere on August 27, 1998, providing important clues about some of the most unusual stars in the Universe. Scientists said the gamma radiation posed no health risk to humans. The wave hit the night side of the Earth and ionized (or knocked electrons out of) the atoms in the upper atmosphere to a level usually seen only during daytime. This astonishing blast of ionization was detected by Prof. Umran Inan of Stanford University. "It is extremely rare for an event occurring outside the solar system to have any measurable effect on the Earth," Inan said. It was so powerful that it blasted sensitive detectors to maximum or off-scale on at least seven scientific spacecraft in Earth orbit and around the solar system. The wave of radiation emanated from a newly discovered type of star called a magnetar. Magnetars are dense balls of super- heavy matter, no larger than a city but weighing more than the Sun. They have the greatest magnetic field known in the Universe, so intense that it powers a steady glow of X-rays from the star's surface, often punctuated by brief, intense gamma-ray flashes, and occasionally by cataclysmic flares like the one observed on August 27. Astronomers think that all these effects are caused by an out-of-control magnetic field -- a field capable of heating, mixing, and sometimes cracking the star's rigid surface to bits. In June a team of scientists led by Dr. Chryssa Kouveliotou of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, AL, used NASA's Compton Gamma Ray Observatory to detect a series of about 50 flashes from the star, a type called a Soft Gamma Repeater (SGR), known as "SGR1900+14" in the constellation Aquila. During the flashing episode, Kouveliotou's team, in collaboration with Dr. Tod Strohmayer and his colleagues at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, pointed sensitive X-ray detectors aboard NASA's Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer satellite toward the star. They found faint X-rays coming from the star, which pulsed regularly in intensity every 5.16 seconds. These 5.16-second pulses already had been detected in April, when Dr. Kevin Hurley, University of California, Berkeley, aimed the Japanese/NASA Advanced Satellite for Cosmology and Astrophysics (ASCA) at the star. Comparisons of the ASCA and RXTE data showed that the X-ray pulses were gradually slowing down. The finding implies that the Soft Gamma Repeater has a magnetic field about 800 trillion times stronger than Earth's magnetic field, and about 100 times stronger than any found anywhere in the Universe. Kouveliotou and her team had earlier found that another SGR was also a magnetar. This was exactly what Dr. Robert Duncan, University of Texas, Austin, and Dr. Christopher Thompson, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, predicted in 1992 when they originated the "magnetar" theory. Before the NASA team could announce these conclusions, SGR1900+14 emitted the tremendous flare of August 27, which was observed by almost every spacecraft with a high-energy radiation detector in space. "Magnetars seem to answer several mysteries about the structure and evolution of stars," said Kouveliotou. "We think magnetars spend their first 10,000 years as Soft Gamma Repeaters. As they weaken with age and slow their rotation, they become Anomalous X-ray Pulsars -- stars that do not have enough 'juice' to flash anymore, but which emit a steady flow of X-rays for perhaps another 30,000 years. After that, they fade to black and drift for eternity through the heavens. The absence of observable pulsars in some supernova remnants just means that the pulsar's lights have gone out sooner than we expected." A magnetar forms from the explosion, or supernova, of a very large, ordinary star. The star's heavy center collapses under its own gravity into a dense ball of super-compressed matter 12 miles across. This "neutron star" consists mostly of neutrons in a dense fluid, but the outer layers solidify into a rigid crust of atoms about 1 mile deep, with a surface of iron. Even with this solid crust, a magnetar is incredibly unstable. Almost unimaginable magnetic fields, about 800 trillion times that of Earth's, cause the crust to crack and ripple in powerful starquakes. The energy released in these explosive starquakes streams out into space as intense flashes of gamma- rays. In the August 27 flare, pure magnetic energy was also released, as the star's entire crust was broken to bits. "A magnet this strong could erase the magnetic strip on the credit cards in your wallet or pull the keys out of your pocket from a distance halfway to the Moon," said Duncan. - end - EDITOR'S NOTE: Additional information on magnetars or the Aug. 27 event is available on the internet at: http://www1.msfc.nasa.gov/NEWSROOM/ and http://www.magnetars.com/ * * * Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 12:19:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA05300; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 12:16:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 12:16:23 -0700 (PDT) From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Minn Kota and Newman Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 15:14:31 -0400 Message-ID: <01bded6f$b7a4de30$0c6cd626 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: <"-xZEc2.0.kI1.6Kz4s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22915 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I just noticed that onsale.com is auctioning 15 refrubished Minn Kota 65TA trolling units today. The add claims 36 lb. thurst and Cool- Power (TM). The current bid range is $61-$71. Since these units appear to be quite common, it looks like J.S.'s suggestion to buy a replacement motor from Walmart of the type Newman tested (58 or 46 lb. thurst) should be possible. Regards, George Holz - george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 12:42:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA14583; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 12:40:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 12:40:13 -0700 Message-ID: <19981001194129.4473.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 12:41:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Jerry Wayne Decker Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"VL2v8.0.jZ3.Sgz4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22916 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gnorts! I think Vortex Power is more appropriate than Whirl power, sounds like a carnival ride...... How about? 1) Aether/ZPE manipulation concentration, diffusion, redirection of ambient aether flows 2) Cold Fusion chemical or differential matter generated heat 3) Vortex Power energy derived from vortexial action 4) Radiant energy tapping ambient or incoming wave energy in the form of light, heat, radio, cosmic or other waves 5) Earth energy tapping into natural electrical energy from the earth or its atmosphere ---Bill Wallace wrote: > > Some choices so far: > > Aether concentration and capture > Cold Fusion > Whirl Power > > >I think possibly a more important issue is the definition of "serious." I > >think one or more of the following characteristics, and maybe others, would > >qualify an investigator as serious: > > I wonder where great inventions or science has come from in the past > milennia? > What is the ratio of established disciplines release of world changing ideas > or technology as compared to say the shadetree folks? > > > > (a) A degree in energy related fields, especially a PHD. > > Did the PHD's of the yesterday invent a flying plane? > > > (b) A primary source of income is in the field, > > e.g. edits an energy related publication, teaches, etc. > > I will agree with that one, wealth and success has seemed to be a great > motivator in the past. > > > (c) Publishes articles, esp. in peer reviewed literature. > > Not necessary. > > > (d) Actively performing experiments or doing quantitaive theory > > in an energy related field. > > Yes, little gets done if no fingers are lifted. > > > (e) Able and willing to discuss energy related theories > > and experiments in a formal quantitative or symbolic manner > > Another I agree with. > > >I think I am serious. However, I am a rank amateur, picking this stuff up > >as I go. I have no degree. I am grateful the more serious have tolerated > >me here these years. My math and physics skills a few years ago were about > >zip, but have improved with work. You learn by *doing.* > > Very true. > > >I think the primary focus here on vortex has been and should continue to be > >on experiments, or ideas or theories with a good prospect of producing near > >term experiments. > > I agree, it seems to me in the past when breakthroughs were made the > competitive spirit was the driving force, but if we are all looking at 50 > different things then it is hard. And specific goals are much easier to > reach or conclude unreachable, I believe the freenrg list has decided > efforts in the clem engine would be a good use of resources, why not > something similar here? > > >My interests have ranged from experimental investigations of > >electrochemical energy production to non-conservative non-Maxwellian > >electromagnetic force laws. Like many others on the list, I have many more > >experiments with negative results than I have posted here. > > > Where do you think the newest breakthroughs lie, or where we need them the > most? > > > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 13:09:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA26101; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:04:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:04:46 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001160549.013560f8 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 16:05:49 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19981001101727.00711800 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"zJjbh2.0.eN6.T1-4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22918 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:15 AM 10/1/98 -0700, Lynn wrote: >And you didn't answer my question: Do you have a working CF cell? It was already answered. We are working, measuring and examining cold fusion systems driven both electrolytically and by sound, and are developing methods to increase the accuracy of methods to monitor these complex systems. Sometimes scores of experiments are done just for calibration. It IS very hard work. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 13:10:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25982; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:04:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:04:32 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001160528.0073bd98 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 16:05:28 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: CF Driven Both Electrolytically and by Sound In-Reply-To: <3613BFB9.5F4AEFE css.mot.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19980930221434.00706a48 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"inQ74.0.7L6.E1-4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22917 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John E. Steck wrote: > At JET Energy Technology we are examining cold fusion > systems driven both electrolytically and by sound "Are you loading the cathodes with sonics? or are you activating in the latice with sonics? both? neither? It's been a while since this approach was discussed. Have you had any positive results that you can share?" Published a very short note on using sound to monitor loading in Group VIII cathodes using frequency analysis of the vibration. Swartz, M., 1996, "Possible Deuterium Production From Light water excess enthalpy experiments using Nickel Cathodes", Journal of New Energy, 3, 68-80 (1996). Some brief phonon theory in Swartz, M., "Phusons in Nuclear Reactions in Solids", Fusion Technology, 31, 228-236 (March 1997). Impact of irreversible lattice breakdown produced by sound (and other reactions) in Swartz. M., 1994 "Catastrophic Active Medium Hypothesis of Cold Fusion" Vol. 4. "Proceedings: "Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion" sponsored by EPRI and the Office of Naval Research, and Swartz, M., 1997, "Hydrogen Redistribution By Catastrophic Desorption In Select Transition Metals". M. Swartz, Journal of New Energy, 1, 4, 26-33 Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 13:21:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30132; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:17:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:17:40 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <3613E34B.DD20B9DA css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 15:17:15 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Databases for Atomic and Plasma Physics Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FwpNh2.0.jM7.aD-4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22919 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here is an interesting site: -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Who watches the watchmen?" - The Comedian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 13:48:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10404; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:46:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 13:46:25 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981001164739.00cae420 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 16:47:39 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Daytime vs. Nighttime Weight Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <199809291612.LAA00798 smtp.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"3FTLa3.0.OY2.Ve-4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22920 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I said: >> Huh? Think about tides. What happens is that the gravitational >>attraction of the sun is exactly counterbalanced by the centripetal At 11:11 AM 9/29/98 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > I would *not* characterize this pattern of differences as a >difference between daytime and nighttime weight. The force you are talking >about here is the force that gives rise to the tides. --Mitchell Jones}*** Certainly is, but most people are unaware that there are solar and lunar tides, and they interact. But both the solar and lunar tides have two peaks a day, so your weight at midnight is approximately the same as at noon. (When I say there are two peaks a day, I am speaking loosely. In reality, the orbital motion of the moon and the earth shift the times every day. That's why you need tide tables if you do any serious sailing.) 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 Oct 1 14:34:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03684; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 14:31:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 14:31:22 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981001213324.00905c28 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, 01 Oct 1998 17:33:24 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Over-Unity Pigs and Magnetars Resent-Message-ID: <"vfVqr1.0.Qv.fI_4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22921 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:52 AM 10/1/98 -0800, Horace Hefner wrote: > > An intense wave of gamma rays, emanating from a catastrophic >magnetic flare on a mysterious star 20,000 light years away, struck >the Earth's atmosphere on August 27, 1998, providing important clues >about some of the most unusual stars in the Universe. Scientists said >the gamma radiation posed no health risk to humans. > > The wave hit the night side of the Earth and ionized (or >knocked electrons out of) the atoms in the upper atmosphere to a level >usually seen only during daytime. This astonishing blast of >ionization was detected by Prof. Umran Inan of Stanford University. > - end - >EDITOR'S NOTE: Additional information on magnetars or the Aug. 27 >event is available on the internet at: > http://www1.msfc.nasa.gov/NEWSROOM/ > and > http://www.magnetars.com/ > > * * * > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > The morning of August 27, 1998 was the morning I saw the pulsating waves streaking across the sky in addition to the normal Northern Lights. Could these X-rays be the cause of the pulsating waves? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 14:55:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA12717; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 14:51:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 14:51:32 -0700 Message-Id: <199810012152.QAA26500 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:51:29 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Minn Kota and Newman Resent-Message-ID: <"7Y2Qg3.0.U63.Yb_4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22922 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >I just noticed that onsale.com is auctioning 15 refrubished >Minn Kota 65TA trolling units today. The add claims >36 lb. thurst and Cool- Power (TM). The current bid >range is $61-$71. Since these units appear to be >quite common, it looks like J.S.'s suggestion to >buy a replacement motor from Walmart of the type >Newman tested (58 or 46 lb. thurst) should be possible. >Regards, >George Holz - george varisys.com >Varitronics Systems ***{I asked about this at K-Mart and at Wal-Mart at couple of weeks ago, and I was told that they don't deal with replacement parts. I checked with Northland Marine, which is apparently a rather closely connected supplier, and they told me they would need the exact model and serial number of the motor that I owned. Since I don't own a motor, that effectively blocked off that route of attack. I called Joe Newman and talked to him about it, and he suggested that I try to find a used Minn-Kota motor with either 70, or 58, or 46 lbs of thrust. That's where I am at the moment. (By the way, Joe offered this suggestion instantly, and impressed me as a totally honest, down-to-earth guy. He left me with the clear impression that he is fully confident that if I obtain one of these motors and test it, I will discover that it is "over unity." Frankly, I have no idea why others seem to question his honesty or his motives.) With regard to www.onsale.com, I tried to check them out, but they will not permit me to browse in their site unless I hand over credit card info, which is a brain dead policy, in my opinion. (How long would Wal-Mart be in business if they wouldn't let customers in the door until they handed over a credit card?) Anyway, have you dealt with these people long enough to be satisfied that they are merely idiots rather than crooks? Do I dare to give them a credit card? --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 15:10:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA20450; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 15:08:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 15:08:16 -0700 Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:10:01 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? In-Reply-To: <19981001194129.4473.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"3SpT31.0.Q_4.Fr_4s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22923 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 1 Oct 1998, Jerry Wayne Decker wrote: I think Vortex Power is more appropriate than Whirl power, sounds like a carnival ride...... How about? 1) Aether/ZPE manipulation concentration, diffusion, redirection of ambient aether flows 2) Cold Fusion chemical or differential matter generated heat ****> 3) Vortex Power energy derived from vortexial action <**** [see below:] 4) Radiant energy tapping ambient or incoming wave energy in the form of light, heat, radio, cosmic or other waves 5) Earth energy tapping into natural electrical energy from the earth or its atmosphere -snip- prior-mail-->Bill Wallace wrote: > > Some choices so far: > > Aether concentration and capture > Cold Fusion > Whirl Power -snip------------------------------------- Hi Jerry, Bill & all, Your #3 Vortex Power IS at the very Heart & Center of "WhirlPower!". [see http://www.ledomedesprit.com/domeworld/whirlpower.html] ;) My Vote is, WHIRLPOWER is dead-on (as well as a DEAD-CENTER) Vortex like spinning apparati! (additionally using fluids (h20) allows an adhesion that is far more KISS than the SMOT ever was. Actually any man-made errors on construction of a unit, should cause the "wobble" almost guaranteed to exist, and that is what David has been saying all along accelerated with distance of the velocity 'from' the vortex for tapping into. If I am reading him right. Hope the above makes (mechanical) sense Hope this finds you all WELL! :) I just caught a 'bug' the wife brought home:( and may be gone throughout this weekend in bed:( my temp= 99.8 and wife been down last two days :( you know you have something when you want to sleep it off over Saturday & Sunday week-end:{ -=se=- steve (i may be ~sick~ & all wet, but I want to build it:) ekwall Yes, taking Vit C,B et al, garlic, herbs and spice tea -THANKS!- plus two kinds of 'cillins. l8tr g8trs From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 15:43:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA08714; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 15:42:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 15:42:01 -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: <36140521.46E607F css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 17:41:37 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Minn Kota and Newman References: <199810012152.QAA26500 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"C5NMt1.0.-72.uK05s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22924 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > With regard to www.onsale.com, I tried to check them out, but they will not > permit me to browse in their site unless I hand over credit card info ??? They only want your card to register a bid. Original List: $200 Current bid range: $99-104 Quantity Available: 3 Auction Closes: 10/2 11am PDT Minn Kota 65TA Transom Mount Motor Manufacturer's Part #: 1379067 This item is Refurbished. AT A GLANCE... Thrust level: 36 lbs Shaft lengths: 36" Tilt Twist Tiller[tm] puts natural outboard convenience in the palm of your hand 10-position mount is built with aircraft aluminum for big-time, big-boat performance Cool Power [tm] runs stronger longer and won't burn out your motor Unbreakable composite shaft won't bend, break or corrode like metal Weedless Wedge[tm] is the only prop with 100% weedlessness and full power Advanced electronics ensure reliable performance outing after outing, year after year - even decade after decade Legendary Quiet Power[tm] gets you closer to fish Minn Kota 65T packs 36 lbs of thrust and more feature-per-dollar than any comparable transom-mount motor! Why do you go fishing - to wonder if your motor's going to make it through the day? Then bag that bucket of bolts and get a Minn Kota. For more than sixty years, they've done everything possible to make sure you won't break down. That's why more than 80% of all transom-mount electric fishing motors are made by Minn Kota. They pioneered the form, innovated 99% of the improvements and are still racking their brains and breaking the rules trying to make sure you never, ever have to worry about a breakdown. Don't take chances on the water. Entrust your fishing to motors that don't know the meaning of quit. Bid now! -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Who watches the watchmen?" - The Comedian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 16:22:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA23259; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:21:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:21:11 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press (http://wire.ap.org/?SLUG=ST Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 23:22:27 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36140e09.400164790 mail-hub> References: <004001bdec6c$67e7a7a0$87b4bfa8 default> In-Reply-To: <004001bdec6c$67e7a7a0$87b4bfa8 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: <"wmDQl3.0.Jh5.bv05s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22925 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 30 Sep 1998 06:16:53 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >Now thats Energy you can use. :-) > >http://wire.ap.org/?SLUG=STELLAR%2dERUPTION Quote: "In this five-minute long flash we saw as much energy as there will be coming from the sun for the next 300 years,'' Hurley said. ``If we could harness this energy we would have enough power to power every city, every village, every light bulb until the end of the universe and far beyond.'' Sure "as much as we get from the sun in 300 years", and we got all that in just 5 minutes, and nobody noticed !?! - methinks somebody's finger slipped on the calculator. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 16:37:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA28199; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:34:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:34:17 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press (http://wire.ap.org/?SLUG=ST Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 23:35:27 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36151166.401025936 mail-hub> References: <004001bdec6c$67e7a7a0$87b4bfa8 default> <36140e09.400164790@mail-hub> In-Reply-To: <36140e09.400164790 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: <"1Ai5T.0.Pu6.t515s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22926 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 01 Oct 1998 23:22:27 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: [snip] >>http://wire.ap.org/?SLUG=STELLAR%2dERUPTION >Quote: >"In this five-minute long flash we saw as much energy as there will be >coming from the sun for the next > 300 years,'' Hurley said. ``If we could harness this energy we would >have enough power to power every > city, every village, every light bulb until the end of the universe >and far beyond.'' > >Sure "as much as we get from the sun in 300 years", and we got all >that in just 5 minutes, and nobody noticed !?! - methinks somebody's >finger slipped on the calculator. > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk Methinks I'm not awake properly yet ;). They probably meant the total amount produced by the star, not what the earth received :] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 17:00:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA08817; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:58:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:58:55 -0700 Message-ID: <19981001235936.1573.rocketmail send101.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:59:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Jerry Wayne Decker Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"uizZA3.0.L92.-S15s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22927 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gnorts Steve et al! You wrote; > While the vortex is _not_ needed in its long and twisty tornado like shape, IT IS CREATED automatically (make that "naturally" by nature) ie gravity? > Wouldn't a "hi-gain DRAIN hole" on the side of a swimming pool wall (say mid-way up the pool wall) create a vortex eventually settling in an upright looking vortex? essentially creating an "L" shaped vortex? (well, maybe more of a short-bottom "J" type i'd guess.?). slow curve! I think this is what Hamel talks about as well as Bessler, using gravity to reset the operation. With the Hamel Spinner, John Bedini had suggested carving a slight depression into a table so that when the ball spins up and moves out from under the influence of the magnetic energy, it will roll back down to fall back into the energy well and be spun back up. I don't know if he ever did that experiment. Oops, time to get off work...nough of this _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 17:09:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA13525; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:08:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:08:11 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:14:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Over-Unity Pigs and Magnetars Resent-Message-ID: <"T1Fis2.0.8J3.gb15s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22928 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:33 PM 10/1/98, Edwin Strojny wrote: [snip] >The morning of August 27, 1998 was the morning I saw the pulsating waves >streaking across the sky in addition to the normal Northern Lights. Could >these X-rays be the cause of the pulsating waves? > >Ed Strojny Just some thoughts: Here in Alaska I have seen the same phenomenon myself, so I feel pretty sure it can come from solar eruptions - unless the Magnetar phenomenon is more common than it seems. That is not to say what you saw was not from the Magnetar. I think (personal assumption, I have no other knowledge about this) the sky-sweeping look comes from a wave of particles being bent by diverging polar magnetic flux. A comparatively flat wave gets sprayed, with increasing delay, over a wide area of the sky, say 200 miles across. At 186,000 mi/s the 200 mile traverse time would be only about 1 ms - way too fast. The displays I saw swept the sky maybe several times a second, impressively fast, though there was a kind of randomness to the direction the lights moved around, a rippling effect, yet a continuity, as if someone were playing with a large flashlight very fast. It doesn't sound logical the phenomenon would likely be from gammas, but maybe there is some mechanism that would distort a large gamma wave front over a 20,000 year period. Maybe the x-rays ionized incoming particles from the sun? Possibly the gammas caused a solar emission? The Magnetors pulse rate of 5.16 seconds also brings back a recollection that the fast pulses would come in groups every several seconds. Maybe this kind of event is more common than presently known. The date coincidence of your observation seems improbable without cause and effect. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 17:36:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA25469; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:34:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:34:21 -0700 Message-ID: <01a901bded9c$6d2711c0$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Over-Unity Bacon or Chewing the Fat. Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 18:33:44 -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: <"MhyQj3.0.rD6.C-15s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22929 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex PdH, could contain 5.7E21 Hydrogen atoms/gram. H2O, 6.7E22 Hydrogen atoms/gram. D2O, 6.02E22 Deuterons/gram Glycerine Stearate (Pigfat) 7.45E22 Hydrogen atoms/gram. Which do you really think is easier to get CF or ZPE O-U from, under the right conditions? Horace should have the details on Deuterated Blubber. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 23:12:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA14293; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:09:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:09:51 -0700 Message-ID: <36146E23.45DEDDCF gte.net> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 23:09:43 -0700 From: Bob Horst X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry References: <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188@world.std.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XTAwj2.0.FV3.ju65s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22930 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Scott has a apparently flawed calorimeter... If I recall correctly, your previous dispute with Scott centered around the error limits of his calorimeter. The experiments he ran were all null, within his error bounds (indistinguishable from noise), while you claimed there was really a signal buried in the noise. This can easily be solved if you, or someone else, have a device that produces more power than the error bounds Scott has determined for his own equipment. Mitchell: What is the most power your devices can currently produce? Scott: What is the least excess power you can reliably detect? These questions could be rephrased with energy instead of power if you believe there is no sustained period of constant power production. This would require the power to be integrated over the duration of the experiment to give total energy in/out. -- Bob Horst From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 23:30:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA25148; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:29:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:29:27 -0700 Message-Id: <199810020630.BAA03279 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 01:29:20 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Minn Kota and Newman Resent-Message-ID: <"In8Kt3.0.b86.5B75s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22931 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> With regard to www.onsale.com, I tried to check them out, but they will not >> permit me to browse in their site unless I hand over credit card info > >??? They only want your card to register a bid. ***{Weird stuff. The first time I went to www.onsale.com I spent 15 minutes trying every link I could find, and the only one's that took me anywhere led to the credit card registration procedure. Result: I concluded that they were idiots who required a credit card before you could browse their site. Since this is very common practice--and one of my pet peeves--I uttered a string of expletives and sent off the post to which you are responding. But now, in response to your "???", I tried again. Result: the buttons that took me nowhere last time worked fine this time. Go figure. Anyway, getting back to Newman, my primary project at this time is to acquire a Minn Kota variant of the Newman Motor and test it, or, failing that, build one myself and test it. I am also working on a project to test out an Ohmori-Mizuno electrochemical cell, but am presently bogged down trying to troubleshoot an old Sorensen DCR 300-8A power supply that I picked up for 50 bucks. It is looking like I may have to buy a used oscilloscope to debug the damn thing. If so, I would be interested in any recommendations that any of you might have, since I have never done a project that required a scope until now, and don't understand much about them beyond general principles of operation. Any scope I buy would have to also be usable to monitor waveforms from the Ohmori Mizuno cell and also to spot any "back spikes" or other jagged waveforms that the Newman Motor may produce. What should I look for to find a scope that would be suited to these various purposes? Suggestions and commentary would be appreciated. --Mitchell Jones}*** [snip] > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > John E. Steck > Senior Mechanical Engineer > Rapid Tooling Applications > Motorola, Libertyville, IL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > "Who watches the watchmen?" - The Comedian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 1 23:38:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA29592; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:37:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:37:48 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981002014009.0091dbc0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 01:40:09 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <36146E23.45DEDDCF gte.net> References: <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Ckkcs1.0.9E7.yI75s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22932 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:09 PM 10/1/98 -0700, Bob Horst wrote: >Scott: What is the least excess power you can reliably detect? I am willing to custom fabricate a calorimeter for just about any conceivable power level if there is sufficient justification. What I have on hand and running right now is as follows: Low-Power Water Flow calorimeter (exhibited at ICCF-7): noise level of +/- 0.02 watts yields a reliable detection limit of about 0.1 watts of excess heat for total input powers less than 3 watts. For higher power levels, the detection limit is about 3% of the input power. Maximum power is around 10-15 watts. Versatile Water-Flow Calorimeter (much used for recent studies): noise level of +/- 0.2 watts yields a reliable detection limit of about 1 watt of excess heat for total input powers less than 30 watts. For higher power levels, the detection limit is about 3% of the input power. Maximum power is around 500 watts. 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 Oct 1 23:51:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA01996; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:46:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:46:35 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981002014845.00929e50 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 01:48:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Minn Kota and Newman In-Reply-To: <199810020630.BAA03279 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"YivnB2.0.0V.8R75s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22933 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 01:29 AM 10/2/98 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >Anyway, getting back to Newman, my primary project at this time is to >acquire a Minn Kota variant of the Newman Motor and test it... Great! Be sure to get one of the thrust ratings Newman recommeded to you, NOT the smaller ones for sale at the auction. >out an Ohmori-Mizuno electrochemical cell, but am presently bogged down >trying to troubleshoot an old Sorensen DCR 300-8A power supply that I >picked up for 50 bucks. Nice buy! >It is looking like I may have to buy a used >oscilloscope to debug the damn thing. If so, I would be interested in any >recommendations that any of you might have, If you can possibly scrape together $2000, the TEK THS720A is a wonderful instrument. Slips easily into a standard briefcase, has 2 FULLY ISOLATED channels, lots of built-in measurement features, waveform math including Ch1xCh2 for power monitoring, etc. etc. etc. Maybe there are used ones out there now? Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 00:08:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA12130; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 00:08:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 00:08:10 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 03:04:42 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Minn Kota and Newman Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810020309_MC2-5B5C-69AD compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"W8iFT1.0.Mz2.Pl75s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22934 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones said: >> Frankly, I have no idea why others seem to question his honesty or his [Joe Newman's] motives.) << If he had ever been conned out of large sums of money by a smooth-talking very nice guy (on the surface) he would not make such naive comments. I'm afraid experience can make one cynical. Norman Horwood. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 00:48:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA28673; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 00:47:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 00:47:19 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 00:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810020748.AAA14777 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "Jeannette Clark" Reply-To: "Jeannette Clark" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? Resent-Message-ID: <"M9E602.0.t_6.6K85s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22935 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill Wallace, Glad you enjoyed it, I got a millon of 'em. You are probably the only reason I am still here. > 20 hours a day! Have you tried looking at some of those machines that cause > sleep in people, delta machines, perhaps if you ran them in reverse you > could stay awake longer. Design a moblie one that you can wear during the > day. I wonder what narcolepsy patients have done in history, perhaps there > is a pattern? I think narcolepsy is just the modern name for something called many names before. > > I can do > >anything I want, totally lucid. > > That is an amazing power, you can tap that other 95% the rest of us cannot > get to consciously and apply that brainpower to physics problem. I can and do. I have met with Einstein and Da Vinci, Tesla and Galileo. I have a seat in the Hall of Inventors. I caught the tornado in the palm of my hand and entered a world of wizards. I am the Devil's parol officer. I have been Knighted before the Throne of God. But it is not something I talk about much. I found out long ago this world likes to hurt people like me and they did and have. But I have out lived most in this game now and that over the hill feeling is bringing out the Phoenix in me, ect. ect. I won't bore you with all the details, it would take a few years. Whirlpower is a great name, Mr. Decker, who wouldn't let me on his list. And I take exception to you trying to change the name. But you point to the very problem. Whirlpower is not about the vortex, nor is it just another name for what John Steck says are for many inventions and theories along this line. They were and are about the vortex, like ZPE's. Whirlpower is about the effect of gravity on the vortex. The closest thing I can see so far is Hal Putoff's quantum jiggle as I told David Little. It is the micro version. Whirlpower is the macro version. I may have spelled Putoff's name wrong and John Collins is probably pointing to my spelling. I don't have one of those fancy spell checkers. Well, I might, I rally don't know. (that one was on purpose) Hi John, I talked to John long ago so he can vouch for its being something that happend before the latest news along these lines, (as one accused me of reading the news and making up this theory) if he remembers me. And sometimes I don't reread what I wrote, or don't reread it thoroughly. I don't care if I spell every word just right. I know a way that you all can help me that won't cost a cent and I can do all the work. I want to talk to Vera Rubin. Set me up. Oh yes, Stephen Kaplan if you ever want to find me a few investors I would be interested. Are you the Stephen Kaplan I saw on TV that used to be in that Rama dude's cult? Now those guys you have to watch out for, they can hypnotize you in a heartbeat and get all your money. That stuff is totally Satanic. The "God of Mirrors". If any of you are into that don't even try to work with me. And Infinite Energy if you want to talk, here I am. I wrote and never got a reply. If you guys check out the Swedes they are building up speed on this quickly and will leave you in the dust before long. I am trying to get as many irons going as possible. And by the way, Whirlpower is not for sale for any price. It is God's gift to the world. But, my other inventions definately are for sale and I will not be giving them away as I did Aqualung. That was chum. David Dennard > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 01:32:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA14282; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 01:30:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 01:30:02 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 01:31:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810020831.BAA16701 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Tides Resent-Message-ID: <"J8iND2.0.4V3.Ay85s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22936 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oops, did it again. Before Ross gets back I want to introduce my latest addition to Whirlpower Theory to this list. The wobble of the Earth causes the tides. In this world there is something know as Maya. What you see is not what you get. Not long ago we thought the Earth was flat. It looks flat. We used to think the Earth was the center of the Solar System. It looks like the Sun goes around the Earth. This is all part of Maya. We saw the other day Ross say that the Moon makes the Moon go around the Earth. That the Moon makes the tides and the tides make the Moon go. Now I guess that is what standard science thinks. And I guess I heard that long ago back in college. And I have always excepted the Moon causes the tides. Well, not any more. And that is why I want to talk to Vera Rubin. If any of you have visited my discussion board you probably saw the transcript from ABC News about the latest discoveries in space due to Vera Rubin's 30 years study of spiral galaxies. I have been reading up on her work, and she was outcast from traditional astronomy for many years for bucking the Big Bang Theory. Now she has practically blown it out of the water, according to the show I saw and the transcript is available for you all to read at my discussion board to draw your own conclusions. In it, it says that science is going to have to give up some of its most precious beliefs. I think that the Moon causes the tides is one of those beliefs. Now it looks like on the surface that the Moon causes the tides, but remember the Maya of it all. A big clue here is that the wobble of the Earth is not even taken into consideration as part of the Moon's movement. That has to be wrong. That wobble moves trillions upon trillions times more mass then the tides move. I won't even venture a guess on exactly how much, but it has to be a factor. Since the timing looks right science says the Moon moves the tides. But if it is the wobble making the Moon go as I propose in Whirlpower Theory and the wobble also makes the tides, there is your timing connection. And then throw in a little common sense and think, how is the gravity of the Moon over such a distance going to override the gravity of the Earth and move the oceans anyway? And if it has to override the gravity of the Earth to move the oceans, how on Earth or the Moon is there going to be enought energy left to make the Moon gain orbital radius? It seems to fly in the face of logic and break every law of physics in the book. I rest my case. I think if I coud talk to Vera and explain Whirlpower Theory to her and how it relates to the 90% figure of unexplained energy of motion she found in her studies, I could prove Whirlpower Theory and we will be on our way very quicky to the New Age of Aquarius. David Dennard "the mouse that roared" From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 03:31:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA31272; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 03:29:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 03:29:01 -0700 Message-ID: <3614ABC1.46034452 GroupZ.net> Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 06:32:34 -0400 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b2 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "freenrg-l eskimo.com" , KeelyNet , "USA-TESLA list.iex.net" , "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Question on magnetic star (off topic) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YPn_n.0.Ue7.ihA5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22937 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Was wondering about the x-rays and gamma rays from the magnetic star that arrived 27 Sep....I assume that they were traveling at speed of light, are there any other particles that may have been emitted by this burst, that may arrive at a later time ??? If so, is there any chance that they could reach the earths surface, I understand that the x-rays and gamma rays were absorbed by the atmosphere....thanks...steve opelc From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 06:02:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA28322; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 05:52:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 05:52:43 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002085345.00710da4 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 08:53:45 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <36146E23.45DEDDCF gte.net> References: <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2f9ym1.0.Lw6.RoC5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22938 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:09 PM 10/1/98 -0700, Bob Horst wrote: >> Scott has a apparently flawed calorimeter... > >If I recall correctly, your previous dispute with Scott centered around the >error limits of his calorimeter. The experiments he ran were all null, within >his error bounds (indistinguishable from noise), while you claimed there was >really a signal buried in the noise. We were not aware of his offset at zero input power, but have since learned of that as well. ============================================================== >Mitchell: What is the most power your devices can currently produce? >Scott: What is the least excess power you can reliably detect? We measure about 80 mW/cm2 for peak nickel/H2O systems. The Pd work is ongoing and has not been published. ============================================================== >These questions could be rephrased with energy instead of power if you believe >there is no sustained period of constant power production. This would require >the power to be integrated over the duration of the experiment to give total >energy in/out. > >-- Bob Horst Good point. We integrate energy over the entire period, and agree this should always be done, too. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 06:52:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA14101; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 06:47:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 06:47:35 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002085114.00debd78 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 08:51:14 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002085345.00710da4 world.std.com> References: <36146E23.45DEDDCF gte.net> <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"xzT6o1.0.ES3.tbD5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22939 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:53 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>Mitchell: What is the most power your devices can currently produce? > We measure about 80 mW/cm2 for peak nickel/H2O systems. You have provided only the power density. To answer Bob's question you need to provide the cathode area as well. 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 Oct 2 07:11:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA21811; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 07:08:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 07:08:34 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:07:11 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Scott could visit Ed . . . Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"fnBR03.0.fK5.YvD5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22940 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I have thought more about this issue of Scott Little testing a bulk Pd or thin film cell. As I said, I think it would be very dicey to try to ship a cell or a cathode from some Lab to Scott Little's place. Everything I have read and seen tells me it would not work. It is sorta like transferring a lighted candle from Michigan to Missouri by jet fighter. It's bound to flicker out along the way. But I wonder if Scott could carry one of his calorimeters out to New Mexico to test one of Ed Storms' cathode in situ. Transferring from one calorimeter to another in the same room would be difficult, but it sounds do-able. I wouldn't know. But I think with some advanced planning and coordination it should work and the results would be interesting. You need to consider the size and shape of the cell, the power levels, the power and instrument leads for the OCV, and other considerations. You don't want to cool it off too much. I do not know what Ed's latest cell looks like, but there are six leads shown in the cross section of one of Mizuno's cells, which I happen to be looking at. Uhh . . . this one has the heater on the outside, so you'll need a few other wires for a joule heater, which I think would be essential for this transplant. You don't need a "pressure transducer" unless it's a closed cell. If you are talking about transferring the cathode from one cell to another cell, that's a whole new ball game. Just thinking aloud here . . . You may not need to move all wires and cell contents, but then again there is no point to operating a cell without the OCV (or a loading measurement), because you can't tell whether heat is coming or going, or what condition the cathode is in. You cannot tell whether you are wasting your time waiting for something to happen. You are flailing in the dark without instrumentation and without knowing where the control parameters stand -- and that is the biggest mistake most people have made in this business. But I suppose the whole cell could be moved to a flow calorimeter. It sounds a bit like the human arm transplant that was performed recently. We could call it "Project Frankenstein." Ed and Scott should consider this. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 07:29:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA29236; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 07:27:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 07:27:29 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 09:31:04 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"DwvUZ2.0.f87.GBE5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22941 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:07 10/2/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >But I wonder if Scott could carry one of his calorimeters out to New Mexico to >test one of Ed Storms' cathode in situ. For a cell making only a watt or two, it would have to be "transplanted" from Ed's calorimeter into mine...as you surmised. If Ed gets a few "hits" with his dual-method calorimeter, I will definitely visit him and, if he is agreeable, we will do just as you suggested. In my opinion, such double-checking is mandatory. 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 Oct 2 07:41:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA32435; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 07:36:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 07:36:31 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:34:20 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: How to ship cathodes Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810021037_MC2-5B57-31A5 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"w4PvW1.0.aw7.kJE5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22942 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex In my previous message "Scott could visit Ed . . ." I mentioned shipping and transferring cathodes. I should add that when you remove a fully loaded, active cathode from a cell, and you store it or ship it to another location, you should pack it in dry ice. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 08:03:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA10539; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 07:59:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 07:59:57 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 11:00:56 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> References: <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"f97g03.0.ba2.jfE5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22943 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:31 AM 10/2/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >For a cell making only a watt or two, it would have to be "transplanted" >from Ed's calorimeter into mine...as you surmised. If Ed gets a few "hits" >with his dual-method calorimeter, I will definitely visit him and, if he is >agreeable, we will do just as you suggested. In my opinion, such >double-checking is mandatory. Double checking is a good idea, but without thermal waveform reconstruction checking the system accuracy and precision, it remains uncalibrated. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 08:07:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA11382; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 08:00:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 08:00:54 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002110147.006afe48 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 11:01:47 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002085114.00debd78 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002085345.00710da4 world.std.com> <36146E23.45DEDDCF gte.net> <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"uKbht1.0.Yn2.bgE5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22944 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>>Mitchell: What is the most power your devices can currently produce? >At 08:53 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> We measure about 80 mW/cm2 for peak nickel/H2O systems. > At 08:51 AM 10/2/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >You have provided only the power density. To answer Bob's question you >need to provide the cathode area as well. Correct. The former is science data and is now in the literature. The latter involves business info and involves ongoing projects. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 08:31:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27936; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 08:28:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 08:28:10 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 10:31:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"s7fVT3.0.Oq6.A4F5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22945 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:00 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Double checking is a good idea, but without thermal >waveform reconstruction checking the system accuracy and >precision, it remains uncalibrated. Wrong. Waveform reconstruction is completely unnecessary if your only interest is determining whether or not the experiment produced more energy that it was supplied. It is also unnecessary if the experiment is sufficiently stable to permit a quasi-equilibrium power balance measurement. It is only of interest if you wish to remove the smearing produced by the calorimeter's response time and reconstruct the experiment's heat function. That is certainly of interest in some calorimetric investigations (e.g. chemical reaction kinetics). However, there is absolutely no justification for stating that a system that does not employ waveform reconstruction is not calibrated. 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 Oct 2 09:10:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA18725; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:08:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:08:26 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002111154.00de18a4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 11:11:54 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002110147.006afe48 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002085114.00debd78 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002085345.00710da4 world.std.com> <36146E23.45DEDDCF gte.net> <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"BvtRY3.0.Pa4.vfF5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22946 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:01 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >At 08:51 AM 10/2/98 -0500, I wrote: >>You have provided only the power density. To answer Bob's question you >>need to provide the cathode area as well. > > Correct. The former is science data and is now in >the literature. The latter involves business info and >involves ongoing projects. Congratulations, Mitch, you dodged a question about your CF cells without attacking the work of others. Bob, here are some of Mitchell's previous excess power claims: 1. In the ICCF-7 proceedings, page 372, he states, "Some (e.g. nickel fibrex in light water) have low excess enthalpy even at the optimal operating peak (maximum excess heat ~0.40-2) whereas nickel spiral versus gold demonstrated levels of ~3-9." The units for these values are not specified but I think we can assume "watts". 2. In earlier issues of Cold Fusion Times (e.g. Vol 5 No 2), his JET Energy Technology advertisement offers: Pi-notch Tested Nickel Electrodes (peak drive condition - 2.5 watts input power) (nominal 1.07-1.7 excess) (nominal 1.5-2.7 excess) (nominal 2.2-3.1 excess) (nominal 2.7-6.5 excess) (subject to availability) [BTW, this part of the ad has recently been removed - e.g. Vol 6 No 2] 3. At 00:04 5/15/98 +0000, Mitchell Swartz wrote about one of his cells on Vortex: >The input electrical power was 9.8 watts. >The output thermal power was about ~45 watts. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 09:53:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA02508; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:51:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:51:28 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:52:29 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"AuxN-3.0.4d.FIG5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22947 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:31 AM 10/2/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >At 11:00 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> Double checking is a good idea, but without thermal >>waveform reconstruction checking the system accuracy and >>precision, it remains uncalibrated. > >Wrong. Waveform reconstruction is completely unnecessary if your only >interest is determining whether or not the experiment produced more energy >that it was supplied. It is also unnecessary if the experiment is >sufficiently stable to permit a quasi-equilibrium power balance measurement. Incorrect, Scott. Waveform reconstruction tests accuracy, precision, and yields some of the time constants of the system. These are important issues of quality control. ================================================ >It is only of interest if you wish to remove the smearing produced by the >calorimeter's response time and reconstruct the experiment's heat function. Not true. The process tests the above and it is IMPORTANT because some flow and static calorimetric systems can, and have, yield(ed) different results for the same source. The more such tests that we use, including noise power analysis, the better the reliability of the measurements become. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 09:56:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA03549; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:53:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:53:14 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002125408.00728ed8 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:54:08 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002111154.00de18a4 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002110147.006afe48 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002085114.00debd78 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002085345.00710da4 world.std.com> <36146E23.45DEDDCF gte.net> <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"AQj9w1.0.Et.vJG5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22948 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:11 AM 10/2/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >>>You have provided only the power density. To answer Bob's question you >>>need to provide the cathode area as well. >> >> Correct. The former is science data and is now in >>the literature. The latter involves business info and >>involves ongoing projects. > >Congratulations, Mitch, you dodged a question about your CF cells without >attacking the work of others. See that you are keeping up your ad hominems, Scott. Au contraire. It is YOU who has not answered the questions; not about quantitative aspects of ZPE, or the checks of your calorimeter, or a repeat look at the low power input to the KS beads. Good dodge, though. ;-)X Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 09:57:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA05072; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:55:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:55:17 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 09:01:47 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Question on magnetic star (off topic) Resent-Message-ID: <"SGx6G3.0.9F1.qLG5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22949 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:32 AM 10/2/98, sno wrote: >Was wondering about the x-rays and gamma rays from the magnetic star >that arrived >27 Sep....I assume that they were traveling at speed of light, are >there any other >particles that may have been emitted by this burst, that may arrive at >a later time ??? > >If so, is there any chance that they could reach the earths surface, I >understand that >the x-rays and gamma rays were absorbed by the >atmosphere....thanks...steve opelc Magnetars are thought to emit electrons (betas) and positrons. This kind of emission would occur in pairs. It seems to me unlikely much could reach the earth due to the annihilation that would take place in the 20,000 plus year voyage here. BTW, the "to:" field should have vortex-l only. It is against vortex rules to spam, e.g. to: "freenrg-l eskimo.com" , KeelyNet , "USA-TESLA list.iex.net" , "vortex-l eskimo.com" I reset the "to:" field to vortex-l alone on the reponse. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 10:07:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA10217; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:05:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:05:58 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002130654.00727310 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 13:06:54 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002111154.00de18a4 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002110147.006afe48 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002085114.00debd78 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002085345.00710da4 world.std.com> <36146E23.45DEDDCF gte.net> <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"bjXdj1.0.XV2.qVG5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22950 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:11 AM 10/2/98 -0500, Scott wrote: >Bob, here are some of Mitchell's previous excess power claims: > >1. In the ICCF-7 proceedings, page 372, he states, "Some (e.g. nickel >fibrex in light water) have low excess enthalpy even at the optimal >operating peak (maximum excess heat ~0.40-2) whereas nickel spiral versus >gold demonstrated levels of ~3-9." The units for these values are not >specified but I think we can assume "watts". This is not an accurate assumption. That was "peak power gain" (symbol pi) as the article explicitly stated in the very sentence prior to the one which Scott Little excerpted. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 10:27:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA19114; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:25:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:25:09 -0700 Message-ID: <36150D45.BB9FAC9B GroupZ.net> Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 13:28:37 -0400 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b2 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Question on magnetic star (off topic) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fNoOl.0.9g4.pnG5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22951 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks for the info and responses didn't know this would be considered a spam...I thought spam was unwanted advertisement....????.....thanks....steve Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 6:32 AM 10/2/98, sno wrote: > >Was wondering about the x-rays and gamma rays from the magnetic star > >that arrived > >27 Sep....I assume that they were traveling at speed of light, are > >there any other > >particles that may have been emitted by this burst, that may arrive at > >a later time ??? > > > >If so, is there any chance that they could reach the earths surface, I > >understand that > >the x-rays and gamma rays were absorbed by the > >atmosphere....thanks...steve opelc > > Magnetars are thought to emit electrons (betas) and positrons. This kind > of emission would occur in pairs. It seems to me unlikely much could reach > the earth due to the annihilation that would take place in the 20,000 plus > year voyage here. > > BTW, the "to:" field should have vortex-l only. It is against vortex rules > to spam, e.g. to: > > "freenrg-l eskimo.com" , > KeelyNet , > "USA-TESLA list.iex.net" , > "vortex-l eskimo.com" > > I reset the "to:" field to vortex-l alone on the reponse. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 10:30:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA22066; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:29:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:29:33 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002123309.006af530 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:33:09 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002130654.00727310 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002111154.00de18a4 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110147.006afe48 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002085114.00debd78 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002085345.00710da4 world.std.com> <36146E23.45DEDDCF gte.net> <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"3h-BO.0.cO5.yrG5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22952 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 13:06 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>1. In the ICCF-7 proceedings, page 372, he states, "Some (e.g. nickel >>fibrex in light water) have low excess enthalpy even at the optimal >>operating peak (maximum excess heat ~0.40-2) whereas nickel spiral versus >>gold demonstrated levels of ~3-9." The units for these values are not >>specified but I think we can assume "watts". > > This is not an accurate assumption. > That was "peak power gain" (symbol pi) as the article explicitly >stated in the very sentence prior to the one which Scott Little >excerpted. OK, thanks, then the latter types produce up to 9 times more heat output power than the driving power, right? Searching further on the same page for absolute excess power levels in watts, I find a plot of Excess Power [Watts] vs Input Electrical Power [Watts]. A curve is drawn which shows a peak Excess Power occurring at about 3.3 input watts. Only one of the y-axis grid lines is labelled and it is labelled "1". The curve starts out below "1" and peaks about 2 divs above "1". There is a note on the graph that say "Overunity If > 1" that confuses me. Since the y-axis is EXCESS Power, shouldn't it say "Overunity if > 0"? What are the proper values for each of the y-axis grid lines on this graph? 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 Oct 2 10:34:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA23018; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:32:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:32:26 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:36:04 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ERM_n3.0.Ud5.guG5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22953 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:52 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Incorrect, Scott. Waveform reconstruction tests accuracy, >precision, and yields some of the time constants of the system. You're getting closer, Mitch, it should read simply "Waveform reconstruction yields some of the time constants of the system." Or better, "Waveform reconstruction requires knowledge of the time constants of the system". 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 Oct 2 10:44:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA28036; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:40:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:40:12 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:38:28 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810021341_MC2-5B6A-A933 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"bovJA2.0.qr6.x_G5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22954 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: The units for these values are not specified but I think we can assume "watts". Pi-notch Tested Nickel Electrodes (peak drive condition - 2.5 watts input power) (nominal 1.07-1.7 excess) . . . Oh. I though that was the C.O.P. That is: 2.5 watts input, 2.7 to 4.3 watts out. I guess it probably means watts. This is a good example of how not to write promotional literature. Swartz explained -- sort of -- why these performance figures are secret: The latter involves business info and involves ongoing projects. In other words, the performance specifications for the flagship product are secret. Gee, that's a funny kind of business. Imagine you visit a automobile dealership and you say, "I'd like to know more about that model over there. How much does it cost? How fast does it go? How many miles per gallon does it get?" And the salesman responds: "that's secret. It's business, you see. If you buy the car we might tell you later on. You'll have to write a check, but we can't tell you who you should make it out to, or the amount. And don't open the hood: you are not allowed to prise open the top even if you buy the car." You wouldn't sell many cars with that sales pitch, would you? I mean, in a sane business they tell what they are selling and how much it costs per unit (per barrel of apples or watt of heat). In fact, they have to tell you that. It is a violation of antitrust and fair marketing laws to keep your price list a secret. What's funny is that 90% of the o-u and CF inventors say more-or-less the same thing, so no sane person will invest in their ideas or take them seriously. Instead of re-thinking their sales pitch the inventors bitch and moan and blame the government, the Patent Office, OPEC and even *me* for suppressing them! Long-suffering readers here will recognize this lunacy: "don't prise open the top!" is a direct quote from one of the, uh, inventors who graces this forum from time to time. I got sick of hearing this garbage five years ago. That's why the inventors and I do not get along. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 11:14:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA12488; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:12:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:12:30 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:13:29 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Zyg_A2.0.z23.DUH5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22955 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:36 PM 10/2/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >At 12:52 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> Incorrect, Scott. Waveform reconstruction tests accuracy, >>precision, and yields some of the time constants of the system. > >You're getting closer, Mitch, it should read simply "Waveform >reconstruction yields some of the time constants of the system." Or >better, "Waveform reconstruction requires knowledge of the time constants >of the system". No. Determining the impulse, and step function, response of a system is standard engineering practice. One does not need a priori knowledge as Scott claims to determine the square wave response (two step functions with time delay), but learns about the system from that response. Also, this standard practice does determine the accuracy and precision (if done several times). [Try a electronic signals and systems book, Scott.] Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 11:28:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA17205; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:25:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:25:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981002141850.007175e4 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:18:50 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <199810021341_MC2-5B6A-A933 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"C5e653.0.lC4.7gH5s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22956 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:38 PM 10/2/98 -0400, Mr. Rothwell wrote: > The latter involves business info and involves ongoing projects. > >JED: "In other words, the performance specifications for the flagship product are >secret. Gee, that's a funny kind of business." Work undergoing R&D (i.e. an ongoing project) is NOT a "flagship product", despite Mr. Rothwell's imprecise English. And such control of R&D info is SOP. ====================================================== > JED: "That's why the inventors and I do not get along." Suggest the inaccuracy on occasion may contribute. Hope it improves. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 11:34:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA21848; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:28:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:28:51 -0700 Message-ID: <36150E8C.374F earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:34:04 -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: Blue: Rothwell: Storms: CF data selection? theory problems 10.2.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cL6dU2.0.yK5.WjH5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22957 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Rothwell: CF cathodes reproducibility 10.1.98 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:43:46 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net At last Jed Rothwell has turned the discussion to the statistics of CF results -- something that should have been part of the debate years ago but was generally given little attention. However, I don't think Jed's assertions reguarding what can be concluded from the statistics he sites are entirely correct. More importantly it appears that we are still being offered only a selected subset of the available data, and that has to send up a red flag. It is so very easy to distort this picture by selecting data that appears to support a particular position. Typically a CF investigator might make dozens or hundreds of extended runs, and then present 10% or less of those runs as demonstrating a positive effect. It is important to know that the measurement was always of an "excess heat". That is to say, there is always heat produced by a known source to be subtracted from the observed heat to leave something considered to be an excess. It is also significant that many of these measurements employ isoperibolic calorimetry, which requires a determination of the calorimeter constant under conditions that closely replicate those for the measurements for effect. For a significant fraction of the claimed positives, the results have been statistically marginal, at best. All that is required to get a positive result is to overlook a systematic bias that may influence the results of some runs differently than others. Now most of the data (I believe) have been analyzed using a statistical model that assumes random variations that follow a normal distribution with an ESTIMATED variance. This clearly is an area where implicit assumptions get made, which are then overlooked in further discussions. If, as it seems, there are data sets with sufficient data, what we should have seen by now are the actual distributions of results, so that we can test the assumptions regarding their statistics. Somehow, I doubt that all the estimates will look very good when compared with real data. While Jed now asserts that there are specific experimental protocols, using alloys rather than pure Pd, that lead to high reproducibility, I have yet to see these results identified. Who did this, and where is it published? Perhaps the leader in establishing as CF gospel the notion that CF success is largely a materials problem, is McKubre who, as I understand it, put much effort into selecting bits of wire from larger batches of candidate material. What I don't understand is how it could be that he had learned the secret for selecting "good" material, but still says that getting a cathode that actually showed the effect was relatively rare. What totally escapes me is how the protocols employed by CETI, Miley, Arata and Zhang, Miles, and others can be made to fit the picture that Jed now presents. Let's not forget that Miley, for example, claims that his cells kept on ticking, even after 40% of the cathode material had been destroyed by a transmutation process!!!! Generally speaking, "excess heat" can be defined only in terms of a long-time average effect. Many, if not all, of the published data that I have examined exhibits what I would characterize as "noise." That is to say the heat shows considerable short-term variation, and that often hold true whether or not there is ultimately an excess on average. Now I want to contemplate the following excercise in experimental statistics. Many hours of electrolysis are logged on many cathodes taken from many different batches of wire during many separate experimental runs. Let's cut all these data into short segments which we label by three numbers: run, sample, and time. Now we take our large sample of data and do a statistical analysis in a blind fashion, such that the labels do not reveal where a particular bit of data comes from. So we calculate the excess heat, and integrate it for an interval of perhaps one hour, and that is the result for just one of our many samples. What do you think the distribution of these snippits would look like? Would we have a single normal distribution or would it be bimodal? Could you derive from this distribution any evidence for there being any real excess heat? What I describe above is actually something that one could do. It is a possible experiment that could be conducted. We may even be able to guess a likely outcome on the basis of what selected information is already available to us. We know that on average Mike McKubre detected ZERO excess heat. So did many others who claimed "positive" results. The only way they got a positive result, however, was to leave lots of snippits out of the average. What does that prove? In fact if you expand on the concept of snippits to include a subdivision of each cathode, we can speculate as to whether each subdivision contributes equally to the heat output of a cell. It seems quit reasonable, in light of the claimed importance of subtle differences in the material, that some parts of the cathode do better than others. It's not even clear that such things as current density are equivalent for all parts of the cathode. That leads me to suggest that the concept that a cathode is "all good" or "all bad", and that it retains that character through a given run or even multiple runs is somewhat suspect. If we had the statistical distributions of the data snippits, as I suggest, we could actually begin to answer such questions. So all this debate had been about is an effect that is, on average, ZERO. To get a positive result there has to be some selections made. The trick is to determine just precisely how and why most of the data gets discarded. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: CF debate 9.30.98 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:51:16 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Again we return to one point in the discussion where Ed Storms stalls out and refuses to move further. The question which he poses is, I think, whether the environment which surrounds a nucleus can influence nuclear wave functions and nuclear reaction processes? I have answered that question several times now in the affirmative. YES, CANR is possible. I have not denied that. I am even willing to refer to specific examples where such effects have been investigated both experimentally and theoretically. Please stop saying that I claim that CANR is impossible. Can't we move on? Ed missed the point I made about fusion data extrapolating smoothly down to zero kinetic energy of relative motion without unexpected discontinuities. That is a significant observation. It is not just "theory", although there is certainly some theory that Ed needs to consider in that regard. There are actual limits that can be placed on the rate at which reaction cross sections vary as a function of energy. That is the basis for my asserting that it is misleading to use the labels "hot" and "cold" as applied to fusion. So, if we are really trying to explore questions relating to the influence of a chemical environment upon nuclear reaction processes, what is a reasonable way to proceed? I have been suggesting that we ought to make use of the information that has been derived from other investigations. I see no reason to adopt a position that we are totally ignorant about this subject. I see some value in making some simple estimates that approach the problem from two sides. I think we can estimate the magnitude of the perturbing potential that is required to induce nuclear effects being claimed. I think we can estimate the magnitude of the perturbing potentials that can possibly arise from changes in the chemical environment. Note that I said "changes in the chemical environment." Simply putting deuterum into a Pd lattice does nothing. We know that as an experimental fact. Indeed one of the claims of the CANR advocates is that most mortals who attempt to replicate the claimed successes will fail, because it somehow requires more than just putting deuterium into Pd. The only way I can read Ed Storms' assertions is that the thing that triggers the effect is, itself, subtle and difficult to observe. Now don't we have a potential contradiction here? We are looking for something that is both very powerful and very subtle. It has to be strong enough to really significantly alter the nuclear physics, without doing anything observable to the way the system behaves chemically and thermodynamically. How can that be? I have been suggesting that it really can't be as Ed Storms would have it. It would seem to me that the ball is in his court. He has to explain some of this to us before further dialog can have much meaning. I don't see that bald assertions about this or that being possible will lead anywhere. Although we keep hearing that there are theories out there that have a potential for explaining cold fusion, all my attempts to lure some of this out into the open, so that it can be examined in the light of day, have come up short. The fact is that the experimental claims present a very difficult target for any theory to address. As I have noted, a theory which might account for a huge enhancement of the reaction rate still must address the claimed suppression of expected radiations. Since the energy release still must be typical of a fusion event, it seems, it's pretty hard to invent a reason to have that energy channeled to lattice thermal energy in some unspecified, but hidden, way. As for what aspect of the chemical environment is to be called upon to account for the claimed effects, there seems to be a constant waffling between things more typical of a highly ordered lattice and things associated with the surfaces where disorder might provide some large deviation from the more ordered bulk material. Which is it to be, order or disorder? It has often been said that high deuterium density is required, but now we can't decide wether that is a volume density in the bulk material or merely a surface density. You may note that Ed Storms can't decide on that choice himself. It's rather sad that after 9 years of experimentation, we don't even know which density is more important. Of course that is but another indiction that there may be problems with the consistancy of the data that is being offered. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Little: Storms--Blue debate 9.30.98 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:23:32 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net I really don't understand the origins of the concept that all observed anomolies constitute evidence for some profound irregularity in the universe. It is more likely, I would suggest, that an observational anomoly is just that. There are an infinite variety of ways to screw up a measurement, any measurement. It happens all the time. Of necessity, then those of us engaged in experimental science must screen results to sort out the good, the bad, and the ugly. Somehow, there seems to have developed a little cult of people who find this chore distasteful, when it applies to claims for a particular brand of miracle marketed as CF or CANR or Massive Transmutations. What I have been trying to suggest is that, like it or not, the claims still have to be evaluated in the context of related experience. Those who want to avoid a potentially critical evaluation of their favorite anomolies seek to discredit the process by insisting that "theory" must not be employed in the debate. This is nothing more than an attempt to hide the weaknesses of their position. If some claim does not make good sense, that should be noted. The cold fusion claims do not make good sense. The claims for massive nuclear transmutations are totally absurd. OK, so you have some anomaly. Enjoy it for whatever it's worth. However, when you move beyond that to claim that the anomaly is the result of some perported reaction process you, too, must have a "theory." The question is how anomalous is that theory? Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 12:42:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA26477; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:39:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:39:27 -0700 Message-ID: <19981002194104.18203.rocketmail send102.yahoomail.com> Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:41:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Jerry Wayne Decker Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? To: Jeannette Clark , vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"wRY9J.0.VT6.klI5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22958 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gnorts! Jeannette Clark (Dennard) wrote; > Whirlpower is a great name, Mr. Decker, who wouldn't let me on his list. And I take exception to you trying to change the name. Your posts particularly this one show why.....also I never changed any name, vortex isn't your trick name of whirlpower, it was, is and will be long after whirlpower is forgotten, unless you or someone else proves the principle. You also wrote; > But you point to the very problem. Whirlpower is not about the vortex, nor is it just another name for what John Steck says are for many inventions and theories along this line. They were and are about the vortex, like ZPE's. Whirlpower is about the effect of gravity on the vortex. Well then say so, build it and prove it before you start making claims about what it can do. Curiously, you class yourself with great scientists which says much about what you want out of this, not to mention bombarding the list with endless argument and the poor me sob story. You also wrote; > The closest thing I can see so far is Hal Putoff's quantum jiggle as I told David Little. It is the micro version. Whirlpower is the macro version. Nothing is new and IMO we should credit those who did the original work and experiments, not those who simply talk about and want their name appended to the greats without one iota of proof. The thing I see novel in your approach is you are more clear about the effect of gravity in re-establishing the wiggle when it 'resets'...nothing more so far...and until you actually build it then your claims are just that. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 12:51:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA31053; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:49:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:49:56 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:51:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810021951.MAA21522 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? Resent-Message-ID: <"JC7bY1.0.3b7.ZvI5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22959 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Steve says, > Hi Jerry, Bill & all, > > Your #3 Vortex Power IS at the very Heart & Center of "WhirlPower!". > [see http://www.ledomedesprit.com/domeworld/whirlpower.html] > gravity? Wouldn't a "hi-gain DRAIN hole" on the side of a swimming pool > wall (say mid-way up the pool wall) create a vortex eventually settling in > an upright looking vortex? essentially creating an "L" shaped vortex? > (well, maybe more of a short-bottom "J" type i'd guess.?). slow curve! Steve has a point here, not exactly the point I am trying to make but like I said, there are untold Whirlpower spin-offs. > This bent-looking vortex would exhibit huge amounts of differential at the > bend or inside of the bend (depending how you look at it.) I never thought > about a "wiggle" or "wobble" before David's posting, but being his idea is > circular/rotary in design, and with the "L or J" shape spinning round and > round, I think I see now what he means by "wiggle/wobble". Actually the entire vortex wiggels and wobbles due to gravity like a top with many segments in flux. > Put a "L or J" shaped coathanger in a hand-held drill and turn it on, and > you'll see what I mean! (**Careful** - IT works (err wobbles) BIG TIME!) > If the coathanger is your spinning vortex, then your drill and outerheld > hand is the Whirlpower collection points. Yes, I know about offset energy > mechanically distrubted thoughout a system. Rem the story of the cat that > pranced across the bridge? to point of collapse? Prior to collapse, there > was HUGE amounts of energy that the 8# cat couldn't collect, just the > causation effect. but, maybe we > could've had we been there 'outside' of the cats action - grabbing the > beams, girders etc. (oh well, just a thought, I may still be all ~wet~ :) The L or J shape is the lever but it happens throughout the vortex. It does appear more directly in Tip Top. > Throwing the cat on a bridge _won't_ get it going, but ONCE going, it will > / should take less and less energy effort to compound the EFFECT! :) > Whirlpower just needs to "get going". Whirlpower has to be going to work. It is really no different than starting a car. Without that initial crank, the explosion of gas, which is also an opening of the void, just like the vortex does, would not move the pistons at all. So all this is related and fire and the Fire of the Kundaline all involve opening the void. > > Your ref: "energy derived from this vortexial action", that is what David > has been politley trying to explain... Trying to, but remember, it is not the vortexial action itself, but the effect of gravity on the vortexial action. If you try to tap the vortexial action it will "snuff out" the power. It Already has been seen in Sweden > for many years by many Scientist working with data from WORKING filtration > systems using the vortex. Plus a cool History on Viktor Schauberger Water > Jets and Saucers that Hitler tried to capture. (US got HIM later). > [see:http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-58759/Starteng.html] > power is available in this outer (just out-side) area of the vortex. > The wobble effect (acting like paddles?) drags the outside water in the > same direction as the vortex, (cat=vortex, bridge=doughnut in Whirlpower). > this can be tapped without ever touching the vortex itself *Cool Idea!*. > Easier to work with and not near as fragile for measurements. They and > other professionals link'd on their page, have stopped their filtration > concepts and are attacking this outside (whirlpower) area now. Yes, and Curt and I are working on a number of Whirlpower concepts. > > While my first attempt would probably by table top size, ie. tub, and I > can't see mechanically attaching to HIS free-floating wheel yet, I do see > a tub with 4 horizontal paddle-wheels (mounted mid-way) on the outsides of > the tub, (1/2 in 1/2 outside the tub as it were)...2 for pumping and 2 for > tapping. If I get into trouble there, I plan to ask David, as he says > he has MANY ways drawn up to approach this. (just wish it was hot summer > time approaching as it sounds wet initially ;) I think Steve is very close to understanding. If he can do this without disturbing the vortex feedback loop system it might work. I really think he need a wider tank though. > > My Vote is, WHIRLPOWER is dead-on (as well as a DEAD-CENTER) Vortex like > spinning apparati! (additionally using fluids (h20) allows an adhesion > that is far more KISS than the SMOT ever was. Actually any man-made errors > on construction of a unit, should cause the "wobble" almost guaranteed to > exist, and that is what David has been saying all along accelerated with > distance of the velocity 'from' the vortex for tapping into. If I am > reading him right. Steve is as close as I have seen outside the vortex experts in Sweden and a number of my close friends. > > Hope the above makes (mechanical) sense > Hope this finds you all WELL! :) > I just caught a 'bug' the wife brought home:( > and may be gone throughout this weekend in bed:( > my temp= 99.8 and wife been down last two days :( > you know you have something when you want to > sleep it off over Saturday & Sunday week-end:{ > -=se=- > steve (i may be ~sick~ & all wet, but I want to build it:) ekwall I hope you will!!! > > Yes, taking Vit C,B et al, garlic, herbs and spice tea -THANKS!- > plus two kinds of 'cillins. > > l8tr g8trs Get well soon!!! To all, I would expect by now, you are either disgusted that I happen to believe in God or you do too. I expect it to be the former. But, make no mistake, the people that say they believe in God, i.e. Christians, are more disgusted with me than you. Most Christians hate my guts because I actually claim to be having experiences with God. So don't think I am part of the Christian establishment or any establishment. I am just who I am, The Phoenix. And I know that more than I know anything. David Dennard "in sackcloth and ashes" From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 13:03:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA02294; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:00:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:00:28 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Minn Kota and Newman Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 16:07:38 -0400 Message-ID: <01bdee40$4d954df0$0c6cd626 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: <"svkTS.0.jZ.Q3J5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22960 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: It is looking like I may have to buy a used oscilloscope to debug the damn thing. If so, I would be interested in any recommendations that any of you might have, ... - Here is my collection of some sites offering surplus scopes on the net. Tucker seems to be the best place to look up equipment specs. and they have a nice catalog, but they also have the highest prices. I have made most of my purchases from Brian Kent at Kentronix, partly due to their location less than an hour from my office. - http://www.a-comm.com/index.htm http://www.madbbs.com/amtronix/ http://www.test-eq.com/ http://www.madbbs.com/amtronix/ http://www.lainet.com/electronics/ http://www.gpte.com/ http://www.kentronix.com/ http://www.metricsales.com/ http://www.tech-services.com/ http://www.manualsplus.com/ http://www.test-equipment.net/ http://www.tucker.com/homepage.html http://www.vigilante-electronics.com/ - The best classified listing of surplus test equipment is probably in Nuts and Volts magazine. http://www.nutsvolts.com/ - The Tek 465,475,485 portable series is reasonably priced these days. I like the 7000 series for the plug in versatility and reasonable surplus pricing. Wideband digital storage scopes are nice for cases like the Newman motor evaluation, but are generally expensive. - George Holz - george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 13:41:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA25340; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:36:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:36:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 16:29:24 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810021632_MC2-5B67-904F compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"DgxAo1.0.gB6.xaJ5s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22962 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Mitchell Swartz explains: Work undergoing R&D (i.e. an ongoing project) is NOT a "flagship product", despite Mr. Rothwell's imprecise English. I see. Let me see if I understand this business strategy. You advertise this stuff and you tell us about it here, but it's actually a secret. It isn't available for sale. I assumed it was a flagship product because there are no other products advertised by the company, but it isn't a product at all. There is no price, no availability, no sales. When a potential customer calls in response to the ad, you have nothing to tell him. You had nothing to inform customers in the first place. In short, the money you spent on advertising was wasted. That's a funny way to run a business! You are lucky I am not on your Board of Directors. Maybe this product doesn't exist yet? Perhaps we are talking about R&D vaporware, and the advertisement was optimistically placed six months too early. That used to happen often in the computer business, back in the wild & wooly days. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 13:39:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA15261; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:30:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:30:05 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 16:28:43 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Blue: bla, bla, bla Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810021630_MC2-5B6A-EBAA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"3pwUf2.0.Ik3.CVJ5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22961 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex This is why I wish Rich Murray would keep my stuff off of spf and out of the hands of ignoramuses. It only spreads confusion. Richard Blue writes: At last Jed Rothwell has turned the discussion to the statistics of CF results -- something that should have been part of the debate years ago but was generally given little attention. Translation: Richard Blue has given this little attention. The CF literature is chock full of statistics, but he has never read it so he has no idea what it says. Typically a CF investigator might make dozens or hundreds of extended runs, and then present 10% or less of those runs as demonstrating a positive effect. This is pure bullshit & blather, which is all the Richard Blue has ever posted, and all that he is capable of posting. The table in question says "total tests: 94" That's not hundreds. Miles does not present "10% or less" he presents every single run. Who wouldn't? McKubre will hand you all of his data from all tests, positive or negative, on a CD ROM. You can decide for yourself what it means. Now most of the data (I believe) have been analyzed using a statistical model . . . Blue says "I believe" this and I surmise that, and he raises all kinds of questions and objections which were addressed in the literature nine years ago, but he never bothers to read anything so his beliefs, conjectures and objections are worthless hot air. And yes, Rich, you can send this missive to Blue with my complements if you like, and tell him to stuff it where the sun does not shine. Ed Storms, bless his heart, sincerely wants a constructive dialog with Richard Blue and his ilk. I want them to shut up, go away, ignore cold fusion, and concentrate their energy and their pitiful IQs attacking something else -- anything else! -- like maybe the hot fusion program. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 16:38:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA30461; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 16:36:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 16:36:49 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Anti-Stokes and "Inverse" Compton Effect, ZPE Connection? Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 23:38:10 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <361562b6.487402593 mail-hub> References: <00b701bdec1a$bc89e360$658f85ce default> In-Reply-To: <00b701bdec1a$bc89e360$658f85ce 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: <"Zv9AX1.0.rR7.HEM5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22963 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 20:33:28 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: [snip] >If you can get the sparse 300-400 km/sec Solar Wind to give you anywhere >near the Solar Sail >Push, you're pulling off the second miracle of the century. :-) [snip] I read elsewhere (sorry no ref.) that the power of the solar wind is about 1/1000 of that of solar radiation. If the velocity is indeed 300 km/sec (i.e. c/1000), then the two factors neatly cancel out, so that the solar wind should deliver the same push as the radiation (if I did my sums right). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 18:07:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA28547; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 18:05:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 18:05:10 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 18:06:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810030106.SAA10059 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: what is VORTEX-L for? Resent-Message-ID: <"5PvMw1.0.oz6.5XN5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22964 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jerry says; > , build it and prove it before you start making claims > about what it can do. I don't see why some, and many do, get such a burr under their saddle about theory. I have heard this many times and I am trying to prove it. I doubt any proof or invention ever from from someone acting alone, without money, without help. One mentioned Edisen, he a lab with 40 people or so going to do what he did. Yes it took 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration but if it had all been Edisen's sweat he would have dehydrated overnight. And I am sure he had financial backing. Oh yea, Einstein also said it was more important what one did with one's mind than body. But I do not remember where I read it. It was a pretty long time ago. And I would bet any person, except those born in wealth, who wants to start a project has to beg for money to start. How much money do you owe? Unless you are really rich you probably owe money and you had to beg to get it. I think that is why get you ruffled when you see me beg, it is because you are a begger too. Only you lie to yourself about it and I uncover it. But the funny part is I owe no one. > > Curiously, you class yourself with great scientists which says much > about what you want out of this, not to mention bombarding the list > with endless argument and the poor me sob story. Yes I am begging for help and I am not ashamed. I feel my reason is just and many think worthwhile. Just because you can't see it and others can does not make you right. But at least I am trying to prove I am right. You aren't even trying to prove you are right, you want everyone to believe you are right. That's what I meant about Galileo. He had a theory he could not prove and they told him to shut up, where's the proof Mr. Big Shot Galileo, show us the proof. I can hear their words still echo across the ages. But Galileo would not shut up. So they imprisoned him. And it was probably someone like Jerry Decker that did it. > > You also wrote; > > The closest thing I can see so far is Hal Putoff's quantum jiggle > as I told David Little. It is the micro version. Whirlpower is the > macro version. > > Nothing is new and IMO we should credit those who did the original > work and experiments, not those who simply talk about and want their > name appended to the greats without one iota of proof. Nor do I, nor did I have to include quantum jiggle. And if I didn't and I am proven right, few would have ever seen the connection. And I do have an iota of proof. A real test of principle model. Now that is not final complete proof but I think it is accepted in many scientific circles as an iota. > > The thing I see novel in your approach is you are more clear about the > effect of gravity in re-establishing the wiggle when it > 'resets'...nothing more so far...and until you actually build it then > your claims are just that. And I am more clear about gravity in general. As to its effects throughout the universe, the tornado and how the vortex goes up (seemingly unknown to this list), the hurricane and how the wobble of the eye wall drives it, the Moon and how the wobble of the Earth drives it, ect. ect. If I ever get to talk to Vera Rubin we can settle this all very quickly. Her math on the spiral galaxy should fit right into my theory. And with that math I can give you all something to chew on for a long time to come. And for that I will not charge you a dime. If someone else comes along and steals the Holy Grail, which is highly likely, that evil person will make you and your family and your children pay through the nose for a very long time to come. I've seen it all before. And much of that will depend on getting there first with the proof and that is why I am willing to beg, wide out in the open, not in some bank behind closed doors. David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 18:39:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA05817; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 18:37:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 18:37:14 -0700 Message-ID: <029901bdee6e$59bb43e0$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Solar Wind Pressure Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 19:36:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"o1TC31.0.hQ1.8_N5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22965 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The Quiet Sun Solar Wind Comprised of 2 to 10 Hydrogen atoms/cm^2 * sec * steradian moving at 300 to 600 Km/sec, doesn't seem to add up to the photon pressure of about 1.0E-6 kg/m^2, Robin. Did I goof? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 20:52:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA14783; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 20:48:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 20:48:00 -0700 Message-ID: <36159E4B.22D7401C gte.net> Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 20:47:26 -0700 From: Bob Horst X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry References: <3.0.1.32.19980930221338.007114e8 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981001082858.0070d188 world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19981002014009.0091dbc0@mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MUa0F1.0.hc3.gvP5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22966 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In response to my questions, Scott Little wrote: > >Scott: What is the least excess power you can reliably detect? > > I am willing to custom fabricate a calorimeter for just about any > conceivable power level if there is sufficient justification. What I have > on hand and running right now is as follows: > > Low-Power Water Flow calorimeter (exhibited at ICCF-7): noise level of +/- > 0.02 watts yields a reliable detection limit of about 0.1 watts of excess > heat for total input powers less than 3 watts. Mitchell, would not answer my question, but Scott dug up some previous claims by Mitchell. If these were not true, I assume he would have retracted them at some point: 2. In earlier issues of Cold Fusion Times (e.g. Vol 5 No 2), his JET Energy Technology advertisement offers: Pi-notch Tested Nickel Electrodes (peak drive condition - 2.5 watts input power) (nominal 1.07-1.7 excess) (nominal 1.5-2.7 excess) (nominal 2.2-3.1 excess) (nominal 2.7-6.5 excess) (subject to availability) So Scott can reliably test 100 mw levels with existing equipment, and Mitchell can produce at least 1 watt excess. This says that the issue of the accuracy of Scott's calorimeter is moot. It does not matter that better calibration might increase its accuracy. The only problem is that Mitchell has not, or can not, deliver the advertised cathodes. -- Bob From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 21:11:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA22382; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 21:03:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 21:03:42 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: Blue: Rothwell: Storms: CF data selection? theory problems 10.2.98 Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 04:04:55 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <361694d4.500236347 mail-hub> References: <36150E8C.374F earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <36150E8C.374F earthlink.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: <"syYkk.0.bT5.R8Q5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22967 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:34:04 -0500, Rich Murray wrote: (Quoting Dick Blue) [snip] >While Jed now asserts that there are specific experimental >protocols, using alloys rather than pure Pd, that lead to >high reproducibility, I have yet to see these results identified. >Who did this, and where is it published? > >Perhaps the leader in establishing as CF gospel the notion that >CF success is largely a materials problem, is McKubre who, as I >understand it, put much effort into selecting bits of wire >from larger batches of candidate material. What I don't understand >is how it could be that he had learned the secret for selecting >"good" material, but still says that getting a cathode that >actually showed the effect was relatively rare. > Surely, all he is saying is that material with the "right" characteristics is rarely if ever produced. IOW the chance of selecting good material from "poor" stock is extremely low. >What totally escapes me is how the protocols employed by CETI, Miley, >Arata and Zhang, Miles, and others can be made to fit the picture >that Jed now presents. Let's not forget that Miley, for example, >claims that his cells kept on ticking, even after 40% of the cathode >material had been destroyed by a transmutation process!!!! My own idea on this is that a perfect cubic lattice is not highly conducive to CF. Therefore the best stock material probably contains some "impurities". It may even be that the best material for CF work is what would normally be considered "poor" material by the supplier (i.e. high on impurities). Hence as time goes by and suppliers get better at purifying their material, the number of CF "hits" gets fewer and fewer. This also means that it is very possible that the production of further impurities in the cathode by means of initial CF reactions may well enhance, rather than degrading, the ability of the cathode in question to produce reactions. [snip] >needs to consider in that regard. There are actual limits that >can be placed on the rate at which reaction cross sections vary >as a function of energy. That is the basis for my asserting I would be interested in an expression of these limits. [snip] >I see some value in making some simple estimates that approach >the problem from two sides. I think we can estimate the magnitude >of the perturbing potential that is required to induce nuclear >effects being claimed. I think we can estimate the magnitude These statements still appear to be based on the assumption that the only possible method of overcoming the Coulomb barrier is brute force. It precludes the notion that there may be more to the tunnelling concept than is currently understood and acknowledged. (I.e. possible very special circumstances in which tunnelling may occur where it otherwise would not). >of the perturbing potentials that can possibly arise from changes >in the chemical environment. Which of course leads to the assumption that the effect needs to be "perturbative" in nature. IOW he seems to be saying that the wave equations as we currently write them are correct and complete, and therefore any special result must perforce come from a perturbation of those equations. It doesn't appear to have occurred to him that the equations themselves may have been wrong from the word go, but in such a fashion that the discrepancy almost never shows up. (This is analogous to relativistic correction). > >Note that I said "changes in the chemical environment." Simply >putting deuterum into a Pd lattice does nothing. We know that >as an experimental fact. Indeed one of the claims of the CANR >advocates is that most mortals who attempt to replicate the >claimed successes will fail, because it somehow requires more >than just putting deuterium into Pd. The only way I can read >Ed Storms' assertions is that the thing that triggers the effect >is, itself, subtle and difficult to observe. Not difficult to observe, just difficult to achieve, when you don't know the circumstances required. > >Now don't we have a potential contradiction here? We are looking >for something that is both very powerful and very subtle. It No. Just subtle. "Powerful" only follows from Dick's mistaken impression that the Coulomb barrier can only be breached by force. >has to be strong enough to really significantly alter the nuclear >physics, without doing anything observable to the way the system No. Strength is not always required to alter the nuclear physics. This is precisely the problem that most modern day physicists appear to be having. (Can't help but think that this is a typical male thought pattern ;). [snip] >the claimed suppression of expected radiations. Since the >energy release still must be typical of a fusion event, it seems, >it's pretty hard to invent a reason to have that energy channeled >to lattice thermal energy in some unspecified, but hidden, way. I have presented two possibilities for this. 1) Energetic alphas - it's possible that these would show many more x-rays than are actually observed. 2) Pre-fusion energy release in the form of a smooth and continual release of photons with ever increasing energy. > >As for what aspect of the chemical environment is to be called >upon to account for the claimed effects, there seems to be a >constant waffling between things more typical of a highly ordered >lattice and things associated with the surfaces where disorder >might provide some large deviation from the more ordered bulk >material. Which is it to be, order or disorder? Both :). Or perhaps more accurately a very special sort of order. I.e. minimal symmetry order. Note that at the surface of a crystal, the symmetry is reduced. Note also that impurities can result in loss of symmetry. > >It has often been said that high deuterium density is required, >but now we can't decide wether that is a volume density in the >bulk material or merely a surface density. You may note that What is required IMO, is high density in that part of the crystal where the symmetry is at a minimum. This will always be true to some extent at the surface, but can also occur in the bulk, if the correct impurities are present. (BTW as impurities I would tend to choose elements that in their pure form have non-cubic lattices. e.g. B, Bi, Sb, etc.) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 21:31:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA29357; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 21:24:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 21:24:26 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Solar Wind Pressure Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 04:24:35 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3617a533.504428772 mail-hub> References: <029901bdee6e$59bb43e0$f0b4bfa8 default> In-Reply-To: <029901bdee6e$59bb43e0$f0b4bfa8 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: <"fJs4L2.0.3A7.fRQ5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22968 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 2 Oct 1998 19:36:28 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >The Quiet Sun Solar Wind Comprised of 2 to 10 >Hydrogen atoms/cm^2 * sec * steradian moving at 300 to 600 Km/sec, doesn't >seem to add up to >the photon pressure of about 1.0E-6 kg/m^2, Robin. Did I goof? > >Regards, Frederick I'm not sure who has "goofed". I am having a little trouble understanding what you wrote above. As I understand it, a steradian is a unit of solid angle. It seems to me that the number of atoms per second through an area would be a function of distance from the source. Does this mean that the measurement given above was taken in Earth orbit (i.e. at a distance of 1 AU)? And how does this relate to the solid angle? Also, the quote I used for "solar wind power", was really just hearsay. So I could well be wrong. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 2 23:15:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA27004; Fri, 2 Oct 1998 23:12:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 23:12:58 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981002211239.00d73bc8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:12:39 -0700 To: "Don J. S. Adams" From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Objective Art - When reasoning fails Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net, vortex-L@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"HFE632.0.nb6.g1S5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22969 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Don and all; Sorry for the delay. I had to catch up on some Autocad drawings. At 11:01 PM 9/25/98 -0500, Don J. S. Adams wrote: >Hi Dennis! > > >Like the fellow who critiqued you... I too didnt pay much attention >to your initial poem posts. Until you said to read it again. WOW! >Am I ever glad I did! Very cool... AND relevant in my humble opinion! >Nicely done and thanks for sharing it! I really appreciate your perspective >and different / refreshing views. Please explain the following if you don't >mind; > >1.) Nonconfrontational modes as alternative to flame wars, this appears > to be a subtle suggestion on your part for motiviating people who disagree > to use more 'civil' methods of discussion. However I get the feeling > you are indicating something deeper here...something more... please explain? I think that the same info could be exchanged as a team effort to find the truth as opposed to a seemingly unfriendly arguement. If people did their homework and were persistant, fuzzy info would become clear. I'd bet that every OU device discussed here has truth behind it and does work as claimed. The difficulty, I believe, is trying to replicate the experiment with out going through the 10, 20 ... or 50 years of development the inventor went through. Getting angry if it doesn't work on the first try may be unreasonable in such a case. >2.) Really loved the extracted text from the book! Simply wonderful! I have been > of this opinion myself for a very long time also! See my post on Acoustic > Fractals! Amazing beautiful music generated from recursive math! I immediately went to that URL when you mentioned it. I always thought it possible to compose music with equations. Anyone got an equation to midi stream generator? I know immediately when I hear music that I find appealing. I'd like to be able to translate those favorite musical segments to an equation. Then I'd know how to compose with equations. Reflections > of eternity? But here is a question for you, is it possible to precisely > isolate and define these 'real' properties of which the author speaks? I live at the Piano Factory which is a community for artists of all disciplines. The evil landlord prepaid the 1% MHFA mortgage and wants to disperse us because of money. We have a gallery where shows are held. I think striving to express greater numbers of levels in an art piece is fun and challenging. An OU device interacting with higher dimensions would instill a greater sense of awe and mystery than say a picture of a bowl of fruit. The NEA would not have things like a crucifix submerged in urine given an objective art criterea for grants. > If so can they be described without the use of anecdotal stories, emotional > associations or such? I felt the author seemed to still rely on sensate > representations, i.e. metaphorical meanings perceived as being embedded > in the statue at Hindu Kush. I mean shouldnt the 'values' or meaning transcend > what he provided as the detailed explanations of their perceptions? But then > I supose how do we use the serial phonetic construct of our language to adequately > contain an idea that is even beyond lateral thinking... way, way beyond.... > perhaps even on the outside of everything we perceive in our consensus, contextual > physical reality.... hmmmm perhaps it is in this modality of thinking that we would > need to be to ever truly discover 'FREE ENERGY'. Hey, you know... the more I think > about your post the MORE I REALLY LIKE IT!!!!!! ;) GIVE US MORE!!!! What do you think of this? Is information or knowledge an energy form? If so, when one teaches another, there is energy transfer. However, one still knows this info. Given the conservation of energy law, how can this be? Has energy been created when learning occurs? Does the teacher have an info vacuum from this knowledge transfer that compells the universe to fill this void with new knowledge? Is information the ultimate Free Energy? Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 04:01:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA24084; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 04:00:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 04:00:28 -0700 Message-ID: <02d001bdeebd$0d374ec0$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: ZPE Extraction and the Fine Structure Constant? Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 04:59:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"9XkzB.0.Eu5.BFW5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22970 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex In the Electromagnetic Interaction in the collision of an Electron and a Proton/Deuteron: +/- k*q^2/hbar*c = 1/137 = Alpha Might it be possible that the "tapped" ZPE energy is 137 times the collision energy,and in the collision of like charges 1/137 of the collision energy? A leap of faith? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 09:40:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28848; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 09:38:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 09:38:56 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981003113726.00a4f3c8 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 11:37:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"xTkka1.0.e27.VCb5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22971 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 14:13 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>better, "Waveform reconstruction requires knowledge of the time constants >>of the system". > No. Determining the impulse, and step function, response >of a system is standard engineering practice. I agree, if you wish to correct the output signal for the finite response time of your system. However, if you are willing to wait many time constants to obtain steady-state power balance measurements....or if you are satisfied with integrating the power signals over a complete experimental run to obtain an energy balance measurement, there is no need to precisely characterize the system time constants. Instead of referring me to signal books, please explain how you think that a lack of waveform reconstruction can adversely affect either the steady-state power balance measurement or total energy balance measurement. 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 Sat Oct 3 09:45:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28872; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 09:38:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 09:38:57 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981003114229.00a527f8 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 11:42:29 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: ICCF-7 p.372, Swartz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"dbHUQ3.0.z27.WCb5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22972 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In the ICCF-7 proceedings, p. 372 in Swartz' paper: Can anyone explain the Y-axis of the upper graph on this page to me? Only one gridline is labelled...what are the values for the others? Also why does the note say "Overunity If > 1" when the Y-axis is labelled "Excess Power [Watts]"? If it is truly EXCESS power being plotted on the Y-axis, the note should say "Overunity if > 0". 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 Sat Oct 3 11:38:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA28218; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 11:37:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 11:37:42 -0700 Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 14:35:56 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Blue: Rothwell . . . Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810031438_MC2-5B7D-9BF4 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"8OV882.0.pu6.sxc5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22973 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Robin van Spaandonk writes: Surely, all [Jed] is saying is that material with the "right" characteristics is rarely if ever produced. IOW the chance of selecting good material from "poor" stock is extremely low. That is right and wrong. Good palladium is extremely rare, except for one alloy which was developed by Johnson-Matthey in the 1930s for the Milton-Roy brand hydrogen filter. It was designed to have the high structural integrity when saturated with hydrogen. Otherwise the palladium filter would crack, and contamination would seep through. This is "Type A." Unfortunately it is not available. Fleischmann know about it long ago. When he decided to perform CF experiments in early 1980s, he went to J-M and asked for some. He advised the Japanese and others to do the same thing, but they did not want to, because they would have been beholden to J-M. They wanted to reinvent it themselves, but it turned out they did not have the skill to reinvent it. J-M was not inclined to assist them. The chance of selecting good material from "poor" stock is not low, it is virtually zero. Selecting palladium samples at random, you could run a thousand CF experiments, or a million, and you might never see excess heat. As Ed Storms says, it is like picking up pieces of gravel from the roadside and testing them for superconductivity. However, there are well-documented ways to test a stock of CF cathode material in advance, and find out if it is good or bad. You can test one or two samples from a batch to see if the batch as a whole has promise. And there are ways to treat the materials, improve quality, and increase your chance of success. These tests take time and money. They must be done by hand, because we do not have the funding to automate the process. You take a batch of cathodes, say 50 to 100 pieces of metal. You test four or five samples to see if the batch is promising. If it is, you perform triage, examining and testing every sample, sorting them into good, bad, and indifferent. You look at them with a light microscope or an SEM; you do electrochemical tests on them; you measure the index of expansion, and so on, as described by Storms. You are likely to end up with five good cathodes. You treat these cathodes to improve them, and then you run a full-scale CF experiments. You are very likely to get robust excess heat at a high level, which is easy to confirm. The problem is, this process I have summarized in a few sentences takes six months to a year. After a year of excruciating labor, 6 days a week, 12 hours a day, you are lucky if you end up with two or three good cathodes. That is why a CF scientist is not anxious to lend a good cathode to someone like Scott Little. Of course this task could done in a few days with prototype testing equipment, or a few hours on a production line. Palladium which fails the test could be melted down and remanufactured. If we had, say, $10 or $20 million, we could speed up the process a thousand times and develop much more reliable cathodes. Johnson-Matthey learned how to do it 60 years ago. Looking for a good cathode by hand is like the job Curie took upon herself in 1904, when she started with a large pile of pitchblende and extracting a little bit of radium from it. The process can be automated, but the first time when it was done by hand so it took a long time. In most CF research since 1989, people have blindly experimented with randomly selected samples, without first testing to see whether these samples have the right characteristics, and without monitoring the materials parameters during the experiment in case a good sample goes bad, by cracking or swelling. This kind of experiment is a waste of time. It is a crapshoot. At the breakneck pace of one cathode per month, you might get positive results once every few hundred years. The Japanese NEDO project performed something like 80 tests in a row without seeing anything, because they did not look for the materials characteristics recommended at ICCF conferences and in papers published by Fleischmann, Storms, Cravens, Oriani and others. This must stand as some kind of record for bone-headed mindless repetition of a mistake. What I am describing is not some kind of closely guarded secret. Electrochemists have known about these characteristics since the late 19th century, decades before the first cold fusion experiments were performed in 1926. They have learned a great deal more about this subject since 1989, but for some weird reason, people refuse to read what has been learned. Some people, like Dick Blue and Morrison, refuse to believe that palladium can have material characteristics! They must think it is the only substance in the universe with unvarying physical and chemical structures, with exactly the same grain size and shape, and precisely the same dopants in every lattice position. Look at SEM photos of palladium samples and you will soon agree with Ed Storms: no two samples are alike. They are as different as snowflakes. However, like snowflakes, they fit in certain patterns, they can be grouped and characterized, like snow that is good for skiing. With enough money and talent we could learn to control range of variation in palladium material just as we control the silicon in semiconductors and the glass in fiber optic cables. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 11:38:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA28291; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 11:37:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 11:37:51 -0700 Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 14:35:36 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Little's calorimeter test Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810031438_MC2-5B7D-9BF2 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"q-nqd2.0.sv6.-xc5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22974 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little Mitch Swartz are debating "waveform reconstruction." This issue is too technical for me, I do not understand it. However, I did understand the lecture Little gave at ICCF7, and the test he performed, and I think it proved conclusively that his calorimeter can measure energy with a high degree of precision and accuracy. The test was performed with a rechargeable battery and a resistance heater as the heat source. In the first phase of the experiment, the battery was charged up, which is an endothermic process. The calorimeter showed the expected energy deficit. In the second phase, the battery was discharged through the resistance heater, an exothermic process. The heat deficit plus the excess heat added up very close to zero, as expected. I do not understand how Swartz can argue with this test. By the way, Little neglected to mention that this test is particularly appropriate because this is an electrochemical process, like cold fusion. The test confirms what we all know, which is that calorimeters are as good at measuring endothermic reactions as exothermic ones. If cold fusion heat was chemical, sensitive calorimeters would show a deficit and a net gain of zero. Instead, they show huge excesses, often thousands of times greater than a chemical process could account for. Skeptics sometimes claim that cells are "charged up" with chemical energy during long latent periods, and then discharged during brief excess heat events. These people have not examined actual data from real experiments. In many cases the alleged "charging-up period" is shorter than the discharge, so the endothermic power deficit during the charging-up period would have to be much larger than the power gain in the next phase. The power gain is easily detected, sometimes at Sigma 50 and above. The deficit power would have to be greater, and even more obvious, at a higher Sigma, yet no sign of it has ever been detected. The other obvious problem with this hypothesis is that it requires the cathode magically store 2 to 3 orders of magnitude more chemical energy than coal, gasoline, or any other chemical. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 13:29:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA01880; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 13:26:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 13:26:47 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 12:33:21 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ZPE Extraction and the Fine Structure Constant? Resent-Message-ID: <"p9DtL.0.AT.6Ye5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22975 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:59 AM 10/3/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >In the Electromagnetic Interaction in the collision of an Electron and a >Proton/Deuteron: > >+/- k*q^2/hbar*c = 1/137 = Alpha > >Might it be possible that the "tapped" ZPE energy is 137 times the collision >energy,and >in the collision of like charges 1/137 of the >collision energy? > >A leap of faith? :-) > >Regards, Frederick If this were true then tokamak plasmas, and stars, would be exhibiting anomalous heating at a runaway rate. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 14:39:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA22175; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 14:37:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 14:37:59 -0700 Message-ID: <030101bdef16$19571ba0$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: ZPE Extraction and the Fine Structure Constant? Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 15:37:13 -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: <"zd3q9.0.1Q5.raf5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22976 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, October 03, 1998 2:30 PM Subject: Re: ZPE Extraction and the Fine Structure Constant? Horace Heffner wrote: >At 4:59 AM 10/3/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>In the Electromagnetic Interaction in the collision of an Electron and a >>Proton/Deuteron: >> >>+/- k*q^2/hbar*c = 1/137 = Alpha >> >>Might it be possible that the "tapped" ZPE energy is 137 times the collision >>energy,and >>in the collision of like charges 1/137 of the >>collision energy? >> >>A leap of faith? :-) >> >>Regards, Frederick > > >If this were true then tokamak plasmas, and stars, would be exhibiting >anomalous heating at a runaway rate. The Sun does about 3.86E-4 watts/kg and judging by the Missing Neutrinos the source of 2/3 of it's energy output is unexplained, the Tokamak's heat output hasn't been measured using Scott's Calorimeter, and the Correa's PAGD is apparently showing a bit of ZPE extraction, also. The output of a Fusion reaction, say 3.5 Mev for a D-D doesn't happen on every collision Blubber Breath. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 15:18:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA00869; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 15:17:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 15:17:28 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981003171942.00923100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 17:19:42 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Little's calorimeter test In-Reply-To: <199810031438_MC2-5B7D-9BF2 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cSa5a1.0.VD.t9g5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22977 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:35 PM 10/3/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >...I did understand the >lecture Little gave at ICCF7, and the test he performed, and I think it proved >conclusively that his calorimeter can measure energy with a high degree of >precision and accuracy. > >The test was performed with a rechargeable battery..... Thanks, Jed. FYI, a description of this test and that nice-looking output plot I showed are contained in the description of our dual-method calorimeter at http://www.eden.com/~little/dual.htm The plot is Figure "F", towards the end. 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 Oct 3 15:37:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA09012; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 15:36:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 15:36:26 -0700 Message-ID: <069501bdef1e$0f348740$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: , "Don J. S. Adams" Cc: , , Subject: Kerr Solution Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 18:34:55 -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: <"HRF5Q2.0.cC2.fRg5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22978 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What can you tell us of the Kerr solution? What happens if a gravitating object rotates is the so-called drag effect. This is easiest to explain using a spherical body (e.g. a star). When the star is nonrotating, a test mass (a small body) which is shot into the direction of the centre of mass of the star will stay on a straight trajectory (on a `radius'). With a rotating star, this is not the case any more. The rotation somehow manages to `drag along' spacetime around it so that the test mass would deviate slightly from the straight line path and take a course into the direction of the rotation. As you might know, gravity obeys Einstein's Field equations, and every solution of those equations might potentially be realized in the `real world'. The solution of the field equations for a spherical, rotating body is known as the `Kerr solution', and it predicts the mentioned drag effect. I'm not sure whether the solution for a torus is known (at least I wasn't able to find anything in that direction), but I'm quite sure that the drag effect will take place anyway. After all one can show that any mass distribution of finite extension will more or less look like a point mass (or a sphere) the farther away you are, but the information about angular momentum must not be lost. http://madsci.wustl.edu/posts/907332964.Ph.r.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 16:44:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA25495; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 16:42:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 16:42:56 -0700 Message-ID: <3616A9DD.6FC2 earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 17:49:01 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Storms: Rothwell: Blue: Pd cathode problems 10.3.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"I-XEP3.0.HE6.0Qh5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22979 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Rothwell: Storms: CF data selection? theory issues 10.2.98 Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 08:33:36 -0600 From: Edmund Storms To: rmforall earthlink.net I would like to answer some the comments made in this exchange as follows: Ed Storms Rich Murray wrote: > > Subject: Re: Rothwell: CF cathodes reproducibility 10.1.98 > Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:43:46 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > > At last Jed Rothwell has turned the discussion to the statistics > of CF results -- something that should have been part of the > debate years ago but was generally given little attention. > > However, I don't think Jed's assertions reguarding what can > be concluded from the statistics he sites are entirely correct. > More importantly it appears that we are still being offered > only a selected subset of the available data, and that has to > send up a red flag. It is so very easy to distort this picture > by selecting data that appears to support a particular position. I agree. > > Typically a CF investigator might make dozens or hundreds of > extended runs, and then present 10% or less of those runs as > demonstrating a positive effect. It is important to know that > the measurement was always of an "excess heat". That is to > say, there is always heat produced by a known source to be > subtracted from the observed heat to leave something considered > to be an excess. It is also significant that many of these > measurements employ isoperibolic calorimetry, which requires > a determination of the calorimeter constant under conditions > that closely replicate those for the measurements for effect. > > For a significant fraction of the claimed positives, the results > have been statistically marginal, at best. All that is required > to get a positive result is to overlook a systematic bias that > may influence the results of some runs differently than others. This is not true. I suggest you read my paper, "Measurements of Excess Heat From a Pons-Fleischmann-Type Electrolytic Cell Using Palladium Sheet" in Fusion Technol. 23 (1993) 230. As you will see, the production of excess energy can be sudden and dramatic. This behavior is seen by everyone, only the magnitude is different. In may case, my calorimeter was good to ±0.5 watts, while I observed a 7 W excess. McKubre used calorimeters good to ±0.05 W, while he saw 2 W extra. These are not subtle effects. > > Now most of the data (I believe) have been analyzed using a > statistical model that assumes random variations that follow > a normal distribution with an ESTIMATED variance. This clearly > is an area where implicit assumptions get made, which are then > overlooked in further discussions. If, as it seems, there > are data sets with sufficient data, what we should have seen > by now are the actual distributions of results, so that we > can test the assumptions regarding their statistics. Somehow, > I doubt that all the estimates will look very good when > compared with real data. > > While Jed now asserts that there are specific experimental > protocols, using alloys rather than pure Pd, that lead to > high reproducibility, I have yet to see these results identified. > Who did this, and where is it published? > > Perhaps the leader in establishing as CF gospel the notion that > CF success is largely a materials problem, is McKubre who, as I > understand it, put much effort into selecting bits of wire > from larger batches of candidate material. What I don't understand > is how it could be that he had learned the secret for selecting > "good" material, but still says that getting a cathode that > actually showed the effect was relatively rare. I have shown how "good" material can be selected by a pretest, and which properties of the material are important. Mike selects by evaluating the loading behavior. If a high composition can not be achieved, no excess energy is expected. In either case, commercial palladium contains very little of the potentially active material. Occasionally, specially made material will have a higher success rate. Unfortunately, we do not yet know how to manufacture material having consistent properties. > > What totally escapes me is how the protocols employed by CETI, Miley, > Arata and Zhang, Miles, and others can be made to fit the picture > that Jed now presents. Let's not forget that Miley, for example, > claims that his cells kept on ticking, even after 40% of the cathode > material had been destroyed by a transmutation process!!!! An interesting observation which, I agree, requires an explanation. > > Generally speaking, "excess heat" can be defined only in terms of > a long-time average effect. Many, if not all, of the published > data that I have examined exhibits what I would characterize as > "noise." That is to say the heat shows considerable short-term > variation, and that often hold true whether or not there is ultimately > an excess on average. You and I are viewing different data. What data are you referring to? > > Now I want to contemplate the following excercise in experimental > statistics. Many hours of electrolysis are logged on many cathodes > taken from many different batches of wire during many separate > experimental runs. Let's cut all these data into short segments > which we label by three numbers: run, sample, and time. A waste of time. The effect is not subtle when "good" material is used. > > In fact if you expand on the concept of snippits to include a > subdivision of each cathode, we can speculate as to whether each > subdivision contributes equally to the heat output of a cell. > It seems quit reasonable, in light of the claimed importance > of subtle differences in the material, that some parts of the > cathode do better than others. It's not even clear that such > things as current density are equivalent for all parts of the > cathode. That leads me to suggest that the concept that a > cathode is "all good" or "all bad", and that it retains that > character through a given run or even multiple runs is somewhat > suspect. If we had the statistical distributions of the > data snippits, as I suggest, we could actually begin to answer > such questions. Samples of good palladium are very inhomogeneous. Therefore, only a few regions become active. As everyone agrees, the nuclear events destroy the nuclear-active sites. If only a few potential sites are present, the sample quickly dies. On the other hand, I have seen one sample which was so active that I had a difficult time stopping energy production. Such material is rare and highly prized. A statistical analysis has no meaning under these conditions. It would be like trying to prove the existence of superconductivity by taking random samples of material and averaging the result. Must material would be dead, so the average would show a small positive indication. Does this approach make sense to you? > > So all this debate had been about is an effect that is, on > average, ZERO. To get a positive result there has to be > some selections made. The trick is to determine just precisely > how and why most of the data gets discarded. > > Dick Blue > > Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: CF debate 9.30.98 > Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:51:16 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > > Again we return to one point in the discussion where Ed Storms > stalls out and refuses to move further. The question which > he poses is, I think, whether the environment which surrounds > a nucleus can influence nuclear wave functions and nuclear > reaction processes? I have stated that I doubt that the environment can influence nuclear wave functions, but can influence nuclear processes. The two statements are separate in my mind rather than connected as in Dick's mind. Can Dick live with this approach? > > I have answered that question several times now in the affirmative. > YES, CANR is possible. I have not denied that. I am even willing > to refer to specific examples where such effects have been > investigated both experimentally and theoretically. Please stop > saying that I claim that CANR is impossible. Can't we move > on? Please give me an example of a CANR process you believe? However, do not include muon fusion, because this is, at best, a subset of CANR and is not the process we are discussing. I, at least, am discussing a process that can cause fusion or other nuclear reactions in a metal lattice in the absence of muons or any other obvious cause. Do you believe this is possible? > > Ed missed the point I made about fusion data extrapolating smoothly > down to zero kinetic energy of relative motion without unexpected > discontinuities. That is a significant observation. It is not > just "theory", although there is certainly some theory that Ed > needs to consider in that regard. There are actual limits that > can be placed on the rate at which reaction cross sections vary > as a function of energy. That is the basis for my asserting > that it is misleading to use the labels "hot" and "cold" as > applied to fusion. Dick Blue's assertion -about fusion data extrapolating smoothly down to zero kinetic energy of relative motion without unexpected discontinuities- is wrong. I suggest he read the paper "Anomalously Enhanced D(d,p)T Reaction in Pd and PdO Observed at Very Low Bombarding Energies" by Kasagi et al in Proc. ICCF-7. > > So, if we are really trying to explore questions relating to > the influence of a chemical environment upon nuclear reaction > processes, what is a reasonable way to proceed? I have been > suggesting that we ought to make use of the information that > has been derived from other investigations. I see no reason > to adopt a position that we are totally ignorant about this > subject. I'm game. What information do you have in mind? > > I see some value in making some simple estimates that approach > the problem from two sides. I think we can estimate the magnitude > of the perturbing potential that is required to induce nuclear > effects being claimed. I think we can estimate the magnitude > of the perturbing potentials that can possibly arise from changes > in the chemical environment. Yes, if your model is applied. Obviously, unless some novel assumptions are applied, we would find that the perturbing potentials are too small. This is the reason new approaches are being explored. > > Note that I said "changes in the chemical environment." Simply > putting deuterum into a Pd lattice does nothing. We know that > as an experimental fact. Indeed one of the claims of the CANR > advocates is that most mortals who attempt to replicate the > claimed successes will fail, because it somehow requires more > than just putting deuterium into Pd. The only way I can read > Ed Storms' assertions is that the thing that triggers the effect > is, itself, subtle and difficult to observe. Yes, this is true. > > Now don't we have a potential contradiction here? We are looking > for something that is both very powerful and very subtle. It > has to be strong enough to really significantly alter the nuclear > physics, without doing anything observable to the way the system > behaves chemically and thermodynamically. How can that be? The nuclear-active regions in PdD are small, isolated and impossible to study as individual sites at the present time. All we can measure are the properties of the surrounding material and then only as average values. Therefore, we do not know if the chemical and thermodynamic properties have changed. Indeed, there is good reason to suspect that these regions are superconducting at room temperature. A number of people, including myself, are exploring this possibility. > > I have been suggesting that it really can't be as Ed Storms would > have it. It would seem to me that the ball is in his court. He > has to explain some of this to us before further dialog can have > much meaning. I don't see that bald assertions about this or > that being possible will lead anywhere. If you want an explanation, I suggest you read the writings of people who have proposed an explanation, as noted in my review. You can take your pick as to which to believe, if any. No use is served by my proposing a possible explanation, only to have it dismissed as not fitting Dick Blue's world view. A judgement of which, if any, might be correct will have to wait until the necessary confirmations are done, a very slow process in the present climate of skepticism. > > Although we keep hearing that there are theories out there that > have a potential for explaining cold fusion, all my attempts to > lure some of this out into the open, so that it can be examined > in the light of day, have come up short. The fact is that the > experimental claims present a very difficult target for any > theory to address. As I have noted, a theory which might account > for a huge enhancement of the reaction rate still must address > the claimed suppression of expected radiations. Since the > energy release still must be typical of a fusion event, it seems, > it's pretty hard to invent a reason to have that energy channeled > to lattice thermal energy in some unspecified, but hidden, way. Yes, I agree, but this does not stop the search. This is the nature of science in my mind. > > As for what aspect of the chemical environment is to be called > upon to account for the claimed effects, there seems to be a > constant waffling between things more typical of a highly ordered > lattice and things associated with the surfaces where disorder > might provide some large deviation from the more ordered bulk > material. Which is it to be, order or disorder? The events are proposed to occur in an ordered lattice located within the surface region, i.e. within a few microns from the surface. The exact thickness of the active layer is uncertain although lattice damage has been seen to penetrate a few microns. > > It has often been said that high deuterium density is required, > but now we can't decide wether that is a volume density in the > bulk material or merely a surface density. You may note that > Ed Storms can't decide on that choice himself. It's rather > sad that after 9 years of experimentation, we don't even know > which density is more important. Of course that is but another > indiction that there may be problems with the consistancy of > the data that is being offered. You are wrong, I can and have decided. You misunderstand what I have said and, once again, run with your misunderstanding to make a general rejection of the field. In order for a nuclear-active region to be created, a very high local composition must be achieved and this region must convert to a new phase. This local composition is always located in the near-surface region. However, for this high composition to exist, the surrounding bulk material must also have a high, but not as high, composition. It is this surrounding composition, i.e. the average bulk value, which we measure and use to evaluate the sample. These values do not represent the properties of the nuclear-active regions. Finely divided material has a high surface energy which helps in achieving the high surface composition. Normal sized material requires the use of an applied voltage to achieve the extra energy to produce the required compositions. > > Dick Blue > > Subject: Re: Little: Storms--Blue debate 9.30.98 > Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:23:32 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > > I really don't understand the origins of the concept that all > observed anomolies constitute evidence for some profound > irregularity in the universe. It is more likely, I would suggest, > that an observational anomoly is just that. There are an > infinite variety of ways to screw up a measurement, any measurement. > It happens all the time. Yes, but this is not the point. There are also many ways to do the experiment correctly. Is the cup half full or half empty? > > Of necessity, then those of us engaged in experimental science must > screen results to sort out the good, the bad, and the ugly. Somehow, > there seems to have developed a little cult of people who find this > chore distasteful, when it applies to claims for a particular brand > of miracle marketed as CF or CANR or Massive Transmutations. > What I have been trying to suggest is that, like it or not, the > claims still have to be evaluated in the context of related experience. I am not a member of this cult. On the other hand, there also exists a cult of people who reject too much so that they overlook important new phenomenon. Is Dick Blue a member of this cult? > > Those who want to avoid a potentially critical evaluation of their > favorite anomolies seek to discredit the process by insisting that > "theory" must not be employed in the debate. This is nothing more > than an attempt to hide the weaknesses of their position. Theory is necessary but it is not required to accept unusual observations. Without this initial acceptance, at least for awhile, no incentive exists to search for a theory. The search is in full swing. > If some claim does not make good sense, that should be noted. The > cold fusion claims do not make good sense. The claims for massive > nuclear transmutations are totally absurd. OK, so you have some > anomaly. Enjoy it for whatever it's worth. However, when you move > beyond that to claim that the anomaly is the result of some perported > reaction process you, too, must have a "theory." The question is > how anomalous is that theory? Dick still fights with the chicken and egg problem. Can't we move on? > > Dick Blue Subject: Blue: bla, bla, bla Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:30:05 -0700 Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 16:28:43 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Reply-To:vortex-l eskimo.com To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com To: Vortex [Reduced to the gentile gist by Rich Murray] Richard Blue writes: "At last Jed Rothwell has turned the discussion to the statistics of CF results -- something that should have been part of the debate years ago but was generally given little attention. Typically a CF investigator might make dozens or hundreds of extended runs, and then present 10% or less of those runs as demonstrating a positive effect." [Rothwell] The table in question says "total tests: 94". That's not hundreds. Miles does not present "10% or less". He presents every single run. Who wouldn't? McKubre will hand you all of his data from all tests, positive or negative, on a CD ROM. You can decide for yourself what it means. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 18:40:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA14250; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 18:36:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 18:36:57 -0700 Message-ID: <032201bdef33$9a39ed20$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Microwave the Case Carbon Catalyst Experiment? Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 19:08:25 -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: <"BWId71.0.aU3.v4j5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22980 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex When Ed Storms start suggesting "Room Temperature Superconductivity in PdD", it might be prudent to run a microwave radiation experiment, something akin to Dr. Case's Activated Carbon-Pd-Deuterium Experiment. No telling if the Fullerines in the carbon lattice might be doing something similar. The 2.45 Gigahertz Microwaves should get into the lattice without much difficulty. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 19:28:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA31695; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 19:19:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 19:19:32 -0700 Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 22:18:25 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Blue: bla, bla, bla Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810032220_MC2-5B88-C0CE compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"4xWJS1.0.5l7.nij5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22981 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Rich Murray writes: [Reduced to the gentile gist by Rich Murray] You mean the goy version. Without the chutzpah. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 20:22:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA16554; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 20:18:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 20:18:50 -0700 Message-ID: <033001bdef45$af88c540$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Deuteration and Deuterogenolysis of Animal-Vegetable Oils. Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 21:17:56 -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: <"8mlX1.0.Q24.Nak5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22982 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The Routine Hydrogenation of Animal or Vegetable Oils, such as in the making of Margarine can be used for Deuterating or Tritiating these oils/fats to increase the D/T count to several percent. The unsaturated Triglycerides in the oils/fats allows this without losing the Carboxyl Group, COOH, that makes the triglyceride high polar and thus gives it a high "Power Factor" or Loss Tangent in high frequency EM Fields as evidenced in microwaving, bacon, butter, or margarine. Also Whale Oil,Horace. :-) Going by the high temperatures these oils can get to for deep-fat frying they get a bit interesting for the CF/ZPE experiments. Just add 11 "herbs and spices" and Chicken Little will do your Calorimetry for you. :-) Sorry, Scott I just couldn't resist. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 22:15:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA14937; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 22:14:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 22:14:15 -0700 Message-ID: <3616F789.7931 earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 23:20:25 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: Storms, Claytor papers on WWW 10.3.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JQ3B01.0.Jf3.cGm5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22983 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: http://www.nde.lanl.gov/cf/storms/iccf7p1.htm Factors affecting heat production in a Pons-Fleischmann Cell Edmund Storms, 2140 Paseo Ponderosa, Santa Fe, NM 87501 INTRODUCTION Lack of reproducibility is still the major reason CANR is not generally accepted and has not advanced into commercial use. The ability to reproduce any phenomenon depends on knowing the major variables and conditions required for the events to operate. In the case of cold fusion, even fundamental factors such as the D/Pd ratio and the crystal structure of the nuclear-active regions are not known. It is the intent of this paper to demonstrate several techniques for obtaining such information and the results obtained from their application to the Pons-Fleischmann Effect. Reproducibility is a materials problem. The nuclear reactions only occur when the required chemical environment is created, the so-called nuclear-active-state (NAS). Some techniques and environments create these conditions more easily than others. This paper will address the electrolytic method of reacting deuterium with palladium..... http://www.nde.lanl.gov/cf/tritweb.htm ABSTRACT Plasma Discharges on Palladium Thomas N. Claytor, LANL Over the past year we have been able to demonstrate that a plasma loading method produces an exciting and unexpected amount of tritium from small palladium wires. In contrast to electrochemical hydrogen or deuterium loading of palladium, this method yields a reproducible tritium generation rate when various electrical and physical conditions are met. Small diameter wires (100 - 250 microns) have been used with gas pressures above 200 torr at voltages and currents of about 2000 V at 3-5 A. By carefully controlling the sputtering rate of the wire, runs have been extended to hundreds of hours allowing a significant amount (> 10’s nCi) of tritium to accumulate. We will show tritium generation rates for deuterium-palladium foreground runs that are up to 25 times larger than hydrogen-palladium control experiments using materials from the same batch. We will illustrate the difference between batches of annealed palladium and as received palladium from several batches as well as the effect of other metals (Pt, Ni, Nb, Zr, V, W, Hf) to demonstrate that the tritium generation rate can vary greatly from batch to batch. 1. INTRODUCTION We will report on our tritium generation results from a palladium wire-plate configuration subjected to periodic pulsed deuterium or hydrogen plasma. This configuration is reproducible within a batch and produces a measurable amount of tritium in a few days. As in other work in this area, it has been found that the output is very batch dependent and sensitive to material impurities that prevent hydriding. As in our previous work1,3, all tritium data was obtained from several batches of 100 or 250 micron wire and 250 micron thick plate from J&M or Goodfellow metals. In these experiments most of the tritium data was obtained with on-line tritium gas monitors. Several times, the gas was oxidized and tested with a scintillation counter. Some have criticized the detection of tritium because the signals seem to be (a) insignificant, (b) tritium is ubiquitous, and (c) the palladium metal is subject to possible tritium contamination. The magnitude of the signals discussed in this paper are multi-sigma and are sometimes over a hundred times the tritium background in the supply gas. Furthermore, the rate of tritium evolution in the sealed system may be the most sensitive and rapid indicator of anomalous nuclear behavior in deuterided metals. As such, it is well suited for parametric investigations. We will briefly discuss the possible avenues for contamination and show that each is negligible, or not a factor, in the experiments described. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 3 23:50:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA01516; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 23:50:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 23:50:04 -0700 Message-ID: <36171B3C.7748 keelynet.com> Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 01:52:44 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Robert Pavlita website Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"u3rSl.0.XN.Rgn5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22984 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gnorts! Finally, after years of lethargy with regard to the amazing work of Robert Pavlita, using a combination of geometry and specific materials to produce amazing phenomena without outside energy input, a website is now up devoted to what he discovered and the permutations that are being investigated by others. Check out; ========================= Jerry, Finally got small web site up, basic of Pavlita: The Geometry of Robert Pavlita; http://www.ddaccess.com/michaeldonovan Not good at computer stuff, graphics don't work yet. But it is a start, and really enough for engineer with real interest to get started, basics are there, just much work. But would love for you to take a look, and would be interested in any comments. (that goes for anyone else who can help him flesh it out..>> Jerry) Best, Michael Donovan michaeldonovan ddaccess.com Norfolk, VA =========== Michael could probably use some help with his site if you are open to offering some free assistance..thanks! It is an important project and long overdue. -- Jerry Wayne Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 00:59:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA12290; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 00:56:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 00:56:31 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 00:02:58 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Question on magnetic star (off topic) Resent-Message-ID: <"Qtj0k.0.j_2.leo5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22986 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:32 AM 10/2/98, sno wrote: >Was wondering about the x-rays and gamma rays from the magnetic star >that arrived >27 Sep....I assume that they were traveling at speed of light, are >there any other >particles that may have been emitted by this burst, that may arrive at >a later time ??? > >If so, is there any chance that they could reach the earths surface, I >understand that >the x-rays and gamma rays were absorbed by the >atmosphere....thanks...steve opelc In the American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 394 October 1, 1998: "The source of the blast is believed to be a neutron star previously known for its intermittent gamma and x-ray emissions. The potency of the August event, however, would seem to characterize the star as a very rare type of object that has come to be known as a magnetar, so named because the star's magnetic field is expected to be in the vicinity of 10^15 gauss, 100 times larger than ordinary neutron stars, and essentially the largest known magnetic field in the universe. The gammas probably arise when magnetic forces crack open the star's crust. Ionized particles above the star ride the magnetic fields, spewing radiation as they go, creating a much more potent version of the solar flares seen on our sun. (Science News, 12 September 1998.)" It appears there is more matter expelled than just electrons and positrons. Since the magnetar is made up principly of neutrons, I don't know from where this matter is supposed to materialize - unles it is from the roughly one mile thick iron crust. That would not be very much iron because the star is so small. It is difficult to imagine this being a particle realated threat - unles the eruption were caused by a collision with another massive object. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 00:59:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA11969; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 00:56:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 00:56:18 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 00:02:54 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ZPE Extraction and the Fine Structure Constant? Resent-Message-ID: <"TDv3w.0.xw2.Xeo5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22985 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:37 PM 10/3/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >-----Original Message----- >From: Horace Heffner >To: vortex-l eskimo.com >Date: Saturday, October 03, 1998 2:30 PM >Subject: Re: ZPE Extraction and the Fine Structure Constant? > >Horace Heffner wrote: > > >>At 4:59 AM 10/3/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >>>To: Vortex >>> >>>In the Electromagnetic Interaction in the collision of an Electron and a >>>Proton/Deuteron: >>> >>>+/- k*q^2/hbar*c = 1/137 = Alpha >>> >>>Might it be possible that the "tapped" ZPE energy is 137 times the >collision >>>energy,and >>>in the collision of like charges 1/137 of the >>>collision energy? >>> >>>A leap of faith? :-) >>> >>>Regards, Frederick >> >> >>If this were true then tokamak plasmas, and stars, would be exhibiting >>anomalous heating at a runaway rate. > >The Sun does about 3.86E-4 watts/kg and judging by the Missing Neutrinos the >source of 2/3 of it's energy output is unexplained, the Tokamak's heat >output hasn't been measured using Scott's Calorimeter, and the Correa's PAGD >is apparently showing a bit of ZPE extraction, also. > >The output of a Fusion reaction, say 3.5 Mev >for a D-D doesn't happen on every collision >Blubber Breath. :-) Oh, how often are you saying the zpe based emission occurs which is 137 times the collision energy? Once every time there is a fusion? I thought you were talking + and - particles, not 2 + particles, for the large zpe reaction. What does 3.5 Mev for a D-D reaction have to do with it? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 01:20:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA15648; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 01:18:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 01:18:17 -0700 Message-ID: <36172FE0.7576C201 GroupZ.net> Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 04:20:48 -0400 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b2 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Horace Heffner Subject: Re: Question on magnetic star (off topic) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9CcCf3.0.Pq3.8zo5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22987 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thank you for the article...gives me a much better picture of what might have happened....was not thinking of possible particle arrivals as a threat...could not imagine any particles arriving from that distance that would have any real effect on earth...hope not anyway ....thanks again....steve Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 6:32 AM 10/2/98, sno wrote: > >Was wondering about the x-rays and gamma rays from the magnetic star > >that arrived > >27 Sep....I assume that they were traveling at speed of light, are > >there any other > >particles that may have been emitted by this burst, that may arrive at > >a later time ??? > > > >If so, is there any chance that they could reach the earths surface, I > >understand that > >the x-rays and gamma rays were absorbed by the > >atmosphere....thanks...steve opelc > > In the American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 394 > October 1, 1998: "The source of the blast is believed to be a neutron star > previously known for its intermittent gamma and x-ray emissions. The > potency of the August event, however, would seem to characterize the star > as a very rare type of object that has come to be known as a magnetar, so > named because the star's magnetic field is expected to be in the vicinity > of 10^15 gauss, 100 times larger than ordinary neutron stars, and > essentially the largest known magnetic field in the universe. The gammas > probably arise when magnetic forces crack open the star's crust. Ionized > particles above the star ride the magnetic fields, spewing radiation as > they go, creating a much more potent version of the solar flares seen on > our sun. (Science News, 12 September 1998.)" > > It appears there is more matter expelled than just electrons and positrons. > Since the magnetar is made up principly of neutrons, I don't know from > where this matter is supposed to materialize - unles it is from the roughly > one mile thick iron crust. That would not be very much iron because the > star is so small. It is difficult to imagine this being a particle > realated threat - unles the eruption were caused by a collision with > another massive object. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 03:38:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA24303; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 03:37:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 03:37:49 -0700 Message-Id: <36175D1A.8F2CF72C verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:33:46 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; U) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: O. A. Barut Theory Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-Sltw2.0.bx5.y_q5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22988 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All, I had an old article of O. A. Barut, who passed 1995, "WHAT ARE TRUE BUILDING BLOCKS OF MATTER" published in "Electrodynamics and Classical Theory of Fields and Particles" by A.O. Barut. ISBN 0-486-64038-8. The article contain a really simple particle theory which I interested so much and finally I am reproducing it manually as a MS Word file. I hope I will finish it in few days. Please inform me If you wish to receive it. (will take less than 100 Kb on zip ped format) BTW, I wonder, if this theory was further investigated and advanced later and still keep its validity and its predictions hold against developments on physics after 80's. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 04:00:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA27261; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 03:59:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 03:59:37 -0700 Message-ID: <035601bdef86$172fb2e0$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: ZPE Extraction and the Fine Structure Constant? Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 04:58:56 -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: <"xrTVu3.0.tf6.OKr5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22989 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here you go Horace, I stated that in an Electromagnetic Interaction Alpha = 1/137 = k*q^2/[hbar*c] the photon created or a pair created therefrom might be 137 times or 1/137 of the collision energy. You took exception to this. :-) OTOH, since ALL of the factors in this equation are CONSTANTS, it would follow that the Photon or Lepton Pair created in the collision of an Electron-Proton or Electron-Deuteron would be QUANTIZED: n*Alpha = n*(1/137) = n*k*q^2/[hbar*c] so that n*2*Ee*Alpha^(+/-)n' where Ee is the rest energy of the electron, n = 1,2,3... and n' = 0,1,2,3.... IOW, the ZPE property of the Vacuum is Quantized and thus can provide quantized O-U photons (or Lepton Pairs) in the Electromagnetic Interaction, ie., collisions, no matter what the energies of these collisions are. Collisions-Electromagnetic Interactions encompass ALL particle interactions/ZPE Extraction, from the Griggs/Potatov and P-F Cells to Stellar "Burning". I might add that; if a collision between an Electron and a Deuteron creates a Neutrino-Antineutrino pair and thus the Quasi-Dineutron the "D"-D ---> He4 + Neutrino + 24 Mev sans detectable ionizing radiation is explained. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 10:27:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA15133; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 10:26:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 10:26:22 -0700 Message-ID: <3617AD33.4EFA skylink.net> Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 10:15:31 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------273543341F55" Resent-Message-ID: <"CXpSl1.0.Mi3.z-w5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22990 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. --------------273543341F55 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A draft of the following article was posted here last April. A final version is attached below. The article will appear in the fall edition of Frontier Perspectives, from The Center for Frontier Sciences at Temple University. Also an abbreviated form of the article will appear in Vol 27 of Electric Spacecraft Journal. Many thanks are due the referee at Frontier Sciences for providing substantial additions and corrections. Regards, Robert Stirniman =================== --------------273543341F55 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Final_Article.txt" The Wallace Inventions, Spin Aligned Nuclei, the Gravitomagnetic Field, and the Tampere 'Gravity-Shielding' Experiment: Is There a Connection? Robert Stirniman September 1998 P.O. Box 71407 Las Vegas NV 89179 E-mail: robert skylink.net Abstract Wallace's patents of the early 1970's claim that a rotating object which contains unpaired nuclear spins can modify gravity. An explanation in terms of a gravitational analogue to the magnetic field of electromagnetism has been proposed. Podkletnov's "gravity shielding" experiment at Tampere, now being replicated by NASA, may also be an example of the same effect. During the 1960s through the mid 1970s, Henry William Wallace was a scientist at GE Aerospace in Valley Forge PA, and GE Re-Entry Systems in Philadelphia. In the early 1970s, Wallace was issued patents [1,2,3] for some unusual inventions relating to the gravitational field. Wallace developed an experimental apparatus for generating and detecting a secondary gravitational field, which he named the kinemassic field, and which is now better known as the gravitomagnetic field. Wallace's experiments were based on aligning the nuclear spin of elements and isotopes which have an odd number of nucleons. These materials are characterized by a total nuclear spin which is an odd integral multiple of one-half (times Planck's constant), resulting in one nucleon with un-paired spin. Wallace drew an analogy between the un-paired angular momentum in these materials, and the un-paired magnetic moments of electrons in ferromagnetic materials. Wallace created nuclear spin alignment by rapidly spinning a brass disk. Brass is composed of elements (copper, zinc, etc.) most of whose isotopes have an odd number of nucleons. Nuclear spin becomes aligned in the spinning disk due to precession of nuclear angular momentum in an approximately intertial reference frame (such as the apparatus which holds the disk), a process similar to the magnetization developed by rapidly spinning a ferrous material (known as the Barnett effect). The gravitomagnetic field generated by the spinning disk is tightly coupled (0.01 inch air gap) to a gravitomagnetic field circuit composed of material also having half integral nuclear spin, and analogous to magnetic core material in transformers and motors. The gravitomagnetic field is transmitted through the field circuit and focused by the field material to a small space where it can be detected. In his three patents, Wallace describes three different methods used for detection of the gravitomagnetic field -- change in the motion of a body on a pivot, detection of a transverse voltage in a semiconductor crystal, and a change in the specific heat of a crystal material having spin-aligned nuclei. In a direct analogy with a magnetic circuit, the relative amount of the detected gravitomagnetic field always varied directly with the size of the air-gap between the generator disk and the field circuit. Wallace's patents are written in great detail, and he appears to be meticulous in his experimental design and practice. In my opinion, it is nearly certain that his experiments performed as claimed. None the less, there has been no scientific acknowledgment whatsoever of Wallace's discoveries. An in-depth search of the literature has uncovered only two references to Wallace's work [4,5] and each of these references merely creates further mystery. The necessary existence of a magnetic-like gravitational field has been well established by physicists specializing in general relativity, gravitational theories, and cosmology. But, the existence of this field is not well known in other of arenas of physical science. The gravitomagnetic field was first hypothesized by Heaviside in the 1880's. The field is predicted by general relativity, and was first formulated in a relativistic context in 1918 by Lense and Thirring [6]. In 1961, Forward [7] was the first to express the gravitational field equations in a vector form directly analogous and nearly identical to Maxwells equations for electromagnetics. During the last 20 years many other scientists [8-17] have published articles demonstrating the necessary existence of the gravitomagnetic field, using arguments based on general relativity, special relativity, and the cause and effect relationship which results from non-instantaneous propagation of energy (retardation). Nearly all of these authors present the gravitational field equations in a vector form similar to Maxwells equations. Some authors comment that these equations provide fundamental insights into gravitation, and it is unfortunate that they are not at all well known. Despite their relative simplicity and possible practical value, the Maxwell-like equations for gravitation do not appear in any undergraduate physics textbook. Just as in Maxwells equations for electromagnetics, it is found that in the presence of a time varying gravitomagnetic flux there will always exist concurrently a time varying gravitoelectric field. The secondary generated gravitoelectric field is a dipole field, and unlike the background gravitoelectric field due to mass charges, the generated gravitoelectric field always exists in closed loops. Henry Wallace recognized this and described it in his inventions. Wallace also describes another effect which may result from generation of a secondary gravitoelectric field. Wallace believed that a secondary gravito- electric field can result in exclusion of an existing primary background field. In other words, a gravitational shield can be created. The bulk of Wallace's patents describe his experimental apparatus, and his detection of the gravitomagnetic field. The effects detected are minuscule, and as such, may not be of immediate practical value. In reading his patents it is possible to become immersed in the detail of his experimental apparatus, and to neglect the possible significance of the alternative embodiment of his invention (figures 7, 7A, and 7B of his first patent). The alternative embodiment uses a time varying gravitomagnetic flux to create a secondary gravitoelectric field in an enclosed shell of material in order to shield the background gravitoelectric field of the earth. Unfortunately, Wallace does not state whether this embodiment was ever actually produced, and unlike the detailed discussion of his experimental apparatus, he provides no experimental findings or data to back his claim. Nor does he provide much in the way of theoretical arguments about how a secondary gravitoelectric field can act to exclude a primary field, except to state: "It is well known that nature opposes heterogeneous field flux densities." Is it well known that nature opposes heterogeneous flux densities? Well, not to me, and I can not find anything in the way of scientific literature to directly support this idea. But it does seem to make sense. It could be argued thusly. In a well- ordered manifold all derivatives of the fields, time-like and space-like, must be continuous. If you force a field to exist in a region of space, the existing background field is somehow required to form a pattern around or smoothly merge with the created field. Nature does not permit flux lines to act with cross-purposes and to exist with widely different directions in the same region of space. Flux lines can never cross. Wallace seems to have gotten his experiments right -- maybe he is also right in his claim of inventing a gravitational shield? In a ground breaking paper in 1966, Dewitt [18] was first to identify the significance of gravitational effects in a superconductor. Dewitt demonstrated that a magnetic-type gravitational field must result in the presence of fluxoid quantization. In 1983, Dewitt's work was substantially expanded by Ross [19]. Beginning in 1991, Ning Li, at the University of Alabama Huntsville, and Douglas Torr, formerly at Huntsville and now at the University of South Carolina, have published a number of articles about gravitational effects in superconductors [20-22]. One interesting finding they have derived is the source of gravitomagnetic flux in a type II superconductor material. In a striking similarity to the ideas of Henry Wallace, Li and Torr demonstrate that the gravitomagnetic field in a superconductor results from spin alignment of the lattice ions. Quoting from Li and Torr's second paper: "The interaction energy of the internal magnetic field with the magnetic moment of the lattice ions drives the lattice ions and superconducting condensate wave function to move together vortically within the range of the coherent length and results in an induced precession of the angular momentum of the lattice ions." And quoting from their third paper: "Recently we demonstrated theoretically that the carriers of quantized angular momentum are not the Cooper pairs but the lattice ions, which must execute coherent localized motion consistent with the phenomenon of superconductivity." And, "It is shown that the coherent alignment of lattice ion spins will generate a detectable gravitomagnetic field, and in the presence of a time-dependent applied magnetic vector potential field, a detectable gravitoelectric field." Li and Torr also demonstrate that the gravitomagnetic field in a superconductor has a relatively large magnitude compared with the magnetic field -- a factor of 10E11 times larger. The gravitational wave velocity in a superconductor is estimated as a factor of two magnitudes smaller than the velocity in free space. And the resulting estimate of relative gravitomagnetic permeability is four magnitudes (10 thousand times) greater than the permeability of free space. In their third paper, Torr and Li, demonstrate that it is possible to generate a time varying gravitomagnetic field in a superconductor, which must exist concurrently with a time varying gravitoelectric field. In 1995, Becker et al [23], show mathematically that a significant size gravitomagnetic field must always exist along with a magnetic field whenever there is flux pinning or other forms of flux trapping in a type II superconductor. They propose a macroscopic experiment to detect the gravitomagnetic field. Becker et al, choose not to speculate about the source of the gravitomagnetic field, except to provide a brief comment that it may result from spin of the lattice ions. One might ask, what is a pinning center if not a microscopic hole which carries trapped flux, and what must be source of the gravitomagnetic dipole moment if not the angular momentum of the lattice ions at the pinning center? Current Research Indirect detection of the gravitomagnetic field was reported in 1988 by Nordtvedt [24] by astronomical observations of the precession rate of the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16. A direct measurement of the earth's gravitomagnetic field was reported in 1997 by Ciufolini et al [25] by laser tracking of the LAGEOS II satellite. Results are pending for the NASA/Stanford Gravity Probe-B experiment to detect the earth's gravitomagnetic field with an orbiting superconductor gyroscope. In 1992, an experiment at Tampere University was reported by Podkletnov [26,27]. A torroidal shaped type II superconductor disk was suspended via the Meissner effect by a constant vertical magnetic field, and was rapidly rotated by a time varying horizontal magnetic field. Masses located in a cylindrical spacial geometry above the rotating disk were found to lose up to 2% of their weight. A gravitational shielding effect is claimed. Conclusion Is a time varying gravitomagnetic field generated in the Tampere disk due to the horizontal time varying magnetic field used to rotate the disk, and does this result in a time varying gravitoelectric field in the disk, and possibly also in the space surrounding the disk, and could this result in exclusion of the earth's primary background gravitoelectric field as claimed by Henry Wallace? In addition, questions remain as to whether the gravitomagnetic field (from the Maxwell-like gravity equations) is of a large enough magnitude to produce the effects reported by Podkletnov and Wallace. Acknowledgments Many of the ideas in this article have been developed in personal discussions with Kedrick Brown (http://home.att.net/~kfbrown/index.html). I would also like to thank Ron Kita for his kind support and useful background information about Henry Wallace. References 1. US Patent No 3626605, Method and Apparatus for Generating a Secondary Gravitational Force Field, Henry Wm Wallace, Ardmore PA, Dec 14, 1971. Wallace's first patent. The gravitomagnetic field is named the kinemassic field. The patent describes the embodiment of his experiment. An additional embodiment of the invention (Figures 7, 7A, and 7B) describes how a time varying gravitomagnetic field can be used to shield the primary background gravitoelectric field. Available on the web at http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wallc. 2. US Patent No 3626606, Method and Apparatus for Generating a Dynamic Force Field, Henry Wm Wallace, Ardmore PA, Dec 14, 1971. Wallace's second patent provides a variation of his experiment. A type III-V semiconductor material (Indium Arsenide), of which both materials have unpaired nuclear spin, is used as an electronic detector for the gravitomagnetic field. The experiment demonstrates that the material in his gravitomagnetic field circuit has hysterisis and remanence effects analogous to magnetic materials. Available on the web at http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wallc. 3. US Patent No 3823570, Heat Pump, Henry Wm Wallace, 60 Oxford Drive, Freeport NY, July 16, 1974 Wallace’s third patent provides an additional variation of his experiment. Wallace demonstrates that by aligning the nuclear spin of materials having an odd number of nucleons, order is created in the material, resulting in a change in specific heat. 4. New Scientist, 14 February 1980, Patents Review. This article is one of the only references to Wallace's work anywhere in the literature. The article provides a brief summary of his invention and ends with this intriguing paragraph. "Although the Wallace patents were initially ignored as cranky, observers believe that his invention is now under serious but secret investigation by the military authorities in the US. The military may now regret that the patents have already been granted and so are available for anyone to read." 5. Electric Propulsion Study, Dennis L. Cravens, Science Applications International Corp, August 1990, Prepared for Astronautics Laboratory, Edwards AFB. This report provides a detailed review of a variety of 5-D theories of gravitational and electromagnetic interactions. It also provides a summary of a variety of possibly anomalous experiments, including experiments relating to spin aligned nuclei. The reports contains two paragraphs about Wallace's inventions -- partially quoted here: "The patents are written in a very believable style which include part numbers, sources for some components, and diagrams of data. Attempts were made to contact Wallace using patent addresses and other sources but he was not located nor is there a trace of what became of his work. The concept can be somewhat justified on general relativistic grounds since rotating frames of time varying fields are expected to emit gravitational waves." 6. On the Gravitational Effects of Rotating Masses: The Lense- Thirring Papers Translated, B. Mashhoon, F.W. Hehl, and D.S. Theiss. General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol 16, 711-50 (1984) A translation of the original article in German by J. Lense and H. Thirring published in 1918. This article is the first fairly comprehensive analysis of the necessary existence of the gravito- magnetic field. An earlier prediction of the existence of this field was made by Heaviside in the 1880s. 7. Proceedings of the IRE Vol 49 p 892, Robert L. Forward (1961) Forward was the first to express the gravitomagnetic field in the modern form of Maxwells equations for gravitation. He named it the prorotational field. 8. Gravitation, C.W. Misner, K.S. Thorne, and J.A. Wheeler, Freeman Publishing, San Francisco (1973). MTW is the bible of gravitational theorists. Among many other theories presented, gravitational field equations are derived from general relativity in a form similar to Maxwells equations. 9. Laboratory Experiments to Test Relativistic Gravity, Vladimir B. Braginsky, Carlton M. Caves, and Kip S. Thorne, Physical Review D, Vol 15 No 8 p2047, April 15 1977. Gravitational field equations are derived from General Relativity in a form similar to Maxwells equations. The gravitomagnetic field is called magnetic-type gravity. A variety of experiments are proposed and analyzed for detecting the gravitomagnetic field. 10. Foucault Pendulum at the South Pole: Proposal for an Experiment to Detect the Earth's General Relativistic Gravitomagnetic Field, Vladimir Braginsky, Aleksander Polnarev, and Kip Thorne, Physical Review Letters, Vol 53 No 9 p863, August 1984. Analyses an experiment for detecting the earth's gravitomagnetic field. Possibly the first authors to use the terms gravitomagnetic and gravitoelectric. 11. On Relativistic Gravitation, D. Bedford and P. Krumm, American Journal of Physics, Vol 53 No 9, September 1985. The necessary existence of the gravitomagnetic field is derived from arguments based on apecial relativity. The field is referred to as the gravitational analog of the magnetic field. 12. The Gravitational Poynting Vector and Energy Transfer, Peter Krumm and Donald Bedford, American Journal of Physics, Vol 55 No 4, p. 362, April 1987. Establishes the necessary existence of the gravitomagnetic field based on arguments from special relativity and energy conservation in mass flow. Derives the gravitational Poynting vector. Names the two types of gravitational fields as gravinetic and gravistatic. 13. Gravitomagnetism in Special Relativity, American Journal of Physics, Vol. 56, No. 6, p. 523, June 1988. Predicts the existence of the gravitomagnetic field using special relativity and time dilation. Names the fields gravielectric and gravimagnetic. 14. Detection of the Gravitomagnetic Field Using an Orbiting Superconducting Gravity Gradiometer: Theoretical Principles, Bahram Mashhoon, Ho Jung Paik, and Clifford Will, Physical Review D, Vol. 39, No. 10 p. 2825, May 1989. Provides a summary analysis of Maxwells equations for gravitation, and an in-depth analysis of the Gravity Probe-B orbital gyroscope experiment for detecting the earth's gravitomagnetic field. 15. Analogy Between General Relativity and Electromagnetism for Slowly Moving Particles in Weak Gravitational Fields, Edward G. Harris, American Journal of Physics, Vol. 59 No. 5, May 1991. Derives Maxwells equations for gravitation from GR in the case of non-relativistic velocities and relatively weak field strengths. A somewhat more direct method of derivation is used compared with the PPN formulation used by Braginsky, et al. 16. Gravitation and Inertia, Ignazio Ciufolini and John Wheeler, Princeton Series in Physics, Princeton University Press (1995), Chapter 6 -- The Gravitomagnetic Field and its Measurement. Derives the electromagnetic analog of the gravitational field equations, and provides in-depth analysis of experiments for detecting the gravitomagnetic field. 17. Causality, Electromagnetic Induction, and Gravitation. Oleg Jefimenko, Electret Scientific Publishing, Star City WV (1992). Jefimenko derives the electromagnetic field equations based on retarded sources, (charges, moving charges, and accelerating charges). He applies similar arguments to the gravitational field equations. If gravitational energy propagates at any finite speed, the gravito-magnetic field must exist. Maxwells equations for gravitation are presented. He also presents an unusual configuration of mass which is predicted to provide an antigravity effect. 18. Physics Review Letters, Vol. 16, p. 1902, B.S. Dewitt (1966) Dewitt was the first to analyze fluxoid quantization in a superconductor in the presence of a time varying magnetic-type gravitational field. 19. The London Equations for Superconductors in a Gravitational Field, D.K. Ross, Journal of Physics A, Vol. 16, p. 1331. (1983) Maxwell’s equations for gravitation are presented in vector form. Ross uses the name coined by Forward for the gravitomagnetic field -- the prorotational field. Fluxoid quantization is analyzed in the presence of a varying gravitomagnetic field. Ross establishes that the momentum of a charged particle in an electromagnetic and gravitational field is given (in MKS units) by: p = mv +qA + mV, where V is the gravito-magnetic vector potential, and A is the magnetic vector potential. The resulting modified London equations are presented in covariant form. 20. Effects of a Gravitomagnetic Field on Pure Superconductors, Ning Li and Douglas Torr, Physical Review D, Vol. 43, No.2, p457, January 1991. Li and Torr present Maxwell’s equations for gravitation using MKS units. The equations are given in a form where the gravitomagnetic permeability of a superconductor material is presumed to be different than the permeability of free space. Vector equations for the gravitational potentials are also presented. The canonical momentum is derived (same finding as Ross paper). It is established that an electrical current also results in a mass current, and an inter-relationship is derived between the magnetic field and gravitomagnetic field in a superconductor. It is established that the magnetic flux in a superconductor is a function of the gravitomagnetic permeability, and vice versa, resulting in a more rigorous form of the Meissner equation and the London theory. It is shown that the gravitomagnetic field must have a relatively large size in a superconductor, and is on the order of 1011 times larger than the magnetic field. 21. Gravitational Effects on the Magnetic Attenuation of Superconductors, Ning Li and Douglas Torr, Physical Review B, Vol. 64, No. 9, p. 5489. September 1992. Li and Torr elaborate on their theory of the interrelationship of the gravitomagnetic field and the magnetic field in superconductors. It is established that the gravitomagnetic field must be sourced by spin alignment of the lattice ions. The velocity of a gravitational wave in a superconductor is estimated to be two orders of magnitude slower than the vacuum velocity, resulting in an estimate of relative gravitational permeability of a superconductor material which is as much as four magnitudes greater than free space. 22. Gravitoelectric-Electric Coupling Via Superconductivity, Douglas Torr and Ning Li, Foundations of Physics Letters, Vol. 6, No. 4, p. 71, (1993). Torr and Li continue their analysis of gravitational effects in superconductors. Abstract: "Recently we demonstrated theoretically that the carriers of quantized angular momentum are not the Cooper pairs but the latice ions, which must execute coherent localized motion consistent with the phenomenon of superconductivity. We demonstrate here that in the presence of an external magnetic field, the free superelectron and bound ion currents largely cancel providing a self-consistent microscopic and macroscopic interpretation of near-zero magnetic permeability inside superconductors. The neutral mass currents, however, do not cancel, because of the monopolar gravitational charge. It is shown the coherent alignment of lattice ion spins will generate a detectable gravitomagnetic field, and in the presence of a time- dependent applied magnetic vector potential field, a detectable gravitoelectric field." 23. Proposal for the Experimental Detection of Gravitomagnetism in the Terrestrial Laboratory, Robert Becker, Paul Smith, and Heffrey Bertrand. September 1995. Published on the web at http://www.inetarena.com/~noetic/pls/RBecker/Gmexp2.htm. Becker, et al, demonstrate mathematically that a significant gravitomagnetic field must exist concurrently with a magnetic field in a superconductor whenever there is flux pinning or other forms of flux trapping. An experiment is proposed whereby a small hole is made in a superconductor, flux is trapped in the hole, and the gravito-magnetic field is detected by measuring counter- torque from a macroscopic cylindrical mass inserted through the hole. 24. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, K. Nordtvedt, Vol 27, p1395-1403. 1988. The gravitomagnetic field is indirectly detected by astronomical observations of the periastron precession rate of the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16. 25. Test of the Lense-Thirring Orbital Shift Due to Spin, Ignazio Ciufolini, Federico Chieppa, David Lucchesi, and Francesco Vespe. Classical and Quantum Gravitation, Vol 14 p2710-2726. 1997. The gravitomagnetic field which results from the earth's rotation is experimentally detected and measured by laser tracking of the LAGEOS II satellite. The results agree with the Lense-Thirring derivation from General Relativity. 26. A Possibility of Gravitational Force Shielding by Bulk YBa2Cu3O7-x Superconductor, E. Podkletnov and R. Nieminen, Physica C Vol. 203, p. 441, (1992). Podkletnov describes an experiment where a 2% reduction in weight is created in a mass suspended over a levitated and rotating super-conductor disk. A detailed compilation of information about this experiment is available on the web at http://www.inetarena.com/~noetic/pls/gravity.html. 27. Weak Gravitational Shielding Properties of Composite Bulk Yba2Cu3O7-x Superconductor Below 70K Under EM Field, Eugene Podkletnov, LANL Physics Preprint Server, Cond-Mat/9701074, January 1997. Podkletnov provides greater detail about his experimental apparatus and the construction of the superconductor disk. Available on the web at http://www.gravity.org/msu.html. Additional Sources The following items give the technical details of NASA's ongoing work to replicate Podkletnov's experiment. Dr. Li, mentioned elsewhere in this paper, is one of the researchers. http://ro.com/~preavis/Delta-G/Physica-C.htm Static Test for A Gravitational Force Coupled to Type II YBCO Superconductors, Ning Li*, David Noever, Tony Robertson, Ron Koczor, and Whitt Brantley NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 35812 and *The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL, 35804. Physica C Preprint. http://ro.com/~preavis/Delta-G/Delta-G_investig.htm High Temperature Superconductor Research (Project 96-07), Investigators: R.J. Koczor/EA01, D.A. Noever/ES76, G.A. Robertson/EP32, Ning Li/UAH. The following items by Modanese are the most detailed theoretical analyses of the Tampere Effect given to date. Modanese's basic idea is that the rotating superconductor is a macroscopic quantum-coherent state (Bose-Einstein condensate) which affects gravity by means of modifying Einstein's cosmological constant term in the gravity-field equations. This mechanism appears to be different from, but possibly closely related to, the gravitomagnetic field discussed above in this article. In any case, it is plausible to think, or at least to suggest, that the unpaired nuclear spins in Wallace's special materials also comprise a macroscopic quantum-coherent state and thus could act as proposed by Modanese's theory. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9612022. Possible quantum gravity effects in a charged Bose condensate under variable e.m. field, G. Modanese, J. Schnurer. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9601160. Role of a "Local" Cosmological Constant in Euclidean Quantum Gravity, G. Modanese. Phys.Rev. D54 (1996) 5002-5009 http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9508018. General properties of the decay amplitudes for massless particles Authors: G. Fiore, G. Modanese. Nucl.Phys. B477 (1996) 623-651. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9505094. Theoretical analysis of a reported weak gravitational shielding effect, G. Modanese. Europhys.Lett. 35 (1996) 413-418. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9410086. Vacuum correlations at geodesic distance in quantum gravity, G. Modanese (INFN, Trento, and Max-Planck-Institut, Muenchen), report U.T.F. 332, July 94. Riv. Nuovo Cim. 17 (1994). APPENDIX-- SI (MKS) Dimensisons of the Gravitomagnetic Field. Gravitoelectric Charge = Kg (in purely electrical units, Kg = (Weber/Meter)(Coul/Meter)(Sec) Gravitoelectric Field = Meter/Sec-Squared Gravitoelectric Flux Density = Kg/Meter-Squared Mass Current = Kg/Sec = (Weber/Meter)(Coul/Meter) Gravitomagnetic Dipole Moment = (Kg)(Meter-Squared)/Sec = Angular Momentum = (Coulomb)(Weber) Gravitoelectric Dipole Moment = (Kg)(Meter) (You would need the equivalent of negative mass to make one of these) Gravitomagnetic Charge = (Velocity)(Meter) = Square-Meter/Sec Gravitomagnetic Field = (Mass Current)/Meter = Kg/Sec-Meter = ((Kg)(Meter^2)/Sec)/Meter^3 = Spin Density = Angular Momentum/Cubic-Meter = (Coulomb)(Weber)/Cubic-Meter Gravitomagnetic Flux Density = (Gravitomagnetic Charge)/Meter^2 = Velocity/Meter = 1/Sec = Angular Velocity Gravitoelectric Scalar Potential = Joule/Kg = (Acceleration)(Meter) = (Gravitoelectric Field)(Meter) = Velocity-Squared = Meter-Squared/Second-Squared Gravitomagnetic Vector Potential = (Gravitomagnetic Charge)/Meter = Velocity = Meter/Sec Gravitoelectric Permitivity = Gravitoelectric Flux per Gravitoelectric Field = (Kg)(Second-Squared)/(Cubic Meter) = 1/4(Pi)(G) = 1.1927E09 Kg-Sec^2/Meter^3 Gravitomagnetic Permeability = Gravitomagnetic Flux per Gravitomagnetic Field = Meter/Kg Assuming Transverse Gravitational Waves Propagate at Light Speed -- = 1/(c-squared)(epsilon0) = 9.316E-27 Meter/Kg --------------273543341F55-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 10:30:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA16536; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 10:29:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 10:29:44 -0700 Message-ID: <3617B185.3314EFC1 crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 19:33:57 +0200 From: "Jean - Paul Bibérian" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [fr] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: O. A. Barut Theory References: <36175D1A.8F2CF72C verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"HFG5h2.0.G24.72x5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22991 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, I am interested by a copy of the paper by Barut. As a matter of fact Vigier is using Baruts ideas in his model for explaining cold fusion Jean-Paul Biberian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 10:39:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA20377; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 10:38:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 10:38:39 -0700 From: Puthoff aol.com Message-ID: <262297c4.3617b2d7 aol.com> Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 13:39:35 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re: ZPE Extraction and the Fine Structure Constant? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78 Resent-Message-ID: <"aFuuY2.0.D-4.UAx5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22992 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 10/3/98 5:02:37 AM, you wrote: <> The way I see it, what we call kinetic energy is the amount of energy involved in work done on the vacuum in accelerating the particles, released from the vacuum upon deceleration; i.e., KE is just a bookeeping operation. As you know, when riding with the particle you do not see any "stored" KE. Hal From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 11:02:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA27169; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 11:00:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 11:00:21 -0700 Message-Id: <199810041801.OAA22233 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Cold Fusion and New Energy Symposium 1998 Date: Sun, 4 Oct 98 13:59:27 -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="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id LAA27139 Resent-Message-ID: <"l7oR92.0.Re6.pUx5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22993 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: COLD FUSION AND NEW ENERGY SYMPOSIUM 1998 Sponsored by Infinite Energy Magazine WHEN: SUNDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1998 € 8:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. WHERE: Holiday Inn, The Center of New Hampshire Convention Center Elm Street, Manchester, New Hampshire Call Infinite Energy Magazine for more information: 603-228-4516 Registration fee only $75.00, includes all sessions plus two coffee/refreshment breaks. Chef¹s luncheon and dinner concession available (guest¹s responsibility). At time of printing, the new Fairfield Inn in Concord still had rooms available, 603-224-4011, $139. +tax. Call soon! PROGRAM: Dr. Eugene Mallove (Infinite Energy Magazine) Cold Fusion and New Energy: Science, Technology, and Business Dr. Peter Graneau (Centre for Electromagnetics Research) Lightning Generates MHD Power; The Cause of Thunder Dr. Edmund Storms (Los Alamos National Laboratory, Retired) Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions Dr. Paulo Correa (Labofex, Toronto, Canada) Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge Reactor: An Update Dr. Daniel Cavicchio (New Energy Partners) Investing in New Energy Technologies Jed Rothwell (Infinite Energy Magazine) Cold Fusion Technology: Comparisons from the History of Technology Mike Carrell (RCA, Retired) The Arata-Zhang Cold Fusion Experiments Dr. Les Case (Fusion Power, Inc.) Update on Catalytic Fusion Dr. Peter Glück (Institute for Isotopic and Molecular Technology) New Sources of Energy: Scale-Up, Problems and Solutions Dr. Thomas Phipps (Author, Heretical Verities) Empirical Evidences of the Failure of the Lorentz Force Law Jeff Kooistra (Physicist, Author, Analog Magazine Columnist) Reaction Forces and the Marinov Motor‹Physical and Social Hal Fox (Trenergy, Inc.) Commercial Development: New Energy and Transmutation Dr. Paul Brown (CEO, Nuclear Solutions, LLC) € The Nuclear Waste Problem ‹Solved by Nuclear Physics € Nuclear Batteries Other - Poster displays and exhibits by other scientists and inventors PLEASE SEND/FAX IN YOUR REGISTRATION BY OCTOBER 8, 1998, if possible. (There *may* be seating for those who show up on October 11th without pre-registration, but space cannot be guaranteed.) Name:______________________________________ Address:____________________________________ Address:____________________________________ City: _______________________________________ State: _________ Zip/Postal Code:_______________ Phone: _____________________________________ Credit Card: MC______ VISA______ AMEX_____ NUMBER::______________________________ Expir. Date:_____/____ Signature: _______________________________ Or, send check for $75.00 via mail. *********************************************** Notice posted by: Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Ph: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 11:32:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA05175; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 11:30:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 11:30:34 -0700 Message-Id: <199810041831.NAA04510 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 13:30:32 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Question on magnetic star (off topic) Resent-Message-ID: <"z_ol62.0.LG1.8xx5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22994 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 6:32 AM 10/2/98, sno wrote: >>Was wondering about the x-rays and gamma rays from the magnetic star >>that arrived >>27 Sep....I assume that they were traveling at speed of light, are >>there any other >>particles that may have been emitted by this burst, that may arrive at >>a later time ??? >> >>If so, is there any chance that they could reach the earths surface, I >>understand that >>the x-rays and gamma rays were absorbed by the >>atmosphere....thanks...steve opelc > > > >In the American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 394 >October 1, 1998: "The source of the blast is believed to be a neutron star >previously known for its intermittent gamma and x-ray emissions. The >potency of the August event, however, would seem to characterize the star >as a very rare type of object that has come to be known as a magnetar, so >named because the star's magnetic field is expected to be in the vicinity >of 10^15 gauss, 100 times larger than ordinary neutron stars, and >essentially the largest known magnetic field in the universe. The gammas >probably arise when magnetic forces crack open the star's crust. Ionized >particles above the star ride the magnetic fields, spewing radiation as >they go, creating a much more potent version of the solar flares seen on >our sun. (Science News, 12 September 1998.)" > >It appears there is more matter expelled than just electrons and positrons. >Since the magnetar is made up principly of neutrons, I don't know from >where this matter is supposed to materialize - unles it is from the roughly >one mile thick iron crust. ***{Horace, my recollection is that the material in a neutron star is too compressed for distinct atoms of iron (or anything else) to exist. Instead, the star is composed of a super-dense substance known as "nuclear fluid," which basically consists of neutrons packed together in a condition of maximal tightness known as *neutron degeneracy.* --Mitchell Jones}*** That would not be very much iron because the >star is so small. ***{Again, I believe this is incorrect with regard to the amount of material. If my memory is even approximately accurate, a cubic mile of nuclear fluid would contain a large multiple of the mass of the earth. I suggest that you hit the used book stores in your area and buy a few astronomy textbooks. I think your speculations in this area could benefit from the presence of more facts. --Mitchell Jones}*** It is difficult to imagine this being a particle >realated threat - unles the eruption were caused by a collision with >another massive object. ***{You are probably right about this, but it is not a sure bet: an ejection of a few thousand cubic miles of nuclear fluid--e.g., due to a stellar collision--would produce a burst of radiation of almost incomprehensible intensity. If by some quirk it were in the form of a beam and happened to be directed at the earth, then we could only hope that the beam would be preceded by a gigantic glob of barbecue sauce. --MJ}*** > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 12:16:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA19916; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 12:15:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 12:15:28 -0700 Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 12:16:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810041916.MAA13033 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version Resent-Message-ID: <"PKHH53.0.3t4.Fby5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22995 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert, I don't know if you have been reading my posts but some of this information is also in Whirlpower Theory. > > The Wallace Inventions, Spin Aligned Nuclei, the Gravitomagnetic > Field, and the Tampere 'Gravity-Shielding' Experiment: Is There a > Connection? And I would like to add, aren't these principles exactly like my macro version principles I have stated in Whirlpower Theory. I know I have not expressed the "physics speak" so well defined by these great works but in sheer simplicity and laymans terms I have tried to say many of these same things. > > Abstract > Wallace's patents of the early 1970's claim that a rotating > object which contains unpaired nuclear spins can modify gravity. > An explanation in terms of a gravitational analogue to the > magnetic field of electromagnetism has been proposed. > Podkletnov's "gravity shielding" experiment at Tampere, now being > replicated by NASA, may also be an example of the same effect. I think this is seen in the hurricane as well, and is the reason it is such a mystery to science. Science is so specialized it can't see the forest for the trees. The two swimming fish go round and round was the way I put it. I don't think it modifies gravity so much as it send out a transverse gravitational effect. Not the up and down terms we usually associate with gravity but the side to side wobble, wiggle, or jiggle. > > During the 1960s through the mid 1970s, Henry William Wallace > was a scientist at GE Aerospace in Valley Forge PA, and GE > Re-Entry Systems in Philadelphia. In the early 1970s, Wallace > was issued patents [1,2,3] for some unusual inventions relating > to the gravitational field. Wallace developed an experimental > apparatus for generating and detecting a secondary gravitational > field, which he named the kinemassic field, and which is now > better known as the gravitomagnetic field. By applying this to the wobble of the Earth it should describe more accurately the motion of the Moon. > > Wallace's experiments were based on aligning the nuclear > spin of elements and isotopes which have an odd number of > nucleons. These materials are characterized by a total nuclear > spin which is an odd integral multiple of one-half (times > Planck's constant), resulting in one nucleon with un-paired spin. > Wallace drew an analogy between the un-paired angular momentum in > these materials, and the un-paired magnetic moments of electrons > in ferromagnetic materials. > > The necessary existence of a magnetic-like gravitational > field has been well established by physicists specializing in > general relativity, gravitational theories, and cosmology. But, > the existence of this field is not well known in other of arenas > of physical science. The gravitomagnetic field was first > hypothesized by Heaviside in the 1880's. The field is predicted > by general relativity, and was first formulated in a relativistic > context in 1918 by Lense and Thirring [6]. In 1961, Forward [7] > was the first to express the gravitational field equations in a > vector form directly analogous and nearly identical to Maxwells > equations for electromagnetics. Almost exactly the information I mentioned in reference to Whirlpower Theory. > > During the last 20 years many other scientists [8-17] > have published articles demonstrating the necessary existence > of the gravitomagnetic field, using arguments based on general > relativity, special relativity, and the cause and effect > relationship which results from non-instantaneous propagation of > energy (retardation). Nearly all of these authors present the > gravitational field equations in a vector form similar to > Maxwells equations. Some authors comment that these equations > provide fundamental insights into gravitation, and it is > unfortunate that they are not at all well known. Despite their > relative simplicity and possible practical value, the > Maxwell-like equations for gravitation do not appear in any > undergraduate physics textbook. Nor does it appear anywhere I can find that these affects relate to the whirlpool like I describe, the hurricane, the motion of the Moon, the motion of the Earth, the motion of the Sun. Nor did Vera Rubin seem to point to this but went off the the direction of theoretical anti-matter and mysterious dark matter. > > Just as in Maxwells equations for electromagnetics, it is > found that in the presence of a time varying gravitomagnetic flux > there will always exist concurrently a time varying > gravitoelectric field. The secondary generated gravitoelectric > field is a dipole field, and unlike the background gravitoelectric > field due to mass charges, the generated gravitoelectric field > always exists in closed loops. Henry Wallace recognized this and > described it in his inventions. > > Wallace also describes another effect which may result from > generation of a secondary gravitoelectric field. Wallace believed > that a secondary gravito- electric field can result in exclusion > of an existing primary background field. In other words, a > gravitational shield can be created. The bulk of Wallace's > patents describe his experimental apparatus, and his detection of > the gravitomagnetic field. The effects detected are minuscule, > and as such, may not be of immediate practical value. In reading > his patents it is possible to become immersed in the detail of > his experimental apparatus, and to neglect the possible > significance of the alternative embodiment of his invention > (figures 7, 7A, and 7B of his first patent). The alternative > embodiment uses a time varying gravitomagnetic flux to create a > secondary gravitoelectric field in an enclosed shell of material > in order to shield the background gravitoelectric field of the > earth. I have a few thought on this as well. But I don't call it sheilding, more like pushing back using an electromagnetic vortex. Probably something like Newman is using. He is trying to use his for energy but I think the appliction is really about propulsion. By combining my mass vortex idea for energy and then putting it together with an electromagnetic vortex for propulsion you get the flying saucer. > > Unfortunately, Wallace does not state whether this > embodiment was ever actually produced, and unlike the detailed > discussion of his experimental apparatus, he provides no > experimental findings or data to back his claim. Nor does he > provide much in the way of theoretical arguments about how a > secondary gravitoelectric field can act to exclude a primary > field, except to state: "It is well known that nature opposes > heterogeneous field flux densities." I know what that feel like. > > Is it well known that nature opposes heterogeneous flux > densities? Well, not to me, and I can not find anything in the > way of scientific literature to directly support this idea. But > it does seem to make sense. I'm reading you loud and clear. It could be argued thusly. In a well- > ordered manifold all derivatives of the fields, time-like and > space-like, must be continuous. If you force a field to exist in > a region of space, the existing background field is somehow > required to form a pattern around or smoothly merge with the > created field. Nature does not permit flux lines to act with > cross-purposes and to exist with widely different directions in > the same region of space. Flux lines can never cross. Wallace > seems to have gotten his experiments right -- maybe he is also > right in his claim of inventing a gravitational shield? That is the way the void is opened. I don't agree exactly about the shield stuff. > > Current Research > > Indirect detection of the gravitomagnetic field was reported in > 1988 by Nordtvedt [24] by astronomical observations of the > precession rate of the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16. A direct > measurement of the earth's gravitomagnetic field was reported in > 1997 by Ciufolini et al [25] by laser tracking of the LAGEOS II > satellite. Results are pending for the NASA/Stanford Gravity > Probe-B experiment to detect the earth's gravitomagnetic field > with an orbiting superconductor gyroscope. Got the same stuff at my discussion board. It seems to me science is very close to understanding what I am talking about but they fail to see the simplicitly of it all and focus on the complexity. But that is what scientists are about. Simplicity is what inventors are about. Robert, if you haven't seen my work here I hope you will check it out. I also hope you and everybody else here will not judge me for my mispellings and my inability to do "physics speak" but see the common thread that runs through what I have said and what science is evidently on the brink of understanding. I just hope my additions will count for something in the effort to find clean practicle energy. I have given my information freely because I think it was the right thing to do and I am not connected or wealthy nor do I have the ability to do it all. I am just doing what I can. David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 13:02:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10966; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 13:01:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 13:01:00 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 12:07:20 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Question on magnetic star (off topic) Resent-Message-ID: <"93jYR3.0.8h2.sFz5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22996 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:30 PM 10/4/98, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] > >***{Horace, my recollection is that the material in a neutron star is too >compressed for distinct atoms of iron (or anything else) to exist. Instead, >the star is composed of a super-dense substance known as "nuclear fluid," >which basically consists of neutrons packed together in a condition of >maximal tightness known as *neutron degeneracy.* --Mitchell Jones}*** > >That would not be very much iron because the >>star is so small. My comments in this regard are based on statements from NASA, not recollections. Again I quote from the NASA memorandum: "A magnetar forms from the explosion, or supernova, of a very large, ordinary star. The star's heavy center collapses under its own gravity into a dense ball of super-compressed matter 12 miles across. This "neutron star" consists mostly of neutrons in a dense fluid, but the outer layers solidify into a rigid crust of atoms about 1 mile deep, with a surface of iron." > >***{Again, I believe this is incorrect with regard to the amount of >material. If my memory is even approximately accurate, a cubic mile of >nuclear fluid would contain a large multiple of the mass of the earth. I >suggest that you hit the used book stores in your area and buy a few >astronomy textbooks. I think your speculations in this area could benefit >from the presence of more facts. --Mitchell Jones}*** My conclusions are based upon current information and *reasoned* speculation: If a neutron star consists of mostly of neutrons then, even if the force were great enough to emit a flare of neutrons, you will end up within minutes with a flare of hydrogen, which poses no threat at 20,000 light years. However, it is very striking to me that neutons do not have charge, only magnetic moments. They can be rotated by magnetic fields, but not accelerated. My conclusion is that a large mass emission of neutrons is highly improbable, hence the emission is limited to a small volume of mostly iron atoms - unless a collision is involved. If you don't like my source, speculations or conclusions then perhaps *you* should make the trip to the library to find a superior source. 8^) Mitchell, I know you take interest in debating things to the nth degree. My thing here is not debate but rather to attempt to contribute meaningfully, and to learn. At present I have very little time for either, so I am not inclined to be much further involved in the subject. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 13:15:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA16861; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 13:14:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 13:14:25 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 12:21:01 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version Resent-Message-ID: <"qLEQJ3.0.G74.VSz5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22997 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:15 AM 10/4/98, Robert Stirniman wrote: >A draft of the following article was posted here last April. >A final version is attached below. [snip] Thanks for posting your article Robert! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 14:10:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA32140; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 14:05:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 14:05:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 14:07:06 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"91J-a3.0.mr7.bC-5s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22998 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Some of the recent discussions reminds me about an important issue. What is the difference between a crackpot versus a "heretic scientist"? Both pursue unconventional, impossible goals. Both are deviants who are excluded from the mainstream, and are disparaged by all reputable researchers. Yet there is a crucial difference. Richard Feynman said it well in "cargo cult science"; his commencement address given at Caltech in 1974. It involves humility, where the good scientists recognize how easily they can fool themselves, and so they ask for criticism, and they do not become defensive when they receive it. It involves profound self-honesty, where good scientists strive to become their own worse critics. Feynman calls it "scientific integrity". It involves cultivating a powerful desire to discover the truth, a desire so strong that it overrides any selfish wishes to see our own ideas proved true. It is what separates the ego-driven crackpots from the scientists both orthodox and "heretic." See below. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 excerpt from CARGO CULT SCIENCE Richard Feynman, 1974 http://www.physics.brocku.ca/etc/cargo_cult_science.html (if you haven't read CARGO CULT SCIENCE in awhile, definitely give it a perusal. It should be required reading for anyone who is involved in any field of "taboo" research.) ...there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in cargo cult science. That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying science in school--we never say explicitly what this is, but just hope that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated. Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. You must do the best you can--if you know anything at all wrong, or possibly wrong--to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. There is also a more subtle problem. When you have put a lot of ideas together to make an elaborate theory, you want to make sure, when explaining what it fits, that those things it fits are not just the things that gave you the idea for the theory; but that the finished theory makes something else come out right, in addition. In summary, the idea is to give all of the information to help others to judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads to judgement in one particular direction or another. The easiest way to explain this idea is to contrast it, for example, with advertising. Last night I heard that Wesson oil doesn't soak through food. Well, that's true. It's not dishonest; but the thing I'm talking about is not just a matter of not being dishonest; it's a matter of scientific integrity, which is another level. The fact that should be added to that advertising statement is that NO oils soak through food, if operated at a certain temperature. If operated at another temperature, they all will--including Wesson oil. So it's the implication which has been conveyed, not the fact, which is true, and the difference is what we have to deal with. We've learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were wrong or right. Nature's phenomena will agree or they'll disagree with your theory. And, although you may gain some temporary fame and excitement, you will not gain a good reputation as a scientist if you haven't tried to be very careful in this kind of work. And it's this type of integrity, this kind of care not to fool yourself, that is missing to a large extent in much of the research in cargo cult science. A great deal of their difficulty is, of course, the difficulty of the subject and the inapplicability of the scientific method to the subject. Nevertheless, it should be remarked that this is not the only difficulty. That's why the planes don't land--but they don't land. We have learned a lot from experience about how to handle some of the ways we fool ourselves. One example: Millikan measured the charge on an electron by an experiment with falling oil drops, and got an answer which we now know not to be quite right. It's a little bit off because he had the incorrect value for the viscosity of air. It's interesting to look at the history of measurements of the charge of an electron, after Millikan. If you plot them as a function of time, you find that one is a little bit bigger than Millikan's, and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, until finally they settle down to a number which is higher. Why didn't they discover the new number was higher right away? It's a thing that scientists are ashamed of--this history--because it's apparent that people did things like this: When they got a number that was too high above Millikan's, they thought something must be wrong--and they would look for and find a reason why something might be wrong. When they got a number close to Millikan's value they didn't look so hard. And so they eliminated the numbers that were too far off, and did other things like that. We've learned those tricks nowadays, and now we don't have that kind of a disease. But this long history of learning how to not fool ourselves--of having utter scientific integrity--is, I'm sorry to say, something that we haven't specifically included in any particular course that I know of. We just hope you've caught on by osmosis . The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you've not fooled yourself, it's easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way after that... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 16:32:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA27617; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 16:29:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 16:29:32 -0700 Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 16:30:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810042330.QAA27926 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Resent-Message-ID: <"DaANp.0.Nl6.QJ06s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22999 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In message writes: > > Some of the recent discussions reminds me about an important issue. What > is the difference between a crackpot versus a "heretic scientist"? Both > pursue unconventional, impossible goals. Both are deviants who are > excluded from the mainstream, and are disparaged by all reputable > researchers. Yet there is a crucial difference. > > Richard Feynman said it well in "cargo cult science"; his commencement > address given at Caltech in 1974. It involves humility, where the good > scientists recognize how easily they can fool themselves, and so they ask > for criticism, and they do not become defensive when they receive it. It > involves profound self-honesty, where good scientists strive to become > their own worse critics. Feynman calls it "scientific integrity". It > involves cultivating a powerful desire to discover the truth, a desire so > strong that it overrides any selfish wishes to see our own ideas proved > true. It is what separates the ego-driven crackpots from the scientists > both orthodox and "heretic." See below. > > ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 > > excerpt from CARGO CULT SCIENCE Richard Feynman, 1974 > http://www.physics.brocku.ca/etc/cargo_cult_science.html > > (if you haven't read CARGO CULT SCIENCE in awhile, definitely give it a > perusal. It should be required reading for anyone who is involved in > any field of "taboo" research.) > > ....there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in cargo cult > science. That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying > science in school--we never say explicitly what this is, but just hope > that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is > interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. > It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought > that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a kind of leaning over > backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report > everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think > is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; > and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, > and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been > eliminated. > > Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if > you know them. You must do the best you can--if you know anything at all > wrong, or possibly wrong--to explain it. If you make a theory, for > example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all > the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. > There is also a more subtle problem. When you have put a lot of ideas > together to make an elaborate theory, you want to make sure, when > explaining what it fits, that those things it fits are not just the things > that gave you the idea for the theory; but that the finished theory makes > something else come out right, in addition. > > In summary, the idea is to give all of the information to help others to > judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads > to judgement in one particular direction or another. > > The easiest way to explain this idea is to contrast it, for example, with > advertising. Last night I heard that Wesson oil doesn't soak through > food. Well, that's true. It's not dishonest; but the thing I'm talking > about is not just a matter of not being dishonest; it's a matter of > scientific integrity, which is another level. The fact that should be > added to that advertising statement is that NO oils soak through food, if > operated at a certain temperature. If operated at another temperature, > they all will--including Wesson oil. So it's the implication which has > been conveyed, not the fact, which is true, and the difference is what we > have to deal with. > > We've learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other > experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were > wrong or right. Nature's phenomena will agree or they'll disagree with > your theory. And, although you may gain some temporary fame and > excitement, you will not gain a good reputation as a scientist if you > haven't tried to be very careful in this kind of work. And it's this type > of integrity, this kind of care not to fool yourself, that is missing to a > large extent in much of the research in cargo cult science. > > A great deal of their difficulty is, of course, the difficulty of the > subject and the inapplicability of the scientific method to the subject. > Nevertheless, it should be remarked that this is not the only difficulty. > That's why the planes don't land--but they don't land. > > We have learned a lot from experience about how to handle some of the ways > we fool ourselves. One example: Millikan measured the charge on an > electron by an experiment with falling oil drops, and got an answer which > we now know not to be quite right. It's a little bit off because he had > the incorrect value for the viscosity of air. It's interesting to look at > the history of measurements of the charge of an electron, after Millikan. > If you plot them as a function of time, you find that one is a little bit > bigger than Millikan's, and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, > and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, until finally they > settle down to a number which is higher. > > Why didn't they discover the new number was higher right away? It's a > thing that scientists are ashamed of--this history--because it's apparent > that people did things like this: When they got a number that was too high > above Millikan's, they thought something must be wrong--and they would > look for and find a reason why something might be wrong. When they got a > number close to Millikan's value they didn't look so hard. And so they > eliminated the numbers that were too far off, and did other things like > that. We've learned those tricks nowadays, and now we don't have that kind > of a disease. > > But this long history of learning how to not fool ourselves--of having > utter scientific integrity--is, I'm sorry to say, something that we > haven't specifically included in any particular course that I know of. We > just hope you've caught on by osmosis . > > The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the > easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After > you've not fooled yourself, it's easy not to fool other scientists. You > just have to be honest in a conventional way after that... > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 16:42:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA01962; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 16:41:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 16:41:35 -0700 Message-ID: <19981004224254.8886.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 15:42:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"XLEHR1.0.aU.lU06s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23000 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have done enough calorimetry to appreciate the issues being discussed between Scott Little and Mitchell Swartz, but I have not done nearly as much as either of them. However, I will offer my opinion to try to clarify this discussion. (Am I ever naive!) Scott has described his calorimeter in enough detail to evaluate. He has also published much data on his web pages. In this wealth of data one can find examples of the "step function response" that Mitchell wants. Whether or not it is important to know the step function response depends on the experimental question being asked. However, my main point is that the step function response is there for the looking in many of Scotts's web data. One also finds that in experimental runs that reach steady state, Scott's calorimeters settle down to P_out = P_in to within a few percent. One also finds examples where Scott has integrated P_in and P_out to compute the respective input and output energies. These are usually equal to within a few percent. It looks like Scott's calorimeters function like good calorimeters should. Otherwise, one has to hypothesize that Scott's calorimeters always work to make it look like P_out = P_in even when a device under test inside is generating OU. This might happen by coincidence once or maybe twice, but not over tens of experiments. I think Scott's calorimeters function well. Mitchell's calorimeter consists of several calorimeter-within-a-calorimeter "rings". These are what I call "thermal conduction" calorimeters. (I haven't read any books on calorimetry, so I don't know the standard names very well. However, I have yet to run into a calorimeter that I haven't been able to understand with my physics and engineering background and a bit of analysis.) Mitchell's calorimeter not only has a slow step response, but the response contains multiple non negligible time constants. Stated simply, Mitchell's calorimeter and its time response time response is complicated. Therefore, he probably MUST measure it in detail in order to interpret his calorimeter's raw data. In principle it can give good results. My guess is that Mitchell's calorimeter is harder to calibrate and operate than Scott's == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 17:15:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA16052; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 17:13:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 17:13:43 -0700 Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 17:14:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810050014.RAA29827 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Resent-Message-ID: <"voR-k.0.fw3.ry06s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23001 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Meant to put something on this first. Willaim says; > > Some of the recent discussions reminds me about an important issue. What > is the difference between a crackpot versus a "heretic scientist"? Both > pursue unconventional, impossible goals. All new thought is said to be unconvention and impossible. That is what new thought is all aobut. Both are deviants who are > excluded from the mainstream, and are disparaged by all reputable > researchers. Yet there is a crucial difference. Every real inovation was called crackpot before proven. As historically proven. When the Wright Brothers said they were going to fly after many failed they were called crackpots by conventional science. Not to mention the Galileo debacle. Bell couldn't get anyone interested in the telephone in this country even after it was invented. But I also recognize the number of crackpot proposals far out weigh the actual crackpot breakthroughs, and I will have to endure this lable till then. > > Richard Feynman said it well in "cargo cult science"; his commencement > address given at Caltech in 1974. It involves humility, where the good > scientists recognize how easily they can fool themselves, and so they ask > for criticism, and they do not become defensive when they receive it. It > involves profound self-honesty, where good scientists strive to become > their own worse critics. That is fine for scientists, they have a reputation to protect, a job to keep, they can't afford to be a crackpot. Inventors on the other hand relish in it. All great inventors came from the outside of the established order of things. they didn't call it Fulton's folly for nothing. Feynman calls it "scientific integrity". It > involves cultivating a powerful desire to discover the truth, a desire so > strong that it overrides any selfish wishes to see our own ideas proved > true. And inventors integrity is the courage to continue when the scientists call him names like crackpot among others. Steve said I had very politely tried to explain my theory and I have, the abuse has been directed towards me. I try to let it pass but at times I strike back to. And, I have apologized when I did. That is not the mark of a ego crazed maniac. I have opened my theory to full scrutiny and have gotton some positive remarks from people here. Others don't want anything to do with it. It is what separates the ego-driven crackpots from the scientists > both orthodox and "heretic." So far this sounds like it comes from who's ego has been bruised because he worked for IBM and still hates Bill Gates and has never gotten over the revenge of the nerds. > > ....there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in cargo cult > science. That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying > science in school--we never say explicitly what this is, but just hope > that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is > interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. Then how is my work considered in the arena. I have "bought it out now and speak of it explicitly." I don't see how it could be more explicit. It is so simple a child should be able to understand it. > It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought > that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a kind of leaning over > backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report > everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think > is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; > and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, > and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been > eliminated. I have given the test of principle model and show other highly respected scientists are in accord. In fact I just heard from Curt and he says Whirlpower will be built by December. He will be posting pictures on line as the process develops so all can watch. Also, he is already linked to Keelynet and from what I understand the Swedish New Physics Association is very respectable. > > Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if > you know them. You must do the best you can--if you know anything at all > wrong, or possibly wrong--to explain it. If you make a theory, for > example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all > the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. So far there has been very little disagreement from a scientific standpoint but a whole lot of namecalling, saying it is impossible, you're a nut, a crackpot ect. No real scientific disproof or analysis of any sort from the critics. > > In summary, the idea is to give all of the information to help others to > judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads > to judgement in one particular direction or another. I have given all the information I can find about a subject that many have studied for a long time. I show my version is unique and very simple. I don't know what else could be added except that science has been wrong about the vortex and nobody understands the hurricane. Top astronmers show science, once thought valid, is not seeing %90 of what is happening in the energy of motion in the universe. You > just have to be honest in a conventional way after that... > I have been and will be totally honest. All my work on this is dated and witnessed going back for over a year. What could be more honest? David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 19:41:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA29778; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 19:40:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 19:40:29 -0700 Message-ID: <03bb01bdf009$84b26e60$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Fat Chance? Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 20:40:23 -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: <"vUGne1.0.4H7.S636s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23002 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex It turns out that soybean oil, corn oil, cod liver oil, peanut oil, and whale oil are unsaturated enough to be "hydrogenated" with up to 8E21 atoms of Deuterium and/or Tritium per gram. You don't suppose "Fat Boy" was an H-Bomb, do you? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 19:55:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA03451; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 19:53:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 19:53:55 -0700 Message-ID: <0b8201bdf00b$3222f460$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: "David Dennard" , Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 22:52:25 -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: <"z0Ddb3.0.qr.2J36s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23003 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: http://www.celestinevision.com/cbs_body.html You need to see if you can be in the movie David. http://library.advanced.org/12523/article2.html http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/mathphysics/abstracts/ADP-98-41-M70.html >All new thought is said to be unconvention and impossible. That is what new >thought is all aobut. > >Every real inovation was called crackpot before proven. As historically proven. >When the Wright Brothers said they were going to fly after many failed they were >called crackpots by conventional science. Not to mention the Galileo debacle. >Bell couldn't get anyone interested in the telephone in this country even after >it was invented. But I also recognize the number of crackpot proposals far out >weigh the actual crackpot breakthroughs, and I will have to endure this lable >till then. > >> >> Richard Feynman said it well in "cargo cult science"; his commencement >> address given at Caltech in 1974. It involves humility, where the good >> scientists recognize how easily they can fool themselves, and so they ask >> for criticism, and they do not become defensive when they receive it. It >> involves profound self-honesty, where good scientists strive to become >> their own worse critics. > > >That is fine for scientists, they have a reputation to protect, a job to keep, >they can't afford to be a crackpot. Inventors on the other hand relish in it. >All great inventors came from the outside of the established order of things. >they didn't call it Fulton's folly for nothing. > > >Feynman calls it "scientific integrity". It >> involves cultivating a powerful desire to discover the truth, a desire so >> strong that it overrides any selfish wishes to see our own ideas proved >> true. > > >And inventors integrity is the courage to continue when the scientists call him >names like crackpot among others. Steve said I had very politely tried to >explain my theory and I have, the abuse has been directed towards me. I try to >let it pass but at times I strike back to. And, I have apologized when I did. >That is not the mark of a ego crazed maniac. I have opened my theory to full >scrutiny and have gotton some positive remarks from people here. Others don't >want anything to do with it. > > >It is what separates the ego-driven crackpots from the scientists >> both orthodox and "heretic." > >So far this sounds like it comes from who's ego has been bruised because he >worked for IBM and still hates Bill Gates and has never gotten over the revenge >of the nerds. > > >> >> ....there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in cargo cult >> science. That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying >> science in school--we never say explicitly what this is, but just hope >> that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is >> interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. > > >Then how is my work considered in the arena. I have "bought it out now and >speak of it explicitly." I don't see how it could be more explicit. It is so >simple a child should be able to understand it. > > >> It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought >> that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a kind of leaning over >> backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report >> everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think >> is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; >> and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, >> and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been >> eliminated. > > >I have given the test of principle model and show other highly respected >scientists are in accord. In fact I just heard from Curt and he says Whirlpower >will be built by December. He will be posting pictures on line as the process >develops so all can watch. Also, he is already linked to Keelynet and from what >I understand the Swedish New Physics Association is very respectable. > >> >> Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if >> you know them. You must do the best you can--if you know anything at all >> wrong, or possibly wrong--to explain it. If you make a theory, for >> example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all >> the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. > > >So far there has been very little disagreement from a scientific standpoint but >a whole lot of namecalling, saying it is impossible, you're a nut, a crackpot >ect. No real scientific disproof or analysis of any sort from the critics. > > >> >> In summary, the idea is to give all of the information to help others to >> judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads >> to judgement in one particular direction or another. > > >I have given all the information I can find about a subject that many have >studied for a long time. I show my version is unique and very simple. I don't >know what else could be added except that science has been wrong about the >vortex and nobody understands the hurricane. Top astronmers show science, once >thought valid, is not seeing %90 of what is happening in the energy of motion in >the universe. > > You >> just have to be honest in a conventional way after that... >> >I have been and will be totally honest. All my work on this is dated and >witnessed going back for over a year. What could be more honest? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 21:16:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA32013; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 21:15:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 21:15:02 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 00:14:11 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpo Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810050015_MC2-5B86-69F0 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"ZkdN81.0.1q7.6V46s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23004 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Every real innovation was called crackpot before proven. As historically proven. When the Wright Brothers said they were going to fly after many failed they were called crackpots by conventional science. Not to mention the Galileo debacle. I must protest these distortions of history. When the Wrights announced they were going to fly, they were invited to address one of America's most prestigious engineering conferences, the Society of Western Engineers. The journal paper from that lecture is the most important scientific analysis of flight published before 1908. It was only after they flew that most members of the scientific establishment ignored them. Most, but not all. A series of misunderstandings piled up, preventing widespread exposure of the facts before 1908. The Wrights were partly to blame. Some people in high places were paying close attention however, because the logjam of confusion between the Wrights and U.S. Army was broken by a personal order of President Roosevelt, and the contract money came out his executive emergency fund. The Wright's financial backers after 1907 included some of the savviest weapons and high technology vendors, including the people who founded IBM. So it isn't fair to say that the Wrights were denigrated by the entire establishment, and for that matter it wouldn't be fair to say that cold fusion has been completely unsupported by all establishments. The French and Italian governments are providing excellent support. It is also absurd to suggest that people thought the Wrights were crackpots. Perhaps uninformed strangers and newspaper readers did, but no scientist, investor, or government official who met with them got that impression. They were straight-laced, by-the-book businessmen and engineers. Their 1902 paper is a masterpiece of conventional hard science and advanced mathematics. They were about as far from being crackpots as McKubre, Storms or Fleischmann is today. The Galileo debacle is a myth. He was given a huge government defense contract for the first telescopes. After he got the money the Pope's experts did, in fact, look though an early model. They saw nothing because it was slipshod prototype which often malfunctioned. They looked through later models, saw what they were supposed to see, and duly reported back the facts. The Galileo myth is instructive as an apocryphal story. It teaches us about ourselves and our perceptions of history. But it isn't history. The same can be said for the ridiculous myth that experts in 1492 thought the world was flat, and that was the cause of their opposition to Columbus. People often say that great inventors, scientists, artists and writers act like crackpots. I think this is a Hollywood myth. I do not like to brag, but I have met a surprising number of important artists, writers and scientists, especially in the cold fusion field. By and large they are the most staid, conventional, understated people you would ever want to know. Frankly, most of them are boring and introverted. They do not have the excess mental energy to be outlandish, or demanding, or cranky. Mostly they shut up and work. Third rate artists and wannabe great inventors act like buffoons and spoiled children, because they think that is how creative people are supposed to act. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 21:47:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA06279; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 21:42:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 21:42:28 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981004193731.00d68d64 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 12:37:31 -0700 To: Jim From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: How magnets work for health Cc: Alan.CHEAH adecco.com, ahannan@MIT.EDU, deadnuts@deadnuts.com, lupem world.std.com, peg@wintergreen.com, bso@acm.org, DaleSVP@ipa.net, dtassen c-zone.net, sweetser@world.std.com, clsmith@darwin.bu.edu, ccantor sequenom.com, 76753.3551@compuserve.com, eben@ergeng.com, ehill world.std.com, leep@world.std.com, ejp@world.std.com, wordpros inforamp.net, moy@ziplink.net, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, gjcheah guybutler.com, wellenstein@binah.cc.brandeis.edu, hic world.std.com, jkokor@alum.mit.edu, Jim Hile , jim@msri.org, discjt@servtech.com, John Ranta , jsearl@tako.demon.co.uk, joshprokop worldnet.att.net, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net, Leonard Dvorson , cadman@mediaone.net, leep world.std.com, ohl@world.std.com, pgm@world.std.com, rsmith itiip.com, raddison@world.std.com, 71022.3001@compuserve.com, 73577.123 compuserve.com, tesla@pupman.com, thiahadge@aol.com, tcapizzi world.std.com, tom.duff@poweroasis.com, TAFAUL@aol.com, vortex-L eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"IiO3h1.0.uX1.pu46s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23005 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Possible explainations for your decrease in energy when experiencing changing magnetic fields: 1. Electroporation - well documented reaction of increase in cell membrane permiability when same is exposed to electric/magnetic fields. If toxins are released (a good thing for you in the long run) from cells due to electroporation, uncomfortable side effects result. 2. Negative electric and magnetic fields (North pole is negative field - South pole of compass needle points to this field) are a contracting energy which has a calming effect. The positive electric and magnetic fields are an expanding energy which has an energizing effect. An aquaintance who runs for exercise noticed that he goes alot further in distance when following electric powerlines on hilly terrain. The undulations cause variations in the distance to the cables thus constantly changing the local magnetic field intensity. When my cat (The Kitty) first got diabetes (she started drinking twice as much water and pissed all over the place), I brought her to a vet who prescribed insulin shots. I later learned that diabetes may be caused by a calcium build up in cell membranes that restricts glucose absorbtion and/or insulin release. I feed her magnesium, methylsulphonalmethane (MSM) with vitamin C, and made a North pole facing magnet plate (150 ceramic8 disc magnets glued down with North Pole up) that went under her bedding. The three above mentioned therapies all aid in releasing the trapped calcium from the cell walls and allowed proper glucose metabolism to resume. It has been 5 months since we stopped the insulin shots. The Kitty is doing fine because the symptoms subsided on the first week of this unconventional treatment and have not returned. We stopped the insulin shots on that first week also because it looked like The Kitty was starting to hate us for doing that. I told the vet about these events and showed her the research papers I found. The vet couldn't believe any of it and she still thinks diabetes is a permanent condition after its' onset has begun. She still insists that we must immediately resume administering the insulin shots to The Kitty. Dennis At 01:12 PM 10/4/98 -0500, you wrote: >Health and spinning magnets: >I (personally) notice a drastic decrease in energy when I play with my >non shielded motors. I am at the point that I need to shield the magnets >I work with. >I have been warned about this in the past and now I can feel the >effects. > >Jim > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > To leave this list, email > with the body text: leave keelynet > WWW based join and leave forms and KeelyNet list archives > are at http://dallastexas.net/keelynet/ > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 22:30:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA25269; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 22:29:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 22:29:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 22:30:44 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" In-Reply-To: <199810050014.RAA29827 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"S63Su1.0.jA6.fa56s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23006 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 4 Oct 1998, David Dennard wrote: > > Richard Feynman said it well in "cargo cult science"; his commencement > > address given at Caltech in 1974. It involves humility, where the good > > scientists recognize how easily they can fool themselves, and so they ask > > for criticism, and they do not become defensive when they receive it. It > > involves profound self-honesty, where good scientists strive to become > > their own worse critics. > > That is fine for scientists, they have a reputation to protect, a job to > keep, they can't afford to be a crackpot. Inventors on the other hand > relish in it. All great inventors came from the outside of the > established order of things. they didn't call it Fulton's folly for > nothing. I disagree, because these crackpots often were "scientists" in fact, if not in name. In many cases their behavior and discoveries better illustrate genuine "science" than the behavior of the learned men who belittled them. But "crackpots" and "scientists" both should strive for high integrity by recognizing that humans, including themselves, are sometimes fooled and misled by their own minds or their own egos. For every "Fulton" who is on a noble mission, there are hundreds of non-fultons who are in pursuit of false dreams. For every "Wright brothers" there are hundreds of flying-machine crackpots who are going about things the wrong way, but have no hope of ever discovering this fact. Regarding asking and receiving criticism: it depends highly upon who is being asked to criticize! There is a great difference between asking our respected collegues for constructive criticism on the one hand, versus posting our ideas among strangers and having them take hostile potshots at it on the other. There is no purpose to the latter, since the hostile criticism will be ignored, whether or not it is valuable or correct. I might be wrong, but in reading the messages from past week I get the idea that you will defend agains ALL criticism, and will assume that it is motivated by narrowmindedness or ego. Yet your very first messages here were a request for critical review of your ideas! > Feynman calls it "scientific integrity". It > > involves cultivating a powerful desire to discover the truth, a desire so > > strong that it overrides any selfish wishes to see our own ideas proved > > true. > > > And inventors integrity is the courage to continue when the scientists > call him names like crackpot among others. Steve said I had very > politely tried to explain my theory and I have, the abuse has been > directed towards me. I try to let it pass but at times I strike back > to. And, I have apologized when I did. That is not the mark of a ego > crazed maniac. I have opened my theory to full scrutiny and have gotton > some positive remarks from people here. Others don't want anything to > do with it. I was unclear: my message was not directed at you specifically, I was also thinking about the Cold Fusion, Newman, and the Meyer controversies. Feynman's words of wisdom have application to all. ALL of us have a need to verify that we are pursuing worthwhile goals, and are not becoming ego-driven crackpots. If I turn into a crackpot, I surely will be the last one to know this, since self-honesty is the first victim of the "crackpot disease." Constructive criticism by respected third parties is a good way to keep from slipping into crackpotism. > It is what separates the ego-driven crackpots from the scientists > > both orthodox and "heretic." > > So far this sounds like it comes from who's ego has been bruised because > he worked for IBM and still hates Bill Gates and has never gotten over > the revenge of the nerds. Feynman is a twisted vengeful person who hates Bill Gates? Or do you mean *I* hate Bill Gates? Either way, it sounds like a pretty nasty accusation. On what do you base it? To me it appears that you tend to respond with nasty speculations about the motivations of people who offer criticism. If the criticism was meant to be constructive, then yours is a good way to convert friends into enemies. Also, you should expect that third parties will probably have nasty speculations about your motivations too. On the other hand, I love to psychoanalyze everyone, including myself, and am not too suprised when people look suspiciously at MY motiviations. Am I an ego-damaged, vengeful fool? Maybe. *I* don't think so, but I'll never entirely trust my own judgement in this area. > > ....there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in cargo cult > > science. That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying > > science in school--we never say explicitly what this is, but just hope > > that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is > > interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. > > > Then how is my work considered in the arena. I have "bought it out now > and speak of it explicitly." I don't see how it could be more explicit. > It is so simple a child should be able to understand it. I don't understand. Feynman is saying here that "scientific integrity" is rarely discussed, even by scientists and their educators. His article is a rare instance of discussing the brutal honesty involved in doing science. > > It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought > > that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a kind of leaning over > > backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report > > everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think > > is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; > > and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, > > and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been > > eliminated. > > > I have given the test of principle model and show other highly respected > scientists are in accord. In fact I just heard from Curt and he says > Whirlpower will be built by December. He will be posting pictures on > line as the process develops so all can watch. Also, he is already > linked to Keelynet and from what I understand the Swedish New Physics > Association is very respectable. One point Feynman makes: when we make a discovery, our very first critic should be ourselves. I wonder, what criticisms of your own work do you yourself make? Since vortex-L is a somewhat hostile forum at this point, I will understand if you don't want to discuss this and give ammunition to the enemy. However, if there was no ongoing hostility, then there could be an opportunity for a debate like so: you present your ideas, then you criticize them yourself. You answer your own criticisms. Other people then offer constructive criticism (if they can think of any which you yourself have not already covered). Then you either offer answers to the issues that they raise, or you take their criticizms seriously and perhaps speculate on future experiments which will answer those criticizms. > > Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if > > you know them. You must do the best you can--if you know anything at all > > wrong, or possibly wrong--to explain it. If you make a theory, for > > example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all > > the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. > > So far there has been very little disagreement from a scientific > standpoint but a whole lot of namecalling, saying it is impossible, > you're a nut, a crackpot ect. No real scientific disproof or analysis > of any sort from the critics. I agree in part. Yet hidden in some of the namecalling has been valid criticism. For example, somebody pointed out earlier that Frame-dragging could not be an appropriate concept here. This criticism needs fleshing out. As conventional science understands it, Frame-dragging is an incredibly feeble effect. It only becomes strong in rare places, for example when a disk of gas orbits near a spinning neutron star. For frame-dragging forces to become important, you need to take an object as massive as the sun, and then spin it at hundreds of times per second. As far as I know, nobody knows how to produce any amount of frame-dragging which is even measurable, to say nothing of being strong enough to be useful. It's just too weak. I recently saw a mention of an experiment in 1894 suggested by Ernst Mach, where somebody searched for frame-dragging forces around a heavy flywheel. They found nothing. (What detectors did they use in 1894?!) Yet your idea is NOT normal frame-dragging. If I understand the conventional viewpoint, Frame-dragging is proportional to the momentum of moving mass. If you rotate the entire universe around a bucket of water, the water will be pulled outwards in the same way as if the universe remains still and the bucket is rotated instead. A spinning gyroscope does not produce measurable frame-dragging. But what about a WOBBLING gyroscope? When a gyroscope only spins, the flywheel mass is being accelerated. But when a gyroscope wobbles too, the mass experiences CHANGES in acceleration. Weird things might occur, since acceleration-of- acceleration is not a well-studied phenomenon. "Transient forces" are usually treated as noise, and they (and the nonlinear effects that may accompany them) are usually seen as problems to be avoided, rather than the subjects of investigation. Who has performed experiments with gyroscopes under forced precession? Nobody in conventional physics, as far as I know. However, this is a hot topic of discussion among amateurs who are involved with "crackpot" experiments involving "Antigravity" and modifications to inertia. This topic has been around for decades, starting many years ago with the infamous "Dean Drive" with its rotating gyroscopes. There are occasional reports of success in this field, but since it is "taboo science", no reputable researchers take it seriously. keywords SPACE DRIVE INERTIALESS THRUSTER DEAN DRIVE COOK DRIVE LAITHWAITE DRIVE http://www.padrak.com/agn/PENDTESTS.html http://www.padrak.com/ine/TGYRO.html http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_9_5.html > > In summary, the idea is to give all of the information to help others to > > judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads > > to judgement in one particular direction or another. > > I have given all the information I can find about a subject that many > have studied for a long time. I show my version is unique and very > simple. I don't know what else could be added except that science has > been wrong about the vortex and nobody understands the hurricane. Top > astronmers show science, once thought valid, is not seeing %90 of what > is happening in the energy of motion in the universe. Feynman is basically saying: present the arguments of your opponents too. List the information which puts your idea in a favorable light, but also list your idea's faults. Fight for your idea yes, but never cover up the criticisms. (Ideally you would list the criticisms, and then for each one show why it does not apply, or propose experiments which would determine if the criticism is valid or not.) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 4 23:16:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA05029; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 23:13:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 23:13:26 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 22:19:45 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Jim From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: How magnets work for health Cc: Alan.CHEAH adecco.com, ahannan@MIT.EDU, deadnuts@deadnuts.com, lupem world.std.com, peg@wintergreen.com, bso@acm.org, DaleSVP@ipa.net, dtassen c-zone.net, sweetser@world.std.com, clsmith@darwin.bu.edu, ccantor sequenom.com, 76753.3551@compuserve.com, eben@ergeng.com, ehill world.std.com, leep@world.std.com, ejp@world.std.com, wordpros inforamp.net, moy@ziplink.net, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, gjcheah guybutler.com, wellenstein@binah.cc.brandeis.edu, hic world.std.com, jkokor@alum.mit.edu, Jim Hile , jim@msri.org, discjt@servtech.com, John Ranta , jsearl@tako.demon.co.uk, joshprokop worldnet.att.net, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net, Leonard Dvorson , cadman@mediaone.net, ohl world.std.com, pgm@world.std.com, rsmith@itiip.com, raddison world.std.com, 71022.3001@compuserve.com, 73577.123 compuserve.com, tesla@pupman.com, thiahadge@aol.com, tcapizzi world.std.com, tom.duff@poweroasis.com, TAFAUL@aol.com, vortex-L eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"sb23U.0.ME1.5E66s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23007 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:37 PM 10/4/98, Dennis C. Lee wrote: >Possible explainations for your decrease in energy when experiencing >changing magnetic fields: [snip] ************************************************************************** Vortex-L Rules: [snip] 4. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE: when you reply to a message DON'T include the ENTIRE message in your reply. Always edit it a bit and delete something. The more you delete, the less traffic overload. The entire message should really only be included if: (A) you are replying to a message that is many days old, or (B) you are doing a point-by-point reply to many parts of a message. Many vortex users must pay by the kilobyte for receiving message traffic, and large amounts of redundant messages are irritating and expensive. So, when including a quoted message in your reply, ALWAYS DELETE SOMETHING, the more the better. 5. Please do not include any other email list in the TO line or the CC line of your messages to vortex-L. In the past this has caused thread leakage between different list and redundant messages as replies from subscribers go to both lists. It's OK to manually forward mail from other lists to vortex-L, as long as the TO line and CC line has only vortex-L and no other list. [snip] Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 4 23:27:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA11271; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 23:26:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 23:26:19 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: O. A. Barut Theory Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 05:38:24 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36195ad9.3818031 mail-hub> References: <36175D1A.8F2CF72C verisoft.com.tr> In-Reply-To: <36175D1A.8F2CF72C verisoft.com.tr> 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: <"LgNLl3.0.wl2.AQ66s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23008 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 04 Oct 1998 13:33:46 +0200, Hamdi Ucar wrote: >Hi All, > >I had an old article of O. A. Barut, who passed 1995, "WHAT ARE TRUE BUILDING BLOCKS OF MATTER" published in "Electrodynamics and Classical Theory of Fields and Particles" by A.O. Barut. ISBN 0-486-64038-8. > >The article contain a really simple particle theory which I interested so much and finally I am reproducing it manually as a MS Word file. I hope I will finish it in few days. Please inform me If you wish to receive it. (will take less than 100 Kb on zi pped format) [snip] Hi Hamdi, It would be nice if you could post the document on a web site. If you don't have one available, I would be glad to post it for you, and I would post the URL here on vortex. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 00:39:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA08540; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 00:37:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 00:37:51 -0700 Message-Id: <199810050738.CAA10763 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 02:37:54 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Question on magnetic star (off topic) Resent-Message-ID: <"1auPg2.0.M52.ET76s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23009 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 1:30 PM 10/4/98, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >> >>***{Horace, my recollection is that the material in a neutron star is too >>compressed for distinct atoms of iron (or anything else) to exist. Instead, >>the star is composed of a super-dense substance known as "nuclear fluid," >>which basically consists of neutrons packed together in a condition of >>maximal tightness known as *neutron degeneracy.* --Mitchell Jones}*** >> >>That would not be very much iron because the >>>star is so small. > >My comments in this regard are based on statements from NASA, not >recollections. Again I quote from the NASA memorandum: "A magnetar forms >from the explosion, or supernova, of a very large, ordinary star. The >star's heavy center collapses under its own gravity into a dense ball of >super-compressed matter 12 miles across. This "neutron star" consists >mostly of neutrons in a dense fluid, but the outer layers solidify into a >rigid crust of atoms about 1 mile deep, with a surface of iron." > > >> >>***{Again, I believe this is incorrect with regard to the amount of >>material. If my memory is even approximately accurate, a cubic mile of >>nuclear fluid would contain a large multiple of the mass of the earth. I >>suggest that you hit the used book stores in your area and buy a few >>astronomy textbooks. I think your speculations in this area could benefit >>from the presence of more facts. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >My conclusions are based upon current information and *reasoned* speculation: > >If a neutron star consists of mostly of neutrons then, even if the force >were great enough to emit a flare of neutrons, you will end up within >minutes with a flare of hydrogen, which poses no threat at 20,000 light >years. However, it is very striking to me that neutons do not have charge, >only magnetic moments. They can be rotated by magnetic fields, but not >accelerated. My conclusion is that a large mass emission of neutrons is >highly improbable, hence the emission is limited to a small volume of >mostly iron atoms - unless a collision is involved. > >If you don't like my source, speculations or conclusions then perhaps *you* >should make the trip to the library to find a superior source. 8^) ***{You were the one who seemed interested in the topic, Horace. My comments were intended only to nudge you in the direction of gathering more facts by suggesting that the material you were quoting is a bit more controversial than you may be aware. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Mitchell, I know you take interest in debating things to the nth degree. >My thing here is not debate but rather to attempt to contribute >meaningfully, and to learn. ***{Debating, in my opinion, is an excellent way both to contribute and to learn. --Mitchell Jones}*** At present I have very little time for either, >so I am not inclined to be much further involved in the subject. ***{Horace, either you debate this with me to the nth degree, or I will take my marbles and go home! :-) Mitchell Jones}*** > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 00:44:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA09946; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 00:43:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 00:43:31 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 00:44:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810050744.AAA15228 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard " Reply-To: "David Dennard " To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Resent-Message-ID: <"ljV9s1.0.JR2.ZY76s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23010 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill Wallace wrote, > http://www.celestinevision.com/cbs_body.html > > You need to see if you can be in the movie David. > > http://library.advanced.org/12523/article2.html > http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/mathphysics/abstracts/ADP-98-41-M70.html Hi Bill, Dont be so secretive, what do you mean and what are these sites about? I am desperately trying to prepare for the Peaceful Energy March and get all the Whirlpower information gathered up from all my lists to present to the DoE. I assume this is related to James Redfield's work and if so I am very interested. There are many references in his book to my work. Please inform us all, it would really save me some precious time. David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 01:19:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA17130; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 01:19:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 01:19:05 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3617AD33.4EFA skylink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 22:17:54 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version Resent-Message-ID: <"w9xsC1.0.aB4.v386s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23011 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert - Good job! Always thought there might be a connection between the Wallace work and some of the unusual phenomena reported lately like the Tampere experiments, unusual pendulum & gyro activity, etc. Sure wish someone would duplicate the Wallace experiment though. Or the Woodward machine too, for that matter. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 02:17:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA26891; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 02:14:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 02:14:49 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 02:15:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810050915.CAA16858 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard " Reply-To: "David Dennard " To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpo Resent-Message-ID: <"h-NL52.0.0a6.8u86s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23012 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed, thank you for this informative historical account. > To: Vortex > > Every real innovation was called crackpot before proven. As > historically proven. When the Wright Brothers said they were going to > fly after many failed they were called crackpots by conventional > science. Not to mention the Galileo debacle. > > I must protest these distortions of history. When the Wrights announced they > were going to fly, they were invited to address one of America's most > prestigious engineering conferences, the Society of Western Engineers. The > journal paper from that lecture is the most important scientific analysis of > flight published before 1908. It was only after they flew that most members > of > the scientific establishment ignored them. Most, but not all. This just shows there is a lot more to the politics of science than the truth. A series of > misunderstandings piled up, preventing widespread exposure of the facts > before > 1908. The Wrights were partly to blame. Some people in high places were > paying > close attention however, because the logjam of confusion between the Wrights > and U.S. Army was broken by a personal order of President Roosevelt, and the > contract money came out his executive emergency fund. The Wright's financial > backers after 1907 included some of the savviest weapons and high technology > vendors, including the people who founded IBM. So it isn't fair to say that > the Wrights were denigrated by the entire establishment, But it would be fair to say they and most all "true breakthroughs" are not welcome by establishments because they change establishments and establishments resist change and are not really interested in truth when it does not serve their interest. This is the unfortunate truth about science. And history shows us if we do not learn from our mistakes we are doomed to repeat them again and again. and for that matter > it wouldn't be fair to say that cold fusion has been completely unsupported > by > all establishments. The French and Italian governments are providing > excellent > support. Interesting that it is the Swedish that are giving me support. It is also absurd to suggest that people thought the Wrights were > crackpots. Perhaps uninformed strangers and newspaper readers did, but no > scientist, investor, or government official who met with them got that > impression. They were straight-laced, by-the-book businessmen and engineers. > Their 1902 paper is a masterpiece of conventional hard science and advanced > mathematics. They were about as far from being crackpots as McKubre, Storms > or > Fleischmann is today. But still as you pointed out they did not get help after they flew. And after I prove Whirlpower, (and by the way nobody seems to be getting the message the Swedes have the test of principle model and they are saying it confirms everything that I have stated) I will not be called a crackpot either. And if you have read Dutch Physicist's Edward Maesen's page he says it has his great privilage to meet with me and he was very impressed with my work. Unfortunately for some, as all my work is dated and witnessed many who have gone out of their way to call me names will be at least slightly emarrased and possibly ridiculed for behavior in all of this. Never before has research that will have this large an impact on the world been done in this manner and will expose everyone involved. To be fair it could go the other way and I will be the one ridiculed. But I doubt that will ever happen since I am not an important person. I have everything to gain and nothing to lose. And like the song says "freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose, and it don't mean nothin' if it ain't free." > > The Galileo debacle is a myth. He was given a huge government defense > contract > for the first telescopes. After he got the money the Pope's experts did, in > fact, look though an early model. They saw nothing because it was slipshod > prototype which often malfunctioned. They looked through later models, saw > what they were supposed to see, and duly reported back the facts. The Galileo > myth is instructive as an apocryphal story. It teaches us about ourselves and > our perceptions of history. But it isn't history. The same can be said for > the > ridiculous myth that experts in 1492 thought the world was flat, and that was > the cause of their opposition to Columbus. I can only speak for the history I have read, and I see your point but your point is not he real point at all. Galileo was told to shut up and was under house arrest for the last part of his life because he was defiant to authority and they did not want the general public to know the truth the because it made them look like fools. And that is the same with Whirlpower, if I am proven right (the Swedes are already saying such proof exists) it will make science look foolish because something this simple should have been recognized long ago. And I bet many a student has stood up in clase and said something along these very lines and been shot down by the dogma of science and ridiculed by the entire class. That is the "unrightable wrong" spoken of in the song The Quest. "To dream the Impossible Dream" And that is why none of you except for Steve Eckwall and Bill Wallace are getting the picture yet and why none of you have yet to lift a finger to try and help, when all it takes is running a mathmatical analysis of a whirlpool. It was said in an earlier post one should come in the class and stand up and say in the most explicit way a theory and explain it honestly. I have done that. Is it said then the class should mock and jeer and call this class member names without a fair analysis? Is that the model you and this list want to be know for? That is the way it is going down. And unless all this is deleted from this archive and my copies are destroyed and copies made by friends that are onlookers are destroyed, that is the way you will be percieved. But there is still time to work things out before the Peaceful Energy March where all this information will be presented in full view to the world. > > People often say that great inventors, scientists, artists and writers act > like crackpots. I think this is a Hollywood myth. I do not like to brag, but > I > have met a surprising number of important artists, writers and scientists, > especially in the cold fusion field. By and large they are the most staid, > conventional, understated people you would ever want to know. Frankly, most > of > them are boring and introverted. They do not have the excess mental energy to > be outlandish, or demanding, or cranky. Mostly they shut up and work. Mostly cold fusion is a dead horse from all I have heard so these attributes to those working on it seem to fit. Third > rate artists and wannabe great inventors act like buffoons and spoiled > children, because they think that is how creative people are supposed to act. So far I think and Steve Eckwall has confirmed I have been very polite and the baffoonery has been directed towards me not from me. And check the patent office I am a real inventor. I guess Einstein was the role model for us, I've read he could really get on his high horse at times. And I applaud him and any who have the guts to say what they think. The world is full of people afraid to speak the truth especially if unpopular at the time. But the world is full of those who want to criticize and do name calling. That takes little thought and no courage. So far you have not responded to me before, Jed, but your reputation on this list proceeded you so remember, the world is going to see all of this if I am right. And things are pointing in that direction like a coon hound on the hunt. David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 02:26:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA28085; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 02:25:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 02:25:25 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3617AD33.4EFA skylink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 23:24:14 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version Resent-Message-ID: <"ozuu92.0.js6.4296s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23013 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert - > Wallace's experiments were based on aligning the > nuclear spin of elements and isotopes which have an odd > number of nucleons. These materials are characterized > by a total nuclear spin which is an odd integral multiple > of one-half (times Planck's constant), resulting in one > nucleon with un-paired spin. Wallace drew an analogy > between the un-paired angular momentum in these > materials, and the un-paired magnetic moments of > electrons in ferromagnetic materials. This leaves me wondering if, or if not then why, magnetic fields can't be used to align this unpaired nuclear spin. In other words, simply expose a non-moving piece of brass to a strong magnetic field. I'm assuming that does nothing, but... Or how about using bismuth (any odd nucleon common isotope?), or some odd-numbered ferromagnetic if such materials exist? And what about the effects of a rotating a magnetic field (often implicated in the lore of gravity modification)? Would such a moving field have any effects on the net spin momentum and/or net alignment percentage of the nuclei? Then there's that "poor man's" Tampere experiment, the rotation of a charged cylindrical capacitor. Spun and charged, it weighs less. Spun only, or charged only, no weight change. Another good target for duplication by hobbyist level experimenters. I need an answer to these things soon, 'cause the millenium's coming, and I'd better get that darn saucer engine finished. Hawaii's supposed to get swamped a few times by waves from some of the more traumatic earth changes! `8-0 - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 08:14:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27431; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 08:11:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 08:11:36 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <3618E14F.8CDD5640 css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 10:10:07 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpo References: <199810050915.CAA16858 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ZoVP4.0.Si6.d6E6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23014 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David Dennard wrote: > And check the patent office I am a real inventor. Search: 1971 to Present Query: (David Dennard) Search Results: Sorry, no patents were found matching your query ....is there some other key word I should use? I know of several from earlier careers that I did not get credit on. I find it quite entertaining that just doing a search using a former boss's name is the best way to review my portfolio..... what an egomaniacal piece of work he was. Just curious. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Who watches the watchmen?" - The Comedian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 08:23:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA31198; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 08:20:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 08:20:34 -0700 Message-Id: <199810051521.LAA19175 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 11:21:32 -0400 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: <"2hTPi1.0.Nd7.1FE6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23015 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Indeed. This is exciting stuff. I am expecting to receive a copy of the patents: 3626605, 3626606, and 3823570 soon, coincidentally having ordered them about a week ago. Ed Wall NERL ---------- > From: Horace Heffner > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version > Date: Sunday, October 04, 1998 4:21 PM > > At 10:15 AM 10/4/98, Robert Stirniman wrote: > >A draft of the following article was posted here last April. > >A final version is attached below. > [snip] > > Thanks for posting your article Robert! > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 09:03:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17442; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 09:01:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 09:01:56 -0700 Message-ID: <3618E0BF.221 earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 10:07:43 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Blue: doubts re Claytor tritium claims 10.5.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"W--w91.0.JG4.prE6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23016 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Re: Murray: Storms, Claytor papers on WWW 10.3.98 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 11:34:31 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > http://www.nde.lanl.gov/cf/storms/iccf7p1.htm > > Factors affecting heat production in a Pons-Fleischmann Cell > > > Edmund Storms, > 2140 Paseo Ponderosa, Santa Fe, NM 87501 >http://www.nde.lanl.gov/cf/tritweb.htm > > ABSTRACT Plasma Discharges on Palladium Thomas N. Claytor, LANL > So is this solid evidence for the form of CANR that Ed Storms claims can be induced by electroylis in a D2O - Pd system? Clearly it has little or nothing to do with the liquid systems, and, indeed, yields a result that is not consistant with, for example, the Miles-Bush experiment. There are several potential problems with the Claytor experiment that have not really been addressed in a totally satisfactory way, as far as I am concerned. Let's run through a few of these problem areas to see if we can clear up a few things. (1) Tritium detection methods: As noted above, the device used for the on-line detection of the tritium is not really very specific to tritium detection. This form of instrumentation was designed primarily for use under conditions where generating a false-positive signal was of less concern than was the possibility of missing the activity entirely. That is to say the instrument response may be coming from a number of things that are not actually tritium. I would suggest that ions of any sort such as those produced in the electrical discharge could actually generate a signal. What assurances are we given that the response is not a false positive? As far as I have seen it is just that at some point some gas was removed and processed through a scintillation detection system where it also gave a tritium-like signal. We know, however, that there is likely some tritium in this system as an initial contaminant so we need a quantitative measurement before we can connect the ion-chamber results to the scincillation counter results. (2) Reaction conditions: Deuterium fusion can, indeed, be induced by by an electrical discharge much like the one employed in these investigations. Simply put, Claytor is producing a "hot plasma." Perhaps a lot rate of tritium production is to be expected. How does one go from these conditions to saying that the tritium is actually produced by "cold fusion"? I think the evidence that whatever is happening must be happening in the Pd wire is pretty weak. (3) Reaction rates and time dependences: I find the statements regarding when the tritium signal appears relative to the time discharges are initiated to be rather vague. It almost sounds as if the "signal" is not well correlated to what is going on in the reaction chamber. Is that actually the case? Do we have here just another example of a build-up of tritium concentration as contaminated deuterium is run through some process? We certainly saw plenty of false claims for tritium production coming from electrolysis. (4) Lack of confirmatory evidence: As I have noted before, the CANR claims taken as a whole have a rather strange sort of variablity. The Claytor result indicating tritium production is certainly no confirmation of the Mile-Bush result for 4He production nor of the Arata-Zhang result claiming 3He and 4He production. How is this to be explained? It seems we are supposed to believe that extremely subtle shifts in the chemical environment (which are grossly speaking all the same) lead to these differences in reaction product. But the outcome in each specific experiment is NOT variable. It is very specifically restricted to only one or two of the assortment of the possible products; and, we are told, the results are highly reproducible. Isn't that just a little strange? (5) Not consistant with known nuclear reaction physics: We do know what happens when two free deuterons fuse. There basically are four possible ways to divide up the four nucleons in the final state. p + T, n + 3He, 4He + gamma, d + d . I would dearly love to hear of any other possible nuclear products that we might look for that are not included above. Most of the debate has centered on what things go missing that I suggest should be there, but are we in agreement that these experiments are not producing gold or linnolium? The prime question I have about the Claytor result is still the clear absence of a neutron signal. If p + T is allowed, why not n + 3He? I would like someone to step up to the plate to name a real physical interaction of any sort that would have the characteristic that it favors p + T over n +3He by the required huge factor. If this is to be a subtle chemical effect I'd like to hear what wild notions circulate in your collective brains to account for such wierdness. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 09:22:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA24084; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 09:19:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 09:19:32 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981005122052.00cfa100 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 12:20:52 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19980930153235.00de49b0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"tIGLh2.0.9u5.I6F6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23017 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:00 AM 10/1/98 +0200, britz wrote: >I just signed on again after a long break, and so I don't know all that >has been thrashed out here. Sorry. I agree, of course, that a random >sequence of rare successes does not constitute reproducibility, and does >not prove an effect. I strongly disagree. In the early days of hot fusion, getting a clean, stable plasma was very hard. It might take weeks after a stellerator had been disassembled and modified before the first stable plasma was achieved, then further weeks of effort to get neutron production. Did this make neutron production hard to study? Of course it did. But no one contended that it wasn't happening, just that it was damn hard to reproduce. Of course it turned out later that those neutrons were produced by instabilities that any power producing device would want to avoid. But it literally took years to determine that they were not coming from hot spots in the plasma but from "hot" deuterons escaping the plasma and impacting the walls. Incidently, it still takes a long time to get a clean plasma after a tokamak has been opened, but the process of cleaning out contaminants is now well understood, and a scheduled part of any maintenance. Or to use another example, one live Coelacanth was enough to prove that they hadn't died out hundreds of millions of years ago. (The coelacanth was considered to have been extinct until a specimen was found in 1938. The second coelacanth was found in 1952. But in spite of numerous attempts, no one has yet succceeded in keeping a coelacanth alive after catching it. See: http://www.dinofish.com/ //www.dinofish.com/discoa.htm and related sites.) Fourteen years without a replication is not a record in science, and there are lots of one-of-a-kind observations waiting for duplication. 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 Oct 5 10:52:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25609; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:45:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:45:35 -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: <36190546.2D4844BB css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 12:43:34 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version References: <3617AD33.4EFA skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SujNB2.0.zF6.-MG6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23018 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: > A draft of the following article was posted here last April. > A final version is attached below. The article will appear > in the fall edition of Frontier Perspectives, from The Center > for Frontier Sciences at Temple University. Also an abbreviated > form of the article will appear in Vol 27 of Electric Spacecraft > Journal. Many thanks are due the referee at Frontier Sciences > for providing substantial additions and corrections. Robert- Thank you very much for posting this pre-print of your article. I found it extreamly informative, and I look forward researching the cited references. Good luck and best wishes. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Who watches the watchmen?" - The Comedian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 10:58:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA29239; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:56:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:56:02 -0700 Message-ID: <3618FB8D.6459 earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 12:02:05 -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: Murray: Stirniman: gravitomagnetic experiments with microturbines? 10.5.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dIVKH2.0.m87.nWG6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23019 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Oct. 4, 1998 Robert Stirniman's [robert skylink.net] review, with its extensive references, of gravitomagnetic field theory and research looks to me like a real thing, theoretically and experimentally. The Wallace work seems relatively simple-- just spin a brass disk! The claim is that spinning disks made with isotopes with odd atomic numbers will cause the odd nuclear spins to generate measurable gravitomagnetic fields. Why has such a straightforward extension of standard physics not been followed up? What might be some new approaches to simple experiments? On Sept. 11, I posted about work led by Dr. Alan H. Epstein [epstein mit.edu] at MIT that spins a 4mm diameter Silicon gas turbine wheel at 2.5 million rpm = 40,000 rps. http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~wilkins/writing/Assign/topics/mems.html http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/october97/features/turbdime/turbdime.html If such a wheel was made solely of Si-29 [abundance 4.67%], or coated with a thin film of Cu, or made of silicon carbide [already being explored by Epstein] with Si-29 and C-13 [1.10% abundance], or even coated with thin film diamond C-13, then how strong would be the various gravitomagnetic effects? Would two such wheels interact with each other, how strongly, at what distance? It should easy to suspend and spin such wheels in vacuum, if need be. Rich Murray rmforall earthlink.net Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~wilkins/writing/Assign/topics/mems.html Macro Power from Micro Machinery A. H. Epstein and S. D. Senturia Science 26, 1211 (1997) with hyperNotes at the end. A. H. Epstein [HN7] is in the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and S. D. Senturia is in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. E-mail: epstein mit.edu, sds@mtl.mit.edu Richard Feynman [HN1], in two famous lectures (1), confessed to being fascinated with the idea of very small motors and machines, but also regretted that he didn't know what such "infinitesimal machinery" might be good for. In jest, he suggested that micromachines could be used in a child's game called "stab the paramecium." Technology for the microfabrication [HN2] of freely moving parts was developed in the mid-1980s, beginning with a Bell Labs microgear spun by an air jet (2), and electrostatic silicon micromotors (3). Applications in micropositioning of optics (4) have begun to appear. In parallel, development work has begun on miniature heat exchangers (5), small fluidic devices of various types (6), and recently, small chemical reaction chambers (7). So an answer to Feynman's question, "What might these machines be good for?" is beginning to emerge, albeit for relatively low-energy and low-power applications. Within the past 2 years, a careful scaling study of high-speed, rotating turbomachinery has shown that suitably designed microdevices are actually remarkably promising (8). A conventional, macroscopic gas turbine generator [HN3], which can drive machinery such as an electric generator, consists of a compressor, a combustion chamber, and a turbine that is driven by the combustion exhaust and powers the compressor. The residual enthalpy in the exhaust stream provides thrust. A large-scale gas turbine with a 1-m-diameter air intake generates power on the order of 100 MW. When such a device is scaled to millimeter size, tens of watts would be produced, provided that the power density can be maintained. The realization of such an infinitesimal thermal machine requires the development of three microscale technologies: rotating machinery, combustors, and high-temperature material fabrication. The key to achieving high-power density in both fluid and electrical rotating machinery is high peripheral speed. High speed in rotating machinery implies high centrifugal stress. In conventional practice, rotor speed is constrained to several hundred meters per second by the strength-to-density ratio of high-temperature metal alloys [HN4]. However, microfabricated microelectronic materials have few defects and are thus quite strong. Also, their density is only 50% that of superalloys. Thus, compared to macroscopic materials, they have a superior strength-to-density ratio and so can be spun to high speeds without the risk of fracture (9). High rotating speeds also require low-friction bearings. Here the cubic scaling of volume, hence mass, combined with the quadratic scaling of areas (the so-called "cube-square law") means that the surface area-to-weight ratio of a rotor is large at small scales, implying that miniature air bearings can support large loads. Preliminary research in this area is quite promising. A combustor of a scale compatible to microrotating machinery may seem challenging at first because chemical-reaction times are invariant with size. However, the time required to mix the fuel and air is a major component of the total combustion time for conventional turbines, and these mixing times do scale. Indeed, a 2-mm-long combustion chamber suitable for turbine use has been recently demonstrated (10). The figure shows a radial inflow turbine 4 mm across made from silicon, using deep reactive ion etching [HN5], a relatively new fabrication method. With minor changes in the airfoil shapes, the same device will function as a centrifugal compressor. Calculations show that such a turbine driving an electrostatic induction generator of similar size will supply tens of watts of continuous electric power. When made of refractory material, like silicon carbide, and combined with the compressor and combustor, a complete gas-turbine generator of under 1 cm3 can be realized delivering as much as 50 W of electric power, or 0.2 N of thrust. The energy density of hydrocarbon fuels is so high that an equivalent mass in this technology can deliver 10 to 30 times the energy of even the most advanced battery materials. ¹ The little engine that could. Electron micrograph of a 4-mm-diameter silicon microturbine. [C. C. Lin and M. A. Schmidt] There is also a remarkable benefit that derives from the cube-square law: If the power per unit airflow remains constant, then, because the airflow scales with the square of a linear dimension whereas the mass scales with the cube, the power-to-weight ratio would increase linearly as the size is reduced. Detailed calculations indicate that the scaling is not quite this dramatic, but a millimeter-size engine would have a thrust-to-weight ratio of about 100:1, compared to 10:1 for the best modern aircraft engines. This level of performance may have profound implications for flight vehicles. Of course, unless large arrays of such microdevices are used, vehicle masses would have to be constrained to a few tens of grams. This is a little small for most passengers, but there is now serious interest in sensor-laden microairplanes (11) [HN6]. And, as an astute child of one of the authors recently noted, 1400 of them working in parallel could levitate his skateboard. References 1.R. P. Feynman, reprinted in J. Microelectromech. Syst. 1, 60 (1992); ibid. 2, 4 (1993). 2.M. Mehregany et al., Sens. Actuators 12, 341 (1987). 3.Y.-C. Tai, L.-S. Fan, R. S. Muller, in Proc. IEEE Workshop Micro Electro Mech. Syst. (MEMS '89), Salt Lake City (1989), pp. 1-6; M. Mehregany et al., Sens. Actuators A 21-23, 173 (1990). 4.L. Y. Lin et al., in Proc. IEEE Workshop Micro Electro Mech. Syst. (MEMS '95), Amsterdam (1995), p. 145. 5.D. B. Tuckerman and R. F. W. Pease, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 2, 126 1981). 6.P. Gravesen, J. Branebjerg, O. S. Jensen, J. Micromech. Microeng. 3, 168 (1993). 7.J. J. Lerou et al., DECHEMA Monogr. 132, 51 (1996). 8.A. Epstein et al., paper 3A1.01 to be presented at the "IEEE Conference on Solid-State Sensors and Actuators (Transducers '97)," Chicago, June 1997. 9.S. M. Spearing and K. S. Chen, Proc. 21st Cocoa Beach Conf. and Exposition on Composites, Advanced Ceramics, Materials and Structures ACerS, Westerville, in press). 10.I. A. Waitz, G. Gauba, Y.-S. Tzeng, paper presented at the A.S.M.E. International Engineering Congress and Exposition, Atlanta, November 1996. 11.Random Samples, Science 275, 1571 (1997). A. H. Epstein [HN7] is in the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and S. D. Senturia is in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. E-mail: epstein mit.edu, sds@mtl.mit.edu HyperNotes Related Resources on the World Wide Web General Hypernotes The Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS) Clearinghouse website, hosted by the University of Southern California's Institute for Information Sciences, offers electronic discussion groups, databases of MEMS patents and materials properties, and other links to MEMS resources. The web page for the Microengineering Common Interest Group of the Institute of Electronic Engineers (UK) has links to their newsletter and other resources for microengineering on the web. The Sandia National Laboratory has a web page devoted to their MEMS activities. The Ministry of International Trade and Industry in Japan supports the Micromachine Center, which has a web page with information about their research activities. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has a web site with information on research at their Microsystems Technology Laboratories, as well as a site offering information about microcombustor research. Several web sites provide information about the related area of nanotechnology, including Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, NASA's Nanotechnology Gallery, and the National University of Singapore. Numbered Hypernotes 1.The full text of Richard Feynman's famous 1959 lecture, "There's plenty of room at the bottom" can be viewed in its entirety at the Xeros PARC web site. 2.Sandia Laboratories News has a brief article about smart micromachines. The Stanford Research Institute web site has a brief analysis of the business view of micromachinery. The Stanford University Center for Design Research has extensive web pages about their microstructures research. The Département de Microtechnique of the Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne has a web page with information about their research activities in microsystems. 3.Pratt and Whitney, a company that designs and manufactures gas turbine engines, provides a clickable diagram and description of a conventional jet engine. 4.ASM International (formerly the American Society for Metals) has a web page with information about reference materials on alloys, along with web links to material science and engineering resources. 5.As part of the Transducers home page of Stanford University, the Integrated Circuit Lab displays a photo of a device created using the Deep Reactive Ion Etching method, along with an assessment of their project. Surface Technology Systems Limited, a UK based manufacturer, offers micrographs of fuel atomizers, components, accelerometers and more produced via their Advanced Silicon etch (ASE). 6.The Georgia Tech Research Institute offers this press release about microflyer research. 7.A. H. Epstein's university home page lists his research interests. S. D. Senturia is affiliated with the MIT Microsystems Laboratory. Copyright © 1997 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. [Previous] [Assignments] [Writing Home Page] [Wilkins Homepage] [OSU Physics] [OSU Engineering] [Ohio State University] Edited by: wilkins mps.ohio-state.edu [August 1997] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 11:39:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA08602; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 11:35:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 11:35:40 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <361911A5.C90678AE css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 13:36:21 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Vortex Equation Help Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_ey9e1.0.K62.x5H6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23020 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ladies and Gents- I am attempting to construct a theoretical base line to measure against. I am looking for any equations or mathematical constructs that describe vortex movement of a liquid. Specifically I need to have gravity, angular velocity, reduction ratio, exit aperture as variables so as to be able to calibrate experimental measurements and develop protocols for augmenting design parameters. I've looked through all my reference books, but I have failed to locate anything along these lines. I will derive a formula if I have to, but I am interested in reviewing any existing work first. Any suggestions? -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world.... .... just your half" - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 13:17:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA11157; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 13:14:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 13:14:15 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 12:20:54 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Resent-Message-ID: <"VZuvc1.0.Dk2.NYI6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23021 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:36 PM 10/5/98, John Steck wrote: >Ladies and Gents- > >I am attempting to construct a theoretical base line to measure against. I am >looking for any equations or mathematical constructs that describe vortex >movement of a liquid. Specifically I need to have gravity, angular velocity, >reduction ratio, exit aperture as variables so as to be able to calibrate >experimental measurements and develop protocols for augmenting design >parameters. I've looked through all my reference books, but I have failed to >locate anything along these lines. I will derive a formula if I have to, but I >am interested in reviewing any existing work first. Any suggestions? You are talking one complicated fluid dynamics problem. You will need a supercomputer and finite element model to accurately model all that. Cheaper faster and easier to just build the thing than model it - but then you have no first principles baseline, other than to close the loop and get perpetual motion if you are looking for ou behaviour. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 13:37:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19420; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 13:33:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 13:33:44 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981005163503.00cac750 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:35:03 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Question on magnetic star (off topic) In-Reply-To: <3614ABC1.46034452 GroupZ.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Jnogy3.0.3l4.dqI6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23022 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:32 AM 10/2/98 -0400, sno wrote: >Was wondering about the x-rays and gamma rays from the magnetic star >that arrived 27 Sep....I assume that they were traveling at speed of light, >are there any other particles that may have been emitted by this burst, that >may arrive at a later time ??? Or at an earlier time? It will be interesting to see if any of the neutrino detectors "saw" this event, and what the relative time of events are. 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 Oct 5 14:28:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA08196; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 14:24:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 14:24:15 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981005172545.00ccbdb0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 17:25:45 -0400 To: rmforall earthlink.net From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Murray: Stirniman: gravitomagnetic experiments with microturbines? 10.5.98 Cc: Vortex-L eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <3618FB8D.6459 earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"emK0f2.0.n_1.-ZJ6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23023 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:02 PM 10/5/98 -0500, Rich Murray wrote: >On Sept. 11, I posted about work led by Dr. Alan H. Epstein >[epstein mit.edu] at MIT that spins a 4mm diameter Silicon gas turbine >wheel at 2.5 million rpm = 40,000 rps... >If such a wheel was made solely of Si-29 [abundance 4.67%], or coated >with a thin film of Cu, or made of silicon carbide [already being >explored by Epstein] with Si-29 and C-13 [1.10% abundance], or even >coated with thin film diamond C-13, then how strong would be the various >gravitomagnetic effects? Why go to such extremes when "ordinary" materials will do. Rotors in commercial lab centrifuges are usually made of aluminium or magnesium (or alloys thereof) to reduce the spun mass and energy necessary to spin up the centrifuge. Aluminium is 100% 13 Al 27 with spin 5/2+, sodium is 100% 11 Na 23 with spin 3/2+, and Berylium is 100% 4 Be 9. Lithium is mostly Li7, and Boron mostly B11, if you want to use those in alloying. So if the Wallace experiments are worth repeating, try aluminum. 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 Oct 5 15:18:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA26321; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:15:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:15:28 -0700 Message-ID: <19981005221631.12100.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [158.152.228.34] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: 100% Electrolysis Question Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 15:16:30 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"UlLtP1.0.6R6.0KK6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23024 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Simple Question, How much gas will 1 watt of power produce for 1 hour of operation in splitting water into H and 02 at a pressure of 1kg/cm3, if the effieciency is 100%. This is required for my Meyer fuel cell tests to give me an idea of what I am aiming for. Rob King ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 15:21:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA27222; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:18:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:18:18 -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: <36193858.2061855A css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:21:28 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SZEXe2.0.Cf6.fMK6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23025 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > You are talking one complicated fluid dynamics problem. Yes. My request was notably over-simplified and I am admittedly in over my head, but I'm game to forge ahead nonetheless. If nothing else, I will know more tomorrow than I do today (figuratively speaking of course). Perhaps I will be able to formulate a better question then? 8^) > You will need a > supercomputer and finite element model to accurately model all that. I hope not! I am not trying to map the entire system, just a general operational envelope to help eliminate the obvious should any seemingly anomalous behavior pop up. > Cheaper faster and easier to just build the thing than model it - but then > you have no first principles baseline, other than to close the loop and get > perpetual motion if you are looking for ou behaviour. Perhaps model is the wrong word. Characterize the dynamics? Yes, the goal is to try and experimentally create and observe 'negative viscosity' type behavior, but to do that I must first have values for non-augmented 'regular viscosity' type behavior. There are too many variable options to take a shotgun design approach and expect any kind of success in this lifetime. Granted, no matter how well planned, the first design may not be much more than a guess, but I would rather it be an educated guess. My research budgetary committee (my wife and my dog) demand a fiscally responsible and conservative approach...... ha ha ha FYI, a good suggestion off-line lead me to a possible reference text that I just ordered from Amazon: Vortex Dynamics (Cambridge Monographs on Mechanics and Applied Mathematics) by P. G. Saffman Our Price: $29.95 Availability: This title usually ships within 2-3 days. Paperback - 311 pages (March 1995) Cambridge Univ Pr (Pap Txt) ISBN: 0521477395 -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world ... ... just your half." - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 16:00:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA19204; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:57:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:57:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <361940F9.2E6E earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:58:17 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Blue: Storms: Spaandonk: bursts, QM tunneling 10.5.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zCcNo.0.zh4.4xK6s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23026 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Storms: Rothwell: Blue: Pd cathode problems 10.3.98 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 13:07:25 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Wow, I certainly have inspired some new and wonderful revelations of what is now considered CANR gospel. It is also interesting to see Ed Storms squirm away from a discussion of the statistical features of the data set, while essentially confirming much of what I was suggesting should be influencing the statistics. As for what data I was commenting on when I described it as "noise-like," Miles-Bush, Pons-Fleischman, McKubre, and numerous others published data like that. In describing their own results they frequently used the word "bursts". Are you now saying that all of that data is somehow wrong or untypical of CANR excess heat? Next Storms continues with the presentation of a picture of the CANR conditions which, I must confess, is entirely new to me. However, I'm easy to get along with and will now accept this new view as all we need consider in further discussions. As I understand it, the "theory" to which Ed Storms directs our attention is that selected material that accepts high bulk loading with deuterium develops selected small, isolated sites in the surface layer that can be made "nuclear active" under some conditions. However, the nuclear reactions which occur in such a site are sufficiently disruptive that no given part of the material can remain active for an extended period. Do I have that right? Now it seems to me this picture supports precisely the sort of statistical picture that I was describing. A region gets "active", produces energy, and then dies. Shouldn't that result in a "burst" of excess heat? A succession of such bursts would account for what I was describing as "noise-like." Is there are problem with this? Next question I would consider is whether material that remains inert with respect to these "nuclear active sites" can exhibit "bursts" of excess heat without ever yielding a net positive integral output? My impression has been that cells that showed no evidence of excess heat could still be "noisey." I have in my hand right now Miles-Bush data confirming that view. However, if you insist, I can adapt to your new orthodoxy. Are you saying that null results come only from cells in which the excess heat is perfectly flat at zero for all times and that anything one might call a "burst" is proof of a nuclear reaction? Now there are a few other points where I don't understand where Ed Storms is coming from. I think we need to be quite careful when describing these effects so we don't generate further confusion. Let's say that M has a calorimeter that is accurate to 0.05 watts and detects 2 watts excess heat. I think we need to keep in mind what the input electrical power was -- was it 10 watts or 100 watts? What I was saying with regard to the statistics is that rather than use your estimate of 0.05 watts for the variance in these measurements, why not plot up the data from several runs to see how they behave statistically? Are they consistant with your interpretation of the results? It's an honest, valid question that you attempt to brush off. I also don't understand the notion that nuclear reaction rates can be changed by chemical means without altering nuclear wave functions. What are we supposed to assume determines nuclear reaction rates, the phase of the moon? Maybe I have uncovered a significant lack of understanding of this problem on Ed Storms' part, or perhaps it was just a slip of the bits. Would you care to reconsider your position on this point, Ed? With regard to the way fusion cross sections extrapolate to zero energy, Ed Storms ignores a lot of data to select a claimed result by Kasagi that appears to be anomalous. I have read at least one paper on the Kasagi claims and have heard indirectly about others, so I am not totally ignorant on the points raised. Basically, I would describe these results in the following terms: A particle spectrum is recorded that can only be interpreted through the use of a model for multistep collisions in which products of the primary beam interaction induce secondary reactions. Kasagi's attempt at modling these data does not agree with his observations, so we have some sort of "anomaly". Let me suggest that the problem may be with the model Kasagi employs rather than the reaction physics. It's pretty weak evidence for CANR. I have been requested to name an area of research that confirms actual CANR effects. I refer to the field known as "perturbed angular correlations" as one example and "electron capture" decay as another. It would do you good to read up on EC before making assertions about dramatic changes in the electron density at a nucleus, for example. Dick Blue I am amazed how often this topic [cathode selection] gets discussed without there being anything new being said. On one hand we have the assertions which Jed Rothwell now repeats that it takes a long and difficult selection process to get suitable material. On the other hand we have claimed success (Arata-Zhang, Miles-Bush, Storms) where nothing like that seems to apply. [re Robin Spandoonk on quantum tunneling in CF] I think we are in danger of being lulled into a kind of supidity arising from a rather strange use of some basic words. I am not overlooking, as Robin seems to imply, the significanace of quantum tunneling. Nuclear reactions, as I am quite familiar with them, are seldom a matter of pure "brute force", however you care to define that. What I do strongly object to is the notion that things can just sort of happen willy-nilly without there being any agent involved. So we have "good" palladium that induces CANR and "bad" palladium that does not. I am suggesting that there must be a difference between the good kind and the bad kind, and that understanding that difference in more fundamental sense should be a part of this research effort, if it is to be taken seriously. Yet we already know, and Jed Rothwell confirms, that the good and the bad materials are very similar with respect to history and many physical properties. Can we not conclude from this that the features essential to the CANR effect are subtle and thus typical of some small variation from the normal palladium structure? Now we come to the heart of the problem. How can small, subtle changes in material make a big difference in something else? I don't happen to believe that directed intelligence, such as Maxwell's Demon, is involved here. Changes in the way material behaves, to me at least, means a change in the way in which the constituent particles interact, i.e. a perturbation. My assertion is that we should be attempting to quantify said perturbation. Now some people here keep insisting that they expect big effects, such as cold fusion, to arise from insignificant, unobservable, and unspecified differences in a chemical environment. Ed Storms, it seems, wants to leave nuclear wave functions out of the discussion. It's nothing more than wishful thinking to suggest that you can get the claimed effects without there being any cause that we can address in the usual manner. What you are asking for simply does not lie within the realm of physics. If you want to perform miracles instead of doing physics perhaps this is the wrong forum for the discussion. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 16:33:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA27728; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 16:31:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 16:31:01 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 16:32:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810052332.QAA28719 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard " Reply-To: "David Dennard " To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Resent-Message-ID: <"QYtGt2.0.An6.qQL6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23027 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John writes; > Ladies and Gents- > > I am attempting to construct a theoretical base line to measure against. I > am > looking for any equations or mathematical constructs that describe vortex > movement of a liquid. John, I've been asking for whirlpool math ever since I got here. I hope you have more luck than I have. Specifically I need to have gravity, angular velocity, > reduction ratio, exit aperture as variables so as to be able to calibrate > experimental measurements and develop protocols for augmenting design > parameters. And I would like to add I want to know about specific math dealing with the wobble of the vortex and it effect of the surrounding liquid that is not in the vortex itself. I've looked through all my reference books, but I have failed to > locate anything along these lines. And I have look and asked hundreds of people an many scientists on many list without results. No data found. This is part of what I have refered to as a "huge exploration gap" along with no data found of a top spinning on a turntable. And in conjunction with the mystery of the power of a hurricane, not he process information but actual comparison of input output power, and the latest space science discoveries, all form a pattern of the absence of scientific understanding that my theory addresses. I will derive a formula if I have to, but > I > am interested in reviewing any existing work first. Any suggestions? Ditto. David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 16:55:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA02956; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 16:53:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 16:53:16 -0700 Message-ID: <08c101bdf0bb$50376480$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: "David Dennard " , Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:53:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"yLgeZ.0.0k.hlL6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23028 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: David Dennard To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, October 05, 1998 5:33 PM Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help David wrote: >John writes; > > >> Ladies and Gents- Snip John's forlorn plea. > >John, I've been asking for whirlpool math ever since I got here. I hope you >have more luck than I have. Try www.eb.com David. For $8.50 a month or an $85.00 Britannica CD, you'll leave us all in the dust (or water vapor) in no time. :-) Regards, Frederick >David Dennard > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 17:04:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA05883; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:02:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:02:34 -0700 Message-ID: <3619603D.22A5DDD fc.net> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 19:11:42 -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 Subject: Re: ZPE Extraction and the Fine Structure Constant? X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <262297c4.3617b2d7 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fqUXE3.0.jR1.PuL6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23029 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Puthoff aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 10/3/98 5:02:37 AM, you wrote: > > < the collision > > energy,and > > in the collision of like charges 1/137 of the > > collision energy?>> > > The way I see it, what we call kinetic energy is the amount of > energy involved > in work done on the vacuum in accelerating the particles, released > from the > vacuum upon deceleration; i.e., KE is just a bookeeping > operation. As you > know, when riding with the particle you do not see any "stored" > KE. > > Hal -- Hi, Hal, I've been wondering lately about the amount of energy that could be extracted from the vacuum and the amount of energy it would take to generate the (local) vacuum. It seems to me that removing that last particle from the vacuum might take an infinite amount of energy,(or a little luck) which seems to imply that once that last particle was removed, infinite energy would reside in the vacuum. ? John Fields, Austin Instruments, Inc. El Presidente Austin, Republic of Texas "I speak for the company" http://www.austininstruments.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 17:27:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA14780; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:25:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:25:47 -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: <361963DC.E7FCDDC8 css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 19:27:08 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question References: <19981005221631.12100.qmail hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Rk3hs.0.rc3.AEM6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23030 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rob King wrote: > Simple Question, > How much gas will 1 watt of power produce for 1 hour of operation in > splitting water into H and 02 at a pressure of 1kg/cm3, > if the effieciency is 100%. hee hee hee, simple... that's a good one. 8^) There are several variables of cell construction and operation that greatly impact outcome. There is no simple answer to your question. For example: => A $200 setup using: - Distilled H2O with 20-30% KOH - Sintered sheet, wire, gauze nickle electrodes - 1-2 atm operation - 1.9-2.0 V - 75-80 deg C - 2000 amp/m^2 current density - glass jar cell => At best 50% efficient, 1KWh should produce approx 167 litres of H => A $$$ high pressure cell using: - Distilled H2O with 30-50% KOH - Coarse screen nickle electrodes - 98.7 atm operation - 1.6 V - 200 deg C - 1 amp/cm^2 current density - Nickle lined steel cell => At best 75% efficient, 1KWh should produce approx 250 litres of H => Theoretically, at 100%, 4.8KWh should produce 1m^3 H. There are no known setups (as far as I have been able to find) that operate at 100%. Not sure how to extrapolate the information above into something that makes sense in comparison to a Meyer cell. I am not familliar with it's construction, materials, or operational parameters. Hope this helps... 8^) -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world ... ... just your half." - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 17:34:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA17737; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:33:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:33:24 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:34:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810060034.RAA05647 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard " Reply-To: "David Dennard " To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpo Resent-Message-ID: <"fhy7H1.0.3L4.JLM6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23031 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John wrote; > David Dennard wrote: > > And check the patent office I am a real inventor. > > > Search: 1971 to Present > Query: (David Dennard) > Search Results: Sorry, no patents were found matching your > query > > .....is there some other key word I should use? Hi John, I assume it was not there without my middle initail. I just ran a check at the same address with my middle initail (G.) and got the numbers. 4610038 4574397 I wish positive search of my information was just as forthcoming. Steve Eckwall confirmed my test of principle model in Sweden but there was no reply to that and I have mentioned it several times and no reply. It is so easy to get criticizm and negative response but none of my critics seem to want to reply to the positive information of my theory. That experts in the field are saying Whirlpower will work. That they are getting ready to construct it and will post the pictures on line for all to see. This kind of information is being ignored. As I said it takes little thought to criticize and do name calling but to actually consider the positive information I have given as to much more than an "iota of proof" is either ignored or overlooked. I think it is ignored. Adn to say I have not been forth coming in giving this information is simply not correct. And to say something is not correct and have the information to back it up is something my critics are yet to do. That is very unscientific in my opinion. Science as I understnd it should be backed up with facts if something is said to be correct or incorrect. Theory should be backed up with all found, unfound, and relavent information. I think I have met all these criteria. Where are the "real scientists?" David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 17:46:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA22845; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:44:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:44:29 -0700 Message-ID: <36195B4D.21A4 earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 18:50:37 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Storms: Blue: Claytor tritium 10.5.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8ApG-3.0.na5.iVM6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23032 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: doubts re Claytor tritium claims 10.5.98 Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 16:24:03 -0600 From: Edmund Storms To: rmforall earthlink.net Dear Rich et al. I would like to comment on the following statements by Dick Blue. Ed. Storms > > Factors affecting heat production in a Pons-Fleischmann Cell > > > > > > Edmund Storms, > > 2140 Paseo Ponderosa, > Santa Fe, NM 87501 > > >http://www.nde.lanl.gov/cf/tritweb.htm > > > > ABSTRACT Plasma Discharges on Palladium Thomas N. Claytor, LANL > > > > So is this solid evidence for the form of CANR that Ed Storms claims > can be induced by electroylis in a D2O - Pd system? Clearly it has > little or nothing to do with the liquid systems, and, indeed, yields a > result that is not consistent with, for example, the Miles-Bush > experiment. Surely Dick Blue does not believe anyone believes the quoted paper is "solid evidence" for CANR. What is the point of such a statement? The paper simply summarizes some experimental conditions found to produce the effect in a liquid system as used by Pons and Fleischmann. Please explain to me how this summary is not consistent with Miles-Bush... > There are several potential problems with the Claytor experiment that > have not really been addressed in a totally satisfactory way, as far as > I am concerned. Let's run through a few of these problem areas to see > if we can clear up a few things. > > (1) Tritium detection methods: As noted above, the device used for the > on-line detection of the tritium is not really very specific to tritium > detection. This form of instrumentation was designed primarily for use > under conditions where generating a false-positive signal was of less > concern than was the possibility of missing the activity entirely. That > is to say the instrument response may be coming from a number of things > that are not actually tritium. I would suggest that ions of any sort > such as those produced in the electrical discharge could actually > generate a signal. What assurances are we given that the response is > not a false positive? As far as I have seen it is just that at some > point some gas was removed and processed through a scintillation > detection system where it also gave a tritium-like signal. We know, > however, that there is likely some tritium in this system as an initial > contaminant so we need a quantitative measurement before we can connect > the ion-chamber results to the scincillation counter results. Yes, the detector is sensitive to the presence of ions produced in the discharge. Consequently, a filter is placed in the line to remove these ions. Tom has gone to considerable effort to eliminate this obvious source of background. The amount of tritium in the deuterium is very low because low-tritium gas is used. Tom has done a quantitative comparison between the ion signal and the scintillation counter with good agreement. I should point out Tom Claytor has been studying and using tritium for years before cold fusion came along and during his normal duties. He and scientists at LANL know tritium when they see it and they know better than Dick Blue the errors that can occur in its detection. > > (2) Reaction conditions: Deuterium fusion can, indeed, be induced by > by an electrical discharge much like the one employed in these > investigations. Simply put, Claytor is producing a "hot plasma." > Perhaps a lot rate of tritium production is to be expected. How does > one go from these conditions to saying that the tritium is actually > produced by "cold fusion"? I think the evidence that whatever is > happening must be happening in the Pd wire is pretty weak. The voltage is much too low to produce detectable tritium by the "normal" process. In addition, the expected neutron emission is not present. Therefore, this tritium is not produced by "normal" (hot) fusion. For this reason, a cold fusion explanation is worth exploring. > > (3) Reaction rates and time dependences: I find the statements > regarding when the tritium signal appears relative to the time > discharges are initiated to be rather vague. It almost sounds as if the > "signal" is not well correlated to what is going on in the reaction > chamber. Is that actually the case? Do we have here just another > example of a build-up of tritium concentration as contaminated deuterium > is run through some process? We certainly saw plenty of false claims > for tritium production coming from electrolysis. We must be reading different papers. The onset of tritium is clearly related to the time discharge is started. Granted, some samples produce no effect, but when an effect is seen, it starts immediately. As for tritium concentrating in the ion chamber, the total amount of tritium within the total D2 gas present in the system is known. The total amount of tritium found after a successful run is greater than this amount. What false claims do you believe result from electrolysis? Or are they all false by definition? > > (4) Lack of confirmatory evidence: As I have noted before, the CANR > claims taken as a whole have a rather strange sort of variablity. The > Claytor result indicating tritium production is certainly no > confirmation of the Mile-Bush result for 4He production nor of the > Arata-Zhang result claiming 3He and 4He production. How is this to be > explained? It seems we are supposed to believe that extremely subtle > shifts in the chemical environment (which are grossly speaking all the > same) lead to these differences in reaction product. But the outcome in > each specific experiment is NOT variable. It is very specifically > restricted to only one or two of the assortment of the possible > products; and, we are told, the results are highly reproducible. Isn't > that just a little strange? Yes, this is strange. This is one reason why an explanation has been so hard to achieve. However, this difficulty does not negate the observations, at least in my mind. > > (5) Not consistent with known nuclear reaction physics: We do know what > happens when two free deuterons fuse. There basically are four possible > ways to divide up the four nucleons in the final state. > > p + T, n + 3He, 4He + gamma, d + d . > > I would dearly love to hear of any other possible nuclear products that > we might look for that are not included above. Most of the debate has > centered on what things go missing that I suggest should be there, but > are we in agreement that these experiments are not producing gold or > linnolium? No gold or linnolium has been detected so far. > > The prime question I have about the Claytor result is still the clear > absence of a neutron signal. If p + T is allowed, why not n + 3He? I > would like someone to step up to the plate to name a real physical > interaction of any sort that would have the characteristic that it > favors p + T over n +3He by the required huge factor. If this is to be > a subtle chemical effect I'd like to hear what wild notions circulate in > your collective brains to account for such wierdness. So would I. However, there is a marked difference in the conditions producing tritium compared to those resulting in helium-4. Tritium is found when conditions exist to produce dendrites on the surface, where the applied voltage can produce a high voltage gradient. Perhaps the Oppenhiemer-Phillips effect is operating after all, as has been suggested by a number of people.. > Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 18:03:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA28986; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:00:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:00:22 -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: <36196BFD.3861C2F css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 20:01:49 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpo References: <199810060034.RAA05647 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"af5AG1.0.q47.ckM6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23033 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David Dennard wrote: > That they are getting ready to construct it and will post the > pictures on line for all to see. This kind of information > is being ignored. The actual information and device details will not. That I can guarantee. > Science as I understnd it should be backed up with > facts if something is said to be correct or incorrect. Yes! > Theory should be backed up with all found, unfound, and > relavent information. Respectfully, I think you are still in the process of doing this. Yes? > Where are the "real scientists?" Doing "real science". 8^) Have a nice evening David...... -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world ... ... just your half." - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 18:11:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA32398; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:10:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:10:33 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 21:04:22 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: David Dennard cc: Vortex Subject: what VORTEX-L In-Reply-To: <199810030106.SAA10059 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"EZ-E-1.0.0w7.9uM6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23034 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: n If you get a Taxi license [$5.00 in Ohio] ... and drive for 1/2 the time you write... you ought to be able to build a proof of concept WP machine.... How much do you think it would cost to built Proof of concept.?? \ What are the cost breakdowns and hurdles? Give us a general description of a device to 'prove out'... please... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 18:24:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA03416; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:19:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:19:40 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:20:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810060120.SAA07964 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard " Reply-To: "David Dennard " To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Resent-Message-ID: <"Khw1V3.0.Dr.h0N6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23035 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I said, > > > >John, I've been asking for whirlpool math ever since I got here. I hope > you > >have more luck than I have. > Fredrick replies; > Try www.eb.com David. For $8.50 a month or an $85.00 Britannica CD, you'll > leave us all in the dust (or water vapor) in no time. :-) Thank you Fredrick, Unfortunately, I don't have a credit card, although I could probably send in the money I don't forsee it any time soon, at least not before I make my presentation at the Peaceful Energy March. Everything about this theory I can scrape together before then will be most helpful. Any one that can help me will be greatly appreciated and recognized should my theory be proven true. And then they are the Swedes they are the back up plan, and Steve Eckwll says he is going to test it. I have learned many times not to put all my eggs in one basket. I can't really tell if you smile is sarcastic or not but I will take it at "face value" and thank you for the positive comment. It is also very helpful in establishing this theory, although it is just a little thing it is those little comments that add up to a huge endorsement of Whirlpower that I have so many of to back up my theory. Lots of positive comments and no disproof continue to lead Whirlpower towards its destination. Without the positive comments, disproof alone is not very convincing. Lots of positive comments, the lack of disproof, huge exploration gaps, are good reference for an emerging theory. I hope to have hard data to take to Washington. This list has the intelligence to make it happen. David From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 18:52:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA12956; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:50:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:50:03 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:50:41 -0700 Message-Id: <199810060150.SAA16906 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: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Resent-Message-ID: <"AfJmU.0.GA3.ATN6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23036 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I will describe the anatomy of a hurricane below, but first respond to a couple of Dennis' points. >Then how is my work considered in the arena. I have "bought it out now and >speak of it explicitly." I don't see how it could be more explicit. It is so >simple a child should be able to understand it. It may seem child's play to you, but when I consider the comments I don't find hard, specific, details about how things work or why. What I see is a lot of speculation, and vague and fuzzy speculation at that. > >> It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought >> that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a kind of leaning over >> backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report >> everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think >> is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; >> and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, >> and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been >> eliminated. > > >I have given the test of principle model and show other highly respected >scientists are in accord. In fact I just heard from Curt and he says Whirlpower >will be built by December. He will be posting pictures on line as the process >develops so all can watch. Also, he is already linked to Keelynet and from what >I understand the Swedish New Physics Association is very respectable. > You interpret that they are in accord by interpreting their comments as being in accord with your comments. If you actualy spoke with Vera Rubin or others, I would venture the results would be different. That said, I have nothing against Dennis and his explorations. My objection is that he fails to present specific, falsifiable phenomena to test, or any quantitative manner or qualitative manner to make predictions. Instead, all I have seen is talk about hurricanes etc. which rotate and wobble or this or that, but then not word one is mentioned that should lead me to conclude that there is anything strange going on. Now on my trip to the SOHO conference, I happened to purchase a magazine, and wouldn't you know it, there was an article on hurricanes inside. The actual physical processes that are going on were described. This is the stuff I had asked Dennis to describe, but which he doesn't have a clue about as best I can figure out. And, evaluating the physical processes, I do find that there is an interesting phenomena that could cause a gravitational distortion, or gravito magnetic field to use more common terms. The process is as follows. You begin with a little vorticity in the air motions. This exists all the time. but you get an exceptionally large spiral going for a little while, and the evaporation of water off of the top surface of the ocean leads to an increase in the local air pressure, and a plume of gases begins to rise. If you don't have about 50 meters of exceptionally warm water, a hurricane will not form or survive, so the key parameter is the energy of the warm water. The evaporation and rising air leads to a plume, and that leads to air moving inward along the surface of the water, and that increases the evaporation rate, and that increases the intensity of the plume, and that increases the inward wind, and thus the evaporation rate. You get the picture, you have a positive feed back loop. So based on that, physicists think they can explain the hurricane, but it is a bit confusing as to why the thing gets started or why it amplifies. I didn't find any comments as to what is "strange" or "wrong" with our models of hurricanes so I cannot comment on Dennis' assertion that present models fail to explain what goes on. And he doesn't provide any detailed numbers, velocities, amount of energy, amount of work, etc. to back up his comments. Instead, he provides a television program and asserts that NBC or ABC is some sort of expert on the subject. That is the part that irks me. But, now that I understand the process a bit more, I can speak to the physics of it to a greater degree based on the model I am writing about in the book due out early next year. What must be recognized, I am convinced, is that mass to energy conversions lead to absorption and emission of aether, the medium of the universe. This is what leads to the cosmological constant thrust, the dark matter problem and a plethora of solar phenomena some new ones I had predicted 6 months ago being reported on at the SOHO conference. You see, I make predictions that can be tested, and proven wrong or right. This is the difference I try to get Dennis to recognize. Anyway, while chemical reactions are of very much lower intensity, they too result in the same phenomena. And so the endothermic reactions of the evaporation process are "aether absorptive". This is the same principle I apply to stars, black holes, atom bombs, everywhere and this is the principle I stand behind as falsifiable. The absorption of aether during evaporation curves spacetime in the direction of the absorption regions and can be treated fluid mechanically for simplicity. So, we get a flow of aether toward the regions of absorption, and this leads to an acceleration of matter in those directions. If we look at the vertical components of the motions, nothing very interesting happens. but, if we look at the horizontal components of the flow of aether profile, we see something that is very interesting. The ambient density of aether in the quantum vacuum is finite. And any phenomena is only going to raise or lower that ambient pressure by some finite amount. Thus, if you study the geometry of the hurricane you find that the evaporation occurs under the clouds and as you move inward. The wind driven component of evaporation is zero, at the center of the vortex, it is zero far away from the hurricane, and it is large directly under the clouds. Thus, the aether density in the region of the hurricane is at a minimum probably around the eye wall and should remain low inside the eye because the low pressure will skew the rate of evaporation inside the eye to be higher, despite the wind driven component of evaporation dying down. Thus, there is a net horizontal flux of aether directed radially inward and this should produce a net thrust on the mass in the region of the hurricane directed inward at low elevations above the surface. Next, the vapor rises, and cools. This is now a slightly exothermic reaction, and ergo aether emissive. But then, you wind up with condensation of the vapor in the clouds of the hurricane, and that is very exothermic and aether emissive. So you have aether directed away from the clouds in all directions. To make a long story shorter, there is an aether flow loop that is formed. It is tightly collimated and directed inward along the ocean surface, and then it rises and is directed outward at greater elevations. But that upper component is more diffuse and so you shouldn't really be able to notice much strange up there if you do an energy balance calculation. but it could be worth a try. The eye forms where the aether in flow velocity is dropping, as the drop in aether pressure approaches minimum. So you no longer have the anomalous inertial acceleration of matter, and thus the clouds don't make it all the way in to the center of rotation and instead you get a calm region, unlike in a tornado which is driven by the inward spiralling air as it accelerates toward a rarefaction plume in the atmosphere. You see, it is curious that a tornado forms an eye unless you understand that there is an inertial acceleration due to spacetime curvature resulting from the aether absorption and emission loop. Now, Dennis claims there are wierd wobbles. I say once again, maybe so. but figure out what the wind velocities are, what the wobble periods are, what the rotation periods are, and then I could track them back to the solar acoustic oscillations that are probably driving them. But instead he has told me that this is too technical or hard to do. I suggest that if he is really interested in learning, that he will go do the foot work, sign up in an atmospheric physics news group, email someone in NOAA or else where and just get the data. Then, if hurricanes turn out to have a typical period of rotation for their winds, or the periods tend to be quantized, or the wobble periods tend to match the solar acoustic oscillations, then and only then can we learn something. To say something is strange is worthless. And please, please, do not say that Vera and others support your ideas, that is patting yourself on the back without justification. So far, I have read no quantitative or testable predictions, and don't get all defensive as I have no time for that sort of banter. Give me some facts I can chew on, and cut all the bs out of it. I will search for the mechanisms driving something, but I need something to bite into. As it happens, I have been seeking information on hurricanes as one test of the models I have developed. So I was disappointed that you did not provide any information or scientific articles describing things you say are mysterious. Do the research, and quit quoting reporters. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 18:58:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA15743; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:56:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:56:15 -0700 Message-ID: <090401bdf0cc$7ca7ac80$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: "David Dennard " , Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 19:56:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"3Sp5v.0.vr3.-YN6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23037 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: David Dennard To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, October 05, 1998 7:22 PM Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help The Smiles are FRIENDLY, David. You can get 7 free days of trial without a credit card if my memory serves me right. Best, Frederick David wrote: >I said, >> > >> >John, I've been asking for whirlpool math ever since I got here. I hope >> you >> >have more luck than I have. >> > >Fredrick replies; > >> Try www.eb.com David. For $8.50 a month or an $85.00 Britannica CD, you'll >> leave us all in the dust (or water vapor) in no time. :-) > > >Thank you Fredrick, > >Unfortunately, I don't have a credit card, although I could probably send in the >money I don't forsee it any time soon, at least not before I make my >presentation at the Peaceful Energy March. Everything about this theory I can >scrape together before then will be most helpful. Any one that can help me will >be greatly appreciated and recognized should my theory be proven true. And then >they are the Swedes they are the back up plan, and Steve Eckwll says he is going >to test it. I have learned many times not to put all my eggs in one basket. > >I can't really tell if you smile is sarcastic or not but I will take it at "face >value" and thank you for the positive comment. It is also very helpful in >establishing this theory, although it is just a little thing it is those little >comments that add up to a huge endorsement of Whirlpower that I have so many of >to back up my theory. Lots of positive comments and no disproof continue to >lead Whirlpower towards its destination. Without the positive comments, >disproof alone is not very convincing. Lots of positive comments, the lack of >disproof, huge exploration gaps, are good reference for an emerging theory. > >I hope to have hard data to take to Washington. This list has the intelligence >to make it happen. > >David > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 19:54:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA07966; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 19:51:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 19:51:56 -0700 Message-ID: <19981006025523.418.rocketmail send104.yahoomail.com> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 19:55:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"e3pC72.0.5y1.ANO6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23038 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rob King asked: How much gas will 1 watt of power produce for 1 hour of operation in splitting water into H and 02 at a pressure of 1kg/cm3, if the effieciency is 100%. It takes 2 electrons to decompose 1 molecule of water into 1 molecule of H2 and 1/2 molecule of O2. At 100% efficiency the decomposition takes 1.48 volt. This works out to 4.736 x 10^-19 joule per H2O molecule. You ask for the result of 1 W for 1 hour, or 3600 watt sec = 3600 joule. The answer is 7.60 x 10^21 H2O are decomposed. This works out to 0.0126 mol of H2 and half that amount of O2. At standard temperature (273 K = 0 C) and pressure (1 bar = 1 Pa, aka 1 atmosphere, aka 1 kg/cm^2) the electrolysis will give you 0.283 Liter of H2 and half that amount of O2. At a typical lab temperature of 300 K = 27 C, the volume will be a bit larger. The final answer is: 100% efficient electrolysis of H2O will give you 0.311 L of H2 and 0.156 L of O2 at 27 at sea level on a 1 bar barometer day. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 20:26:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA21440; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:24:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:24:17 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810060034.RAA05647 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:23:02 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpo Resent-Message-ID: <"ybhps3.0.tE5.WrO6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23039 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David - > And to say something is not correct and have the > information to back it up is something my critics are > yet to do. No. At least three people now have explained that your description of the operation of the device is not correct" since you attribute its operation to "frame dragging". This contention has been backed up by your critics using the history of experiments into frame dragging as well as the magnitude of the effect. Simply posting messages like the above which ignore/deny this fact is behavior that many people on this list will find quite aggrivating. I know I do. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 20:45:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA26539; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:39:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:39:33 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810060340.UAA15164 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version Resent-Message-ID: <"JkHvq1.0.ZU6.q3P6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23040 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick says; > I need an answer to these things soon, 'cause the millenium's coming, and > I'd better get that darn saucer engine finished. Hawaii's supposed to get > swamped a few times by waves from some of the more traumatic earth changes! Rick might not see this if he has his "kill file", but like I have said I have many more inventions. Some already in prototype. One such already built prototype would solve his wave delima. A sort of 21st century Noah's Ark. Of course we all 'know a' little about that story. Noah was also a "crackpot" I will not give details of this invention away and for Rick I might even charge double (not really) but it is real, is it built, and it is beautiful (if I don't say so myself). The Tensegrity Airship Fuller dreamed of a floating city. A ship so large it could hover in the clouds. The math has been done. 1 mile across is all it takes for enough displacement of air at a 1 degree difference in inside and outside air temperature to lift a structure, along the lines of his geodesic technology, up and "float". Unfortunately, geodesic technology breaks down after the 1/4 mile range. If fact man has never built a dome span past that barrier. In my backyard is the prototype. It is unique. Not geodesic. Not like any dome on Earth. It can be built miles across in my estimation. It is pretty much top secret, and unless you have access to satellite cameras and aim it here you can't get the information. But even with that I doubt the resolution can reslove the secret, so I feel pretty confident it can't be stolen. It is definately for sale and for a limited time on sale. David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 20:58:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA01329; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:56:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:56:07 -0700 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:57:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810060357.UAA15950 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: what VORTEX-L Resent-Message-ID: <"MwWVM3.0.gK.NJP6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23041 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John writes; > > If you get a Taxi license [$5.00 in Ohio] ... and drive for 1/2 > the time you write... you ought to be able to build a proof of concept WP > machine.... How much do you think it would cost to built Proof of concept.?? > \ > What are the cost breakdowns and hurdles? Give us a general > description of a device to 'prove out'... please... As I have stated, and don't want to have to continue about, I am Narcoleptic, I can't drive a taxi or anything on wheels. I can drive this old computer (a little bit). Steve Eckwall, member of this list has put out the offer to make the prototype and a call for money to do so. He evidentily has done his homework and checked out my story and confirmed all I have stated is true. I think his plans are definately in the least possible expense arena and I bet If you contact him he can give you an estimate. A general idea of the machine can be seen at; www.ledomedesprit.com/domeworld/whirlpower.html This does not include all the specific hardware but it does not take an Einstein to figure it out. It is very simple. Children catch on much faster then adults and every one that has seen it knows exactly what I am talking about and how it would work. David Dennard "the hardest working man in dreamland" From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 21:20:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA01044; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 21:19:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 21:19:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <36198B7D.6DCC earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 22:16:14 -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: Storms: Blue: bursts, QM tunneling 10.5.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"F9nMI.0.DG.GfP6s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23042 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Storms: Spaandonk: bursts, QM tunneling 10.5.98 Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 19:09:26 -0600 From: Edmund Storms To: rmforall earthlink.net Dear Rich et al. I would like to comment on the following. Regards, Ed. Storms Rich Murray wrote: > > Subject: Re: Storms: Rothwell: Blue: Pd cathode problems 10.3.98 > Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 13:07:25 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > > Wow, I certainly have inspired some new and wonderful revelations > of what is now considered CANR gospel. It is also interesting > to see Ed Storms squirm away from a discussion of the statistical > features of the data set, while essentially confirming much of > what I was suggesting should be influencing the statistics. > > As for what data I was commenting on when I described it as > "noise-like," Miles-Bush, Pons-Fleischman, McKubre, and numerous > others published data like that. In describing their own results > they frequently used the word "bursts". Are you now saying that > all of that data is somehow wrong or untypical of CANR excess heat? Bursts occur as well as steady production. The bursts are thought to result when an increasing fraction of the surface becomes active. This activity heats up the cathode thereby causing a loss of deuterium. This loss causes those sites which were active to become inactive, thereby allowing the cathode to cool. This process can be repeated, but the next cycle will be different because the loss of deuterium can result in a permanent change in the PdD structure which prevents the required high composition in some areas. Yes, some of the data published by these people are marginal. The issue is not picking apart the worst data, but asking whether some of the data are so beyond noise as to indicate the presence of a new phenomenon. Then we can debate why the phenomenon is weak or does not occur at all in some samples. > > Next Storms continues with the presentation of a picture of the > CANR conditions which, I must confess, is entirely new to me. > However, I'm easy to get along with and will now accept this new > view as all we need consider in further discussions. As I understand > it, the "theory" to which Ed Storms directs our attention is that > selected material that accepts high bulk loading with deuterium > develops selected small, isolated sites in the surface layer that > can be made "nuclear active" under some conditions. However, the > nuclear reactions which occur in such a site are sufficiently > disruptive that no given part of the material can remain active > for an extended period. Do I have that right? Yes, you are correct. > > Now it seems to me this picture supports precisely the sort of > statistical picture that I was describing. A region gets "active", > produces energy, and then dies. Shouldn't that result in a > "burst" of excess heat? A succession of such bursts would account > for what I was describing as "noise-like." Is there are problem > with this? Yes, heat production fluctuates. However, the time constant of the calorimeter, which can be 15 min to several hours, averages out some of the fluctuation. > > Next question I would consider is whether material that remains > inert with respect to these "nuclear active sites" can exhibit > "bursts" of excess heat without ever yielding a net positive > integral output? My impression has been that cells that showed > no evidence of excess heat could still be "noisey." I have > in my hand right now Miles-Bush data confirming that view. > However, if you insist, I can adapt to your new orthodoxy. > Are you saying that null results come only from cells in which > the excess heat is perfectly flat at zero for all times and > that anything one might call a "burst" is proof of a nuclear > reaction? This is essentially correct. All calorimeter signals have a noise which is seen as random fluctuations both above and below zero. When averaged over sufficient time, the net effect is zero or something very close. However, excess energy is observed as a net positive signal which lasts for sufficient time to be greater than the noise time constant. For a burst to be identified as excess energy, the duration must be significantly outside of the known noise duration. Frequently, the burst is superimposed on an already positive signal which has lasted for many hours. > > Now there are a few other points where I don't understand where > Ed Storms is coming from. I think we need to be quite careful > when describing these effects so we don't generate further > confusion. Let's say that M has a calorimeter that is accurate > to 0.05 watts and detects 2 watts excess heat. I think we need > to keep in mind what the input electrical power was -- was > it 10 watts or 100 watts? What I was saying with regard to > the statistics is that rather than use your estimate of > 0.05 watts for the variance in these measurements, why not > plot up the data from several runs to see how they behave > statistically? Are they consistant with your interpretation > of the results? It's an honest, valid question that you > attempt to brush off. You are correct, the noise of a calorimeter increases as the current is increased. As a result, a burst or steady excess must be larger at high current than when seen at low current. Nevertheless, such effects are only attributed to excess energy when they remain positive at a value and for a time which is outside of the observed behavior of noise. So in this sense, each of us does a statistical analysis by comparing the signal to the way noise behaves. Unfortunately, we have a good understanding of noise both by using dead Pd as well as Pt cathodes which show no excess. The hours of such data we experience can not be published although examples are contained in most papers. We do not accept marginal variations as an indication of excess. We are as careful and concerned with the truth as you are. The difference is that we have viewed many hours of data and have a good idea when the data are real and when they are noise. I know of no one in the field who wishes to exaggerate the results or wishes to be deceived by random fluctuations. If you have the time, you are welcome to take any of my data and see what you can make of it. > I also don't understand the notion that nuclear reaction rates > can be changed by chemical means without altering nuclear wave > functions. What are we supposed to assume determines nuclear > reaction rates, the phase of the moon? Maybe I have uncovered > a significant lack of understanding of this problem on Ed Storms' > part, or perhaps it was just a slip of the bits. Would you > care to reconsider your position on this point, Ed? Nuclear wave functions are one model used to describe the energy levels in the nucleus. These only come into play in a fusion reaction, for example, when the two deuterium nuclei come close enough together for the wave functions to interact, i.e. overlap. They do not answer the question as to how the nuclei manage to get close enough to react in the first place. In hot fusion, if I may use the phrase, translational energy allows the nuclei to get close enough for reaction. In cold fusion, this translational energy is absent. The question is: what process allows the nuclei to come close enough together for the nuclear wave functions to come into play? Of course, other models of nuclear energy states have been suggested which do not involve wave functions. > > With regard to the way fusion cross sections extrapolate to > zero energy, Ed Storms ignores a lot of data to select a claimed > result by Kasagi that appears to be anomalous. I have read > at least one paper on the Kasagi claims and have heard indirectly > about others, so I am not totally ignorant on the points raised. > Basically, I would describe these results in the following terms: > A particle spectrum is recorded that can only be interpreted > through the use of a model for multistep collisions in which > products of the primary beam interaction induce secondary reactions. > Kasagi's attempt at modling these data does not agree with his > observations, so we have some sort of "anomaly". Let me suggest > that the problem may be with the model Kasagi employs rather > than the reaction physics. It's pretty weak evidence for CANR. The Kasagi data are not evidence for CANR. The results are only an indication that high energy fusion is not consistent with the conventional model at low energy. Perhaps the data are wrongly interpreted as you suggest. I could care less because these data are not generated in the proposed unique structure which is typical of cold fusion. > > I have been requested to name an area of research that confirms > actual CANR effects. I refer to the field known as "perturbed > angular correlations" as one example and "electron capture" > decay as another. It would do you good to read up on EC before > making assertions about dramatic changes in the electron > density at a nucleus, for example. Thanks for the suggestion. It would be interesting to see how EC decay would be affected if it occurred in a material which was nuclear-active rather than in ordinary material were it is usually observed. > Dick Blue > > I am amazed how often this topic [cathode selection] gets discussed > without there being anything new being said. On one hand we have the > assertions which Jed Rothwell now repeats that it takes a long and > difficult selection process to get suitable material. On the other hand > we have claimed success (Arata-Zhang, Miles-Bush, Storms) where nothing > like that seems to apply. Once again, Dick Blue has adoped a conclusion which is at odds with the facts. A lot new has been said, Dick just isn’t listening. Arata-Zhang used palladium-black which has a different set of properties relevant to the effect compared to solid palladium. Indeed, only certain palladium-black works and only if it is carefully treated. Miles-Bush found that most palladium tried by them did not work, but they did not try to determine why. In my case, I studied 90 pieces of palladium supplied by IMRA in an effort to determine a relationship between the properties of palladium and its ability to make excess energy. Of these, only about 4 pieces made excess energy, one at the 4 watt level. > > [re Robin Spandoonk on quantum tunneling in CF] > I think we are in danger of being lulled into a kind of supidity arising > from a rather strange use of some basic words. I am not overlooking, > as Robin seems to imply, the significanace of quantum tunneling. > Nuclear reactions, as I am quite familiar with them, are seldom a matter > of pure "brute force", however you care to define that. What I do > strongly object to is the notion that things can just sort of happen > willy-nilly without there being any agent involved. I agree, there has to be an agent involved, but not the one Dick Blue has envisioned or would accept. Much effort is being applied to finding that agent. Why does Dick carry the argument to an absurdum to make a point? This contributes nothing to the argument because such statements are not even remotely related of the issue. > > So we have "good" palladium that induces CANR and "bad" palladium that > does not. I am suggesting that there must be a difference between the > good kind and the bad kind, and that understanding that difference in > more fundamental sense should be a part of this research effort, if > it is to be taken seriously. Yet we already know, and Jed Rothwell > confirms, that the good and the bad materials are very similar with > respect to history and many physical properties. Can we not conclude > from this that the features essential to the CANR effect are subtle > and thus typical of some small variation from the normal palladium > structure? First of all, I, McKurbre and the NHE laboratory in Japan have made a study of a range of properties which influence the effect. More work would be done if funding were available. Second, the gross properties of palladium, i.e. the only ones easily studied, are similar between “good’ and “bad” palladium. However, this is not the issue. These small differences allow the PdD to change into a material which is quite different from ordinary PdD, i.e. the nuclear-active state. This material is difficult to study with the tools presently available. > Now we come to the heart of the problem. How can small, subtle changes > in material make a big difference in something else? I don't happen > to believe that directed intelligence, such as Maxwell's Demon, is > involved here. Changes in the way material behaves, to me at least, > means a change in the way in which the constituent particles interact, > i.e. a perturbation. My assertion is that we should be attempting > to quantify said perturbation. I should point out that we have a similar situation with respect to superconductivity. PdD is superconducting and the temperature is a strong function of the amount of deuterium present even though there are no obvious changes in the structure, external appearance, or bond energy. Thus, here is an example of an unusual property being changed with little apparent change in the physical or chemical properties. We are attempting to quantify said perturbations. That has been my major contribution to the field. More would be known if the necessary tools were available. > > Now some people here keep insisting that they expect big effects, > such as cold fusion, to arise from insignificant, unobservable, > and unspecified differences in a chemical environment. Ed Storms, > it seems, wants to leave nuclear wave functions out of the > discussion. It's nothing more than wishful thinking to suggest > that you can get the claimed effects without there being any > cause that we can address in the usual manner. What you are asking > for simply does not lie within the realm of physics. If you want > to perform miracles instead of doing physics perhaps this is the > wrong forum for the discussion. If this is all you can conclude from what has been said, perhaps you are correct, this is the wrong forum. Of course, the cause can be addressed. What do you mean by usual manner? Efforts to address the cause have used the tools available. If Dick Blue has other tools available which have not been tried, I would be happy to use them provided there is no cost involved. > > Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 5 21:39:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA16569; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 21:37:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 21:37:24 -0700 Message-ID: <361991E5.5B2D earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 22:43:33 -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: Brown: Stirniman: Wallace gravitomagnetic field devices 10.5.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"TkUlF3.0.j24.3wP6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23043 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Murray: Stirniman gravitomagnetic field review 10.5.98 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 23:07:30 -0400 From: "Kedrick Brown" To: Hi Rich: Thanks for your inquiry and links to the microturbine pages. I have a BS in physics but work in a different field, studying gravitational modification related topics in my spare time. If you have not seen it, I would like to refer you to my web page, because Robert and I had some discussions on the points I bring out on this page: http://home.att.net/~kfbrown/index.html I also have a summary of this page at: http://home.att.net/~kfbrown/summary.html My page is an attempt to distill the fundamental scientific aspects of Wallace's patent into a simplified version of his patent that is easier (and less expensive) to test. If you recall, Wallace claimed that his device produced a changing nuclear polarization in what is basically a solid ringlike circuit. Thus a much simpler and more efficient method of testing his patent (which is also electromagnetically rather than mechanically based) should be induction of NMR in a solid ringlike circuit (which I explain on my page). However, in the extensive NMR literature I have heard of no gravitational anomalies associated with induction of NMR (which of course should not have to be in a ringlike circuit if Wallace's claims are correct). Furthermore, I have tested a very rudimentary version of his experiment and come up with a null result, and I know of someone else who has also come up with a null result. On my page I show that nothing in Wallace's device (wheel or nuclei) is capable of producing a non-infinitesmal gravitomagnetic field from their angular momentum, so that any effects he observed would likely have to arise from the strong nuclear force (although possible evidence for such a coupling is extremely scarce in scientific literature). He hints at this possibility in patents '605 and '606 (i.e. that kinemassic (gravitomagnetic) fields may be related to the strong force). So basically my line of logic was: 1) Nothing in Wallace's device has enough angular momentum to produce a non-infinitesmal gravitomagnetic field 2) If his results are credible, the strong force is the only remaining possibility for production of this field, however improbable this may be (i.e. because electromagnetic effects are screened out) 3) This means that each nonzero spin nucleus should somehow emit a gravitomagnetic field much stronger than commonly thought 4) A simple way to demonstrate this is to induce NMR in a solid ringlike circuit. Of course this is very similar to Li's hypothesis that a changing nuclear polarization in a superconductor should produce a gravitoelectric field by induction (but this is for a different reason, not the strong force). I noticed also that rotation of the superconductor in the Tampere experiment should cause its nuclei to be a least partially polarized by Barnett's effect (which seems to relate it further to Wallace's experiment). Anyway, the obvious questions are then: 1) If Wallace is right in that a changing nuclear polarization in a ringlike circuit should produce anomalous grav. effects, then how come no gravitational anomalies have been observed in relation to NMR experiments? 2) With regards to the Tampere experiment, how come the results seem so difficult to reproduce? It thus appears that the validity of Wallace's results may be questionable UNLESS his personal explanation of the effect is wrong, and it is an effect arising solely from the rotation of the brass wheel in his device. How this could be, I don't know (because like I said the wheel cannot produce a noninfinitesmal gravitomagnetic field). The only way this is possible is if the wheel's rotation actually causes an alteration in the strong nuclear force but this is a hugely unscientific stretch of the imagination with no proof whatsoever. Wallace's patents actually claim two very radical results: 1) A nonlinear deviation from Barnett's effect for systems of nonzero spin nuclei rotating at high angular velocity (that causes nuclear polarization to an apparent degree of saturation over time). 2) Gravitoelectromagnetic effects arising from rings of "spin nuclei" material in which a changing nuclear polarization is induced (VIA BARNETT'S EFFECT). THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT the simplified (NMR) version of Wallace's experiment seems to yield a null result (although it should be scientifically sound, according to his explanation of his results), therefore the only way we can prove for certain that his results are incorrect is to mechanically rotate a wheel at high angular velocity and monitor the nuclear polarization of the wheel over time. If this nuclear polarization does not linearly increase with the angular velocity of the wheel but instead inreases more rapidly and appears to reach a point of saturation over time, then Wallace's results would have to be correct (although inexplicable with current scientific knowledge). This means that a microturbine wheel spinning at 2.5 million RPM should DEFINITELY exhibit nuclear polarization to a degree of saturation (in a fraction of the time that Wallace's wheel [28,000 RPM] did in patent '606). I hope this answers your question about changing the makeup of the turbine wheel. I would suggest using a cheap, uniform material like Aluminum, which contains 100% nonzero spin nuclei, so that nuclear polarization may be easier monitored. Cobalt is also 100% uniform and contains nonzero spin nuclei. As Wallace states, Bismuth is the ideal choice -- this is because it has the highest level of strong force saturation of any stable element (due to its high number of nucleons). TO SUMMARIZE: THE CRITICAL PROOF OF WALLACE'S RESULTS IS THE OBSERVATION OF A NONLINEAR DEVIATION FROM BARNETT'S EFFECT FOR SYSTEMS OF NONZERO SPIN NUCLEI ROTATING AT HIGH ANGULAR VELOCITY. Observation of such an anomaly would strongly corroborate his results. Do you know of a way to test this or of any scientists that could -- maybe the makers of the turbine, for example? It seems to be a very straightforward experiment for anyone with the facilities. I look forward to your comments on this. Kedrick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 00:26:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA27359; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 00:25:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 00:25:08 -0700 Message-ID: <19981006072606.28848.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.73.204.24] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 00:26:05 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"VrpDr.0.Hh6.JNS6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23044 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Michael, Thanks for that, I didn't know that the hydrogen atom pairs remained together after seperation from the oxygen atom. Its not a lot of gas and I was watching the video of the Meyer fuel cell the other day and watched his pressure gauge on his cell go up by 1PSI in a matter of 2-3 seconds. All I need to know would be the power used on that experiment, guess the volume in the top of the cell and pipework and work out the efficiency. The voltage would be about 14.7 volts from the alternator. The current was supposed to be about 0.5 amps. The volume may have been about 0.5 litres. if 1 joule = 0.00008638 L of H2 and 0.00004333 L of O at 1kg/cm3 power used= 22 joules. of energy. therefore it should produce 2.83 cm3 of gas at 1kg/cm3. So what would that work out as pressure increase in a volume of 0.5 litres. Cheers Rob King >Rob King asked: > >How much gas will 1 watt of power produce for 1 hour of operation in >splitting water into H and 02 at a pressure of 1kg/cm3, >if the effieciency is 100%. > >It takes 2 electrons to decompose 1 molecule of water into 1 molecule >of H2 and 1/2 molecule of O2. At 100% efficiency the decomposition >takes 1.48 volt. This works out to 4.736 x 10^-19 joule per H2O >molecule. > >You ask for the result of 1 W for 1 hour, or 3600 watt sec = 3600 >joule. The answer is 7.60 x 10^21 H2O are decomposed. This works out >to 0.0126 mol of H2 and half that amount of O2. At standard >temperature (273 K = 0 C) and pressure (1 bar = 1 Pa, aka 1 >atmosphere, aka 1 kg/cm^2) the electrolysis will give you 0.283 Liter >of H2 and half that amount of O2. At a typical lab temperature of 300 >K = 27 C, the volume will be a bit larger. The final answer is: 100% >efficient electrolysis of H2O will give you 0.311 L of H2 and 0.156 L >of O2 at 27 at sea level on a 1 bar barometer day. >== >Michael J. Schaffer > > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 00:42:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA00281; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 00:41:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 00:41:34 -0700 Message-ID: <19981006074238.19350.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.73.204.24] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 00:42:38 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"JYBmQ3.0.G4.kcS6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23045 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi John, Thankyou for your answers. So based on yours answer of 50% that works out to be 0.334 L of H2 at 100% effieciency. 75% is 0.333 L of H2 at 100%. But the last one looks to be a bit off the mark at 0.208 L of H2. It pretty well confirms what Michael wrote, his figure is 0.311 L of H2. So if I can get 0.35 L of H2 in one hour at 1 watt then I've cracked it. Cheers Rob King >Rob King wrote: >> Simple Question, >> How much gas will 1 watt of power produce for 1 hour of operation in >> splitting water into H and 02 at a pressure of 1kg/cm3, >> if the effieciency is 100%. > >hee hee hee, simple... that's a good one. 8^) > >There are several variables of cell construction and operation that greatly >impact outcome. There is no simple answer to your question. For example: > >=> A $200 setup using: >- Distilled H2O with 20-30% KOH >- Sintered sheet, wire, gauze nickle electrodes >- 1-2 atm operation >- 1.9-2.0 V >- 75-80 deg C >- 2000 amp/m^2 current density >- glass jar cell >=> At best 50% efficient, 1KWh should produce approx 167 litres of H > >=> A $$$ high pressure cell using: >- Distilled H2O with 30-50% KOH >- Coarse screen nickle electrodes >- 98.7 atm operation >- 1.6 V >- 200 deg C >- 1 amp/cm^2 current density >- Nickle lined steel cell >=> At best 75% efficient, 1KWh should produce approx 250 litres of H > >=> Theoretically, at 100%, 4.8KWh should produce 1m^3 H. There are no known ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 00:49:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA02007; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 00:48:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 00:48:55 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:50:26 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981005122052.00cfa100 spectre.mitre.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"DktWb3.0.GV.djS6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23046 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 5 Oct 1998, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > At 09:00 AM 10/1/98 +0200, britz wrote: > > >I just signed on again after a long break, and so I don't know all that > >has been thrashed out here. Sorry. I agree, of course, that a random > >sequence of rare successes does not constitute reproducibility, and does > >not prove an effect. > > I strongly disagree. In the early days of hot fusion, getting a clean, > stable plasma was very hard. It might take weeks after a stellerator had > been disassembled and modified before the first stable plasma was achieved, > then further weeks of effort to get neutron production. Did this make > neutron production hard to study? Of course it did. But no one contended > that it wasn't happening, just that it was damn hard to reproduce. [...] I strongly disagree with your disagreement. You are misrepresenting me. I am saying that these random bits of evidence are not proof; I am NOT saying that they constitute disproof. > Or to use another example, one live Coelacanth was enough to prove that > they hadn't died out hundreds of millions of years ago. (The coelacanth > was considered to have been extinct until a specimen was found in 1938. > The second coelacanth was found in 1952. But in spite of numerous > attempts, no one has yet succceeded in keeping a coelacanth alive after > catching it. See: http://www.dinofish.com/ //www.dinofish.com/discoa.htm > and related sites.) I reckon this is qualitatively different. A Coelacanth is clearly identifiable as just that, without a shadow of a doubt. But a neutron, or a triton, or a milliwatt of excess heat, could come from a number of causes. The equivalent of a Coelacanth in CNF would be the sometimes-claimed kilowatt of XS heat. If I viddied that with my own glazzies - rather than just reading about it from people who have something to gain from my believing them - I would have to believe it. CNF is one of those phenomena that can't be proven wrong. Unless it is proven right, I for one have to suspend judgement. All I can do is to estimate plausibilities - a more common thing in science than we scientists like to think. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 01:00:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA05457; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 00:58:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 00:58:09 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:59:42 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"N4G5R.0.BL1.GsS6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23047 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 5 Oct 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > At 1:36 PM 10/5/98, John Steck wrote: > >Ladies and Gents- > > > >I am attempting to construct a theoretical base line to measure against. I am > >looking for any equations or mathematical constructs that describe vortex > >movement of a liquid. Specifically I need to have gravity, angular velocity, > >reduction ratio, exit aperture as variables so as to be able to calibrate > >experimental measurements and develop protocols for augmenting design > >parameters. I've looked through all my reference books, but I have failed to > >locate anything along these lines. I will derive a formula if I have to, but I > >am interested in reviewing any existing work first. Any suggestions? > > > You are talking one complicated fluid dynamics problem. You will need a > supercomputer and finite element model to accurately model all that. > Cheaper faster and easier to just build the thing than model it - but then > you have no first principles baseline, other than to close the loop and get > perpetual motion if you are looking for ou behaviour. First of all, let me say that in terms of plausibility, I regard this as extremely unlikely to be a real effect, i.e. energy out of nothing from stirring water. However, I also admit that there are undoubtedly physical laws and effects that we have yet to discover, and you might just possibly have discovered one. I'd say forget fluid dynamics and supercomputers. They would cost you a lot of money, but they are almost guaranteed to prove that you should not have an effect, because such a study would be based on orthodox assumptions that exclude a novel effect. it would be better to do a much simpler, thermodynamic-style, overall, analysis: How much power is going in, what are the pathways for heat losses, tally everything up. To do a mechanistic analysis to confirm your effect, you need to know the novel physical law that causes it. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 01:28:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA11960; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 01:27:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 01:27:50 -0700 Message-ID: <10ba01bdf103$05fb67c0$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: , Subject: Re: Brown: Stirniman: Wallace gravitomagnetic field devices 10.5.98 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 04:14:21 -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: <"IXXE91.0.nw2.5IT6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23049 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >uniform and contains nonzero spin nuclei. As Wallace states, Bismuth is >the ideal choice -- this is because it has the highest level of strong >force saturation of any stable element (due to its high number of >nucleons). Really? I thought Bob Lazaar had found one better (grin) I wonder if it is as diamagnetic too! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 01:29:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA11599; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 01:27:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 01:27:25 -0700 Message-ID: <10b801bdf102$f67f2c00$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: "David Dennard" , Subject: Re: Wallace-Tampere Article - Final Version Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 03:57:50 -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: <"xP_Bd2.0.4r2.jHT6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23048 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> I need an answer to these things soon, 'cause the millenium's coming, and >> I'd better get that darn saucer engine finished. Hawaii's supposed to get >> swamped a few times by waves from some of the more traumatic earth changes! > > >Rick might not see this if he has his "kill file", but like I have said I have >many more inventions. Some already in prototype. One such already built >prototype would solve his wave delima. A sort of 21st century Noah's Ark. Of >course we all 'know a' little about that story. Noah was also a "crackpot" > >I will not give details of this invention away and for Rick I might even charge >double (not really) but it is real, is it built, and it is beautiful (if I don't >say so myself). > >The Tensegrity Airship > >Fuller dreamed of a floating city. A ship so large it could hover in the >clouds. The math has been done. 1 mile across is all it takes for enough >displacement of air at a 1 degree difference in inside and outside air >temperature to lift a structure, along the lines of his geodesic technology, up >and "float". Unfortunately, geodesic technology breaks down after the 1/4 mile >range. If fact man has never built a dome span past that barrier. > >In my backyard is the prototype. It is unique. Not geodesic. Not like any >dome on Earth. It can be built miles across in my estimation. It is pretty >much top secret, and unless you have access to satellite cameras and aim it here >you can't get the information. But even with that I doubt the resolution can >reslove the secret, so I feel pretty confident it can't be stolen. > >It is definately for sale and for a limited time on sale. But I thought you believed information should be free! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 01:59:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA20046; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 01:58:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 01:58:18 -0700 Message-Id: <199810060858.SAA24343 tig.com.au> From: "NeXuS" To: , "Jim" Cc: , , , , , , , , , , , <76753.3551 compuserve.com>, , , , , , , , , , , , "Jim Hile" , , , "John Ranta" , , , , "Leonard Dvorson" , , , , , , <71022.3001@compuserve.com>, <73577.123 compuserve.com>, , , , , , Subject: Re: How magnets work for health Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:54:50 +1000 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: <"oNxga1.0.3v4.fkT6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23050 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Do people tend to be more active in the north than in the south on theis planet earth Could this could this give people halucinations cause they are very active Hmmz bermuda triangle one of the places that is true magnetic north? ---------- > From: Dennis C. Lee > To: Jim > Cc: Alan.CHEAH adecco.com; ahannan@MIT.EDU; deadnuts@deadnuts.com; lupem world.std.com; peg@wintergreen.com; bso@acm.org; DaleSVP@ipa.net; dtassen c-zone.net; sweetser@world.std.com; clsmith@darwin.bu.edu; ccantor sequenom.com; 76753.3551@compuserve.com; eben@ergeng.com; ehill world.std.com; leep@world.std.com; ejp@world.std.com; wordpros inforamp.net; moy@ziplink.net; freenrg-l@eskimo.com; gjcheah guybutler.com; wellenstein@binah.cc.brandeis.edu; hic world.std.com; jkokor@alum.mit.edu; Jim Hile ; jim@msri.org; discjt@servtech.com; John Ranta ; jsearl@tako.demon.co.uk; joshprokop worldnet.att.net; KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net; Leonard Dvorson ; cadman@mediaone.net; leep@world.std.com; ohl world.std.com; pgm@world.std.com; rsmith@itiip.com; raddison world.std.com; 71022.3001@compuserve.com; 73577.123 compuserve.com; tesla@pupman.com; thiahadge@aol.com; tcapizzi world.std.com; tom.duff@poweroasis.com; TAFAUL@aol.com; vortex-L eskimo.com > Subject: Re: How magnets work for health > Date: Monday, October 05, 1998 5:37 AM > > Possible explainations for your decrease in energy when experiencing > changing magnetic fields: > > 1. Electroporation - well documented reaction of increase in cell membrane > permiability when same is exposed to electric/magnetic fields. If toxins are > released (a good thing for you in the long run) from cells due to > electroporation, uncomfortable side effects result. > > 2. Negative electric and magnetic fields (North pole is negative field - > South pole of compass needle points to this field) are a contracting energy > which has a calming effect. The positive electric and magnetic fields are an > expanding energy which has an energizing effect. > > An aquaintance who runs for exercise noticed that he goes alot further in > distance when following electric powerlines on hilly terrain. The > undulations cause variations in the distance to the cables thus constantly > changing the local magnetic field intensity. > > When my cat (The Kitty) first got diabetes (she started drinking twice as > much water and pissed all over the place), I brought her to a vet who > prescribed insulin shots. I later learned that diabetes may be caused by a > calcium build up in cell membranes that restricts glucose absorbtion and/or > insulin release. I feed her magnesium, methylsulphonalmethane (MSM) with > vitamin C, and made a North pole facing magnet plate (150 ceramic8 disc > magnets glued down with North Pole up) that went under her bedding. The > three above mentioned therapies all aid in releasing the trapped calcium > from the cell walls and allowed proper glucose metabolism to resume. It has > been 5 months since we stopped the insulin shots. The Kitty is doing fine > because the symptoms subsided on the first week of this unconventional > treatment and have not returned. We stopped the insulin shots on that first > week also because it looked like The Kitty was starting to hate us for doing > that. I told the vet about these events and showed her the research papers I > found. The vet couldn't believe any of it and she still thinks diabetes is a > permanent condition after its' onset has begun. She still insists that we > must immediately resume administering the insulin shots to The Kitty. > > Dennis > > > > At 01:12 PM 10/4/98 -0500, you wrote: > >Health and spinning magnets: > >I (personally) notice a drastic decrease in energy when I play with my > >non shielded motors. I am at the point that I need to shield the magnets > >I work with. > >I have been warned about this in the past and now I can feel the > >effects. > > > >Jim > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > To leave this list, email > > with the body text: leave keelynet > > WWW based join and leave forms and KeelyNet list archives > > are at http://dallastexas.net/keelynet/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > Tall Ships > http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 02:01:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA21596; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:00:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:00:33 -0700 Message-Id: <199810060901.TAA26217 tig.com.au> From: "NeXuS" To: Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:58:02 +1000 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: <"cfLM42.0.MH5.mmT6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Unidentified subject! Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23051 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Sowee for da reply didnt realise you werent alot to send whole reply agains sowee=) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 02:09:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA23056; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:08:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:08:00 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <10ba01bdf103$05fb67c0$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 23:06:50 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Brown: Stirniman: Wallace gravitomagnetic field devices 10.5.98 Resent-Message-ID: <"Qe71o.0.4e5.ltT6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23052 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bill - >uniform and contains nonzero spin nuclei. As Wallace states, Bismuth is >the ideal choice -- this is because it has the highest level of strong >force saturation of any stable element (due to its high number of >nucleons). I must have missed that message, as well as any mention of bismuth in the patents. Do you or does anyone know where and in which patent this is mentioned? All I can find is the part about the brass alloy having copper, zinc, lead, and nickel. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 02:27:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA27927; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:26:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:26:43 -0700 Message-ID: <10e501bdf10b$3f905600$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: "David Dennard " , Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 04:37:14 -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: <"tvHlq2.0.Aq6.I9U6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23053 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Dont be so secretive, what do you mean and what are these sites about? Like my elementary school teacher told me David R-E-A-D. You may find answers to the questions you seek. >assume this is related to James Redfield's work and if so I am very interested. >There are many references in his book to my work. Aren't you the one spoken of in the Prophecy? It appears Kerr, and Carter and Newman have beaten you to whirlpower in a sense and have the mathematical models that you do not. http://library.advanced.org/12523/article2.html Schwarzschild's calculations however did consider neither a black hole's angular momentum nor its charge. But as black holes develop from dying stars and as they turn, a different way of finding a solution had to be chosen. Roy Kerr was the first to succeed. The New-Zealandian mathematician was checking Einstein's field equations for solutions which were to describe the curvature of space-time in the proximity of a rotating star. Brandon Carter, a physicist from down under, has developed Kerr's solutions further and has found out that these were actually describing turning black holes. In contrast to Schwarzschild's holes, rotating black holes set the space-time in their vicinity moving WHIRLPOOL-LIKE, comparable to water that goes down a bathtub drain. Ted Newman has finally delivered the formulas for charged rotating black holes. Although the charge of most black holes is neglectably small, those to be found in nature obey the laws of the so-called Kerr-Newman geometry. The Schwarzschild geometry can describe really existing collapsars only insufficiently. It applies for singularities whose event horizons are ideally round, hence do not possess any angular momentum and are not charged electrically - and can hardly be found in nature. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 02:36:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA28006; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:26:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:26:50 -0700 Message-ID: <10e801bdf10b$42df32e0$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: "David Dennard " , Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 05:24:50 -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: <"yWIXz.0.Or6.P9U6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23054 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> I am attempting to construct a theoretical base line to measure against. I >> am >> looking for any equations or mathematical constructs that describe vortex >> movement of a liquid. Don't know about a liquid but what about this Kerr-Newman geometry? >John, I've been asking for whirlpool math ever since I got here. I hope you >have more luck than I have. Kerr-Newman geometry? Newman-Janis algorithm? >And I would like to add I want to know about specific math dealing with the >wobble of the vortex and it effect of the surrounding liquid that is not in the >vortex itself. Kerr-Newman geometry? Newman-Janis algorithm? Does it handle wobble effects? >And I have look and asked hundreds of people an many scientists on many list >without results. No data found. Kerr-Newman geometry? Newman-Janis algorithm? http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/mathphysics/abstracts/ADP-98-41-M70.html However no clear reason has ever been given as to why the Newman-Janis algorithm works, many physicist considering it to be an ad hoc procedure or ``fluke'' and not worthy of further investigation. Contrary to this belief this paper shows why the Newman-Janis algorithm is successful in obtaining the Kerr-Newman metric by removing some of the ambiguities present in the original derivation. Finally we show that the only perfect fluid generated by the Newman-Janis algorithm is the (vacuum) Kerr metric and that the only Petrov typed D solution to the Einstein-Maxwell equations is the Kerr-Newman metric. More links, do some homework David. http://lheawww.gsfc.nasa.gov/users/public_html/chen/public_html/BH/tsld014.h tm http://www.wspc.com.sg/journals/ijmpa/1315/sidh.html http://astro.mff.cuni.cz/karas/papers/mbhabs.htm http://www.gsu.edu/other/timeline/holes.html 1969 : Roger Penrose discusses the Penrose process for the extraction of the spin energy from a Kerr black hole http://galaxy.cau.edu/tsmith/BlackHole.html This effect can be said to be due to extreme frame dragging, or to timelike translations becoming spacelike as though they had been Wick rotated in Complex SpaceTime. http://www.sff.net/people/geoffrey.landis/charge.htp This section is for those readers who know what a metric is, and want to see the actual equations. The Reisner-Nordstrom solution to Einstein's equations is given in any comprehensive textbook on general relativity. For example, in Robert Wald, General Relativity, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1984, the Reisner-Nordstrom metric is given in problem 3 on page 158, and the more general Kerr-Newman metric (which includes both charge and angular momentum) is given on page 313. The metric is: ds^2 = -[1-2M/r+V^2)] dt^2 + [1-2M/r+V^2)]^(-1) dr^2 + r^2 dq^2 + r^2 sin^2qdf^2 where V, defined in terms of the total charge Q, is the classical electrostatic voltage at a distance r: V=Q/r In particular, note that the contribution of the voltage to the metric is opposite in sign to the contribution of mass, and both the charge and the distance term come in as squares. Thus, as long as Q is not zero, for sufficiently small r the positive (voltage) term will be larger than the negative (mass) term. http://linux.ucs.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9712.2/0609.html I like this one, mathematica crashed when trying to calculate kerr-newman data. http://www.cisti.nrc.ca/cisti/journals/cjp/p97-026.html http://www.teleport.com/~bfryer/RS_REF2.html The gravitational and electromagnetic fields of a moving charged spinning point particle are obtained in the Lorentz covariant form by transforming the Kerr--Newman solution in Boyer--Lindquist coordinates to the one in the coordinate system which resembles the isotropic coordinates and then covariantizing it. He determines that there is a region of space around a charged spinning mass in which the gravitational force is negative. The ability to generate a negative gravity effect may come as no surprise to experimenters who have worked with Bose-Einstein condensates, superfluids, or superconductor material in which the angular momentum of quantum level particles can become aligned along a "macroscopic" spin axis. And it is probably also not a surprise to those who have looked at devices such as the inventions of Henry Wallace, in which a macroscopic body is mechanically spun at high speed in order to cause a "kinemassic" gravito-magnetic field due to spin alignment of the nucleus of elemental materials having an odd number of nucleons (un-paired spin). http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/newtech.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 02:37:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA30507; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:36:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:36:55 -0700 Message-ID: <112601bdf10c$ae3bd420$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Subject: Re: Brown: Stirniman: Wallace gravitomagnetic field devices 10.5.98 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 05:35:33 -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: <"f2k8O1.0.aS7.tIU6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23055 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have no idea, but let us know if you come up with anything. How much does a few pounds of bismuth go for? I wonder if I freeze my pepto bismol if that will work (grin) >Bill - > >>uniform and contains nonzero spin nuclei. As Wallace states, Bismuth is >>the ideal choice -- this is because it has the highest level of strong >>force saturation of any stable element (due to its high number of >>nucleons). > >I must have missed that message, as well as any mention of bismuth in the >patents. Do you or does anyone know where and in which patent this is >mentioned? All I can find is the part about the brass alloy having copper, >zinc, lead, and nickel. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 02:45:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA32098; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:40:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:40:24 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 03:42:10 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november Reply-To: Steve Ekwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xPUpe3.0.Rr7.7MU6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23056 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, Steve Ekwall wrote: On Mon, 5 Oct 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: At 1:36 PM 10/5/98, John Steck wrote: >Ladies and Gents- > >I am attempting to construct a theoretical base line to measure against. I am >looking for any equations or mathematical constructs that describe vortex >movement of a liquid. Specifically I need to have gravity, angular velocity, >reduction ratio, exit aperture as variables so as to be able to calibrate >experimental measurements and develop protocols for augmenting design >parameters. I've looked through all my reference books, but I have failed to >locate anything along these lines. I will derive a formula if I have to, but I >am interested in reviewing any existing work first. Any suggestions? -------------------- Hi John, Horace & all... I'm sure my reference books are _more_ outdated than most on the list, but the "Encylopedia of Physics" by Lerner & Trigg [Second Edition VCH] ISBN 0-89573-752-3, has on page(s) 1348-1352 "Vortices by P.G.Saffman" many equations that are WAY over my head for mathmatical application. The angular velocity is mention however 'oddly' I don't see gravity nor wobbles mentioned*.. Except in one with (Fi,Gi), most of the equations seem to pursue a uniform, or smooth vortex for equations. It starts off: "Votices The velocity of a fluid can be described by a vector function of space (x) and time (t), written as u(x,t). Its curl, __ w(xt)= \/ x u(x,t), is called the vorticity. In incompressible fluid, the relation between velocity and vorticity is analogous to that between magnetic field and current density. In this article, it will be supposed that the density p is constant unless the contrary is stated explicitly. Vorticity can be interpreted physically as an angular-momentum density; a spherical fluid particle, instantaneously frozen without loss of angular momentum, rotates with the angular velocity 1/2~w~. The term vortex motion refers to flows in which the vorticity is confined to finite regions, called vortices, inside which the motion is said to be rotational..." ... on and on for another 2-3 pages that are again (sigh) over my head at the moment. (Almost 20+ other equations to fit all types of things I sure don't understand yet :), however terms like "Ross's" vortex smoke rings, are embeded in the text & equations that with admittance, "Definitive results for fattish rings are sparse. Vortex line breaking and reconnection occurs in real fluids and leads to fusion or fission of vortex rings....." on and on.. and gives an equation for "cut-off" length. * vvvvvvvvvvv Anyway, (in thin rings), "..there is evidence of instability to twisting motions, i.e, those in which the cross section remains circular but the circular axis of the core is deformed." ^^^^^^^^^^^^ So, Unless this is a wobble/wiggle instability, which SHOULD include gravity.... I think I will have to re-read this about a dozen times :) my brain, is not quite in gear yet tonight. It notes the even Kelvin argued that the uniform core without swirl was stable to axisymmetric disturbances, BUT!, left open the question of stability to three-dimensional disturbances...[see above *] Probably no help, but fun reading material! Best to you & yours -=se=- steve (just a little ~/wiggley/fluid/thought~ :) ekwall ekwall2 diac.com p.s. these pages are over my head and equation solving ability, so I will bow-out and pass it on to the brainiacs on the list! Good-Luck Gentleman! :) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 02:51:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA01906; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:50:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:50:54 -0700 Message-Id: <199810060951.TAA22223 tig.com.au> From: "NeXuS" To: "Steve Ekwall" , Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:47:13 +1000 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: <"XsqjL3.0.iT.-VU6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23057 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Smoke rings wobble dont they =) They are ring vortices just if anyone is wondering they act really cooly they clear a space for themselves then mmove in to it whole physics could be based aroung it VIA i think its called vortical insertion acceleration got equations for it somewhere i dunno where they are though hmmz =) ---------- > Anyway, (in thin rings), "..there is evidence of instability to twisting > motions, i.e, those in which the cross section remains circular but the > circular axis of the core is deformed." > ^^^^^^^^^^^^ > So, Unless this is a wobble/wiggle instability, which SHOULD include > gravity.... I think I will have to re-read this about a dozen times :) > my brain, is not quite in gear yet tonight. > > It notes the even Kelvin argued that the uniform core without swirl was > stable to axisymmetric disturbances, BUT!, left open the question of > stability to three-dimensional disturbances...[see above *] > > > Probably no help, but fun reading material! > Best to you & yours > -=se=- > steve (just a little ~/wiggley/fluid/thought~ :) ekwall > ekwall2 diac.com > > p.s. these pages are over my head and equation solving ability, so I will > bow-out and pass it on to the brainiacs on the list! > Good-Luck Gentleman! :) > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 04:10:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA05979; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 04:09:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 04:09:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <098301bdf119$182e3600$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Whirlpower? Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 05:04:24 -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: <"15AFH3.0.HT1.RfV6s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23058 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David, According to the picture on your web page: http://www.ledomedesprit.com/domeworld/whirlpower .html the "Donut", ie., Torus of water should have a moment of inertia, I = 1/2*M*(pi)^2*R*r^2[R^2 +(5*r^2/4)] >From this the kinetic energy of rotation: K.E. = I*(2*pi*f)^2 As the water is diminished due to the "spillover" the geometry will change and thus so will the moment of inertia (I)as will the kinetic energy K.E. But, each portion of water spilled will have it's K.E. (1/2*Mv^2) plus it's gravitational potential, M*g*h, minus the plumbing losses. Even if "frame dragging" is adding a significant boost, it is difficult to see any extractable Over-Unity energy coming from this "loop". On the bright side the water will increase in temperature though. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 05:46:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA30893; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 05:44:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 05:44:53 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 06:46:38 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: David Dennard cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpo In-Reply-To: <199810060034.RAA05647 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"SLZ5Y.0.dY7.43X6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23059 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 5 Oct 1998, David Dennard wrote: -snip- I wish positive search of my information was just as forthcoming. Steve Eckwall confirmed my test of principle model in Sweden but there was no reply to that and I have mentioned it several times and no reply. -snip- these criteria. Where are the "real scientists?" David Dennard -------------------------------- Hi David and all, ref: "real scientists" : I'm _NOT!_, sorry, but game & open minded! just a lerker...(take with a grain of salt - er, pepper * see below:) Wow, (and just getting over being sick on the weekend too:), Actually David, I AM extremely impressed with the work being done by the swedes at :} but, grab a jar and try it! The "wobble" is always there as it's 'hand-spun'. I couldn't of course maintain this spin without picking it back up and twirling it again, disturbing the pepper grounds distribution. The motion of your "outer-spin" area appeared both faster and longer in duration than anything the vortex could provide. As you mentioned with your spinning record's outer edge. The little pepper crumbs sank to the bottom and accumilated in the CENTER, just where you proposed your pump for your whirl-power idea.. this was also interesting! I don't know if this is where you call it the "cut-tail" area, or if the vortex needs to actually expose/touch this drain area. You can also add a drop of dishwashing soap to make a few bubbles to more easily see the surface's rotation action if needed. Try it with the jar 1/3 full or upto 3/4 full (oh, & use the lid!:) Anyway, it looked like speed (swirl velocity) and depth are not that important, but a ratio of about 1-2 on depth might be considered. Just a guess, so, if your whirlpower whirl radius was 8' around, it might be best to try a 3-4' depth. The doughnut area keeps spinning ~8-10 times longer than the surface area. Cost of that experiment = one empty mayonaise jar and h20. (oh, & a dash of ground pepper:) I shot a little red lasar I have (pointer pen type) through the jar, but that didn't help define the doughnut area. Backlighting with a flashlight seemed best. (at least with pepper:) Again, I'm no scientist myself, just an other that wants to extract some power for self-efficiency, and hope all the world can benefit from it.. my logistics have winter on the way here:( And that could dampen time/data till spring (sigh) no heated garage:( This was meant to be a "thumbs-up" message to all that are following your whirlpower thread, hope it comes across that way. Whether it is self-sustaining or not is a question, but as you've said, If it is, it will be far more that just ~99.5%-101% .. looks like 180+%! :) For the others, I give you the 'Mayonaise Jar!' 1/3 filled with water, twirl and observe the wobble maintain itself in fluid adhesion. Yea, I know, I need a bigger jar! hey, it's cheap! Fire Away (I'm running and ducking for cover:) Best to all -=se=- steve (looks like I'll be getting wet anyway/ jump in:) ekwall ekwall2 diac.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 05:59:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA04192; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 05:58:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 05:58:51 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <112601bdf10c$ae3bd420$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:57:42 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Brown: Stirniman: Wallace gravitomagnetic field devices 10.5.98 Resent-Message-ID: <"3bHYm.0.N11.AGX6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23060 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill - > How much does > a few pounds of bismuth go for? $50/lb. for clean shot or powder. But ingots shouldn't be so much, it's ordinary solder. Hey, that almost rhymes. (Better grab the Pepto-Bismol) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 07:02:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA24397; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 07:00:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 07:00:54 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:57:48 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810061001_MC2-5BCE-9FBA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Jk4pn.0.5z5.LAY6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23061 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Rob King asked: How much gas will 1 watt of power produce for 1 hour of operation in splitting water into H and 02 at a pressure of 1kg/cm3, if the efficiency is 100%. You cannot determine this from watts alone, you need to know amps and volts. The amount of gas is a function of amperage, not power (watts). Once the voltage is high enough to fracture the water molecules (1.48 volts), additional voltage (overpotential) will not affect the rate of electrolysis. See Faraday's Laws: 1. The weight of a given element liberated at an electrode during electrolysis is directly proportional to the quantity of electricity [amperes] which passes through the solution. 2. When the same quantity of electricity passes through solutions of different electrolytes, the weights of substances liberated at the electrodes are directly proportional to their equivalent weights. - F. Hess, "Chemistry Made Simple," (Doubleday, 1984), p. 88 The quantity of electricity required to deposit one equivalent weight (at. weight/valence; one mole for hydrogen) of any element is 96,500 coulombs, or one faraday. Coulombs = amperes x seconds. So, if the current is 1 amp for one hour, that's 3,600 coulombs, or 0.04 faradays, or 0.04 grams of hydrogen. Voltage or watts can be 2 or 200, the gas volume will be the same. However, high power will increase evaporation, so you will lose more fluid. You can cool the cell or the effluent gas and condense the water vapor. Michael Schaffer figured the answer to be "0.0126 mol of H2 and half that amount of O2." I do not understand his computation, but I think he is off by a factor of four. "Half the amount O2" is right because water is 2 parts H to 1 part O, and because the valence of oxygen is 2 and the equivalent weight of O is 8 (15.999/2). My answer comes straight out the textbook, which is where everything I say comes from. I cannot work out the answer from first principles in physics or chemistry. I believe Meyer claimed the rate of gas production in his cell was a function of voltage, not amperage. If that is true, the effect he saw cannot be ordinary electrolysis. (I have no idea what it might be instead.) With electrolysis, you can change voltage all you like by moving the anode and cathode apart or adding salt to the electrolyte. As long as you hold amperage steady, the rate of gas production does not change. So your first test of the Meyer cell would be to measure gas production with different voltages. Two problems: 1. It can be difficult to measure gas production accurately; 2. You may have recombination. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 07:07:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA26698; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 07:05:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 07:05:31 -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: <361A23FF.5B3FBDE3 css.mot.com> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 09:06:55 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hurricane anatomy References: <199810060150.SAA16906 Au.oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"TpXRf1.0.oW6.gEY6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23062 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ross Tessien wrote: > You see, it is curious that a tornado forms an eye unless you understand > that there is an inertial acceleration due to spacetime curvature resulting > from the aether absorption and emission loop. Ok, I was following along just fine until I got to this paragraph. Can you expand on this statement a bit? No hurry if you are busy. Just trying to keep up to date with your constructs. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world ... ... just your half." - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 07:52:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA12387; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 07:50:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 07:50:38 -0700 Message-ID: <01BDF10E.F2252A40 209-113-17-144.insync.net> From: Allen Nelson To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:51:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BDF10E.F24FE3C0" Resent-Message-ID: <"-GuBT2.0.Q13.zuY6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23063 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF10E.F24FE3C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >You begin with a little vorticity in the air motions. This exists all = the >time. but you get an exceptionally large spiral going for a little = while, >and the evaporation of water off of the top surface of the ocean leads = to an >increase in the local air pressure, and a plume of gases begins to = rise. If >you don't have about 50 meters of exceptionally warm water, a hurricane = will >not form or survive, so the key parameter is the energy of the warm = water. >The evaporation and rising air leads to a plume, and that leads to air >moving inward along the surface of the water, and that increases the >evaporation rate, and that increases the intensity of the plume, and = that >increases the inward wind, and thus the evaporation rate. You get the >picture, you have a positive feed back loop. >So based on that, physicists think they can explain the hurricane, but = it is >a bit confusing as to why the thing gets started or why it amplifies. This may already be a theory in the works somewhere but I believe that = it eventually will be shown that the following explanation is why a = hurricane gets started in the first place. (Once it gets started, the = positive feed back loop is what causes it to amplify and be maintained.) As the sun heats the surface of the ocean water, in addition to = evaporation, the air on the surface of the water is also heated. This = effect occurs evenly and simultaneously across an extremely large = contiguous area over the ocean water. This evaporation and heating = reduces the density of the air in the lower altitudes of the atmosphere = while the air at higher altitudes experiences little or no density = change relative to what's happening on the surface of the water. The = net effect of this is that the atmosphere becomes "top heavy" and will = want to displace the lighter air with the heavier air. The problem is = that the lighter air became lighter at the same time and uniformly at = all points on the vast area over the ocean water. This leaves no = significant difference in the way the density imbalances are produced = for a long period of time allowing the sun to continue to heat the = lighter air increasing the imbalance. Eventually the density imbalance = between the lower and upper atmosphere reaches a threshold, first at a = single geographical location over the ocean. This will trigger massive = convection such that one of two things will happen. At this = geographical location where the density imbalance first reaches this = threshold, either the heavier air on top will "punch" a hole downward in = the lighter air on bottom or the lighter air on the bottom will punch a = hole upward in the heavier air on top. Let's assume the later situation = to be the case. Once this convection event begins, a chain reaction = will occur as the lower lighter air rushes upward displacing the heavier = air above it pushing it horizontally and radially outward from the = center of the event. The entire mass of warmer lighter air spreading = many thousands of square miles has suddenly found a point of least = resistance through which it can now move from under the heavier air = sitting on top of it. Air masses from all around this single = geographical point will now begin to converge on this "hole in the sky" = moving radially inward. The earth's rotation influences this inward = flowing convergence of air via the Coriolis effect causing it to begin = to rotate as it moves inward. This, of course, creates the initial = vortex action of the birthing hurricane. The sun continues to heat the = ocean surface all around the growing hurricane thereby maintaining a = continuous supply of warmer lighter air that must move inward to allow = the heavier air on top to "fall". As the air rushes radially inward, it = also begins to rise slightly. This rising action increases in velocity = as air approaches the inner vortex stream. This rising is what causes = the evaporated water to begin to condense into clouds and then into = heavy rain. As this water leaves the air from which it came, it takes = with it the heat that the air had accumulated causing the air to cool as = it reaches the upper elevations at the vortex core. Eventually, enough = of the water in the inward flowing rising air will have "rained out" to = increase its density to where it now becomes the heavier air sitting on = top of warmer lighter air. This also acts to feed the hurricane because = the entire cycle can now be completed. Having reached the upper = elevations, the dried out cooled air now begins to spiral radially = outward eventually reaching the outer reaches of the hurricane where it = "falls" as it displaces the lower inward flowing lighter air. What = feeds the hurricane? The sun, of course. This is my explanation of how a hurricane starts and is maintained. Allen Nelson ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF10E.F24FE3C0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IjYOAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQmAAQAhAAAARjFGMURDMTk5MzU4RDIxMTgxMzQwMDgwNUYzMURE QzMABQcBBYADAA4AAADOBwoABgAJADMAKQACAEwBASCAAwAOAAAAzgcKAAYACQAzACkAAgBMAQEE kAYAxAEAAAEAAAARAAAAAwAAMAAAAAALAA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARwAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1u AN0BD1QCAAAAACd2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tJwBTTVRQAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20A AB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgADMAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQACAfYP AQAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAwAVDAEAAAACAQswAQAAABkAAABTTVRQOlZPUlRFWC1MQEVTS0lNTy5DT00A AAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAAJ3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAHgAgOgEAAAAWAAAAJ3ZvcnRl eC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAACwBAOgEAIDADAP4PBgAAAAMAADkAAAAAAwD/XwAAAAADAP1fAQAA AB4A9l8BAAAAFAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20AAgH3XwEAAABFAAAAAAAAAIErH6S+oxAZ nW4A3QEPVAIAAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQBTTVRQAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20A AAAA+V4BDYAEAAIAAAACAAIAAQSAAQBIAAAAUkU6IEh1cnJpY2FuZSBhbmF0b215LCB3YXMsIFJl OiAiaGVyZXRpYyBzY2llbnRpc3RzIiB2ZXJzdXMgImNyYWNrcG90cyIAJhkBA5AGAOATAAArAAAA AgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb3xONPY5dlPglz2EdKxHgBgCK/37gAAAgExAAEAAABOAQAAUENERkVCMDkA AQACAHUAAAAAAAAAOKG7EAXlEBqhuwgAKypWwgAARU1TTURCLkRMTAAAAAAAAAAAG1X6IKpmEc2b yACqAC/EWgwAAABUQkVMSE9VAC9vPVRyYWN0ZWJlbC9vdT1UQkVMRVhITy9jbj1SZWNpcGllbnRz L2NuPUNSYXdscwAuAAAAAAAAAJF8gxZiwtERslcAgF8x3cMBAEDD7zqpoNERskwAgF8x3cMAAAAE ObQAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAJF8gxZiwtERslcAgF8x3cMBAEDD7zqpoNERskwAgF8x3cMAAAAEObYA ABAAAADx8dwZk1jSEYE0AIBfMd3DSAAAAFJFOiBIdXJyaWNhbmUgYW5hdG9teSwgd2FzLCBSZTog ImhlcmV0aWMgc2NpZW50aXN0cyIgdmVyc3VzICJjcmFja3BvdHMiAAAAAwA2AAAAAAADAAaACCAG AAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAABShQAAtw0AAB4AJoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFSFAAABAAAA BAAAADguMAADACeACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAABhQAAAAAAAAsAAYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAA AABGAAAAAAOFAAAAAAAACwAwgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAADoUAAAAAAAADAAOACCAGAAAA AADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAQhQAAAAAAAAMAMYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAABGFAAAAAAAAAwAz gAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAGIUAAAAAAAAeAEKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAA2hQAA AQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAHgBDgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAN4UAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAB4ARIAI IAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAADiFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAACAQkQAQAAALINAACuDQAAlB4AAExa RnX/6+bFAwAKAHJjcGcxMjVyMgxgYzEDMAEHC2BukQ4QMDMzDxZmZQ+STwH3AqQDYwIAY2gKwHOE ZXQC0XBycTIAAJIqCqFubxJQIDAB0IUB0DYPoDA1MDQUIfMB0BQQNH0HbQKDAFAD1PsR/xMLYhPh FFATshj0FNCvBxMCgAKRCOY7CW8wGt/6ZQ4wNRwKHSEc3x3pG/T/HhIcfyBPIA0fjx2/HA8QYPwy OCXaJvEmrye5G/Qn4r8mTyofKd0pXyePK1Q5DlAfLqQwASgjMAACgnN0eepsB5BoCeB0AAATUAPw UGRjdGwKsVwyWGGYZGp1MXAFEGdoBUI7FjIMAWMJwDJgAzBzbnxleBcwB7AFsADAAnNzsQBQc2Iy FFAxYGET8PRcawngcAuQMj8yowhg6zKQC4BlMaB2OWABQDObvwwwNGQoADdABKALgGcn8ek05mJh FxBkAiA1oDVG5zHQM5A7kSAxMTMOUDaf/zevOL8AUTn8AKA0bjx/PYb/MSQPwD6PP59Arw5QOe9D D9tEHz2zMwKCExBjNmBLoZMzkD2wdGk5kCBEARCoYXVsBUBQCsBhCcDgYXBoIEYCITYkJUDoZmkt D5A4AUA5MFAz60cPMqNiCyByCVBSUhag2VJSdzQlQRcAcAHQTXJ/M79Kn0umT9BOkAUQAjAtQ08w A2E6IFRvV7BTKHViagWQdFewRGHodGU6NiQ2T/9RD1If/1MvVDkxwD2jDiFLoTq2DlCbVW9WflI5 gRcBIEg9kfsEkDYkN1lvWn9bj1ydOQ8vXb8PkGlwCNBiCrB0OP9J+g9URhBfv2DGagBh0AtQvHkv T0BcsAsRYkVzNiT/KABjP2RPZV9cr1RPa19sb+9tdVfSV3RYqTlvvzM/AzAdabM5c590r3qgRG9j /nUHgAIwBdBPABoBeNJ4MPd4cHFRAYBuWDAAYAnwTaDvfQACATXgXlJlAPB9ADGAknAegFx2CJB3 awuA3mRrQICiBPAHQGUwAQ4A73EiPYKB9QIQbwVCFyES8g1YwG0LUVjAIEM6XOpcVwBvTuFtTzAD EAeQTYSgTQ3gA2BzbwGAIK5PASAN4H/wXIZWRQDA9QMQLktwdH3QFxB4cDUh3WdyeEYxiBJONGMD IBLz8wCABZBsdkGhRtAOcDXg/4nyAZAAIIqCgPF9QQHBifE/FuAPcAAARtAM0AGQIC7/GhKJ6IHh irFOcHjAix+ML3+NPw/ARtAFgY7fj++Q/2y7a0BG0GyOn5NflGUpjWyPJUCSP5cflFRiICgCkf+Y P4ozWVCV75qvm7+cz4pg/2MQnhKK759/oI+NbCgAnh//o5+kr6W/imB4AKKfqC+pP/+qRAr5AzB4 L3k/es0IwTTyCTWgPlkS8mJrbWs5rBMgX32AAxBYoWF9YQhgIGJlZ6+hA/B0n08glLBncAJAMaAg dgkR8w3gTcB5IK+htdATgAtwjwXABGBN0AIgcy4gV8DaaAQAIDVwBAB0BCAHQHcDILdhCoU+TdAH gLhRYulnUCB5tSFnFyC18AOgfzVwhpAFMLgRuUG3EAtgcr27ICBygLewB0C7EG89wtt/cbX4d7iQ MaAsubYAcH81ILdiZ8BPAAWwWLC4ESD/hhC1oFixBcCGEMCgwJG3Yvh0b3C8wAhwTkCGkMFW/30A PZADoDGgsUAEIMHQu1H/ubYLgAUAPZATcbc1CQCBkf+3kxdwB5DCEb6wu1E1IJSw9wtQfSHAgmdL QQQgtVPDo+cFEBcQuFFJZrm2uuJLcb4nBUAW4E3xAaBnQSBe4f8HgMDhBCDAkbucbZGFIMDD/8ax PXAIcAUQgZA1YLWhuVD/ubYTUAVAf3LAgAXAwhGAoP9n0MawhgC3U0agtxAKsYUQ/8tityDDob+i NWC8kLcQwWX9zNguCoW5triAv7y/UsjB/z3Ct6LDaMckxrS10Fiww1n/t7C5tgRggKA90QuAbZMH QP8CID3gt2LCHc0m18bEltHD/7m2v9rAIdeK3Pu3IVjAAIH/twHBZddNxB7gdm2TA/B/EN/XlrFw v4/fArhRWbr1uYn/vOCwMMaDuuLKdMYgE2BNxO8QUAmAtUAA0GvFgcHg067+U8PQSzPAgLdCWLDG sE8Q/nkN0bjztdALgOqAt2G3EP/OAbjBr3S3Ys23xrC6ok3An9Ghvte1QPBRBaBuZrFw/9YTw6O+ cLcQwZPtwT3guyH/BCCsE+xCBcDygvBRhRALUPsGkAiQc7OmfwG0edOtuIPvAMC3EAdAxMFktxC1 ULXx97dhBbC3F3cFsLQQ0FEHgO++cASQE4C6okm1QWdwZ8Hv35UFQGfBAjB1zITOYfiy/zHAr/Ds hLdTAhC5UK/xPdH/7qO8EMBDuKHygs2a82u3NT9u0BcABUALUYaQuFEoT//EoMUBBUDzasaw4aPp j+qT///E2BGBkLFwx/HwUcPC9ON/+CG/YfjBh2EQ8AtxGwAu+inTvEHRxMIQr7A9ge2D/9rvwwTN Ja+hTZTscsPQv9n/BHS3ouxzC2/AxLihgaDQYf8K4gkRuGaG4FhRwvF9EMuR7/xSvEG/Uu0wbU5h zhHK4P5zE8KF0rkhu3KxkIQAZ6DnvFbxgU3QZ3UUwbXwxMH/wIBh8QwuuFfU/QriPcIl8b+OgOBl rMHhKreixSd3wPG/gaBN0OhgrMDLo7djdLfg/3KA+qO+c7dX2BG4kEnAHZv/7qE7YPUwA0G5ILYl vbHPEP0bt2OUAoRgJfCEMU3i8lN7WLAooHEXIIRRuSDioHD/gGA7gg9/25m4U4RgNWD8Mf8StcFy uKHRs/4FHtm1UPGA98dguSBvQGQtwCVEwdI9gfx2eS4gK8fGw/0DbZB9Uf/DwT2wcoACssVEsbId krexf7Wz7yMsofUwL+MoFcYwb/8r0IQAKasviish0UEveP4U/0ZQx2G6MsbDCrD1EH+BE8L/u0G5 UcAAVyHLobdEv+ACcX8XfxiOw2Fn0LkgIwHtMGf/NkEAooNAPbASsRsAA0P5lf/4ERuKukAFsP9B G0I4cTHi/xsi9gC9pdqCIcI/EMFTNbP//pYKZsPBFsOKsCSTCuIy7+/ElUF2Pge4UUX8aD1PPlL9 tUF0HYAiAB0aNgIl4SBC/x73xMEjsD6Ct1HGQf2QK7D/xrACRDbSFCFeoLZhuyCE4v9PEAChxdDF ksBEONu4Vv0D/7GSuyC3wWBQ7TDpIfGBZ9D/sDDAUgqgI7DX5GCQwnT58O/y9E+1JcS4UUHnYrih TR//wEP6lEbfR+MCREqmKWNLSf5ltcE45TDZ7GPB4f0DK6n+cAqwI7As60MQ/oAbof2h/22TxSYz ScBhytC2QPpgz5L/Xx+3RGBF/QNc013WSZBemvdar+rQuGBMg4AlKFCxx1L/xVPA0+Eh/KANtvjB t2KBkP/I44ZAA0IpY1Ep/FPIFc1y/yOxr6FKolYE/RITE/ITHTf9L4pysXBK4mPlLrVBdmTK/8rB 6SHwUVzQf7DZs8pRvbC8aXoW0bwj1aOxQGm8I/vK4XZjZncBaOR9QcDz5YX/fUEoFX1B2OAIchVh wJN/kN9uTSqw+GLWEodgbvKiFMHbv1HLo3MlQD6ybYVSymH/85EeEKzBvEGDEAqwxvM3Un/AgsNh WEPtMKwRacSF4HX/scC+YlHx8VK7Ya/ht9EFMv91MnzxWj9n0xqzW2XLwQUA/1RCt7JQscfxdSM3 ArEQfOP/KWNMr70RfVT9A4BCtVRCNH840RaR7HO4oVwpXgO3NXP+ayzb2YV0F9n0dua0QV0R/yVG FUAI0P+E8aDHQCIEKWT/2gSPkP60iLZH8svBt6LZoPn48yBDcxH+gBJ4BtJylf9ok4hFjuPpMQcj gIKQVrhV/8awy8HxgBNBxqHEsl2g4Hb/BQG9EbaSFcAVEcBGYhPY4P/zBM23KBUKokJmw6NDJ8ME fwuGhPsA4RVA/sPNuFoSZf5iACAIltYTQlYXMgqgJeD/dHJ4L7ei1/MUUAJxgIPZ9f/W8v6SgX9b ZdbxXCkLsLlQ/10pVELRxG75jJ0NITbiEZH/yCy8wC+DFPC4VtXmaqTc+P8NQROQxZG28vIhICMl 4BVAv1iWxQLSMZmGuQDEwW2ubf8GXb+a6iHAxJTK8YEbwuCz/0JB/qB8UBVyv3OPUkL0LMD/3vEN QKoW/9LA0zqFDwZ1I/d/eddyB0Jh9dBPsjBhB0L/MKTnYioGX+HioMbxbVEUUf+2M5QWDwZCM/6A leVYeGPC/0my+2AZgcxCEVH+FJmV8YD/GwBF+1nRzxB/MhB8YfSQff/V6VOV6SGoeboy7EL7AF0q /9bxr8bwQRFQG8byUyri8FH/h+QrRIGPgp+jvxj3EXNsgX+dMwVj7ysz4wbx5YR3ZGP+ebiAaRKA JPjBK0H/MGYg/RIDSDDxGtNKwp+Ew84O5P5kIeHL08JD6iFf0ofnnTP/KrBxkE2xdB/8WUqjQXZ0 ob9xUUqmx1UAaM6XqH1zXSvfByMutm26kH3SfFcGkgVie8/FAHY/nBeXifbPKYRt/wAg/xqDcf2R ADsBU7jU99NbCLcJXH0JcvYAXIBBaWpkEuBsCYFc8Yj4gGrXpUFQMTNgIPVgY5/g8ZBuMIPgT/BI gU77YBGQbmZ984fwdn0A9gD2MAAAAwAmAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAsAAgABAAAACwAjAAAAAAALACkA AQAAAB4AcAABAAAASAAAAFJFOiBIdXJyaWNhbmUgYW5hdG9teSwgd2FzLCBSZTogImhlcmV0aWMg c2NpZW50aXN0cyIgdmVyc3VzICJjcmFja3BvdHMiAAMA/T/kBAAAQAA5ANAi+tM48b0BAwDxPwkE AAAeAB4MAQAAAAMAAABFWAAAHgAfDAEAAAAxAAAAL089VFJBQ1RFQkVML09VPVRCRUxFWEhPL0NO PVJFQ0lQSUVOVFMvQ049Q1JBV0xTAAAAAAMAGUAAAAAAAwCAEP////8CAfk/AQAAAE0AAAAAAAAA 3KdAyMBCEBq0uQgAKy/hggEAAAAAAAAAL089VFJBQ1RFQkVML09VPVRCRUxFWEhPL0NOPVJFQ0lQ SUVOVFMvQ049Q1JBV0xTAAAAAB4A+D8BAAAADAAAAENsaWZ0IFJhd2xzAAIB+z8BAAAATQAAAAAA AADcp0DIwEIQGrS5CAArL+GCAQAAAAAAAAAvTz1UUkFDVEVCRUwvT1U9VEJFTEVYSE8vQ049UkVD SVBJRU5UUy9DTj1DUkFXTFMAAAAAHgD6PwEAAAAMAAAAQ2xpZnQgUmF3bHMAQAAHMACI8tM48b0B QAAIMPAr+tM48b0BHgA1EAEAAABCAAAAPDQwQzNFRjNBQTlBMEQxMTFCMjRDMDA4MDVGMzFEREMz MUI1NDNEQDIwOS0xMTMtMTctMjYuaW5zeW5jLm5ldD4AAAADAAYQ9Mr8hQMABxAQDwAAAwAQEAEA AAADABEQAAAAAB4ACBABAAAAZQAAAFlPVUJFR0lOV0lUSEFMSVRUTEVWT1JUSUNJVFlJTlRIRUFJ Uk1PVElPTlNUSElTRVhJU1RTQUxMVEhFVElNRUJVVFlPVUdFVEFORVhDRVBUSU9OQUxMWUxBUkdF U1BJUkFMR08AAAAAAwANNP0/AAACARQ0AQAAABAAAABUlKHAKX8QG6WHCAArKiUXHgA9AAEAAAAF AAAAUkU6IAAAAAAqrQ== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF10E.F24FE3C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 07:59:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA14947; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 07:56:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 07:56:44 -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: <361A2CD8.CB8DE0DE css.mot.com> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 09:44:40 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question References: <19981006074238.19350.qmail hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Om6u_.0.Kf3.h-Y6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23064 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rob King wrote: > So based on yours answer of 50% that works out to be 0.334 L of H2 at > 100% effieciency. > 75% is 0.333 L of H2 at 100%. > But the last one looks to be a bit off the mark at 0.208 L of H2. These are reported values off actual equipment. Expect measured results to vary over time as electrolite concentration, temperature, pressure, voltage, current density, etc. fluctuate through the run. > It pretty well confirms what Michael wrote, his figure is 0.311 L of H2. > So if I can get 0.35 L of H2 in one hour at 1 watt then I've cracked it. Yep. But even if you only get to 80% efficiency at 1-2 atm, you will get a lot of attention. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world ... ... just your half." - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 08:10:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18911; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:05:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:05:48 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <361A31C7.C3FC56E6 css.mot.com> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 10:05:43 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5NPn6.0.Md4.B7Z6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23065 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: britz wrote: > I'd say forget fluid dynamics and supercomputers. They would cost you a > lot of money, but they are almost guaranteed to prove that you should not > have an effect, because such a study would be based on orthodox > assumptions that exclude a novel effect. it would be better to do a much > simpler, thermodynamic-style, overall, analysis: How much power is going > in, what are the pathways for heat losses, tally everything up. To do a > mechanistic analysis to confirm your effect, you need to know the novel > physical law that causes it. Agreed. The current plan is: 1) derive a formula 2) measure an actual system 3) re-evaluate the formula to calibrate the results 4) measure an actual system with a -single- augmented variable 5) evalute the results against the calibration formula 6) record the start and end variables 7) go back to 4 I agree with your scepticism, but I am tired of all the "wouldn't it be nice..." conversation. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world ... ... just your half." - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 08:19:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA23186; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:16:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:16:03 -0700 Message-ID: <09a401bdf13c$338dba60$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:15:40 -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: <"GgnPh.0.8g5.oGZ6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23066 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Allen Nelson To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 8:53 AM Subject: RE: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Allen Nelson wrote: Snip some GOOD SCIENCE for a change. >What feeds the hurricane? The sun, of course. Is that what feeds those figure skaters that do those "twirly" things on ice, Allen? I often wondered what would happen if they held a bowling ball in each hand and let go them when they get up to about 60 rpm. I was beginning to believe it was space-time ethereal vortices caused by sniffing too much ethyl ether. :-) Those thermal updrafts on the Moon (BTW, it was full last night) do tend to cause a warping effect, along with dust devils and sprites. Regards, Frederick Allen Nelson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 08:39:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA30517; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:29:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:29:42 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <361A33E9.1F8812FA css.mot.com> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 10:14:49 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mAwGz.0.QS7.aTZ6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23067 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Steve Ekwall wrote: > Probably no help, but fun reading material! Every contribution helps. Thanks! > p.s. these pages are over my head and equation solving ability, so I will > bow-out and pass it on to the brainiacs on the list! > Good-Luck Gentleman! :) I feel similarly over-whelmed, but unfortunately retreat is not an option for me. It's my idea.... sigh. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world ... ... just your half." - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 08:43:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA03092; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:39:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:39:17 -0700 Message-ID: <001401bdf13f$a9cb0450$a31a010a ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:40:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 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-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA03057 Resent-Message-ID: <"jLoFJ.0.6m.acZ6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23068 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Allen Nelson To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 9:54 AM Subject: RE: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" >You begin with a little vorticity in the air motions. This exists all the >time. but you get an exceptionally large spiral going for a little while, >and the evaporation of water off of the top surface of the ocean leads to an >increase in the local air pressure, and a plume of gases begins to rise. If >you don't have about 50 meters of exceptionally warm water, a hurricane will >not form or survive, so the key parameter is the energy of the warm water. Air with high-humidity is LESS dense than drier air. So the initial impulse from evaporation is to create an area of LOWER pressure. Right? In addition, the water cools during evaporation, thereby lowering its energy potential. >The evaporation and rising air leads to a plume, and that leads to air >moving inward along the surface of the water, and that increases the >evaporation rate, and that increases the intensity of the plume, and that >increases the inward wind, and thus the evaporation rate. You get the >picture, you have a positive feed back loop. More to it... as the lower density air rises, it expands as the atmospheric pressure drops at higher altitude. This lowering pressure causes cooling and will force the water-laden air to begin condensation. At the condensation point, the air is heated to a degree because of the condensation. (Evaporation causes cooling, and condensation causes heating.) This makes the column of air a bit warmer than the air around and below it at the condensation point, and this adds even more energy to the rising column. Rain cools the water even more. The net result is that the layer of water beneath the hurricane becomes cooler as its energy is released into the atmosphere. Which is why hurricanes only occur when the water is very warm -- above 80F or so. Craig Haynie (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 08:45:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05520; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:42:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:42:15 -0700 Message-ID: <01BDF116.30FCF2A0 209-113-17-144.insync.net> From: Allen Nelson To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:43:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BDF116.30FCF2A0" Resent-Message-ID: <"3jvCW3.0.gL1.MfZ6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23069 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF116.30FCF2A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Frederick, Am I to interpret your comment as disagreement, agreement or neither in that you were just engaging in some comic relief? Allen Nelson -----Original Message----- From: Frederick J Sparber [SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 10:23 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: George Subject: Re: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" -----Original Message----- From: Allen Nelson To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 8:53 AM Subject: RE: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Allen Nelson wrote: Snip some GOOD SCIENCE for a change. >What feeds the hurricane? The sun, of course. Is that what feeds those figure skaters that do those "twirly" things on ice, Allen? I often wondered what would happen if they held a bowling ball in each hand and let go them when they get up to about 60 rpm. I was beginning to believe it was space-time ethereal vortices caused by sniffing too much ethyl ether. :-) Those thermal updrafts on the Moon (BTW, it was full last night) do tend to cause a warping effect, along with dust devils and sprites. Regards, Frederick ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF116.30FCF2A0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+Ii0PAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQmAAQAhAAAAQjBGM0RDMTk5MzU4RDIxMTgxMzQwMDgwNUYzMURE QzMAAgcBBYADAA4AAADOBwoABgAKACsAJgACAEIBASCAAwAOAAAAzgcKAAYACgArACYAAgBCAQEE kAYAxAEAAAEAAAARAAAAAwAAMAAAAAALAA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARwAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1u AN0BD1QCAAAAACd2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tJwBTTVRQAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20A AB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgADMAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQACAfYP AQAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAwAVDAEAAAACAQswAQAAABkAAABTTVRQOlZPUlRFWC1MQEVTS0lNTy5DT00A AAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAAJ3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAHgAgOgEAAAAWAAAAJ3ZvcnRl eC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAACwBAOgEAIDADAP4PBgAAAAMAADkAAAAAAwD/XwAAAAADAP1fAQAA AB4A9l8BAAAAFAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20AAgH3XwEAAABFAAAAAAAAAIErH6S+oxAZ nW4A3QEPVAIAAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQBTTVRQAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20A AAAA+V4BDYAEAAIAAAACAAIAAQSAAQBIAAAAUkU6IEh1cnJpY2FuZSBhbmF0b215LCB3YXMsIFJl OiAiaGVyZXRpYyBzY2llbnRpc3RzIiB2ZXJzdXMgImNyYWNrcG90cyIAJhkBA5AGADgOAAArAAAA AwA2AAAAAAADAAaACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAABShQAAtw0AAB4AJoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAA AABGAAAAAFSFAAABAAAABAAAADguMAADACeACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAABhQAAAAAAAAsA AYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAOFAAAAAAAACwAwgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAADoUA AAAAAAADAAOACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAQhQAAAAAAAAMAMYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABG AAAAABGFAAAAAAAAAwAzgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAGIUAAAAAAAAeAEKACCAGAAAAAADA AAAAAAAARgAAAAA2hQAAAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAHgBDgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAN4UAAAEA AAABAAAAAAAAAB4ARIAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAADiFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAACAQkQAQAA AAkIAAAFCAAAXBIAAExaRnV5nnMuAwAKAHJjcGcxMjVyMgxgYzEDMAEHC2BukQ4QMDMzDxZmZQ+S TwH3AqQDYwIAY2gKwHOEZXQC0XBycTIAAJIqCqFubxJQIDAB0IUB0DYPoDA1MDQUIfMB0BQQNH0H bQKDAFAD1PsR/xMLYhPhFFATshj0FNCvBxMCgAKRCOY7CW8wGt/6ZQ4wNRwKHSEc3x3pG/T/HhIc fyBPIA0fjx2/HA8QYPwyOCXaJvEmrye5G/Qn4r8mTyofKd0pXyePK1Q5DlAfLqQwASgjMAACgnN0 eepsB5BoCeB0AAATUAPwUGRjdGwKsVwyWGGYZGp1MXAFEGdoBUI7FjIMAWMJwDJgAzBzbnxleBcw B7AFsADAAnNzsQBQc2IyFFAxYGET8PRcawngcAuQMj8yowhg6zKQC4BlMaB2OWABQDObvwwwNGQo ADdABKALgGcn8ek05mJhFxBkAiA1oDVG5zHQM5A7kSAxMTMOUDaf/zevOL8AUTn8AKA0bjx/PYb/ MSQPwD6PP59Arw5QOe9DD9tEHz2zMwKCExBjNmBLoZMzkD2wdGk5kCBEARCoYXVsBUBQCsBhCcDg YXBoIEYCITYkJUDoZmktD5A4AUA5MFAz60cPMqNiCyByCVBSUhag2VJSdzQlQRcAcAHQTXJ/M79K n0umT9BOkAUQAjAtQ08wA2E6IFRvV7BTKHViagWQdFewRGHodGU6NiQ2T/9RD1If/1MvVDkxwD2j DiFLoTq2DlCbVW9WflI5gRcBIEg9kfsEkDYkN1lvWn9bj1ydOQ8vXb8PkGlwCNBiCrB0OP9J+g9U RhBfv2DGagBh0AtQvHkvT0BcsAsRYkVzNiT/KABjP2RPZV9cr1RPa19sb+9tdVfSV3RYqTlvvzM/ AzAdabM5c590r3qgRG9j/nUHgAIwBdBPABoBeNJ4MPd4cHFRAYBuWDAAYAnwTaDvfQACATXgXlJl APB9ADGAknAegFx2CJB3awuA3mRrQICiBPAHQGUwAQ4A73EiPYKB9QIQbwVCFyES8g1YwG0LUVjA IEM6XOpcVwBvTuFtTzADEAeQTYSgTQ3gA2BzbwGAIK5PASAN4H/wXIZWRQDA9QMQLktwdH3QFxB4 cDUh3WdyeEYxiBJONGMDIBLz8wCABZBsdkGhRtAOcDXg/4nyAZAAIIqCgPF9QQHBifE/FuAPcAAA RtAM0AGQIC7/GhKJ6IHhirFOcHjAix+ML3+NPw/ARtAFgY7fj++Q/2y7a0BG0GyOn5NflGUpjWyP JUCSP5cflFRiICgCkf+YP4ozWVCV75qvm7+cz4pg/2MQnhKK759/oI+NbCgAnh//o5+kr6W/imB4 AKKfqC+pP/+qRAr5AzB4L3k/es0IwTTyzzWgV3AJgAZxY2saIrMkFiwKhQqFQYUgSSB0PG8gVyEE kBdwFyAgebUIYSAFoG19M0tAID2wt0ZQCcJ9Miy3gLgGIAWx/zVgTcAx0AXAr6G5oFiwtrJcIHcE kBOAsWIgCfBnf07QPcKvoYYAB4C3Ag3gIPca8GdwARA/tMyvBK/PsN9zBUCy90FsMaADoAfAbD2G AG4CkL09svcS8mJr5G1rrBMgX32AAxBYoehhfS3FIk+xoQuAB0D3BdAHkLfhZcUjvauvZmL//2+v cL9xz2c/aE9pX2pvsq5nV5EMgrN4IEoGAAqxYgG5wVtTTVRQOmb2anKA0vFAcoBXEodjtxH+XcbP x9Ruv8lPyl9x77Fff7JpDDCzFQZgAjDRtLQYVKEKUHNkYXm4gE/X8N5v0xIT4LiAL/A5zyAPkOg6 MjO1kE3CmNyXV9GN3X12CRE1cC1sQAeQn4DgBGDU0uCPNaBDY91u/EdlBbDGUOQP3QFYJd19+2HQ V7BICHCz0QBwE4AAcG9YsANw3sFtkHO4gOlSIn+5sRcgvJEE8AiQAjAEAHT8cyLiwGIB2vDrQAUA AND8a3CDMOxw1S+vr79v209/stHCnwqFxS/GPld0wUog5Dxn3nF0QPDAANBYwG/TEApARlDU0j4K hVfSJ/vi3wNwJ/bg+T/4SFij3l8x32g4OjXgSVgXUkX/6X/qj+uf7KQKhe0ftSf2Oq53EaBYwbTM U6yQcLwEEEdPT0TdEENJRfBOQ0Ugf3G3gLcAlALkZS60zD5XujIQUBsAz7eguaE9cAAGPyBXwAth /ezQbriAhhC3AQAAFxAJrfZJCzK6QXcKuhNi1rD3AP+60eNwWLEXALoUS3C9pQ+U7CJ0FnDZMHns gLogO5H/t6D2wYaBuIDBQwwgtdCGEf3BcXfB4G4RGwAO1BSQTmBbNSAW4HCAYBMxZhFXZe55PXEV oZSwYu8gzJE94P9LMMFQueI9kAlAFcF/EACB9zUgMaB9YGe2ALmhhSAO4O/BcRbTxlB9YHUHoLXw vaWb0eDMYSBGcLywcG0NfvsBEheAZbuRO4K14vfBgLDfTfFNwB2T09GGkC1N0Afh/4OAAcL0YfqS hoG3oIGQ8KD5FPFieb2lNVAWQNawHlN9tgBtjoBPICBRMZAgRC7hDDAgOi0ptMwMUA+y77miNfEb AdkgYX6QEwMLUoZNgyDu4ChCVFe4gP0fNWZOYImg7rC7IayQScH+KREhteB/ARs4IXMJEQERv7Zg PcJOMArw72C4gWzB4O894O8wuiAMMGS7EqzAgKDvwcAZI9QyWMBzCa1h0Ltw/4LgAUEkUbOH8jjD xCnixIgEfQAysAAAAAMAJgAAAAAAAwAuAAAAAAALAAIAAQAAAAsAIwAAAAAACwApAAEAAAACATEA AQAAAE4BAABQQ0RGRUIwOQABAAIAdQAAAAAAAAA4obsQBeUQGqG7CAArKlbCAABFTVNNREIuRExM AAAAAAAAAAAbVfogqmYRzZvIAKoAL8RaDAAAAFRCRUxIT1UAL289VHJhY3RlYmVsL291PVRCRUxF WEhPL2NuPVJlY2lwaWVudHMvY249Q1Jhd2xzAC4AAAAAAAAAkXyDFmLC0RGyVwCAXzHdwwEAQMPv Oqmg0RGyTACAXzHdwwAAAAQ5tQAAAAAAAC4AAAAAAAAAkXyDFmLC0RGyVwCAXzHdwwEAQMPvOqmg 0RGyTACAXzHdwwAAAAQ5tgAAEAAAALDz3BmTWNIRgTQAgF8x3cNIAAAAUkU6IEh1cnJpY2FuZSBh bmF0b215LCB3YXMsIFJlOiAiaGVyZXRpYyBzY2llbnRpc3RzIiB2ZXJzdXMgImNyYWNrcG90cyIA AAAeAHAAAQAAAEgAAABSRTogSHVycmljYW5lIGFuYXRvbXksIHdhcywgUmU6ICJoZXJldGljIHNj aWVudGlzdHMiIHZlcnN1cyAiY3JhY2twb3RzIgACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABvfFAFbPl2U+KXPYR0rEe AGAIr/fuAABAADkAsO/aFUDxvQEDAPE/CQQAAB4AHgwBAAAAAwAAAEVYAAAeAB8MAQAAADEAAAAv Tz1UUkFDVEVCRUwvT1U9VEJFTEVYSE8vQ049UkVDSVBJRU5UUy9DTj1DUkFXTFMAAAAAAwAZQAAA AAADAP0/5AQAAAMAgBD/////AgH5PwEAAABNAAAAAAAAANynQMjAQhAatLkIACsv4YIBAAAAAAAA AC9PPVRSQUNURUJFTC9PVT1UQkVMRVhITy9DTj1SRUNJUElFTlRTL0NOPUNSQVdMUwAAAAAeAPg/ AQAAAAwAAABDbGlmdCBSYXdscwACAfs/AQAAAE0AAAAAAAAA3KdAyMBCEBq0uQgAKy/hggEAAAAA AAAAL089VFJBQ1RFQkVML09VPVRCRUxFWEhPL0NOPVJFQ0lQSUVOVFMvQ049Q1JBV0xTAAAAAB4A +j8BAAAADAAAAENsaWZ0IFJhd2xzAEAABzCwljjMP/G9AUAACDDgdtwVQPG9AR4ANRABAAAAQgAA ADw0MEMzRUYzQUE5QTBEMTExQjI0QzAwODA1RjMxRERDMzFCNTQzRkAyMDktMTEzLTE3LTI2Lmlu c3luYy5uZXQ+AAAAAwAGEJ+rY8UDAAcQ7AMAAAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAABG UkVERVJJQ0ssQU1JVE9JTlRFUlBSRVRZT1VSQ09NTUVOVEFTRElTQUdSRUVNRU5ULEFHUkVFTUVO VE9STkVJVEhFUklOVEhBVFlPVVdFUkVKVVNURU5HQUdJTkdJTlNPTUVDAAAAAAMADTT9PwAAAgEU NAEAAAAQAAAAVJShwCl/EBulhwgAKyolFx4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAA8o8= ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF116.30FCF2A0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 08:59:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12097; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:54:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:54:16 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:55:43 -0700 Message-Id: <199810061555.IAA03690 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: Hurricane anatomy Resent-Message-ID: <"48zxV3.0.xy2.dqZ6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23071 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Ross Tessien wrote: >> You see, it is curious that a tornado forms an eye unless you understand >> that there is an inertial acceleration due to spacetime curvature resulting >> from the aether absorption and emission loop. > >Ok, I was following along just fine until I got to this paragraph. Can you >expand on this statement a bit? No hurry if you are busy. Just trying to keep >up to date with your constructs. A tornado forms all the way into a small diameter funnel. Unless there was something that was *failing* to cause the air flow near the surface to continue into a thermal funnel, the clouds reasonably ought to continue right into the center of the vortex. But instead, the winds die down near the center. Even if there was an eye, the winds should continue to climb in velocity if this was just a thermal effect like a tornado. The counter statement to that would be that the vaporization raises the air pressure near the surface, and so that rising pressure finally manages to halt the convergent flow as you near the center. But if that were so, then you would have rising pressure near the center eye, where you actually have very low pressures, and ergo tidal surges, ie, the water level can be several feet higher than "sea level" in the eye. Again, the result of the spacetime distortion in the horizontal direction near the surface. The water converges inward leading to essentially a hydraulic jump, if you step away from the hurricane and look at it from afar, the dimple of water is sort of like a hydraulic jump where KE is converted into PE. However, this jump is not really like water flowing over a dam because you never get the KE. What you have is mass to energy conversion. IOW, the hydraulic jump isn't in the water itself, it is in the aether flow motions, and ergo it shows up as a spacetime distortion. Later, Ross From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 09:04:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12069; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:54:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:54:13 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 08:55:45 -0700 Message-Id: <199810061555.IAA03708 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: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Resent-Message-ID: <"Ao5142.0.Ty2.aqZ6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23070 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >This may already be a theory in the works somewhere but I believe that it eventually will be shown that the following explanation is why a hurricane gets started in the first place. (Once it gets started, the positive feed back loop is what causes it to amplify and be maintained.) > Allen; Good analogy. You have the classical model pretty well nailed as was described in the article. The trick to the thing, the part that is wierd, is that the air motions become convergent and amplified so directionally near the surface. The evaporation could lead to air motions directed diagonally upward since evaporation is essentially creating high localized pressure, rather than low like in a tornado. I know the central eye, and plume is at low pressure, so it all looks fairly reasonable except for one thing. If this were a convection plume, then the convection plume should continue to amplify right into the center of the eye, rather than forming a wall at such large distances. This is how convection plumes operate over dry hot land for the same reasons you cited, ergo tornados. There is something additional going on in hurricanes that creates an outward thrust in the eye. Evaporation should be near highest in the eye due to the very low pressures in that region which aid evaporation. There is something that ceases to drive the horizontally convergent air motions around the eye wall and allows the moist air to divert upward. If you consider the aether mechanics it all looks like you expect. If you consider only classical mechanics as you have (reasonably), then you should expect the convection plume to continue to converge inward and lead to maximum wind velocities at the innermost region just as in a tornado. The wind speeds of the hurricane are far slower than in a tornado. And water spouts do occur over water so there is nothing intrinsically wrong with driving a tornado over water. The problem is, hurricanes down converge all the way inward. If you look at the spacetime curvature (which after I get my book written and out you will be able to do), then you find that the curvature is dropping to zero as you head inward near the center of the eye. The evaporation is not, but the curvature is. Later, Ross From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 09:04:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA15697; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:01:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:01:28 -0700 Message-ID: <09cd01bdf142$8ee74a60$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:01:13 -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: <"idg6D.0.4r3.NxZ6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23072 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Allen Nelson To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 9:46 AM Subject: RE: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Very much in AGREEMENT Allen! The points brought up by Craig Haynie are to be considered as complimentary to your thoughts. The 12,000 Quads/day Solar Insolation on the Earth compared to the total World Production/Use of about ONE QUAD/DAY gives one an appreciation of what that Solar energy of a kilowatt/meter^2 can do over thousands of square miles of Biosphere. The facetious comments were directed at those who tend to take science to the "theory of everything" fringe. Regards, Frederick Allen wrote: >Frederick, > >Am I to interpret your comment as disagreement, agreement or neither in that you were just engaging in some comic relief? > >Allen Nelson > >-----Original Message----- >From: Frederick J Sparber [SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] >Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 10:23 AM >To: vortex-l eskimo.com >Cc: George >Subject: Re: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Allen Nelson >To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' >Date: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 8:53 AM >Subject: RE: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus >"crackpots" > >Allen Nelson wrote: > >Snip some GOOD SCIENCE for a change. > >>What feeds the hurricane? The sun, of course. > >Is that what feeds those figure skaters that do >those "twirly" things on ice, Allen? I often wondered what would happen if >they held a bowling ball in each hand and let go them when they get up to >about 60 rpm. > >I was beginning to believe it was space-time ethereal vortices caused by >sniffing too much ethyl ether. :-) > >Those thermal updrafts on the Moon (BTW, it was full last night) do tend to >cause a warping effect, along with dust devils and sprites. > >Regards, Frederick > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 09:10:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA19747; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:07:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:07:32 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:08:58 -0700 Message-Id: <199810061608.JAA05540 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: Hurricane anatomy, was, Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpots" Resent-Message-ID: <"9P2Ac3.0.Dq4.21a6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23073 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > >>You begin with a little vorticity in the air motions. This exists all the >>time. but you get an exceptionally large spiral going for a little while, >>and the evaporation of water off of the top surface of the ocean leads to an >>increase in the local air pressure, and a plume of gases begins to rise. If >>you don't have about 50 meters of exceptionally warm water, a hurricane will >>not form or survive, so the key parameter is the energy of the warm water. > > >Air with high-humidity is LESS dense than drier air. So the initial impulse from evaporation is to create an area of LOWER pressure. Right? In addition, the water cools during evaporation, thereby lowering its energy potential. Correct, if you have air at a given pressure with high vs low humidity, the H2O molecules are less dense so on the surface you got it right. But, what you missed is the fact that you already had the ambient atmosphere there, and then via an exothermic process you injected more water vapor into the atmosphere. That injection of new molecules, even if they are of lower mass, constitutes and increase in the partial pressure of the water vapor, and thus an increase in the local pressure due to that single effect. And the cooling, reduces the potential for further injection of more water vapor. That is a key component in driving hurricanes. You need about 60 feet of warm water depth in order for there to be enough energy available to continue to drive the heating. The point is, the original mechanism increases the atmospheric pressure locally, it doesn't decrease it. you are injecting molecules that weren't previously there. Ergo, the vortex should just blow radially outward and never form. It isn't until after the hurricane is formed that the inner pressure drops and things look like what you are describing, ie, low pressure near the surface. The question is, if it begins with a high pressure effect why did it get going in the first place. That is a key problem with hurricanes. >Rain cools the water even more. The net result is that the layer of water beneath the hurricane becomes cooler as its energy is released into the atmosphere. Which is why hurricanes only occur when the water is very warm -- above 80F or so. The rain, condensation, releases the heat energy. So that drives the expansion radially outward up above the surface again due to a pressure rise. That is why the air currents curve radially outward near the cloud tops. But the more important fact about condensation is that you are taking the partial pressure of water vapor **out** of the atmosphere up at the cloud tops where condensation occurs. So that drops the pressure up above the surface, and creates a siphon effect. Higher pressure blowing upward. The partial pressure of water vapor is what you should keep your eye on because that is the changing component. It is also the changing component that is driving the energy to mass and then mass to energy conversions in the endothermic then exothermic evaporation / condensation process. Mass to energy conversion should properly be called, mass to space conversions. Later, Ross From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 10:09:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA12800; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:07:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:07:13 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:08:32 -0700 Message-Id: <199810061708.KAA14364 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: SOHO conference report; Resent-Message-ID: <"fEuXN1.0.q73.0va6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23074 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Greetings; As some of you who are interested in the SOHO (solar and heliospheric observatory) space satellite know I was back in Maine near Bar Harbor and the Acadia National Park for the SOHO 7 conference on coronal heating and solar wind acceleration mechanisms. 110 of the worlds leading solar physicists specializing in the study of those properties of the sun were at this conference. I asked about how SOHO was doing and was told that the people who are directing the operations were all here at the conference, so nothing was being done of consequence last week. In the upcoming weeks, each instrument will be checked out to see how many were damaged and how many are still in operation. But the air of discussion seemed as though there was no concern over attitude control. ie, that part of the recovery seems to be complete, and the power and controls are all back in place. It is now necessary to see if they can down load any images. It seemed as though they assumed that they would immediately resume acquiring data, so maybe some of the PI's (principle investigators) knew more than the scientist I spoke with. As for the information presented, I found about another 10 pieces of evidence that the aether model I am studying is correct, and I found no evidence that it failed to anticipate what they are observing. In particular, the aether flow out of the sun can be treated like a flow of gas out of a fluidized bed of particles. You could think of a simple sphere of sand out in space, large like the moon let's say, where you have some canisters of gas in the core that you can release. Then, you set the thing rotating, and you consider how the gas flows out through the fluidized bed. What you find is that the axis of rotation is the path of least flow resistance, and so that is the path that most of the flow takes. This fact leads to t-tauri jets in new born stars (neutral H is accelerated in those jets), to the coronal holes in our sun, and to FLIERs in planetary nebulae. It may also be responsible for the recent high energy magnetar burst of Aug 27, though that one comes from a neutron star pulsar, and the black hole core inside trying to blast outward, ie, a totally different process. Anyway, when you study the flow paths for the gas in that simple model, it turns out that the direction of flow is the direction of the solar magnetic fields. I learned long ago that I could not have aether flow without simultaneously creating a magnetic field. You see this most clearly in new born planetary nebula and their white dwarfs which have some of the highest stellar magnetic fields known. They are created when their He fusion furnace ignites. For the sun, this causes all manner of havoc for the scientists because they cannot figure out why the expansion of the magnetic field lines should be super radial. In fact, the field lines at large distances point toward the poles, not to the center of the sun, and not in a bar magnetic sort of pattern. Some of the most rewarding information came from the fact that if this is aether flow related, then, as the aether exits the fluidized bed of particles, the pressure should be dropping and the velocity should be climbing. ie, the aether should be accelerating. This causes a spacetime distortion. We are used to thinking of matter moving through spacetime, but we are not used to thinking of spacetime moving through matter, so it takes some getting used to. You see, if you can have spacetime in some region accelerate or decelerate, then you can have non particle velocity red and blue shifts, and this is just not accepted in main stream physics. However, if you read up on Arp and Burbidge, you will learn that statistical analysis of quasars and several galaxies including the major galaxy of groups of galaxies, all show statistical evidence that quasars are associated with nearby galaxies, thus meaning they are non velocity of the quasar red shifts. Likewise with the red shift of the main galaxy in galaxy clusters, the largest galaxy which should be at the center of the cluster always has a greater than the mean red shift. This is due to the aether expansion away from those objects, but let's get back to SOHO. My point is just to let you know that the things I am reporting about our sun are observed elsewhere too. For the sun, we can think of the aether flow out of it as being like water flowing over a dam spillway. In fact, I had the painting made for the book about 7 months ago, and just found hard evidence for it last week. If you think of water spilling over a dam, it flows down and accelerates as it is going over the spillway, then it slams into the river flow and you get a hydraulic jump in pressure again as the dam flow is pushing the outward flow of the water in the river downsteam. Now recognize that I am using the image of a dam as an analogy, but what is really going on is that aether is flowing out of the sun, ie, the expansion of the universe is driven by fusion reactions in the core that push the rest of the universe away, and so the sun is spewing aether, and in essence, it is thus spewing "space". If I place a pea in the water at the top of the dam, and the pea is a speaker, then the sound emitted by the pea can be monitored by an observer with a microphone (ie the SOHO satellite) down stream. However, as the pea begins to move over the spillway, the water around the pea is accelerating (we have to pretend that "gravity" in this analogy is acting on the water, but not on the pea. You see, in the real case, it isn't gravity at all that is driving the expansion it is aether pressure, so this is just an analogy to help you understand non velocity red and blue shifts of light) So the pea is being accelerated due to the rising velocity of water, and the viscous interaction. Sound emitted from the pea in that region will receive a net red shift, because of the accelerating reference frame where the water acceleration is really space accelerating past the pea. Further over the spillway, as the pea approaches the hydraulic jump, the pea has momentum in the fluid flow and wants to continue at the high speed of the spillway. So sound there will be blue shifted as observed by the microphone far downstream in the river, ie SOHO. The observers have identified that as ions cross the transition region of the sun, they get strange spectral images with wide spectral lines corresponding to the transition region, implying a wide range of velocity dispersion. In the region I mentioned in the analogy, they observe the lines split into to blobs, one shifted red and one shifted blue. They interpret this via velocity per norm, and conclude that they have bi directional jets for some reason. But the dam analogy shows you that the matter is always flowing outward, it is just that space around the matter is flowing outward too, and at changing velocities. Now the one observation wouldn't be enough to nail this down. There is more. C IV , ie C 3+ in stellar notion, where the turkeys use C I to designate the neutral state, remnant from historical proceedure put in place last century, aargh. Anyway, C IV has a net red shift when you observe all over the disk. Meaning, that there are regions of carbon ions moving up, and regions where they are moving down, but on averge, they are moving downward if you think this is a velocity effect. C IV occurs at the base of the transition region. C IV is produced at about 100,000 K Ne VIII has a net blue shift across the disk. ie, just the opposite of the C IV. Ne VIII is produced near the top of the transition region at rest temperatures of about 630,000 K Also, the velocity dispersion of the two "satellite" blobs in the spectral images is around 800 km/s. This is the same velocity as in the coronal holes. The solar surface escape velocity is 600 km/s, the slow solar wind is 400 km/s, and so you see that the surface escape velocity is right in between the fast and slow solar winds, and, the fast winds which escape have velocities on a part with the velocity dispersions of the transition regions. The Ne ions are emitting their photons in the hydraulic jump region, and the C ions are emitting their photons lower, in the entry to the spillway of the transition region. The transition region is tiny, ie, 100 km thick. If that isn't enough, I had long predicted that the acceleration in this region, due to the flow of space, should be inertial. And thus the heating of ions should be inertial. If you think that space acceleration and deceleration and turbulence are responsible, then it is logical to think that heating should be proportional to mass. This simply says that the velocity dispersions of the ions are all the same! ie, all peas of all geometries in the flow are going to be equally accelerated (ie ions of all types). If you think that the heating of the corona is due to magnetic fields, then you would not expect this. You would expect a charge proportional heating, or a charge to mass ratio proportional heating. But the heating IS in fact mass proportional. And, there is no thermal equilibrium anywhere in the fast solar wind or lower corona. This means that the high ionization states are NOT caused by collisions. And the electron temperatures are way too low (remember that mass proportional heating problem?). So that only leaves photonic ionization for the main stream. For the crackpot, there is additionally spacetime turbulence as you would expect from the hydraulic jump model, so the heating of the corona isn't a problem, and should be mass proportional as it is known to be. I don't have much time to answer a bunch of questions regarding this, but will try if they are too the point. The net is, the visit to Maine led to my identifying about 10 new phenomena that I had predicted should exist, and it led to nothing discovered to cause me to doubt the models I have developed. Thus, the gist is, that all seems well for aether mechanics and mass to space conversion in fusion reactions. The origin of the cosmological constant IS, what you call mass to energy conversion. Mass can be defined to be, "amount of aether". Aether must be conserved in all interactions. Aether can manifest no transfer of action via tensile means. Action is equal to reaction, when considered at the aether level, but not when you consider it with a "particle" model because particle models deny the aether resonant nature of matter, and the massive nature of empty space. ie, mass is emitted like a simple rocket ship during fusion reactions, and that is what accelerates the particles. But you then have to account for the flow of aether out of the star doing the fusion. The above examples are just a couple of the dozens I have assembled and will put into the book. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 10:16:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17452; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:15:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:15:29 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 13:11:52 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810061316_MC2-5BCD-AE07 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"jpnms3.0.WG4.l0b6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23075 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I forgot to mention that in real-world industrial energy applications, electrolysis efficiency is 65% and it is expected to rise to 75% with advanced techniques in 2020. That according to: Hydrogen Program Plan, FY 1993 - FY 1997, DoE Pacific Gas and Electric Co., "Hydrogen and Electricity as Carriers of Solar and Wind Energy for the 1990s and Beyond," G.W. Braun, A. Suchard, J. Martin, 1990 "The Hydrogen Technology Assessment, Opportunities for Industry and Research, Phase I," National Hydrogen Association "Economic Assessment of Advanced Electrolytic Hydrogen Production," S. Dutta, D. Block, R. Port, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol.15, No. 6, pp. 387-395,1990 "Modern and Prospective Technologies for Hydrogen Production from Fossil Fuels," M. Steinberg, H. Cheng, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol.14, No.11, pp. 797-820, 1989 "Energy Options," J.M. Bockris, Ch.10, J. Wiley, 1980 Perhaps I did not make this clear in my previous message. If you have, say, 2 volts and 1 amp (2 watts), you get the same level of electrolysis as you would with 100 volts and 1 amp (100 watts), but in the latter case you also get a lot of waste heat. Naively (VERY naively) I wonder why they cannot hold the voltage at exactly 1.48 and channel all energy into electrolysis instead of waste heat. I wouldn't know, but I am sure an electrochemist like Dieter Britz could explain. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 11:01:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA04551; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:58:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:58:52 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981006140024.01fa0420 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:00:24 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Blue vs Storms In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19981005122052.00cfa100 spectre.mitre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"-x0Tx1.0.071.Rfb6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23076 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:50 AM 10/6/98 +0200, britz wrote: >I strongly disagree with your disagreement. You are misrepresenting me. >I am saying that these random bits of evidence are not proof; I am NOT >saying that they constitute disproof. I think we are in agreement, but I didn't say you said that "they constitute disproof." It's just that I have "wandered in the wilderness" on several occasions when all I had to go on was a single existance proof of a phenomena without enough data to completely reproduce it. For example, I spent over six months trying to figure out why one of a set of otherwise identical nozzles did not melt down when used in a plasma arc. It finally turned out that the internal water flow was insufficient to cool the nozzles, but this nozzle had gotten oxidized on surfaces of the cooling channels. This formed enough of a wick that when the water boiled out of the nozzle, the heat pipe effect pulled in enough water to keep it cool. Of course, I only found this out by disecting my only working nozzle... Once I understood why the oxide mattered, it was possible to design nozzles which used only heat pipes for cooling, and I could push the arc power up further. >I reckon this is qualitatively different. A Coelacanth is clearly >identifiable as just that, without a shadow of a doubt. Actually it wasn't. The internal organs of the first one caught were gone before biologists could check it out, which was why the second one caught raised all the fuss. >But a neutron, >or a triton, or a milliwatt of excess heat, could come from a number >of causes. The equivalent of a Coelacanth in CNF would be the >sometimes-claimed kilowatt of XS heat. If I viddied that with my own >glazzies - rather than just reading about it from people who have >something to gain from my believing them - I would have to believe it. And there lies the difference. I have seen enough evidence to convince me that there is something going on, but not enough to know what. Everyone gets to set their own level of proof, and either mine is just a little lower than yours, or the differences in our backgrounds mean that I have seen some puzzle pieces that fit together while you haven't. Actually one of the puzzle pieces that I have seen is one any of you can duplicate, but will have a very hard time explaining. Take a fluoresent light with an old tube. Put it and the ballast in a calorimeter if you want, but instrument the power side pretty thoroughly. Now you know that behavior where the ends of the tube glow, then the tube flashes several times before, with a final "flink" noise it comes on? Well working with much more powerful ballasts and tubes, I noticed that the flink radiates more power than you put in. I managed to come up with a model for what is going on which doesn't violate known physics and uses very standard electrical engineering (or physics) equations. The problem is that it requires pulling power out of nowhere. When the plasma in the tube forms, it represents stored energy (mostly in the form of a magnetic field and charge separation between ions.). When you turn the power off, that energy is not radiated, it just disappears. You could contend that it is stored in the gas in the tube waiting for the next time it is turned on, in fact I can even present evidence to that effect. But it really bothers me. (You don't have to use an old tube, it's just that the audible signal is so clear. Of course, I've seen and heard "flinks" in the kilojoule range, running single shot, and compared the light output curve to the power in.) Notice, I've never seen overunity behavior, just pulling a lot of stored? energy out of a plasma, then replaced it. But 20 to 30 joules is a lot of energy to pull out of a few milligrams of inert gas. The energy storage effect is real and easily reproducible. The real problem is what happens when you stop pumping energy in. The energy you think is stored in the plasma disappears. But if you go to balance the books, you find you are in good shape, you didn't provide that energy anyway. 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 Oct 6 15:11:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA28257; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:08:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:08:57 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981006221753.00d8cc7c popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 18:17:53 -0400 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: How magnets work for health Cc: Alan.CHEAH adecco.com, ahannan@MIT.EDU, deadnuts@deadnuts.com, lupem world.std.com, peg@wintergreen.com, bso@acm.org, DaleSVP@ipa.net, clsmith darwin.bu.edu, ccantor@sequenom.com, 76753.3551@compuserve.com, eben ergeng.com, ehill@world.std.com, leep@world.std.com, ejp world.std.com, wordpros@inforamp.net, moy@ziplink.net, gjcheah guybutler.com, wellenstein@binah.cc.brandeis.edu, hic world.std.com, jkokor@alum.mit.edu, Jim Hile , jim@msri.org, discjt@servtech.com, John Ranta , jsearl@tako.demon.co.uk, joshprokop worldnet.att.net, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net, lstelmac lynx.neu.edu, Leonard Dvorson , cadman mediaone.net, ohl@world.std.com, rsmith@itiip.com, raddison world.std.com, 71022.3001@compuserve.com, 73577.123 compuserve.com, thiahadge@aol.com, tcapizzi@world.std.com, tom.duff poweroasis.com, TAFAUL@aol.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"_ya831.0.Lv6.uJf6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23077 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I forgot to mention that the south pole of a compass is marked as the north pole because opposites attract. Also, Wateroz.com probably has the best minerals since they are water soluble. Sorry for the cross post but I want to clarify the compass pole marking issue. Dennis At 10:28 AM 10/5/98 -0700, you wrote: >Hey Dennis: Thanks for the info, especially about diabetes. I'm keeping >this one. It should work in humans as well. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 15:37:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA10656; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:34:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:34:34 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:32:57 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810061835_MC2-5BDB-5D27 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"39xNX2.0.Ic2.whf6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23078 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Steck wrote: >> Theoretically, at 100%, 4.8KWh should produce 1m^3 H. There are no known setups (as far as I have been able to find) that operate at 100%. << If Meyer's set-up produces anywhere near that output, presumably at STP, then its a winner. I was never able to get anywhere near that with my SS concentric tubes (1.5mm radial gap) in distilled water and 10k volts DC at frequencies from 4kHz to 20kHz square wave pulses (as prescribed by Meyer). Norman Horwood. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 15:38:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA10842; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:34:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:34:58 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:36:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810062236.PAA05647 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Whirlpower Resent-Message-ID: <"rnxHF2.0.Kf2.Iif6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23079 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: It looks like we are getting close to a breakthrough. I see no evidence anyone has beaten me to it. No one has a theory that proposes to tap a whirlpool but me. Plain and simple. This other stuff is very relevant but does not address tapping the effect of gravity on the vortex. That is Whirlpower Theory. The problem scientifically with the hurricane is not how it gets started, it is how does it keep going and where does the energy come from. I am very glad to see this has peeked some curiosity and I hope there will be some to follow through. If all it takes is to build a whirlpool as I have described for us to have clean infinite energy and this list can't figure it out before the Swedes build it, all I can say is, I tried to show you the simplicity, all you folks could see was the complexity. I never said all information should be free. I said Whirlpower is the Holy Grail and it is God's gift to Earth. I said from the very begining I would give a little but I was not going to give all my inventions away. This is just another example of how what I say in very simple straightforward english (admitedly mispelled at times) is twisted and ignored and not understood. Build a whirlpool and you get energy from gravity. I've said it many times, it is very simple, and I can document back for a very long time. David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 16:17:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA28425; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 16:16:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 16:16:09 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 16:17:43 -0700 Message-Id: <199810062317.QAA31499 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: Whirlpower Resent-Message-ID: <"tUnqc2.0.1y6.uIg6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23080 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >It looks like we are getting close to a breakthrough. > Maybe it is an advance in understanding the nature of the driving mechanism, but it does not at all lead to any evidence whatever that anyone could tap into it. There is an identified source of energy in the hurricane, ie, the heat energy of the warm water. That heat energy is tapped in a unique manner. This does not mean that there is any free energy to tap, as David thinks. No evidence provided by anyone indicates any available energy. The only energy is in the warmth of the water, and that is available to be tapped by any of a number of mechanisms, none of them very efficient as far as machines are concerned. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 17:08:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12989; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:05:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:05:49 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810070006.RAA11767 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower Resent-Message-ID: <"1G1Tc.0.rA3.T1h6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23081 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I said, > >It looks like we are getting close to a breakthrough. Ross says, > Maybe it is an advance in understanding the nature of the driving mechanism, > but it does not at all lead to any evidence whatever that anyone could tap > into it. There is an identified source of energy in the hurricane, ie, the > heat energy of the warm water. But as I pointed out in the Pearl of Wisdom that the heat of the Sun only excites the H2O molecule. There is no force force from the Sun pulling the vapor up. Gravity pulls the more dense atmosphere beneath the H20 molecule and pushes the water to the clouds. The basic misconception that the heat of the Sun is the driving force behind evaporation is the root of the problem. The Sun vaporizes, gravity evaporates. The next think wrong is not seeing the wobble of the eye wall is dragging and accelerating the donut around the eye wall. But if you watch the hurricane it is very easy to see. If you know what you are looking for. Steve Eckwall saw it. Tell em' Steve. The two swimming fish go round and round. Now, it is seen in several of the posts that once this system gets going all it needs is water to keep it going. That is why it slows down over land or goes into cooler waters. It gets less water and loses power. Now when sheer mass is the reason for power loss then it shows gravity is the driving force. It is so very simple. That heat energy is tapped in a unique > manner. This does not mean that there is any free energy to tap, as David > thinks. No evidence provided by anyone indicates any available energy. Free energy? Is hydro-electric free energy? It is just gravity working in a macro system provided by nature. The hurricane is gravity working in a system provided by nature. Whirlpower is a machine that replicates the hurricane in a system built by man. The bird is a flying life form in nature. The airplane is a machine that replicates that form built by man. For flight, look to the bird. For power, look to the hurricane. David Dennard "And the world will be better for this, that one man scorned and covered with scars, still strove with his last ounce of courage, to reach the unreachable stars." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 18:12:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA05095; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:10:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:10:35 -0700 Message-ID: <0a2001bdf18f$45c38220$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re; Whirlpower vs Hydropower? Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:09:34 -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: <"0GmEG1.0.KF1.A-h6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23082 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The installed Hydroelectric power generation in the U.S. is about 100,000 Megawatts, with a maximum estimated capacity of 187,000 Megawatts. The power generated; P = Q*H/11.1 (kilowatts) where Q = cubic feet/second and H is head in feet. (times efficiency factor of 0.8 or less). So about 550 gallons/minute falling 11.1 feet (4.8 psi)will develop about 1.0 kilowatt. Gravity does do work with help from the Sun. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 18:57:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA22443; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:55:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:55:25 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:56:56 -0700 Message-Id: <199810070156.SAA19727 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: Re; Whirlpower vs Hydropower? Resent-Message-ID: <"rERGA3.0.ZU5.Cei6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23083 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Gravity does do work with help from the Sun. Gravity is the driving force that makes the conversion of the energy from photonic, from the sun, to an increase in elevation of the water possible. But gravity is a passive component of the system. The sun is active in infusing the energy. And the water is active in moving from here to there, and changing from water, to vapor, and back to water again. Gravity, just stays the same providing a continuous acceleration. ie, the "work" doesn't originate in the gravitational field. Without the sun's energy input, gravity alone cannot do a thing. You need for an object to be able to fall, in order to derive energy from the change in gravitational potential of the object. This is a fine point that no one seems to get, but it is important to distinguish between the origins of energy and the forces we use in various energy conversion systems. The forces are not the origin of the energy. The process that changed the gravitational potential IS the origin of the energy. And for hydro power, that process is the heating of the sun, phase change from liquid to vapor, and cooling due to radiation to deep space, and condensation back to liquid but at a greater elevation up a hill. No energy was derived from gravity in the process if you follow it all the way around, and a drop of water that began in the ocean, returns to the ocean. Gravity did no net work. Now, for David's comments: >The basic misconception that the heat of the Sun is the driving force behind >evaporation is the root of the problem. The Sun vaporizes, gravity evaporates. The heat of the sun warms the water in the ocean to great depths. That heat resevoir, increases the vapor pressure of the water at the surface. The reason is because if you study the velocity distribution of the particles in the liquid water, some small number of them have enough velocity to exit the liquid form and launch themselves right out of the liquid to become, vapor. That, is what evaporation is all about. The fastest molecules are flying out of the surface of the water. And the warmer the water, the more molecules have enough velocity to launch outward. So, the sun heats the water, and the kinetic energy distribution then increases, and so a greater number of molecules have enough velocity to exit the liquid and become vapor. Gravity doesn't do much but keep the ocean on the surface of the earth, and keep the pressure of the atmosphere fairly large so that the ocean doesn't all boil away. >The next think wrong is not seeing the wobble of the eye wall is dragging and >accelerating the donut around the eye wall. But if you watch the hurricane it >is very easy to see. If you know what you are looking for. Steve Eckwall saw >it. Tell em' Steve. The two swimming fish go round and round. Well then, measure it. What are the velocities? What are the acceleration rates? What are the diameters? What are the wobble periods? How do these parameters differ from one hurricane to the next? Quantify your comments so that they can be analyzed if you want to say it is "wierd". Now, it is seen in several of the posts that once this system gets going all it needs is water to keep it going. That is why it slows down over land or goes into cooler waters. It gets less water and loses power. Now when sheer mass is the reason for power loss then it shows gravity is the driving force. It is so very simple. I haven't a clue what you mean by sheer mass being the factor. It is well established that the evaporation of water is the driving source of energy for the hurricane. If the vortex forms over water that is warm but only to a shallow depth say, 20 or 30 feet, then the evaporation at the surface drives convection currents in the water, and mixing, and so the cool water makes it's way to the surface and the wannabe hurricane dies. Without warm water, and lots of it, hurricanes cannot be born, let alone become large. The warm water is the energy resevoir that is tapped. So this entire thing is in accord with normal thermodynamics as far as an energy balance is concerned. >Free energy? Here David doesn't understand the term "free energy" as pertains to this group. "Free Energy" means energy derived from the quantum vacuum, in the absence of any known thermodynamic process such as solar insolation. solar heating of water is not a free energy process, the origin of the energy is the photonic emission of the sun, and is well understood. A perpetual motion machine taps into free energy. A zero point energy machine taps into free energy. a proposed whirlpool of yours would have to tap into free energy. But hurricanes, tap into the well understood thermal source of energy called, "warm water". That is why a hurricane differs from Davids proposals. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 19:43:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA05596; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:37:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:37:43 -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: <361AD445.C6A416B9 css.mot.com> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 21:39:01 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question References: <199810061316_MC2-5BCD-AE07 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SPhz93.0.EN1.sFj6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23084 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > I forgot to mention that in real-world industrial energy applications, > electrolysis efficiency is 65% and it is expected to rise to 75% with advanced > techniques in 2020. That according to: IMHO, I think the following recently posted link has more promise for wide spread utilization: Overview ----------------- Powerball technology uses the sodium-water reaction, which is one of the most well-known, and most difficult to contain reactions in science. The advantage with Powerballs is that the sodium is stored in small quantities inside a plastic skin. The concept behind Powerball Technologies is to tame energy, (so to speak) and to store one powerful element - sodium - in order to later get Hydrogen on Demand. Powerballs are small solid balls or pellets of sodium hydride that are coated with a waterproof plastic coating or skin. Powerballs are stored directly in water. They can remain in water for months with little or no change to the coatings. As soon as a Powerball is cut in half under water the sodium hydride inside can react with the water to produce hydrogen. NaH + H2O = NaOH + H2 The sodium hydride/water reaction is very exothermic and fast. A solid sodium hydride ball (with a 1 inch diameter), when cut in half under water, will react to completion within 10 seconds. Sodium hydride Powerballs react with water to release hydrogen on demand. --------------- Thanks to whomever brought it to our attention! -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world ... ... just your half." - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 20:43:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA32506; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 20:41:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 20:41:44 -0700 Message-ID: <003e01bdf1a4$9b3f7640$56faf0cf default> From: "mrand access" To: Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 20:41:28 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"3KcOk2.0.ox7.tBk6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23085 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael Schaffer wrote: [snip] The final answer is: 100% >efficient electrolysis of H2O will give you 0.311 L of H2 and 0.156 L >of O2 at 27 at sea level on a 1 bar barometer day. Would more H2/O2 be be produced if there was a vacuum/suction in the airspace above the electrolyzer water surface pulling the gases out of the cell. This might explain claims by inventors powering cars by their special water cell designs or just by their 12V car battery :-) Regards, Michael Randall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 21:21:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA12791; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 21:17:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 21:17:00 -0700 Message-ID: <13ec01bdf1a9$1f2aaf20$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: "David Dennard" , Subject: Re: Whirlpower Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 00:12:12 -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: <"Q_En62.0.b73.wik6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23086 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >It looks like we are getting close to a breakthrough. > >I see no evidence anyone has beaten me to it. What about the dolphins: http://www.syspac.com/~dolphin/dolphins.html http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/Dolphin.html Looks like they could have been playing with vortex rings millions of years now. >No one has a theory that proposes to tap a whirlpool but me. Plain and simple. http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week111.html In 1969, Penrose showed that, in principle, one could extract energy from a rotating black hole: 1) Roger Penrose, Gravitational collapse: the role of general relativity, Rev. del Nuovo Cimento 1, (1969) 272-276. >I never said all information should be free. Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. Information should be free. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 22:48:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA17818; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:46:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:46:24 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810070547.WAA28924 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: " " Reply-To: " " To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Re; Whirlpower vs Hydropower? Resent-Message-ID: <"IIHS-.0.FM4.l0m6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23087 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ross, I don't think your argument makes sense. I know it does to you and if Whirlpower works you would also argue the energy comes from the Sun. > > > >Gravity does do work with help from the Sun. Did I make this statement or did someone else? I don't remember saying these words. > > Gravity is the driving force that makes the conversion of the energy from > photonic, from the sun, to an increase in elevation of the water possible. > But gravity is a passive component of the system. The sun is active in > infusing the energy. And the water is active in moving from here to there, > and changing from water, to vapor, and back to water again. Gravity, just > stays the same providing a continuous acceleration. Continuous acceleration, sound like work to me. And above the other statement contridicts yours. Gravity does do work. ie, the "work" doesn't > originate in the gravitational field. I don't think where the work originates is the issue, it is where the work is done. I could argue the work originates in my dream (which it does) but that is not where the work is done. Without the sun's energy input, > gravity alone cannot do a thing. Without the gravity the sun's energy alone cannot do a thing. You need for an object to be able to fall, > in order to derive energy from the change in gravitational potential of the > object. Object can fall up in inverse density situations. I could also carry bucket after bucket of water up the hill and it would run down. Of course you could argue the Sun grew the plants I ate to give me the strength but that would just continue to show the absurdity of your argument. > > This is a fine point that no one seems to get, Everyone gets your point Ross. Yours is the standard scientific dogma that has been around for ages. but it is important to > distinguish between the origins of energy and the forces we use in various > energy conversion systems. The forces are not the origin of the energy. > The process that changed the gravitational potential IS the origin of the > energy. And for hydro power, that process is the heating of the sun, phase > change from liquid to vapor, and cooling due to radiation to deep space, and > condensation back to liquid but at a greater elevation up a hill. > > No energy was derived from gravity in the process if you follow it all the > way around, and a drop of water that began in the ocean, returns to the > ocean. Gravity did no net work. Yet work is done due to gravity, not sunlight. This scientific double speak sure does nothing to impress me and should not impress anyone that is thinking clearly. I think this is ludidrous science speak. Gravity is the major factor in hydroelectric power. > > Now, for David's comments: > > > >The basic misconception that the heat of the Sun is the driving force behind > > >evaporation is the root of the problem. The Sun vaporizes, gravity > evaporates. > > The heat of the sun warms the water in the ocean to great depths. That > heat resevoir, increases the vapor pressure of the water at the surface. > The reason is because if you study the velocity distribution of the > particles in the liquid water, some small number of them have enough > velocity to exit the liquid form and launch themselves right out of the > liquid to become, vapor. That, is what evaporation is all about. The > fastest molecules are flying out of the surface of the water. And the > warmer the water, the more molecules have enough velocity to launch outward. And if there is not an inverse density situation all you get is fog. The Sun plays no role in the actual transport of the vapor. And I think it is so obvious is isn't funny. What is funny is the fog of your thought. > > So, the sun heats the water, and the kinetic energy distribution then > increases, and so a greater number of molecules have enough velocity to exit > the liquid and become vapor. Gravity doesn't do much but keep the ocean on > the surface of the earth, and keep the pressure of the atmosphere fairly > large so that the ocean doesn't all boil away. No, gravity transports the vapor the Sun makes. > > >The next think wrong is not seeing the wobble of the eye wall is dragging > and > >accelerating the donut around the eye wall. But if you watch the hurricane > it > >is very easy to see. If you know what you are looking for. Steve Eckwall > saw > >it. Tell em' Steve. The two swimming fish go round and round. > > Well then, measure it. What are the velocities? What are the acceleration > rates? What are the diameters? What are the wobble periods? How do these > parameters differ from one hurricane to the next? Quantify your comments so > that they can be analyzed if you want to say it is "wierd". Science says the hurricane is the most mysterious event in nature. YOUR science peers all agree. I never said the hurricane is weird. Never. I said the hurricane is the most mysterious event in nature to the scientists that have studied it for decades. They cannot explain the power. They have added up the heat energy and the wind energy and it does not come anywhere close to explaining the power of the hurricane. Your science says that. The power of the hurricane does not fit into the conservation of energy equation. Every serious scientist that has studied the hurricane knows this very well. A hurricane has the power equivalent of a nulear bomb going off every second. This cannot be explained by the coriolis effect, the wind, or the heat of the Sun added together. In fact I have heard it is only a fraction of energy compared to the energy a hurricane puts out. I have never been able to get an exact number on this because I don't think anone knows the exact number. If someone does I hope they will share it with us. I think it is around 10% of the energy output. The other 90% is unexplained and is why the hurricane is the most mysterious event in nature. > > Now, it is seen in several of the posts that once this system gets going all > it > needs is water to keep it going. That is why it slows down over land or goes > > into cooler waters. It gets less water and loses power. Now when sheer mass > is > the reason for power loss then it shows gravity is the driving force. It is > so > very simple. > > I haven't a clue what you mean by sheer mass being the factor. It is well > established that the evaporation of water is the driving source of energy > for the hurricane. Not true, if so the hurricane would not be a mystery. Evaporation is not spinning the hurricane. And as I have shown gravity is the driving force of evaporation. Your logic would lead one to believe that the Sun makes the water fall. All it is doing is seeking a balance. If it is more dense than its surroundings, it goes down. If it is less dense than it surroundings it goes up. And gravity is the reason. I do not say it is the origin of energy. Mass itself is no more than "spun light". One could argue buring a log is solar energy but that is not the case. The work happens where it is done, not where it got its origin. You said it yourself when you said gravity holds the oceans on the Earth. That is gravity doing something your exact words. Doing something is work. If the vortex forms over water that is warm but only to > a shallow depth say, 20 or 30 feet, then the evaporation at the surface > drives convection currents in the water, and mixing, and so the cool water > makes it's way to the surface and the wannabe hurricane dies. Without warm > water, and lots of it, hurricanes cannot be born, let alone become large > > The warm water is the energy resevoir that is tapped. So this entire thing > is in accord with normal thermodynamics as far as an energy balance is > concerned. Then there should be no mystery, and science should be able to explain the power exhibited in a hurricane. I have seen it said, I have read it in print, the hurricane does not fit the conservation of energy equation. If it does and you have the data then I submit to you, show me the data. You keep saying that to me. Let's see you practice what you preach. You say the entire thing is in energy balance and in accord with normal thermodynamics. I have seen the exact opposite and every scientist I have talked to says it is not in balance. I challenge you to back up this statement of fact with proof right now and I want it confirmed by the list. If you can't do this I think it will be obvious to everyone here who the crackpot is. If you can do this you need to contact PBS and tell them you have solved the mystery of the power of hurricane. They will do a full hour special on you. > > >Free energy? > > Here David doesn't understand the term "free energy" as pertains to this > group. "Free Energy" means energy derived from the quantum vacuum, in the > absence of any known thermodynamic process such as solar insolation. solar > heating of water is not a free energy process, the origin of the energy is > the photonic emission of the sun, and is well understood. > > A perpetual motion machine taps into free energy. A zero point energy > machine taps into free energy. a proposed whirlpool of yours would have to > tap into free energy. But hurricanes, tap into the well understood thermal > source of energy called, "warm water". That is why a hurricane differs from > Davids proposals. Then let's see the proof. Astound the world with the solution to nature's most mysterious event. Let's see measured energy input compared to measured energy output. At least I have stated my research as theory. By stating your's as fact you should be required to show those facts and get independent confirmation. I can't wait to see this one. It will go against everything I have seen of TV about the vortex and the hurricane and everything I have read on the Web. Folks stay tuned for the most important post of the century. Ross the floor is yours. David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 22:53:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA19532; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:51:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:51:43 -0700 Message-ID: <19981007055505.12994.rocketmail send103.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:55:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Eachus' flink To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"4SQ59.0.1n4.k5m6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23088 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Eachus wrote: Actually one of the puzzle pieces that I have seen is one any of you can duplicate, but will have a very hard time explaining. Take a fluoresent light with an old tube. Put it and the ballast in a calorimeter if you want, but instrument the power side pretty thoroughly. Now you know that behavior where the ends of the tube glow, then the tube flashes several times before, with a final "flink" noise it comes on? Well working with much more powerful ballasts and tubes, I noticed that the flink radiates more power than you put in. I managed to come up with a model for what is going on which doesn't violate known physics and uses very standard electrical engineering (or physics) equations. The problem is that it requires pulling power out of nowhere. When the plasma in the tube forms, it represents stored energy (mostly in the form of a magnetic field and charge separation between ions.). When you turn the power off, that energy is not radiated, it just disappears. You could contend that it is stored in the gas in the tube waiting for the next time it is turned on, in fact I can even present evidence to that effect. But it really bothers me. (You don't have to use an old tube, it's just that the audible signal is so clear. Of course, I've seen and heard "flinks" in the kilojoule range, running single shot, and compared the light output curve to the power in.) Robert, could you clarify what your analysis was? The standard analysis is that energy is stored in the ballast inductance--- that's why it is there. The "flink" in an old fluorescent lamp comes from an internal switch that interrupts current flowing through that inductance, to generate a voltage spike and start the discharge. The magnetic energy in the magnetic field surrounding the plasma column in your high current discharges might have been appreciable---I don't dispute that. But the magnetic energy it has in a fluorescent fixture at less than 0.5 Amp is very small, a micro joule or so. Notice, I've never seen overunity behavior, just pulling a lot of stored? energy out of a plasma, then replaced it. But 20 to 30 joules is a lot of energy to pull out of a few milligrams of inert gas. The energy storage effect is real and easily reproducible. The real problem is what happens when you stop pumping energy in. The energy you think is stored in the plasma disappears. But if you go to balance the books, you find you are in good shape, you didn't provide that energy anyway. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 6 23:15:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA25356; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:12:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:12:38 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810070613.XAA29709 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard " Reply-To: "David Dennard " To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Work vs. Energy Resent-Message-ID: <"UZvU61.0.6C6.LPm6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23089 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In my above post if you come away with anything from it one can easily see work happens where it is done, not where energy originates. Work is not energy. If so it would be Work = MC2. If so a camp fire would be solar energy. If so a car going down the road would be solar energy. All energy originates from the Sun, but the work is done here on Earth. I think Ross is confusing work with energy. And that is why I think Whirlpower can do work. If you follow Ross's logic then a car does not generate energy, a hydro electric plant does not generate energy, a fire does not generate energy. I can even concede this riddle in semantics. But they do produce work. David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 00:57:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA13475; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 00:50:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 00:50:51 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 00:52:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810070752.AAA02435 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard " Reply-To: "David Dennard " To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Energy and Power Resent-Message-ID: <"Dsb-G.0.RI3.Qrn6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23090 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: As Ross stated, free energy is not the term I have been using for Whirlpower. I think I finally understand what he means. But that seems to contridict any possibility of ZPE. Maybe Zero Point Power would more accutately describe things like quantum vacuum, or the opening of the void (as I refered to the vortex as being). I call it Whirlpower not Whirlenergy. And that power comes from gravity not energy. The call it hydropower, horsepower, not hydro energy, not horse energy. Is this really the problem in all the argument? I may have refered to Whirlpower as a form of gravitational energy a few times, but I don't think I ever called Whirlpower energy. And as far as I can see at this point with this new understanding of the "physics speak" there really can be no such thing as ZPE but there could be something called ZPP (zero point power) or even ZPW (zero point work) If gravity also does something instead of the standard falling thing on the vertical axis. If it does something on the horitontal axis, wobble, wiggle, jiggle, then that could explain the different phenomena we have been calling ZPE by mistake. Does this make any sense. I am just coming to this understanding as I write this. It has all been a matter of the "physics speak". But maybe not. On the other hand you say the quantum vacuum jiggle is energy and you recognize no thermodynamics at play. Even if I still don't see it as free energy. Could this be because gravity is a form of energy not merely a passive player at all? Or is it the thermodynamics are to hard to measure. In the deepest space, devoid of all light, all heat, gravity would still exist. and the wobble would still exist if this theoretical planet was spinning. So it seems gravity could exist without light or heat. But the inverse could not be true. Light could not exist as we define it without a star or some kind of burning matter. So I still see a delima. This will definately be a good one to dream about. Again I find myself back at gravitation energy. No light or heat. Spinning mass, producing a wobble and frame dragging an area around the dark mass. But no light or heat whatsoever. Would this not violate laws of theromdynamics and the conservation of energy if all energy comes from a Sun. It appears we have motion and energy without light or heat. But I still would not be inclined to call it "free energy". It is tapping the spin's wobble and slowing down the spin. Still conservation of energy. Conclusion; Since gravity can exist without light but light cannot exist without gravity. I think we have it wrong. Gravity is - energy. Light is + energy. We see negative and positive in everything else, why not energy? David Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 01:15:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA18716; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 01:13:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 01:13:24 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:14:58 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question In-Reply-To: <199810061316_MC2-5BCD-AE07 compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"1eh9Z1.0.Ma4.YAo6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23091 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Perhaps I did not make this clear in my previous message. If you have, say, 2 > volts and 1 amp (2 watts), you get the same level of electrolysis as you would > with 100 volts and 1 amp (100 watts), but in the latter case you also get a > lot of waste heat. Naively (VERY naively) I wonder why they cannot hold the > voltage at exactly 1.48 and channel all energy into electrolysis instead of > waste heat. I wouldn't know, but I am sure an electrochemist like Dieter Britz > could explain. Yes he could, it's quite simple. First of all, efficiency is expressed relative to something, and there are various definitions. The one that seems to be meant here is the ratio of the power actually used to make the electrochemical reaction go, divided by the total input power; a figure of interest for industry, for sure. Why not stick to 1.48 V? That is the minimum total cell voltage (with all concentrations at standard values), above which a current will flow. You could indeed get 100% efficiency at this voltage, but with an infinitesimal current flowing. If you want a finite current, you need an overvoltage above that. The actual reaction takes the power given by 1.48 V multiplied by the current, and the rest, as Rothwell writes correctly, goes into waste heat. You can't avoid that, but you try to minimise it, and believe me, they do try. The total voltage, above that 1.48 V, is partly due to the overvoltage to get a useful current, and resistance in the electrolyte, leading to iR drop there. Both of these lead to ohmic heating. There might be small resistances in the electrodes themselves and in the poweer leads, but these are small. OK, you can try to reduce the iR problem by using a shorter electrolyte current path. Then you get mixing of the products, and recombination - loss of efficiency. You can prevent that by inserting a porous (or otherwise permeable) membrane between the electrodes; this raises the resistance, increases the iR again. You eventually reach some compromise between these factors. In industry they stack cells in series, and thus use higher voltages in total; this doesn't mean that high an overvoltage, as any single cell in the stack will still have a voltage of no more than 3-4 V across it, probably less. Electrolysis is not a good way to produce energy (i.e. energetic fuel like hydrogen), unless you get the energy for the electrolysis cheaply, like from solar cells. There were schemes once for large arrays of solar cells in the Sahara (or Spain), busy electrolysing water, the hydrogen being piped elsewhere. I don't know how these schemes stand today. Bockris' name is synonymous with the "Hydrogen Economy", he was behind the push, and probably still is. He planned it all while in South Australia, another place with lots of desert and sunshine. All this, although technically challenging, is completely orthodox. Schemes like the Meyer car are attempts to beat thermodynamics. Meyer essentially tried to circumvent that 1.48 V limit, and reckoned he could break up water by magic, then get energy by burning the hydrogen. This is, to say the least, highly improbable. It is like winding up a spring without doing any work, then reaping the benefits of the spring unwinding again and doing work for you. I can't prove you can't do it, and I wouldn't even try. You'd have to try hard to prove it to me though. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 03:02:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA08855; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 03:01:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 03:01:11 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:02:55 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Re; Whirlpower vs Hydropower? In-Reply-To: <199810070156.SAA19727 Au.oro.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"jKi-B2.0.BA2.dlp6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23092 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, Ross Tessien wrote: to David Dennard: >Gravity does do work with help from the Sun. -snip- RT> .. and changing from water, to vapor, and back to water again. Gravity, just stays the same providing a continuous acceleration. ie, the "work" doesn't originate in the gravitational field. Without the sun's energy input, gravity alone cannot do a thing. -snip- DD> >The next thing wrong is not seeing the wobble of the eye wall is >dragging an accelerating the donut around the eye wall. But if you >watch the hurricane it is very easy to see. If you know what you are >looking for. Steve Ekwall saw it. Tell em' Steve. --------------------------------------- :} gulp!:} Hi David, Ross & ALL :) Steve Ekwall here YES!, Easily seen on the TV weather channel watching a hurricane's movement. David, I thought it was especially fortunate that hurricane "Gorges" was coming into play, just as you started posting about Whirlpower! It was spiraling as you said it would. I was especially impressed we have satellite graphics to show it in motion (as it were) For 3-4 days during Gorges approach, I was especially noting a "slippage" of the hurricanes shape ~3/4 on its outer edge: This raises many questions in my mind, the least of which seem to point to the outer edge containing the faster winds, yet the slower inner edge seems to have THE POWER that is slinging it around. Hence, there is a slip of somesort with the entire system, this is what excited me to try a build this 'tempest in a teacup' in a smaller model if possible. I know, that's not a question but there is visiably something different going on there! This may be heaven sent, 'Holy Grail' as it were, because the timing was perfect! David has seen the power of the area he calls the doughnut just beyound the central vortex, I think anyone could see it, if they just look for it. It's there! But What is causing it that we can tap into? David's whirlpower has a tappable area. Can it be tapped? -- Ross has shown us satellite pictures (I think they were of the striats of Gibraltar) that shows "pounding" aeteric waves being created by the sun. This too fits with his theory. Waves of Aetheric force that smashing the earth and are warming the Oceans. THEY are there! low (below surface) and heating the water as well as disturbing the gravity. Plus 10 more supportive positions for his book on his return. Congratulations Ross! :) Looking forward to your books release too! :) We're talking one of the greatest forces in the universe, if not the greatest! ---- Gentleman, I feel like a ~little stand-in part guy~ in a movie scene the "CLASH of THE TITANS": These Ideas/ Concepts are "Your BABIES".. I could NO more tell either of you what your really talking about and why, as you could tell some of my personal history and thought flow. That's what the starting :} gulp!:} in the header was about... Round & Round: (you both have the tiger by the tail. let's tame him!:) I can handle PUSH ~or~ PULL Gravity (open minded, free thinker that I can be at times) And actually can see that you two are both attacking the same thing form two different sides as it were. In other words, If whirlpower works, Push Gravity could still be the causation. It's really a flip of coin as Newton plighted over. Whirlpower(d) by gravity. Sun supplies ALL the gravity. (And I'm/ we'all getting 'smushed' in the middle!) *COOL STUFF!* :) WHAT I/some might call yin/yang or i/chi, positive, negative David calls two fish swimming in a circle (round & round) Ross calls Aether emitted sun pushing gravity (this leads to the formation of spinning Galaxies) (spinning round & round) ------------------ David, you see a wobble (that has to be there to work with the gravity) Ross, you see compressed aether waves (that force that drives gravity home, Everywhere in the universe) ------------------ :} gulp again!:} I hope I have those right? ------------------- Anyway, I would like to bow out and watch you two TITANS of the Future figure it out... noting, that when you come full circle and meet and understand your both in the same circle, *Wow* another Big Bang Idea! Keys:? I think, I was just writing the list about what HURRICANES DO AT NIGHT? (power/gravity wise)..Increase in strength, decrease, or maintain, just when Ross was leaving for his meetings. Then it turned into "do we WEIGH more at night or not! Ross, you once mentioned indeed we do weigh less. Notice your commonality of Sunlight=>(gravity) / Gravity (less Sunlight + spin/velocity). That's _NOT_ an equation BTW, or at least I don't think so :) Anyway, We had answers (not hurricane/or sun related) that one weighs MORE, LESS, and 'NO CHANGE' per this list..using centrifical forces. hummm.. I (lowly me) see this as a common KEY that you two might finally come to agreement on, and if so, both Aether & Gravity will LEAP FORWARD. What happens in the "NIGHT-TIME" with your replies? You should come together on this (I hope). Both of your ideas are the absolute simplest : (KISS/ that's good!) I'm going to duck out of the way, and just KEEP UP with you both, the best I can! This NEW-Power *IS* exciting:) -=se=- steve (compressed waves are wobbily:) ekwall "As long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think, free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress." -- J. Robert Oppenheimer, American physicist (1904-1967) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 04:39:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA25428; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:32:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:32:11 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:33:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810071133.EAA06439 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard " Reply-To: "David Dennard " To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: The Origin of Energy Resent-Message-ID: <"EqZI03.0.ED6.x4r6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23093 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: After some deep pondering and a dream or two I want to go out on this either astounding or broken limb a few more inches and state the Origin of Energy. We have seen it stated it is all important to understand the origin of energy to trace the path of evaporation and hydroelectric power. It is said the heat of the sun in the origin of energy. But if we follow that logic we find gravity has to be present for a star to burn but the converse of a star having to be present for gravity to exist is not the case. And if we are to follow the path we must conclude gravity has to be the Origin of Energy. Again, without gravity there would be no heat or light. But heat or light are not required for gravity to exist. When both are present we get power and work. Can energy exist without heat or light? We see it is possible to have gravity without heat or light. We have a model of quantum jiggle in the vacuum without heat or light. We have a few more ideas floating around in the same vein. I think it is worth considering. Not to mention the black hole which is gravity at its greatest and it eats light for breakfast. What I haven't seen said about the black hole is that it is wobbleing. It is reported to be spinning, it is reported to frame drag an area just past the event horizon, in the donut, that wobbles; but I have yet to see a report that states the black hole itself is wobbleing (except Whirlpower Theory) I think this is part of science's misconception about gravity. And is part of the Origin of Energy. In fact I think there could be a galaxy of unignited stars, spinning around a black hole, no light, no heat, but definately energy. So light and heat are not even necessary for energy to exist. No if you want to be able to see that energy and feel it, light and heat are necessary. But light and heat are not necessary for the energy to be there. In the equation, E=mc2 we see energy is mass. The reference to the speed of light is not necessarily a reference to light. So I propose gravity is energy. Light and heat are the result of gravity. They are like the Pearl of Wisdom density explanation. Light and heat are less dense than space itself, thus gravity pulls the more dense space beneath the photon and pushes it at a constant rate away from a star. And it is that compression caused by gravity that caused the star to ignite in the first place. It is this constant rate of light speed that is the clue. If light were energy it would slow down over distance. But since it is just along for the ride, riding on that "old gravity train" it does not lose speed. And the distance gravity has to move is the size of one photon, so it never loses energy either. It just keeps doing it over and over but never really goes anywhere. It just jiggles, like cosmic jello. Gravity could be seen as the laugh of God. And it shook when he laughed like a bowl full of jello. David Dennard The Phoenix From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 06:20:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA15936; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 06:18:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 06:18:40 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981007082227.006cbba4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 08:22:27 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question In-Reply-To: References: <199810061316_MC2-5BCD-AE07 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"oZxQX2.0.nu3.mes6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23094 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:14 10/7/98 +0200, britz wrote: >Bockris' name is synonymous with the "Hydrogen >Economy", he was behind the push, and probably still is. Dieter, in "Modern Electrochemistry Vol 1." by Bockris & Reddy (first edition only), he makes a big deal in Chapter 1 about the Great Nernstian Hiatus, his name for a dark period in electrochemistry where analysis of cells was attempted primarily from a "potentio-centric" viewpoint. Bockris goes so far as to claim that, if it weren't for Nernst's "fundamental error and lack of conceptualization", electrochemistry might now be FAR ahead of where it actually is...that we would even have giant fuel-cell electric power plants instead of the existing combustion electric power plants. Do you subscribe to that view? P.S. Nice to see you around here again! 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 Oct 7 08:00:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA05980; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 07:57:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 07:57:05 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981007100031.006c478c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 10:00:31 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy In-Reply-To: <199810071133.EAA06439 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"rlOsn1.0.KT1.05u6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23095 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:33 10/7/98 -0700, David Dennard wrote: >After some deep pondering and a dream or two..... >...but I have yet to see a report that states the black hole itself is >wobbleing (except Whirlpower Theory)... There have been appeals for you to do some experimental work to back up your theories. I suggest that you take a field trip to the nearest black hole immediately and report your findings back to this forum via radio modem. Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 09:56:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA27141; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 09:55:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 09:55:17 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 09:56:40 -0700 Message-Id: <199810071656.JAA12851 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: Re; Whirlpower vs Hydropower? Resent-Message-ID: <"FykeM1.0._d6.qpv6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23096 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >What I haven't seen said about the black hole is that it is wobbleing. It is >reported to be spinning, it is reported to frame drag an area just past the >event horizon, in the donut, that wobbles; but I have yet to see a report that >states the black hole itself is wobbleing (except Whirlpower Theory) This is the perfect example of what is wrong with this kind of science. Watch. Have you read about reverberation mapping of active galactic nuclei in either of "Active Galactic Nuclei" by Robson or "An Introduction to Active Galactic Nuclei" by Peterson? Have you read about "The Nature of Space and Time" by Penrose and Hawking? Or "Gravity's Fatal Attraction" by Begelman and Rees? Or "Quasar's Redshifts and Controversies" by Arp, or Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics"? Or have you read the simplistic accounts presented in "The Cambridge Atlas of Astronomy"? Probably the answer is no to all of the above. So when you say, "I have not read where anyone has mentioned such and such", so what. You haven't read much of anything, so of course you haven't ever seen where others have already considered these things. You haven't even read the literature of hurricane thermodynamics to see how wobble and precession is considered in the standard literature. So you don't know whether your ideas are new or not. GO DO THE RESEARCH. Then report back what you find. Don't proclaim that no one has studied it. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 10:42:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA15736; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:40:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:40:25 -0700 Message-ID: <361B9ACD.311 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 11:46:05 -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: Blue: Storms: data selection? 10.7.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"S24Nb.0.kr3.8Uw6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23097 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: bursts, QM tunneling 10.5.98 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:49:03 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net [Rich Murray: I wonder if Ed Storm could send some of his own data to Dick Blue, and perhaps post it on the EarthTech website, so we can examine it together.] > > > > As for what data I was commenting on when I described it as > > "noise-like," Miles-Bush, Pons-Fleischman, McKubre, and numerous > > others published data like that. In describing their own results > > they frequently used the word "bursts". Are you now saying that > > all of that data is somehow wrong or untypical of CANR excess heat? > > Bursts occur as well as steady production. The bursts are thought to > result when an increasing fraction of the surface becomes active. This > activity heats up the cathode thereby causing a loss of deuterium. This > loss causes those sites which were active to become inactive, thereby > allowing the cathode to cool. This process can be repeated, but the > next cycle will be different because the loss of deuterium can result in > a permanent change in the PdD structure which prevents the required high > composition in some areas. Yes, some of the data published by these > people are marginal. The issue is not picking apart the worst data, but > asking whether some of the data are so beyond noise as to indicate the > presence of a new phenomenon. Then we can debate why the phenomenon is > weak or does not occur at all in some samples. > Certainly part of the issue is eliminating the worst data from further consideration, so we don't waste bandwidth rehashing results that really don't mean very much. However, among CANR advocates getting those not very significant results set aside is as hard as pulling teeth. Now although Ed Storms wants to use slightly different language than I, we seem to have come to an agreement as to just what is "typical" behavior for the heat signal from a Pons-Fleischmann type of reaction cell. That's progress! The questions I have been trying to bring foward here deal with just what the statistical implications are for data of the sort being described, bearing in mind that there may well be a problem relating to the signal-to-noise ratio and what I call post-selection bias. That is to say I believe we should consider the possibility that positive results are being "generated" by simply selecting the best results from a data set that is noisey. As Ed Storms acknowledges, runs which ultimately yield no excess heat, on average, still may show "bursts" that to the casual observer look very much like what occurs in a cell that is producing an excess. I would go futher to say that if you took the data from a cell that yields nothing and the data from a cell showing the effect, concealed the zero level, and placed these two data sets in front of Ed Storms he would have difficulty selecting which data shows a net positive effect. Those of you who have been around long enough may recall that when the chips were down no one could show an operating cell to the DOE Committee and say that it was producing "excess heat." Like it or not, we are dealing here with filtered and selected data. Exactly how the data gets filtered and selected is a very important aspect of the final results and the claims for a positive CANR effect. Although the excess heat has been portrayed as being a simple and direct observation which yields incontrovertible evidence for cold fusion, it really is no such thing. > > This is essentially correct. All calorimeter signals have a noise which > is seen as random fluctuations both above and below zero. When averaged > over sufficient time, the net effect is zero or something very close. > However, excess energy is observed as a net positive signal which lasts > for sufficient time to be greater than the noise time constant. For a > burst to be identified as excess energy, the duration must be > significantly outside of the known noise duration. Frequently, the > burst is superimposed on an already positive signal which has lasted for > many hours. > Here we see an example of Ed Storms "filtering" data in his mind. He has an idea that he can recognize differences in the details of the time dependence that is admittedly noise and that which he considers a signal. One mistake he may be making is with regard to time constants. He assumes that there is a single time constant characteristic of whatever accounts for the noise, so that everything showing a longer time constant must not be due to the noise. But we really don't know what is generating the noise, so we don't know what its characteristic time behavior may be. Let me suggest that for isoperibolic calorimeters there can be a number of effects that result in slow drifts in the calorimeter constant -- changing air currents and temperature, for example. That would certainly be a noise source with an arbitrarily long time constant. > > You are correct, the noise of a calorimeter increases as the current is > increased. As a result, a burst or steady excess must be larger at high > current than when seen at low current. Nevertheless, such effects are > only attributed to excess energy when they remain positive at a value > and for a time which is outside of the observed behavior of noise. So in > this sense, each of us does a statistical analysis by comparing the > signal to the way noise behaves. Unfortunately, we have a good > understanding of noise both by using dead Pd as well as Pt cathodes > which show no excess. The hours of such data we experience can not be > published although examples are contained in most papers. We do not > accept marginal variations as an indication of excess. We are as careful > and concerned with the truth as you are. The difference is that we have > viewed many hours of data and have a good idea when the data are real > and when they are noise. I know of no one in the field who wishes to > exaggerate the results or wishes to be deceived by random fluctuations. > If you have the time, you are welcome to take any of my data and see > what you can make of it. > So Ed Storms further confirms that he filters the data on the basis of some assumptions that need to be examined very carefully. He ASSUMES that the fluctuations he sees in the so-called "dead" cells is characteristic of any and all noise sources that are also present when a cell shows excess heat. Suppose he is wrong in that assumption. Suppose that the cells which show a net excess heat are simply the ones for which the essential averaging and integrating functions of the calorimeter don't quite work as expected, i.e. a chance deviation from expected behavior. Perhaps there is a problem with the "filter" rather than the signal source. > energy allows the nuclei to get close enough for reaction. In cold > fusion, this translational energy is absent. The question is: what > process allows the nuclei to come close enough together for the nuclear > wave functions to come into play? Of course, other models of nuclear > energy states have been suggested which do not involve wave functions. > I fear we may be drifting off into Never-Never Land in which we are ask to consider the possibility that some New Age version of quantum theory is going to rescue these claimed CANR effects. All I can say this is a poor context in which to begin a revision of fundamental theory. In fact it's quite clear that Ed Storms doesn't want to do that in any general sense. He has to cling to some of the basics or he can't even make the case that there truly is some sort of excess heat. For the time being, I suggest that we stick to the notion that we are dealing with a phenomenon that can fit within the framework of quantum theory as we now know it. In that context I agree that getting two deuterons close enough to interact need not (likely does not) involve the internal coordinates of the deuterons, i.e. up to that point their internal wave functions need not have been perturbed. The trick is, of course, to figure out just what does account for anomalous behavior in that regard. So far, I have not heard about any viable explanations for this as being on the table at this time. It gets much worse, however, when we attempt to proceed from there. Just suppose that the deuterons do get close enough to interact via the nuclear interaction potential. What I have been saying is that now you must consider a mechanism to account for changes in nuclear wavefunctions, if you want to claim that the reaction process is somehow dramatically altered by the chemical environment. You can dream about subtle effects initiating the reaction event, but what happens next cannot be very subtle. Here's where the "brute force" really has to be considered. You see, what we actually know is that external "brute force" when it is known to be present does not actually do very much to alter the branching ratios between p and n emission, for example. > A lot new has been said, Dick just isn’t listening. Arata-Zhang > used palladium-black which has a different set of properties relevant to > the effect compared to solid palladium. Indeed, only certain > palladium-black works and only if it is carefully treated. Miles-Bush > found that most palladium tried by them did not work, but they did not > try to determine why. In my case, I studied 90 pieces of palladium > supplied by IMRA in an effort to determine a relationship between the > properties of palladium and its ability to make excess energy. Of these, > only about 4 pieces made excess energy, one at the 4 watt level. > OK, so everyone in every case has to be "careful." All you are saying is that they have to be selective to get a desired result. What I was trying to get across is that what Arata-Zhang do to get "good" palladium black is not the same as what McKubre did to get "good" solid cathodes which work. The two selection processes are not obviously related in a very concrete way. > > I agree, there has to be an agent involved, but not the one Dick Blue > has envisioned or would accept. Much effort is being applied to finding > that agent. Why does Dick carry the argument to an absurdum to make a > point? This contributes nothing to the argument because such statements > are not even remotely related of the issue. > Well I resort to absurdities on occasion to force key admissions from you. Now, we agree that there must be an agent which acts upon the interacting deuterons, if the reaction outcome is to be anomalous as claimed. It seems rather obvious, but it surely has not been easy to get anyone to acknowledge even that much. Now suppose I ask the questions: (1) How strong is the said agent? (2) What accounts for said agent arising from within a chemical environment where it does not ordinarily act? I am glad to acknowledge that what Ed Storms is proposing must lie well beyond my realm of knowledge. > > First of all, I, McKurbre and the NHE laboratory in Japan have made a > study of a range of properties which influence the effect. More work > would be done if funding were available. Second, the gross properties of > palladium, i.e. the only ones easily studied, are similar between “good’ > and “bad” palladium. However, this is not the issue. These small > differences allow the PdD to change into a material which is quite > different from ordinary PdD, i.e. the nuclear-active state. This > material is difficult to study with the tools presently available. > So I have been suggesting that one tool that can be available is being seriously under utilized -- its a radiations detector. If you can't see rather dramatic differences in the radiations evironment then quite possibly you aren't actually doing anything very interesting with respect to CANR. It's a quick, cheap, effective way to screen a whole bunch of experimental claims. > > I should point out that we have a similar situation with respect to > superconductivity. PdD is superconducting and the temperature is a > strong function of the amount of deuterium present even though there are > no obvious changes in the structure, external appearance, or bond > energy. Thus, here is an example of an unusual property being changed > with little apparent change in the physical or chemical properties. > We are attempting to quantify said perturbations. That has been my > major contribution to the field. More would be known if the necessary > tools were available. > Are you claiming the PdD is superconducting at room temperature???? I think we know how to tell whether something is superconducting, so I don't understand your assertions that there are "no obvious changes." Of course, any time you don't look for differences you will not find them. How do you know it's superconducting it you can't observe a change? It's like my old question as to how you can claim to have high-energy reaction events if you don't look for high-energy reaction events. As for there being a shortage of tools for CANR investigations, you've got to be kidding! KcKubre and Pons and Fleischmann spent a ton of money between them. The fact that they ultimately have little to show for their efforts is their problem, not the result of a shortage of funds. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: Claytor tritium 10.5.98 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:00:32 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net So we do agree that Claytor results are clearly at odds with other CANR results. I suppose one can go on accumulating "anomalous" data from all quarters and piling it all together. Let's see here, perhaps if I dig through my files I can make a contribution myself. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 11:14:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26721; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:10:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:10:16 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981007141151.01fb2450 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 14:11:51 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Eachus' flink In-Reply-To: <19981007055505.12994.rocketmail send103.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"LEl8g.0.LX6.8ww6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23098 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:55 PM 10/6/98 -0700, Michael Schaffer wrote: > Robert, could you clarify what your analysis was? The standard > analysis is that energy is stored in the ballast inductance--- > that's why it is there. The "flink" in an old fluorescent > lamp comes from an internal switch that interrupts current flowing > through that inductance, to generate a voltage spike and start the > discharge. Actually most ballasts today don't use starters. But the flink I am speaking of is distinct and comes from charge redistribution in the bulb causing the envelope to contract then expand. I have never actually measured it, just heard it in a fluoresent. At higher energies considerable acoustic power can be generated. (Also in the higher power devices the magnetic field in a helix shaped tube can shorten the tube by a significant fraction. In operation the tube shortens, then lengthens as it heats up.) > The magnetic energy in the magnetic field surrounding > the plasma column in your high current discharges might have been > appreciable---I don't dispute that. But the magnetic energy it > has in a fluorescent fixture at less than 0.5 Amp is very small, > a micro joule or so. Why do you think that? During glow discharge operation, you are right, the power is negligible. But, as I said, with an old tube you can get a single sparck/arc the length of the tube. As the pinch forms, you pull power out of the tube, when the arc breaks it seems to nicely swallow its tail. Some of the energy remains in the form of ions, which is why, in the case of the fluoresent, you get glow discharge behavior (normal behavior) from then on. If you tune things right, this tail swallowing behavior means that the tube is cool--light is emitted during the discharge, but there is little or no residual energy left in the tube. Again a data point--I took a seven watt rated flash tube, designed for flash cameras, up over 1 KW. It made a wonderful light, but the electrodes weren't even hot. (If you want to try it, you have to pulse at about 15 kilohertz with a sharp risetime and fast decay, so the duty cycle is about 1%. The limit on power is where the electrodes penetrate the quartz envelope. If you do it right, there will be no direct conduction or convection energy transfer from the plasma to the envelope--all that will occur is some absorption and reradiation of the light. Do use a quartz envelope--it is transparent to most of the radiation. Also take care so you don't get welders flash, cheap sunglasses will do.) > But if you go to >balance the books, you find you are in good shape, you didn't provide >that energy anyway. As I said, no overunity behavior, but when you look at the energy balance, the plasma is storing a considerable amount of energy you did not provide. But when the plasma goes away, the energy budget balances. My read has always been that the properites of space in the current thread are different. I suspect that the energy you see is zero point energybut you can't extract it. As an example, these are not recent experimental results, just from memory: Magnetic energy stored in tube: 14 J Heat energy in tube between pulses: 47 J Power in (and measured power out) around 8400 Watts Heat energy in tube after operation: 30 J As you can see calorimetry is a little tough, as is keeping the input waveform clean enough that there are a few milliseconds of zero current. Now it could be that some of the stored energy is separation between positive and negative ions, etc. By varying the power side of the circut, I could and did measure the stored power directly, and found that the lamps operated best when the stored power in capacitor, inductance and tube were all approximately equal. So there is power stored there. But I was never able to determine where it went when the lights went out. 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 Oct 7 11:35:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA00122; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:20:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:20:49 -0700 Message-ID: <361BA454.472F earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 12:26:44 -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: Ladbury: Tim Lucas, MacroSonix resonant sound Feb 98 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------521394271BD" Resent-Message-ID: <"9huO63.0.q1.04x6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23099 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. --------------521394271BD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.macrosonix.com/020098pt.htm --------------521394271BD Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1; name="020098pt.htm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline; filename="020098pt.htm" Content-Base: "http://www.macrosonix.com/020098pt.htm" MacroSonix - Media Coverage

I N   T H E   N E W S   |   P R E S S   R E L E A S E S   |   M E D I A   C O V E R A G E

MEDIA  = ; COVERAGE

3D"Physics
February 1998

Ultrahigh-Ener= gy Sound Waves
Promise New Technologies

Ray Ladbury

Researchers in acoustics have long wondered whether sound waves could = replace mechanical components in devices such as compressors, combustion = engines, and pumps; now a team of researchers in Virginia has answered - = with a very loud, YES!

Perhaps because we are constantly bombarded by sound, it is easy to forge= t that sound waves actually represent quite small pressure variations. Th= e sound of a jet engine a few meters away measures only about 20 Pa (abou= t 0.0002 atmospheres). As one increases the energy going into a sound wav= e, nonlinear processes in the gas in which the wave propagates direct mor= e and more energy into harmonics of the drive frequency. The harmonics di= stort the sound wave and ultimately form shock waves. It is these shocks = that limit the amplitudes attainable. Soundwaves=92 low energy levels and= compression ratios (defined as the ratio of the waveform=92s peak and mi= nimum pressures) have limited their usefulness in high-power applications= such as compressors and pumps. Accordingly, many researchers have wonder= ed whether the acoustic saturation imposed by shock formation can be circ= umvented in some special circumstances.

Although acoustic saturation has been found to be inevitable (perhaps tha= nkfully) for sound waves propagating in free space, the question of wheth= er acoustic saturation is also unavoidable for standing waves in resonati= ng cavities has received little attention. Recently, researchers at Macro= sonix Corporation (Richmond, Virginia) have reported creating sound waves= with energy densities 1600 times higher than was previously possible. Ac= cording to Macrosonix founder and CEO Tim Lucas, pressures in these sound= waves oscillate from peak values of up to10 atmospheres down to hard vac= uum, rendering the concept of compression ratios all but meaningless.
=
Two papers presented by Macrosonix at the December 1997 meeting of the Ac= oustical Society of America in San Diego, California, discuss using reson= ator geometry to control the phases and amplitudes of harmonics in a wave= form, thereby tailoring the waveform to a particular application. The res= earchers christened this technique resonant macrosonic synthesis (RMS). A= s an epplication of RMS, they used a specifically designed resonator call= ed a horn-cone (shaped like the bell of an elongated trumpet) to shape th= e waveform to avoid the discontinuity characteristic of a shock. The resu= lting shock-free sound waves can then be driven at much higher amplitudes= =2E

Although the idea of using resonator geometry to control sound waveforms = is not new, previous advances have been less dramatic. The newly synthesi= zed sound waves are powerful enough to perform tasks that previously requ= ired mechanical components. Moreover, Lucas hopes to use RMS not only to = attain high pressure amplitudes, but also to tailor the shapes and charac= teristics of waveforms to applications ranging from materials processing = to pharmaceutical and chemical manufacturing to electric power generation= =2E

Putting sound to work

Lucas originally became interested in generating large-amplitude acoustic= waves when he realized that such waves could drive acoustic compressors = that, in turn, could be used in environmentally benign refrigerators and = pumps. After founding Macrosonix to tackle the technical problems involve= d in generating and controlling high-amplitude sound waves, Lucas spent a= year at Los Alamos National Laboratory, where he worked in the lab of ac= oustical physicist Greg Swift. Lucas and his collaborators at Macrosonix = then worked for the next seven years to develop methods of modeling non-l= inear phenomena associated with high-amplitude waves, find resonator geom= etries likely to achieve high amplitudes, create efficient mechanical dri= vers for their resonators and finally to harness a variety of high-energy= acoustic effects to perform power hungry tasks such as gas compression, = pulverization and electric power generation. By 1996, they had developed = an acoustic compressor suitable for a commercially viable (and, yes, fair= ly quiet) accoustical refrigerator.

Developing viable acoustical technologies required a detailed understandi= ng of the nonlinear phenomena associated with high-energy sound waves. Un= fortunately most commercial software for acoustics implicitly assumes a s= mall amplitude approximation. This forced the company to develop its own = software for modeling the behavior of sound waves in cylindrically symmet= ric resonators. Beginning with conservation of mass and momentum (includi= ng viscous dissipation) and the state equation for an ideal gas, the team= derived a set of coupled differential equations that could be solved num= erically. As reported at the ASA conference, Lucas, Yurii Ilinksy, Bart L= ipkens, Thomas Van Doren and Evgenia Zabolotskaya used the resulting mode= l to predict the behavior of sound waves in a variety of resonators, incl= uding the horn-cone and others shaped like a cylinder, a cone and a bulb.= The model was crucial for predicting which resonators were likely to avo= id shocks at high pressure amplitudes.

Shock waves tend to form when the relative phases of the wave=92s harmoni= cs and fundamental frequency assume certain values. RMS uses resonator ge= ometry to force the phases and amplitudes of harmonics to assume values o= ther than those characteristic of shocks. For example, in consonant reson= ators, like a simple cylindrical cavity, the wave=92s harmonics coincide = with the higher modes of the cavity, providing precisely the conditions n= eeded to generate shocks. In dissonant resonators (such as a cone), modes= are not equally spaced, and so harmonics are less likely to coincide wit= h cavity modes. As a result, resonators that achieve high pressure amplit= udes are most likely to be dissonant, although even many dissonant resona= tors produce sever shocks at low pressure amplitudes. Hence the importanc= e of being able to accurately model the physical processes occurring with= in the resonator.

The Macrosonix team also determined that efficient generation of high amp= litude sound waves required a more effective method of driving the sound = wave in the resonator. To effectively couple the mechanical motion of the= driving force to the acoustic wave in the resonator, the team used a tec= hnique called entire-resonator drive, in which the resonator is shaken al= ong its axis. In effect, this technique uses the entire inner surface of = the resonator to drive the gas, rather than just a diaphragm of piston at= one end, as was done in previous studies. As a result, entire resonator = drive minimizes energy inefficiency. Even so, energy dissipation in the g= as does raise its temperature and pressure, and therefore its sound speed= and resonance frequency. Consequently, sensors in the cavity monitor the= conditions in the gas and automatically adjust the drive frequency to re= main on resonance.

According to Lucas, a major (so far unnamed) manufacturer of appliances h= as already licensed an RMS-based compressor design for use in a refrigera= tor, which is expected to be available commercially within two years. Luc= as is confident that a range of other applications will mature in the nea= r future. At present, however, researchers in acoustics are as interested= in the characteristics of the high-amplitude acoustic waves as they are = in their applications.

In the other paper presented by the company at the San Diego conference, = Lucas, Van Doren, Lipkens, Christopher Lawrenson and David Perkins descri= bed measurements of waveforms and their dependence on driving-force ampli= tude and frequency (near resonance), as well as the effects of different = gases on the waveform for a variety of resonator geometries, including cy= lindrical, conical, horn-cone and bulb. In general, regardless of the res= onator, as the driving force (and therefore pressure amplitude) increased= , the sound waves first changed from smooth to distorted sine waves, then= developed ripples and finally discontinuous shock waves. However, resona= tor geometry was crucial in determining the pressure at which those trans= ition occurred: Dissonant resonators achieved higher pressures than conso= nant resonatores, and the horn-cone significantly outperformed the other = dissonant resonators, as predicted by the Macrosonix model. The horn-cone= was also more efficient at generating so-called DC pressure, a nonlinear= ly generated steady-state (nonoscillatory) pressure distribution that cha= nges the local equilibrium pressure about which the sound waves oscillate= =2E According to Lucas, such steady-state pressure differentials within t= he resonator up to 3.3 atmospheres and can be used in valveless pumps and= compressors, as well as to levitate heavy objects.

The researchers also observed interesting hysteresis in which nonlinear p= rocesses in the gases caused an upward or downward shift in the resonance= frequency as resonance was approached from below relative to that measur= ed when resonance was approached from above. Moreover, whether the shift = was null, upward or downward was determined by the resonator geometry, ra= ther than by the properties of the gas. Indeed, aside from small differne= ces in the pressures attained that depended on how nonideal the gas was, = the waveforms looked the same for the three different gases investigated = - R-134 (1,1,1,2-tetrafluroethane, a refrigerant), propane and nitrogen. = This finding suggests that the same resonators may be used with different= gases.

A sound future

Although Macrosonix nature as a startup high-tech firm has forced Lucas a= nd his collaborators to maintain an applied, technical focus, Lucas is ex= cited about the prospects for RMS in basic research as well as in technol= ogy. "RMS is a primarily technology," he stresses. "This is the first te= chnique capable of generating sound waves of such amplitudes. I can=92t w= ait to see what other researchers will do with these techniques." If the = reception given to the papers presented in San Diego is any indication, L= ucas=92s fellow researchers are equally enthusiastic about potential appl= ications of RMS in their own areas of research. As Steve Garrett of Penns= ylvania State University put it, "If he ever puts these in commercial fri= dges, I=92d buy one, throw away the fridge and just keep the pump to do s= cience."

References
1. Y.A. Ilinskii, B. Lipkens, T.S. Lucas, T.W. Van Doren, E. A. Zabolots= kaya, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., in press.
2. C.C. Lawrenson, B. Lipkens, T.S. Lucas, D.K. Perkins, T.W. Van Doren,= J. Acoust. Soc. Am., in press.
3. D.F. Gaitan. A.A. Atchley, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93, 2489 (1993) and re= ferences therein.
4. See for example, A.B. Coppens, J.V. Sanders, J. Acoust. Soc. Am 58, 1= 133 (1975).



 Acoustic compressors replace most of the mechanical = parts in conventional compressors with standing sound waves. During one = acoustic cycle, the pressure oscillates from high (red) to low (blue). In= the first part of the cycle (upper image), low pressure in the narrow po= rtion of the resonator closes the discharge (upper) valve and opens the i= ntake (lower) valve. Allowing low-pressure gas into the resonator. In the= second part of the cycle (lower image), high pressure in the narrow port= ion of the resonator closes the intake valve and allows high-pressure gas= to flow through the discharge valve. Because they use no oil and have fe= w moving parts, acoustic compressors are expected to be clean and reliabl= e.

I N   T H E   N E W S   |   P R E S S   R E L E A S E S   |   M E D I A   C O V E R A G E

Copyright© 1997, 1998 MacroSonix Corporation
--------------521394271BD-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 11:44:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA09226; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:41:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:41:12 -0700 Message-ID: <361BA904.AB3 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 12:46:44 -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: Woodsum: Sonetech Corp sound technology 10.7.98 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------167E59212407" Resent-Message-ID: <"R11Vc3.0.4G2.7Nx6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23100 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. --------------167E59212407 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.sonetechcorp.com/macrosonix.html --------------167E59212407 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1; name="macrosonix.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline; filename="macrosonix.html" Content-Base: "http://www.sonetechcorp.com/macrosonix .html" Correction to Previous Web Article Posted by Sonetech

3D"Sonetech

Correction to Previous Web Article Posted by Sonetec= h

Recently Sonetech posted a web article which compared recently published = work by Tim Lucas, et. al. of MacroSonix, Inc. on Resonant Macrosonic Syn= thesis for creation of unshocked waves (e.g. see Physics Today article, F= ebruary 1998) to prior work of Dr. Harvey Woodsum (of Sonetech) on Satura= tion Suppression. In the original Sonetech web article, a statement was m= ade that the effect responsible for the discovery by MacroSonix was "iden= tical" to the mechanisms proposed by Dr. Woodsum in 1979. After further s= tudy of the work of Lucas et. al., Dr. Woodsum and Mr. Lucas have agreed = that this statement as originally posted it is not strictly correct, and = may create the wrong impression with respect to the originality and impor= tance of the discovery of RMS by MacroSonix. Dr. Woodsum and Sonetech the= refore wish to retract and correct this prior statement, by adding additi= onal information. This retraction is intended to indicate the sincere res= pect of Dr. Woodsum and co-workers at Sonetech for the rather profound ac= complishments of Lucas et. al at MacroSonix in this field, as well as to = place Dr. Woodsum's original discovery in a correct historical light.
Dr. Woodsum's work, as previously cited, relates to the control of the ra= te of second harmonic formation in traveling waves in order to potentiall= y reduce or eliminate shock formation. The primary mechanism suggested in= 1979 by Dr. Woodsum for control of shock formation, was the modification= of the medium through the addition of resonant, absorbing bubbles= at the second harmonic frequency, although medium modifications to accom= plish dispersion was also suggested as an additional mechanism to exploit= =2E

The thermodynamic treatment of Dr. Woodsum (based on Westervelt's Energy = Conservation Law, the acoustic equivalent of the Manley-Rowe Equations of= nonlinear optics) shows that the lowest order harmonic responsible for r= emoval of energy from the primary frequency is the third harmonic. Contro= l of the rate of second harmonic formation was shown to be a theor= etically viable mechanism for eliminating third harmonic formation, which= in turn, theoretically mitigates or eliminates shock formation. Dr. Wood= sum would also like to point out that the original papers of 1970, 1980, = and 1981, contained minor errors which were corrected at a JASA Conferenc= e Paper in 1991.

While the highly innovative work by MacroSonix has proven Dr. Woodsum's o= riginal insight correct, several important differences are noted between = the work of Lucas et. al., and Dr. Woodsum's original theoretical discove= ry. These include: (1) Lucas et. al. are working with standing waves, whi= ch were not treated in Dr. Woodsum's papers (2) the MacroSonix approach t= o eliminating shock is more subtle, manipulating potentially many harmoni= cs in order to control shock and potentially control the wave shape in th= e cavity; the primary mechanism for controlling rate of harmonic formatio= n is also not linear absorption (3) MacroSonix has successfully developed= actual practical applications based on this new acoustic physics, which = were not foreseen or predicted by Dr. Woodsum's original work, (4) MacroS= onix is working at extremely high Mach numbers with respect to any of pri= or theoretical or experimental work of the past (4) No modification of th= e propagation medium is necessary in the MacroSonix approach.

Dr. Woodsum would like to apologize for any technical inaccuracies in the= prior posting, and would like to thank Tim Lucas, President of MacroSoni= x, Inc., for pointing out the differences cited above.

--------------167E59212407-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 12:10:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24006; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:08:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:08:43 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:15:21 -0800 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy Resent-Message-ID: <"xFP5n1.0.ts5.vmx6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23101 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:33 AM 10/7/98, David Dennard wrote: [snip wobblespeak] > It just jiggles, >like cosmic jello. Gravity could be seen as the laugh of God. And it shook >when he laughed like a bowl full of jello. > >David Dennard >The Phoenix David, I can only speak to you on this based upon my experience. I strongly suggest you buy yourself some physics and math books. Do the problems. Do some experiments. It can become a wonderful lifelong pursuit. I am engaged in that pursuit, so I speak from experience, and do as I say, at least in that regard. 8^) I have managed, by luck and by persistence, to accumulate a wonderful math and physics library, much of it at 50 cents to a dollar a book, by going to second hand stores and library discarded book sales. I must say, though, that I am surprized at how little of my time is now available for study since projects have taken over my time personal time, which has only been part time. It is amazing how much you can *do* with so little background. When I first got started, though, I had no money at all, so spent all my time reading and doing problems. If you don't even have a clear concept of the differences and similarities between the classical concepts of work, energy, and power, how can you hope to have meaningful discussion, much less serious discussion, of the topics of this forum? If you should decide to do some experiments yourself, you may be very surprised at the amount of help you can get from this forum. I have, and it has meant a lot to me. I try to give back as I can. The help from the list comes not as a big chunk of money, but in the form of free professional advice, resource locating, publication references, new ideas, helpful discussion and cross pollenation, and sometimes in the form of actual physical things showing up in the mail. At present it appears you either will not or can not do any of the following: (1) Check references, even website references, which are free (2) Discuss your ideas quantitatively. It appears that in some circumstances you are unclear about even the magnitudes of the quantities you are discussing. (3) Discuss anthing in terms of even simple formulas (4) Correctly use standard units of physical measurement, even in conversation. (5) Do even simple cheap experiments to check you concepts and take even basic measurements like time, distance, or rpm's. If I am wrong about this I would very much like to see the evidence in the form of your future communications. The vortex-l list is a wonderful resource. Don't waste it! Get involved. Get serious. Get to work and have some fun. I think the response you get from this group will be in proportion to the degree you show you are serious. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 12:37:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA05826; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:34:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:34:36 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:41:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Resent-Message-ID: <"3tB0a3.0.pQ1.A9y6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23102 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello Dieter! Nice to see you here. I hope you stick around, even if it does get boring for you! At 9:59 AM 10/6/98, britz wrote: [snip[ > >I'd say forget fluid dynamics and supercomputers. I had assumed that modelling with fluid dynamics and supercomputers was a given impossibility. Didn't make that clear in my statement though, I guess. >They would cost you a >lot of money, but they are almost guaranteed to prove that you should not >have an effect, because such a study would be based on orthodox >assumptions that exclude a novel effect. it would be better to do a much >simpler, thermodynamic-style, overall, analysis: How much power is going >in, what are the pathways for heat losses, tally everything up. To do a >mechanistic analysis to confirm your effect, you need to know the novel >physical law that causes it. > >-- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db For some reason I have the impression the effect John is looking for is that described in Larry Wharton's "Rotational corrections for eddy viscosity and heat conduction" (Please correct me if I am wrong on this John.) I have attached a copy of Larry's summary of the paper. It seems to me that an accurate calculation is probably out of reach for such a complicated problem. Curve fitting and number adjustment, calibration, fudging, is also useless in general if the experiment changes, i.e. between a control run and live run, unless the adjustment is based on an appropriate underlying model, at minimum a model with the appropriate dimensionality. For example, adjusting the wrong curve to a point will not insure accurate modelling of other points on the curve. Perhaps a better approach would be to carefully design a control experiment. Then the results would depend primarily on measurements and not so much on theory. At 11:43 AM 9/29/98, Larry Wharton wrote: [snip] >Rotational corrections for eddy viscosity and heat conduction >Lawrence E. Wharton >Popular Summary >Turbulent transport of momentum and heat, sometimes called eddy transport, >refers to the movement of heat or momentum caused by fluid mixing and >fluctuations. If a tub was filled with cold water and then with hot water >at one end, there would be heat concentrated at the hot end of the tub. >If the water was then mixed, the heat would be equalized and there would >be a net movement of heat from the hot end to the cold end. This would be >an example of eddy heat transport. An analogous example of eddy momentum >transport would be an area of water with momentum or motion at one end and >no motion at the other end. If the water was mixed up then the motion >would also equalize and some of the motion would be moved from the moving >end to the non moving end. This turbulent transport involves fluid >motions and in a rotating fluid those motions are affected by the Coriolis >Force. >The effect of rotation of the fluid or gas on this eddy transport has been >calculated and a significant modification due to the Coriolis Force has >been found. The flow of water in the Mississippi River is sometimes given >as an example of the effect of the Coriolis force. As the water flows >from North to South, the rotation of the Earth causes the flow to move >over to the West bank. If some hot water was dumped in the middle of the >Mississippi River, this Coriolis force would cause it to move over toward >the West bank. So while the river current is transporting the hot water >from North to South, the Coriolis force causes it also to move to the >West. This extra movement of heat to the West is an example of the >rotational correction for heat transport. >One result from the rotational correction to the heat transport is that it >may interact with the momentum transport to cause a phenomena known as >"negative viscosity". Normal viscosity acts to slow down fluid motions but >"negative viscosity" has the opposite effect and actually acts to speed up >fluid motions. If a bucket were filled with rotating water then the water >would slow down in time due to the effects of normal viscosity. Negative >viscosity would force the water to continue rotating, contrary to our >experience with normal viscosity. In the late 1960's the belief evolved, >lead by prominent meteorologists E. N. Lorentz and V. P. Starr, that >negative viscosity was responsible for maintaining rotating structures in >the Earth's atmosphere such as high and low pressure systems and the >overall atmospheric rotation. Later, with the advent of computers, the >negative viscosity concept was abandoned and replaced with artificial >rigging of computer atmospheric models. This may have been a mistake as >negative viscosity may actually exist. It could be useful in >understanding rotating atmospheric structures and it could be applied to >the development of improved mechanical devices such as jet engines. > > >Lawrence E. Wharton >NASA/GSFC code 913 >Greenbelt MD 20771 >(301) 286-3486 Email - wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 13:16:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25300; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:13:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:13:16 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981007151656.006dde88 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 15:16:56 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"iG3lY.0.sA6.Qjy6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23103 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:15 10/7/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >If you don't even have a clear concept of the differences and similarities >between the classical concepts of work, energy, and power, how can you hope >to have meaningful discussion, much less serious discussion, of the topics >of this forum? >The vortex-l list is a wonderful resource. Don't waste it! Get involved. >Get serious. Get to work and have some fun. I think the response you get >from this group will be in proportion to the degree you show you are >serious. David, I would like to retract my earlier response, which was not very constructive, and endorse what Horace is saying above. Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 14:03:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12275; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:56:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:56:09 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:54:00 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: DoE ERAB committee Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810071656_MC2-5BFD-98D0 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"lbziL.0.Y_2.cLz6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23104 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Dick Blue rewrites history: Those of you who have been around long enough may recall that when the chips were down no one could show an operating cell to the DOE Committee and say that it was producing "excess heat." That is incorrect. The committee adjourned long before working cells could be set up. Later, Melvin Miles and others invited the DoE Committee to see a working cell, but the committe turned down the invitations. The problem is, the committee rushed to judgment in six weeks, whereas an experiment takes six months. The committee's goal was too rubber-stamp the establishment point of view quickly, before real data could be gathered. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 14:39:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA28026; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:37:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:37:38 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:38:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810072138.OAA11954 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Twinkle Resent-Message-ID: <"VtEJr3.0.or6.Xyz6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23105 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I am not a scientist. I said that from the begining. Twinkle, twinkle, little star I think I know just what you are Way up in the sky so bright Like a diamond in the night I wish I may, I wish I might Have my wish I dreamed last night. THE TWINKLE of a STAR It is more simple than I ever thought. And I know I probably won't get the credit. Build a whirlpool like I said and the world will have all the clean energy it needs. Anyone can do it. I ask no money for it. Even if you steal my information it really won't help. It's just too simple. Any one can use it as soon as they find out about it. It is as simple as a fountain, Hero's Fountain. Spread the word, as quickly as possible. Put you own name on it, I really don't care. The only way you can stop me is kill me. And if so I will die bravely, for I know I said the truth. I will not shut up. I do not need to study your dogma. This is so simple a child can understand. Ye shall know the truth and the truth will set you free. And I will keep on telling this story as long as there is a breath in me. It is now going out to hundreds on many lists. Build the whirlpool! That's all it takes! Do it call now, for heaven's sake! If I am killed, at least you had a chance to hear. Power to the computer. Power to Whirlpower. David Dennard "in sackcloth and ashes" From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 14:40:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA28646; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:38:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:38:39 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <361BDF7F.2FA96734 css.mot.com> Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 16:39:11 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"S8vqM3.0.U_6.Uzz6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23106 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > For some reason I have the impression the effect John is looking for is > that described in Larry Wharton's "Rotational corrections for eddy > viscosity and heat conduction" (Please correct me if I am wrong on this > John.) I have attached a copy of Larry's summary of the paper. I printed off a copy when he posted it. It would be nice to be able to read the whole thing though...... 8^) Come on Larry! Don't be such a tease! 8^) > It seems to me that an accurate calculation is probably out of reach for > such a complicated problem. Curve fitting and number adjustment, > calibration, fudging, is also useless in general if the experiment changes, > i.e. between a control run and live run, unless the adjustment is based on > an appropriate underlying model, at minimum a model with the appropriate > dimensionality. For example, adjusting the wrong curve to a point will > not insure accurate modelling of other points on the curve. > > Perhaps a better approach would be to carefully design a control > experiment. Then the results would depend primarily on measurements and > not so much on theory. I would like to do both, unless the theory aspect gets too convoluted. I only want to have a base line model by which to intelligently evaluate findings. What is the point of taking careful measurements if you aren't sure what they mean? ha ha ha Typically I've always built first, explained later. I have to take a different approach this time because the design variable are too numerous to systematically try them all. BTW, there has been something I've been trying to find and I have yet to recall where or how I heard of it. I am assuming someone here brought it up as this is only outlet I have to discuss such things. Did Schauberger have an ideal spiral formula or ratio when he designed his water turbines? For some reason I want to say it was named a gazelle's antler or something like that. Ring any bells? Thanks in advance. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I don't want the whole world ... ... just your half." - TMBG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 16:25:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA08490; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:19:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:19:52 -0700 Message-ID: <361BEA4B.5D48 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:25:16 -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: mi moller.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com, kerbruck@mit.edu, epstein@mit.edu, sds mrl.mit.edu, gordy@mtl.mit.edu Subject: Murray: Ashley: MacroSonix resonators for high pressure pulsed combustion 10.7.98 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------68A4203870E6" Resent-Message-ID: <"83BvV3.0.V42.MS_6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23107 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. --------------68A4203870E6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Oct. 6, 1998 Hello, As a MIT educated layman, I'm passing along some possibly useful ideas and information. Tim Lucas of MacroSonix Corp., Richmond, VA [www.macrosonix.com] has invented carefully calculated resonant chambers that allow fairly coherent acoustic waves to build up to 500 psi at 600 cps, with the air actually moving back and forth ~6 cm in a ~18 cm long chamber, attaining 0.5 Mach, and pressure variation of 27:1 peak to minimum. So, there is a potential application to small pulsed jet and rocket engines, with high combusion pressures and high exhaust velocities. http://www.macrosonix.com/030098me.htm [snip] Electric-power generation using pulse combustion of hydrocarbon fuels could also be realized through this technology. Using clean-burning, high-efficiency pulse-combustion engines similar to those used on Nazi Germany's V-1 buzz-bomb weapon, engineers could create high-energy-density standing waves inside a football-shaped RMS cavity. These resonators would be attached to electromagnetic dynamos to generate electricity. In effect, this scheme would mean running the acoustic compressor cycle in reverse to produce electric power. [end of snip] Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/labs/GTL/ RESEARCH Power MEMS Micro-Rockets Prof. Jack L. Kerrebrock Adam London Overview: The ultimate objective of the MIT/NASA Microrocket project is to develop and demonstrate a Silicon micro-machined, liquid-fueled, turbopump-driven,bipropellant rocket engine that is fully regeneratively cooled. We envision this liquid oxygen/ethanol rocket engine to be a wafer-like structure approximately 1.5 cm long, 1.2 cm wide, and about 2.5 mm thick, producing a thrust of a little over three pounds. This means it would have a thrust to weight ratio exceeding 10,000, which compares quite favorably with the space shuttle main engine's thrust to weight ratio of around 70, or even the Russian NK-33 engine's thrust to weight ratio of approximately 125. In addition, the fact that it will use pumps to provide the high chamber pressure means that the propellant tanks on the spacecraft that use this type of engine will be un-pressurized, greatly saving in total spacecraft mass. [GTL Home] [Aero/Astro Home] [MIT Home] --------------68A4203870E6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1; name="030098me.htm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline; filename="030098me.htm" Content-Base: "http://www.macrosonix.com/030098me.htm" MacroSonix - Media Coverage

I N   T H E   N E W S   |   P R E S S   R E L E A S E S   |   M E D I A   C O V E R A G E

MEDIA  = ; COVERAGE


March 1998

Sound Waves at= Work

Researchers have devised a new technique to use soun= d waves, opening the way for simple acoustic compressors, speedy chemical= -process reactors, and clean electric-power generators.
By Steven Ashley, Associate Editor

EVER SINCE ELECTRICITY became a familiar part of everyday life, people ha= ve grown accustomed to the idea of getting the power for various mechanic= al tasks from unseen electromagnetic waves traveling through metal wires.= Few, however, have witnessed the acoustic analogue of electromagnetism-= sound waves, or pressure waves, propagating through gas-filled chambers-d= oing much in the way of useful work.

This CAD drawing depicts an acoustic-air-compresso= r demonstration unit based on MacroSonix Corp.'s resonant-macrosonic-synt= hesis technology.

That situation may change, as a new way of packing large amounts of power= into sound waves can now be used as a prime mover for a range of industr= ially significant processes. Over the past decade, Tim Lucas, an acousti= cian who is president and chief executive officer of MacroSonix Corp. in = Richmond, Va., has developed a technique by which standing sound waves re= sonating in specially shaped closed cavities can be loaded with thousands= of times more energy than was previously possible. For example, the new= devices can generate dynamic (oscillating) pressures exceeding 500 pound= s per square inch in gases, more than what is needed for commercial appli= cations. "You've heard about researchers using sound to levitate Ping-Po= ng balls inside tubes he said. "Our technology should allow us to levita= te bowling balls with sound waves."

Lucas and his research colleagues at MacroSonix are focusing on exploitin= g what he called "a new primary technology" akin in significance to laser= s or semiconductor transistors. "We have reached the power-density level= s of machines we use every day-machines developed in the industrial revol= ution," Lucas said. "Now we can replace those machines and their moving = parts-with sound waves."

Lucas's wave-shaping technology is known as resonant macrosonic synthesis= (RMS). With some clever engineering, he said, the elevated acoustic-ene= rgy levels produced using RMS can be tapped for a wide range of industria= l applications, including simplified compressors, pumps, speedy chemical-= process reactors, and clean electric-power generators. MacroSonix has al= ready licensed the RMS technology to a large appliance manufacturer to de= velop acoustic compressors for home refrigerators and air conditioners. The new technology should enable engineers to use sound to perform tasks = commonly performed by mechanical devices, Lucas said'. This inherent sim= plicity could result in lower manufacturing costs, higher energy efficien= cy, lower operating costs, increased reliability and durability, and oill= ess operation, which is critical for the semiconductor and pharmaceutical= industries.

RMS ranks among the most significant recent advances in acoustics, along = with thermoacoustics and sonoluminescence, according to other experts in = the field. Thermoacoustics is concerned with the thermal effects resulti= ng from acoustically driven gas compression and expansion processes; sono= luminescence is the intense flashes of light that can be generated as an = air bubble trapped in an aqueous sound field collapses.

High-power standing sound waves can be generated insid= e an RMS bulb resonator (front) by driving it with a linear motor (left).= A cutaway (rear) reveals that the specially shaped closed cavity is hol= low.
MacroSonix has demonstrated the ability to produce high-pressure amplitud= es inside resonator cavities, according to Greg Swift, a staff member of = the Condensed Matter and Thermal Physics Group at Los Alamos National Lab= oratory in Los Alamos, N.M. "It's the equivalent of shaking a dishpan ful= l of water and getting waves 16 inches high. I've never seen anything qu= ite this high before."

Anthony Atchley, head of the graduate program in acoustics at Pennsylvani= a State University in State College, was similarly impressed with how Mac= roSonix's technology manages to produce high-amplitude standing waves in = resonators. Atchley noted that, by suppressing the generation of harmoni= cs, they sculpt the waveform in a way that distorts it but doesn't shock = it. "Of course, the big question is: What else can you do with it?"

RESONATOR ACOUSTICS

Finite-amplitude acoustic phenomena in resonant cavities have been of pra= ctical interest since the 1930s, when German researchers studied them in = connection with the development of mufflers for tanks. Historically, sci= entists have believed that there is an intrinsic limit for sound waves in= gases (in closed half-wavelength resonator cavities) that would never al= low high-energy levels and acoustic pressures to exist. Previous experim= ental work had shown that sound waves in a resonator would build up energ= y only to a certain level and no more. This acoustic saturation point oc= curs when shock waves start to form. Once a shock wave exists, any energ= y added to the wave is wasted as heat without any increase in the dynamic= pressure of the wave.

The MacroSonix technology "relates to pressure waves in gases, which ten= d be nonlinear in behavior," Lucas said. A mechanical analogy would be a= nonlinear spring: If you displace the spring only a small amount, the re= sponse will be mostly linear. A large displacement, on the other hand, w= ill yield a nonlinear response. Similarly, if you drive small-pressure a= mplitudes into a cavity, the dynamic pressure will be small compared to t= he average gas pressure, and you can expect the resulting wave to propaga= te without distortion. Conversely, higher pressures typically produce di= storted waves.

In general, a rigorous theoretical model for nonlinear standing waves, ev= en in simple cavity geometries, is quite involved. In any real situation= , thermal and viscous losses at the walls of the cavity must be considere= d in addition to the mainstream losses. This typically requires a three-= dimensional solution to the nonlinear wave equation that includes a descr= iption of the motion of the compressible fluid within the boundary layer.= To simplify its analysis, Lucas's research team uses a two dimensional = axisymmetric model, which is made possible by the axially symmetric shape= s of the resonator cavities they use.

To explain this complex condition, Lucas suggested considering a simplifi= ed example in which a sine-wave pressure oscillation is imparted to some = average gas pressure in the cavity. These oscillating pressure values, h= e noted, can be added to the average pressure at each position along the = length of the axisymmetric cavity in the same way an ac voltage riding on= a dc voltage is summed at each location along the pathway of the current= =2E The sine-wave oscillation superimposes itself on the average pressur= e, so the peak pressure is the difference between the average pressure an= d peak value of the sine wave. Similarly, a significant pressure deviati= on occurs at the low-pressure trough of the sine wave, he added. Company= researchers work with relative pressure ratios normalized by dividing th= e peak pressure difference by the average pressure.

According to Lucas, the high-pressure regions are also areas of significa= nt temperature deviation. "And since sound speed goes with temperature, = a higher-temperature pressure peak tends to catch up to the trough [a low= -pressure, lower-temperature region] ahead of it. The whole wave leans i= nto a sawtooth shape." This pressure-steepening effect, in which the peak= s catch up to the troughs, continues until the peaks reach the now near-v= ertical pressure drops and can go no farther. The resulting sawtooth-sha= ped waveforms are called shock waves. Finally, because of the high tempe= rature gradient that exists across the shock front, "no matter how much e= nergy you try to put in, it's lost as heat ' " he said. "You can't store= any more energy in the wave," which has reached what is known as acousti= c saturation. Another way to consider this situation is to think of the = added energy as going into higher harmonics instead of higher amplitudes.=

Previously, the nonlinear nature of the gaseous medium through which soun= d waves propagate was considered the primary limiting factor in creating = higher amplitude (more-powerful) sound waves. Lucas discovered that for = resonant sound waves, the geometry of the resonator cavity through which = the sound waves travel is the most important factor in determining the sh= ape of the wave.

This computer rendering shows the discharge and suctio= n cycles of an idealized acoustic compressor. The standing wave formed i= nside the resonator causes the gas pressure to oscillate, driving a disch= arge valve and a suction valve to convert the pressure oscillation into g= as compression and flow.

In fact, many researchers in the past had used cylindrical resonators, wh= ich is the one resonator configuration most likely to produce shock waves= , he said. Most of the previous work was done in cylindrical cavities, w= hich are pretty much guaranteed to give a shock wave in a standing wave; = this contributed to the perception that the problem was intractable. Som= e researchers experimenting with other cavity shapes showed that the onse= t of shocking could be suppressed, but their estimates of the best dynami= c gas-molecule velocity-the speed of a parcel of gas-was approximately Ma= ch 0.1. Thus, the general perception remained that the research was a dea= d end.

As noted, the key realization leading to RMS is that the shape of the osc= illating resonator can be used to control or tune the shape of the pressu= re waveform (the phase and amplitude of the wave's harmonics). While wor= king at Los Alamos in 1990, Lucas found that he could create relatively l= arge-amplitude, or macrosonic, sound waves up to 60 pounds per square inc= h by properly shaping the resonator.

He later demonstrated that the shape of the waves could be determined by = the shape of the resonator even at extremely high pressure amplitudes. T= hus, RMS allows the synthesis of nonshocked waveforms, which in turn lets= large amounts of energy to be added to the wave so extremely high dynami= c pressures can be achieved. "We get a specific series of harmonics that= have a specific amplitude and phase to produce the desired waveform" via= Fourier wave summing. MacroSonix's cavity shapes, which include various= cones, cone-horn hybrids, and bulbs, are said to have high Q, the resona= nce-storage quality factor.

The next technical hurdle researchers addressed was to figure out how to = transfer a lot of power into a cavity, Lucas said. "People typically use= moving pistons or diaphragms, but at the vibration rates we wanted to wo= rk at-500 or 600 cycles per second-you have to move the piston back and f= orth by 3 or 4 centimeters very rapidly," which is quite difficult to do.= "I decided to shake the whole thing-the entire cavity-with a linear mot= or, a vibrator that is nothing more than a glorified electromagnet," he s= aid. "That way, the whole inner surface of the resonator transfers energ= y to the enclosed gas. Now the cavity acts like one large piston."

Lucas has demonstrated his RMS technology using a resonator cavity shaped= like an elongated pear. When this cavity is vibrated with a linear moto= r so that its wars move back and forth a distance of about 100 microns, i= t resonates with a smooth, shockless wave of high energy. Acoustic parti= cle velocities in RMS cavities have reached Mach numbers greater than 0.5= =2E He reported that there appears to be no theoretical reason why partic= le velocities cannot reach Mach 1.

FIRST APPLICATIONS

Since making his basic discovery eight years ago, Lucas has been working = in secret on RMS, forming MacroSonix along the way. To date, the company= has been awarded 10 U.S. patents. Now he is revealing the technology to= the rest of the world in hopes of licensing the technology to companies = that could exploit various RMS applications and forming research consorti= a to expand the company's advanced research on the technology.

The first major application for RMS technology is likely to be a simple, = low-cost acoustic compressor. Compressors, of course, are all but ubiqui= tous in the modern world. MacroSonix's licensing and development agreeme= nt with a Fortune 500 appliance maker was signed in 1994 for the manufact= ure of acoustic compressors for household refrigerators, air conditioners= , and certain commercial refrigeration and cooling applications. "We are= developing a lubricant-free acoustic compressor that is environmentally = safe and promises to be more energy-efficient than standard compressors,"= he said. In this compressor, the standing wave becomes the machine that= provides the required gas compression, and it eliminates the need for oi= l and moving parts such as pistons connecting rods, crankshafts, and bear= ings.

A current version of the acoustic compressor has a cavity that oscillates= back and forth by about 100 microns. "You can't see it move," Lucas sai= d. "It's almost a solid-state compressor' " Inside the cavity, dynamic g= as-molecule displacement is about 5 to 6 centimeters, about one-third of = the resonator length.

The compressor has a large-diameter end and a small-diameter end where a = pair of reed valves are installed. "Since the losses are pretty much pro= portional to pressure, you don't want high pressure everywhere," he said,= noting that the pressures at the small end can be seven to 10 times high= er than those at the large end. MacroSonix engineers designed the cavity= to concentrate most of its acoustic losses at the small high-pressure en= d. Peak-to-minimum-pressure ratios of 27:1 were observed using this type = of device. Practical compressors for air, refrigerants, or other gases r= equire pressure ratios (discharge to suction) of 3:1 or more.

In operation, the compressor emits a nearly pure tone that is sufficientl= y loud to require a sound-deadening enclosure. "We are confident that we = can meet what's become an appliance industry standard-about 35 decibels, = which is lower than a whisper;" he said.

Lucas reported that his team has also designed an acoustic compressor tha= t doesn't need valves. It is based on creating a static pressure distrib= ution in which a high-pressure area is located at a port on one end of th= e resonator and a low-pressure area is placed near another port at the ot= her end. Although this design generates a lower-pressure head, it offers= the benefit of noncontaminating operation. The valveless operation make= s the compressor pump almost entirely solid-state.

This bulb resonator shape is only one of many cavi= ty geometries that can be used for resonant macrosonic synthesis.

For competitive reasons connected with MacroSonix's licensing deals, Luca= s has not revealed the energy efficiencies attained by his acoustical com= pressors. "In these kinds of markets, cost and efficiency are king," he = said. "If you can't compete on those issues, no one would be interested = in the technology."

OTHER RMS CONCEPTS

According to Lucas, the new RMS concepts will make previously unattainabl= e physical effects possible. Such effects could be used in a range of ne= w industrial devices and processes, with cavities shaped specifically for= each application. For example, specialized noncontaminating acoustic co= mpressors and pumps for commercial gases, ultrapure fluids, and hazardous= fluids are a possibility, as are roughing vacuum pumps, which are import= ant for the pharmaceutical and semiconductor industries.

Another application would be simplified process reactors for the chemical= and pharmaceutical industries. RMS technology could be used to drive an= d control thermal and kinetic chemical reactions by producing localized h= eating with rapid pressure changes. "Theoretically," Lucas said, "you co= uld change pressure and temperature rapidly, and turn the reaction on and= off as needed. We've also demonstrated that we can move material in and= out of cavities without disrupting the standing waves inside. This coul= d allow us to turn batch processes into semicontinuous processes," in whi= ch small amounts of material are successively brought into the cavity, pr= ocessed, and moved out.

Acoustic chambers could be used for separation, agglomeration, levitation= , mixing, and pulverization of materials. For example, improved acoustic = agglomeration of particulate contaminants-causing them to stick together-= could lead to improved environmental gas scrubbers for power-plant flue g= ases by allowing smaller units to operate at higher flow rates. Rapidly s= olidified metal alloying operations might make good use of RMS-based levi= tation devices.

Electric-power generation using pulse combustion of hydrocarbon fuels cou= ld also be realized through this technology. Using clean-burning, high-e= fficiency pulse-combustion engines similar to those used on Nazi Germany'= s V-1 buzz-bomb weapon, engineers could create high-energy-density standi= ng waves inside a football-shaped RMS cavity. These resonators would be = attached to electromagnetic dynamos to generate electricity. In effect, = this scheme would mean running the acoustic compressor cycle in reverse t= o produce electric power.

Lucas said MacroSonix is working on a new licensing deal for an RMS air c= ompressor and another with an electronic-component supplier. "We're also= looking at letting a license for a special compressor for handling hazar= dous gases of interest to semiconductor firms." The company would like to= enter into larger research consortia with private, university, or govern= ment research labs to explore the R-MS electric-power-generation concept.= Finally, Lucas is interested in setting up RMS research centers at univ= ersities to spread the technical expertise needed to best exploit the inn= ovation.

"Now that large amounts of energy can be transferred into resonant sound = waves," Lucas said, "these sound waves can be used to perform industry's = high-powered tasks in completely new and simpler ways. RMS quite literal= ly unlocks the power of sound."

[ TOP ]

I N   T H E   N E W S   |   P R E S S   R E L E A S E S   |   M E D I A   C O V E R A G E

Copyright© 1997, 1998 MacroSonix Corporation
--------------68A4203870E6-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 16:40:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA16717; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:39:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:39:30 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981007151656.006dde88 mail.eden.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:38:12 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy Resent-Message-ID: <"3ftRh2.0.l44.mk_6s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23108 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: David - Scott Little wrote to you: >At 11:15 10/7/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>If you don't even have a clear concept of the differences and similarities >>between the classical concepts of work, energy, and power, how can you hope >>to have meaningful discussion, much less serious discussion, of the topics >>of this forum? > >>The vortex-l list is a wonderful resource. Don't waste it! Get involved. >>Get serious. Get to work and have some fun. I think the response you get >>from this group will be in proportion to the degree you show you are >>serious. > >David, I would like to retract my earlier response, which was not very >constructive, and endorse what Horace is saying above. > >Scott And I also strongly endorse Horaces very well stated advice. But I also fully understand and find myself often sharing Scott's feelings of frustration that comes out as dark humor like he expressed in his other post. One is easily driven to such levels of irritation after seeing things like your recent "origin of energy" post. ***PLEASE*** take Horace's excellent advice, and spare the list from such things until you have personally achieved some rigorous perspective on these matters. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 18:19:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA01448; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:14:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:14:49 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981008012318.00daa0d0 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 21:23:18 -0400 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com, From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: How magnets work for health Cc: Alan.CHEAH adecco.com, ahannan@MIT.EDU, deadnuts@deadnuts.com, lupem world.std.com, peg@wintergreen.com, Cyberinga@zz.com, bso acm.org, claudeg@world.std.com, DaleSVP@ipa.net, dtassen c-zone.net, sweetser@world.std.com, clsmith@darwin.bu.edu, ccantor sequenom.com, 76753.3551@compuserve.com, eben@ergeng.com, ehill world.std.com, leep@world.std.com, ejp@world.std.com, wordpros inforamp.net, moy@ziplink.net, gjcheah@guybutler.com, wellenstein binah.cc.brandeis.edu, hic@world.std.com, jkokor alum.mit.edu, Jim Hile , jim@msri.org, discjt servtech.com, John Ranta , jsearl tako.demon.co.uk, joshprokop@worldnet.att.net, KeelyNet DallasTexas.net, lstelmac@lynx.neu.edu, Leonard Dvorson , cadman@mediaone.net, ohl world.std.com, pgm@world.std.com, rsmith@itiip.com, raddison world.std.com, 71022.3001@compuserve.com, 73577.123 compuserve.com, thiahadge@aol.com, tcapizzi@world.std.com, tom.duff poweroasis.com, TAFAUL@aol.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com, WhiteGold lyghtforce.com, WhiteGold@zz.com Resent-Message-ID: <"9bR4X2.0.VM.6817s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23109 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello All; Cat Vitamins: check magnesium level http://www.cats-only.com/facts.html Proper Cat water flowrate: http://www.pricemd.com/felinediabetes/pupd.htm Magnesium & Disease Prevention: see Diabetes http://www.execpc.com/~cc/tmiller.html Magnesium & Toxic Shock: http://lonezone.com/HEALTH/HERB/p13.txt Diabetes overview: http://www.ummed.edu/dept/diabetes/handbook/chap01.htm Biomagnetics: http://fox.nstn.ca/~dkeeshan/articles/biomag.html Water Soluble Magnesium: http://www.fleshmaster.com/magnesium.htm Other Water Soluble Minerals: http://www.fleshmaster.com/lifemor.htm Magnesium deficiency 72% of us: http://www.execpc.com/~magnesum/articles.html This is not an endorsement to use any of these methods. Reference purposes only. Sorry for the cross posts; but I was challenged as to the validity of this info. Thus I include the above references. Re: Alex Chiu - I talked to Alex. He told me that it was through trial and error experimentation on himself for several years which is how he figured out his magnet placement. The rings and foot braces look like the anti scaling magnets they strap onto waterpipes. I don't know the implications for the acupuncture meridiens. Dennis At 03:29 PM 10/7/98 -0700, Robert A Longworth wrote: >I am a browser and my interest was piqued by some partial comments on >"frenrg" discussions I stumbled across. Have a cat and me with diabetes and >I am always looking for new input re: diabetes. I am approaching 76 yrs >old, the cat isn't or that would really be astounding, can you give me a >lead to find the source info on that material. >I don't know if I am talking to Dennis or Chris . . . >My name is Bob. aka: 5spot > > >Many Thx > > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 18:39:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA18467; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:36:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:36:22 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:37:40 -0700 Message-Id: <199810080137.SAA19020 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: The Origin of Energy Resent-Message-ID: <"yiJSy1.0.OW4.LS17s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23110 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 11:15 10/7/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>If you don't even have a clear concept of the differences and similarities >>between the classical concepts of work, energy, and power, how can you hope >>to have meaningful discussion, much less serious discussion, of the topics >>of this forum? > >>The vortex-l list is a wonderful resource. Don't waste it! Get involved. >>Get serious. Get to work and have some fun. This is precisely what I am saying. I have no problem with anyone, with any level of background asking any silly question whatever. I have no problem with any level of background telling us that such and such has been observed, or claimed to have been observed no matter how outrageous the claims may be. What I do have trouble with, is someone who is admitedly not a scientist, telling this group that some strange energy **can** (note the word *can* and not the word *has* as in the SMOT device for example), be derived from a wobble or whatever. Tell me *what is*, and not *what you think might be*. Give me facts. Give me speeds, or energy balances if you want to state things as facts. And if instead you want to suppose that energy might be derived, then make the statements as **opinions**. Opinions are things you think. Observations are things you know because you measured them. The statements by Steve I think it was that the velocity of the outer clouds was faster than the velocity of the inner clouds was a statement of observation, one of the only statements dealing with the hurricane thread. It wasn't until I dug up that article that the discussion group even learned that there were strong horizontal winds associated with the amplification of evaporation along the surface. If David wants to make some statements and tell us all about hurricanes I am all for it. I really seriously wish he would take it on himself to research them in detail. I would think he would want to since this has to do with his pet project, and I certainly am interested in any facts about them. But here I am, one more time, writing bantor and wasting all of our time. David, the proper response is not a long response to this. It is simply, "OK, I'll go out onto the internet and type in the word, hurricane plus wobble, into some search engines and get into the university web pages to learn about what is known, and I will come back with the observational information and some statistics about hurricanes". Be creative with your search word choices. Get some statistics about wind speeds and wobble periods. Those things can ultimately tie back to solar acoustic oscillations. It is now known that despite the fact that the sun's luminosity changes dramatically little during the 11 year solar cycle, the cloudiness of the earth's atmosphere is strongly linked to the solar period. It is known that the clouds that orbit Venus every day have a 4.2 day period (despite the fact that Venus doesn't rotate at all, FAPP, ie 2 sun rises and sun sets per year), and it is known that there is a peak in the solar acoustic oscillations power at that period. It is known that the Be 10 concentration in the Greenland ice cap varies in cadence with the solar cycle. It is known that the variation contines right on through the Maunder minimum when sun spots virtually didn't occur, indicating that there is something more fundamental going on in the sun than just the spots. These things are facts. They are observations. David, go get some facts like these regarding hurricanes and let's stop this BS about what anyone "thinks". The only other discussion is whether or not you get energy out of the gravitational field. And if it isn't clear that a cm cubed of water that begins in the ocean, evaporates, rises, rains, runs down a river through a turbine, and returns back to the ocean again, doesn't produce energy out of moving around that loop, then anyone who is confused needs to read a thermodynamics text and why that process excludes perpetual motion machines from existing. The only way to get energy out of the gravitational potential is if you have some material, or some device, such that you can change the gravitational weight of an object so that it is less when it is going up than it is when it is going down. In that case, then you can get energy out of the gravitational field by building a Ferris Wheel, turbine or some other effect such that you actively change the weight of the objects. But, the amount of energy expended to perform the change must not exceed the amount of energy gained by doing it, otherwise you still have nothing. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 19:58:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA04416; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 19:55:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 19:55:59 -0700 Message-Id: <199810080257.MAA04084 tig.com.au> From: "NeXuS" To: Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:53:32 +1000 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: <"33Z4M3.0.v41.-c27s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23111 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Just wondering doese this technique high frequency electricity to break up the molecules. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 20:51:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA28315; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 20:49:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 20:49:45 -0700 Message-ID: <171c01bdf26e$81dfe3e0$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Subject: Re: Re; Whirlpower vs Hydropower? Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:48:17 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"iW9u62.0.-v6.OP37s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23112 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I agree Ross, further study is required. I have only begun to read the works of penrose as he seems to be an interesting fellow. In your opinion Ross, which of these references listed here has the most relevance to what we are examining and trying to achieve? >Have you read about reverberation mapping of active galactic nuclei in >either of "Active Galactic Nuclei" by Robson or "An Introduction to Active >Galactic Nuclei" by Peterson? > >Have you read about "The Nature of Space and Time" by Penrose and Hawking? Could you please elaborate on the penrose process for extracting energy of a spinning black hole? >Or "Gravity's Fatal Attraction" by Begelman and Rees? Or "Quasar's >Redshifts and Controversies" by Arp, or Quantum Field Theory in Curved >Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics"? > >Or have you read the simplistic accounts presented in "The Cambridge Atlas >of Astronomy"? > >Probably the answer is no to all of the above. So when you say, "I have not >read where anyone has mentioned such and such", so what. You haven't read >much of anything, so of course you haven't ever seen where others have >already considered these things. You haven't even read the literature of >hurricane thermodynamics to see how wobble and precession is considered in >the standard literature. So you don't know whether your ideas are new or not. > >GO DO THE RESEARCH. Then report back what you find. Don't proclaim that no >one has studied it. In your opinion Ross, where is money and time best invested then, I have not read what you have, so where should we focus our efforts? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 20:58:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA30752; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 20:55:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 20:55:20 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 20:56:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810080356.UAA02702 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> From: "David Dennard" Reply-To: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: The Origin of Energy Resent-Message-ID: <"FIVXH1.0.QW7.dU37s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23113 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The Peaceful Energy March organizer just asked me to send him all my Whirlpower information. This stuff is going to Washington. People on the other lists are talking serious building plans. Steve, did anyone ever offer you any help to build? I know there was one person asking and I said talk to you. If anyone on this list can help me a little, please send Richard Laskin of the University of Maryland any and all information from here, from my website, from my discussion board to; PlantSeedK aol.com You will be rewarded by history for your efforts. And I will not forget. Well, that's it for me here for a while. This computer will be operational for less than 12 more hours. If any wants to contact me and see the tensegrity airship prototype and has the ability to help me, now is the time. If you don't, there are many others who will. I have done my job. If you can't see it, if you don't want to recognize it, that's just your tough luck. I gave you the chance, that's more than most here did. (a few exceptions :) and you know who you are) I'm out of here. email is still available for a very limited time. I'm going to Disney Land. Not really, but I sure have got that record breaking feeling. But I am taking a well deserved vacation, and this computer is going to the shop for an overhaul. Making this thing work has been like kicking a mule. Later, Dennard From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 21:22:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA07601; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:19:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:19:48 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981008042849.00d86134 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:28:49 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Resent-Message-ID: <"dJNfF3.0.cs1.Zr37s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23114 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:14 AM 10/7/98 +0200, you wrote: >Why not stick to 1.48 V? That is the minimum total cell voltage (with >all concentrations at standard values), above which a current will >flow. You could indeed get 100% efficiency at this voltage, but with >an infinitesimal current flowing. I believe that Brown's Gas (monatomic hydrogen/monatomic oxygen) is made by maintaining as close to 1.48V (as I recall) as possible. Commercial Brown's Gas generators use large electrode surface areas to increase efficiency. >If you want a finite current, you >need an overvoltage above that. The actual reaction takes the power >given by 1.48 V multiplied by the current, and the rest, as Rothwell >writes correctly, goes into waste heat. The way they determine if Brown's Gas is being generated is by measuring cool electrolysis temperatures. I believe a commercial unit has a temperature sensor on the electrodes. > You'd >have to try hard to prove it to me though. ? Regards; Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 21:37:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA18778; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:36:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:36:29 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008003659.0075d158 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:36:59 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott's calorimetry In-Reply-To: <199810021632_MC2-5B67-904F compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lG6lh1.0.Kb4.C547s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23115 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:29 PM 10/2/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Mitchell Swartz explains: > Work undergoing R&D (i.e. an ongoing project) is NOT a "flagship > product", despite Mr. Rothwell's imprecise English. > >I see. Let me see if I understand this business strategy. > >You advertise this stuff and you tell us about it here, but it's actually a >secret. ... [assumptions, etc. deleted] .... As told before, we are still testing several systems at JET Energy and elsewhere in the Boston area - and when we are ready with sufficient data to justify talking - we will let vortex know. And as for the ludicrous baloney about secrets, we have put several papers in the literature so this is more of Jed's inaccuracy. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 21:38:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA19092; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:37:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:37:31 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008003818.007355f0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:38:18 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981003113726.00a4f3c8 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5qWXt2.0.5g4.A647s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23116 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:37 AM 10/3/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >At 14:13 10/2/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>>better, "Waveform reconstruction requires knowledge of the time constants >>>of the system". > >> No. Determining the impulse, and step function, response >>of a system is standard engineering practice. > >I agree, if you wish to correct the output signal for the finite response >time of your system. > >However, if you are willing to wait many time constants to obtain >steady-state power balance measurements....or if you are satisfied with >integrating the power signals over a complete experimental run to obtain an >energy balance measurement, there is no need to precisely characterize the >system time constants. > >Instead of referring me to signal books, please explain how you think that >a lack of waveform reconstruction can adversely affect either the >steady-state power balance measurement or total energy balance measurement. That is easy. It is standard operating policy to determine a sysetms impulse (or step function) response. It is a sine qua non of linear systems which calorimetry is when it is correctly done. The lack of checking the system is illogical. Engineers routinely examine systems this way. Try the signal books, they are standard third year electrical engineering matters and issues. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 21:42:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA20548; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:38:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:38:51 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008003938.00743598 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:39:38 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: ICCF-7 p.372, Swartz In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981003114229.00a527f8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"XVQlQ3.0.u05.Q747s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23117 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:42 AM 10/3/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >In the ICCF-7 proceedings, p. 372 in Swartz' paper: >Can anyone explain the Y-axis of the upper graph on this page to me? >Only one gridline is labelled...what are the values for the others? >Also why does the note say "Overunity If > 1" when the Y-axis is labelled >"Excess Power [Watts]"? If it is truly EXCESS power being plotted on the >Y-axis, the note should say "Overunity if > 0". > Mea culpa. Thanks. The graph was embedded in the paper using a new WP, and the control-P was used to set the additional axis which was a suggestion of a revieweE. When done, the axis was unintentionally mislabelled at, and as 1 rather than 0 as Scott correctly states. BTW, Graph 2, IMO, is very important. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 21:42:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA22276; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:40:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:40:06 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008004046.0074be08 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:40:46 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: "heretic scientists" versus "crackpo In-Reply-To: <199810050015_MC2-5B86-69F0 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"8TkHt.0.yR5.a847s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23119 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:14 AM 10/5/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >The Galileo debacle is a myth. He was given a huge government defense contract >for the first telescopes. After he got the money the Pope's experts did, in >fact, look though an early model. They saw nothing because it was slipshod >prototype which often malfunctioned. They looked through later models, saw >what they were supposed to see, and duly reported back the facts. The Galileo >myth is instructive as an apocryphal story. This is different. Rather than house imprisonment as the conventional "story goes", Jed indicates Galileo got a "defense contract for the first telescopes". Would like to hear more. Any copies of the Defense contract? Jed's also neostory neglects to indicate whom the Pope "duly reported back the facts" about the "later models [when they] saw what they were supposed to see". Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 21:42:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA21750; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:39:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:39:48 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008004034.0074f610 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:40:34 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Little's calorimeter test In-Reply-To: <199810031438_MC2-5B7D-9BF2 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Xz23Y3.0.PJ5.I847s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23118 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:35 PM 10/3/98 -0400, J Rothwell wrote: >Scott Little Mitch Swartz are debating "waveform reconstruction." This issue >is too technical for me, I do not understand it. Thermal waveform reconstruction is testing the step response of the system. It is fundamental and not too technical for any engineer. In fact, impulse response testing (or step function) is a sine qua non, and SOP in any engineering practice. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 22:29:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA12623; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:26:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:26:38 -0700 Message-ID: <18a901bdf27c$069f1f80$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: "David Dennard" , Subject: Re: Twinkle Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:24:59 -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: <"x0huk3.0.753.Cq47s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23120 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >It is more simple than I ever thought. And I know I probably won't get the >credit. Most assuredly you won't, if your theories ever do produce anything of consequence I am sure the physicists that originally published the data - wether they correlated that or not into working models for our benefit - probably will not matter and they will get the credit for the research. Build a whirlpool like I said and the world will have all the clean >energy it needs. Anyone can do it. Not true, and you would not be here if that was the case. I ask no money for it. Even if you steal >my information it really won't help. David, you may have shined the light in a page of a book, but it seems that page was already written by someone else. >The only way you can stop me is kill me. Why would they want to do that, that would make a martyr out of you, better just to make you look like a fool, why are you playing into thier hands? And if so I will die bravely, for I >know I said the truth. I will not shut up. I do not need to study your dogma. >This is so simple a child can understand. Build one then, and report back later. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 22:32:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA15361; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:30:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:30:34 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:32:11 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: David Dennard cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy In-Reply-To: <199810080356.UAA02702 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"j4Byz.0.Hl3.tt47s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23121 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, David Dennard wrote: The Peaceful Energy March organizer just asked me to send him all my Whirlpower information. -snip- Steve, did anyone ever offer you any help to build? I know there was one person asking and I said talk to you. ----------------------------------- Hi David, Short answer - no Long answer - No, & actually always figured on just doing it myself, as it appears simple enough for kitchen-top (make that back yard:) check-out. I have a few water pumps and small generators, lots of misc. motors and junk laying around, and plenty of ALL Kinds of wire and coax, I was only held up by this recent flu-bug last week and the fact it's a big tub, and my first Ideas of cutting 4 slits in the side need 'sealing' if I want to have any good results. but, believe in thinking it out BEFORE making a cut in something that is not easy to replace as to the best location(s) [Think 3 times, Measure Twice, CUT Once!] If it works and gets into manufacturing stage, that's your baby. If it works and needs larger than 10' pool, that's their baby, I'm just thinking about ordering a 3'x 10' galvanized cattle-feed watering tub. It's only about ~$200 (which is my christmas present:) and will still have Colorado winters to slow things down. (freezing the pool I'm sure:( But THAT is one big tub for a little guy like me. Logistics here make me wonder how it's even going to get here empty, Sideways I suppose down the streets. placement alone should be worth the price. I can see my neighbors faces now :) On our hill, see one edge on ground, the other on saw-horses for liquid level. (could be an advantage somewhere but not that I've thought about yet, short of getting 'under it' for drain-pump repair:) Did you try the mayonaise/ pepper jar?.. very centered! Note: I'm thinking about adding (see: clover design on outer circle of whilrpower) four semi-circles to introduce pumps and generators along the mid outer edges to dip into your doughnut area. Horizontally. Mechcanically this makes more sense to me both for pulling and replacement of each and for testing measurments access. For pumps & motor replacement etc. Without adding magnetics to your paddle(s) for inductance, I don't see how I can Mech. connect it for output yet. hence clover-leaf design. I know, I'm not following/thinking paddles per your original gif, but If it will go round and round, then maybe we can get the data needed for crunching by the math brainiacs out there for what's full-potential could be. I never ask for any monies for "check-this out or check-that out" in experiments stage, when I can do them myself, and pass on the report. You of course would be the "whirlpower" innovator as dreamed, I was just hoping to give it a kick-start and let the others help figure out why this would work as envisoned. I did like the math that showed that it ~may~ just/only (hot water) produce HEAT and that may work in my favor in this climate year round. Heat has power potential too! --------------------- You finally wrote -snip- to Disney Land. Not really, but I sure have got that record breaking feeling. But I am taking a well deserved vacation, and this computer is going to the shop for an overhaul. Making this thing work has been like kicking a mule. Later, Dennard --------------------- Have a good trip & enjoy! -=se=- steve (Do they still have those grant$ in DC - hey!:) ekwall probably won't be built as fast as you can dream though. p.s. I still have a lot of other links out there on this subject to check out too, needs some time to learn what has been done already, I don't have your advantage(?) and am UP ~20 hours a day re-reading most things twice! and still behind on most everything! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 22:41:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA19769; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:38:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:38:15 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981008004012.009365d0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:40:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Waveform reconstruction In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981008003818.007355f0 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981003113726.00a4f3c8 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"YewTY1.0.Zq4.--47s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23122 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 11:37 AM 10/3/98 -0500, I requested of Mitchell: >>Instead of referring me to signal books, please explain how you think that >>a lack of waveform reconstruction can adversely affect either the >>steady-state power balance measurement or total energy balance measurement. and at 12:38 AM 10/8/98 -0400, Mitchell wrote: >That is easy. It is standard operating policy to determine >a sysetms impulse (or step function) response. That doesn't answer my request at all. >It is a >sine qua non of linear systems which calorimetry is when >it is correctly done. That doesn't answer my request either. >The lack of checking the system is illogical. That doesn't answer my request. >Engineers routinely examine systems this way. That doesn't answer my request. >Try the signal books, they >are standard third year electrical engineering matters and issues. That doesn't answer my request. Mitchell, I'm well aware of the importance of waveform reconstruction in signal processing where the primary goal is to obtain a faithful reproduction of the original signal. Indeed that is also the case in some calorimetric measurements, particularly when reaction rates, etc. are being studied. In that case, the goal is to determine the actual heat function generated by the sample. However, in the case where an experiment can be operated in quasi-equilibrium (i.e. a constant input power and a constant output power for many time constants) or in the case where the desired measurement is the energy balance over a certain period of operation of the experiment, waveform reconstruction is unnecessary. Unless you can provide and explain some examples where lack of waveform reconstruction actually causes errors in the two measurements mentioned above, I would like you to stop raising this issue as a negative criticism of my calorimetric results. Thank you, 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 Oct 7 22:54:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA28077; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:53:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:53:31 -0700 Message-ID: <19981008055529.21002.rocketmail send102.yahoomail.com> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:55:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"8UQ3P2.0.cs6.QD57s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23123 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >I agree, if you wish to correct the output signal for the finite >response time of your system. > >However, if you are willing to wait many time constants to obtain >steady-state power balance measurements....or if you are satisfied with >integrating the power signals over a complete experimental run to >obtain an energy balance measurement, there is no need to precisely >characterize the system time constants. Mitchell Swartz Wrote: > That is easy. It is standard operating policy to determine >a sysetms impulse (or step function) response. It is a >sine qua non of linear systems which calorimetry is when >it is correctly done. > > The lack of checking the system is illogical. Engineers >routinely examine systems this way. Try the signal books, they >are standard third year electrical engineering matters and issues. As I posted a few days ago, many of Scott's runs posted at his web site show examples where a heater or some other non-OU power was applied as a STEP function and the calorimeter response is visible. One also can see that the calorimeter settles into P_out = P_in, to within a few percent, after the transient has died away. Also, Scott integrates P_in and P_out to get input and output energies, respectively. The fact that they are usually equal to within a few percent shows that his energy accounting is good. For the runs Scott has posted, I do not think it is NECESSARY that he try to reconstruct the P_in step from P_out. Routine reconstruction of runs would reveal possible short-time responses of the system under test. However, in most of the tests Scott has posted, his calorimeter time constant is usually short enough to not prejudice his power measurements. Some time ago I sent him a formula he could use to do the reconstruction. It is simple when there is only one significant pole, as in his case. Mitchell's calorimeter is complicated and has multiple long time constants, and he is well advised to measure his calorimeter's step or impulse response and do the test of reconstructing the test P_in from the P_out signal. Without such tests on a calorimeter with a complicated response, one would indeed tend to be wonder whether it was working correctly. I recognize that he have spent a lot of effort to characterize his calorimeter. I have done both thermal impedance and water flow calorimetry. In my limited experience, flow calorimetry was easier, or at least it was easier to identify and remove artifacts from the flow system than from the thermal impedance one. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 22:58:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA28989; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:57:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:57:39 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981008060650.00d819d4 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 02:06:50 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: 100% Electrolysis Question - Meyer Patent? Resent-Message-ID: <"z5se63.0.o47.JH57s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23124 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; Has anyone read the Meyer Patents? 4936961 : Method for the production of a fuel gas http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=4936961 4613304 : Gas electrical hydrogen generator http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=4613304 Looks like alot of tuning parameters are involved. It might almost be said that it would be an 'art' to get one of these things running. ;) Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 7 23:23:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA03708; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:22:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:22:48 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008022331.007378e0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 02:23:31 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Waveform reconstruction In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981008004012.009365d0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981008003818.007355f0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981003113726.00a4f3c8 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cZqLj3.0.sv.te57s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23125 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:40 AM 10/8/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >>>Instead of referring me to signal books, please explain how you think that >>>a lack of waveform reconstruction can adversely affect either the >>>steady-state power balance measurement or total energy balance measurement. > >and at 12:38 AM 10/8/98 -0400, Mitchell wrote: >>That is easy. It is standard operating policy to determine >>a systems impulse (or step function) response. > >That doesn't answer my request at all. > Actually it does. If your calorimeter (one of the two in your case) fails the test(s) it is not accurate to that degree. ======================================================= >>It is a >>sine qua non of linear systems which calorimetry is when >>it is correctly done. > >That doesn't answer my request either. Actually it does. Engineers routinely examine systems this way. ======================================================= >>Try the signal books, they >>are standard third year electrical engineering matters and issues. > >That doesn't answer my request. > >Mitchell, I'm well aware of the importance of waveform reconstruction in >signal processing where the primary goal is to obtain a faithful >reproduction of the original signal. >Indeed that is also the case in some calorimetric measurements, >particularly when reaction rates, etc. are being studied. In that case, >the goal is to determine the actual heat function generated by the sample. The goal is accuracy, and an explanation for the differences in observed heat for some of the different systems. And that IS a faithful reproduction of the original signal. Unless Scott shows interest in this by reexamining his KS-bead data, and by agreeing that accuracy and precision are important as are their testing, then there is little more to say. ======================================================= >However, in the case where an experiment can be operated in >quasi-equilibrium (i.e. a constant input power and a constant output power >for many time constants) or in the case where the desired measurement is >the energy balance over a certain period of operation of the experiment, >waveform reconstruction is unnecessary. Not true. The V*I calculation determines the input. The calorimeter may or may not give accurate output. Some apparently are less interested in testing this. However, this and noise power measurement, and some of the other issues previously discussed, are important. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 00:49:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA27026; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 00:48:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 00:48:57 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:50:32 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981008042849.00d86134 popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"j1EhF.0.Ac6.ev67s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23126 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Dennis C. Lee wrote: [...] > I believe that Brown's Gas (monatomic hydrogen/monatomic oxygen) is made by > maintaining as close to 1.48V (as I recall) as possible. Commercial Brown's > Gas generators use large electrode surface areas to increase efficiency. I frankly don't believe there is such a gas. Monatomic H and O would combine with others of the same in no time. There is a rather high collision frequency in a gas, and the reactions for both H and O, X+X=>X2 is hugely on the right hand side. If a monatomic species ever did make it off the electrode surface (which I doubt) it wouldn't last as long as an ice cube in hell. > > You'd > >have to try hard to prove it to me though. > > ? Did you read this only after you snipped away the rest? If not, why the "?" ? But this applies equally to your Brown's Gas. You'd have to try hard to prove its existence to me. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 01:03:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA29156; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:02:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:02:11 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:03:39 -0700 Message-Id: <199810080803.BAA26858 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: Re; Whirlpower vs Hydropower? Resent-Message-ID: <"PrG4L2.0.U77.3677s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23127 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I agree Ross, further study is required. I have only begun to read the >works of penrose as he seems to be an interesting fellow. In your opinion >Ross, which of these references listed here has the most relevance to what >we are examining and trying to achieve? Which specific field are you interested in. I have read a lot of books, many more than listed. But the fields range from sub atomic particles to inter galactic space and cosmology, and everywhere in between. Most of the books I listed dealt with black holes, since that is what David claimed he knew about tacitly. But there are a lot of other books that are more to the point of research into hurricanes I would imagine. There must be books that deal specifically with the atmosphere. I have read a lot of web pages on various things in the atmosphere. As for learning about space, stars, black holes, etc., I would recomend the Cambridge Atlas of Astronomy. It has a little of everything in it including the evolution of stars. I would also strongly recommend the book by Begelman and Rees, "Gravity's Fatal Attraction". The other books are more specialized and detailed in their discussions. But Robson I like better for AGN's. One of the best books out there for just learning about our ability to observe is called "The New Astronomy" by Henbest. It shows you a lot of observations of the same objects at various different wavelengths, radio, optical, gamma, x-ray, etc. And an excellent book on controversial stuff is Arp's book. There are newer books such as Vera Rubin's book called "Bright Galaxies, Dark Matters" I think it is. That one has a lot of easy reading short essays, and has some counter information as to Arps reports. So be careful with Arp's book to read the papers that refute his information. But there are some other books out and other papers that back up some of the supposition by Arp, such as by Burbidge. You need to read a lot in order to weed through the bs and get to the important things that don't go away. In the AGN books you will learn that the low ionization lines in the spectra are systematically red shifted. And in recent SOHO information the same thing is true. So what you have is that there is a common phenomena going on in both quasars and in our sun, and in other stars. Anyway, there are lots of things to read. And I am only telling you about the astronomical books, if you want to learn about chaos, or about the golden section or other mathematical things, or about particle physics, let me know. Later, Ross From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 01:14:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA00935; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:13:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:13:30 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 10:15:01 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981007082227.006cbba4 mail.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"NSGcN2.0.ME.fG77s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23128 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Scott Little wrote: > At 10:14 10/7/98 +0200, britz wrote: > > >Bockris' name is synonymous with the "Hydrogen > >Economy", he was behind the push, and probably still is. > > Dieter, in "Modern Electrochemistry Vol 1." by Bockris & Reddy (first > edition only), he makes a big deal in Chapter 1 about the Great Nernstian > Hiatus, his name for a dark period in electrochemistry where analysis of > cells was attempted primarily from a "potentio-centric" viewpoint. > Bockris goes so far as to claim that, if it weren't for Nernst's > "fundamental error and lack of conceptualization", electrochemistry might > now be FAR ahead of where it actually is...that we would even have giant > fuel-cell electric power plants instead of the existing combustion electric > power plants. > > Do you subscribe to that view? Hi, Scott. I don't have this book handy here, so I have to guess what Bockris means. My guess is that he means that for a long time, people equated electrochemistry with thermodynamics. Even today, most chemistry students are exposed only to this facet of electrochemistry, a world where no currents ever flow. It's all concentration cells, half cell potentials, will this reaction run if let go (it never is allowed), etc. If the student then chooses electrochemistry, he/she finds that there can be currents, and potentials are not all Nernstian (equilibrium) potentials, there are overpotentials, to drive actual reactions. However, it is not correct to say that this is neglected. Bockris himself was in on the golden age of all this, in the 50's, where polarography dominated, for analytical electrochemistry, a fine tool at the time, before there was AA etc. People thought that electrochemistry at other than fresh clean Hg drops was too difficult, but Bockris showed it could be done at solid electrodes, by excruciatingly careful experiments, now classics. Around the 70's, there was a lot of enthusiasm about electrosynthesis; people thought electricity was going to be too cheap to meter ... but it turned out that only a few chosen reactions could be done better by electrochemistry, and you can count them on the fingers of one hand (a few are still of great importance though). About then, as well, fuel cells came in, and this might be the major thing. Fuel cells "burn" the fuel much better, without nasty byproducts, so I'd endorse Bockris' vision here. Expensive to set up large-scale, though. So, if that is what he means, yes, I agree, and there was a hiatus for maybe 40 years or so. During that time, there was of course some work with real currents, but not that much. On the other hand, we are well out of all that now, and electrochemistry is far from neglected. It is in fact so big a field that one kind of electrochemist might never have heard of other electrochemists working in different areas. When I first heard of Notoya, I thought, who is she? Later, I happened to mention her to a friend of mine who is into electrocatalysis and he said, oh yes, she is quite well known. But everyone knows Bockris, and Fleischmann. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 02:02:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA09022; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:58:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:58:26 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 03:00:08 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november Reply-To: Steve Ekwall To: David Dennard cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower / Vortex Equation Help In-Reply-To: <199810060120.SAA07964 wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"rzA4F1.0.uC2.nw77s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23129 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: David wrote: ref: whirlpower: -snip- ...to test it... -snip- Last Thoughts?? ----------- Hi David & All, Just as a follow up and to maybe induce more ideas for additional ways to tap your whirlpower whirlpool doughnut, I would like to mention to the group at large that the extreme outer edge to mid-center from the rim of the doughnut looks like it has the MOST potential. This is where you've drawn your paddles+.. however, again, I think entry from the horizontal outside (mid-fluid level height) will allow mechanical paddle wheels (as in a river boat's / 4 water wheels on each of its sides) to extract MAXIMUM power. (clover-leaf design initially just for testing) [2 or more for pumping - 2 or more for generating power out measurments] This would still never touch the vortex for tapping, MAJOR problem solved here with your postings, as the vortex is delicate indeed within it's own right! Yours looks frictionless, but I think mine should bear out SOME results. -THANKS- Just my thought... Anyway, THINKING isn't doing, and I think I'll BACK OFF the list and THIS thread until I've SOMETHING to report - Data wise! OFF to try it, and will let everyone know if successful. (I'm probably all wet again ) BTW, I still think, You & Ross are ~perfect opposites~, I admire you both for "stick_to_it_tiveness" it is harder than 'simple' but always in OUR face! Admittadly, without a working unit in others hands, it turns out like a SMOT... [This is -very- close too!] no joke, it answers ALL the questions, but where is the working unit. It's best I just SHUT-UP here and get to WORK on it! Best to everyone, everywhere, -=se=- steve ( on a hillside with my water:) ekwall Hey, it's gotta be all downhill from here -ya? Even "I" can handle that! :) (all wet:) Gentleman, I wish you all the best of luck on your pursuits! l8tr g8tr's bye - signing off (*poof*) KISS's <----- ! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 03:26:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA18828; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 03:23:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 03:23:50 -0700 Message-ID: <0b4101bdf2a5$b6c177e0$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Brown's Gas and Plasma Sterilizers Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 04:23:25 -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: <"LH2JH.0.6c4.rA97s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23130 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dieter Britz mentioned that "The Collision Frequency and thus recombination of H and O Radicals is Too High for Brown's Gas to exist". I tend to agree, unless the pressure is at a few torr and an inert gas is involved. U.S. Patents: 5,472,664 5,325,020 5,184,046 bear this out and show the use of the H and O radicals to effect sterilization of medical equipment at 60 C or less. This is of paramount importance now that low- melting plastics are used so extensively in medical apparatus. Maybe some of the Vortex-L H2O electrolysis talent could be put to use in this area. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 06:03:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA23117; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 06:01:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 06:01:53 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008090240.007403a0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 09:02:40 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <19981008055529.21002.rocketmail send102.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"EMa1R2.0.7f5.0VB7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23131 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:55 PM 10/7/98 -0700, Michael Schaffer wrote: >As I posted a few days ago, many of Scott's runs posted at his web >site show examples where a heater or some other non-OU power was >applied as a STEP function and the calorimeter response is visible. >One also can see that the calorimeter settles into P_out = P_in, to >within a few percent, after the transient has died away. Also, Scott >integrates P_in and P_out to get input and output energies, >respectively. The fact that they are usually equal to within a few >percent shows that his energy accounting is good. A complete run with a single input is critical IMO. A run with Pout as a function of Pin is critical to examine purported O/U devices is critical IMO. These are not present in the data which I have seen from Scott, but would help. ==================================================== >For the runs Scott has posted, I do not think it is NECESSARY that he >try to reconstruct the P_in step from P_out. Routine reconstruction of >runs would reveal possible short-time responses of the system under >test. However, in most of the tests Scott has posted, his calorimeter >time constant is usually short enough to not prejudice his power >measurements. Some time ago I sent him a formula he could use to do >the reconstruction. It is simple when there is only one significant >pole, as in his case. The time constants are especially impt with Scott because he does multiple things in each run (often inadvertantly). It is not clear in his cases ESPECIALLY because he uses two types of calorimeters, and waveform reconstruction will define the accuracy of each. ==================================================== >Mitchell's calorimeter is complicated and has multiple long time >constants, and he is well advised to measure his calorimeter's step or >impulse response and do the test of reconstructing the test P_in from >the P_out signal. This is false. Multiring calorimetry is simple, and some of the time constants in small volumes were as short as 10 minutes. Also we have done conventional systems as well. IMO it is ALWAYS a good idea to tests with a step function any purported linear system. ==================================================== >I have done both thermal impedance and water flow calorimetry. In my >limited experience, flow calorimetry was easier, or at least it was >easier to identify and remove artifacts from the flow system than from >the thermal impedance one. Flow calorimetry is "easy" because it has an equation which purports to be "correct". However, it has all the problems of static calorimetry AND additional heat and mass flow issues and thus is not simpler, except when the simple equation is naively believed a priori without testing. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 07:15:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA16344; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 07:13:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 07:13:01 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008091641.006d0b6c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 09:16:41 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Waveform reconstruction In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981008022331.007378e0 world.std.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19981008004012.009365d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008003818.007355f0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981003113726.00a4f3c8 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"qrrCn1.0.2_3.iXC7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23132 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:23 10/8/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz apparently continues to fail to even read my questions. I ask him to explain how the lack of waveform reconstruction can cause errors in the specific measurements I am making and he responds with various permutations of "because everybody does it that way"! For example, >It is standard operating policy to determine >a systems impulse (or step function) response. and >Engineers routinely examine systems this way. You be the judge, but I can only conclude from these empty responses that Mitchell does not actually understand the significance of waveform reconstruction. >>However, in the case where an experiment can be operated in >>quasi-equilibrium (i.e. a constant input power and a constant output power >>for many time constants) or in the case where the desired measurement is >>the energy balance over a certain period of operation of the experiment, >>waveform reconstruction is unnecessary. >Not true. The V*I calculation determines the input. The calorimeter >may or may not give accurate output. Thank you. I have been waiting for you to admit...even indirectly...that, if the calorimeter output is equal to the V*I input, the calorimeter is accurate. Then he throws in: > Unless Scott shows interest in this by reexamining his >KS-bead data, and by agreeing that accuracy and precision are >important as are their testing, then there is little more to say. You are well aware that I have reexamined the KS-bead data, and that I agree that accuracy and precision are important and should be tested. Please stop repeating this false criticism! Mike Schaffer wrote: >As I posted a few days ago, many of Scott's runs posted at his web >site show examples where a heater or some other non-OU power was >applied as a STEP function and the calorimeter response is visible. >One also can see that the calorimeter settles into P_out = P_in, to >within a few percent, after the transient has died away. Also, Scott >integrates P_in and P_out to get input and output energies, >respectively. The fact that they are usually equal to within a few >percent shows that his energy accounting is good. > >For the runs Scott has posted, I do not think it is NECESSARY that he >try to reconstruct the P_in step from P_out. Routine reconstruction of >runs would reveal possible short-time responses of the system under >test. However, in most of the tests Scott has posted, his calorimeter >time constant is usually short enough to not prejudice his power >measurements. Some time ago I sent him a formula he could use to do >the reconstruction. It is simple when there is only one significant >pole, as in his case. Thanks for the vote of confidence, Mike. I understand the waveform reconstruction technique you described to me and I will definitely implement it should circumstances ever warrant it. Meanwhile, since I am getting satisfactory performance from my calorimeters, I place a higher priority on continued experimentation. 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 Oct 8 07:41:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA26446; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 07:40:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 07:40:17 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 10:37:48 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Confusion about Galileo history Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810081041_MC2-5BFC-69BF compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"TUzF93.0.3T6.GxC7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23133 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I wrote that the Galileo "debacle" is a myth. I was referring to the story apocryphal story that the Vatican scientists refused to look through the telescope. Mitch Swartz writes: This is different. Rather than house imprisonment as the conventional "story goes", Jed indicates Galileo got a "defense contract for the first telescopes". We are confusing to separate incidents. Galileo worked on the telescope in 1609 and 1610. An apocryphal story has it that during this period Vatican experts refused to look through the telescope. It is historical fact that he was placed under house arrest from 1633 to 1641, when he died. Would like to hear more. Any copies of the Defense contract? Would like to see first person pronoun. The city of Venice paid Galileo large sums for his first telescopes, to be used in harbor defense. They also doubled his salary and offered him tenure. Jed's also neostory neglects to indicate whom the Pope "duly reported back the facts" about the "later models [when they] saw what they were supposed to see". I did not say the Pope reported anything. I said his experts reported the findings. If you want know when, look it up. Here is an amusing extract from an essay I wrote about this, primarily based on Koestler's book "The Watershed" which describes the relationship between Kepler and Galileo. In 1610, Galileo hit the big time. He performed a preliminary experiment with inadequate instrumentation. Before anyone got a chance to replicate he boasted to the world that he had made an earthshaking discovery. When the experts came to his house to look though his "clumsy" telescope they could hardly see a thing, and much of what they could see was experimental error: "Sometimes a fixed star appeared in duplicate." "The marvel is not so much that he found Jupiter's moons, but that he was able to find Jupiter itself." "Thus, it was not entirely unreasonable to suspect that the *blurred dots* which appeared to the strained and watering eye pressed to the spectacles-sized lenses might be optical illusions in the atmosphere, or somehow produced by the mysterious gadget itself." (My emphasis) The telescope was not even mounted properly at first. He was going around showing it to people and trying to convince them with a sloppy, half finished experiment, with a telescope you had to aim by hand. This was forty years after Tycho began building mounted instruments capable of locating planets to within a fraction of an arc-minute. -Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 08:10:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05406; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:08:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:08:23 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008110952.00c9ed30 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 11:09:52 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question In-Reply-To: References: <1.5.4.32.19981008042849.00d86134 popd.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"IYClP2.0.IK1.cLD7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23134 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:50 AM 10/8/98 +0200, britz wrote: >I frankly don't believe there is such a gas. Monatomic H and O would >combine with others of the same in no time. There is a rather high collision >frequency in a gas, and the reactions for both H and O, X+X=>X2 is hugely >on the right hand side. If a monatomic species ever did make it off the >electrode surface (which I doubt) it wouldn't last as long as an ice >cube in hell. That is somewhat simplistic. Both H + H --> H2 and O + O --> O2 do not occur without surface catalysis. The problem is that there needs to be someplace for the energy to go. H + H --> H2+ + e- can occur, and makes monatomic hydrogen very hard to deal with as a gas. H2 + H+ --> H3+, H3+ + H --> H2 + H2+ makes any ionizing radiation, including ultraviolet light act as a catalyst. There are similar chains for oxygen. But the real nasties are the OH radical reactions, so yes, any mix of monatomic hydrogen and oxygen is not long for this world at STP, especially if there is any moisture involved. (H3O and H3O+ provide another molecule to carry away the kinetic energy, and H2O + O-- --> 2 OH- nicely takes care of the oxygen.) If you are careful, and work at low temperature with a good heat sink, you can use a wet plate as a recombiner--in fact, many steam plants do, although they don't need to be as careful, since what they are recombining is a mix that is nearly 90% water vapor. But you can make single-H, you can even keep it stable at low temperatures and it makes one hell of a rocket fuel. Potential specific impulse (Isp) is over 5000 seconds. The SSMEs (Space Shuttle Main Engines) operate at just over 400 seconds. (Isp is basically how long it takes a rocket engine to burn a mass of fuel equal to its thrust. Higher is better.) 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 Oct 8 08:14:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA07132; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:12:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:12:14 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <361CD6A0.A99A7449 css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 10:13:36 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7aHzD.0.Dl1.DPD7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23135 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: britz wrote: > I frankly don't believe there is such a gas. Monatomic H and O would > combine with others of the same in no time. There is a rather high collision > frequency in a gas, and the reactions for both H and O, X+X=>X2 is hugely > on the right hand side. If a monatomic species ever did make it off the > electrode surface (which I doubt) it wouldn't last as long as an ice > cube in hell. Hello Dieter! Nice to see you back. 8^) Not sure how exactly to classify Brown's Gas, but the burn characteristics are strikingly different than classic recombination of typical H and O. There seems to be a different 'state' to the gases evolved in this method of electrolysis. Whether they are truly monatomic or not is beyond my understanding or capabilities to argue however. Eagle Research has been championing BG for a while now and has some general information posted there about it. Also offered are technical papers on the process (which turned out not to be a waste of money), and some working devices for sale. Given your expertise in the field, your perspective on the technology would be most interesting. Have you been to their site yet? -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune" -Nicholas Ling From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 08:39:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18152; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:37:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:37:42 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:39:05 -0700 Message-Id: <199810081539.IAA04869 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: humor Resent-Message-ID: <"BjKrn2.0.LR4.4nD7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23136 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: GRAND PRIZE WINNER When a cat is dropped, it always lands on its feet. And when toast is dropped, it always lands with the buttered side facing down. I propose to strap buttered toast to the back of a cat; the two will hover, spinning inches above the ground. With a giant buttered cat array, a high-speed monorail could easily link New York with Chicago. RUNNERS-UP: #1 If an infinite number of rednecks riding in an infinite number of pickup trucks fire an infinite number of shotgun rounds at an infinite number of highway signs, they will eventually produce all the world's great literary works in Braille. #2 Why Yawning Is Contagious: You yawn to equalize the pressure on your eardrums. This pressure change outside your eardrums unbalances other people's ear pressures, so they must yawn to even it out. #3 Communist China is technologically underdeveloped because they have no alphabet and therefore cannot use acronyms to communicate ideas at a faster rate. #4 The earth may spin faster on its axis due to deforestation. Just as a figure skater's rate of spin increases when the arms are brought in close to the body, the cutting of tall trees may cause our planet to spin dangerously fast. HONORABLE MENTION: The quantity of consonants in the English language is constant. If omitted in one place, they turn up in another. When a Bostonian "pahks" his "cah," the lost r's migrate southwest, causing a Texan to "warsh" his car and invest in "erl wells." HuMoUr LiStSeRv From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 08:46:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA07031; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:43:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:43:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <0b5a01bdf2d1$c4760f00$f0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Deuterium-Lithium Fusion in a Resonant Cavity? Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:38:09 -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: <"7p9E73.0.nj1.ysD7s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23137 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex With a powerful magnetron feeding a circular waveguide-resonant cavity rotating so as to create a cavity in molten Lithium Deuteride at the melting point of 680 C and a pressure of about 30 Torr: 1H2 + 3Li7 ---> 2 2He4 + neutron + 15.02 Mev Where power flow, P = a*E^2/[4*mu*Vp] (watts) where a is the diameter of the wave guide, Vp is the phase velocity, mu = 4(pi)E-7, E is volts/meter derived from Maxwell's equations. :-) At suitable power levels E can get high enough to easily create a plasma in the D2/Li7 gas, but, can it create measurable quantities of neutrons in such a device? >From this it seems that one could get very high field strengths suitable magnetron power levels. If ZPE Extraction due to Electron-Deuteron collisions is occurring this should show up as O-U heat also. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 09:38:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA11661; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:34:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:34:54 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008123531.006d7cc0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:35:31 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Waveform reconstruction In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981008091641.006d0b6c mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981008022331.007378e0 world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19981008004012.009365d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008003818.007355f0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981003113726.00a4f3c8 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"73ILL.0.1s2.jcE7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23138 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:16 AM 10/8/98 -0500, Scott Little pejoratively wrote: >Scott: At 02:23 10/8/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz apparently continues to fail to >even read my questions. I ask him to explain how the lack of waveform >reconstruction can cause errors in the specific measurements I am making >and he responds with various permutations of "because everybody does it >that way"! First, the errors are INTRINSIC to the system and the sample and the paradigms used to obtain INFORMATION from the data. The lack of testing does not "cause errors". Please stop trolling with dumb demands. Illogical questions dont have scientific answers. Second, the possible errors were discussed, and the systems which can be used to r/o some of them were discussed. It is obvious that some on both side dont care about calibration and Q/A testing. ===================================== >>It is standard operating policy to determine >>a systems impulse (or step function) response. > >and > >>Engineers routinely examine systems this way. > >You be the judge, but I can only conclude from these empty responses that >Mitchell does not actually understand the significance of waveform >reconstruction. Listen, Mr. Little. At MIT in electrical engineering we had a course in the third year, called 6.05 teaching that subject which was important. Perhaps since you know more than them you should be teaching there. BTW Little's ad hominems in the absence of his concern for accuracy herald low wattage substitutes for diligence. ===================================== >>>However, in the case where an experiment can be operated in >>>quasi-equilibrium (i.e. a constant input power and a constant output power >>>for many time constants) or in the case where the desired measurement is >>>the energy balance over a certain period of operation of the experiment, >>>waveform reconstruction is unnecessary. > >>Not true. The V*I calculation determines the input. The calorimeter >>may or may not give accurate output. > >Scott: Thank you. I have been waiting for you to admit...even indirectly...that, >if the calorimeter output is equal to the V*I input, the calorimeter is >accurate. No. This is not true, Mr. Little. V*I is the electrical input and says nothing of the calorimeter's accuracy. It says nothing about leaking of the electrical dissipation or the heat thereafter. Try some serious study before trolling and other attacks. ====================================== >> Unless Scott shows interest in this by reexamining his >>KS-bead data, and by agreeing that accuracy and precision are >>important as are their testing, then there is little more to say. > >Scott: You are well aware that I have reexamined the KS-bead data, and that I >agree that accuracy and precision are important and should be tested. >Please stop repeating this false criticism! Scott did NOT actually reexamine the beads according to HIM. There may have been low level excess heat and he doesn't care. If there is 50 milliwatts of excess heat due to any fusion reaction, that is significant. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 09:46:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA14727; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:42:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:42:30 -0700 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 10:42:32 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <361CD6A0.A99A7449 css.mot.com> X-Mailer: YAM 2.0 Preview5 - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck - http://www.yam.ch Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question http://sunflower.signet.com.sg MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"tLc9O2.0.1c3.rjE7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23139 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vortexians, Another commercial site selling water electrolysis welders (Browns Gas??) is: http://sunflower.signet.com.sg/~greengas These welders seem to have some very interesting cababilities as compared to conventional systems. Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 11:51:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA31231; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 11:48:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 11:48:47 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:45:27 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Newman accused of swindling distributor Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810081449_MC2-5C18-1111 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"pFLZA1.0.nd7.EaG7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23140 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex A few weeks ago on this forum I said that to my knowledge Newman has not been accused of fraud was swindling people. I have now received information to the contrary. I have to documents: a 1993 distributorship agreement between Newman and a man in Ohio and a recent letter from the man's lawyer. The distributorship agreement calls for delivery of a machine in 1994. The lawyer claims that Newman collected in excess of $70,000, but he never delivered a machine. Instead, "Mr. Newman disappeared and took the prototype motor with him." One of my correspondents says there may be two sides to the story. I said the letter if true is prima facie evidence of fraud. Jones says, "Mere failure to honor contractual commitments is not, of itself, evidence of fraud, since there can be many extenuating circumstances. You have only a fragment of information from one of the parties, not a complete picture." I disagree. This is no mere failure to honor a contract. Newman is four years late, and instead of giving his customer a written explanation, or offering to refund the money, he did a disappearing act. There cannot be two sides to the story, because the distributor did not fail to fulfill his contractual obligations. He couldn't have; he never received a machine. I'm sure he never received a machine because Soule told me here a few weeks ago that only one Newman machine exists. The others have supposedly been sacrificed for spare parts. This case has not been taken to court, and I'm not aware of any other claims against Mr. Newman or court rulings against him. However I know little about Newman. The might be hundreds of complaints. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 12:04:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA02130; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 11:54:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 11:54:44 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:48:25 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981008042849.00d86134 popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Fm1XZ2.0.RW.ofG7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23141 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What prevents the gases from forming molecules? How do you know the H and O are monotomic? Forgive typos... keyboard is flakey... On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Dennis C. Lee wrote: > > > At 10:14 AM 10/7/98 +0200, you wrote: > > > >Why not stick to 1.48 V? That is the minimum total cell voltage (with > >all concentrations at standard values), above which a current will > >flow. You could indeed get 100% efficiency at this voltage, but with > >an infinitesimal current flowing. > > I believe that Brown's Gas (monatomic hydrogen/monatomic oxygen) is made by > maintaining as close to 1.48V (as I recall) as possible. Commercial Brown's > Gas generators use large electrode surface areas to increase efficiency. > > > >If you want a finite current, you > >need an overvoltage above that. The actual reaction takes the power > >given by 1.48 V multiplied by the current, and the rest, as Rothwell > >writes correctly, goes into waste heat. > > The way they determine if Brown's Gas is being generated is by measuring > cool electrolysis temperatures. I believe a commercial unit has a > temperature sensor on the electrodes. > > > > You'd > >have to try hard to prove it to me though. > > ? > > > Regards; > Dennis > > > Tall Ships > http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 12:06:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA06846; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:01:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:01:50 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:55:44 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vtMt62.0.mg1.TmG7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23142 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks, ksD D. B!! On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, britz wrote: > On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Dennis C. Lee wrote: > > [...] > > I believe that Brown's Gas (monatomic hydrogen/monatomic oxygen) is made by > > maintaining as close to 1.48V (as I recall) as possible. Commercial Brown's > > Gas generators use large electrode surface areas to increase efficiency. > > I frankly don't believe there is such a gas. Monatomic H and O would > combine with others of the same in no time. There is a rather high collision > frequency in a gas, and the reactions for both H and O, X+X=>X2 is hugely > on the right hand side. If a monatomic species ever did make it off the > electrode surface (which I doubt) it wouldn't last as long as an ice > cube in hell. > > > > You'd > > >have to try hard to prove it to me though. > > > > ? > > Did you read this only after you snipped away the rest? If not, why > the "?" ? But this applies equally to your Brown's Gas. You'd have to > try hard to prove its existence to me. > > -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 12:23:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA16311; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:20:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:20:35 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:31:06 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: To Rothwell: Response to false accusation Resent-Message-ID: <"nwnGr3.0.m-3.22H7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23143 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex > >A few weeks ago on this forum I said that to my knowledge Newman has not been >accused of fraud was swindling people. I have now received information to the >contrary. I have to documents: a 1993 distributorship agreement between Newman >and a man in Ohio and a recent letter from the man's lawyer. The >distributorship agreement calls for delivery of a machine in 1994. The lawyer >claims that Newman collected in excess of $70,000, but he never delivered a >machine. Instead, "Mr. Newman disappeared and took the prototype motor with >him." > >One of my correspondents says there may be two sides to the story. I said the >letter if true is prima facie evidence of fraud. Jones says, "Mere failure to >honor contractual commitments is not, of itself, evidence of fraud, since >there can be many extenuating circumstances. You have only a fragment of >information from one of the parties, not a complete picture." I disagree. This >is no mere failure to honor a contract. Newman is four years late, and instead >of giving his customer a written explanation, or offering to refund the money, >he did a disappearing act. There cannot be two sides to the story, because the >distributor did not fail to fulfill his contractual obligations. He couldn't >have; he never received a machine. I'm sure he never received a machine >because Soule told me here a few weeks ago that only one Newman machine >exists. The others have supposedly been sacrificed for spare parts. > >This case has not been taken to court, and I'm not aware of any other claims >against Mr. Newman or court rulings against him. However I know little about >Newman. The might be hundreds of complaints. > >- Jed Dear Jed, Joseph Newman has hardly "disappeared" as your above note states. His address/telephone number have been extensively published on this List, other Lists, as well as publicly on the Internet. If the above 'man in Ohio' believes that Joseph Newman has "committed fraud against him" then Joseph Newman can be easily contacted by the individual and/or his attorney. In fact, the individual has had FOUR YEARS to contact Joseph Newman. And, just to be explicit: Joseph W. Newman Newman Energy Technologies Corp. 2050 Vineyard Drive Castle Rock, Colorado 80104 (303) 814-3403 If _anyone_ would like to contact Joseph Newman regarding this "accusation," he may be reached at the above telephone number. Jed, one point you state above is quite correct: "However, I know little about Newman." With this I would agree. Based upon your previous comments, it is true that you know little about Joseph Newman and have little understanding of his technology. Sincerely, Evan Soule' From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 13:04:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06523; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:00:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:00:38 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:56:58 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: To Rothwell: Response to false accusatio Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810081601_MC2-5C19-2596 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"U1Lv31.0.gb1.bdH7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23144 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Evan Soule writes: Joseph Newman has hardly "disappeared" as your above note states. The lawyer stated it, not me. The lawyer says Newman disappeared; Soule says the machine disappeared; the plaintiff says his money disappeared. If _anyone_ would like to contact Joseph Newman regarding this "accusation," he may be reached at the above telephone number. The lawyer contacted attorney Tamra A. Palmer, who reportedly represents Newman. This discussion is off-topic. However, I thought it best to bring this situation to the attention of the readers here. Someone here may be thinking about dealing with Newman, or investing in his technology. This is a red flag for a potential investor. I think this flag should be displayed here, because Soule represents Newman and he frequently contributes here. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 13:26:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA16245; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:21:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:21:02 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008152445.006e2e24 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 15:24:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Waveform reconstruction In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981008123531.006d7cc0 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981008091641.006d0b6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008022331.007378e0 world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19981008004012.009365d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008003818.007355f0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981003113726.00a4f3c8 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"geOFv1.0.jz3.kwH7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23145 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:35 10/8/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Hope that helps. My apologies to the forum for wasted bandwidth. Back to the laboratory. Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 13:36:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21533; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:33:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:33:01 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:39:41 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Newman accused of swindling distributor Resent-Message-ID: <"eWYPC.0.NG5.z5I7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23146 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 2:45 PM 10/8/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: >To: Vortex > >A few weeks ago on this forum I said that to my knowledge Newman has not been >accused of fraud was swindling people. [snip] I assume the above is a typo? Should read "I said that to my knowledge Newman has not been accused of fraud *or* swindling people." Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 13:51:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA27544; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:48:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:48:36 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:59:03 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Joseph Newman Responds to Jed Rothwell Resent-Message-ID: <"p_59X1.0.Hk6.aKI7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23147 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To the People of the United States and the World: You can know that the statements and conclusions implied by Mr. Jed Rothwell are false. I have always been available and I moved to Colorado shortly over one year ago. Anyone can reach me and my address/telephone number have been extensively published on the Internet. Refer to pages 460 and 461 of my book to see the Truth of my life's work. The "scum crawls out of the woodwork" now as they know that production of my technology is at hand. The newest, 8th Edition of my book (The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman) which was published just this year describes on page 520 how others around me have already betrayed humanity and my life's work by producing my Pioneering Invention in the limited way of "trolling motors" which have financially realized more than $300 million per year between the two companies which have been producing my technology. Page 520 of my book also describes how these motors are more than 100% (production) efficient via the credible scientific tests which they have conducted. Joseph Westley Newman The following information below further verifies the truth of what I have said: Thursday, October 8, 1998 To the People of the World: While scientific 'academics' and U.S. politicians have fought against or been silent with respect to my life's work for humanity, others beyond the borders of the United States are assisting this technology to go forward. My attractive and thinking wife has, on several occasions, told me that "you will find a larger response from the people of Europe than those in the United States." Recently, Cambridge University (via one of their professors) in England has requested a review copy of my book, The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman, which I forwarded to the University. This week I opened the letter (described below) and find reputable individuals in Europe provide me with the credit of being an "expert" in the subject which relates to my life's work. I plan to be in Europe next year. Will you, the people of the United States (with notable exceptions), be the last to recognize my service to you and humanity? I invite the people of the United States to come and see me when I am established in Phoenix, Arizona in the near future. Joseph Westley Newman ___________________________ LETTER RECEIVED: TO: Joseph W. Newman Newman Energy Technologies Corp. 2050 Vineyard Drive Castle Rock, Colorado 80104 U.S.A. Dear Mr. Newman, Professor Dieter Roller, the ISATA Chairman, and Messe Dusseldorf, as organisers, are delighted with the resounding success of the recent 31st ISATA in Dusseldorf and are most keen to continue the international reputation of ISATA for addressing the most topical and important areas of research and development in a wide variety of fields relevant to the automotive industry. We are now delighted to announce the 32nd ISATA which will take place during the period 14th - 18th June 1999, this time in its new and exciting location of Vienna, Austria. The 32nd ISATA will comprise 8 Simultaneous Tracks complemented by an exhibition. The First Announcement & Call for Papers is attached for your information. We were very interested to learn of your work and of the "Newman Motor/Generator" and feel you would like to know about the newly combined Programme Track on 'Clean Power Sources & Environmental Implications in the Automotive Industry' which will form part of the 32nd ISATA. AS AN EXPERT IN THIS FIELD, WE WOULD VERY MUCH WELCOME A PRESENTATION FROM YOU AT OUR HIGHLY POPULAR AND EXTREMELY WELL ATTENDED SYMPOSIUM. The presentation of your work will reach a very wide automotive audience ranging from key decision makers in the industry to engineers and academics. There will also be ample opportunity for establishing contacts with other leading experts in your specialist area. We will be offering rewards for the best papers at next year's conference. I do hope that you will be able to contribute to the success of the 32nd ISATA. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions and I look forward to hearing from you shortly. Yours sincerely, A. M. Stonehouse Conference Co-ordinator From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 13:53:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA27668; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:48:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:48:48 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:59:06 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: To Rothwell: Response to false accusation Resent-Message-ID: <"RAdTz3.0.yl6.kKI7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23148 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex > >Evan Soule' writes: > > Joseph Newman has hardly "disappeared" as your above note states. > >The lawyer stated it, not me. The lawyer says Newman disappeared; Soule' says >the machine disappeared; the plaintiff says his money disappeared. Either, Mr. Rothwell, you are sadly confused or you are outright LYING. I have NEVER said "the machine disappeared." I have stated that Joseph Newman has recycled portions of earlier prototypes to be incorporated into later prototypes. > > If _anyone_ would like to contact Joseph Newman regarding this > "accusation," he may be reached at the above telephone number. > >The lawyer contacted attorney Tamra A. Palmer, who reportedly represents >Newman. > >This discussion is off-topic. However, I thought it best to bring this >situation to the attention of the readers here. Someone here may be thinking >about dealing with Newman, or investing in his technology. This is a red flag >for a potential investor. I think this flag should be displayed here, because >Soule' represents Newman and he frequently contributes here. > >- Jed The "red flag" which I see being "waved" is your inability to correctly report the facts surrounding this technology. If you were not intellectually dishonest, you would have endeavored to speak directly with Joseph Newman before making inaccurate and/or misleading posts. Evan Soule' From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 14:51:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA10113; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:32:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:32:47 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <361D2FA5.36CF6FD4 css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 16:33:25 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Joseph Newman Responds to Jed Rothwell References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qGHmu2.0.uT2.-zI7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23149 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Joseph Westley Newman wrote: > ......how others around me have already betrayed humanity and my life's > work by producing my Pioneering Invention in the limited way of "trolling > motors" which have financially realized more than $300 million per year > between the two companies which have been producing my technology. > While scientific 'academics' and U.S. politicians have fought against or > been silent with respect to my life's work for humanity.... ...for humanity? ...or for the $300 million per year? Hmmmmm....... hard to keep the story straight isn't it? I guess we are all supposed feel betrayed until Joe gets his cut of the action....... I better go practice feeling betrayed. Ooops! I almost forgot, I can't do that! I'm part of the forces of evil allied against him. Sorry, sorry..... 8^) -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune" -Nicholas Ling From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 15:05:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA20317; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:03:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:03:49 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:01:43 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Newman accused of swindling distribu Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810081805_MC2-5C13-95B4 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"vRuym3.0.Nz4.4RJ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23151 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: vortex Horace Heffner writes: I assume the above is a typo? Should read "I said that to my knowledge Newman has not been accused of fraud *or* swindling people." Yes, right. It wasn't a typo, it was a "speako" -- I instilled . . . I am still learning to use NatSpeak voice input. Trying to use it . . . Evan Soule writes: The "red flag" which I see being "waved" is your inability to correctly report the facts surrounding this technology. The issue is not technology, it is breach of contract and 70 thousand missing dollars. But, this is off-topic. Let it drop. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 15:10:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA15145; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:52:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:52:28 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981008215800.00d81c44 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 17:58:00 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Resent-Message-ID: <"r7TaT1.0.Xi3.RGJ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23150 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:48 PM 10/8/98 -0400, you wrote: > > > What prevents the gases from forming molecules? > > How do you know the H and O are monotomic? Forgive typos... >keyboard is flakey... The volume is twice as much as what H2 & O2 would occupy (Avagadro's Constant). David Hudson has done a lot of research on monatomic high spin states: http://monatomic.earth.com/ The commercial generators use the fuel as soon as it is produced however. For some reason, high spin states are applicable to the platinum group and transition elements. I wonder if different resonant frequencies and/or combinations thereof might make a water molecule divide in different ways (Dr. Linus Pauling's "Nature of the Chemical Bond")? Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 15:14:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA23309; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:10:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:10:24 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:20:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Joseph Newman Responds to Jed Rothwell Resent-Message-ID: <"isTTk2.0.1i5.FXJ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23152 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Joseph Westley Newman wrote: > >> ......how others around me have already betrayed humanity and my life's >> work by producing my Pioneering Invention in the limited way of "trolling >> motors" which have financially realized more than $300 million per year >> between the two companies which have been producing my technology. > >> While scientific 'academics' and U.S. politicians have fought against or >> been silent with respect to my life's work for humanity.... > > >...for humanity? ...or for the $300 million per year? Hmmmmm....... hard to >keep the story straight isn't it? I guess we are all supposed feel betrayed >until Joe gets his cut of the action....... I better go practice feeling >betrayed. > >Ooops! I almost forgot, I can't do that! I'm part of the forces of evil >allied >against him. Sorry, sorry..... 8^) > > >-- > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > John E. Steck > Senior Mechanical Engineer > Rapid Tooling Applications > Motorola, Libertyville, IL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > "Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune" -Nicholas Ling It's a good thing you're not being sarcastic -- otherwise I'd have to believe that you are part of 'the forces of evil allied against him.' Of course, your obviously sincere apology is certainly appreciated. :-) Evan Soule' From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 15:19:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA26574; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:17:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:17:29 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:28:01 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: To Rothwell: Response to false accusation Resent-Message-ID: <"kl52-1.0.2V6.udJ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23153 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: vortex > >Horace Heffner writes: > > I assume the above is a typo? Should read "I said that to my knowledge > Newman has not been accused of fraud *or* swindling people." > >Yes, right. It wasn't a typo, it was a "speako" -- I instilled . . . I am >still learning to use NatSpeak voice input. Trying to use it . . . > > >Evan Soule' writes: > > The "red flag" which I see being "waved" is your inability to correctly > report the facts surrounding this technology. > >The issue is not technology, it is breach of contract and 70 thousand missing >dollars. But, this is off-topic. Let it drop. > >- Jed You brought it up, now you want to drop it. No, the issue IS technology and your inability/unwillingness to understand it. Anyone can "claim" a "breach of contract" and "missing dollars" -- however, Joseph Newman is _not_ "missing": He can be reached at -- 2050 Vineyard Drive Castle Rock, Colorado 80104 (303) 814-3403 -- Evan Soule' From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 16:25:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA18218; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:13:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:13:45 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981008184327.006ecefc world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 18:43:27 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Waveform reconstruction In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981008152445.006e2e24 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981008123531.006d7cc0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008091641.006d0b6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008022331.007378e0 world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19981008004012.009365d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008003818.007355f0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981003113726.00a4f3c8 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"dtES73.0.BS4.cSK7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23154 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:24 PM 10/8/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >At 12:35 10/8/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> Hope that helps. > >My apologies to the forum for wasted bandwidth. Back to the laboratory. This was NOT wasted bandwidth. Issues of calibration, accuracy, signal processing, and controls quite are important to serious scientists in this field. Apparently the points made were just ignored. Good luck anyway. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 16:29:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA19663; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:18:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:18:00 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:27:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Galileo's Heresy: The "Claims" Against Him Resent-Message-ID: <"Pp2qx3.0.mo4.RWK7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23155 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The following are excerpted portions from the "Sentence of the Tribunal of the Supreme Inquisition against Galileo Galilei, given the 22nd day of June of the year 1633": "It being the case that thou, Galileo, son of the late Vincenzio Galilei, a Florentine, now aged 70, wast denounced in this Holy Office in 1615: "That thou heldest as true the false doctrine taught by many, that the Sun was the centre of the universe and immoveable, and that the Earth moved, and had also a diurnal motion: That on this same matter thou didst hold a correspondence with certain German mathematicians.... "That the Sun is the centre of the universe and doth not move from his place is a proposition absurd and false in philosophy, and formerly heretical; being expressly contrary to Holy Writ: That the Earth is not the centre of the universe nor immoveable, but that it moves, even with a diurnal motion, is likewise a proposition absurd and false in philosophy, and considered in theology ad minus erroneous in faith..... "Invoking then the Most Holy Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and of His most glorious Mother Mary, ever Virgin, for this Our definite sentence, the which sitting pro tribunali, by the counsel and opinion of the Reverent Masters of theology and doctors of both laws, Our Counsellors, we present in these writings, in the cause and causes currently before Us, between the magnificent Carlo Sinceri, doctor of both laws, procurator fiscal of this Holy Office on the one part, and thou Galileo Galilei, guilty, here present, confessed and judged, on the other part: "We say, pronounce, sentence, and declare, that thou, the said Galileo, by the things deduced during this trial, and by thee confessed as above, hast rendered thyself vehemently suspected of heresy by this Holy Office, that is, of having believed and held a doctrine which is false, and contrary to the Holy Scriptures, to wit: that the Sun is the centre of the universe, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the Earth moves and is not the centre of the universe: and that an opinion may be held and defended as probable after having been declared and defined as contrary to Holy Scripture; and in consequence thou hast incurred all the censures and penalties of the Sacred Canons, and other Decrees both general and particular, against such offenders imposed and promulgated. From the which We are content that thou shouldst be absolved, if, first of all, with a sincere heart and unfeigned faith, thou dost before Us abjure, curse, and detest the above-mentioned errors and heresies and any other error and heresy contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church, after the manner that We shall require of thee. "And to the end that this thy grave error and transgression remain not entirely unpunished, and that thou mayst be more cautious in the future, and an example to others to abstain from and avoid similar offences, "We order that by a public edict the book of DIALOGUES OF GALILEO GALILEI be prohibited, and We condemn thee to the prison of this Holy Office during Our will and pleasure; and as a salutary penance We enjoin on thee that for the space of three years thou shalt recite once a week the Seven Penitential Psalms, reserving to Ourselves the faculty of moderating, changing, or taking from, all other or part of the above-mentioned pains and penalties. "And thus We say, pronounce, declare, order, condemn, and reserve in this and in any other better way and form which by right We can and ought. Ita pronunciamus nos Cardinalis infrascripti. F. Cardinalis de Asculo. G. Cardinalis Bentivolius D. Cardinalis de Cremona. A. Cardinalis S. Honuphri. B. Cardinalis Gypsius. F. Cardinalis Verospius. M. Cardinalis Ginettus. _____________________________________________ GALILEO'S ABJURATION. I, Galileo Galilei, son f the late Vincenzio Galilei of Florence, aged 70 years, tried personally by this court, and kneeling before You, the most Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinals, Inquisitors-General throughout the Christian Republic against heretical depravity, having before my eyes the Most Holy Gospels, and laying on them my own hands; I swear that I have always believed, I believe now, and with God's help I will in future believe all which the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church doth hold, preach, and teach. But since I, after having been admonished by this Holy Office entirely to abandon the false opinion that the Sun was the centre of the universe and immoveable, and that the Earth was not the centre of the same and that it moved, and that I was neither to hold, defend, nor teach in any manner whatever, either orally or in writing, the said false doctrine; and after having received a notification that the said doctrine is contrary to Holy Writ, I did write and cause to be printed a book in which I treat of the said already condemned doctrine, and bring forward arguments of much efficacy in its favour, without arriving at any solution: I have been judged vehemently suspected of heresy, that is, of having held and believed that the Sun is the centre of the universe and immoveable, and that the Earth is not the centre of the same, and that it does move. Nevertheless, wishing to remove from the minds of your Eminences and all faithful Christians this vehement suspicion reasonably conceived against me, I abjure with sincere heart and unfeigned faith, I curse and detest the said errors and heresies, and generally all and every error and sect contrary to the Holy Catholic Church. And I swear that for the future I will neither say nor assert in speaking or writing such things as may bring upon me similar suspicion; and if I know any heretic, or one suspected of heresy, I will denounce him to this Holy Office, or to the Inquisitor and Ordinary of the place in which I may be. I also swear and promise to adopt and observe entirely all the penances which have been or may be by this Holy Office imposed on me. And if I contravene any of these said promises, protests, or oaths, (which God forbid!) I submit myself to all the pains and penalties which by the Sacred Canons and other Decrees general and particular are against such offenders imposed and promulgated. So help me God and the Holy Gospels, which I touch with my own hands. I Galileo Galilei aforesaid have abjured, sworn, and promised, and hold myself bound as above; and in token of the truth, with my own hand have subscribed the present schedule of my abjuration, and have recited it word by word. In Rome, at the Convent della Minerva, this 22nd day of June, 1633. I, GALILEO GALILEI, have abjured as above, with my own hand. ________________________________________ Personal sidebar comment: The above seven "Cardinals" were not "fit to lick the underside of Galileo's shoes." If there is an "afterlife" I hope the "souls" of the seven cardinal idiots are devoutly 'praying' for Galileo's forgiveness of their stupidity and intellectual dishonesty. Evan Soule' From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 17:00:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA32748; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:55:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:55:49 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:02:11 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Galileo's Heresy: The "Claims" Against Him Resent-Message-ID: <"Aw_HR1.0.S_7.34L7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23156 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 6:27 PM 10/8/98, Evan Soule wrote: [snip wonderful bit of history - thanks!] >Personal sidebar comment: > >The above seven "Cardinals" were not "fit to lick the underside of >Galileo's shoes." > >If there is an "afterlife" I hope the "souls" of the seven cardinal idiots >are devoutly 'praying' for Galileo's forgiveness of their stupidity and >intellectual dishonesty. > >Evan Soule' A striking fact regarding the story is that *both* Galileo and the Church were wrong. Galileo was only somewhat more correct. If there is a lesson to be learned it seems to me to be the value of free speech in scientific investigation. Any social force which threatens and coerces, here the church, only delays the outing of the truth. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 17:34:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12266; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:26:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:26:29 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:31:30 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: To Rothwell: Response to false accusation Resent-Message-ID: <"Pmwr9.0.P_2.mWL7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23158 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 5:28 PM 10/8/98, Evan Soule wrote: [snip] >You brought it up, now you want to drop it. > >No, the issue IS technology and your inability/unwillingness to understand >it. Anyone can "claim" a "breach of contract" and "missing dollars" -- >however, Joseph Newman is _not_ "missing": [snip] How about the motor the dealer was supposed to receive? Does it still exist? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 17:36:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12124; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:26:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:26:09 -0700 Message-Id: <199810090026.TAA13799 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 19:25:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Newman accused of swindling distributor Resent-Message-ID: <"EZxZw.0.Lz2.QWL7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23157 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex > >A few weeks ago on this forum I said that to my knowledge Newman has not been >accused of fraud was swindling people. I have now received information to the >contrary. I have two documents: a 1993 distributorship agreement between Newman >and a man in Ohio and a recent letter from the man's lawyer. The >distributorship agreement calls for delivery of a machine in 1994. The lawyer >claims that Newman collected in excess of $70,000, but he never delivered a >machine. Instead, "Mr. Newman disappeared and took the prototype motor with >him." > >One of my correspondents says there may be two sides to the story. I said the >letter if true is prima facie evidence of fraud. Jones says, "Mere failure to >honor contractual commitments is not, of itself, evidence of fraud, since >there can be many extenuating circumstances. You have only a fragment of >information from one of the parties, not a complete picture." ***{For the record: in the absence of compelling evidence that Newman is a swindler, I assume that he is *not* a swindler. I would add that I consider it immoral to publicly speculate about anyone's honesty in the absence of such evidence. These are matters that are best discussed via e-mail. The only discussion that is appropriate here is a discussion of the scientific merits of Newman's technology. --Mitchell Jones}*** I disagree. This >is no mere failure to honor a contract. Newman is four years late, and instead >of giving his customer a written explanation ***{That would be foolish in a litigious society such as this, even if the circumstances that led to the breach were unavoidable. --Mitchell Jones}*** , or offering to refund the money ***{He may not have had the money at that point. Business plans don't always pan out, and the reasons usually have nothing to do with fraud. For all you know, Newman may have suffered contractual breaches himself, and they may have prevented him from delivering on his commitment to the "man in Ohio." --Mitchell Jones}*** , >he did a disappearing act. ***{You state this as a fact, but you don't know it as a fact. As I said in the e-mail that you quoted: "You have only a fragment of information from one of the parties, not a complete picture." --Mitchell Jones}*** There cannot be two sides to the story, because the >distributor did not fail to fulfill his contractual obligations. He couldn't >have; he never received a machine. I'm sure he never received a machine >because Soule told me here a few weeks ago that only one Newman machine >exists. The others have supposedly been sacrificed for spare parts. ***{I repeat: if Newman failed to fulfill his contractual obligations, he may have done so for the usual sorts of business related reasons, unrelated to fraud. I would also note that you are the only one speaking of fraud here. The letter from the lawyer, to which you referred above, does not use that word. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >This case has not been taken to court, and I'm not aware of any other claims >against Mr. Newman or court rulings against him. However I know little about >Newman. The might be hundreds of complaints. > >- Jed ***{Might, smight. Why are you stirring this up, Jed? These are private, personal matters to be settled between Newman and those who are at odds with him, if justice is to be done. Once the light of publicity is focused on these affairs, justice becomes impossible, and this turns into a popularity contest. In that case, Newman is guaranteed to lose due to his abrasive personality, whatever the objective merits of his position. Is that what you want? Doesn't the possibility that his motor may work concern you at all? --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 17:36:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12405; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:27:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:27:28 -0700 From: Puthoff aol.com Message-ID: <93ee062a.361d55ad aol.com> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 20:15:41 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re: Deuterium-Lithium Fusion in a Resonant Cavity? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78 Resent-Message-ID: <"Y893b2.0.i13.5XL7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23159 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred, has anyone tried this? Hal From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 17:45:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA28208; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:41:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:41:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19981009003716.20687.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [158.152.228.34] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Meyer Water Fuel Cell Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 17:37:12 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"cdHVW1.0.Su6.GkL7s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23160 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Vorts, How many people have done work on the Meyer fuel cell using distilled water and got it to produce hydrogen? I'm convinced that although the device may not be over-unity it may be another way of producing hydrogen at a better efficiency. Ive spent about 50GBP on SS tubing so I'm committed to seeing this experiment through now and I would like to see what others have done. Cheers Rob King ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 17:45:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA28931; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:43:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:43:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:40:43 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Unsubscribe Re: Joseph Newman Responds to Jed Rothwell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vYn0d2.0.v37.xmL7s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23161 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, ALL VORT(s) :) I'm now UNsubsrcribing, and this seems an appropriate time, as two years ago, when I signed on, THIS was the discussion then. Appears to surface annually (roughly) and now I can say of vortex-l "been there - done that" There are many reasons why, this is not the major, but it sure takes up the quality bandwidth of the list, and an individuals time. In defense (possible?), of evan & newman I leave the following quotes: " one must be responsible for ones actions" - me and others:) and "If a thing is old, it is a sign that it was fit to live...The guarantee of continuity is quality" --Eddie Rickenbacker (1890-1973) ------------------- In defense (possible?), of the list I leave the following quote: "Discovery ... walking where none others have walked, beholding what human eyes have not seen before." -- Mark Twain -------------------- ~adios~ amigos, chio, bon voyage & later gaters! :) -=se=- steve (best of success to EVERYONE:) ekwall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 18:15:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA27850; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:09:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:09:53 -0700 Message-ID: <361D4F30.3719 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 18:48:00 -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: Storms: Blue: data selection? 10.8.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"brg8X1.0.xo6.W9M7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23162 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Storms: data selection? 10.7.98 Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 09:03:34 -0600 From: Edmund Storms To: rmforall earthlink.net Ed. Storms reply > > Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: bursts, QM tunneling 10.5.98 > Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:49:03 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > [Rich Murray: I wonder if Ed Storm could send some of his own data to > Dick Blue, and perhaps post it on the EarthTech website, so we can > examine it together.] You can see a sample of my data in “Measurements of Excess Heat From a Pons-Fleichmann-Type Electrolytic Cell Using Palladium Sheet” in Fusion Technol. 23 (1993) 230 and “A Study of Those Properties of Palladium that Influence Excess Energy Production by the Pons-Fleischmann Effect”, in Infinite Energy, 2 , #8 (1996) page 50. Unfortunately many of the figures are screwed up in the latter article. If you are interested, I can supply the correct figures. When I start up my studies in the winter, I will be happy to send you some extended data which you can analyze. > Certainly part of the issue is eliminating the worst data from further > consideration, so we don't waste bandwidth rehashing results that really > don't mean very much. However, among CANR advocates getting those not > very significant results set aside is as hard as pulling teeth. Now > although Ed Storms wants to use slightly different language than I, we > seem to have come to an agreement as to just what is "typical" behavior > for the heat signal from a Pons-Fleischmann type of reaction cell. > That's progress! > > The questions I have been trying to bring foward here deal with just > what the statistical implications are for data of the sort being > described, bearing in mind that there may well be a problem relating to > the signal-to-noise ratio and what I call post-selection bias. That is > to say I believe we should consider the possibility that positive > results are being "generated" by simply selecting the best results from > a data set that is noisey. > > As Ed Storms acknowledges, runs which ultimately yield no excess heat, > on average, still may show "bursts" that to the casual observer look > very much like what occurs in a cell that is producing an excess. I > would go futher to say that if you took the data from a cell that yields > nothing and the data from a cell showing the effect, concealed the zero > level, and placed these two data sets in front of Ed Storms he would > have difficulty selecting which data shows a net positive effect. Those > of you who have been around long enough may recall that when the chips > were down no one could show an operating cell to the DOE Committee and > say that it was producing "excess heat." > > Like it or not, we are dealing here with filtered and selected data. > Exactly how the data gets filtered and selected is a very important > aspect of the final results and the claims for a positive CANR effect. > Although the excess heat has been portrayed as being a simple and > direct observation which yields incontrovertible evidence for cold > fusion, it really is no such thing. > The statistical arguments Dick makes have two imbedded assumptions. First, that the experimenter is so inexperienced and quick to see a positive result, that he is more easily fooled than someone who has no experience with the apparatus. Second, that the effect is so small that it is easily hidden in the noise, so that only a deceived believer can pick it out. The facts are that most of the studies are being done by people who are very careful and who have gained a considerable on the job training using their particular calorimeter. All of these people know the unreasonableness of the claims and have nothing to gain by seeing something that isn’t there. However, I respect Dick Blue’s need to see for himself and will honor his wish as best I can. As for the second assumption, the effect is occasionally huge as can be seen in my papers referenced above. Statistical analysis is pointless under these conditions. Sure, you can propose a drift in calibration. However, in my case, the calorimeter was calibrated before, during and after excess energy production with no significant change being noted. I have spent many hours trying to find an experimental reason for this result, and Dick has proposed no explanation that I have not already considered and found good reasons to reject. Experimental studies always require judgement which comes from many hours of experience. Lots of things can go wrong, and some data are always rejected because of known errors. When an anomalous result is seen, the first effort is to check all aspects of the experiment to find the cause. This search is not part of the data being recorded, so you would not see the result of the search in a data dump. You would just have to take my word that the anomalous result was found to be caused by a flaw in the apparatus or that no such explanation was found in spite of a careful search. Just because Dick can suggest that a room temperature change, for example, could explain the effect does not mean that I, or any other competent experimenter, have not thought of this and not taken precautions. It is reasonable to ask if such precautions were taken. It is insulting to assume that this is the explanation before the question is asked. Early in the field, such suggestions were useful because we all were new at the game. During 9 years, we gained considerable on the job training and all of these questions have been answered. If Dick can come up with some new ideas, that would be useful. However, without this training Dick is at as much a loss as I would be in trying to tell him where he is making errors in his field. Before I could hope to find such errors, I would have to ask many questions and study the subject before reaching a conclusion. I wish Dick Blue would start asking questions rather than reaching premature conclusions. > I fear we may be drifting off into Never-Never Land in which we are ask > to consider the possibility that some New Age version of quantum theory > is going to rescue these claimed CANR effects. All I can say this is a > poor context in which to begin a revision of fundamental theory. In > fact it's quite clear that Ed Storms doesn't want to do that in any > general sense. He has to cling to some of the basics or he can't even > make the case that there truly is some sort of excess heat. > > For the time being, I suggest that we stick to the notion that we are > dealing with a phenomenon that can fit within the framework of quantum > theory as we now know it. In that context I agree that getting two > deuterons close enough to interact need not (likely does not) involve > the internal coordinates of the deuterons, i.e. up to that point their > internal wave functions need not have been perturbed. The trick is, of > course, to figure out just what does account for anomalous behavior in > that regard. So far, I have not heard about any viable explanations for > this as being on the table at this time. > > It gets much worse, however, when we attempt to proceed from there. > Just suppose that the deuterons do get close enough to interact via the > nuclear interaction potential. What I have been saying is that now you > must consider a mechanism to account for changes in nuclear > wavefunctions, if you want to claim that the reaction process is somehow > dramatically altered by the chemical environment. You can dream about > subtle effects initiating the reaction event, but what happens next > cannot be very subtle. Here's where the "brute force" really has to be > considered. You see, what we actually know is that external "brute > force" when it is known to be present does not actually do very much to > alter the branching ratios between p and n emission, for example. Dick has raised an interesting question. When two deuterons are caused to approach each by whatever means, why are the nuclear consequences of the resulting interaction not always the same? In other words, why does “cold” fusion not produce the same nuclear products as “hot“ fusion, since the nuclear wave functions should not be influenced by the translational energy of the nuclei? To answer this question, it is worth while to summarize what we know. 1. The few neutrons that are emitted have energy peaks. One is at 2.45 MeV, the value expected for normal fusion and another small peak is at 7 MeV, an energy which should not be seen. In addition, a major peak is seen near 4.5 MeV. However, the number of neutrons detected is too small to account for the heat no matter what the reaction. Therefore, these are low level, parallel reactions of unknown type. 2. When excess energy is measured, it is associated with a reaction having an energy anywhere between 12 to 48 MeV/He, depending on how much helium-4 is assumed to be retained in the palladium. No detectable tritium is produced. 3. Boron does not enter into this reaction. 4. Energy release is localized and is at a rate sufficient to cause melting. 5. Soft X-rays are emitted from the active sites. We might conclude that the reaction is not fusion but a Li-6 + deuteron reaction to produce 2 He-4 which gives 11.2 MeV/He. For this to be consistent with the measurements, about 75% of the helium produced would have to be retained in the palladium. This is not an unreasonable number. However, heat has been seen in the absence of lithium yet with the production of helium. The Arata and Case studies can be taken as examples. In these cases, the He-energy relationship is still being studied and is not yet generally known. He-3 has been detected by Arata, but its source is unknown. Apparently, yet another nuclear reaction is possible. >From this, it is reasonable to conclude that lithium is not involved and the result is not consistent with normal fusion. The Chubbs have proposed a process which side steps these problems by assuming that, under the right conditions, a deuteron can act as a wave and interact in this form. Hagelstein has proposed that the helium results from alpha emission after a deuteron is added to a metal nuclei. After you have studied their arguments, I would like to know your reaction to these ideas. I would hope you would not dismiss the ideas out of hand just because they do not fit your model. > > OK, so everyone in every case has to be "careful." All you are saying > is that they have to be selective to get a desired result. What I was > trying to get across is that what Arata-Zhang do to get "good" palladium > black is not the same as what McKubre did to get "good" solid cathodes > which work. The two selection processes are not obviously related in a > very concrete way. As to your comments about the selection processes for bulk Pd and palladium black -- Of course, the methods would be different because the materials are different. I do not see the relevance of this difference to our discussion. Nevertheless, in both cases, the selection and treatment are designed to achieve the same end, i.e. a very high concentration of deuterium at the surface. > > So I have been suggesting that one tool that can be available is being > seriously under utilized -- its a radiations detector. If you can't see > rather dramatic differences in the radiations evironment then quite > possibly you aren't actually doing anything very interesting with > respect to CANR. It's a quick, cheap, effective way to screen a whole > bunch of experimental claims. Various radiation detectors have been used, but present experience indicates that the radiation being produced is too weak to penetrates the walls of the container. Occasionally, photographic film placed inside shows the presence of low-energy radiation. People using the gas discharge technique have had better luck. > > Are you claiming the PdD is superconducting at room temperature???? > I think we know how to tell whether something is superconducting, so I > don't understand your assertions that there are "no obvious changes." > Of course, any time you don't look for differences you will not find > them. How do you know it's superconducting it you can't observe a > change? It's like my old question as to how you can claim to have > high-energy reaction events if you don't look for high-energy reaction > events. No, I am not suggesting that normal beta PdD is superconducting at room temperature. The transition temperature is about 12 K. However, there are reasons to believe that the conditions in which the nuclear reactions occur are superconducting at room temperature. My point was that the presence of superconductivity is not also associated with other major changes in the structure or chemistry of PdD. Thus, a major change in properties in one area need not be accompanied by an easily detected change in another area. Unconventional methods are needed to see such changes. The tools permitting such unconventional studies are not presently available to cold fusion workers because of their cost. > > As for there being a shortage of tools for CANR investigations, you've > got to be kidding! KcKubre and Pons and Fleischmann spent a ton of > money between them. The fact that they ultimately have little to show > for their efforts is their problem, not the result of a shortage of > funds. Of course a ton of money was spent and for that ton we now have a great deal of insight which Dick Blue will not accept. Another ton will obviously have to be spent obtaining insights which Dick Blue and other skeptics will accept. We are all learning how to do the job better and this takes money; money which is not now available. I will grant that the initial ton was not well-spent in some cases. This is not surprising in such a new and controversial field. Why should this fact be used to dismiss future efforts? > > Dick Blue > > Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: Claytor tritium 10.5.98 > Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:00:32 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > > So we do agree that Claytor results are clearly at odds with > other CANR results. I suppose one can go on accumulating > "anomalous" data from all quarters and piling it all together. > Let's see here, perhaps if I dig through my files I can make > a contribution myself. Sarcasm will get us nowhere. The Claytor data are a part of CANR because he demonstrates that an anomalous nuclear reaction can be made to occur. The CANR field is not one reaction or one method. Indeed, there is reason to believe that dendrites are operating on the surface of his electrode in the same manner as seen in electrolytic cells. A lot of what appear to be isolated effects are being seen which are gradually being understood to have a common cause. It is this common cause we all are seeking. If you don't look, you will not see. Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 18:19:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA29444; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:13:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:13:00 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 19:52:16 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: To Rothwell: Response to false accusation Resent-Message-ID: <"NQdh13.0.tB7.PCM7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23163 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 5:28 PM 10/8/98, Evan Soule wrote: >[snip] >>You brought it up, now you want to drop it. >> >>No, the issue IS technology and your inability/unwillingness to understand >>it. Anyone can "claim" a "breach of contract" and "missing dollars" -- >>however, Joseph Newman is _not_ "missing": >[snip] > > >How about the motor the dealer was supposed to receive? Does it still exist? > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner Tell you what, Horace, here's Joe's number (I know it has been "missing"): (303) 814-3403 [Best time to call would be c. 9:30-10pm Mountain Time.] Give him a call and ask for his report on the "motor" in question. Sincerely, Evan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 18:28:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA04518; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:24:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:24:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 18:22:01 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Waveform reconstruction In-reply-to: <3.0.1.32.19981008152445.006e2e24 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199810090120.SAA13965 smtp2.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <3.0.1.32.19981008123531.006d7cc0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008091641.006d0b6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008022331.007378e0 world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19981008004012.009365d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981008003818.007355f0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981003113726.00a4f3c8 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002141329.007155cc world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002123604.006bb10c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002125229.0072324c world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002103145.00dedb6c mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002110056.006b0030 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981002093104.00debb9c mail.eden.com> <199810021009_MC2-5B4B-BB54 compuserve.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"97YTL.0.N61.uMM7s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23164 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:24 PM 10/8/98 -0500, you wrote: >At 12:35 10/8/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >> Hope that helps. > >My apologies to the forum for wasted bandwidth. Back to the laboratory. > >Scott > No problem as far as I'm concerned Scott. Mitch just needs an excuse to not trust your measurements. Then he can use that excuse to refuse to pony up one of his working CF cells for you to test. I have to figure that you will get a working CF cell from Mitch to test in your lab about the same time you receive an official working Newman motor to test. Neither event will ever happen. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 18:32:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA04767; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:30:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:30:36 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 20:41:09 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Waveform reconstruction Resent-Message-ID: <"fo2W23.0.PA1.xSM7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23165 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 03:24 PM 10/8/98 -0500, you wrote: >>At 12:35 10/8/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> >>> Hope that helps. >> >>My apologies to the forum for wasted bandwidth. Back to the laboratory. >> >>Scott >> > >No problem as far as I'm concerned Scott. Mitch just needs an excuse to not >trust your measurements. Then he can use that excuse to refuse to pony up >one of his working CF cells for you to test. I have to figure that you will >get a working CF cell from Mitch to test in your lab about the same time >you receive an official working Newman motor to test. > >Neither event will ever happen. > >--Lynn The latter will happen before you understand the technology. --Evan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 22:36:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA01208; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 22:35:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 22:35:01 -0700 Message-ID: <19981009053539.25447.rocketmail send101.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 22:35:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"vVZn8.0.oI.52Q7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23166 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Roberet Eachus wrote: >That is somewhat simplistic. Both H + H --> H2 and O + O --> O2 do not >occur without surface catalysis. The problem is that there needs to be >someplace for the energy to go. H + H --> H2+ + e- can occur, and >makes monatomic hydrogen very hard to deal with as a gas. [snip] ??? H + H have only about 4.5 eV of energy with respect to ground state H2, whereas H2+ + e- has about 15 eV. H + H does not have the energy to make H2+. >If you are careful, and work at low temperature with a >good heat sink, you can use a wet plate as a recombiner--in fact, many >steam plants do, although they don't need to be as careful, since what >they are recombining is a mix that is nearly 90% water vapor. ??? Aren't you confusing condensation with recombination. Steam plants condense exhaust steam---cold H2O vapor, is usually down about 50 C in temperature. Exhaust steam does not have many ions that would need to be recombined. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 22:49:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA05931; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 22:48:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 22:48:45 -0700 Message-ID: <19981009054723.20331.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 22:47:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Eachus' flink To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"7kf8q2.0.bS1.yEQ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23167 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Eachus wrote: [snip] But, as I said, with an old tube you can get a >single sparck/arc the length of the tube. As the pinch forms, you pull >power out of the tube, when the arc breaks it seems to nicely swallow >its tail. What do you mean by "swallow its tail"? I don't understand. It's not standard terminology that I am aware of. Please explain better. >Some of the energy remains in the form of ions, which is >why, in the case of the fluoresent, you get glow discharge behavior >(normal behavior) from then on. Isn't this just a manifestation of the slowness of recombination? Recombination starts out fast, but later it slows down greatly. The recombination time is long enough that some ions survive until the next voltage rise. >If you tune things right, this tail swallowing behavior means that the >tube is cool--light is emitted during the discharge, but there is >little or no residual energy left in the tube. Again a data point >--I took a seven watt rated flash tube, designed for flash cameras, up >over 1 KW. It made a wonderful light, but the electrodes weren't even >hot. (If you want to try it, you have to pulse at about 15 kilohertz >with a sharp risetime and fast decay, so the duty cycle is about 1%. >The limit on power is where the electrodes penetrate the quartz >envelope. If you do it right, there will be no direct conduction or >convection energy transfer from the plasma to the envelope--all that >will occur is some absorption and reradiation of the light. Interesting, but I still don't understand what you mean by "tail swallowing behavior." == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 8 23:51:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA16640; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 23:50:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 23:50:18 -0700 Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 02:48:05 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Meyer Water Fuel Cell Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810090251_MC2-5C25-7CD5 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"lkKBP2.0.q34.f8R7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23168 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rob King said: >> How many people have done work on the Meyer fuel cell using distilled water and got it to produce hydrogen? I'm convinced that although the device may not be over-unity it may be another way of producing hydrogen at a better efficiency. Ive spent about 50GBP on SS tubing so I'm committed to seeing this experiment through now and I would like to see what others have done. << I have spent many weeks and GBP trying to replicate the Meyer cell as described in his patents and literature. The most problematic aspect is the circuitry to produce the stepped pulsed wave form over a range of frequencies and voltages. After many trials and failures I eventually gave up. I also supplied the late Chris Tinsley with a cell, and he also was unable to obtain ou or even more than Faradic output of H and O. If you are successful I will be the 1st to congratulate you. Good luck. Norman Horwood From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 00:25:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA15601; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 00:24:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 00:24:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:16:46 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981008090240.007403a0 world.std.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"5LLU81.0.hp3.qeR7s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23169 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Flow calorimetry is "easy" because it has an equation > which purports to be "correct". However, it has all the > problems of static calorimetry AND additional heat and > mass flow issues and thus is not simpler, except when the simple > equation is naively believed a priori without testing. I'm glad somebody said this, I always wondered why it should be so much better. You have all the same alternative heat paths - radiation, gases evolved, electrodes sticking out etc - as in F&P-style. All this means to me that something like 1% accuracy is the best you can get, if you are as careful as, e.g., Todd Green was in his Ph.D. work. It is more likely to be around 3% in my opinion. That's what those French calorimetry experts got... And I'd like to again put in a plug for calibration with a chemical reaction with known enthalpy, standard practice in calorimetry. As for waveforms - I thought this was thrashed out long ago. Our own experiments here showed that you can safely filter cell voltage and multiply the filter output by the (constant) current, to measure the input power. Cell voltage fluctuations are not correlated with fluctuations in current, which are negligible in any case, even with F&P's "filter", which actually caused oscillations. But if you still distrust this, I wonder why noone uses multipliers? Multiply current and voltage continuously, and filter the output of that. Any comments? Or are analogue multipliers no longer used? It's a long time since I used one, and then I made it myself because they were damned expensive (this was in 1968, so things just might have changed {:] ). -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 00:36:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA25563; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 00:35:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 00:35:23 -0700 Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:36:29 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981008110952.00c9ed30 spectre.mitre.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zYyle3.0.KF6.woR7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23170 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > At 09:50 AM 10/8/98 +0200, britz wrote: > >I frankly don't believe there is such a gas. Monatomic H and O would > >combine with others of the same in no time. There is a rather high collision > >frequency in a gas, and the reactions for both H and O, X+X=>X2 is hugely > >on the right hand side. If a monatomic species ever did make it off the > >electrode surface (which I doubt) it wouldn't last as long as an ice > >cube in hell. > > That is somewhat simplistic. Both H + H --> H2 and O + O --> O2 do not > occur without surface catalysis. The problem is that there needs to be > someplace for the energy to go. H + H --> H2+ + e- can occur, and makes > monatomic hydrogen very hard to deal with as a gas. H2 + H+ --> H3+, > H3+ + H --> H2 + H2+ makes any ionizing radiation, including ultraviolet > light act as a catalyst. There are similar chains for oxygen. [...] Thanks, Robert, you seem to know more about this. I was talking generalities, knowing only the order-of-magnitude thermodydnamic quantities. You are also right, of course, that normally, in electrolysis, H2 is formed by the surface (heterogeneous) reaction of two adsorbed monatomic H's. Actually, although I still don't believe in Brown's gas, this might seem to lend some credibility to the claim that they get BG at low current densities - where you might expect a low surface concentration of H's, and thus a smaller 2-D collision rate. If I had the time (which I do not), I might do some reading on all this, so that I'd know what I was talking about. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 01:01:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA29844; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 01:00:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 01:00:14 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981009080923.00d724b8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 04:09:23 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Meyer Water Fuel Cell Resent-Message-ID: <"umF6V2.0.EI7.DAS7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23171 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:48 AM 10/9/98 -0400, you wrote: >The most problematic aspect is the circuitry to produce the stepped pulsed >wave form over a range of frequencies and voltages. After many trials and >failures I eventually gave up. Did you try a computer soundcard output? What was the basis for the frequencies you chose? Plan A: Dr. Linus Pauling's "Nature of the Chemical Bond" has frequency and vibration mode data. Plan B: There is speculation that John Keely's chords made up of 3 frequencies should be looked into. Plan C: Professor Searl's magic squares may also be applicable in determining proper volume, dimension, composition, and frequency values for the electrodes. Plan D: Zero Point Energy ion acoustic resonance analysis? I hope this helps. Sounds like fun to me. :) Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 04:57:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA01402; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 04:56:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 04:56:37 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 04:03:27 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: To Rothwell: Response to false accusation Resent-Message-ID: <"RhqLX2.0.kL.qdV7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23172 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 7:52 PM 10/8/98, Evan Soule wrote: [snip] >Tell you what, Horace, here's Joe's number (I know it has been "missing"): > >(303) 814-3403 [Best time to call would be c. 9:30-10pm Mountain Time.] > >Give him a call and ask for his report on the "motor" in question. > >Sincerely, > >Evan You put the word "motor" in quotes. Are you implying there was no motor promised to the dealer in Ohio? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 06:01:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA16952; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 05:59:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 05:59:06 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981009085944.007f9800 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 08:59:44 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19981008090240.007403a0 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"YNo161.0.n84.PYW7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23173 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:16 AM 10/9/98 +0200, Dieter Britz wrote: >As for waveforms - I thought this was thrashed out long ago. Our own >experiments here showed that you can safely filter cell voltage and >multiply the filter output by the (constant) current, to measure the >input power. Cell voltage fluctuations are not correlated with >fluctuations in current, which are negligible in any case, even with >F&P's "filter", which actually caused oscillations. But if you still >distrust this, I wonder why noone uses multipliers? Multiply current >and voltage continuously, and filter the output of that. Any comments? >Or are analogue multipliers no longer used? It's a long time since I >used one, and then I made it myself because they were damned expensive >(this was in 1968, so things just might have changed {:] ). The problem is calibrating the detector (ie. calorimeter) with a test pulse. This has nothing to do with determining the electrical input power which is V(t)*(I(t). Such calibrations are routine and handled by determining the system's step or impulse response. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 06:17:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA21164; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:15:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:15:51 -0700 Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 15:17:24 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981009085944.007f9800 world.std.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"cJFej.0.UA5.6oW7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23174 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > The problem is calibrating the detector (ie. calorimeter) > with a test pulse. This has nothing to do with determining the > electrical input power which is V(t)*(I(t). > > Such calibrations are routine and handled by determining > the system's step or impulse response. OK, sorry, I guess I came into this too late to know what the issue is. I thought it was (again) about power artifacts due to oscillations. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 06:20:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA22774; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:19:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:19:17 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981009092001.007ea530 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:20:01 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19981009085944.007f9800 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"w9Bbl3.0.mZ5.LrW7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23175 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: No problem. I think a calorimeter ought to be tested by giving it a clean square wave (ie. temperature pulse). What is the big deal? The big deal is that some flow calorimeters give back the first derivative to some degree. The test determines this. It is getting cold here. Mitchell At 03:17 PM 10/9/98 +0200, britz wrote: >On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >> The problem is calibrating the detector (ie. calorimeter) >> with a test pulse. This has nothing to do with determining the >> electrical input power which is V(t)*(I(t). >> >> Such calibrations are routine and handled by determining >> the system's step or impulse response. > >OK, sorry, I guess I came into this too late to know what the issue is. >I thought it was (again) about power artifacts due to oscillations. > >-- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 06:36:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA29091; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:35:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:35:23 -0700 Message-Id: <361E1EA0.88AEECB3 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:33:04 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Barut's Theory is available. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Stq2E2.0.667.R4X7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23176 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All, I reproduced Barut's Theory "WHAT ARE THE TRUE BUILDING BLOCKS OF MATTER" as a MS Word file. It is / will be available at http://users.bigpond.net.au/Ultra-High-Temp-BECs/barut.zip (43K) and http://users.bigpond.net.au/Ultra-High-Temp-BECs/mtextra.ttf (8K) thanks to Robin van Spaandonk. Available also at http://www.geocities.com/rainforest/6660/barut.zip (43K) and http://www.geocities.com/rainforest/6660/mtextra.zip (5K) The second file is the "MT Extra" font may require to reproduce it in a windows system. I did my best effort to avoid typos and other errors as I reproduced it manually. The theory (made in 1980) is explaining all hadrons and mesons by structures made by electrons, neutrinos and protons. forces named strong and weak explained by magnetic / electromagnetic fields). Quarks or any hypothetical particles or forces are not use d or needed for the theory. I wonder why 20 years later, still high-energy physics was not enlightened by this theory? Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 06:37:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA29570; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:35:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:35:55 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 08:46:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: To Rothwell: Response to false accusation Resent-Message-ID: <"ycF5t2.0.xD7.x4X7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23177 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 7:52 PM 10/8/98, Evan Soule wrote: >[snip] >>Tell you what, Horace, here's Joe's number (I know it has been "missing"): >> >>(303) 814-3403 [Best time to call would be c. 9:30-10pm Mountain Time.] >> >>Give him a call and ask for his report on the "motor" in question. >> >>Sincerely, >> >>Evan > > >You put the word "motor" in quotes. Are you implying there was no motor >promised to the dealer in Ohio? > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner I'm not implying anything. But I have provided the "missing" number for you to call Joe and ask for his report on the "motor" in question. If you're curious, call him up. Sincerely, Evan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 06:42:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA00472; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:41:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 06:41:30 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981009084506.006d64a4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 08:45:06 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19981008090240.007403a0 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4WQYA1.0.67.8AX7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23178 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:16 10/9/98 +0200, britz wrote: >I'm glad somebody said this, I always wondered why it [flow calorimetry] >should be so much >better. You have all the same alternative heat paths - radiation, gases >evolved, electrodes sticking out etc - as in F&P-style. All this means to >me that something like 1% accuracy is the best you can get, if you are as >careful as, e.g., Todd Green was in his Ph.D. work. It is more likely to >be around 3% in my opinion. That's about right, Dieter. I get 1% accuracy at best from my systems. But that's typically much better than obtained from an isoperibolic system (heat output determined via the delta-T across a thermal barrier between the cell and an isothermal bath), particularly when the barrier is the glass wall of the electrolysis cell. In that case, as Storms reported at ICCF-7, you can get all kinds of variation in the "calorimeter constant"...the apparent thermal conductivity of the barrier. High bubble density in the cell, for example, can significantly reduce the effective conductivity of the cell wall. Then there's the "fundamentality" of flow calorimetry: I take the observed delta-T (using precision thermistors, corrected only with an offset term) and multiply by the observed mass flow rate (using the stopwatch-weight method to periodically confirm the flow of a constant-delivery pump) and by the specific heat of water and that alone produces nearly the correct result! In the case of my Low-power Calorimeter, which features a servo-controlled "active insulation" system that automatically adjusts to keep the average delta-T across the insulation walls equal to zero, no additional factor is required. In the case of my Versatile Water-flow Calorimeter, which is typically applied to much larger experiments that are simply wrapped with passive insulation, a TWO PERCENT correction factor is applied to the fundamental result described above. >And I'd like to again put in a plug for calibration with a chemical >reaction with known enthalpy, standard practice in calorimetry. Good point but, with good metering, electrical power/energy delivered to a resistive heater in the calorimeter chamber is quite satisfactory, especially if the overall accuracy target is only 1%. >As for waveforms - I thought this was thrashed out long ago. Our own >experiments here showed that you can safely filter cell voltage.... The recent subject of "discussion" was THERMAL waveform reconstruction, a common practice in reaction calorimetry to remove the smearing effect of the calorimeter's response time from the original heat-vs-time function of the sample. I don't employ these calculations because I either make power balance measurements (Pout vs Pin) at quasi-equilibrium (i.e. steady heat production for many time constants) or I integrate Pin and Pout over a complete run (starting at Pin=0 equilibrium and ending at Pin=0 equilibrium) to obtain an overall energy balance for the experiment. I have demonstrated many many calibration runs (and, unfortunately, live experiment runs, too) in which quasi-equilibrium is established and the Pout (heat output) reading becomes precisely equal to my Pin (electrical input) reading. This fact alone is sufficient to demonstrate the accuracy of my calorimeters but Swartz thinks otherwise. He has repeatedly criticized my calorimetry because of the lack of thermal waveform reconstruction. Despite repeated questioning on my part, he cannot...or will not...explain why. >...I wonder why noone uses multipliers? Multiply current >and voltage continuously, and filter the output of that. Any comments? We use it all the time....on practically every experiment we run. We are the pround owners of one of the best multipliers available, the Clarke-Hess 2330 Wide Bandwidth Sampling Power Analyzer. Even when that instrument is not employed, we always set up our data acquisition system to measure both voltage and current and multiply them to obtain power....just not as rapidly as the 2330 does. 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 Oct 9 08:08:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA03463; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 07:58:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 07:58:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19981009145653.24599.rocketmail send104.yahoomail.com> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 07:56:53 -0700 (PDT) From: ron kita Subject: Silver Bulbs To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"EbuP33.0._r.8IY7s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23179 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In Hawley s Condensed Chemical Dictionary I saw the following: Light bulbs are coated with a sandwich of two layers of titanium dioxide with a layer of silver between. This reduces power consumption by 50% and triples the life of the bulb. Thickness is 180A. No reason for the effect was given....I found it interesting... Best, Ron Kita _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 08:16:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA29926; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 08:09:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 08:09:09 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981009110944.007ee200 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 11:09:44 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott could visit Ed . . . In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981009084506.006d64a4 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981008090240.007403a0 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"wlCDc2.0.VJ7.KSY7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23180 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:45 AM 10/9/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >>As for waveforms - I thought this was thrashed out long ago. Our own >>experiments here showed that you can safely filter cell voltage.... > >The recent subject of "discussion" was THERMAL waveform reconstruction, a >common practice in reaction calorimetry to remove the smearing effect of >the calorimeter's response time from the original heat-vs-time function of >the sample. That is NOT what was discussed. What was discussed was determining the response of each system (eg. in Scott's dual) to a single square wave thermal pulse. It is simple Q/A. =================================================== > I don't employ these calculations because I either make power >balance measurements (Pout vs Pin) at quasi-equilibrium (i.e. steady heat >production for many time constants) or I integrate Pin and Pout over a >complete run (starting at Pin=0 equilibrium and ending at Pin=0 >equilibrium) to obtain an overall energy balance for the experiment. These do NOT answer the questions revealed by the simple calibration of a square wave. Like chemical controls, noise power measurement, etc. it ought be a standard calibration technique. =================================================== > Despite repeated questioning on my part, he cannot...or >will not...explain why. Au contraire. Scott Little discerns a putative dichotomy above between two systems (and I dont believe it since flow systems are more complicated than simple isoperibolic systems) and therefore it is a sine qua non to determine a priori HOW they respond to a simple pulse signal. It would not seem fair to choose which is more accurate when the two disagree without a test such as the standard suggested using thermal waveform reconstruction. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 09:07:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA14108; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:00:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:00:29 -0700 Message-ID: <361E336C.3741E8E7 GroupZ.net> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 12:01:48 -0400 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b2 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Silver Bulbs References: <19981009145653.24599.rocketmail send104.yahoomail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"oHYXi3.0.lR3.wBZ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23181 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I believe this is to reduce radiation loss (other than visible light)...therebye keeping the filament from cooling as fast.....same principal as vacuum bottle.....steve ron kita wrote: > > In Hawley s Condensed Chemical Dictionary I saw the > following: > Light bulbs are coated with a sandwich of two layers > of titanium dioxide with a layer of silver between. > This reduces power consumption by 50% and triples > the life of the bulb. Thickness is 180A. > No reason for the effect was given....I found it > interesting... > Best, > Ron Kita > > _________________________________________________________ > DO YOU YAHOO!? > Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 09:33:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28977; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:24:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:24:08 -0700 Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:44:02 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810091206_MC2-5C2B-F8E compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"IniUJ1.0.c47.eYZ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23182 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Regarding flow calorimeters, Dieter Britz writes: I'm glad somebody said this, I always wondered why it should be so much better. You have all the same alternative heat paths - radiation, gases evolved, electrodes sticking out etc - as in F&P-style. All this means to me that something like 1% accuracy is the best you can get, if you are as careful as, e.g., Todd Green was in his Ph.D. work. It is more likely to be around 3% in my opinion. By 1991 McKubre et al. achieved "the greater of 10 mW war 0.1%." See proceedings ICCF2. This was achieved partially by accounting for the alternative heat paths Britz discusses. This level of accuracy requires a great deal of money. Scott Little responded: That's about right, Dieter. I get 1% accuracy at best from my systems. If you spend another $500,000 you will achieve an order of magnitude greater accuracy and precision. Start with HP thermocouples with 0.001 deg K accuracy, and a bath temperature regulated to +/- 0.003 deg C. McKubre says "in all experiments reported here, high purity, air saturated H2O was used as the calorimeter fluid, for which the thermal capacity was taken to be 4.188 +/- 0.004 J g^-1 K^-1 in the interval 30 <= T <= 40 deg C." So don't ferget yer' high purity air saturated H2O, okay? But that's typically much better than obtained from an isoperibolic system (heat output determined via the delta-T across a thermal barrier between the cell and an isothermal bath) . . . That is incorrect. Top quality isoperibolic systems can achieve 0.1% accuracy. . . . particularly when the barrier is the glass wall of the electrolysis cell. A glass wall is not recommended, particularly when he is measured inside cell. A modified Dewar cell should be used when heat is measured inside. See Pons and Fleischmann. Or use or glass with a copper jacket and foam insulation on the outside, with lead wires should be thermally staked to bath temperature. (That's one of the ways you deal with the problem of "electrodes sticking out.") See Miles et al., China Lake, NAWCWPNS TP 8302, p. 54, Fig. 4, Improved Calorimetry Design. In that case, as Storms reported at ICCF-7, you can get all kinds of variation in the "calorimeter constant"...the apparent thermal conductivity of the barrier. High bubble density in the cell, for example, can significantly reduce the effective conductivity of the cell wall. Yes, that is why glass is not recommended. With the modified Dewar, heat transfer occurs below the waterline and below most of the bubbles. With the Miles cell, heat transfer is spread out so bubbles are less of a factor, but bubbles must still be accounted for. Miles shows how to measure the effect of bubbles, and predict it by first principles. In other words, these are significant problems but an expert will know how to deal with them. I think that if you are determined to achieve high accuracy at the milliwatt power level, you should use a Seebeck calorimeter. You will save a few hundred thousand dollars and a lot of work. A few weeks ago Britz said that cold fusion heat events are "random." I pointed out that the events are correlated with high loading conditions and that the loading conditions only occurred with some types of metal. I showed that random heat events would not produce the Miles data in the lifetime of the universe. The same can be said for other data sets from other researchers. Whenever loading, expansion and other critical parameters are measured, they are always correlated with heat. There is no physical mechanism by which these cathode properties could cause calorimeter errors, especially not errors in flow, isoperibolic and Seebeck calorimeters. I think Britz should address this issue or retract his claims. If we are going to make any progress in a serious scientific debate, we should try to address carefully-worded, well documented claims. Bear in mind this is not *my* claim, or my statistical analysis. I am merely reporting what Miles, Storms and others have written. Naturally I agree with their conclusions. I do not see how anyone could disagree. Blue claimed that the Miles heat events were at low sigma and Miles probably ignored other equally strong heat events which were randomly distributed. That is incorrect. These were high sigma events. Nothing like them occurred with the dud palladium samples. Blue is wrong about this. In fact, every statement that he has made about experiments for the past nine years has been wrong, because he never reads the literature. He relies on imagination and opinion, which is no way to do science. Britz is not as bad as Blue, but he too was relying upon opinion, guesswork, maybe and I suppose when he wrote: "All this means to me that something like 1% accuracy is the best you can get . . . It is more likely to be around 3% in my opinion." I have to ask: why your opinion? Why would anyone rely on opinion when we have thousands of peer-reviewed cold fusion papers and a huge literature on calorimetry? Britz has reviewed most peer-reviewed papers on cold fusion. I suppose he has the major papers at his fingertips. Anyone in this field should keep McKubre's papers nearby! So why should Britz guess about such a critical issue? He ends up making a huge mistake -- he is off by a factor of 30. I do not understand it. I would never guess about the accuracy of calorimeters when I can look up the facts in thirty seconds. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 09:33:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA32160; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:30:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:30:41 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981009123215.00cc1e10 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 12:32:15 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <19981009053539.25447.rocketmail send101.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ohNbM2.0.Ps7.meZ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23183 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:35 PM 10/8/98 -0700, Michael Schaffer wrote: >??? H + H have only about 4.5 eV of energy with respect to ground >state H2, whereas H2+ + e- has about 15 eV. H + H does not have the >energy to make H2+. The problem is that once one ion is around they propagate explosively. Hydrogen recombination cannot occur without a catalyst, but it can produce it's own catalyst. >??? Aren't you confusing condensation with recombination. Steam plants >condense exhaust steam---cold H2O vapor, is usually down about 50 C in >temperature. Exhaust steam does not have many ions that would need to >be recombined. No, I meant recombiner. High temperature steam, at equilibrium contains some dissociated hydrogen and oxygen. When this steam is expanded through a turbine, the gas reaches low temperature (on the order of 50 degrees C) and low pressure (often less than atmospheric) very quickly. So some of the hydrogen and oxygen remains. After you condense the steam, you are left with a gas containing some contamination (usually dissolved atmospheric gases from make up water), hydrogen, oxygen, and water vapor. This mix is fed into a recombiner, which recombines the hydrogen and oxygen, then the remaining gas is compressed, fed through a cold trap to remove the water vapor, and vented. Recombiners are usually rated in lbs/day, but don't let that mislead you. I think the largest recombiner I am aware of was rated at 100,000 lbs/day. (For a BWR plant--the ionizing radiation also causes disassociation.) Steamships have lower pressure boilers, which equates to lower outlet temperatues, which leads to a radically smaller fraction of dissociated gasses. So such plants usually just use a purge, and as a result use more makeup water. 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 Oct 9 09:51:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA10519; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:48:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:48:23 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981009124944.00cb6aa0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 12:49:44 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Eachus' flink In-Reply-To: <19981009054723.20331.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"LiM2D.0.uZ2.KvZ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23184 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:47 PM 10/8/98 -0700, Michael Schaffer wrote: >What do you mean by "swallow its tail"? I don't understand. It's not >standard terminology that I am aware of. Please explain better. Don't you know classical Norse mythology? The Midgard serpent which circles the earth swallowed its tail, making it hard to find. The problem I had was that the energy model for what was going on did not match the energy in the tube when the power was cut. (Cut literally, in some experiments we cut the circut in less than a millsecond during a zero crossing.) We finally decided that the power was getting out through the circut, but with a time constant too short for us to observe, or was being radiated away. >Isn't this just a manifestation of the slowness of recombination? >Recombination starts out fast, but later it slows down greatly. The >recombination time is long enough that some ions survive until the >next voltage rise. Yep, even if the next voltage rise is a week away. It only takes one ion to start the avalance. >Interesting, but I still don't understand what you mean by "tail >swallowing behavior." During operation, the plasma in the tube is stratified--the inner layers are much hotter than the outer layers, with the innermost thread at several eV. In the case of the seven watt tube, the residual energy in the plasma (which is much more dense than in most tokamaks), should have been enough to melt the envelope (or blow it to pieces). It didn't even glow. (The ends of the electrodes did, but it was very local.) 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 Oct 9 10:04:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12597; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:52:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:52:34 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981009125301.007f7520 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 12:53:01 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <199810091206_MC2-5C2B-F8E compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"YJPSE2.0.h43.HzZ7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23185 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:44 AM 10/9/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >I think that if you are determined to achieve high accuracy at the milliwatt >power level, you should use a Seebeck calorimeter. You will save a few hundred >thousand dollars and a lot of work. It is more complicated than this. Seebeck calorimetry can change the reactions as I have published since '93 by taking large amounts of heat away from the reaction volume at a when it seems to be required for what may be catastrophic reactions as discussed there too. Isoperibolic is the best first approach. Flow calorimetry has advantages IF heat loss must be handled BUT there are problems with vertical low flow systems, and all the problems of "static" calorimetry and more (i.e. possible different solutions, materials, and new sources of input power and heat). All need joule and chemical controls and background noise power measurements. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 10:53:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA05223; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:49:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:49:14 -0700 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 11:47:42 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <361E1EA0.88AEECB3 verisoft.com.tr> X-Mailer: YAM 2.0 Preview5 - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck - http://www.yam.ch Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: Barut's Theory is available. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"Yegbu1.0.SH1.Poa7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23186 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hamdi, Thanks for making this effort. I really appriciate having the artical. Ron On 09-Oct-98, Hamdi Ucar wrote: > Hi All, > > I reproduced Barut's Theory "WHAT ARE THE TRUE BUILDING BLOCKS OF MATTER" as a MS Word file. It is / will be available at From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 11:39:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04475; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:37:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:37:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <361E5586.D9861010 fc.net> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 13:27:18 -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 Subject: Hey, Joe X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DhWfk3.0.r51.ZVb7s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23187 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I think it's interesting that whenever anyone posts a request for quantitative data, Evan responds with "Call Joe" and no request for technical information is ever really responded to with hard, factual information in writing. Just an observation... John Fields From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 11:46:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA30246; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:43:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:43:18 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981009144448.00cad290 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 14:44:48 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Silver Bulbs Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <19981009145653.24599.rocketmail send104.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"YBiql3.0.MO7.4bb7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23188 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:56 AM 10/9/98 -0700, ron kita wrote: >Light bulbs are coated with a sandwich of two layers >of titanium dioxide with a layer of silver between. >This reduces power consumption by 50% and triples >the life of the bulb. Thickness is 180A. >No reason for the effect was given....I found it >interesting... Less than 4% of the energy from a standard incandescent lightbulb is emitted as visible light. (Quartz halogen cycle bulbs can be pushed to about 18%.) If you add a reflector which returns IR to the filament, you can heat the filament, both increasing light output and reducing current. Whether or not this increases bulb life depends on the bulb characteristics and the amount of heat involved. Conventional bulbs fail when a small section of the filament becomes narrower than the rest of the filament. This section becomes hotter, more tungsten evaporates, and you get into a viscious feedback cycle. In a system like that described, the factors contributing to the feedback are inhibited. On the other hand you can have a catastrophic failure, where a large section of the filament melts. This becomes more likely as the filament temperature increases. With quartz halogen lamps, feeding back heat helps the iodine cycle. We ran 500 Watt lamps up from 2850 degrees K to 3250 degrees K using dichroic reflectors. 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 Oct 9 11:59:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA03921; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:54:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:54:06 -0700 Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 14:50:17 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Flow and static . . . corrections Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810091454_MC2-5C37-A95 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"oIaOG1.0.Bz.Dlb7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23189 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex This voice input program is driving me nuts. It scatters errors in places you do not think to look. The pattern of errors is different from typos, and the program never makes a spelling mistake, so the word processor spell check does not catch them. I wrote (dictated): By 1991 McKubre et al. achieved "the greater of 10 mW war 0.1%." . . . That's supposed to be: By 1991 McKubre et al. achieved "the greater of 10 mW or 0.1%." . . . The higher the input power, the larger the error, but at the highest power this instrument is designed for, error does not exceed 0.1%. Dick Blue misunderstood this point. Ah, here's another mistake: "A glass wall is not recommended, particularly when he is measured inside cell." I meant "heat is measured." I am trying to master this program to avoid carpal tunnel syndrome. The company that sold me this program has a good document about it: http://www.continuousspeech.com/carpal_tunnel.html "Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Introduction" This is tied in to an advertisement for the company, so I hesitate to mention it here, but I think it is valuable information. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 12:34:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA19632; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:31:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:31:23 -0700 Message-ID: <361E57F6.1020 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 13:37:42 -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: Storms: CF data issues, flaws in Chubb theory 10.9.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RL9uv2.0.do4.BIc7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23190 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: data selection? 10.8.98 Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 13:45:50 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > The statistical arguments Dick makes have two imbedded assumptions. > First, that the experimenter is so inexperienced and quick to see a > positive result, that he is more easily fooled than someone who has no > experience with the apparatus. Second, that the effect is so small that > it is easily hidden in the noise, so that only a deceived believer can > pick it out. The facts are that most of the studies are being done by > people who are very careful and who have gained a considerable on the > job training using their particular calorimeter. All of these people > know the unreasonableness of the claims and have nothing to gain by > seeing something that isn’t there. However, I respect Dick Blue’s need > to see for himself and will honor his wish as best I can. As for the > second assumption, the effect is occasionally huge as can be seen in my > papers referenced above. Statistical analysis is pointless under these > conditions. Sure, you can propose a drift in calibration. However, in > my case, the calorimeter was calibrated before, during and after excess > energy production with no significant change being noted. I have spent > many hours trying to find an experimental reason for this result, and > Dick has proposed no explanation that I have not already considered and > found good reasons to reject. > As for the experimenters being inexperienced or easily fooled, I can certainly site examples in the CANR literature where that is indeed the case, so it is more than just an assumption with me -- it is established fact. It is, of course, not universal such that all CANR claims can be easily dismissed, but that is where the advocates of CANR have done themselves a disservice by not cleaning house to eliminate some of the most obviously erroneous claims. If you want us to believe that you are a careful experimenter, you should be more careful about the company you keep. > and all of these questions have been answered. If Dick can come up with > some new ideas, that would be useful. However, without this training > Dick is at as much a loss as I would be in trying to tell him where he > is making errors in his field. Before I could hope to find such errors, > I would have to ask many questions and study the subject before reaching > a conclusion. I wish Dick Blue would start asking questions rather than > reaching premature conclusions. > I am not sure I agree with you that all the questions have been answered, but I do freely admit that I am not likely to be able to really address the more subtle aspects of these experiments. I certainly would never be so bold as to suggest that I could do the calorimetry better than everyone else, although I do believe I could improve upon most of the nuclear detection results that Ed Storms is relying on. However, the reason I have been raising questions about the statistical aspects of these measurements is that I have not, in nine years, seen a truly adequate discussion of this subject as it relates to claimed positive excess heat. If Ed Storms has addressed this part of the problem in detail elsewhere, I just hope he will indulge me long enough to go over some of this again. > > Dick has raised an interesting question. When two deuterons are caused > to approach each by whatever means, why are the nuclear consequences of > the resulting interaction not always the same? In other words, why > does “cold” fusion not produce the same nuclear products as “hot“ > fusion, since the nuclear wave functions should not be influenced by the > translational energy of the nuclei? > > To answer this question, it is worth while to summarize what we know. > > 1. The few neutrons that are emitted have energy peaks. One is at 2.45 > MeV, the value expected for normal fusion and another small peak is at 7 > MeV, an energy which should not be seen. In addition, a major peak is > seen near 4.5 MeV. However, the number of neutrons detected is too > small to account for the heat no matter what the reaction. Therefore, > these are low level, parallel reactions of unknown type. > 2. When excess energy is measured, it is associated with a reaction > having an energy anywhere between 12 to 48 MeV/He, depending on how much > helium-4 is assumed to be retained in the palladium. No detectable > tritium is produced. > 3. Boron does not enter into this reaction. > 4. Energy release is localized and is at a rate sufficient to cause > melting. > 5. Soft X-rays are emitted from the active sites. > > We might conclude that the reaction is not fusion but a Li-6 + deuteron > reaction to produce 2 He-4 which gives 11.2 MeV/He. For this to be > consistent with the measurements, about 75% of the helium produced would > have to be retained in the palladium. This is not an unreasonable > number. > > However, heat has been seen in the absence of lithium yet with the > production of helium. The Arata and Case studies can be taken as > examples. In these cases, the He-energy relationship is still being > studied and is not yet generally known. He-3 has been detected by > Arata, but its source is unknown. Apparently, yet another nuclear > reaction is possible. > > >From this, it is reasonable to conclude that lithium is not involved > and the result is not consistent with normal fusion. > Here I will suggest that Ed Storms is making an error by citing some obscure and rather doubtful experimental claims concerning such details as the supposed energy spectrum of emitted neutrons. I'd be glad to discuss some of the problems with the measurements, but they involve such low rates that they really don't have much significance in the big picture. > The Chubbs have proposed a process which side steps these problems by > assuming that, under the right conditions, a deuteron can act as a wave > and interact in this form. Hagelstein has proposed that the helium > results from alpha emission after a deuteron is added to a metal > nuclei. After you have studied their arguments, I would like to know > your reaction to these ideas. I would hope you would not dismiss the > ideas out of hand just because they do not fit your model. > As a matter of fact I have had very detailed discussions with Scott Chubb concerning his proposed model for "deuteron waves" in the lattice. We can debate whether there is any reality associated with that model, but the key point, I think, is that his model does nothing to account for a nuclear reaction process and the supposed dramatic changes of reaction outcome. In fact I discovered that Scott Chubb did not even know how to constuct a nuclear wave function, so clearly he had not thought about that aspect of the problem. Initially, he was assuming that some sort of lattice symmetry would restrict the energy release to the radiationless decay, but that is a totally bogus concept, once you acknowledge that deuterons are composite particles. A second error in his thinking involved assumed energy degeneracy, or near degeneracy, between an ensemble of deuterons and an ensemble of 4He nuclei. Wrong! That is, after all, where the 23 MeV energy release comes from, so we can be sure there is no degeneracy. Finally, Scott came to realize that his original model for the reaction process was, in fact, a "no reaction" model so he changed his model to one in which the reaction actually occurs outside the lattice. Of course he had no model for that part of the problem so he really could not say anything. > Various radiation detectors have been used, but present experience > indicates that the radiation being produced is too weak to penetrates > the walls of the container. Occasionally, photographic film placed > inside shows the presence of low-energy radiation. People using the gas > discharge technique have had better luck. > Again Ed Storms is placing too much faith is some questionable experimental claims. The photographic film techniques don't really demonstrate that there is low-energy radiation. The safest way to summarize the experimental results is that there really is not sufficient intensity observed to be considered significant. I don't think it's a matter of "luck." It's a question of proper experimental design. > are reasons to believe that the conditions in which the nuclear > reactions occur are superconducting at room temperature. My point was > that the presence of superconductivity is not also associated with other > major changes in the structure or chemistry of PdD. Thus, a major > change in properties in one area need not be accompanied by an easily > detected change in another area. Unconventional methods are needed to > see such changes. The tools permitting such unconventional studies are > not presently available to cold fusion workers because of their cost. > I am certainly aware that one does not detect a transition to a superconducting state by eyeball, nor would I expect to see something indicative of this assumed CANR state by eye. That is not what I was suggesting. However, I have to ask just what is it that leads you to believe there is any connection between superconductivity that occurs below 12K and some other phenomenon occuring at room temperature? What real observations justify that? What I would suggest, however, is that a transition to a state in which there is a great enhancement of some nuclear-lattice coupling should be observable by other means that are sensitive to the nuclear-lattice coupling when there is one. Suppose one does NMR on deuterium in PdD. That's a very sensitive technique. Let's return to the question of statistics. You acknowledged that high current density leads to a greater noise level in the heat signal. Isn't it interesting that the conditions required for the effect are those which increase the noise? I would say that is justification for being a bit more cautious about these data than one might normally be. I also note that there is supposed to be a phase transition associated with this effect. That is yet another reason to be more cautious about a thermal measurement on this system. My first suggestion would be to rely less on assumptions concerning the statistical behavior and more on actual observations. I would also be more concerned about the influence of data sampling rates and correlations between times at which various parameters are logged. For example, I could not understand why Pons and Fleischmann, in their "boiling water" experiments use such a hidiously low data sampling rate. As I recall the entire boiloff was spanned by something like 4 data samples. As I understand it, you see a separation in the frequency spectra for cells that produce no heat when compared to those showing a positive effect. Is that a clear separation or do things sort of run together? I am really interested in what sort of histogram results when you plot up the data from all the bad runs -- especially the runs that you had reasonably expected to yield a positive result. What disturbs me is that the energy production process you describe seems to be so highly variable with only some regions being reactive in some samples some of the time. My first guess would then be that this variability would make itself apparent in the experimental data. I have difficulty understanding why it does not. I think there should be more runs that sort of show the effect, maybe. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 14:12:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA25773; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 14:10:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 14:10:06 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981009161300.006d6b30 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:13:00 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow and static . . . corrections In-Reply-To: <199810091454_MC2-5C37-A95 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"vFSsJ.0.LI6.jkd7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23191 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 14:50 10/9/98 -0400, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >This voice input program is driving me nuts. May bee Hugh knead two stop you zing it.... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 14:57:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA12880; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 14:51:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 14:51:57 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 17:02:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Hey, John Resent-Message-ID: <"YrZwK2.0.593.xLe7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23192 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I think it's interesting that whenever anyone posts a request for >quantitative data, Evan responds with "Call Joe" and no request for >technical information is ever really responded to with hard, factual >information in writing. > >Just an observation... > >John Fields Hey, John, Your observation is incorrect. I have provided on this and other forums technical information regarding Joseph Newman's technology. But hey, John, since I'm sure Joe would love to chit chat with you -- give him a call anyway. Just an observation... Evan Soule' "What do the letters D.N.A. stand for?" "National Dyslexics Association." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 18:03:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA14002; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:01:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:01:40 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981010011036.00d916d4 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 21:10:36 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question Resent-Message-ID: <"-6hOy3.0.eQ3.p7h7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23193 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Dr. Britz; Given your background, I was wondering if you would be kind enough to consider a few questions I've been curious about. At 09:36 AM 10/9/98 +0200, you wrote: >Thanks, Robert, you seem to know more about this. I was talking >generalities, knowing only the order-of-magnitude thermodydnamic >quantities. You are also right, of course, that normally, in >electrolysis, H2 is formed by the surface (heterogeneous) reaction of >two adsorbed monatomic H's. Actually, although I still don't believe >in Brown's gas, this might seem to lend some credibility to the claim >that they get BG at low current densities - where you might expect a >low surface concentration of H's, and thus a smaller 2-D collision >rate. The Meyer cell seems to work with a resonant electric field. Are there any opinions on the effect of (ion acoustic-collisionless) resonance and electrolysis? Is the idea of mean free path valid for ions in this case? What would the corresponding frequency(s) be? Does the different frequency to vibration modes covered in Linus Pauling's "Nature of the Chemical Bond" indicate specific types of resonance for a given frequency? Should a frequency be included for each of these vibration modes? Once a hydrogen ion is free, how do we get it to combine with an electron rather than another hydrogen ion? Might there be a frequency(s) that would inhibit H-H or O-O bonds but encourage monatomic formation? Best Regards; Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 18:38:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA27293; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:36:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:36:39 -0700 Message-ID: <361EBC55.C8D5C321 fc.net> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 20:45:57 -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 Subject: Re: Hey, Evan X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"I0I5c2.0.Bg6.ceh7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23194 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: Hey, John, > Your observation is incorrect. I have provided on this and other > forums > technical information regarding Joseph Newman's technology. > > But hey, John, since I'm sure Joe would love to chit chat with you > -- give > him a call anyway. > > Just an observation... > > Evan Soule' > > "What do the letters D.N.A. stand for?" > > "National Dyslexics Association." Hey, Evan, if he'd love to chit chat with me he can call me at 512 339 9020 anytime. Just please ask him to study up on resonance before he calls, OK? Specifically, I'd like to talk about what's going on at the junction of an inductance and a capacitance at series resonance. Actually, better than calling and chatting, I'd much rather have him respond here. Fat chance? Well, just a thought... -- John Fields, Austin Instruments, Inc. El Presidente Austin, Republic of Texas "I speak for the company" http://www.austininstruments.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 19:17:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA11258; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:15:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:15:50 -0700 Message-Id: <199810100217.MAA01010 tig.com.au> From: "NeXuS" To: Subject: Info regarding newman motor Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 12:13:23 +1000 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: <"JVePW2.0.ql2.LDi7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23195 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Evan, Went to a site sith details on the newman motor the diagrams dont make sense to you have any diagrams info ect. Would appreciate it. wanna check out if thing really works. Nexus From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 19:22:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA13125; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:21:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:21:06 -0700 Message-Id: <199810100221.VAA08523 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 21:21:09 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Flow and static . . . corrections Resent-Message-ID: <"XSUA83.0.zC3.HIi7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23196 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 14:50 10/9/98 -0400, you wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>This voice input program is driving me nuts. > >May bee Hugh knead two stop you zing it.... ***{Scott, I had to pause to translate, but after I did, I had a great laugh. Thanks. As my grandaddy used to say: when a dog howls, it's because he is sitting on a sharp rock. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 20:12:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA27239; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 20:09:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 20:09:49 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981010031757.00d76794 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 23:17:57 -0400 To: "NeXuS" , "Jerry Wayne Decker" , From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: On Cold Fusion & Stimulated Superconductor 'Levitation' Cc: , vortex-L@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"omLr01.0.Xf6.z_i7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23197 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gravity: I thought gravity was a 10^12 Hz. radiation? Is this frequency somehow shielded by the magnetic field or diamagnetic/superconducting material? Or could ether particles (Joseph Cater's soft electrons) be shielded from interacting with mass to produce this 10^12 Hz frequency? Cold fusion: I subscribe to David Hudson's superconducting theory that Yttrium Barium Copper Oxide is really a Yttrium Barium Oxide lattice with monatomic copper held in the lattice compartments. The spacing is such that the monatomic copper is held coincident to the quantum wave thus synchronizing the copper atoms coherently. Thus, could cold fusion be a similar phenomenon with a Palladium lattice holding monatomic hydrogen coincident to a quantum wave? I would use cold fusion techniques if it could be customized to produce O/U hydrogen/oxygen fuels (directly from the electrodes) to power existing internal combustion engines. Dennis At 12:10 PM 10/10/98 +1000, NeXuS wrote: > >Question Just wondering if they did this experiment again with mganetic >shielding so as to rule it out anyone ? > >> --- On Podletnekov Stimulated Superconductor Levitation >> >> Consider this, we have a piece of superconducting material, either >> rotating or stimulated by a surrounding coil. >> >> Any mass placed ABOVE this material appears to lose approximately 3% >> to 5% of its weight. >> >> Any object placed BELOW this material does NOT experience a weight >> loss. >> >> I asked John Schnurer if he'd tested this and he said YES, there is NO >> weight loss under such material. >> >> Now, what is below the material that is not above the material? >> >> Perhaps the magnetic field of the earth, undistorted by the stimulated >> superconductor? >> >> This would make the effect purely diamagnetic because it is repelling >> against the earths magnetic field. >> >> Therefore, again in my opinion, there is no true gravity effect. >> >> We must take into consideration the flying frogs which were living >> beings, all done with incredibly dense magnetic fields, but repellent >> (diamagnetic) nonetheless. >> >> Just my observations for the record. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 20:17:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA28619; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 20:13:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 20:13:21 -0700 Message-Id: <199810100312.NAA21733 tig.com.au> From: "NeXuS" To: "Jerry Wayne Decker" , , "Dennis C. Lee" Cc: , Subject: Re: On Cold Fusion & Stimulated Superconductor 'Levitation' Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 13:08:52 +1000 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: <"4pd861.0.z-6.F3j7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23198 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Isnt yttrium barium oxide the superconductor used the gravity reduction experiments just wondering that is all. ---------- > From: Dennis C. Lee > To: NeXuS ; Jerry Wayne Decker ; KeelyNet DallasTexas.net > Cc: chenders keelynet.com; vortex-L@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: On Cold Fusion & Stimulated Superconductor 'Levitation' > Date: Saturday, October 10, 1998 1:17 PM > > > Gravity: > I thought gravity was a 10^12 Hz. radiation? Is this frequency somehow > shielded by the magnetic field or diamagnetic/superconducting material? Or > could ether particles (Joseph Cater's soft electrons) be shielded from > interacting with mass to produce this 10^12 Hz frequency? > > Cold fusion: > I subscribe to David Hudson's superconducting theory that Yttrium Barium > Copper Oxide is really a Yttrium Barium Oxide lattice with monatomic copper > held in the lattice compartments. The spacing is such that the monatomic > copper is held coincident to the quantum wave thus synchronizing the copper > atoms coherently. Thus, could cold fusion be a similar phenomenon with a > Palladium lattice holding monatomic hydrogen coincident to a quantum wave? > > I would use cold fusion techniques if it could be customized to produce O/U > hydrogen/oxygen fuels (directly from the electrodes) to power existing > internal combustion engines. > > Dennis > > At 12:10 PM 10/10/98 +1000, NeXuS wrote: > > > >Question Just wondering if they did this experiment again with mganetic > >shielding so as to rule it out anyone ? > > > >> --- On Podletnekov Stimulated Superconductor Levitation > >> > >> Consider this, we have a piece of superconducting material, either > >> rotating or stimulated by a surrounding coil. > >> > >> Any mass placed ABOVE this material appears to lose approximately 3% > >> to 5% of its weight. > >> > >> Any object placed BELOW this material does NOT experience a weight > >> loss. > >> > >> I asked John Schnurer if he'd tested this and he said YES, there is NO > >> weight loss under such material. > >> > >> Now, what is below the material that is not above the material? > >> > >> Perhaps the magnetic field of the earth, undistorted by the stimulated > >> superconductor? > >> > >> This would make the effect purely diamagnetic because it is repelling > >> against the earths magnetic field. > >> > >> Therefore, again in my opinion, there is no true gravity effect. > >> > >> We must take into consideration the flying frogs which were living > >> beings, all done with incredibly dense magnetic fields, but repellent > >> (diamagnetic) nonetheless. > >> > >> Just my observations for the record. > > > Tall Ships > http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 20:17:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA28939; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 20:14:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 20:14:42 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:21:20 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: To Rothwell: Response to false accusation Resent-Message-ID: <"_TLXX1.0.247.W4j7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23199 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 8:46 AM 10/9/98, Evan Soule wrote: [snip] >I'm not implying anything. But I have provided the "missing" number for >you to call Joe and ask for his report on the "motor" in question. > >If you're curious, call him up. > >Sincerely, > >Evan I'm curious, but not interested in paying long distance charges from Alaska. Isn't it about time Joe learned how to use email? Also, my interest is in public, not private, discussion. I'm especially interested in how one manages to get $70,000 out of someone, anyone, for free energy stuff. That's 7 times my research and education budget for over three years, and believe it or not I (with others) might actually be getting somewhere for a change. Not only that, I have a patent for a communications polling method mathematically proven to work and to provide great efficiency improvements - that I haven't managed to sell to anyone and would let go for a song and dance. (Yes, I realize that I should develop a *product* and sell that.) So, how do you go about doing this Joe? I think many of us would be interested in how to make some *real* dough in the free energy game. I would like to know how to make big bucks with only a proof of principle prototype, i.e. without anything of practical use? You must be onto a great marketing technique. Let's here about it! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 21:42:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA16237; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 21:39:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 21:39:00 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981010031757.00d76794 popd.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:37:33 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: On Cold Fusion & Stimulated Superconductor 'Levitation' Resent-Message-ID: <"pGVzh1.0.dz3.YJk7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23200 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dennis - > The spacing is such that the monatomic > copper is held coincident to the quantum > wave thus synchronizing the copper atoms > coherently. Could you expand a little bit on the definition of "incident to the quantum wave" in this context? Thanks, - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 22:21:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA28200; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 22:18:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 22:18:30 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981010052733.00d8d178 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 01:27:33 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: On Cold Fusion & Stimulated Superconductor 'Levitation' Resent-Message-ID: <"Wy216.0.Tu6.buk7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23201 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This, I'm not sure of but I believe it has something to do with Plank's constant or multiple thereof. Bucking magnetic fields produce this frequency, I think. Dennis At 06:37 PM 10/9/98 -1000, you wrote: >Dennis - > > > The spacing is such that the monatomic > > copper is held coincident to the quantum > > wave thus synchronizing the copper atoms > > coherently. > >Could you expand a little bit on the definition of "incident to the quantum >wave" in this context? Thanks, Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 23:25:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA14492; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 23:24:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 23:24:20 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 06:25:48 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3620fd26.18555420 mail-hub> References: <361BDF7F.2FA96734@css.mot.com> In-Reply-To: <361BDF7F.2FA96734 css.mot.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: <"xVAkt.0.EY3.Jsl7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23202 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 07 Oct 1998 16:39:11 -0500, John Steck wrote: [snip] >only outlet I have to discuss such things. Did Schauberger have an ideal spiral >formula or ratio when he designed his water turbines? For some reason I want to >say it was named a gazelle's antler or something like that. Ring any bells? > >Thanks in advance. [snip] I think I remember seeing this associated with Golden Mean. Also try looking at mollusc shells (conch etc). There is a site on the web that has this shell as part of the header or background image....Leonardo Da Vinci association. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 9 23:39:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA17290; Fri, 9 Oct 1998 23:38:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 23:38:20 -0700 Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 02:37:49 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Meyer Water Fuel Cell Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810100239_MC2-5C3F-A5BE compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"SUZ5-2.0.4E4.R3m7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23203 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> Did you try a computer soundcard output? << No, I have a variable wave generator and audio-amp as well as a purpose-built pulse generator to Meyer's spec as published by him. >> What was the basis for the frequencies you chose? << Meyer's patents and literature. This was 5 or 6 years ago at least. I was limited to frequencies from 4k Hz up to 20kHz by the amplifier. Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 00:32:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA28000; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 00:31:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 00:31:32 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981010074045.00dbad50 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 03:40:45 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Resent-Message-ID: <"ZCOeR2.0.Lr6.Jrm7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23204 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 06:25 AM 10/10/98 GMT, you wrote: >On Wed, 07 Oct 1998 16:39:11 -0500, John Steck wrote: >[snip] >>only outlet I have to discuss such things. Did Schauberger have an ideal spiral >>formula or ratio when he designed his water turbines? For some reason I want to >>say it was named a gazelle's antler or something like that. Ring any bells? >> >>Thanks in advance. >[snip] >I think I remember seeing this associated with Golden Mean. Also try >looking at mollusc shells (conch etc). It was a Kudu antelope horn. If anyone has a Kudu antelope horn, let's digitize it into an Autocad solid and rapid prototype it. Schauberger likes phi spirals. "Living Energies" by Callum Coates is highly recommended. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 02:21:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA26078; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 02:19:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 02:19:58 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981010052733.00d8d178 popd.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 21:58:21 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: On Cold Fusion & Stimulated Superconductor 'Levitation' Resent-Message-ID: <"Ujdk82.0.LN6.zQo7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23205 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dennis - >This, I'm not sure of but I believe it has something to do with Plank's >constant or multiple thereof. Bucking magnetic fields produce this >frequency, I think. > >Dennis I still don't have much of a graphical idea of this. I get it that the movement of the lattice ions is quantized and organized into coherence. Beyond that I have no idea. But as to the structure of HTSC crystals, hasn't that been determined pretty well by crystallography? I wasn't aware that there were questions as to the distribution and position of the atoms in the lattice in the better known recipes. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 03:06:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA04100; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 03:06:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 03:06:03 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981010101500.00dbda38 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 06:15:00 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Meyer Water Fuel Cell Cc: <100060.173 compuserve.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"tGxHc3.0.-_.B6p7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23206 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 02:37 AM 10/10/98 -0400, you wrote: >>> Did you try a computer soundcard output? << > >No, I have a variable wave generator and audio-amp as well as a >purpose-built pulse generator to Meyer's spec as published by him. >>> What was the basis for the frequencies you chose? << > >Meyer's patents and literature. > >This was 5 or 6 years ago at least. > >I was limited to frequencies from 4k Hz up to 20kHz by the amplifier. Was it 4936961 : Method for the production of a fuel gas? http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=4936961 Did the water you use have a dielectric constant of 78.54 at STP? (Natural Water) >From patent: >1. A method of obtaining the release of a gas mixture including hydrogen and oxygen and other >dissolved gases formerly entrapped in water, from water, consisting of: > > (A) providing a capacitor in which water is included as a dielectric between capacitor plates, in > a resonant charging choke circuit that includes an inductance in series with the capacitor; I don't see wall thickness of the electrode capacitor cylinders. > (B) subjecting the capacitor to a pulsating, unipolar electric charging voltage in which the > polarity does not pass beyond an arbitrary ground, whereby the water molecules within the > capacitor are subjected to the electric field between the capacitor plates; > (C) further subjecting the water in said capacitor to a pulsating electric field resulting from the > subjection of the capacitor to the charging voltage such that the pulsating electric field induces > a resonance within the water molecules; Dr. Linus Pauling's "Nature of the Chemical Bond" states different types of vibration modes for different frequencies. The patent doesn't state what this frequency is. How do you fine tune the power supply? A ball park frequency might be determined by calculating the values of the inductors and electrode capacitor from the patent. I don't see a specification on inductor cores though. The vibration mode illustrated in the patent is mentioned in the book. > (D) continuing the application of the pulsating charging voltage to the capacitor after resonance > occurs so that the energy level within the molecules is increased in cascading incremental steps > in proportion to the number of pulses; > (E) maintaining the charge of said capacitor during the application of the pulsating charging > voltage, whereby the co-valent electrical bonding of the hydrogen and oxygen atoms within > said molecules is destabilized, such that the force of the electrical field applied to the molecules > exceeds the bonding force within the molecules, and hydrogen and oxygen atoms are liberated > from the molecules as elemental gases. Did the power supply output have the same profile of the Patent? (eg. cascading incremental steps in proportion to the number of pulses) Did you wind the toroid, inductor and variable inductor? Can you vary the pulse amplitude, frequency, and gate pulse width? Looks like the initial voltage is about 100V - pulse amplitude 26V in primary with 5X increase from toroidal transformer. This should build up to over 1000V on the last step of the pulse train. In the patent configuration that is. Regards; Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 04:13:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA13335; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 04:10:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 04:10:50 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981010111626.00da5dcc popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:16:26 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: On Cold Fusion & Stimulated Superconductor 'Levitation' Resent-Message-ID: <"DI8v3.0.EG3.v2q7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23207 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick; At 09:58 PM 10/9/98 -1000, you wrote: >I still don't have much of a graphical idea of this. I get it that the >movement of the lattice ions is quantized and organized into coherence. >Beyond that I have no idea. But as to the structure of HTSC crystals, >hasn't that been determined pretty well by crystallography? I wasn't aware >that there were questions as to the distribution and position of the atoms >in the lattice in the better known recipes. http://www.dnai.com/~zap/super001.html Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 04:35:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA17107; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 04:34:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 04:34:44 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 06:45:19 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Hey, John Resent-Message-ID: <"zCBFw1.0.8B4.JPq7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23208 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Evan Soule' wrote: Hey, John, > >> Your observation is incorrect. I have provided on this and other >> forums >> technical information regarding Joseph Newman's technology. >> >> But hey, John, since I'm sure Joe would love to chit chat with you >> -- give >> him a call anyway. >> >> Just an observation... >> >> Evan Soule' >> >> "What do the letters D.N.A. stand for?" >> >> "National Dyslexics Association." > >Hey, Evan, if he'd love to chit chat with me he can call me at 512 >339 9020 anytime. > >Just please ask him to study up on resonance before he calls, OK? > >Specifically, I'd like to talk about what's going on at the junction >of an inductance and a capacitance at series resonance. > >Actually, better than calling and chatting, I'd much rather have him >respond here. > >Fat chance? > >Well, just a thought... > >-- > >John Fields, Austin Instruments, Inc. >El Presidente Austin, Republic of Texas >"I speak for the company" http://www.austininstruments.com Hey, John --- Yep. Fat chance he would waste his time calling you. And, yo, El Presidente -- just please ask him yourself to "study up on resonance" when you call him and chit chat..... I'm sure he would appreciate your thoughtful recommendation. It's kinda possible that he might even have a recommendation or two for you as well. I guess that's what sharing is all about! :-) But, John -- give him a call and you two fellas have a little chit chat... Fat chance? Oh well, just a thought.... Evan Soule' "What do you call cheese that isn't yours?" "Nacho Cheese." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 04:56:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA20603; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 04:55:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 04:55:34 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:06:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Info regarding newman motor Resent-Message-ID: <"gMOF12.0.r15.siq7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23209 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Dear Evan, > > Went to a site sith details on the newman motor the diagrams dont make >sense to you have any diagrams info ect. Would appreciate it. wanna check >out if thing really works. > Nexus Dear Nexus, I'll be happy to forward some gif images to your attention. Evan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 05:52:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA27611; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 05:51:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 05:51:19 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981010130000.00d6df94 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 09:00:00 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Flow and static . . . corrections Resent-Message-ID: <"CDsQy1.0.Il6.6Xr7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23210 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; Carpal Tunnel - inflamation - build up of calcium. Magnesium, MSM & vitamin C, north pole magnet pad will all release calcium and allow proper cell respiration. Wateroz has water soluble minerals: http://www.waterozm.com Or try active noise cancellation: http://www.andreaelectronics.com/index.html Also, the MIT voice recognition seminar I attended last January recommended a 'loaded' Pentium II 233 Mhz system at least, for this technology. Even then, none of the systems they demo'ed - IBM, Dragonsomething, several others, Kurzweil was not on the market yet, - worked 100%. Maybe 95% on a good day. They also didn't have the Andrea ANC microphones either. The magnesium thing fixed my girlfriend's asthma and carpal tunnel BTW. Dennis At 02:50 PM 10/9/98 -0400, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >This voice input program is driving me nuts. It scatters errors in places you >do not think to look. The pattern of errors is different from typos, and the >program never makes a spelling mistake, so the word processor spell check does >not catch them. I wrote (dictated): > > By 1991 McKubre et al. achieved "the greater of 10 mW war 0.1%." . . . > >That's supposed to be: > > By 1991 McKubre et al. achieved "the greater of 10 mW or 0.1%." . . . > >The higher the input power, the larger the error, but at the highest power >this instrument is designed for, error does not exceed 0.1%. Dick Blue >misunderstood this point. > >Ah, here's another mistake: "A glass wall is not recommended, particularly >when he is measured inside cell." I meant "heat is measured." > >I am trying to master this program to avoid carpal tunnel syndrome. The >company that sold me this program has a good document about it: > >http://www.continuousspeech.com/carpal_tunnel.html > >"Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Introduction" This is tied in to an advertisement for >the company, so I hesitate to mention it here, but I think it is valuable >information. > >- Jed > > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 07:39:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA17329; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:34:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:34:54 -0700 Message-ID: <00e601bdf45b$1e378c00$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re; Meyer Water Fuel Cell Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:33:57 -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: <"mwhEb2.0.eE4.C2t7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23211 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dennis C.Lee wrote: Meyer's Patent and Literature. Snip Details The cell can be made using a dry Lead-Acid automotive battery,ie., a storage battery that hasn't been filled with the Water-Acid Electrolyte. The gases can be bled of through hoses connected to the fill holes. SAFETY DISCLAIMER! If one wants to jiggle the water molecules without H2O Electrolysis, double-sided printed circuit boards can be laminated in Mylar or coated with a spray lacquer and immersed in water with electrical contact to each side of a spaced stack of PCBs. Other than that the Meyer Fuel Cell is basically a pulsed electrolysis cell. With the insulated PCBs and the proper thickness of water the voltage divides across the insulator layers and the water layer and "jiggles" the water molecules causing dielectric (Loss Tangent)heating of the water with possible ZPE Extraction (dE = hbar/dt)that can be determined with good calorimetry. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 07:42:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA18164; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:36:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:36:28 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981010144531.00d9e084 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:45:31 -0400 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: CF white crud? Resent-Message-ID: <"gnASI3.0.aR4.g3t7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23212 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi; Is there a white crud that forms on Palladium when the cold fusion process works? Dennis >we got a copy of Pons & >Fleischman's paper before they publicly announced. It was sent to >GE for their review. It was their electric chemical catalyst >division who works with Palladium. They handed it to me and said, >"Dave, look here. What's coming out here?" Pons and Fleischman >were putting a Palladium electrode in this Lithium Deuterate >solution. Lithium is the third element on the Periodic Table. >Lithium will dissolve into the Palladium just like Hydrogen. It's >tiny and it goes in between the metal-metal bonds, just like >Hydrogen, and it weakens the s-p bonding and little by little, >the Palladium begins to disaggregate from the other palladium >atoms and go to the high-spin state. What they have reported is >that after several days, there is this tremendous release of >energy and it's more energy than the amperage that went into the >sample. What they haven't figured out is that a superconductor >feeds on the magnetic field, not on the amperage. And so >literally, when they pull the voltage potential in it, there's >no amperage flowing. The amperage only puts the Lithium into the >Palladium. That's the only purpose of the amperage is to >electroplate the Lithium onto the Palladium and cause the metal- >metal bonding of the Palladium to break and form what Pons and >Fleischman call, and this is their scientific technical term, >"the white crud on the surface of the Palladium." And that white >crud is the superconductor. And it literally builds up energy. >Builds up energy. Kind of like you think of a capacitor building >up energy. It's flowing more and more light and it's feeding on >the magnetic potential. More and more light, more and more light, >until it reaches what's called HC2, the greatest amount of >magnetic field that superconductor can sustain. and at that >point, it collapses. > In another paper it says "We will find >that a superconducting material like Palladium is going into a >state that is much like superconductivity when it causes the cold >fusion reaction." And they're figuring this out. They're seeing >what 1 am describing, but they don't understand this, yet. >Palladium specifically can become superdeformed. Palladium will >come apart by just looking at it wrong. So certainly 'when this >flux collapse occurs, you'll get all sorts of elements that >shouldn't have been there before. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 09:57:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA04914; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 09:56:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 09:56:10 -0700 From: mrb ap.net Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981010095824.007d6c50 mail.ap.net> X-Sender: mrb mail.ap.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 09:58:24 -0700 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: U.S. Patent 4394230 In-Reply-To: <00e601bdf45b$1e378c00$afb4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"J7e8M1.0.iC1.g6v7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23213 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Anyone interested in an elegent method of splitting the water molecule should take a look at the Patent referenced above, issued to the late Dr. Henry Puharich. The full Patent will be found on the IBM Patent Server. His work was tested in an independent laboratory. Puharich vibrated the water molecule apart using two different AC frequencies. Efficiency was very high. See the last page of the Patent for a discussion of how it might be made even higher. Puharich, an MD, was doing electrolysis of blood as part of his medical research when he realized how to apply his work to water. I cannot supply further information. Please do not ask! Mark Goldes, Magnetic Power Inc. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 12:17:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA25186; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 12:16:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 12:16:10 -0700 Message-ID: <00fd01bdf482$6bec0e40$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: U.S. Patent 4394230 Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 13:15:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"CL73K.0.L96.v9x7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23214 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: mrb ap.net To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, October 10, 1998 10:58 AM Subject: Re: U.S. Patent 4394230 Mark Goldes wrote: >Anyone interested in an elegent method of splitting the water molecule >should take a look at the Patent referenced above, issued to the late Dr. >Henry Puharich. > >The full Patent will be found on the IBM Patent Server. > >His work was tested in an independent laboratory. > >Puharich vibrated the water molecule apart using two different AC >frequencies. > >Efficiency was very high. See the last page of the Patent for a discussion >of how it might be made even higher. > >Puharich, an MD, was doing electrolysis of blood as part of his medical >research when he realized how to apply his work to water. > >I cannot supply further information. Please do not ask! Interesting Patent. The statement that the electrolysis cell "MUST ABSORB HEAT FROM THE ENVIRONMENT TO GET OVER-UNITY Efficiency"(about 20% at 300 K) is most interesting. Then again ZPE Extraction could also be creating conditions that enhances O-U heat and/or the necessary 2.6 ev (more or less)photons that are splitting the H2O molecule in addition to the electrode action. Regards, Frederick > >Mark Goldes, Magnetic Power Inc. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 14:03:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA21152; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 14:01:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 14:01:31 -0700 From: UNIR2B1 aol.com Message-ID: <81cf5870.361fcb52 aol.com> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 17:02:10 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: PROGRESSIVE COMMUNITY NOW FORMING... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"nvTTc1.0.IA5.giy7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23215 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Attn: Professional/avocational scientists, free energy questors seeking to immigrate from population centers-- PROGRESSIVE COMMUNITY NOW FORMING... ...on 40 wooded acres between two rural, dead-end roads. Geographically, this area of the southeastern US is a 'safe zone' according to various "future maps" that juxtapose prophecy with tectonic, topological and geomagnetic data. Situated at the southern end of Lookout Mt., this land overlies a high water table; the level of our well remained constant even through a recent, protracted dry spell. This acreage is also a jumping-off point to a vast wilderness (deer and other wildlife roam the vicinity). Should the need arise to "take to the hills," the original Appalachian Trail fortuitously begins right behind our property! Additionally, this area is a spelunker's Mecca, and some of us are currently scouting to provision a nearby cave. We are predicating our "intentional community" on faith that is rational, optimism that is realistic. We're seeking partners diverse in their views and backgrounds, but like-minded in their dedication to personal and collective progress. Leaving fanatics and dogmatists to the confines of their cults, we are focusing on human evolution. Beginning with exigent concerns like establishing survival stores, we hope to quickly deploy exciting and tenable long-term solutions to all forms of dependency. Initial plans include water enhancement techniques, spirulina cultivation, composting & vermiculture, hydroponics, and alternative energy (we expect to generate novel contributions to most of these arts). Beyond these projects, however, we are evaluating innovative methods of converting various energy forms *directly* into human and plant vitality, and pursuing loftier concerns like interdimensional "consciousness expansion" (of which we have gained some definitive and rather exclusive knowledge). Although self-sufficiency and isolation from marauders are essential for surviving a worst-case millennium transition, we are emphasizing preparedness against a *particular* ramification of societal collapse: dissociation from fellow minds. Travel restrictions, telecommunication disruption, etc. will threaten, above all, the ability of the forward-looking people to brainstorm and collaborate. We regard the right mix of people not only as the greatest survival resource, but also the most essential ingredient for abundant and meaningful living. Therefore, we envision a microcosm wherein civilization itself could progress even in seclusion. Such an assemblage requires people of conscience and learning; self-governing and communicative, with an aptitude for creative and interactive thinking. Although the most cutting-edge discoveries are now pointing toward natural, low-tech means of tapping subtler energies, lab equipment is also needed for apprehending and verifying those discoveries. This is not a solicitation to join a regimented community, but an opportunity to create an enterprise--a haven for intellectual and spiritual freedom and productivity. Ayn Rand wrote: "Don't say, 'Life isn't like that;' ask yourself whose." We see the current human predicament not merely as a signal to retreat to hoarding, but as a call to advance beyond the need of it. If privation is mankind's looming threat, let's fight it by discovering, utilizing, refining and promulgating new keys to plenitude. ...But time is short for organizing a fully proactive response; so if these aspirations resonate with your own, please don't delay in contacting us. Sincerely, Russ Rosser UNIR2B1 aol.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 15:10:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA02567; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 15:09:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 15:09:04 -0700 Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 18:07:17 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Vortex Equation Help Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810101810_MC2-5C4C-1928 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"LHglI3.0.0e.0iz7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23216 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> Did Schauberger have an ideal spiral formula or ratio when he designed his water turbines? << As far as I know, the design of the water turbine volute was/is such that there is minimum 'shock' to the water as it flows to the inlet guide vanes. So the maths was aimed at controlling the X-section of the chamber to give constant velocity with a reducing volume flow as the water flowed into the rotor circumferentially, usually entering tangentially and exiting vertically. Where the flow was vertical at entry and exit end thrust problems on the bearings were the main difficulties. This is straining my memory, but I hope it helps! Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 15:48:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA10496; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 15:46:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 15:46:52 -0700 Message-ID: <361FD732.7A4F earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:52:50 -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: Chubb: Blue:ion band state theory 10.10.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Vqv1l.0.wZ2.RF-7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23217 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Chubb: Blue: ion band state theory 10.10.98 Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 17:21:46 -0400 From: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil To: rmforall earthlink.net CC: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil Rich, I would appreciate your forwarding this to the Vortex-L crowd and to the people on your distribution list. It is a response to comments that Dick Blue has made about our theory and discussions I have had with him in the past. Thanks, SCOTT CHUBB Dick Blue, I have been quietly monitoring your discussion with Ed Storms. I noticed the following comments: >As a matter of fact I have had very detailed discussions with Scott >Chubb concerning his proposed model for "deuteron waves" in the >lattice. We can debate whether there is any reality associated with >that model, but the key point, I think, is that his model does nothing >to account for a nuclear reaction process and the supposed dramatic >changes of reaction outcome. In fact I discovered that Scott Chubb did >not even know how to constuct a nuclear wave function, so clearly he had >not thought about that aspect of the problem. This is untrue. It is insulting to suggest that I "did not know how to construct a nuclear wave function." In point of fact, the disagreement was/and-continues-to-be associated with the separability of the nuclear degrees of freedom from the electrostatic degrees of freedom. In free space, this separability involves writing the wave function as a simple product of nuclear and "electrostatic" factors. In most situations inside a lattice this is also the case. This is also true in most cases involving interaction. The point of confusion (and demarcation in thinking) is associated with the conditions involving maintaining this form of separability during a coherent process in which the lattice is allowed to exchange energy with the nuclear degrees of freedom. Initially, the manner in which the lattice could do this was not explained in detail, and Dick Blue did make some comments that inspired me to think about this more fully. >Initially, he was >assuming that some sort of lattice symmetry would restrict the energy >release to the radiationless decay, but that is a totally bogus concept, >once you acknowledge that deuterons are composite particles. Initially, some of the details of the theory were not precisely stated. The motivation, however, has remained intact. Initially, there was a tacit assumption that was not stated. Temperature=0 conditions are assumed and maintained within the bulk material, where lattice symmetry is assumed to prevail. In other words, not only is lattice symmetry required, but to maintain lattice symmetry, it is assumed that no excitation of the lattice or any of the entities within the lattice is allowed. When this assumption is made, only a very restrictive set of potential avenues for interaction exist: coherent ("Umklapp") processes in which momentum is transferred elastically directly to the lattice (for example through lattice recoil [as in the Mossbauer effect] or a redefinition of the boundaries of the lattice) and energy is transferred through a constant shift of the zero of energy of the ordered lattice, relative to its surroundings. It is well-known that these kinds of processes: 1. exist, and 2. provide a means for maintaining lattice symmetry. To maintain lattice symmetry at T=0, these are required. When they do apply, they lead to an important selection rule: coherent nuclear processes occur in which initial and final states always possess ground state nuclei, with energy released through processes which are initiated at the boundaries of the solid. This is discussed in more detail in our ICCF6 Proceedings paper. It is the formal justification of the "bosons in and bosons out" selection rule that bothered you so much and of our prediction that although bulk properties affect the behavior CANR's, in the cases under consideration, the energy release appears to be initiated in the surface regions of a lattice. >A second error in his thinking involved assumed energy degeneracy, or near >degeneracy, between an ensemble of deuterons and an ensemble of 4He >nuclei. Wrong! That is, after all, where the 23 MeV energy release >comes from, so we can be sure there is no degeneracy. This reflects a difference in the starting points for thinking about the problem. The 23 MeV energy release occurs through a rigid shift in the zero of energy of the periodically ordered lattice, relative to its surroundings, while maintaining the periodic order of the many-body state. In the many-body state, the 4He are degenerate. On the scale of a 10^9 unit cell lattice, a 23 MeV energy shift translates to a per unit cell energy change of .023 meV, which is comparable to the lowest phonon excitation energy. For this reason, in lattices that are roughly this size, it is to be expected that the dominant energy releasing processes will involve phonons (generated initially at the boundaries of the lattice) and not radiation. >Finally, Scott came to realize that his original model for the reaction >process was, in fact, a "no reaction" model so he changed his model to one in >which the reaction actually occurs outside the lattice. Very early in the theory, the avenues for reaction were discussed. And it is untrue to say that we had a "no reaction" model. What bothered you at the time of our last discussion were the selection rules. The logic behind these selection rules did become sharper as a result of the discussion. I think (hope) you would find the discussion in my ICCF6 paper especially germane in this regard. >Of course he had no model for that >part of the problem so he really could not say anything. Again, this is untrue. I stopped communicating with you because doing so became too time-consuming, and I became involved with an experiment (related to my job). Well, Dick, as I said, I have been listening quietly in the background. The last time I discussed these issues with you, I simply was overtaken by time requirements associated with continuing the dialogue and stopped communicating with you as a consequence. It was useful to me at the time, but I can see from your comments that a number of points about our theory have not been assimilated into your thinking. Because a number of ideas in our description have become more clear with time and you do not seem to be aware of this, I think prior discourse with me about your potential comments about our theory could be useful potentially prior to your airing your ideas before a large audience. Finally, I would like to point out that there is a common thread to Hagelstein's, Schwinger's, Preparata's, and our theories that is not part of your thinking about CANR and the manner in which nuclear wave functions can be coupled to the environment. It is the notion of a coherent process in which many entities in the environment effectively "march" in lock step (i.e., act together) in such a way that an unanticipated result can occur. Superconductivity is an example of such a coherent process; so is lasing; Bose Condensation is a third example. The macroscopically large scattering lengths associated with conductivity in solids and semi-conductors are also the result of coherence associated with periodic order. A final example is provided by lattice recoil. Dr. Scott R. Chubb Code 7252 Naval Research Laboratory Washington, D.C. 20375-5351 PHONE: 202-767-5270, FAX: 202-767-3303 EMAIL: chubb ccf.nrl.navy.mil, chubb@neptune.nrl.navy.mil From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 15:50:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11308; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 15:49:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 15:49:42 -0700 Message-ID: <011501bdf4a0$3cf3d780$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "Lynda" Subject: The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press (http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:45:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01BDF46D.6C95A140" 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: <"r1zWL2.0.Wm2.6I-7s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23218 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_0007_01BDF46D.6C95A140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID=SCIENCE&STORYID=APIS6OERRN80 ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BDF46D.6C95A140 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID=SCIENCE&STORYID=APIS6OERRN80 Modified=0092CF9F9FF4BD0151 ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BDF46D.6C95A140-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 16:18:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA07839; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:17:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:17:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <361FDC10.3601 earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 17:13:36 -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: Storms: Blue: more on CF data 10.9.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7VmKa3.0.Pw1.hh-7s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23219 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Storms: CF data issues, flaws in Chubb theory 10.9.98 Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 18:22:04 -0600 From: Edmund Storms To: rmforall earthlink.net Reply to Dick Blue by Ed. Storms > > Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: data selection? 10.8.98 > Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 13:45:50 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > > As for the experimenters being inexperienced or easily fooled, I can > certainly site examples in the CANR literature where that is indeed the > case, so it is more than just an assumption with me -- it is established > fact. It is, of course, not universal such that all CANR claims can be > easily dismissed, but that is where the advocates of CANR have done > themselves a disservice by not cleaning house to eliminate some of the > most obviously erroneous claims. If you want us to believe that you are > a careful experimenter, you should be more careful about the company you > keep. Dick Blue wants us to clean house as a means to improve our reputation. How do you propose this be done? We have a new field in which the results are difficult to evaluate because no theory is available and past experience is minimal; we have skeptics who are trying to dismiss every claim, no matter how well done; and we have a group of sincere people who are learning as they go. What would be the point of rejecting possibilities which might be real, especially when an army of skeptics are willing to do the job. Putting down another person’s work does not, in my opinion, enhance a reputation. In any case, you will notice that I have attempted to select the better data in my reviews. Must I also attack another scientist because the work doesn’t meet the highest standards, or indeed your standards. Within the field, what are good data and what are bad data is known, and this knowledge guides the thinking. Why must we make a “public” display of this selection process? If you were willing to view the work with an enquiring mind, you would be invited to join this selection process and you would see that we are not duped by incompetence. > I am not sure I agree with you that all the questions have been > answered, but I do freely admit that I am not likely to be able to > really address the more subtle aspects of these experiments. I > certainly would never be so bold as to suggest that I could do the > calorimetry better than everyone else, although I do believe I could > improve upon most of the nuclear detection results that Ed Storms is > relying on. Yes, we all would like better nuclear detection results. We take what we can get. The problem has always been that great effort is taken to set up a good detection experiment, but the palladium is dead because it was a bad piece or because people trained in detection have no idea how to do electrochemistry. Until robust samples are available, we will have to make do with what is available. > > However, the reason I have been raising questions about the statistical > aspects of these measurements is that I have not, in nine years, seen a > truly adequate discussion of this subject as it relates to claimed > positive excess heat. If Ed Storms has addressed this part of the > problem in detail elsewhere, I just hope he will indulge me long enough > to go over some of this again. Everyone’s data set is different and many experiments are not reported. Consequently, I admit it is difficult to do a statistical analysis. I can only speak for my data. I suggest you look at my results in Fusion Technol to see what I call statistically significant results. When I get time this winter, I will provide more current and complete examples. > Here I will suggest that Ed Storms is making an error by citing some > obscure and rather doubtful experimental claims concerning such details > as the supposed energy spectrum of emitted neutrons. I'd be glad to > discuss some of the problems with the measurements, but they involve > such low rates that they really don't have much significance in the > big picture. Yes, the rates are low, and yes, they don’t have much significance, except for the almost obsessive focus on neutron emission in some quarters. However, the results cited were done by experts in the neutron detection field and are worth considering in any explanation. I grant, the results are not sufficiently certain to make them the total basis for a theory. Once again, we are into shades of gray, not right and wrong. > > As a matter of fact I have had very detailed discussions with Scott > Chubb concerning his proposed model for "deuteron waves" in the > lattice. We can debate whether there is any reality associated with > that model, but the key point, I think, is that his model does nothing > to account for a nuclear reaction process and the supposed dramatic > changes of reaction outcome. In fact I discovered that Scott Chubb did > not even know how to construct a nuclear wave function, so clearly he had > not thought about that aspect of the problem. Initially, he was > assuming that some sort of lattice symmetry would restrict the energy > release to the radiationless decay, but that is a totally bogus concept, > once you acknowledge that deuterons are composite particles. A second > error in his thinking involved assumed energy degeneracy, or near > degeneracy, between an ensemble of deuterons and an ensemble of 4He > nuclei. Wrong! That is, after all, where the 23 MeV energy release > comes from, so we can be sure there is no degeneracy. Finally, Scott > came to realize that his original model for the reaction process was, in > fact, a "no reaction" model so he changed his model to one in which the > reaction > actually occurs outside the lattice. Of course he had no model for that > part of the problem so he really could not say anything. I’m glad you and Scott are talking. I will send this exchange to him and let him respond. > > > Again Ed Storms is placing too much faith is some questionable > experimental claims. The photographic film techniques don't really > demonstrate that there is low-energy radiation. The safest way to > summarize the experimental results is that there really is not > sufficient intensity observed to be considered significant. I don't > think it's a matter of "luck." It's a question of proper experimental > design. Here we see the effect of our difference in basic belief. Dick rejects the use of photographic techniques to detect radiation, even though this is a standard, accepted method in other fields, because he rejects there being any source of radiation in the first place. On the other hand, I accept the photographic results here, as well as in other fields, because I am willing to believe a source exists in each case. Granted, ways exist to get false positive results. However, these observations have been done by several people who have used more than normal care. While I would not base any explanation on these results alone, they do suggest low level radiation is present, which warrants a more careful study. Once again, we do not have “proof”, only a clue to guide further work. > > I am certainly aware that one does not detect a transition to a > superconducting state by eyeball, nor would I expect to see something > indicative of this assumed CANR state by eye. That is not what I was > suggesting. However, I have to ask just what is it that leads you to > believe there is any connection between superconductivity that occurs > below 12K and some other phenomenon occurring at room temperature? What > real observations justify that? The reasons for entertaining this belief are based on observations made in Italy where the resistivity of a sample showed anomalous behavior which suggested the presence of an area of very low resistivity. In addition, if you accept for discussion the idea that a coherent electron structure is required, then this structure, it seems to me, should be superconducting. Cooper pairs are a low level coherent structure. The level of coherence required for a nuclear reaction could be viewed as a collection of Cooper pairs, i.e, a Cooper six-pack perhaps. Anyway, this is again not a justification but only a way of guiding future studies. > > What I would suggest, however, is that a transition to a state in which > there is a great enhancement of some nuclear-lattice coupling should be > observable by other means that are sensitive to the nuclear-lattice > coupling when there is one. Suppose one does NMR on deuterium in PdD. > That's a very sensitive technique. Yes, that is a good idea. Several people have suggested this approach. Several people have applied frequencies which could couple to the nucleus and have shown mixed success. However, no one, as far as I know, has used a calibrated, well understood NMR apparatus to examine the effect. This should be done. > > Let's return to the question of statistics. You acknowledged that high > current density leads to a greater noise level in the heat signal. > Isn't it interesting that the conditions required for the effect are > those which increase the noise? I would say that is justification for > being a bit more cautious about these data than one might normally be. > I also note that there is supposed to be a phase transition associated > with this effect. That is yet another reason to be more cautious about a > thermal measurement on this system. Yes, on the surface, one might propose a correlation between increased noise and increased apparent heat. However, the amount of noise does not show a sharp onset at at the onset of excess power. Indeed, the amount of noise depends on the experimental design. In my case, I use samples having a surface area of 4 cm2. To achieve the excess-power onset, I have to go to much higher total current than does McKubre, for example, who has a 0.5 cm2 surface area. The onset appears at a common current density not a common current. It is the total current which introduces the noise. A phase change introduces energy to a system only while it is occurring, not for hours afterwards. In addition, the phase change clearly involves only a small fraction of the sample. This being the case, if the apparent excess were caused by this effect, the heat of transition would have to be the highest known by many orders of magnitude. This fact, if believed, should cause all kinds of interest, which isn’t evident. Of course, this explanation, if true, would not apply to other systems where excess heat has been detected. > > My first suggestion would be to rely less on assumptions concerning the > statistical behavior and more on actual observations. I would also be > more concerned about the influence of data sampling rates and > correlations between times at which various parameters are logged. For > example, I could not understand why Pons and Fleischmann, in their > "boiling water" experiments use such a hideously low data sampling > rate. As I recall the entire boiloff was spanned by something like 4 > data samples. I can’t speak for P-F. They frequently do not report all they know or all acquired data. Four points are clearly not very impressive. > > As I understand it, you see a separation in the frequency spectra for > cells that produce no heat when compared to those showing a positive > effect. Is that a clear separation or do things sort of run together? > I am really interested in what sort of histogram results when you plot > up the data from all the bad runs -- especially the runs that you had > reasonably expected to yield a positive result. Most samples never acquire the necessary high deuterium concentration to produce heat. Such samples show a bandwidth of values against which a positive signal is judged. If the bandwidth is plus or minus 0.5 W, then a positive result would have to exceed this value to be interesting. Although I have had too few successful samples to give a quantitative answer your to question, my impression is that as the excess power rises further out of the noise, fewer samples are obtained as the excess power increases. This is taken to mean that it is easier to produce a few active spots than to produce many spots. > > What disturbs me is that the energy production process you describe > seems to be so highly variable with only some regions being reactive in > some samples some of the time. My first guess would then be that this > variability would make itself apparent in the experimental data. I have > difficulty understanding why it does not. I think there should be more > runs that sort of show the effect, maybe. Yes, I would expect this also and there is some indication this is true. However, people tend to reject samples having only a small amount of heat above the noise. You might think this cutoff value is poorly chosen in some cases. Nevertheless, I can promise, people see marginal values which are not reported. Therefore, the selection is actually opposite to what you have proposed. I will be out of town for several days, so be patient for my reply. Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 18:27:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA13691; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 18:26:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 18:26:44 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Eachus' flink Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 01:28:16 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <362008ca.87090668 mail-hub> References: <3.0.1.32.19981009124944.00cb6aa0 spectre.mitre.org> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981009124944.00cb6aa0 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: <"RNdiL3.0.rL3.Jb08s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23220 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 09 Oct 1998 12:49:44 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote: [snip] > Don't you know classical Norse mythology? The Midgard serpent which >circles the earth swallowed its tail, making it hard to find. The problem [snip] Maybe the "Midgard serpent" is Charles Cagle's toroidal current (responsible for the Earth's magnetic field). When the serpent wakes all hell breaks loose. (Read - when the current switches to poloidal huge volcanic and tectonic activity results):). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 20:23:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA06414; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 20:20:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 20:20:10 -0700 Message-ID: <36202484.5E7C keelynet.com> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:22:44 -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 DallasTexas.net CC: freenrg-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Tapping the Casimir force Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-OyYh.0.7a1.fF28s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23221 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Folks! I found this amusing post and thought it worth sharing with some additional information. It deals with the zero point 'pressure' which is everywhere present and which can apparently do physical work by pushing two plates together. Of course, these plates stay pushed together but please read the following, then continue for some notes on Win Lambertsons' WIN CELLS; ================= Email: rangrrik gte.net Date: 1998/09/20 Forums: alt.energy.over-unity, sci.energy, sci.skeptic Ian Goddard wrote: > > The Casimir experiment [1] showed that the zero-point > energy of empty space can exert a force on plates that > pushes them together. Based on this effect, it has been > proposed that energy might be extracted from empty space. > [2] However, the following, quoted from a website about > free energy [3], points out a simple reason why a ZPE > device should be just another free-energy fallacy: > > The catch to any zero point energy device is > that quantum electrodynamics is a conservative > force; therefore, it matters not how the plates > come together. It'll take the same amount of > energy to pull them apart and return them to > their starting position as it took for them > to move together. [so it produces no energy] > > How is that not totally obvious to everyone? What have those > promoting ZPE as an energy source come up with to solve this? Rubber bands? ================= Another Casimir URL; http://www.phys.uni.torun.pl/~jkob/physnews96/node9.html On the Vacuum Energy; http://www.pcss.maps.susx.ac.uk/users/markh/RQF1/node34.html#SECTION00053000000000000000 The most recent experiment by Lamoreaux; http://www.pcss.maps.susx.ac.uk/users/markh/RQF1/node36.html#SECTION00055000000000000000 Darrell Moffitts article originally posted directly to the KeelyNet BBS and lifted by the vampire site Sumeria; http://www.livelinks.com/sumeria/phys/cpedog.html ================== I had the privilege to meet Win Lambertson about 4 years ago and attend his workshop. This was when he was working on getting a patent for his WIN cells and I'm not sure one was ever issued. At the workshop, Win reported on his early experiments with this Casimir force where he placed two plates together in close proximity and developed a means to convert the mechanical pressure to electrical energy and to restore the plates to their original position, in a word, re-cocking it mechanically so they could again be pushed together. Win said in those early days he used banks of 100 Watt tungsten filament bulbs which often blew out. Examination of the tungsten filaments show they were blow apart, like a fuse subjected to a momentary burst of high voltage. He said he was able to extract electrical energy from his cells for nearly constant power but the lamps would randomly blow out. He attributes these failures to changes in the zpe pressure which cause high voltage spikes. He realized he could use sodium or gas vapor lamps that could easily absorb these high voltage spikes and simply convert any excessive spikes into more light. Much like using a lamp as a ballast in an oscillator. There are pictures of his Win Cells (many of these put together into a cylinder to add the power from each) powering 5 sodium lamps. So, I heard what I considered to be another confirmation that the aether/zpe does move in waves which we can think of as higher pressure or higher energy followed eventually by the normal pressures. This means any device or circuit which was intended to tap zpe/aether flows would need to have a 'pilot circuit' to serve as a voltage/current regulator when it detected an intensification of the incoming power. Kind of like an AVR (automatic voltage regulator). This would protect whatever load was placed on the device by quenching any spikes or pulling up any sags. At Win's workshop, he passed around a few of these single cells and you could clearly see what appeared to be an RTV/silicon caulk like compound between two thin ceramic plates. My thinking at the time was this WAS THE RUBBER BAND the guy jokes about above. In a question to Win, I theorized at the workshop that he had quartz or other crystals embedded in the silicone caulk which would be subject to the slapping of the plates against each other from the pressure of the zpe/aether waves. Win said 'well we won't talk about that as I am working on my patent.'..... I might have been offbase but it would explain the conversion of mechanical force to electricity by piezoelectric action and the rubbery silicone caulk would be the RESTORATIVE mechanical action to 're-cock' the plates for another mechanical compression from the Casimir effect. The cell would serve as a rectifier/check valve/diode which is one way (pun intended) to tap into this force as Henry Moray was supposed to have done with his 'swedish stone' based Moray Valve. Many of these 'cells' are stacked together into columns all connected together electrically. Because it is piezoelectric (in my opinion), the energy should be high voltage, which would drive a sodium (ionized plasma) tube, indicating these single cells should be connected in series. The rubbery silicone caulk, thinly applied so that the plates would be kept apart the requisite Casimir distance, would compress under the mechanical zpe/aether pressure, slap the quartz crystals which would produce piezoelectricity, then the plates would be pushed back to their original position by the rubbery caulk, ready to be slapped together again. This would be a linear analogue to the rotary paddlewheel idea of tapping into flowing energies that result from differences in potential. It strikes me that DC is the brute force method of energy extraction from AC with this linear method while AC is extracted by resonant tapping as with the paddlewheel method. Interesting how this ties in with the report of the Tesla electric car where he used several vacuum tubes in his electrical box that sat on the seat of the vehicle. Here are two relevant Tesla files; http://www.keelynet.com/energy/teslafe1.htm http://www.keelynet.com/energy/teslafe2.htm The cells/tubes could be hooked in parallel to increase the current or in series to increase the voltage. Perhaps the ceramic disks used by Lambertson are piezoelectric unto themselves, that is by their very composition. Like the two chocolate pieces of an Oreo cookie with the rubbery silicone as the cream filling. This is a distinct possibility as an alternative to the idea of ground up quartz crystals suspended in the silicone caulk. I would think construction of such a cell (with the ground up crystals) would require that the crystals be oriented perpendicular to the faces of the ceramic plates, to get the greatest amount of mechanical compression for the most electricity. If the ceramic plate composition is the key, then just slapping them together would produce the piezoelectric energy. When examining the cells Win graciously passed around, I saw only the two ceramic disks, the silicone caulk and no metal. I think there was a wire attached to each ceramic piece like a solar cell, but I don't recall now. I don't hear or see any work or reports by anyone other than Win for this intriguing mechanical energy extraction using the Casimir force and if Win can do it in his workshop, surely a crude version could be produced just to produce enough to fulfill Puthoffs 'One Watt Challenge'. -- Jerry Wayne Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 21:28:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA22245; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:27:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:27:00 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981011042921.008eb31c 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, 11 Oct 1998 00:29:21 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"FK-Ap3.0.NR5.JE38s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23222 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have a problem with some recent news about what the Hubble space telescope is looking at. The report (CNN Interactive) states that Hubble is looking at galaxies alleged to be 12 billion light years away. (Somewhere else, I don't remember where, I read that these star clusters are about 7 billion light years away. With either figure I still have the same problem.) The news article also stated that the age of the age of the universe is believed to be about 12 billion to 15 billion years old and that these star clusters Hubble is pointed at were about 700 million years old when the light started on its journey toward our solar system. If you take the age of the universe to be the larger figure, 15 billion years, then the age of the universe 12 billion years ago was 3 billion years. [Simple arithmetic so far] Now if the universe started with the Big Bang from a point source and expanded rapidly from there at the speed of light then the maximum distance across the universe at that time was 6 billion light-years across. But the universe is not expanding at the speed of light but at a rate significantly less than that. Pick any figure, say 1/1000th the speed of light. The volume of the universe would then be 6 million light years in diameter. So the maximum time it would take for the light to go from one edge of the universe to a diametrically opposite edge would be 6 million light years. Since our galaxy is not anywhere near the edge of the universe, the time it would take to reach our region of the universe would a lot less than 6 million light years. Also, the star clusters Hubble is detecting is not at the edge of the universe (?). Six million light years is a lot less than 12 billion or even 7 billion light years. Either 1) The age of the universe is much, much greater than 15 billion years. 2) The Big Bang theory is wrong. 3) My concept of a point source for the occurence of the Big Bang is wrong. That is, a point source in space(?) is billions of light years in diameter. 4) Hubble is looking at another universe. 5) The estimation of distance based on red shifts is not correct. 6) My reasoning is incorrect. Does anyone have an explanation? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 10 23:26:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA28733; Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981011060453.00d70d50 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 02:04:53 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Re; Meyer Water Fuel Cell Resent-Message-ID: <"ee9S92.0.t07.mb48s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23223 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: What will the capacitance of the water filled battery be? Will it be able to sustain the 100V - 1000V step increases? How do you know if resonance has been achieved? At 08:33 AM 10/10/98 -0600, you wrote: >The cell can be made using a dry Lead-Acid automotive battery,ie., a storage >battery that hasn't been filled with the Water-Acid Electrolyte. The gases >can be bled of through hoses connected to the fill holes. > >SAFETY DISCLAIMER! > >If one wants to jiggle the water molecules without H2O Electrolysis, >double-sided printed circuit boards can be laminated in Mylar or coated with >a spray lacquer and immersed in water with electrical contact to each side >of a spaced stack of PCBs. > >Other than that the Meyer Fuel Cell is basically a pulsed electrolysis cell. The patent says it is a capacitor. The bonds are aligned and stretched with resonant energy. The bonds are broken with just a little bit more of a stretch on the last step up of voltage. I think there were 5 steps to the increasing voltage cascade so perhaps 1/5 the energy is required for this resonance method as opposed to straight electrolysis? Or perhaps the same amount of energy breaks 5 times as many bonds? >With the insulated PCBs and the proper thickness of water the voltage >divides across >the insulator layers and the water layer and "jiggles" the water molecules >causing dielectric (Loss Tangent)heating >of the water with possible ZPE >Extraction The resonant frequency is targeting the bonds holding the H2O together. I guess that would be ion acoustic resonance when the molecule splits. The voltage steps keeping the molecules aligned may cohere the motion of the ions? When H2O splits, does it form ions? If not, will the random polarization lines of the electron cloud equalize the ZPE interaction? >(dE = hbar/dt) What was the significance of Planck's Constant/2*pi again? >that can be determined with good calorimetry. Speaking of heat transfer, I've heard that all the rain and weird weather we've been getting due to the north polar icecap melting twice as fast as the south polar icecap. Are they melting because we have so many powerplants in the northern hemisphere? If the ice caps did melt, could this put the Earth out of balance? If the Earth's axis makes a shift, would the powers that are restricting this technology be making a big mistake? Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 00:28:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA13127; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:27:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:27:59 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Questions about our universe Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 07:29:27 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36255de2.108881266 mail-hub> References: <1.5.4.32.19981011042921.008eb31c freeway.net> In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981011042921.008eb31c freeway.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: <"OWNRx3.0.yC3._t58s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23224 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:29:21 -0400, Edwin Strojny wrote: >I have a problem with some recent news about what the Hubble space telescope >is looking at. The report (CNN Interactive) states that Hubble is looking >at galaxies alleged to be 12 billion light years away. (Somewhere else, I >don't remember where, I read that these star clusters are about 7 billion >light years away. With either figure I still have the same problem.) The >news article also stated that the age of the age of the universe is believed >to be about 12 billion to 15 billion years old and that these star clusters >Hubble is pointed at were about 700 million years old when the light started >on its journey toward our solar system. > >If you take the age of the universe to be the larger figure, 15 billion >years, then the age of the universe 12 billion years ago was 3 billion >years. [Simple arithmetic so far] Now if the universe started with the Big >Bang from a point source and expanded rapidly from there at the speed of >light then the maximum distance across the universe at that time was 6 >billion light-years across. But the universe is not expanding at the speed >of light but at a rate significantly less than that. Pick any figure, say How do you know the speed is significantly less than the speed of light? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 00:29:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA13339; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:28:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:28:32 -0700 Message-ID: <014001bdf4e8$b9fb8320$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Re; Meyer Water Fuel Cell Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 01:27:40 -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: <"roePG3.0.LG3.Wu58s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23225 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Dennis C. Lee To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, October 11, 1998 12:22 AM Subject: Re: Re; Meyer Water Fuel Cell For the Lead-Acid Storage Battery, C = 78*8.84E-12*Plate Area/Plate Spacing. For the Mylar Laminated or Lacquer-Coated PCBs, C = K*8.84E-12*Plate area/Mylar thickness in series with C = 78.8*8.84E-12*Plate Area/Water thickness, thus each "Cell" will consist of Two Mylat or Lacquer-Coated Capacitors in Series with the "Water Capacitor" Capacitance times the number of Cells. The voltage will divide across these the same as for three capacitors in series with the water capacitor being the middle capacitor. Thus only the displacement current can be drawn as opposed to the Meyer Cell which draws an ion (electrolysis)current as well as a displacement current I = C*dV/dt I Think. :-) Regards, Frederick Dennis C. Lee wrote: >What will the capacitance of the water filled battery be? Will it be able to >sustain the 100V - 1000V step increases? How do you know if resonance has >been achieved? > >At 08:33 AM 10/10/98 -0600, you wrote: > >>The cell can be made using a dry Lead-Acid automotive battery,ie., a storage >>battery that hasn't been filled with the Water-Acid Electrolyte. The gases >>can be bled of through hoses connected to the fill holes. >> >>SAFETY DISCLAIMER! >> >>If one wants to jiggle the water molecules without H2O Electrolysis, >>double-sided printed circuit boards can be laminated in Mylar or coated with >>a spray lacquer and immersed in water with electrical contact to each side >>of a spaced stack of PCBs. >> >>Other than that the Meyer Fuel Cell is basically a pulsed electrolysis cell. > >The patent says it is a capacitor. The bonds are aligned and stretched with >resonant energy. The bonds are broken with just a little bit more of a >stretch on the last step up of voltage. I think there were 5 steps to the >increasing voltage cascade so perhaps 1/5 the energy is required for this >resonance method as opposed to straight electrolysis? Or perhaps the same >amount of energy breaks 5 times as many bonds? > >>With the insulated PCBs and the proper thickness of water the voltage >>divides across >>the insulator layers and the water layer and "jiggles" the water molecules >>causing dielectric (Loss Tangent)heating > > >>of the water with possible ZPE >>Extraction > >The resonant frequency is targeting the bonds holding the H2O together. I >guess that would be ion acoustic resonance when the molecule splits. The >voltage steps keeping the molecules aligned may cohere the motion of the >ions? When H2O splits, does it form ions? If not, will the random >polarization lines of the electron cloud equalize the ZPE interaction? > >>(dE = hbar/dt) > >What was the significance of Planck's Constant/2*pi again? > >>that can be determined with good calorimetry. > >Speaking of heat transfer, I've heard that all the rain and weird weather >we've been getting due to the north polar icecap melting twice as fast as >the south polar icecap. Are they melting because we have so many powerplants >in the northern hemisphere? If the ice caps did melt, could this put the >Earth out of balance? If the Earth's axis makes a shift, would the powers >that are restricting this technology be making a big mistake? > >Dennis > > >Tall Ships >http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 02:47:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA29067; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 02:45:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 02:45:06 -0700 Message-ID: <36207F3B.50EF8865 crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 11:49:49 +0200 From: "Jean - Paul Bibérian" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [fr] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Darwin's theory and physisists Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qQPwJ.0.467.Ru78s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23226 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear all, I am preparing a talk on revolutions in science. I wish to use Darwin as an example. It seems to me that not only the Church was opposed to him for Biblical reasons, but also physisists of his time were saying that the universe was not old enough for evolution to occur. Their statement was based on the fact that the sun could not have been old enough: a few thousand years (in agreement with the Bible) to give time to evolution to occur. At that time (the end of the XIXth century), nuclear energy was not known and chemistry could not provide enough energy for the sun to last long enough. Has anyone more detailed infos on the subject. I think that this is an important point in this present scientific revolution. This is also true for Kervran with biological transmutation. Jean-Paul Biberian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 04:25:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA09029; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 04:24:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 04:24:35 -0700 Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 13:21:59 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199810111121.NAA00844 imaginet.fr> X-Sender: lentin mail.imaginet.fr 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: Jean-Pierre Lentin Subject: Re : Darwin's theory and physisists Cc: biberian crmc2.univ-mrs.fr Resent-Message-ID: <"VmUUJ3.0._C2.oL98s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23227 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Cher Jean-Paul, et al Physicists opposed to Darwin were not referring to the Bible. Biblical account of the universe's age is about 6000 years, so it had been completely discarded by scientists much before Darwin's time. Their anti-Darwin arguments were purely physical. Actually the main argument was Lord Kelvin's calculation of the age of the earth measured by its cooling rate. (I don't have the exact figure on hand right now, but it was much shorter that the necessary time-span postulated by Darwin). Darwin was rather annoyed by Kelvin's paper. Unfortunately, old Charles died before radioactive decay of elements as an heat source for earth was discovered. Kelvin, though, did live to witness his discomfiture on that point. Hope this helps --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jean-Pierre Lentin --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 04:52:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA13576; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 04:52:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 04:52:19 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981011120110.00db17f4 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 08:01:10 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"H5y-q2.0.yJ3.ol98s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23228 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 07:29 AM 10/11/98 GMT, you wrote: >>But the universe is not expanding at the speed >>of light but at a rate significantly less than that. Pick any figure, say > >How do you know the speed is significantly less than the speed of >light? Isn't the redshift due to (ether) interactions while the photon is traveling to the observer and not due to the Doppler effect. So if they are determining the expansion speed with 'doppler' redshift, it's inaccurate. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 05:00:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA14944; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 04:59:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 04:59:08 -0700 Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <36205506.6585D4EB mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:49:42 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Questions about our universe References: <1.5.4.32.19981011042921.008eb31c freeway.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"nPlHu1.0.Qf3.Bs98s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23229 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edwin Strojny wrote: ...2) The Big Bang theory is wrong. ...Does anyone have an explanation? Ed Strojny Hi Ed, The problem lies in the interpretation of red shift data. Maybe Fred Hoyle was right about continuous creation of matter as opposed to the big bang. There could be another explanation for the background radiation. And, of course, since gravity is supposed to play a role in redshit, our lack of understanding of gravity is a serious obstacle to making any sense of the situation. Also, since the big bang does not seem to have any practical design implications, there is not much incentive to abandon "cargo-cult" science in this case.OU may be able to make substantial advances in the absence of fundemental understanding. After all, Roger Bacon invented gun powder while believing that everything consisted of earth, air, fire, and water. Does Hamdi's reference to Electro-Magnetic Quantum Gravity show promise? Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 05:17:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA18028; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 05:15:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 05:15:47 -0700 Message-ID: <015e01bdf510$d18e7ce0$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Questions about our universe Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:15:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"POhnO3.0.XP4.n5A8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23230 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Taylor J. Smith To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, October 11, 1998 6:01 AM Subject: Re: Questions about our universe Redshit???? That's a new one. LOL! >Edwin Strojny wrote: > > ...2) The Big Bang theory is wrong. > > ...Does anyone have an explanation? > > Ed Strojny > >Hi Ed, > >The problem lies in the interpretation of red shift >data. Maybe Fred Hoyle was right about continuous >creation of matter as opposed to the big bang. >There could be another explanation for the background >radiation. And, of course, since gravity is supposed >to play a role in redshit, our lack of understanding of >gravity is a serious obstacle to making any sense of >the situation. Also, since the big bang does not >seem to have any practical design implications, there >is not much incentive to abandon "cargo-cult" science >in this case.OU may be able to make substantial >advances in the absence of fundemental understanding. >After all, Roger Bacon invented gun powder while >believing that everything consisted of earth, air, fire, >and water. Does Hamdi's reference to Electro-Magnetic >Quantum Gravity show promise? > >Jack Smith > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 05:31:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA20061; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 05:30:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 05:30:22 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981011123717.00db805c popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 08:37:17 -0400 To: Henry Curtis From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Corbino Effect? Cc: Alan.CHEAH adecco.com, alex@frolov.spb.ru, Eric Howlett , freenrg-l@eskimo.com, gjcheah guybutler.com, wellenstein@binah.cc.brandeis.edu, hic world.std.com, jkokor@alum.mit.edu, discjt@servtech.com, jsearl tako.demon.co.uk, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net, lstelmac lynx.neu.edu, 71650.60@compuserve.com, rsmith@itiip.com, 73577.123 compuserve.com, tcapizzi@world.std.com, tom.duff poweroasis.com, TAFAUL@aol.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com, Nick Edgington Resent-Message-ID: <"B4yyP3.0.Mv4.UJA8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23231 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; I have my Dad's January 1965 Glossary of Electronic Properties by Emil Schafer EPIC Report No. S-7. Under Hall Coefficient: The Corbino effect is a special case of the Hall effect which occurs when a disc carrying a radial current is placed in a magnetic field which is perpendicular to the plane of the disc. I did a web search but I could only find that, while the Hall effect is resistive in nature, the Corbino effect is a conductance phenomenon. Any comments are welcome. I don't think that people who ask questions are ignorant. Dennis At 01:35 AM 10/11/98 -0600, you wrote: >Please forgive my ignorance, but what is the Corbino effect? Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 06:14:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA25031; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:13:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:13:17 -0700 Message-ID: <018301bdf518$e2723e40$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Corbino Effect? Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 07:12:58 -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: <"vRLEE2.0.z66.ixA8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23232 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Dennis C. Lee Date: Sunday, October 11, 1998 6:32 AM Subject: Re: Corbino Effect? Corbino Disk: "A variable-resistance device utilizing the effect of a magnetic field on the flow of carriers from the center to the circumference of a disk made of semiconducting or conducting material." Dennis C. Lee wrote: >Hi; > >I have my Dad's January 1965 Glossary of Electronic Properties by Emil >Schafer EPIC Report No. S-7. Under Hall Coefficient: > >The Corbino effect is a special case of the Hall effect which occurs when a >disc carrying a radial current is placed in a magnetic field which is >perpendicular to the plane of the disc. > >I did a web search but I could only find that, while the Hall effect is >resistive in nature, the Corbino effect is a conductance phenomenon. Any >comments are welcome. > >I don't think that people who ask questions are ignorant. Neither do I Dennis, but they will be if they don't ask. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Dennis > > >At 01:35 AM 10/11/98 -0600, you wrote: > >>Please forgive my ignorance, but what is the Corbino effect? > > >Tall Ships >http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 06:21:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA27615; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:19:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:19:55 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981011132211.008c5fe0 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, 11 Oct 1998 09:22:11 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"CiWkv1.0.Kl6.x1B8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23234 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:49 AM 10/11/98 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: >Edwin Strojny wrote: > > ...2) The Big Bang theory is wrong. > > ...Does anyone have an explanation? > > Ed Strojny > >Hi Ed, > Does Hamdi's reference to Electro-Magnetic >Quantum Gravity show promise? > >Jack Smith > I don't know anything about Hamdi's reference. Can you point the way? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 06:21:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA27566; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:19:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:19:52 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981011132210.008fdee4 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, 11 Oct 1998 09:22:10 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"LuRZ.0.ck6.t1B8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23233 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:29 AM 10/11/98 GMT, Robin Spaandonk wrote: >On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:29:21 -0400, Edwin Strojny wrote: > >> >>If you take the age of the universe to be the larger figure, 15 billion >>years, then the age of the universe 12 billion years ago was 3 billion >>years. [Simple arithmetic so far] Now if the universe started with the Big >>Bang from a point source and expanded rapidly from there at the speed of >>light then the maximum distance across the universe at that time was 6 >>billion light-years across. But the universe is not expanding at the speed >>of light but at a rate significantly less than that. Pick any figure, say > >How do you know the speed is significantly less than the speed of >light? >[snip] > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > I don't know. If the universe were expanding at the speed of light, I have the same problem: 6 billion light year diameter after three billion years expansion is still less than 11 billion or 7 billion light years. If the universe were expanding at the speed of light would we see anything? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 06:57:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA03272; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:56:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:56:10 -0700 Message-ID: <019401bdf51e$dd9cb2a0$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Questions about our universe Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 07:55:49 -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: <"6On0L3.0.1p.uZB8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23235 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, October 11, 1998 7:22 AM Subject: Re: Questions about our universe Ed Strojny wrote: >If the >universe were expanding at the speed of light would we see anything? One Helluva Redshit, Perhaps? :-) Actually the *experts* say that the Universe expansion is as if all the Stars/Galaxies are on the surface of a balloon or a layered balloon that is being inflated, thus putting the Big Bang point in the middle of nowhere. If you take the Speed-of-Light c = (1/(uo*eo)^1/2 where eo is the permittivity of the aether (8.84E-12 Farads/meter)(and uo is a function of eo) as decreasing as the mass of the Universe moves out on the surface of the balloon c IS NOT CONSTANT but increasing between the sides of the Balloon. Thus the Universe may only be a few thousand years old, Ed. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Ed Strojny > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 09:26:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA10485; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 09:25:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 09:25:02 -0700 Message-ID: <3620DBC4.65308485 gte.net> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 09:24:39 -0700 From: Bob Horst X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press (http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID References: <011501bdf4a0$3cf3d780$afb4bfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fFxr41.0.kZ2.TlD8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23236 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick -- On a message like this, I would very much appreciate it if you could use a descriptive title to the mail message, and add a sentence or two on what the story is about. With the large volume of Vortex mail, some of us to not take the time to follow every hyperlink to determine if it is of interest. Thanks, -- Bob Frederick J Sparber wrote: > http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID=SCIENCE&STORYID=APIS6OERRN80 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Name: The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press.url > The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press.url Type: unspecified type (application/octet-stream) > Encoding: 7bit From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 09:44:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17066; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 09:41:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 09:41:39 -0700 Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <36209746.456D0E08 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 11:32:22 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Questions about our universe References: <1.5.4.32.19981011132211.008c5fe0 freeway.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"aACGs1.0.VA4.2_D8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23237 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edwin Strojny wrote: ...2) The Big Bang theory is wrong. ...Does anyone have an explanation? Jack Smith wrote: Hi Ed, Does Hamdi's reference to Electro-Magnetic Quantum Gravity show promise? Ed wrote: I don't know anything about Hamdi's reference. Can you point the way? Jack Smith writes: Sorry about the typo. The reference is http://xxx.lanl.gov/html/physics/9809042 The file exists in html, a pleasant surprise. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 10:25:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA28492; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 10:24:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 10:24:03 -0700 Message-ID: <36210578.697 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 12:22:32 -0700 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Reply-To: stk sunherald.infi.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: (Off-topic?) Re : Darwin's theory and physisists References: <199810111121.NAA00844 imaginet.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Iiu2d3.0.2z6.ocE8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23238 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jean-Pierre Lentin wrote: > Physicists opposed to Darwin were not referring to the Bible. Biblical > account of the universe's age is about 6000 years, so it had been completely > discarded by scientists much before Darwin's time. This is simply not correct. The Bible says nowhere that the universe is 6000 years old. Bishop Usser (sp?) said that. In fact, it also does not say that the earth was created in six days. Study it a bit, you will find that the Hebrew word for the 'creation days' is totally different from the word for day elsewhere in the bible. The word can mean: 1. A 24-hour day, or 2. A generation, or long period of time. I think everyone is fairly aware that the universe is somewhere on the order of 15Gyr old, ans the solar system about 4.6Gyr old. (Gyr=1 billion years) Also: If you plan to look at Darwinism in a scientific way, look at it the way Feynman lectured scientists to study. Do instense research on the original assumptions/requirements for Darwinian evolution, (such as the simple cell) and the paleontological evidence for pre-Cambrian precursor lifeforms. Also study all the evidence of hominid lifeforms thought to be ancestors of man. Do not check just one source, heavily research the evidence. You may not like what you find. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 11:44:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA14610; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 11:31:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 11:31:32 -0700 Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 11:33:01 -0700 Message-Id: <199810111833.LAA03603 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: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"IJbEa.0.7a3.3cF8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23239 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >If you take the age of the universe to be the larger figure, 15 billion >years, then the age of the universe 12 billion years ago was 3 billion >years. [Simple arithmetic so far] The arithmetic is fine. It is the understanding of what you are dealing with that needs a little help, see below. Now if the universe started with the Big >Bang from a point source and expanded rapidly from there at the speed of >light then the maximum distance across the universe at that time was 6 >billion light-years across. But the universe is not expanding at the speed >of light but at a rate significantly less than that. Pick any figure, say >1/1000th the speed of light. This is incorrect. What you must understand is that as you move outward across the universe, things are moving faster. And, there are regions at the extremes of our universe that ARE moving at faster than light relative to our location. Even at less than the speed of light, there develops what is known as an observational horizon, beyond which light has not yet had enough time to make it to our location within the universe. That horizon is veiled by the cosmic background radiation, CBR. That radiation comes from as far out into our universe as we can observe. Beyond that, there is more to our universe, but we cannot see it because light from some object out there, would have been scattered by the density of photons in the early universe and we could not make out any of those objects. The same thing happens in our sun. There is no surface to our sun, and yet we cannot see into the interior. The reason we think we are seeing a surface at the photosphere, is because that is the surface of last scattering of the photons. The density of matter doesn't really drop off as rapidly as the visual impression leads us to conclude. Rather, above the photosphere is the chromosphere and then the coronal transition region, and then the corona. The point being, cosmologists speak of the "observable universe" and the "physical universe". The difference is that the observable universe is the region within the physical universe we are capable of seeing to. As each million years passes, we are able to see another million light years distant out into the physical universe. So our observable universe is growing, but so too is our physical universe. And, our physical universe is growing faster. If, as I expect, our universe is just one localized resonant region in a much larger expanse I call the Omniverse, meaning all universes, then some day in the future, we will be capable of seeing beyond the limits of our "observable" universe. This will occur when the veil of the CBR lifts, and light from outside our universe begins to pour in. Don't hold your breath, though, as this isn't likely to happen unless it already has. And if it has, then there should be some "hole" in the CBR, but we don't see any holes in the CBR so I don't think it has happened. >1) The age of the universe is much, much greater than 15 billion years. Best current estimates put it around 12 billion. >2) The Big Bang theory is wrong. Too much good evidence in support of it. Your argument was based on a simplistic model that doesnt fit what we observe. It isn't that things are moving at a fixed velocity like you supposed. Rather, they are moving at a velocity that is distance dependent. A uniform expansion. So if you double the distance from us, then you must double the velocity objects are moving at out at that location. I agree there are in essence, "non velocity" red shifts, but there are also velocity red shifts, as you know from your local sherrif and his radar gun's. Read Arp's book to learn about the controversy on red shifts. But don't get lost in a steady state model because they fail on other grounds. The tricky thing about non velocity red shifts, is that the cause is the emission of space from discrete objects. For example, if we didn't know that we circle our sun, and we observed it in C IV lines, we would conclude that the sun was moving away from us. ie, we would think that there was a red shift for our own sun due to it's velocity of recession! But, if we observed it only in Ne VIII lines, we would conclude that the sun was racing toward us and that we would smack in a day or so (3 km/s if I recall). So right in our own play pen we have both red and blue shifts of the light of two different ions. But what you have to understand is that those ions are on opposite sides of the transition region of the sun. And you have to understand that 'space' is flowing out of the sun all the time. (aether). So once you grasp that, then it doesn't take a brain surgeon to recognize that just like water spilling over a dam spillway, the water accelerates as it rolls over the top, and it decelerates as it reaches the bottom hydraulic jump. So, a speaker in the water will be red shifted as the water accelerates past it at the top, and the sound will be blue shifted as the water rams into the stream bed flow and rapidly decelerates at the hydraulic jump. That is what is going on with the C IV and the Ne VIII ions light emissions. And the same thing happens outside of quasars, and outside of galaxies. For quasars, the shift occurs around the broad line region as it is known. The counterpart is the broad line region of our sun, which is the coronal transition region. this region is where the aether is slipping as it expands outward, and so there is a residual shock. The ionization occurs due to "spacetime turbulence", and not due to photo ionization or collisional excitation. The SOHO scientists are close to establishing this for the sun, because the density of particles in the transition region are too small, and the particle temperatures (ie e-) are too low for collisional excitation to be at work. And there is not enough EUV radiation to be responsible. That would be like getting the egg to lay itself before the chicken had hatched. So the SOHO scientists have basically established that there is some new, unknown process at work ionizing matter as it crosses the transition region. I can only tell you what I am convinced the process is. But as everyone is used to working with spacetime as a "metric", and not as a "structure of wave energy", the above comments make no sense to anyone thinking in terms of todays ideas. But overall, the only thing wierd about this is the fact that we have thought all these years that empty space is "nothingness". If we instead thought of the universe as being an ocean, then we would question how there could be more empty space in the universe today, than there was a billion years ago. Where did all that "empty space" come from? The answer is, it came from the emission of aether from stars. And stars did it when they "converted mass into energy". Basically, empty space is massive, and we should really use the term, "mass to space" conversion. This new idea leads us back to conservation of action, ie, action reaction, which we thought was not valid when we observed the infusion of KE into particles involved in nuclear reactions where some of the mass turns up missing. The reaction of aether emission is the acceleration of the particles involved, ie, the KE we observe. But what we have been missing all century long, is the fact that the fusion process ALSO pushed the rest of the universe away from that region of exothermy. Thus, what we learn in the end is that the inflationary process of the big bang never ended! It continues today, and we call the process, "exothermy". Exothermic processes are aether emissive, and they push the universe away. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 14:41:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA28918; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 14:39:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 14:39:46 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981011164159.00941a60 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:41:59 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press (http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID In-Reply-To: <3620DBC4.65308485 gte.net> References: <011501bdf4a0$3cf3d780$afb4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lMwlK.0.j37.XMI8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23240 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:24 AM 10/11/98 -0700, Bob Horst wrote: >Frederick -- > >On a message like this, I would very much appreciate it if you could use a descriptive title to the mail message, and add a >sentence or two on what the story is about. I agree....especially since there's a high probability that any "breaking" news these days is about that ridiculously expensive waste of time in Wash, DC. Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 15:52:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA17431; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:46:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:46:10 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981011224831.00907108 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, 11 Oct 1998 18:48:31 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"Ip6cS1.0.HG4.oKJ8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23241 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:33 AM 10/11/98 -0700, Ross Tessien wrote: > > > >The arithmetic is fine. It is the understanding of what you are dealing >with that needs a little help, see below. > > >Now if the universe started with the Big >>Bang from a point source and expanded rapidly from there at the speed of >>light then the maximum distance across the universe at that time was 6 >>billion light-years across. But the universe is not expanding at the speed >>of light but at a rate significantly less than that. Pick any figure, say >>1/1000th the speed of light. > >This is incorrect. What you must understand is that as you move outward >across the universe, things are moving faster. And, there are regions at >the extremes of our universe that ARE moving at faster than light relative >to our location. > >Even at less than the speed of light, there develops what is known as an >observational horizon, beyond which light has not yet had enough time to >make it to our location within the universe. That horizon is veiled by the >cosmic background radiation, CBR. That radiation comes from as far out into >our universe as we can observe. Beyond that, there is more to our universe, >but we cannot see it because light from some object out there, would have >been scattered by the density of photons in the early universe and we could >not make out any of those objects. > >Later, Ross Tessien > I am beginning to an understand as to what is happening. My mental pictorial view of the Big Bang was too simplistic. Thank you for your explanation. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 16:15:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA25457; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:14:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:14:15 -0700 Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:15:45 -0700 Message-Id: <199810112315.QAA27391 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: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"9yB-r1.0.cD6.7lJ8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23242 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >I am beginning to an understand as to what is happening. My mental >pictorial view of the Big Bang was too simplistic. Thank you for your >explanation. The usual introductory explanation is to think of a loaf of raisin bread that is rising, and consider the distance from raisin to raisin. The loaf is expanding due to yeast, everywhere equally. So two raisins one inch apart are moving away from one another at some velocity. But two raisins two inches apart are moving apart at double that velocity, and 6 inches apart are moving away at 6 times the velocity. The expansion rate of the universe if I remember off the top of my head, is around 80 km/s per megaparsec. But when you get out to the most distant reaches, the velocities of recession of quasars (assuming velocity shift here) can be up to 50 percent of the speed of light. Much further away than that, and the recession velocity is so great that even though the light could have been emitted from inside of the physical universe, it may not have had time to make it to us. You have to remember that the universe is of a finite age. So "sound", aka light, emitted from the far side of the expanding "loaf of bread" hasn't necessarily had time to cross the entire thing. The more intense the inflationary period of the big bang, the bigger this problem is, and the smaller is the percentage of the physical universe that we can observe. ie, the ratio of observable universe volume / physical universe volume goes down if the rate of inflation goes up. We may only be able to observe a really tiny part of the entire physical universe, and to date, no logic or observations have narrowed this down in concrrete terms. It is a big place out there. A galaxy like ours has on the order of 100 billion stars. And there are on the order of 100 billion galaxies. And if the ideas I am working on are correct, then our universe is one of billions of regions of resonance in a very much larger, Omniverse. Don't hold your breath waiting for any solutions to the entire thing. However one thing is obvious. It is an ocean out there, and not a vast expanse of nothingness. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 11 17:21:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA11509; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:18:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:18:16 -0700 Message-Id: <199810120019.TAA25172 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 19:18:14 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press (http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID Resent-Message-ID: <"KsJDi.0.gp2.7hK8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23243 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 09:24 AM 10/11/98 -0700, Bob Horst wrote: > >>Frederick -- >> >>On a message like this, I would very much appreciate it if you could use a >descriptive title to the mail message, and add a >>sentence or two on what the story is about. > >I agree....especially since there's a high probability that any "breaking" >news these days is about that ridiculously expensive waste of time in Wash, >DC. ***{That's right: if an item does not concern the activities, statements, or beliefs of those who are pushing us toward global slavery, it usually isn't considered to be "news." Thus to label something as "breaking news" is not much of a recommendation. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 01:32:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA30882; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:29:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:29:12 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981012083054.006779a4 atlantic.net> X-Sender: johmann atlantic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 04:30:54 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press Resent-Message-ID: <"zqgu8.0.NY7.NtR8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23244 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones (mjones jump.net) writes: >>At 09:24 AM 10/11/98 -0700, Bob Horst wrote: >> >>>Frederick -- >>> >>>On a message like this, I would very much appreciate it if you could use a >>descriptive title to the mail message, and add a >>>sentence or two on what the story is about. >> >>I agree....especially since there's a high probability that any "breaking" >>news these days is about that ridiculously expensive waste of time in Wash, >>DC. > >***{That's right: if an item does not concern the activities, statements, >or beliefs of those who are pushing us toward global slavery, it usually >isn't considered to be "news." Thus to label something as "breaking news" >is not much of a recommendation. --Mitchell Jones}*** Mitchell, I have to say you got that right. I stopped watching the so-called news years ago, as it is all Orwellian brainwashing garbage spewed forth by the evil American empire (the recent destruction of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan is just another in a very long list of its crimes against humanity). When I saw Frederick's post, I didn't try the link for the same reason others are saying: without some summary information as to what the alleged "news" is, it is probably a waste of time to look, so why bother. Kurt Johmann -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 01:51:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA04146; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:47:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:47:48 -0700 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:49:33 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <199810091206_MC2-5C2B-F8E compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"RKao31.0.i01.q8S8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23245 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Regarding flow calorimeters, Dieter Britz writes: [...] > By 1991 McKubre et al. achieved "the greater of 10 mW war 0.1%." See > proceedings ICCF2. This was achieved partially by accounting for the > alternative heat paths Britz discusses. This level of accuracy requires a > great deal of money. SO why, if I have all these peer-reviewed papers at my fingertips, do I still reckon that 1% is about the best you can get? Just checking one of the few papers he has published outside conf procs (JEC 368 (1994) 55), he gives, in the section on errors and uncertainties, several errors, and two of them are 0.2% each, adding up to at least 0.4%. What with the others, not expressed as % errors, he could well get to that 1% mark. That's doing well, in fact, and he doesn't need 0.1%; his excess heats lie well outside the 1% mark. If only he could them any time he likes. > A few weeks ago Britz said that cold fusion heat events are "random." I > pointed out that the events are correlated with high loading conditions and > that the loading conditions only occurred with some types of metal. I showed Well, then, the world should be beating a path to his door; this means he has achieved reproducibility, doesn't it? Or he should be beating a path to the patent office. Why have we not heard more about this? Rothwell did not comment on my remark on calibrations using a chemical reaction. I have changed my mind on that. It has actually been done, all the time. I am referring to the 1.48*I (or 1.53*I for D2O) correction. If, in a control run, your heat balances out +- your error, using that correction, then you are in effect measuring the enthalpy of water breakup, and thereby calibrating your calorimeter with a known chemical reaction. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 01:58:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA06878; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:55:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:55:29 -0700 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:57:11 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 100% Electrolysis Question In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981010011036.00d916d4 popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"cl-J42.0.Nh1.0GS8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23246 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Dennis C. Lee wrote: > Dear Dr. Britz; > > Given your background, I was wondering if you would be kind enough to > consider a few questions I've been curious about. [...] > The Meyer cell seems to work with a resonant electric field. Are there any > opinions on the effect of (ion acoustic-collisionless) resonance and > electrolysis? Is the idea of mean free path valid for ions in this case? > What would the corresponding frequency(s) be? Does the different frequency > to vibration modes covered in Linus Pauling's "Nature of the Chemical Bond" > indicate specific types of resonance for a given frequency? Should a > frequency be included for each of these vibration modes? Once a hydrogen ion > is free, how do we get it to combine with an electron rather than another > hydrogen ion? Might there be a frequency(s) that would inhibit H-H or O-O > bonds but encourage monatomic formation? I don't know. All this is irrelevant though. What I do know is that you need a certain amount of energy to break up water, and when you burn the resulting H2 + O2, you can get some of that back as useful work. I understand that Meyer would have us believe that by some magic, he can (or could) do the first step without any energy, and thus gets it for free when doing the burning step. Not possible, as the Russians like to say. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 02:34:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA14287; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 02:31:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 02:31:06 -0700 Message-ID: <01dd01bdf5c3$01594f60$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 03:30:47 -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: <"cLG7C3.0.7V3.PnS8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23247 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, October 12, 1998 2:52 AM Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Good to hear the Voice of Reason, Dr. Britz! For a while there with all that Clucking and Cackling, I thought perhaps Vortex-L was turning into a "Beat The Press" Forum. :-) Regards, Frederick >On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> Regarding flow calorimeters, Dieter Britz writes: >[...] >> By 1991 McKubre et al. achieved "the greater of 10 mW war 0.1%." See >> proceedings ICCF2. This was achieved partially by accounting for the >> alternative heat paths Britz discusses. This level of accuracy requires a >> great deal of money. > >SO why, if I have all these peer-reviewed papers at my fingertips, do >I still reckon that 1% is about the best you can get? Just checking >one of the few papers he has published outside conf procs (JEC 368 >(1994) 55), he gives, in the section on errors and uncertainties, >several errors, and two of them are 0.2% each, adding up to at least >0.4%. What with the others, not expressed as % errors, he could well >get to that 1% mark. That's doing well, in fact, and he doesn't need >0.1%; his excess heats lie well outside the 1% mark. If only he could >them any time he likes. > >> A few weeks ago Britz said that cold fusion heat events are "random." I >> pointed out that the events are correlated with high loading conditions and >> that the loading conditions only occurred with some types of metal. I showed > >Well, then, the world should be beating a path to his door; this means he >has achieved reproducibility, doesn't it? Or he should be beating a path >to the patent office. Why have we not heard more about this? > >Rothwell did not comment on my remark on calibrations using a chemical >reaction. I have changed my mind on that. It has actually been done, all >the time. I am referring to the 1.48*I (or 1.53*I for D2O) correction. >If, in a control run, your heat balances out +- your error, using that >correction, then you are in effect measuring the enthalpy of water >breakup, and thereby calibrating your calorimeter with a known chemical >reaction. > >-- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 06:32:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA25502; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 06:30:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 06:30:05 -0700 From: mrb ap.net Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981012063223.007938d0 mail.ap.net> X-Sender: mrb mail.ap.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 06:32:23 -0700 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Disc video In-Reply-To: <19981009145653.24599.rocketmail send104.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"AhAuM3.0.JE6.SHW8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23248 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ron, If you have our tape of the Disc you might forward it to Rex, since he is thinking about a model airplane version of his drive. Glad you enjoyed it! Mark From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 07:20:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA13728; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 07:18:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 07:18:28 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <36220FF3.CD5BE387 css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:19:31 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: U.S. Patent 4394230 References: <00fd01bdf482$6bec0e40$afb4bfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wgvqs1.0.QM3.p-W8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23249 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J Sparber wrote: > Interesting Patent. The statement that the electrolysis cell "MUST ABSORB > HEAT FROM THE ENVIRONMENT TO GET OVER-UNITY Efficiency"(about > 20% at 300 K) is most interesting. Electrolysis is an endothermic reaction in the < 2V range. Theoretically, at 25C & 1.24V, 65.3W will split one mole of water. Recombining releases 79.3W. Typically, resistance in the cell provides the heat energy and subsequent efficiency loss. If resonance can be used to predispose the splitting of water, resistance could significantly be reduced, efficiency could be increased, and heat energy would have to be supplied from outside the system. O/u? No, just chemically sloshing around existing energy -> in = out. .....or so I have read. Any corrections? -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune" -Nicholas Ling From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 07:21:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA14222; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 07:20:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 07:20:16 -0700 Message-Id: <3621EAA0.522656AC verisoft.com.tr> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:40:16 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Barut's paper revision update Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ZmRcs1.0.8U3.W0X8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23250 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, I did minor corrections (name of Y axxis of the Fig.2 and few tpyos on text) and improved the formatting of the document. The new rev 1.02 is available at http://www.geocities.com/rainforest/6660/barut.zip and will be at (when Robin Robin van Spaandonk update its copy on its site) http://users.bigpond.net.au/Ultra-High-Temp-BECs/barut.zip The theory (WHAT ARE THE TRUE BUILDING BLOCK OF MATTER, introduced at 1980) is based on very simple principles which can be understand without difficulties with introductory level of particle physics. Only higher order of knowledge is required for followi ng sections on how complex concepts introduced on quantum theory are simplified and gain physical base with the offered theories. IMO, all the mistery surrounding the particle physics,weak,strong forces, quarks, and all other additional hypothetical particles, conservation rulws of quantum numbers, etc. are disappearing and everythig is getting simpler and clear with this theory. I think the ignorance of this theory on main-stream science (evident from its absence on current basic physics textbooks) is phenomenological. (If anybody have late 90's revised books, please check the particle physics section, (my latest textbook is a 19 91 edition)) One can clearly realize the all the effort to build higher energy accelerators are unnescesary as we already have the fundemental components which are protons, electron, neutrino and electromagnetic field. (Proton is a composite particle but the only fund emental baryon and stable , at it used always on the structure of ot other baryons, which are unstable). Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 08:26:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA04585; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 08:23:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 08:23:51 -0700 Message-ID: <3622126A.5BF9 earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:30:02 -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, nntrancer@aol.com, JosephHRowe@compuserve.com, lucille telis.org, rollo@pilgrim.com, sethnet@efn.org, 72507.3443 compuserve.com, physics.guide@miningco.com Subject: SarfattI: The End of Quantum Theory 10.11.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"0_gRY2.0.X71.7yX8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23251 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: The End of Quantum Theory: Jack Sarfatti reviews his position. Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:58:58 -0700 From: gordon g globus From: Jack Sarfatti sarfatti well.com The End of Quantum Theory: Einstein, Wigner, Wheeler, Bohm and Beyond First Draft Introduction I have explained my back-action principle for the post-quantum generation of experiential qualities in terms of Einstein's principle of relativity that there are no "absolute ethers" on any level of physical reality. By "levels" I mean, essentially, David Bohm's notion of the "explicate order" for classical physics, the "(first) implicate order" for quantum physics, and the "super-implicate order" beyond the first implicate order. I have also related Einstein's principle to Wigner's action-reaction principle. What do I actually mean by this? Wigner (1) wrote the following definition of what I call "post-quantum back-action" = "Wigner self-reaction of matter on mind" "The physico-chemical conditions and properties of the substrate not only create the consciousness, they also influence its sensations most profoundly." - Wigner What Wigner did not know when he wrote those lines about 1960 is that, in terms of Bohm's theory, with the mind in the implicate order, there is no quantum non mechanism for the substrate to create the consciousness without violating the normal statistical predictions of orthodox quantum theory. Wigner then completes the "loop" by adding what I call the "Wigner action of mind on matter". "Does, conversely, the consciousness influence the physico-chemical conditions?" - Wigner So here we have the basic "Wigner action - reaction principle. What is its relation, if any beyond superficial metaphor to Newton's third law of mechanics of equal and opposite reaction to an action? Wigner also did not know that later on Bohm would come up with a natural quantum non mechanical organic way for the consciousness to influence the physico-chemical conditions as the gradient flow of those conditions on the quantum information landscape in the configuration space of those physicochemical conditions that form the material "system point" or "Level 1 "beable". Note on "configuration space" in Bohm's theory (2) , Dewdney and Squires wrote: "The dependence of the motion of the individual components of a composite quantum system on the evolution of the configuration space wave function is the ground of the essential unity of all quantum phenomena." This is the "essential unity" of the "binding problem" in the mind-matter mystery, i.e., the essential unity in the "occasions of experience" (3). Dewdney and Squires continue: "Although Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics allows for the analysis of a composite quantum system in terms of well defined and deterministic individual motions of its constituent parts in the usual three dimensional space, the true arena in which the system's motion is determined (and hence the arena for understanding the system's motion and the interrelations of its parts) is configuration space. This is the essential feature of quantum mechanics which transcends the paradigm of classical physical description and expresses the essential unity of quantum phenomena in the undivided universe." (3) From: C. Dewdney and E.J. Squires, "How late measurements of quantum trajectories can fool a detector." Physics Letters A 184 (1993) 6-11, e-mail from M. Creon Levit, NASA Ames Research Center, http://science.nas.nasa.gov/~creon Wigner continues: "The traditional answer to this question is, "No": the body influences the mind but the mind does not influence the body." - Wigner So here, we have the "one-way" property of Aristotle's "unmoved mover" characteristic of Einstein's notion of the "absolute ether" that violates his principle of relativity. Thus, Einstein wrote (4): "If Newton called the space of physics 'absolute', he was thinking of yet another property of that which we call 'ether'. Each physical object influences and in general is influenced in turn by others. The latter, however is not true of the ether of Newtonian mechanics. The inertia-producing property of this ether, in accordance with classical mechanics, is precisely not to be influenced, either by the configuration of matter, or by anything else. For this reason, one may call it 'absolute'." - Einstein So here Einstein defines "absolute" as the one-way influence i.e., as an action without a reaction (AKA "back-action"). Einstein continues that his theory of gravitation is a "back-action" theory in exactly the sense that I mean it for explaining experiential qualities in the mind. That is, post-quantum theory "removes a defect" of quantum theory found by David Bohm. This "defect" is that the quantum information field guiding the motion of matter in its higher dimensional non metrical configuration space beyond ordinary metrical space is another "absolute ether". It is this "defect" that is the deep cause of uncontrollable random quantum chance in actual individual events. Therefore, I argue that this quantum randomness is not fundamental, but is an approximation to a deeper self-organizing spontaneously sentient intelligent order. In accord with Einstein's Vision, God does not play dice with the universe. The Lord is subtle, but not malicious. "The general theory of relativity removes a defect of classical dynamics: in the latter, inertia and weight appear as totally different manifestations, quite independent of each other, in spite of the fact that they are determined by the same body-constant, i.e. the mass." - Einstein Einstein then discusses how his "equivalence principle" between inertia and mass for an electrically neutral test particle in "free float" geodesic motion does this and how the inhomogeneous distribution of mass-energy stress causes a variable curving away from the flat space-time of special relativity. Einstein continues: "The ether of the general theory of relativity therefore differs from that of classical mechanics or the special theory of relativity respectively, in so far as it is not 'absolute', but is determined in its locally variable properties by ponderable matter." - Einstein Eugene Wigner clearly saw the need for a post-quantum theory of consciousness. Thus, in dramatic contrast to our direct introspection, from the "common sense" absurdity of coherent quantum superpositions in our ordinary experiences of the outer classical world, Wigner wrote: "the being with a consciousness must have a different role in quantum mechanics than the inanimate measuring device." - Wigner Wigner, in his analysis of his "friend", then argues that orthodox quantum theory requires that our experiential qualities are somehow bogus, or "tricks of the mind". That is quantum theory requires us to renounce our experiences at face value as some kind of illusion, some kind of passive epiphenomenon. or to adopt solipsism. However, "All this is … logically consistent so long as I maintain my privileged position as ultimate observer. … to deny the existence of the consciousness of a friend to this extent is surely an unnatural attitude, approaching solipsism, and few people, in their hearts will go along with it." - Wigner Wigner thinks that orthodox quantum theory's "weakness" is in not having a clear way for thought to influence matter. Wigner accepts that matter influences consciousness although he never shows how quantum theory explains that. In fact, the reality is reversed from the way Wigner understood it when we look at this problem in Bohm's ontology where matter is in the explicate order and mind is in the implicate orders beyond space-time. It is easy, within orthodox quantum theory to see how the implicate influences the explicate, i.e. how mind influences matter. However, this influence is "one-way". Thus, Bohm and Hiley (2) show that the quantum field is an absolute ether in Einstein's sense: "unlike what happens with Maxwell's equations … the Schroedinger equation for the quantum field does not have sources, nor does it have any other way by which the field could be directly affected by the conditions of the particles. This of course constitutes an important difference between quantum fields and other fields… the quantum theory can be understood completely in terms of the assumption that the quantum field has no sources, or other forms of dependence on the particles." (p. 30) This one-way absolute ether of quantum information means that there is no two-way spontaneous self-organization possible between the implicate and the explicate orders. One consequence of this lack of sources in the quantum field is the inability to use nonlocal quantum connections as a faster-than-light communication channel. "any attempt to send a signal by influencing one of a pair of particles under EPR (Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen) correlation will encounter the difficulties … If for example we tried to 'modulate' the overall wave function so that it could carry a signal in a way similar to what is done by a radio wave, we would find that the wholes pattern of this wave would be so fragile that its order could change radically in a chaotic and complex way. As a result no signal could be carried." p. 284 How do we modulate an electromagnetic field to send a signal. Clearly, we do it by controlling the electrons that are sources of the field. Well we cannot do that ordinarily in inanimate quantum matter with quantum waves in configuration space. When it does happen in animate post-quantum matter, the fifth phase of matter, it generates experiential qualities. The key to using nonlocal quantum connections for faster-than-light (FTL) and backwards-in-time (BIT) communication is to replace the one-way action of the absolute ether of the quantum information field on its attached matter with a two-way action/reaction feedback-control loop. The quantum information field in configuration space then becomes controllable just like the Maxwell electromagnetic field in ordinary space. This is the beginning of post-quantum theory and the end of quantum theory. So the key is action/reaction. Let's see what John Archibald Wheeler thinks of that (5). "One of the pillars of physics is Newton's third law. A common way to state it is that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Another way to say it is that forces come in balanced pairs. … In its modern, general form, Newton's third law applies to all interactions of one thing to another. It tells us that anything that affects something else must, in turn, be affected by that something else. Paul Hewitt … has expressed the idea in engaging human terms: 'You can't touch without being touched'." p.p.234-5 Here you have the basic principle of "back-action" of the post-quantum theory, which is really Einstein's principle of relativity somewhat disguised, i.e. " anything that affects something else must, in turn, be affected by that something else". All that remains to be done is to recognize that in Bohm's ontology there is an explicate order and a whole sequence of implicate orders. Newton and Einstein were only working in the explicate order, but their principle is universal and applies also to the implicate orders of quantum information and beyond. What you do not get from Henry Stapp's "pragmatism" based on Bohr's Copenhagen Interpretation is that the field of quantum information is a bona fide physical object in its own right. This is quite divorced from statistical consequences based on "ensembles". It applies to unique complex objects like living mind-brain systems that span both the implicate and the explicate orders. Returning to Wigner "The second argument to support the existence of an influence of consciousness on the physical world is based on the observation that we do not know of any phenomenon in which one subject is influenced by another without exerting an influence thereupon." So here, you have this common theme of "action/reaction" running through the history of physics from Newton, Einstein, Wigner, Wheeler, Bohm right to my back-action principle of post-quantum theory for the generation of experiential qualities. To say that post-quantum theory has no connection with the rest of physics is absurd. References (1) Remarks on the mind-body question, Eugene Wigner in "Quantum Theory and Measurement", ed. Wheeler and Zurek (Princeton). (2) David Bohm and Basil Hiley, The Undivided Universe. See also http://www.hia.com/pcr/vigier/slides/Vigier.HTM (3) Henry Stapp, Matter, Mind and Quantum Mechanics (4) Albert Einstein "On the Ether" (1924) in "The Philosophy of Vacuum" ed. Saunders and Brown, (Oxford) (5) John Archibald Wheeler (with Ken ford), "Geons, Black Holes & Quantum Foam From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 09:09:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA21458; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:02:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:02:32 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981012120404.00cde6a0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:04:04 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Questions about our universe In-Reply-To: <199810112315.QAA27391 Au.oro.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"8I0OL.0.6F5.MWY8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23252 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:15 PM 10/11/98 -0700, Ross Tessien wrote: >The usual introductory explanation is to think of a loaf of raisin bread >that is rising, and consider the distance from raisin to raisin... >The more intense the inflationary period of the big bang, the bigger this >problem is, and the smaller is the percentage of the physical universe that >we can observe. ie, the ratio of observable universe volume / physical >universe volume goes down if the rate of inflation goes up. I was waiting for someone to mention inflation, but Ross forgot to explain what it was. Understanding inflation, even though it lasted for much less than a second just after the Big Bang, is crucial to understanding the universe. In most GUT theories inflation occurs as a consequence of symmetry breaking in the early universe. As the various forces decoupled from each other, the universe expanded faster than the speed of light. (It doesn't matter what the speed of light in the early universe was, just that inflation occured faster.) As a result of inflation, there are areas of the universe that we can't see--light emitted from those areas, even a few seconds after the Big Bang cannot have reached us yet. More important, evidence now says that inflation went on long enough that the volume of the universe that we will ever be able to see from Earth is a small fraction of the whole. In other words there are areas of the universe which (due to the expansion of the universe) are more than a light year further away each year. Notice that this recessional velocity is apparent, not real. It is due to the creation of new space or if you prefer, to the stretching of existing space. This is where the raisin bread (or spots on a balloon) analogies don't fit. Distant objects appear to be moving away because space is being created in between. In particular, this means that relativity doesn't apply--there is no relative motion. The percieved motion can be of any size, and of course, we just don't see anything with an apparent recessional speed greater than light. Whew! Hope that helped, because now you get to the two ages issue. The rate of expansion, now and in the past, determines how far away, and therefore how young a universe we can see. Current results from Hubble suggest that this value is 1/2 to 2/3rds of the age of the universe, with a cutoff around 8 billion years. 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 Oct 12 09:17:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA26001; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:14:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:14:52 -0700 Message-ID: <020c01bdf5fb$559582a0$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: U.S.Patent 4394230 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:13:57 -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: <"RQLAN.0.6M6.xhY8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23253 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Steck wrote: > Electrolysis is an endothermic reaction in > < 2V range. > Theoretically,at 25C & 1.24V,65.3W will split > one mole of water. Recombining releases 79.3W. By a rather strange coincidence 1.24V (eV)is the energy in a 1.0 Micron "Infrared" Photon. Lots of those generated in water at 25 C (298 K) or pushing Photo-Synthesis on a cloudy day: 1, CO2 + H2O + hf ---> H-COOH + 1/2 O2 2, H-COOH + hf ---> CH2O + 1/2 O2 If you want to be precise, the "autoionization" of water: H2O <---> H+ + OH- is endothermic by about 20 Kcal/mole (0.826 eV/bond or 1.5 micron Infrared). Laser Tomatoes using your TV remote? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 10:06:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA16154; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:04:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:04:21 -0700 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:02:19 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: News from New Energy Symposium Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810121305_MC2-5C61-3D32 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"4SrhC3.0.Gy3.KQZ8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23255 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Yesterday Infinite Energy magazine sponsored the Cold Fusion and New Energy Symposium 1998, at the Holiday Inn in Manchester, New Hampshire. We usually hold this annual event in Cambridge, Mass., but that hotel was booked up. Happily, a large number of people were willing make the trek north from Boston, and we had we had a pleasant and productive gathering. There were 14 presentations. The symposium lasted from nine in the morning until 9:30 at night, which is too long, but it was worth sticking it out, especially because the last presentation by Paul Brown was one of the best. He described a conventional nuclear physics technique dating back to the 1930s which his company is using in experimental remediation of nuclear waste, and then he described an advanced tritium powered nuclear battery. Peter Graneau gave a fascinating talk. He showed experimental and theoretical evidence that lightning discharges act as naturally occurring MHD (magneto-hydrodynamic) generators, and this explains the sound of thunder. It is surprising how little is known about thunder, and how much the conventional theories have changed over time. Graneau's lectures are a joy to behold. Edmund Storms described recent work and said he hopes to test thin film palladium cathodes this winter. He has apparently achieved extraordinarily high loading with them. He is dissatisfied and pessimistic, because he feels he has reached the limits of what he can do by himself in the basement without sophisticated equipment, and he is now seeing "diminishing returns." He thinks the field is now "on life support." I agree. Correa divided his time and gave two lectures, both rushed and both unsatisfactory. He described the business, economics and sociology of inventing over-unity energy devices, and his latest results. I think his ideas about business are abhorrent and his experiments are inconclusive. I asked him about the "ping pong" battery tests. He did not give a straight answer, but as far as I can determine he has not continued the tests far beyond the limits of chemistry, but only roughly 1.5 times beyond the limits. It is difficult to measure the level of charge in a battery, and pulsed electricity is known to improve recharging, loading batteries above expected capacity, so I suspect his results are an electrochemical artifact, which would ironically put him in the same category as the people who have botched cold fusion experiments. If he would swap batteries back and forth ten time or better yet a hundred times, he would prove the issue beyond all arguments, but so far as I can tell he has never done and he has no intention of trying. (Newman could also do this test, and he also flatly refuses.) It would be better still to eliminate the second battery pack, loop the energy from battery directly back in to the PAGD, and run it for a month with a live videos on Internet and the Evening News. Correa says it would be terribly difficult to feed from an active battery directly into the PAGD device, and it will cost hundreds of thousands. He has blown two invertors trying to do this. Electrical engineers tell me this is a trivial task, and Correa apparently lacks engineering skill. I cannot judge his engineering or scientific knowledge, but his notions about business and capitalism are an invitation to disaster and his attitude towards customers and the public is disgraceful. Daniel Caviccio gave a concise lecture about "Investing in Cold Fusion" which I hope to transcribe for the magazine. Thomas Philips described the Marinov motor and a tuning fork experiment in a lecture that was too technical for me, and then Jeff Kooistra treated us to a live demonstration of his latest Marinov motors. The demonstration was interesting and fun, but went on too long, which was not fair to the remaining speakers. Mike Carrell described the Arata-Zhang experiments. Peter Gluck discussed the science, business and politics of cold fusion, Hal Fox described charged clusters. I read a short paper on Comparisons from the History of Technology. I will publish a longer version in the magazine. On the experimental front, there was bad news and good news. David Marett read a superb paper about an Ohmori - Mizuno replication. He used the same open cell and calorimetry as Ohmori, with similar heat losses and other conditions. He reproduced the Ohmori curves quite closely, with the same separation between joule heating control runs and plasma discharge anode effect runs. Then he improved the insulation around the cell and he extended the run, and he showed that the apparent excess heat is an artifact. It is transient effect, probably caused by bubbles changing heat retention in the initial phase of run. I would say that unless Ohmori can show the apparent excess lingers for an hour or more, Marett has conclusively proven it is an artifact. We hope to publish this paper soon. Perhaps we can squeeze it into the next issue, if Marett can get back to his Mac and e-mail us the figures in time. I think this is how a replication should be done. You should start by reproducing the effect by copying the equipment configuration. Scott Little ran a convincing experiment showing no excess heat from the anode effect, but he did not explain Ohmori's results because he did not replicate the configuration and methods. Little made a valuable contribution, but he did not help clear up questions like: "Did Ohmori make a mistake?" and "what exactly happened in Ohmori's lab?" Once it is established that an effect is real beyond question, that is the time to run variations on the original experiment with different calorimeters, protocols and materials. In the initial phase, I favor sticking closely to the original protocol to reproduce the original curves, so you know you are looking at the same basic phenomenon. Or, if you try a different type of calorimeter in the first phase (what Little did) and you get a puzzling result, you should go back to the original configuration. What it boils down to is that I think scientists do not follow directions well. The good news came from Les Case, who works with gas loaded cells with industrial catalysts made of palladium on activated charcoal. He has been hard at work on two projects: a replication of his experiment at SRI, and a scale up to a larger, self-sustaining cell. The work at SRI is going well. Russ George is participating in this project. The first run was 28 days. Excess power was roughly 15 watts. There was a linear build-up of helium to 11 ppm, which is far above atmospheric concentration. They measure helium continuously, on-line. They had a problem with the detector which interrupted data collection, which was probably caused by contaminated "traps." (A trap is the section of the mass spectrometer system which removes deuterium from the gas, leaving only helium.) The manufacturer has cleaned up the instrument and they are preparing for another run. They want to repeat the experiment and publish a definitive paper in 3 to 6 months. In the next phase they will look for helium-3. This experiment is particularly well suited for helium detection because it is performed in a sealed gas cell that produces heat and helium for weeks, so helium concentration builds up. Electrolysis requires a recombiner which introduces contamination, or a stream of effluent gas, which dilutes the helium and makes it difficult to exclude contamination. In his own lab back in New Hampshire, Case has redesigned the cells and he is closing in on the goal that Mallove and I urged him to pursue: a self-sustaining cell with no auxiliary heater. This has been more difficult than he thought it would be, but he has made very solid progress towards it. It involves trade-offs between the thermal mass of the catalyst and the increasing surface area of the cell. After weeks of frustration Case decided to put off the attempt for a while, and he worked on the energy density of the catalyst instead. This is now much improved. His latest run has been going for six weeks, producing 10 to 20 watts of excess. At this moment, 11:00 a.m., October 12, 1998, heater power is 58 V, 1.79 A, 104 watts. The temperature is 214.5 deg C. It has been declining lately, from a peak of 219 or so. The base temperature is 181.5, which was established with hydrogen and with deuterium during the first hours of the run before the temperature began to climb. That means excess heat is 10 or 12 watts at present. The thermocouple is not well seated. It rises by two degrees when he wiggles it around, and then it falls back, which is not a good sign. I am sorry to hear that he is still using such crude instruments, but if he succeeds in the next self sustaining run, all will be forgiven. Case is now preparing for the next run which he hopes will self sustain. He has finished building and testing a new cell made with the largest Dewar vessel I have ever seen. It is a cylinder 27" long, 8" in diameter, from a cryogenics laboratory. He will begin a run with it as soon as he can repair one last small leak in the lid. The auxiliary heater is in a bar inserted into the center of the cylinder, rather than a jacket heater. At typical temperatures for this experiment, the power loss from this vessel is 175 watts. This vessel will hold enough catalyst to produce far more than the heat loss if all goes well. If the auxiliary power is reduced to zero, and cell begins to self-sustain, and the temperature continues to rise, Case will inject another tube with water, which will boil off and carry away excess power safely. Case is concerned about another safety issue. The large Dewar has thin walls and it will be filled with hydrogen and catalyst, so an air leak could cause a violent chemical explosion. Case stresses the importance of the shape of the container, but unfortunately he did not have time to describe this in detail. He advises Scott Little to stick closely to the geometry of containers that Case himself has used, because Case has been frustrated by many other container shapes that did not work. Some containers will destroy the catalyst with a heat build up. Don Slack, of Aqua Environment Inc., sent us a preliminary heat-transfer analysis of the Case cell, "Determining Temperature Rise Caused by Heat Sources with Natural Convection Heat Transfer." He has been in frequent communication with Case. This is an analysis of the performance of air, deuterium, helium and hydrogen based on specific heat, density, viscosity and thermal conductivity, based on the standard theory described in Kreith et al., "Principles of Heat Transfer," (West Publishing Co), ISBN 0-314-01360-1, fifth edition. He concludes, "Here we see that given the same vessel geometry, the same heat source, and the same gas pressure within the vessel, the temperature different between the internal gas and vessel walls will vary with gas used. For example deuterium will result in a temperature rise 7 or 8% greater than hydrogen . . ." This sounds suspiciously close to the results Case gave me over the telephone, but apparently that is a worst case analysis because Slack does not think that Case's recent results can be caused by a heat transfer artifact. Slack is a former tokamak scientist. Case points out that his baseline is established with empirical methods. With an inactive catalyst, hydrogen and deuterium produce the same temperature to within a few degrees. Case and Slack agree that a different catalyst cannot affect heat transfer. I think I should stop writing this and go help Ed Wall clean up the laboratory. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 10:07:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA16005; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:04:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:04:00 -0700 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:01:49 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810121305_MC2-5C61-3D2E compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"2XIlU1.0.pv3._PZ8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23254 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Dieter Britz writes: SO why, if I have all these peer-reviewed papers at my fingertips, do I still reckon that 1% is about the best you can get? Just checking one of the few papers he has published outside conf procs (JEC 368 (1994) 55), he gives, in the section on errors and uncertainties, several errors, and two of them are 0.2% each, adding up to at least 0.4%. Who are we talking about? McKubre? He peer-reviewed papers say the same thing as the proceedings I quoted, verbatim: errors are the greater of 10 mW or 0.1%. The statement "two of them are 0.2% each, adding up to at least 0.4%" is a common mistake in arithmetic. You cannot (usually) add up percentages. If you buy a computer, a CRT and a printer, and each is on sale at 10% off the list price, you do not save 30% overall. If McKubre reported a 0.1% error measuring input and another 0.1% measuring output, that would add up to a larger error, but that is not what he reported. What with the others, not expressed as % errors, he could well get to that 1% mark. Perhaps he could, but he doesn't. He says he got to the 0.1% mark. The paper describes each instrument and each step exhaustively. You should not make vague, unsupported statements about imaginary might-have-beens. You should address what the paper actually says. If you think overall errors are greater than 0.1% you should cite specific technical reasons to back up that statement. I wrote that heat events are correlated with high loading conditions and that the loading conditions only occurred with some types of metal. Britz responds: Well, then, the world should be beating a path to his door; this means he has achieved reproducibility, doesn't it? Or he should be beating a path to the patent office. Why have we not heard more about this? Yes, the world should be beating a path to his door. No, reproducibility has nothing to do with a non-random distribution of events. A highly reproducible result can be random (uncorrelated with any known control parameter), and a highly unreproducible result might be perfectly correlated with one well defined control parameter. If I set out mouse traps randomly at various places around my house, but I catch many more mice in the October than other months, that does not mean I have devised a sure-fire method of catching mice and the world should beat a path to my door. It means that mice come indoors in the fall -- mouse invasions are non-random events correlated with cold weather. My distribution of results (dead mice) is not random and not my imagination, but reproducibility remains poor because most of the mice in my house live happily under the cupboards all seasons of the year. Cold fusion heat events are non-random, and correlated with well-defined cathode material conditions. The conditions are extremely difficult to achieve, and most attempts to achieve them fail, so reproducibility is low. We always know why a given cathode has failed, but we do not know how to make better cathodes. If "we have not heard more about this" that is because we are remiss in our homework. We should read the scientific literature more carefully, more often. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 10:45:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA30507; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:39:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:39:36 -0700 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:38:54 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: New Energy Symposium - correction Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810121340_MC2-5C6F-9657 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"nQMAx3.0.XS7.NxZ8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23256 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The name should be spelled David Marrett. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 12:33:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA03958; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:31:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:31:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981012063223.007938d0 mail.ap.net> References: <19981009145653.24599.rocketmail send104.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:15:40 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Disc video Resent-Message-ID: <"o5sIO2.0.mz.Fab8s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23257 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mark - > Ron, > > If you have our tape of the Disc you might > forward it to Rex, since he is thinking about > a model airplane version of his drive. > > Glad you enjoyed it! > > Mark :) Rex drive? The Disc? Interesting. Inquiring minds want to know... - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 13:59:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24794; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:56:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:56:45 -0700 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:58:12 -0700 Message-Id: <199810121958.MAA22917 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: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"kbXp-3.0.E36.yxb8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23258 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 04:15 PM 10/11/98 -0700, Ross Tessien wrote: >>The usual introductory explanation is to think of a loaf of raisin bread >>that is rising, and consider the distance from raisin to raisin... > >>The more intense the inflationary period of the big bang, the bigger this >>problem is, and the smaller is the percentage of the physical universe that >>we can observe. ie, the ratio of observable universe volume / physical >>universe volume goes down if the rate of inflation goes up. > > I was waiting for someone to mention inflation, but Ross forgot to >explain what it was. Understanding inflation, even though it lasted for >much less than a second just after the Big Bang, is crucial to >understanding the universe. > > In most GUT theories inflation occurs as a consequence of symmetry >breaking in the early universe. As the various forces decoupled from each >other, the universe expanded faster than the speed of light. Yes, good explanation. I find there is another, easy way of thinking about inflation, and of the Hubble expansion of the universe as two versions of the same process. If you begin thinking in terms of a pot of hot water for familiarity, or liquid helium to be a bit more accurate (but still approximate), and you place the pot out into empty space, it will boil. Imagine a large ball of liquid with nothing around it anywhere nearby, the whole thing begins boiling rampantly, and begins to accelerate outward radially. This is the early "Inflationary period" if you think in terms of liquid aether boiling to produce vapor aether, the medium of our universe. But during the boiling process, you set up acoustic waves throughout the volume of the boiling liquid. And those waves are communicated across the liquid faster than they can be communicated across the vapor (same goes for air vs water for example, where the sound speed is much faster in liquid than in gases). So you set up acoustic nodes throughout the volume of the boiling medium. Late in the boiling process, the only remaining droplets of liquid are trapped in the acoustic nodes set up by the boiling process. The acoustic nodes are regions in the expanse where the sound waves are greatly curved into a convergent standing wave resonance. We call those remaining droplets, "particles", and we call the structure of waves around them "fields". In order for the boiling process to continue following all of the droplets being trapped in a global structure of standing waves (we call that "spacetime"), they must change geometry. Ergo, by combining resonances into a new geometry (ie fusion), you can change the amount of aether density build up that is possible, and thus the excess is emitted. This is the same thing as during the inflationary boiling process, but today it is limited by the rate at which stars can fuse matter. This model leads you directly to considering that the expansion of the universe today, can be traced right back into the interiors of stars, which are spewing out aether. And so when you study stars, you learn that indeed, there is a plethora of evidence that aether is pouring out of them. But it is difficult to separate the effects of flow of aether from wave filtering of particles, and so it is difficult to separate out the two independent phenomena that induce inertial accelerations. The first is due to wave filtering, and is what we think of as gravity. The second is due to flow of aether and is what we think of as a thrust of empty space, or the quantum vacuum, and we call it the "cosmological constant" term of general relativity. What we have to date failed to notice, is that symmetrically disposed in between the regions that are supposed to be subject to the cosmological constant force, are stars. And when you study the "dumb" idea that the cosmological constant is due to aether emission of stars in proportion to their "mass to space" conversion inside, you learn that all manner of astro physical mysteries make sense. These include as I have said, the dark matter problem, solar neutrino problem, red shifting of C IV and blue shifting of Ne VIII across the solar transition region, acceleration of the solar wind out of the solar system, inertial heating of ions in corona, inertial accelerations of ions in coronal mass ejections, etc etc. These are all inertial acceleration and heating mechanisms that are well established now. And despite the obvious facts of the matter, present theories do not anticipate the possibility of an inertial acceleration mechanism, and so theorists are trying in vain to force the observations to fit models that use magnetic field resonances to explain them. When you look at the facts with a child's mind, it is so obvious that the accelerations are inertial that it is funny. And so, you see, "Inflation" never ceased. The boiling of the last remaining droplets of aether continues today, and we call the process exothermy. And the vapor is flowing out of our sun and curving the topology of the spacetime wave structure as it does. Stars, and planets are just the fog banks in a universe ocean of aether. And in stars, there is a process to vaporize the remaining droplets and emit that aether vapor out into the expanse of the universe so that the Hubble expansion can continue. So the inflationary process halted when spacetime formed as a coherent, global (ie all across the universe), structure of wave energy being communicated between all of the remaining droplets of aether trapped in the acoustic nodes. We even see the reverse of the boiling process taking place inside of our universe when stars collapse and form black holes. Inside of those are cores of aether condensate, and they want to boil too. Thus, whenever you get too much angular momentum flowing into those cores, they breach and spew out the aether in a directed process very similar to the big bang. We observe million light year long jets of radio energy, the ripples in the ocean of aether. And this also means that our universe, must be a localized resonance in a much larger expanse, the "Omniverse". Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 15:11:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA16405; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:03:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:03:08 -0700 Message-ID: <36227001.5B7F earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 16:09:21 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Blue: Storms: CF data analysis 10.12.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Hj4td3.0.F04.Sod8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23259 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: more on CF data 10.9.98 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:43:35 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > Subject: Re: Blue: Storms: CF data issues, flaws in Chubb theory 10.9.98 > Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 18:22:04 -0600 > From: Edmund Storms > To: rmforall earthlink.net > > Reply to Dick Blue by Ed. Storms And Dick Blue's response to some of this. > > Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: data selection? 10.8.98 > > Date: Fri Oct. 9, 1998 > Within the field, what are > good data and what are bad data is known, and this knowledge guides the > thinking. Why must we make a “public” display of this selection > process? If you were willing to view the work with an enquiring mind, > you would be invited to join this selection process and you would see > that we are not duped by > incompetence. Perhaps Ed Storms is just too much of a gentlemen to be fully engaged in the sorting of fact from fiction. This process should not be seen merely as a personal attack on an individual who asserts some new experimental claim. It is a neccessary effort to screen results. You have been unwilling to do any screening, so you are left with an assortment that includes a great deal of bogus information. It's no wonder progress is so slow as far too much experimental effort is being wasted in pursuit of dead ends. > > I am not sure I agree with you that all the questions have been > > answered, but I do freely admit that I am not likely to be able to > > really address the more subtle aspects of these experiments. I > > certainly would never be so bold as to suggest that I could do the > > calorimetry better than everyone else, although I do believe I could > > improve upon most of the nuclear detection results that Ed Storms is > > relying on. > > Yes, we all would like better nuclear detection results. We take what > we can get. The problem has always been that great effort is taken to > set up a good detection experiment, but the palladium is dead because it > was a bad piece or because people trained in detection have no idea how > to do electrochemistry. Until robust samples are available, we will > have to make do with what is available. So this has given a needed excuse to dismiss a lot of negative evidence from the nuclear measurements. Each time a radiation detector is brought near the palladium, it plays dead. I see a real problem here. Everything you describe about the CANR process seems to indicate that it should be possible to get a little bit of a reaction going without ever reaching the level of sensitivity for the calorimetry. I would expect that some samples that appear "dead" as far as an excess heat signal is concerned may well still be reactive at a very low level, perhaps for just a short period of time. That should still provide an opportunity for the much more sensitive radiation detector to catch a signal. However, that does not seem to happen. > > However, the reason I have been raising questions about the statistical > > aspects of these measurements is that I have not, in nine years, seen a > > truly adequate discussion of this subject as it relates to claimed > > positive excess heat. If Ed Storms has addressed this part of the > > problem in detail elsewhere, I just hope he will indulge me long enough > > to go over some of this again. > > Everyone’s data set is different and many experiments are not reported. > Consequently, I admit it is difficult to do a statistical analysis. I > can only speak for my data. I suggest you look at my results in Fusion > Technol to see what I call statistically significant results. When I get > time this winter, I will provide more current and complete examples. > > > Here I will suggest that Ed Storms is making an error by citing some > > obscure and rather doubtful experimental claims concerning such details > > as the supposed energy spectrum of emitted neutrons. I'd be glad to > > discuss some of the problems with the measurements, but they involve > > such low rates that they really don't have much significance in the > > big picture. > > Yes, the rates are low, and yes, they don’t have much significance, > except for the almost obsessive focus on neutron emission in some > quarters. However, the results cited were done by experts in the neutron > detection field and are worth considering in any explanation. I grant, > the results are not sufficiently certain to make them the total basis > for a theory. Once again, we are into shades of gray, not right and > wrong. I don't like to "accept" a result just because it comes from measurements by a so-called expert. I would rather evaluate actual experimental data and discuss the conditions of the measurements to arrive at an understanding as to what can or cannot be relied upon. In the case of the reported neutron energy spectra, I would point out that the measurements are difficult, because the detectors employed do not, in fact, yield information regarding the neutron energy very directly. The pulse-height spectra have to be unfolded to get the claimed result. What is, I believe, being overlooked is the fact that at the very low detection rates an appreciable fraction of the detector response is actually gamma rays rather than neutrons. Of course there was some electronic discrimination against the gamma signals, but the technique has some definite limitations which I am very familiar with. It is not 100% efficient. It's only 99% efficient. So if the gamma flux is being detected at 100 times the neutron rate, the final data is still a 50-50 mix of neutrons and gammas. Do you see the problem for low rate measurements? > > Again Ed Storms is placing too much faith is some questionable > > experimental claims. The photographic film techniques don't really > > demonstrate that there is low-energy radiation. The safest way to > > summarize the experimental results is that there really is not > > sufficient intensity observed to be considered significant. I don't > > think it's a matter of "luck." It's a question of proper experimental > > design. > > Here we see the effect of our difference in basic belief. Dick rejects > the use of photographic techniques to detect radiation, even though this > is a standard, accepted method in other fields, because he rejects there > being any source of radiation in the first place. On the other hand, I > accept the photographic results here, as well as in other fields, > because I am willing to believe a source exists in each case. Granted, > ways exist to get false positive results. However, these observations > have been done by several people who have used more than normal care. > While I would not base any explanation on these results alone, they do > suggest low level radiation is present, which warrants a more careful > study. Once again, we do not have “proof”, only a clue to guide further > work. > Yes, there is indeed low level radiation present! If you take a commercial sample of palladium of the purist sort and place a detector next to it you will learn that it is RADIOACTIVE!!! Photographic film is useful for certain types of studies. I am not making a blanket condemnation of every measurement that ever used film as a radiation detector. What I wish to suggest is, however, that with respect to definitive determinations of CANR the limitations of this technique are sufficient to rule out such measurements as establishing any essential feature of CANR. The data obtained with film packs do not determine the intensity, the energy spectrum, the radiation type, or the timing relative to chemical events. I would not trust it with respect to the spatial distribution of radiation sources either, unless the intensities are higher than seems to be the case. There are ways for generating bogus signals. It would be much better if the film results were confirmed by other means. > In addition, if you accept for discussion the idea that a coherent electron > structure is required, then this structure, it seems to me, should be > superconducting. Cooper pairs are a low level coherent structure. The > level of coherence required for a nuclear reaction could be viewed as a > collection of Cooper pairs, i.e, a Cooper six-pack perhaps. Anyway, > this is again not a justification but only a way of guiding future > studies. > I know of nothing to suggest that a coherent electron stucture would do anything to enhance CANR as claimed. There is a serious disconnect between the electronic wave functions and the nuclear wave functions -- something I am waiting to hear addressed by anyone. Part of the disconnect, as I see it, has to do with the fact that not all atomic electrons are conduction electrons and not all participate in a transition to a superconducting state, even should there be one. To do anything to the nucleus, a electron has to be at the nucleus at the specific reactive site in the palladium sample. A coherent electron on the moon is not going to account for the CANR. Now should the effects you suggest ever be real, I would suggest that calorimetry is still not the best way to detect something of this sort. Show me an Electron Capture decay that is sensitive to something like this, and you could turn me into a believer real fast. Ironically, George Miley relies on EC decay to "prove" that there is a form of CANR. He must, however, assume that this decay is unperturbed. I also would sit up and pay attention if anyone were producing anomolous X-ray spectra via electrolysis of Pd. > > Isn't it interesting that the conditions required for the effect are > > those which increase the noise? I would say that is justification for > > being a bit more cautious about these data than one might normally be. > > I also note that there is supposed to be a phase transition associated > > with this effect. That is yet another reason to be more cautious about a > > thermal measurement on this system. > > Yes, on the surface, one might propose a correlation between increased > noise and increased apparent heat. However, the amount of noise does > not show a sharp onset at at the onset of excess power. Indeed, the > amount of noise depends on the experimental design. In my case, I use > samples having a surface area of 4 cm2. To achieve the excess-power > onset, I have to go to much higher total current than does McKubre, for > example, who has a 0.5 cm2 surface area. The onset appears at a common > current density not a common current. It is the total current which > introduces the noise. > > A phase change introduces energy to a system only while it is occurring, > not for hours afterwards. In addition, the phase change clearly involves > only a small fraction of the sample. This being the case, if the > apparent excess were caused by this effect, the heat of transition would > have to be the highest known by many orders of magnitude. This fact, if > believed, should cause all kinds of interest, which isn’t evident. Of > course, this explanation, if true, would not apply to other systems > where excess heat has been detected. > We clearly are approaching this from two different points of view. You are assuming that the "excess heat" is a real, physical phenomenon, while I am still waiting to see more conclusive and complete evidence. I suspect that the "excess heat" is largely an artifact of the technique, so I am curious about details of the observations that you may not see as significant clues. Now you make reference to the "onset" of the production of excess heat, as it were that easily recognized. I am not sure there is, in fact, a definitive way to recognize such an onset, at least not in much of the data I have examined. As I said before regarding the Miles-Bush data, the runs that yield a null result look very much like the runs that show an excess. There is no place you can point your finger to say that's where it begins to show the excess. There is no clear "onset" that provides a signal large relative to the "noise". It's things like replenishing the D2O that produce a signal that catches the eye. > Most samples never acquire the necessary high deuterium concentration to > produce heat. Such samples show a bandwidth of values against which a > positive signal is judged. If the bandwidth is plus or minus 0.5 W, then > a positive result would have to exceed this value to be interesting. > Although I have had too few successful samples to give a quantitative > answer your to question, my impression is that as the excess power rises > further out of the noise, fewer samples are obtained as the excess power > increases. This is taken to mean that it is easier to produce a few > active spots than to produce many spots. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that there is no real CANR effect. How would the data from your experiments differ from what you have been describing? Because of the "noise" which you acknowledge is present you would get variable results. If you plotted the integral "excess heat" for each of many runs as a histogram you would get a distribution. What does that distribution look like? It may well have a tail out on the positive side, but so what? > Yes, I would expect this also and there is some indication this is > true. However, people tend to reject samples having only a small amount > of heat above the noise. You might think this cutoff value is poorly > chosen in some cases. Nevertheless, I can promise, people see marginal > values which are not reported. Therefore, the selection is actually > opposite to what you have proposed. > So you acknowledge that people have been rejecting marginal results and not reporting them, prefering to publish only data showing a large "effect." That is precisely what I have been driving at. Unless we can actually see ALL the data we are not likely to be able to tell just what is going on in these experiments. My current hypothesis is that positive results are being generated by an improper selection of data. To prove me wrong we need to see the distribution from which the published sample is drawn. You take comfort, it seems, in having data from which the marginal results have been removed, as if that were a good thing. I am suggesting that it is actually a significant distortion of the information being published about CANR. We need to be able to evaluate just how results are being sorted into the "yes" and "no" bins. In particular the kinds of information that you are relying on to arrive at a description of the CANR process may not be as well determined as you suggest. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 15:25:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA22327; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:14:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:14:24 -0700 Message-ID: <36227289.3798 earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 16:20:09 -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: Re: News from New Energy Symposium References: <199810121305_MC2-5C61-3D32 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Vi0Re3.0.jS5._yd8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23260 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oct. 12, 1998 Hello Jed, May I repost your NES summary? Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 15:29:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA24341; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:19:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:19:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: bilb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:21:09 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"1K40u2.0.Cy5.12e8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23261 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 13:45:00 -0800 From: James DeMeo Reply-To: obrl-news lists.village.virginia.edu To: *OBRL_News Subject: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision Orgone Biophysical Research Lab http://id.mind.net/community/orgonelab/index.htm Forwarded News Item Please copy and distribute to other interested individuals and groups ********** From: DHughesman aol.com Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 14:53:50 EDT Subject: Benveniste wins court decision In a decision by a Paris civil trial court dated September 16, 1998, Excelsior , publisher of Science et Vie, a French monthly science magazine, was convicted of libeling Dr. Jacques Benveniste. A money award was made. The August, 1997, issue of Science et Vie contained the following statement: "He [the American magician, James Randi] has several major hunting trophies on his wall: unmasking Uri Geller's methods of cheating, and the memory-of-water fraud (see Science et Vie, April, 1997)." The court decision specifies that the defendant (Science et Vie) produced no evidence that could establish its good faith. Comments from Jacques Benveniste Furthermore, The Times of London, which echoed the same statement, attributed to James Randi, in its September 9, 1998, issue, published a correction with an apology on September 25, 1998. It should be mentioned that James Randi himself, in a letter posted in March 1998 to his Internet discussion group, denied having made any allegation of fraud in the memory-of-water case: "If they (two French Nobel Prize winners) did indeed think that he was a fraud, I disagree." These events cast a harsh light on the inconsistent behavior of French Nobel Prize winners, Charpak and Jacob, who declared, in a January, 1997, article in the French daily, Le Monde, that a fraud indeed existed. In fact, if the two Nobel winners had had the slightest bit of evidence pointing to fraud, Science et Vie certainly would have produced it in court! To conclude, as far as science is concerned, the fact that the results of this research cannot be attributed to either a fraud or an artifact (for which no one in the past ten years has proposed a credible hypothesis) strongly suggests collective behavior aimed at keeping the lid of strict orthodoxy on biological research. On this subject, see the article in the June, 1998, issue of La Recherche and my answer in the September, 1998, issue. Also visit http://www.digibio.com. ++++++++++ Another related item: (One wonders if these Harvard professors quoted below have studied the history of science, to know that everything from meteorites to steam engines to the airplane were declared "fraud" for many years by the unstudied university "scientists". Obviously, these Harvard professors don't have too much hard work on their hands, except, perhaps, to shop around for the most fashionable powdered wigs and robes to wear at their "outings". - J.D.) French scientist shrugs off winning his second Ig Nobel prize [Nature, 8 October 1998, Vol. 395, p. 535.] [Boston] French researcher Jacques Benveniste is set to become the first person in history to win two `Ig Nobel' Prizes when this year's prizes are announced at an award ceremony due to take place at Harvard University tonight (8 October). Benveniste won his first 'Ig'--awarded annually by Marc Abrahams, editor of the Annals of Improbable Research, and a group of scientists--for work claiming to show that antibody solutions retain their biological effectiveness, even when diluted to the point where no trace of the antibody is detectable (Nature 333, 816; 1988). The water, Benveniste argues, preserves a "memory" of the substance after it is gone. The second Ig Nobel Prize will be awarded for an extension of this work. Benveniste now claims that a solution's biological activity can be digitally recorded, stored on a computer hard drive, sent over the Internet as an attached document, and transferred to a different water sample at the receiving end (see http://www.digibio.com). "We've demonstrated that you can transmit the biological effect by e-mail between Chicago and Paris," says Benveniste, who heads the Digital Biology Laboratory in Clamart, France, which is financed by the private company, DigiBio S.A. "With this approach, you could transfer the activity of a drug by means of standard telecommunications technology." "French science has not risen to such giddy heights since N-rays were invented by Blondlot early in this century," says magician and sceptic James Randi, author of the forthcoming book A Magician in the Laboratory, based partly on his involvement in an (sic) investigation of Benveniste's laboratory practices carried out in 1988. Benveniste argues that the science establishment is inherently resistant to new ideas. "Orthodox people are determined to block anything new in biology," he says. He compares the conventional view that "you need a molecule to have a biological effect" with the debate between Descartes and Newton four centuries ago over whether action at a distance was possible. "I say the effect comes not from the molecule itself but from the signal it imparts." Benveniste says that he is "happy to receive a second Ig Nobel Prize, because it shows that those making the awards don't understand anything. People don't give out Nobel Prizes without first trying to find out what the recipients are doing. But the people who give out Ig Nobels don't even bother to inquire about the work." Harvard chemist Dudley Herschbach, who won the 1986 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, finds Benveniste's claims "very hard to reconcile with what we know about molecules." Herschbach considers the [second 'Ig'] prize "very well deserved. And he just might win a third one if he keeps going in this way." (JD Note: Randi, a magician with no scientific training or expertise, engaged in a calculated smear of Benveniste with the support and assistance of Nature magazine editors. There was no "investigation" as such.) ********** OBRL News is a product of the non-profit Orgone Biophysical Research Lab Greensprings Research and Educational Center PO Box 1148, Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA http://id.mind.net/community/orgonelab/index.htm demeo mind.net Building upon the discoveries of the late, great natural scientist, Dr. Wilhelm Reich To subscribe to OBRL-News, send the message: subscribe obrl-news to the following address: Majordomo lists.village.virginia.edu To unsubscribe, or change to a new email address, firstly: unsubscribe obrl-news to the same address above. Then re-subscribe with your new address. subscribe obrl-news From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 15:30:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA25502; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:23:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:23:28 -0700 Message-ID: <362274BA.1E78 earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 16:29:30 -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: Chubb: ion band state theory 10.12.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vHx3Y1.0.BE6.T5e8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23262 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Chubb: Blue: ion band state theory 10.10.98 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:18:30 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > Thanks, SCOTT CHUBB > > Dick Blue, > > I have been quietly monitoring your discussion with Ed Storms. > I noticed the following comments: > > >As a matter of fact I have had very detailed discussions with Scott > >Chubb concerning his proposed model for "deuteron waves" in the > >lattice. We can debate whether there is any reality associated with > >that model, but the key point, I think, is that his model does nothing > >to account for a nuclear reaction process and the supposed dramatic > >changes of reaction outcome. In fact I discovered that Scott Chubb did > >not even know how to constuct a nuclear wave function, so clearly he had > >not thought about that aspect of the problem. > > This is untrue. It is insulting to suggest that I "did not know how to > construct a nuclear wave function." In point of fact, the disagreement > was/and-continues-to-be associated with the separability of the nuclear > degrees of freedom from the electrostatic degrees of freedom. In free > space, this separability involves writing the wave function as a simple > product of nuclear and "electrostatic" factors. In most situations > inside a lattice this is also the case. This is also true in most cases > involving interaction. The point of confusion (and demarcation in > thinking) is associated with the conditions involving maintaining this > form of separability during a coherent process in which the lattice is > allowed to exchange energy with the nuclear degrees of freedom. > Initially, the manner in which the lattice could do this was not > explained in detail, and Dick Blue did make some comments that inspired > me to think about this more fully. You could have proven me wrong by actually constructing the nuclear wave functions you employ in your calculations in at least a sketchy manner. What you wrote down was simply incorrect in that you have a position coordinate for the nuclear center of mass and then position coordinates for both the neutron and the proton. That's one too many position coordinates. The system does not have that many degrees of freedom. However, what I find truly objectionable is this concept that there is a nuclear potential and an electrostatic potential that can somehow go their separate ways without remaining functionally related to the same set of coordinates. You apply the 1/N factor (N beng the number of lattice points) to the electrostatic potential and ignore that for the nuclear part, thus achieving the magical reduction in repulsion without acknowledging that you have simply scaled the ENTIRE potential. > >Initially, he was > >assuming that some sort of lattice symmetry would restrict the energy > >release to the radiationless decay, but that is a totally bogus concept, > >once you acknowledge that deuterons are composite particles. > > Initially, some of the details of the theory were not precisely stated. > The motivation, however, has remained intact. Initially, there was a > tacit assumption that was not stated. Temperature=0 conditions are > assumed and maintained within the bulk material, where lattice symmetry > is assumed to prevail. In other words, not only is lattice symmetry > required, but to maintain lattice symmetry, it is assumed that no > excitation of the lattice or any of the entities within the lattice is > allowed. When this assumption is made, only a very restrictive set of > potential avenues for interaction exist: coherent ("Umklapp") processes > in which momentum is transferred > elastically directly to the lattice (for example through lattice recoil > [as in the Mossbauer effect] or a redefinition of the boundaries of the > lattice) and energy is transferred through a constant shift of the zero > of energy of the ordered lattice, relative to its surroundings. It is > well-known that these kinds of processes: 1. exist, and 2. provide a > means for maintaining lattice symmetry. To maintain lattice symmetry at > T=0, these are required. When they do apply, they lead to an important > selection rule: coherent nuclear processes occur in which initial and > final states always possess ground state nuclei, with energy released > through processes which are initiated at the boundaries of the solid. > This is discussed in more detail in our ICCF6 Proceedings paper. It is > the formal justification of the "bosons in and bosons out" selection > rule that bothered you so much and of our prediction that although bulk > properties affect the behavior CANR's, in the cases under consideration, > the energy release appears to be initiated in the surface regions of a > lattice. Scott is glossing over a very significant problem here when he refers to "lattice symmetry." All he is actually considering is the center-of-mass coordinate of the deuterons for which he constructs a lattice. Remember that the internal coordinates of the nucleus has been "separated" and are not in the problem in any way, shape, or form. What happens next is equivalent to assuming that "lattice symmetry" also applies to those degrees of freedom internal to the deuterons. It is a slight of hand -- not reality. The reality is that the deuterons as supplied form a totally disordered ensemble with respect to those internal degrees of freedom, even if they are placed into an ordered lattice with respect to the center-of-mass. > >A second error in his thinking involved assumed energy degeneracy, or > near > >degeneracy, between an ensemble of deuterons and an ensemble of 4He > >nuclei. Wrong! That is, after all, where the 23 MeV energy release > >comes from, so we can be sure there is no degeneracy. > > This reflects a difference in the starting points for thinking about the > problem. The 23 MeV energy release occurs through a rigid shift in the > zero of energy of the periodically ordered lattice, relative to its > surroundings, while maintaining the periodic order of the many-body > state. In the many-body state, the 4He are degenerate. On the scale of > a 10^9 unit cell lattice, a 23 MeV energy shift translates to a per unit > cell energy change of .023 meV, which is comparable to the lowest phonon > excitation energy. For this reason, in lattices that are roughly this > size, it is to be expected that the dominant energy releasing processes > will involve phonons (generated initially at the boundaries of the > lattice) and not radiation. Again it is important to note what is being assumed as opposed what is being demonstated by a calculation. There is no calculation to show that a rigid shift in zero energy can or will occur. In the case of the Mossbauer effect to which frequent reference is made, the lattice does recoil much as Scott describes, but there is a very important difference in that case centering on the word "recoil." For the cold fusion case as Scott describes it there is no recoil because there is no emission. I think we need to hear further how we get said recoil. Recoil from what? > >Finally, Scott came to realize that his original model for the reaction > >process was, in fact, a "no reaction" model so he changed his model to one > in >which the reaction actually occurs outside the lattice. > > Very early in the theory, the avenues for reaction were discussed. And > it is untrue to say that we had a "no reaction" model. What bothered > you at the time of our last discussion were the selection rules. The > logic behind these selection rules did become sharper as a result of the > discussion. I think (hope) you would find the discussion in my ICCF6 > paper especially germane in this regard. > > >Of course he had no model for that > >part of the problem so he really could not say anything. > > Again, this is untrue. I stopped communicating with you because doing > so became too time-consuming, and I became involved with an experiment > (related to my job). > > Well, Dick, as I said, I have been listening quietly in the > background. The last time I discussed these issues with you, I simply > was overtaken by time requirements associated with continuing the > dialogue and stopped communicating with you as a consequence. It was > useful to me at the time, but I can see from your comments that a number > of points about our theory have not been assimilated into your > thinking. Because a number of ideas in our description have become more > clear with time and you do not seem to be aware of this, I think prior > discourse with me about your potential comments about our theory could > be useful potentially prior to your airing your ideas before a large > audience. > > Finally, I would like to point out that there is a common thread to > Hagelstein's, Schwinger's, Preparata's, and our theories that is not > part of your thinking about CANR and the manner in which nuclear wave > functions can be coupled to the environment. It is the notion of a > coherent process in which many entities in the environment effectively > "march" in lock step (i.e., act together) in such a way that an > unanticipated result can occur. Superconductivity is an example of such > a coherent process; so is lasing; Bose Condensation is a third example. > The macroscopically large scattering lengths associated with > conductivity in solids and semi-conductors are also the result of > coherence associated with periodic order. A final example is > provided by lattice recoil. > Dr. Scott R. Chubb > Code 7252 > Naval Research Laboratory > Washington, D.C. 20375-5351 > > PHONE: 202-767-5270, FAX: 202-767-3303 > EMAIL: chubb ccf.nrl.navy.mil, chubb@neptune.nrl.navy.mil Yes, all the theories to which you make reference have a common thread centering on concepts of order and coherence that are totally unrealistic for the systems being described. Sure there can be some marvelous effects involving long range order at T=0, but these systems don't actually have that long range order and they are not at T=0. As I have said many times before, the assumed nuclear energy release is associated with a change in the way wave functions for nucleons are correlated within this system. When paired as a proton and a neutron we have the intial state and when grouped by fours -- two of each kind -- we have the final state. You can't describe that transition or learn anything relating it by a calculation that has the internal nuclear coordinates separated out. That separation is an implicit assumption that nothing significant happens with respect to those internal coordinates. If nothing changes you are left with the deuterons you started with and there is no energy release. When you assume a seamless, direct transition from an ensemble of deuterons to an ensemble of 4He, you are assuming a degeneracy between those two states that does not, in fact, exist. That is not reality. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 17:12:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA30752; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:09:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:09:07 -0700 Message-Id: <199810130009.TAA19713 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:09:03 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"-YTo6.0._V7.Yef8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23264 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 13:45:00 -0800 >From: James DeMeo >Reply-To: obrl-news lists.village.virginia.edu >To: *OBRL_News >Subject: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision > >Orgone Biophysical Research Lab >http://id.mind.net/community/orgonelab/index.htm >Forwarded News Item > >Please copy and distribute to other interested individuals and groups > >********** > > >From: DHughesman aol.com >Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 14:53:50 EDT >Subject: Benveniste wins court decision > > >In a decision by a Paris civil trial court dated September 16, 1998, >Excelsior , publisher of Science et Vie, a French monthly science >magazine, was convicted of libeling Dr. Jacques Benveniste. A money >award was made. The August, 1997, issue of Science et Vie contained the >following statement: "He [the American magician, James Randi] has >several major hunting trophies on his wall: unmasking Uri Geller's >methods of cheating, and the memory-of-water fraud (see Science et Vie, >April, 1997)." The court decision specifies that the defendant (Science >et Vie) produced no evidence that could establish its good faith. > > >Comments from Jacques Benveniste > >Furthermore, The Times of London, which echoed the same statement, >attributed to James Randi, in its September 9, 1998, issue, published a >correction with an apology on September 25, 1998. > >It should be mentioned that James Randi himself, in a letter posted in >March 1998 to his Internet discussion group, denied having made any >allegation of fraud in the memory-of-water case: "If they (two French >Nobel Prize winners) did indeed think that he was a fraud, I disagree." > >These events cast a harsh light on the inconsistent behavior of French >Nobel Prize winners, Charpak and Jacob, who declared, in a January, >1997, article in the French daily, Le Monde, that a fraud indeed >existed. In fact, if the two Nobel winners had had the slightest bit of >evidence pointing to fraud, Science et Vie certainly would have produced >it in court! > >To conclude, as far as science is concerned, the fact that the results >of this research cannot be attributed to either a fraud or an artifact >(for which no one in the past ten years has proposed a credible >hypothesis) strongly suggests collective behavior aimed at keeping the >lid of strict orthodoxy on biological research. On this subject, see the >article in the June, 1998, issue of La Recherche and my answer in the >September, 1998, issue. Also visit http://www.digibio.com. > > >++++++++++ > >Another related item: > >(One wonders if these Harvard professors quoted below have studied the >history of science, to know that everything from meteorites to steam >engines to the airplane were declared "fraud" for many years by the >unstudied university "scientists". Obviously, these Harvard professors >don't have too much hard work on their hands, except, perhaps, to shop >around for the most fashionable powdered wigs and robes to wear at their >"outings". - J.D.) > >French scientist shrugs off winning his second Ig Nobel prize >[Nature, 8 October 1998, Vol. 395, p. 535.] > >[Boston] French researcher Jacques Benveniste is set to become the first >person in history to win two `Ig Nobel' Prizes when this year's prizes >are announced at an award ceremony due to take place at Harvard University >tonight (8 October). > >Benveniste won his first 'Ig'--awarded annually by Marc Abrahams, editor >of the Annals of Improbable Research, and a group of scientists--for work >claiming to show that antibody solutions retain their biological >effectiveness, even when diluted to the point where no trace of the >antibody is detectable (Nature 333, 816; 1988). ***{The fact that no trace is detectible does not mean that no trace remains. An antibody is a substance produced by the human body, and it may be that at least one molecule of an antibody is necessary to trigger the production of more such molecules. In that case, if the metabolic machinery which produces an antibody goes into a quiescent state due, say, to the unavailability of one of the raw materials which the process requires, and stays in that state until the entire supply of existing antibodies of that type has disappeared from the body, then production would remain shut down even after the availability of raw materials had been restored. Under those conditions, the injection of *a single molecule* of the antibody would be as effective in restoring the body's full supply as would be the injection of millions of such molecules. --Mitchell Jones}*** The water, Benveniste argues, >preserves a "memory" of the substance after it is gone. ***{The only viable theory here, I should think, would be that the water still contains a few molecules of the substance, despite the fact that our measuring instruments falsely *say* that it is gone. In any case, Benveniste's theory can be nonsense without his experimental results being fake. That is why the burden of proof is on those who accuse him of fraud, and it is why these sorts of accusations do not belong in public forums until supported by overwhelming evidence. --Mitchell Jones}*** [rest snipped] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 17:33:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA10479; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:31:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:31:57 -0700 Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:33:03 -0400 From: Soo Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Sender: Soo To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810122033_MC2-5C6E-EDAE 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 RAA10422 Resent-Message-ID: <"tI1WB2.0.bZ2.zzf8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23265 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I started a discussion on memory of water in the CompuServe Science Forum a while back. I recklessly suggested a good test would be a seriously diluted-down oral contraceptive solution to see if it still prevented pregnancy. Some wag instantly retorted that the basis of homeopathy was to ingest the very solution which actually created the medical condition...... "Would I swallow that?" he enquired. - Soo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 17:39:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA13330; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:36:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:36:51 -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, 12 Oct 1998 14:35:06 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"_A5qh.0.6G3.X2g8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23266 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill Beaty quotes from the Benveniste report: > The second Ig Nobel Prize will be awarded > for an extension of this work. Benveniste > now claims that a solution's biological > activity can be digitally recorded, stored on a > computer hard drive, sent over the Internet > as an attached document, and transferred to a > different water sample at the receiving end > (see http://www.digibio.com). Now here I am, a regular denizen of wierd science lists, and I'm having a very hard time swallowing that one. Of course, there is the Monsanto flap about the treated water. If you treat water with EM, and there's different tones or chords or whatever you can play, then hey... This seems like it would be easy to test in any case. Fugue a cold and Waltz a fever, or is it the other way around? I can never remember. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 19:15:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA02378; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:13:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:13:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810122033_MC2-5C6E-EDAE compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:58:07 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"XHQ8l.0.4b.XTh8s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23267 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Soo - > "Would I swallow that?" he enquired. .....message deleted> - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 19:55:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA13606; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:53:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:53:32 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981012225306.008db430 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:53:06 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199810130009.TAA19713 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"81gNd1.0.PK3.h2i8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23268 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 07:09 PM 10/12/98 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{The fact that no trace is detectible does not mean that no trace >remains. Actually, if memory still serves, I believe that the dilution was repeated over and over ... to the point of zero molecules appearing in any of the containers, except perhaps one molecule per every 100 or 1000 containers. So effectively-- no trace remained. That was the main reason why he received the prize. It just *appeared* totally unreasonable. IMO, somewhat similar reactions would ensue about "waves", if only particle theory was taught in physics. Colin Quinney From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 20:05:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA18469; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:03:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:03:16 -0700 Message-ID: <02a301bdf655$f806f320$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Same Question, Over-Unity with Wet Bricks? Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:01:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"zysCc2.0.UW4.pBi8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23269 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex A good quality common brick has a nanopore volume of as much as 25% of the brick volume and an enormous surface area. With the brick saturated with H2O or D2O plus Lithium or Potassium (salts)after dry firing,an Electrolysis current can be passed through the brick as easily as through a P&F Cell. A similar technique (Electroosmosis) is used for Dewatering clay soils in civil engineering. Then again there's always the microwave oven or Dan Quickert's Boyscout campfire with exploding rocks. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 20:17:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA24350; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:15:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:15:51 -0700 Message-ID: <02a801bdf657$bd168800$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:15:18 -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: <"-PB_V1.0.Oy5.cNi8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23270 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Quinney To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, October 12, 1998 8:56 PM Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Colin Quinney wrote: > >Actually, if memory still serves, I believe that the dilution was repeated >over and over ... to the point of zero molecules appearing in any of the >containers, except perhaps one molecule per every 100 or 1000 containers. >So effectively-- no trace remained. That was the main reason why he >received the prize. It just *appeared* totally unreasonable. So does the marine biologists report that a Shark can "smell" a human in a wetsuit in water from over two miles offshore. If the water molecules align on your wetsuit and drift out to the shark, his barbels can sense the alignment of those water molecules as lunch. Same for the Duck-Billed Platypus that can "smell" the signature of a clam buried in the bottom of a stream. These "water memory" effects can be measured using a ceramic disk capacitor waterproofed with nail polish and dipped in a glass of water using a "AAA" battery and a sensitive DVM. > >IMO, somewhat similar reactions would ensue about "waves", if only particle >theory was taught in physics. Agreed. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Colin Quinney > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 20:22:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA27041; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:20:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:20:58 -0700 Message-ID: <02bf01bdf658$74c897e0$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Fw: Subscriber Update Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:20:23 -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: <"WSwPG3.0.Rc6.QSi8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23271 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Britannica Online To: fjsparb sprintmail.com Date: Monday, October 12, 1998 9:12 PM Subject: Subscriber Update >Dear Britannica Online Monthly Subscriber, > >I'm writing to you today with some exceptionally good >news -- we've lowered our subscription rates! A >monthly subscription to Britannica Online now costs >$5.00 -- a significant decrease from $8.50. That's >a $42 savings in one year alone. > >So what do you need to do to start receiving this great >rate? Absolutely nothing. The next time your credit >card is charged, the new lower price automatically >goes into effect. > >It is important that you know how much we appreciate >your business. We look forward to serving you for >many months to come. > >Sincerely, >Lisa Girolimetti >Marketing Manager >Britannica Online > >P.S. The annual subscription price was lowered as well >- to $50. Signing up for an annual subscription gives >you 2 months free. If you're interested in upgrading, >call Customer Service at 1-800-522-8656 or >1-312-294-2112. > >****************************************************************** >This is a post-only mailing. Please do not respond to >this message. All questions should be sent to >inquiries eb.com. The prices reflected are in U.S. >dollars and are available for home use only. > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 20:39:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA05050; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:38:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:38:31 -0700 Message-ID: <3622CB39.5F107CAF gte.net> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:38:38 -0700 From: Bob Horst X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: 150 kj Ultracapacitor Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"h1ECb3.0.jE1.sii8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23272 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Just saw an interesting ad in EE Times from Maxwell technologies for a 150 kj ultracapacitor. It can deliver over 12 KW for 5 seconds. It is 95 Farads at 56 volts, and made up of 28 separate 2.3 V ultracapacitors in series. It will sell for around $5000 in small quantities. Tim Taylor would be proud to own one of these babies. They also have smaller versions. See http://www.powercache.com These might be useful in some experiments that are trying to use batteries to supply the starting power. It should be harder to fool them with strange charging currents (or was that the reason for using batteries in the first place?) Too bad the voltage is so low (and the price so high), or we could suggest them to Correa. -- Bob Horst From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 20:42:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA06745; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:41:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:41:05 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981012234040.009dda40 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:40:40 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) In-Reply-To: <02a801bdf657$bd168800$afb4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"fNoAP.0.5f1.Hli8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23273 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:15 PM 10/12/98 -0600, Frederick S. wrote: > >These "water memory" effects can be measured using a ceramic disk capacitor >waterproofed with nail polish and dipped in a glass of water using a "AAA" >battery and a sensitive DVM. That sounds very interesting. -- what [memory effect?] was being measured? Thanks, Colin. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 20:45:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09126; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:44:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:44:10 -0700 Message-ID: <000a01bdf65b$a423ac20$9d4ad3d0 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: New Energy Symposium Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:24:00 -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: <"6y1H9.0.JE2.Aoi8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23274 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This report is supplementary to Jed's notes on the symposium. The papers were generally meaty, with good technical content. Jed has commented well on Case's news, and the work of Dave Marett. In contrast to his report of no o/u performance, Gene cited a report just received from Russia of well-controlled tests of a plasma electrolysis reactor (a generic name for the Ohmari cell) in which COP's of 1.42 and 1.82 were measured. The report is endorsed by a committee of the faculty of Kuban State University. The cathode is molybdenum and the anode titanium. A number of the papers were read, including Correa's. I had difficulty in understanding some of the comments and I have asked Correa for the full text. He made several comments on the PAGD reactor that I had not heard before. Jed's comments on Correa's views of the problems of getting funding of new technology must remain Jed's own. My own extensive conversations with Correa over the years gives a different aspect. He did outline the battery-exchange process by which he demonstrates that his system does produce measurable energy gain in the batteries as a result of extended operation as an isolated system with no connection to any external normal power source. Correa did show graphical results, which have to be interpreted in the context of an understanding of his battery calibration procedure, which Jed is unaware of. It is described in the patents and my articles in IE. Correa also showed selected pulses from the drive pack and into the charge pack, which appeared to be the same as shown in my article in IE. One of the audience asked the obvious question: could one hook a standard DC/AC inverter to the charge pack and derive the energy necessary to condition the PAGD for simple, self-sustaining operation as a "Universal Battery Charger". Correa indicated that this had been tried, with burn-outs of the inverters. I advise the vortex community to be cautious in jumping to conclusions about the PAGD and its test circuits, and to read my articles carefully. I didn't do a good job of illustrating the battery calibration and test cycle, leaving some uncertainties which have been pointed out. It's tough, and I made some mistakes. If anyone wants to correspond with me, I will try to convey the correct information. I advise also to assume that the PAGD may really release vacuum energy in a major way, and that these very energetic bursts have their own rules for interactions with the environment and connected circuits. Peter Graneau described some of his experiments with arcs generated by discharge of high voltage capacitors, which give an understanding of thunder. He also showed some of his experiments with water in which the chemical bonding energy is suddenly released, producing a fog, and also jets of water capable of penetrating metal. Thomas Phipps described an elegant experiment involving a tuning fork and a wiring configuration which illustrate the interaction between current elements, which is fundamental to electromagnetic theory. His results are another support for the Ampere longitudinal forces acting on current elements. Lest this seem trivial, they are a wedge in the relationship of the Lorentz forces and relativity physics. Jeff Kooistra showed courage in going live with a series of demonstrations derived from the Marinov motor. His setups, excellent basement physics making good use of styrofoam cups, showed some seriously anomalous effects. His climax showed that under certain circumstances, the current ring and the centrally suspended magnets rotated in the SAME direction -- not what one would expect from Newton's third law. All this is also on video tape. In a post-session discussion, some of the notable physicists present very carefully did not engage that particular effect. Vortex member Peter Glueck was present from Romania and presented an outline of some of the overall issues facing the community. He emphasized a view he has presented before, that the CANR effects are due to active sites in the cathode materials, not bulk effects. What is lacking is a physical specification for an active site, as one can specify a transistor. It seems unlikely that much progress toward site-specification will be made in electrolytic cells due to the difficulty of observation. Another method of loading and observation will have to be used. Unfortunately, the facilities for such research are very expensive. Mike Carrell and Tom Phipps gave accounts of elegant experiments in basic physics which challenge the conventional wisdom of the interaction of current elements in electromagnetism. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 21:02:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA07726; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <02e601bdf65d$698d47e0$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:56:01 -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: <"j4lFT.0.eu1.62j8s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23275 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Quinney To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, October 12, 1998 9:43 PM Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Colin wrote: >At 09:15 PM 10/12/98 -0600, Frederick S. wrote: >> >>These "water memory" effects can be measured using a ceramic disk capacitor >>waterproofed with nail polish and dipped in a glass of water using a "AAA" >>battery and a sensitive DVM. > > >That sounds very interesting. > -- what [memory effect?] was being measured? You gotta do some playing to see the highly polar water molecules align to the residual fields in the capacitor. It also makes a fairly decent hydrophone if the circuitry is done right. Playin is easier than sayin. :-) The water molecules in the inner ear (cochlear fluids) do all kinds of stuff related to what Jacques Benveniste is getting at also. Including the ability to demodulate UHF (AM) signals. That ringing/hash you think is Tinnitus may be your local UHF tv Video signal under the right atmospheric conditions. :-) Regards, Frederick > > >Thanks, > >Colin. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 12 23:02:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA27994; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:00:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:00:30 -0700 Message-ID: <19981013060216.26630.rocketmail send105.yahoomail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:02:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: U.S. Patent 4394230 To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"2-_Es2.0.Gr6.znk8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23276 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Steck wrote: >Electrolysis is an endothermic reaction in the < 2V range. >Theoretically, at 25C & 1.24V, 65.3W will split one mole of water. >Recombining releases 79.3W. [snip] O/u? >No, just chemically sloshing around existing energy -> in = out. > >.....or so I have read. Any corrections? Corrections: 1. 65.3W? 79.3W? Can't be. For one, you need energy units (joules or calories), not power (W). 2. Electrolysis of H2O requires 1.48 V. 1.24 relates to equilibrium, not electrolysis. (I worked the difference out once to my satisfaction, but I've forgotten the details and also where I filed that piece of paper.) == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 00:10:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA08725; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 00:02:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 00:02:32 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:04:08 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <199810121305_MC2-5C61-3D2E compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"CY1cc1.0.F82.8il8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23277 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Dieter Britz writes: > > SO why, if I have all these peer-reviewed papers at my fingertips, do I > still reckon that 1% is about the best you can get? Just checking one of > the few papers he has published outside conf procs (JEC 368 (1994) 55), > he gives, in the section on errors and uncertainties, several errors, > and two of them are 0.2% each, adding up to at least 0.4%. > > Who are we talking about? McKubre? He peer-reviewed papers say the same thing > as the proceedings I quoted, verbatim: errors are the greater of 10 mW or > 0.1%. The statement "two of them are 0.2% each, adding up to at least 0.4%" is > a common mistake in arithmetic. You cannot (usually) add up percentages. If [...] > than 0.1% you should cite specific technical reasons to back up that > statement. I got this from his team's paper in J. Electroanal. Chem. 368 (1994) 55-66. Section 2.5 of this paper, "Fixed errors, uncertainty propagation and transient effects" (they are very thorough) has an equation that any scientist will understand, and says what scientists all know, that with uncorrelated error sources, the total % error of a quantity calculated from several measured variables is the sum of the % errors in those variables. This arises from the mathematics of error propagation. The paper then states some errors; 4 of them (Cp, dm/dt, a resistance, and something called alpha, plus 0.2% on input heater power (!) and 0.2% power (I assume this means measured output). The last two, despite Rothwell's protestations, add up to 0.4%, and I haven't the time to convert the other 4 to % errors. I could be wrong in my guess that they probably make the total error to about 1%, but that's what I feel it'll be if I were to follow this up quantitatively. Certainly 0.4% is the minimum. As I wrote, the figure clearly shows a 1W excess power, with the uncertainty line down around 0.1 or so, so the excess is quite clear. He doesn't need 0.1% and in fact I can't find that figure ini the paper (although I have only taken a cursory look, mainly in section 2.5, where I'd expect to find it). I have wondered how people can claim 0.1% absolute accuracy anyway; there are always electrical components involved, and 0.1% precision resistors are not common. OK, you can easily get 1% ones and calibrate them yourself, but how stable will they then be, how sensitive to temperature? That's another in-principle reason for being more comfortable with the 1% figure. I don't mind 0.1% precision, though. Doesn't McKubre read this list, and could maybe comment? What I have read of his writings, comes across much more sober than those of his fans. He is, after all, a scientist. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 04:52:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA28311; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 04:50:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 04:50:38 -0700 Message-ID: <19981013114917.19450.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 04:49:17 -0700 (PDT) From: ron kita Subject: Randi/Beneviste To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"Cs48-.0.Cw6.Dwp8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23278 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If my memory serves correct, Randi is a MacArthur Foundation "Fellow". He receives a rather nice honorarium for this award. We live in a world where "good" science goes begging for money...and magicians are rewarded. Perhaps Beneviste can make Randi disappear. Cheers, RJK _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 04:53:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA29333; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 04:52:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 04:52:45 -0700 Message-ID: <030901bdf69f$f3240920$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Jacques Benveniste's Water Memory Etc. Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 05:51:41 -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: <"hNtLS2.0.FA7.Dyp8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23279 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex At temperatures around 37 C water molecules can form "clusters/patterns" that are as innumerable as snowflakes, each with a unique signature that can be "smelled". Next time you're in the kitchen, note the aroma of food that has molecules that couldn't possibly be coming off as outgassing vapors, or how livestock can smell water miles from a waterhole. Fido uses this phenomenon to Brand you car tires with a personalized signature. And you think the magnetic strip on your credit card has memory? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 05:12:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA05564; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 05:11:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 05:11:21 -0700 Message-ID: <19981013121339.18898.rocketmail send102.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 05:13:39 -0700 (PDT) From: ron kita Subject: Sci.electromag post-FWD To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"vn7o22.0.lM1.eDq8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23280 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---Ron Kita wrote: > ATTACHMENT part TEXT message/news _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 05:32:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA14111; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 05:31:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 05:31:38 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981013123402.008f8294 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:34:02 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"aqr2l1.0.NS3.fWq8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23281 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:56 PM 10/12/98 -0600,Frederick Sparber wrote: >Including the ability to demodulate UHF (AM) signals. That ringing/hash you >think is Tinnitus may be your local UHF tv Video signal under the right >atmospheric conditions. :-) > >Regards, Frederick > So, if I wear a metal helmet my tinnitus should disappear? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 06:24:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA16919; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 06:23:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 06:23:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981013081652.006ed090 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:16:52 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: News from New Energy Symposium In-Reply-To: <199810121305_MC2-5C61-3D32 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"GQldi2.0.D84.7Hr8s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23282 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 13:02 10/12/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Yesterday Infinite Energy magazine sponsored the Cold Fusion and New Energy >Symposium 1998.... >The work at SRI is going well. Russ George is participating in this project. >The first run was 28 days. Excess power was roughly 15 watts. Jed, do you have any details of the calorimetry being used at SRI on this experiment? Are they using Case's one-point temperature measurement or something more rigorous. >Case stresses the importance of the shape of the container, but unfortunately >he did not have time to describe this in detail. He advises Scott Little to >stick closely to the geometry of containers that Case himself has used... That's news. When I was doing the experiments, Case didn't see anything wrong with the shape of my container. He truly believed all that was required was to heat the right catalyst to the right temperature in D2 gas. That is why I conducted the experiments using the small cylindrical chamber we had on hand. If SRI's result has been obtained in a rigorous calorimeter, I'm interested in resuming this experiment. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 06:59:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA21914; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 06:56:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 06:56:52 -0700 Message-ID: <19981013135841.13048.rocketmail send105.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 06:58:41 -0700 (PDT) From: ron kita Subject: Sci.physics.electromag Post Correction To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"rNLXf1.0.KM5.Zmr8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23283 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Sorry for the non-transfer of the recent sci.physics. electromag usenet post. In a post "Mystified by the Results" a spinning magnetic device is related that looses approx 5% of its weight. Will try again to transfer the complete text, but not as an attachment. Best, RJK _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 07:54:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA05926; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 07:53:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 07:53:02 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 07:00:01 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA05850 Resent-Message-ID: <"9BXra.0.ES1.Dbs8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23284 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here is the post: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: ecogen iol.ie (Chris Eccles) Newsgroups: sci.physics.electromag Subject: Mystified by Results Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 08:49:02 +0100 Organization: genesis Message-ID: <1dgf37j.1qva74l1r4wg9uN dialup-042.ennis.iol.ie> NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-042.ennis.iol.ie Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: MacSOUP 2.3 Lines: 44 Xref: hub1.ispnews.com sci.physics.electromag:8005 I don't often post to news but, this time, I feel that someone out there might offer me an answer to a wierd outcome of an experiment. I have spent my entire career in mainstream physics research and have always been amused (often annoyed) by the "crankies" who believe in teleportation, spoon-bending, etc etc etc, and have consistently held the view that these fringe things belong firmly outside what I call physics. A few weeks back, my lab assistant got some stuff off the net about a "magneto-gravity" device, accompanied by some notes by Tom Bearden. This swatch of paper was lying about in the lab office and I happened to read it. Out of nothing but bemused interest, I said to my team, "Lets build this crap and see what happens...." We constructed a variant of the device shown in the drawings which accompanied the data. This consisted of a Duralumin disc (350mm dia) which could be spun on a motor shaft, using a Picador bearing which we had lying about. The disc was made to spin 1.5mm eccentric and was fitted with twelve button magnets around its periphery, with all their N poles facing outwards, by fixing the magnets to 90-degree offcuts of alloy angle. The whole thing was then mechanically balanced by adding extra thin strips of copper busbar (!) to compensate for the eccenticity. When tested, the disc displayed some imbalance but this was easily corrected until we had it running smoothly at 2850 rpm from a mains-powered 750W motor. So far so good. We then rigged an enclosing fence of alloy strip around the disc, on which we mounted twelve more button magnets with their S poles facing inwards. The clearance between the disc-mounted magnets and the peripheral ones varied by ±0.75mm as the disc turned. The whole shazam was mounted on an acrylic baseplate and weighed. It was 14.26 kg. When we switched the motor in, the weird shit happened. The balance showed a loss of grav mass of the assembly of some 550 grams (3.85%) and every computer terminal and fluorescent lamp in the lab went ape ! Is this real, or should I take a holiday ? Can anyone offer an explanation ? Chris - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 08:16:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14662; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:12:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:12:33 -0700 Message-ID: <033b01bdf6bb$d661e8e0$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:11:58 -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: <"UndSn1.0.0b3.Xts8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23285 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Edwin Strojny To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 6:33 AM Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Ed Strojny wrote: >At 09:56 PM 10/12/98 -0600,Frederick Sparber wrote: > >>Including the ability to demodulate UHF (AM) signals. That ringing/hash you >>think is Tinnitus may be your local UHF tv Video signal under the right >>atmospheric conditions. :-) >> >>Regards, Frederick >> >So, if I wear a metal helmet my tinnitus should disappear? Maybe,maybe not. Try a WWII German helmet design, or the "Bullet-Cone" shape the soldiers wore in the movie, El Cid. For a real fashion statement, a galvanized milk pail down to the shoulders. Ignore anyone calling you "Pailface". :-) Regards, Frederick >Ed Strojny > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 08:30:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA20588; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:26:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:26:44 -0700 Message-ID: <36237174.3127CA86 ctron.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:27:48 -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: Questions about our universe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YlcEV.0.Z15.p4t8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23286 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ross Tessien wrote: > And so, you see, "Inflation" never ceased. The boiling of the last > remaining droplets of aether continues today, and we call the process > exothermy. And the vapor is flowing out of our sun and curving the topology > of the spacetime wave structure as it does. > Later, Ross Tessien I think I remember this question being posed once before but I forget what the response was... Ross, if stars are literally spewing space, curving the topology of spacetime, than why is it that the sun isn't getting farther away? Why aren't the orbits of the planets getting slowly larger? Terren From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 10:24:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA00531; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:20:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:20:41 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:22:10 -0700 Message-Id: <199810131722.KAA04922 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: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"10qgn3.0.D8.elu8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23287 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Ross Tessien wrote: > >> And so, you see, "Inflation" never ceased. The boiling of the last >> remaining droplets of aether continues today, and we call the process >> exothermy. And the vapor is flowing out of our sun and curving the topology >> of the spacetime wave structure as it does. > >> Later, Ross Tessien > >I think I remember this question being posed once before but I forget >what the response was... Ross, if stars are literally spewing space, >curving the topology of spacetime, than why is it that the sun isn't >getting farther away? Why aren't the orbits of the planets getting >slowly larger? Good question but it isn't really that complicated if you think about it. The planets are always falling toward the sun. they are falling through space along a radial line, in fact accelerating. But they also have a motion tangential to the sun, and so they fall just enough to make it down to where a circular path resides. The only thing that saying that space is flowing out of the sun does, is to change the rate of falling. But if it is in balance, then everything is still as it seems. Remember, it is not possible to determine if you are in an inertial frame of reference, that you have some absolute velocity. The next thing that removes our ability to notice an acceleration, is that the flow of space outward is expanding radially. And so too is the graviational acceleration being "diluted" in strength by 1/R^2. So these two effects are coincident, and declining at the same rate. The outflow IS, the cosmological constant component of gravitation. The only way to notice that this second component of gravitation is important in and around the sun is to notice time variable effects, or, to notice the effect of the deceleration out in regions intermediate to the stellar emitters. The latter effect is known as the dark matter problem. The former effect is the one that interests me in my research. The reactions in the sun are time variable. They are treated as steady state by physicists because it takes 170,000 years for Compton scattering to bring the heat energy from the core to the surface of the sun. But, aether compression waves take hours or minute to surface. So the time constant is very much shorter, and shorter term variability can be important. This leads to coronal mass ejections, flares, prominences, etc etc. Actually, as far as the planet question you posed, as the sun goes through the 22 year solar cycle, the radii of orbits of the planets SHOULD change by a small amount. We are currently in a trend of decreasing internal reactivity, approaching maximum solar "activity". Solar maximum activity occurs each 11 years during the period when the internal reactivity is changing most rapidly. This is the period when the solar atmosphere is being increasingly, or decreasingly fluidized. In both cases, you form sun spots and flaring. On the increasing side, extra aether must blast out. On the decreasing side, the matter of the sun is in essence, "settling", and the excess aether inside is blasting out. Either way, the surface looks "active". Evidence from SOHO establishes this first data point in that the slow solar wind has been decreasing in velocity, despite our heading into solar maximum. I am telling you that the 22 year cycle will display the balance of the pattern, but the data we have on this is only 3 years old, so this is a prediction. Another place you can look, is apparent if you think in terms of the sun being a fluidized bed of rotating particles. In this case, there is an assymetrical drop in fluid (aether) pressure as it exits the particle fluidized bed. A drop in pressure comes along with an increase in outflow KE, ie velocity. This occurs as the aether flow nears the surface. So just outside the photosphere, there is a hydraulic jump. A slower ramp up in outflow velocity, followed by that flow ramming into the aether ocean, and pushing the rest of the universe away. If "space" accelerates and then decelerates, photons emitted will be observed to be red shifted and then blue shifted. This is indeed what we observe of ions on opposite sides of this hydraulic jump region known as the solar coronal transition region. Ions that are accelerated across that region are heated via *inertial* acceleration due to the aether motions. ie, ions are heated in proportion to MASS, and not charge to mass ration or charge. So, by understanding that the flow is doing certain things, it is possible to study where the flow should alter what we can observe in manners we wouldn't expect otherwise. But blowing the planets away isn't one of them. Another issue with that is that planets curve, or, densify spacetime locally. So they do not gravitate the same as do smaller objects or individual atoms. The differences are for the most part subtle, and you would have to read up on Hal Puthoff's models for ZPE action induced gravitation to understand this a bit more. But basically you have objects that filter out wave energy arriving from deep space, thus pushing them toward the sun. And second you have any local flow of aether pushing objects away from the sun. As for particles, they do not bridge a large region of spacetime, and they are more easily carried away by local aether currents. And in fact the solar wind does accelerate outward as it heads away from the sun, all the while gaining in gravitational potential energy. the solar wind is still accelerating as it passes Jupiter! The photonic push is not sufficient to do this, so something else is involved. That something else, is the flow of aether. Later, Ross From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 10:35:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA07070; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:31:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:31:49 -0700 Message-Id: <199810131731.NAA29671 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: "Vortex" Subject: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:34:57 -0400 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: <"dLTfb.0.1k1.4wu8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23288 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: http://www.artbell.com/artquits.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 10:44:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA11364; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:40:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:40:27 -0700 Message-ID: <362390EB.4BBDA773 ariel.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:42:03 -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: Questions about our universe References: <199810131722.KAA04922 Au.oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yLwKx2.0.Un2.A2v8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23289 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ross Tessien wrote: > > >Ross Tessien wrote: > > > >> And so, you see, "Inflation" never ceased. The boiling of the last > >> remaining droplets of aether continues today, and we call the process > >> exothermy. And the vapor is flowing out of our sun and curving the topology > >> of the spacetime wave structure as it does. > > > >> Later, Ross Tessien > > > >I think I remember this question being posed once before but I forget > >what the response was... Ross, if stars are literally spewing space, > >curving the topology of spacetime, than why is it that the sun isn't > >getting farther away? Why aren't the orbits of the planets getting > >slowly larger? > > Good question but it isn't really that complicated if you think about it. > The planets are always falling toward the sun. they are falling through > space along a radial line, in fact accelerating. But they also have a > motion tangential to the sun, and so they fall just enough to make it down > to where a circular path resides. > > The only thing that saying that space is flowing out of the sun does, is to > change the rate of falling. But if it is in balance, then everything is > still as it seems. Remember, it is not possible to determine if you are in > an inertial frame of reference, that you have some absolute velocity. Ok... if space flowing out of the sun changes the rate of falling, wouldn't there be a difference in the equations describing the orbit of a body around an aether-emissive body, and say, the orbit of a moon around a planet? Wouldn't there be an error in the orbits as predicted by Kepler's Laws? Terren From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 10:47:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13015; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:44:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:44:55 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:47:12 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199810131745.KAA13849 smtp2.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <199810121305_MC2-5C61-3D2E compuserve.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"apTlF3.0.HB3.M6v8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23290 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:04 AM 10/13/98 +0200, you wrote: >equation that any scientist will understand, and says what scientists >all know, that with uncorrelated error sources, the total % error of a >quantity calculated from several measured variables is the sum of the >% errors in those variables. This arises from the mathematics of error >propagation. Perhaps this was referring to a specific formula in the paper? It is certainly not true generally, or even usually. For a simple example, if the power in a DC circuit is computed by P = i^2R and i is measured with 2% and R with 3% error, the absloute error in the calculated value of P is approximately given by (a little differential calculus here): dP = 2iR di + i^2 dR, where di = .02i, dR = .03R so dP = 2iR(.02 i) + i^2(.03R) = .04 i^2 R + .03 i^R = .07 i^R = .07P In this case we have a possible 7% error, not 2% + 3% = 5%. The example should have plus/minus signs which I can't show, but you get the idea. It gets worse for higher powers and may also depend on the measured values themselves in other formulas. You can't just add the errors. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 10:57:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA16580; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:53:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:53:31 -0700 Message-Id: <3623A4B3.328B79B4 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:06:27 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! References: <199810131731.NAA29671 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QOZbF2.0.y24.QEv8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23291 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yes, this is strange. Who are so powerful above the laws? Few days ago a home page inquiring TNT's "KGB UFO doumentary" program was forced down by the film producers. Ed Wall wrote: > > http://www.artbell.com/artquits.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 10:58:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17478; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:55:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:55:45 -0700 Message-Id: <199810131756.MAA07953 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:55:37 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id KAA17446 Resent-Message-ID: <"G6oi03.0.tG4.WGv8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23292 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Here is the post: >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >From: ecogen iol.ie (Chris Eccles) >Newsgroups: sci.physics.electromag >Subject: Mystified by Results >Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 08:49:02 +0100 >Organization: genesis >Message-ID: <1dgf37j.1qva74l1r4wg9uN dialup-042.ennis.iol.ie> >NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-042.ennis.iol.ie >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >X-Newsreader: MacSOUP 2.3 >Lines: 44 >Xref: hub1.ispnews.com sci.physics.electromag:8005 > >I don't often post to news but, this time, I feel that someone out there >might offer me an answer to a wierd outcome of an experiment. > >I have spent my entire career in mainstream physics research and have >always been amused (often annoyed) by the "crankies" who believe in >teleportation, spoon-bending, etc etc etc, and have consistently held >the view that these fringe things belong firmly outside what I call >physics. > >A few weeks back, my lab assistant got some stuff off the net about a >"magneto-gravity" device, accompanied by some notes by Tom Bearden. >This swatch of paper was lying about in the lab office and I happened to >read it. Out of nothing but bemused interest, I said to my team, "Lets >build this crap and see what happens...." > >We constructed a variant of the device shown in the drawings which >accompanied the data. This consisted of a Duralumin disc (350mm dia) >which could be spun on a motor shaft, using a Picador bearing which we >had lying about. The disc was made to spin 1.5mm eccentric and was >fitted with twelve button magnets around its periphery, with all their N >poles facing outwards, by fixing the magnets to 90-degree offcuts of >alloy angle. The whole thing was then mechanically balanced by adding >extra thin strips of copper busbar (!) to compensate for the >eccenticity. When tested, the disc displayed some imbalance but this >was easily corrected until we had it running smoothly at 2850 rpm from a >mains-powered 750W motor. So far so good. > >We then rigged an enclosing fence of alloy strip around the disc, on >which we mounted twelve more button magnets with their S poles facing >inwards. The clearance between the disc-mounted magnets and the >peripheral ones varied by ±0.75mm as the disc turned. > >The whole shazam was mounted on an acrylic baseplate and weighed. It >was 14.26 kg. When we switched the motor in, the weird shit happened. >The balance showed a loss of grav mass of the assembly of some 550 grams >(3.85%) and every computer terminal and fluorescent lamp in the lab went >ape ! > >Is this real, or should I take a holiday ? > >Can anyone offer an explanation ? ***{Prof. Thomas Barnes has an electromagnetic theory of gravitation according to which the attraction between unlike charges is ever so slightly greater than the repulsion between like charges. Result: seemingly neutral masses have a slight net attraction for one another, which we term the force of gravity. By this theory, Newton's gravitational formula is a special case of Coulomb attraction. Since a neutron decays into a proton and an electron, and since a photon exhibits an oscillation between a positive and a negative electrical charge, this theory can with some plausibility be applied even to neutrons and photons. While I disagree with the Barnes theory for reasons that I will not go into here, it does seem relevant to the above result. I would also note that the above described experiment involves a spinning disc, and there are vast numbers of claims by what is generally regarded as the lunatic fringe to have observed disc-shaped aircraft of apparently alien origin ("flying saucers") which seem to be able to hover in defiance of gravity. It is rather easy to imagine that a "flying saucer" has an array of magnets mounted around its periphery, south poles pointing inward, and a rotating circular array just inside of that, north poles pointing outward. While such speculations are probably just a bunch of rubbish, I would say that this report merits further investigation before being dismissed. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >Chris >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 10:58:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA18005; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:56:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:56:28 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:58:03 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-reply-to: <199810131745.KAA13849 smtp2.asu.edu> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199810131756.KAA19625 smtp2.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <199810121305_MC2-5C61-3D2E compuserve.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"VrKii.0.AP4.BHv8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23293 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:47 AM 10/13/98 -0700, you wrote: Whoops, I dropped a couple of 2's in the last line. It should read: > >dP = 2iR(.02 i) + i^2(.03R) = .04 i^2 R + .03 i^2R = .07 i2^R = .07P > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 11:47:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18371; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:44:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:44:49 -0700 From: Chuck Davis To: Hamdi Ucar Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:45:44 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3623A4B3.328B79B4 verisoft.com.tr> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"hvT-6.0.sU4.X-v8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23294 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 13-Oct-98, Hamdi Ucar wrote: >Yes, this is strange. Who are so powerful above the laws? The US gov's "MIB's" are more powerful than, even, Clinton :( Your Gov, too, -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 12:32:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03957; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:23:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:23:16 -0700 Message-Id: <199810131923.PAA24232 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:58:55 -0400 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: <"UbrvL1.0.lz.ZYw8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23295 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A good book on the subject is: _The Memory of Water_ by Michel Schiff, who knew Jacques Benveniste well, worked with him and reproduces experimental results. Ed Wall NERL ---------- > From: Quinney > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) > Date: Monday, October 12, 1998 11:40 PM > > At 09:15 PM 10/12/98 -0600, Frederick S. wrote: > > > >These "water memory" effects can be measured using a ceramic disk capacitor > >waterproofed with nail polish and dipped in a glass of water using a "AAA" > >battery and a sensitive DVM. > > > That sounds very interesting. > -- what [memory effect?] was being measured? > > > Thanks, > > Colin. > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 12:47:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA14822; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:41:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:41:21 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:42:47 -0700 Message-Id: <199810131942.MAA24450 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: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"E0NnO1.0.Ld3.Wpw8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23296 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Ok... if space flowing out of the sun changes the rate of falling, >wouldn't there be a difference in the equations describing the orbit of >a body around an aether-emissive body, and say, the orbit of a moon >around a planet? Wouldn't there be an error in the orbits as predicted >by Kepler's Laws? > >Terren No. Look at the flow geometry, it is spherically expanding. So gravity has a 1/R^2 term, the flow profile has a 1/R^2 term, and both are coincident with the same origin. You can't figure it out from that alone, and both objects with, or without flow will seem like they gravitate the same. Note that you really don't know the mass of the sun or the earth, except by using theory to weigh them. ie, my model does mean that the mass of the sun is larger than we think, in order to offset this component of gravitation. But once you balance things again, you cannot distinguish between their behaviors in any obvious manner. You must consider temporally varying phenomena, or, spatially varying phenomena that are flow related. ie, the solar wind is flowing out at 800 km/s from the poles, and at 400 km/s from equitorial regions. Note that these velocities straddle the surface escape velocity of 600 km/s! Also note that for a rotating fluidized bed of particles, aka the sun, that the flow path of least resistance is via the axis of rotation due to the slightly oblate geometry produced by rotation. So an increase in aether flow out of the axis of rotation is expected, and an increase in acceleration of the solar wind along the axis is observed. Also, pay close attention to this comment. The solar wind does not decelerate as it gains in gravitational potential energy. Rather, it accelerates. This is entirely unexpected. If you climb mount Everest, you don't expect to need to take an air conditioner to keep cool, rather, you expect that the gain in gravitational potential energy of the air molecules will manifest as a drop in temperature. Likewise, as the solar wind gains in gravitational potential energy, you should expect it to be cooling off and slowing down. But it doesn't. Instead, for no known reason, it accelerates and heats up. this process is most dramatic near the surface, where the hydraulic jump of aether flowing out of the sun manifests as the solar coronal transition region, where the temperature jumps from 5000 K at the photosphere, to ~6,000,000 for H and ~100,000,000 for O ions. Note that these are ~ proportional to the mass ratio of the ions, meaning that their acceleration, aka heating, is mass proportional. ie, inertial. Aether is flowing out of the sun. Evidence exists at all scales that this is so if one simply learns how to think of empty space as an ocean, spacetime as a structure of standing wave energy in that ocean, particles as localized resonances coupled to the spacetime wave energy, and fields as the distortion to the wave energy near to the "particles". But it takes a while to get used to it in order to learn what to expect. Once you do, though, you can make predictions absolutely anywhere, and then go research a brand new field and learn that indeed, they have observed what you expected and are mystified by it. It is pretty fun when you have done this over 20 times and know that the odds have exceeded a million to one that you could have guessed red or black at the roulette table in a similar manner. Ross Tessien. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 13:05:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25322; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:01:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:01:52 -0700 Message-ID: <3623B214.4BF15CF5 ariel.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:03:32 -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: Questions about our universe References: <199810131942.MAA24450 Au.oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"K-Svs3.0.YB6.l6x8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23297 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ross Tessien wrote: > > >Ok... if space flowing out of the sun changes the rate of falling, > >wouldn't there be a difference in the equations describing the orbit of > >a body around an aether-emissive body, and say, the orbit of a moon > >around a planet? Wouldn't there be an error in the orbits as predicted > >by Kepler's Laws? > > > >Terren > > No. Look at the flow geometry, it is spherically expanding. So gravity has > a 1/R^2 term, the flow profile has a 1/R^2 term, and both are coincident > with the same origin. > > You can't figure it out from that alone, and both objects with, or without > flow will seem like they gravitate the same. Note that you really don't > know the mass of the sun or the earth, except by using theory to weigh them. > > ie, my model does mean that the mass of the sun is larger than we think, in > order to offset this component of gravitation. But once you balance things > again, you cannot distinguish between their behaviors in any obvious manner. > You must consider temporally varying phenomena, or, spatially varying > phenomena that are flow related. Yes, I see what you mean that once it's balanced you can't distinguish behaviors. But I don't feel you've answered my question regarding equations that describe the orbits of bodies due to gravitation - from what you've been saying, it seems obvious that they ought to include a term for any aether emissive bodies (that would vary according to the rate of aether ejected)... i.e. an object would fall faster towards a star that produced less aether. Let's say you've got a star with mass Ms. You've also got a huge hunk or iron with the same mass: Mi = Ms. Now the star emits aether and the hunk of iron just sits there. Are you saying that the equation to describe the orbit of a satelite with mass Mo around each of these objects is identical? Terren From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 14:50:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03368; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:43:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:43:28 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <3623A4B3.328B79B4 verisoft.com.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:42:15 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-Message-ID: <"yBauK2.0.Hq._by8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23298 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here's the message off the website, supposedly a transcript from the show: > You may recall about a year ago... I told you that there was an > event, a threatening terrible event occured to my family, which > I could not tell you about. Because of that event, and a succession > of other events, what you're listening to right now, is my final > broadcast on the air. This is it folks, I'm going off the air and > will not return. And what I will tell you now is what I told you > then. When the time comes when I can tell you what occurred, I > will tell you, through the press, through the media, of one sort > or the other. I will explain to you the entire thing, it's not that I > want to hold anything back from my audience, however, for the > protection of my family, until it is otherwise revealed, I can't > discuss it, I won't discuss it. And if you were in my position, you > would do exactly the same thing. And when you finally hear > whatever it is, what it is, whenever you hear it, I think you will > then understand. > > At any rate, I wanted to tell you, I didn't want to go without > saying a word, so I'm telling you now. What you are listening to, > is MY FINAL BROADCAST. It's been a good run, and you've been a > great audience, and it's been an absolutely incredible forum. And > my presumption is, that the forum will continue. At any rate, it > certainly is my hope, that the forum will continue. > > And again when the time comes, when this information can be > released, you can be sure that I will release it, and I would > assume because of the magnitude of the forum that I have held, at > that time, you'll get the whole story. But the time will come > when I will tell it. > > So for now and the foreseeable future, that's it! That is the end of > this man's broadcast career. So, thank you, and goodbye... > > (Art Bell, 2:55 AM, Oct 13, 1998) This could just be from his own personal paranoia or other silly personal reasons he chooses to overdramatize. But there is a wicked hatred out there in the US against those who work the territory Art Bell visited frequently on his show. I doubt government spooks worried about him much, as his more flakey guests probably helped discredit many of the claims regarding what may have had some national secrecy attached to it from time to time. But there's another large and demonstrably violent mindset around that thinks he's a tool of the devil, and, like abortion clinics or homosexuals etc., constitutes a legitimate target. Remember radio talk show personality Dave Berg - self proclaimed "loud-mouthed Jew" ? Remember what happened to him? A full clip from a MAC-10 is what happened to him. Freedom of speech is not something to be taken for granted. It's literally to die for. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 16:11:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA04437; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:10:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:10:16 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:11:47 -0700 Message-Id: <199810132311.QAA21092 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: Questions about our universe Resent-Message-ID: <"wufzi1.0.451.Mtz8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23299 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Ross Tessien wrote: >> >> >Ok... if space flowing out of the sun changes the rate of falling, >> >wouldn't there be a difference in the equations describing the orbit of >> >a body around an aether-emissive body, and say, the orbit of a moon >> >around a planet? Wouldn't there be an error in the orbits as predicted >> >by Kepler's Laws? >> > >> >Terren >> >> No. Look at the flow geometry, it is spherically expanding. So gravity has >> a 1/R^2 term, the flow profile has a 1/R^2 term, and both are coincident >> with the same origin. >> >> You can't figure it out from that alone, and both objects with, or without >> flow will seem like they gravitate the same. Note that you really don't >> know the mass of the sun or the earth, except by using theory to weigh them. >> >> ie, my model does mean that the mass of the sun is larger than we think, in >> order to offset this component of gravitation. But once you balance things >> again, you cannot distinguish between their behaviors in any obvious manner. >> You must consider temporally varying phenomena, or, spatially varying >> phenomena that are flow related. > >Yes, I see what you mean that once it's balanced you can't distinguish >behaviors. But I don't feel you've answered my question regarding >equations that describe the orbits of bodies due to gravitation - from >what you've been saying, it seems obvious that they ought to include a >term for any aether emissive bodies (that would vary according to the >rate of aether ejected)... i.e. an object would fall faster towards a >star that produced less aether. > >Let's say you've got a star with mass Ms. You've also got a huge hunk >or iron with the same mass: Mi = Ms. Now the star emits aether and the >hunk of iron just sits there. Are you saying that the equation to >describe the orbit of a satelite with mass Mo around each of these >objects is identical? > Well Terren, what a surprise. someone with his brain turned on and listening. GR already has this term in it. It is called the cosmological constant, and from recent super nova studies, we know that the term really does need to be included into gravitational equations. The term accounts for how "space" pushes against "space" in today's thinking. So this is only supposed to be of cosmological concern. But then you should also know about that other nagging problem, the one called dark matter. So for gravitation, what you need to do is to include two terms. For example, F = GMm/R^2 - G_1*L(t)/R^2 G_1 being some constant just like G L(t) being the luminosity as a function of time R being the radius of the gravitating object per norm Technically, L should be a vector function describing the local flow velocity, or perhaps one would formulate it as the derivitive of the flow velocity of aether. In any case, the gist of what I am saying is that gravity needs to be constructed some how from two terms, one accounting for the amount of mass in the region, and the other for the aether flow velocity in the region. Now, if you had two objects you mention, one might be a white dwarf that is not burning fuel, the other a standard one solar mass sun that was burning fuel like our sun. So, the gravity would work out like this. the sun burning hydrogen has the same mass as the white dwarf of iron that is not burning any longer, it is dead. So gravitationally we have F = GMm/R^2 = 2GM/R^2, agreed? But, one of the two stars is burning fuel. So now we need to figure out what the repulsion thrust is in proportion to the "attraction" thrust. I can use our sun, and the assertion that we must go back to the idea that action is conserved to find the answer. Action reaction, simple you would think, right?? Anyway, what this means is that when you have a nuclear reaction, such as say, DD > He3n where the beginning and ending masses are different, that what you have done is to emit that aether excess as the resonances were separating. Aether, IS, mass. Mass, IS, "amount of aether". Take that to heart and learn to work with it, it works everywhere you try to apply it. and if you ever find an exception, consider the process more carefully and you will find that you evaluated something wrong the first time around! OK, so, mass is aether, and we emitted some mass at the speed of light, and so the particles that recoiled attained the energy mc^2. Now what? Well, this means that we not only heated up the particles, but we also heated up the local spacetime via creating turbulence in it. And those turbulences can interact with other resonances and so on. So, the heating we are going to get out of nuclear reactions in an enclosed system like a star are going to be double to what we would normally expect. The particles that reacted are heated, and particles all around those are also heated indirectly by the spacetime turbulence. This means that to explain the existing luminosity of the sun, you only need half of the reactivity. And it also means that to explain how the matter is supported against the crush of gravity, we have one measure of support from the energy imparted to the particles directly (this is what we know about), and we have one measure of support from the energy imparted to spacetime (this we don't know about), and we have one measure of support from the flow of aether away from the core (this we don't know about either.) Now, the first two components that induce heating are expected from our observation of the amount of heat being emitted by the sun from the luminosity we observe on the exterior surface. This follows directly because any heat that escapes the surface had to be generated in the core. Except now, we learn that we only need half of the reactions in order to generate that amount of heat. Ergo, we should only expect half of the numbers of neutrinos. The fact is, we observe half the number of neutrinos we expect to observe. Next, we have that other measure of support from the flow of spacetime outward, and, we have only the neutrino evidence that turbulence in spacetime could heat matter. So we now move to inspect what is going on at the surface of the sun. There should be a support against gravitation that is provided 2/3 by thermal motions of the matter, and 1/3 from the outflow of aether. So, at the surface, the system should be in these proportions. I'll have to do a calculation of the mean velocity distribution for a 6,000 K plasma of H ions or electrons to see if they are at around 400 km/s = (2/3)* 600 km/s IOW, if the aether outflow could be pinned down that would nail down the ambient density of the aether in terms of kg/m^3. I haven't worked all this out yet so I am thinking off the top of my head above, sorry if I am wandering. Anyway, from the above logic, it is looking like the aether flow velocity may well be 200 km/s out of the sun. That is a very interesting number to have arrived at because it is in the range of circular velocities for stars in spiral galaxy disks. it is also the amount that the fast and slow solar winds differ above and below the mean surface escape velocities of the sun. OK. Back to your original question. The solution is really very simple. The emission of aether leads to the star that is burning fuel "gravitating" slightly less strongly than if it was not burning fuel. ie, it will I think, gravitate with a force that is 2/3 of what it would if it were just the iron star that was not burning fuel. So, that binary would gravitate according to; F = G(M)(2M/3)/R^2 = 2GM^2/3R^2 All this does is to change the orbital periods, ie, circular velocities of objects orbiting a star. If the sun increased its rate of burning fuel, then that increase in aether flow would just increase the radius of the orbit of earth, and then the earth would once again orbit per norm at the new elevation and new orbital period. It may seem wierd, but just imagine the earth moving through "empty space". How can you distinguish between the earth moving through space, or space moving through the earth? You can't. And objects will gravitate per norm too. The only time you will notice anything wierd is if the rate of burning changes during your experiment. So, here is a prediction you can remember. Our sun DOES change it's rate of burning. There are two periods of particular importance. These are ~28 days, and ~11 years. One is associated with the lunar orbit, and also with the solar neutrino counts. The second is associated with the solar activity cycle. And actually the 22 year period is the full cycle as I said before. So, the earths orbit should change in radius slightly over the coming years as we approach solar maximum, and then for about another 3 years after that. At that time, the solar aether emission should reach be at a minimum, and stay there for about 3 years or so, and then begin to rise again for the next 11 years as we pass through the next solar maximum and over toward the 90 degree phase beyond that. Just plot out a sine wave. that is aether emission rate. You should think of that as a small amplitude sinusoid added to a large constant value of reactivity. so the reactivity might be varying by say, a fraction of a percent. And "solar maximum" occurs when the rate of reactivity is most rapidly changing, ie, if you plot a sine wave you begin at sin(0) = 0. Then sin(90)= 1 etc. So at 0 and 180 degrees, the slope is maximum, and those are the solar maximum time frames. The entire period of the sine wave taking 22 years. Anyway, we should observe a similar meander in earth's orbit with the same period. VLA observations are good enough now to observe this variance directly I think, if anyone wanted to check for it. That, you see, is yet another prediction that we could go looking for, and one that may well show up in the data already but not be commonly known. I'll see if I can find it. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 17:28:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA11241; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:24:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:24:38 -0700 Message-ID: <3623D440.6A2C earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:29:20 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Chubb: Blue: more on band state theory 10.13.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"nvckH2.0.Ol2.r4-8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23300 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Chubb: ion band state theory 10.12.98 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:16:50 -0400 From: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil To: rmforall earthlink.net CC: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil Dick Blue, I do think that some private communication would save some time concerning confusion that seems to be present with regard to your interpretation of our theory. >You could have proven me wrong by actually constructing the nuclear wave >functions you employ in your calculations in at least a sketchy manner. >What you wrote down was simply incorrect in that you have a position >coordinate for the nuclear center of mass and then position coordinates >for both the neutron and the proton. That's one too many position >coordinates. The system does not have that many degrees of freedom. You seem to be referring to Eq. 12 of our BYU conference Proceedings paper (AIP Conf Proc 228, [ed Jones et al, AIP, New York, 1991], 704.) In point of fact, you seem to have actually "misinterpreted" this equation. Here, the reference implicitly is to a many-body system, involving an outside force, provided by the lattice, acting on a "two-particle" system. The total system in fact involves all of the degrees of freedom associated with the lattice. For simplicity, however, the problem can be recast in a form in which the lattice possesses a momentum (and lattice coordinates), and the nucleons possess momenta (and coordinates). This is different than the free space system where two nucleons interact amoung themselves. In fairness to you, I suppose it is fair to say that the discussion of this point (which is well-known in a variety of contexts associated with solid state physics) was somewhat terse. >However, what I find truly objectionable is this concept that there >is a nuclear potential and an electrostatic potential that can somehow >go their separate ways without remaining functionally related to the >same set of coordinates. You apply the 1/N factor (N beng the number of >lattice points) to the electrostatic potential and ignore that for the >nuclear part, thus achieving the magical reduction in repulsion >without acknowledging that you have simply scaled the ENTIRE potential. > I think you should check out the ICCF6 Proceedings paper to gain a more complete understanding of this point. In fact, what bothers you here is associated with coherence--the coherence that is manifestly implicit in a peridocally ordered system at T=0. >> Initially, some of the details of the theory were not precisely stated. >> The motivation, however, has remained intact. Initially, there was a >> tacit assumption that was not stated. Temperature=0 conditions are >> assumed and maintained within the bulk material, where lattice symmetry >> is assumed to prevail. In other words, not only is lattice symmetry >> required, but to maintain lattice symmetry, it is assumed that no >> excitation of the lattice or any of the entities within the lattice is >> allowed. When this assumption is made, only a very restrictive set of >> potential avenues for interaction exist: coherent ("Umklapp") processes >> in which momentum is transferred >> elastically directly to the lattice (for example through lattice recoil >> [as in the Mossbauer effect] or a redefinition of the boundaries of the >> lattice) and energy is transferred through a constant shift of the zero >> of energy of the ordered lattice, relative to its surroundings. It is >> well-known that these kinds of processes: 1. exist, and 2. provide a >> means for maintaining lattice symmetry. To maintain lattice symmetry at >> T=0, these are required. When they do apply, they lead to an important >> selection rule: coherent nuclear processes occur in which initial and >> final states always possess ground state nuclei, with energy released >> through processes which are initiated at the boundaries of the solid. >> This is discussed in more detail in our ICCF6 Proceedings paper. It is >> the formal justification of the "bosons in and bosons out" selection >> rule that bothered you so much and of our prediction that although bulk >> properties affect the behavior CANR's, in the cases under consideration, >> the energy release appears to be initiated in the surface regions of a >> lattice. > >Scott is glossing over a very significant problem here when he refers to >"lattice symmetry." All he is actually considering is the >center-of-mass coordinate of the deuterons for which he constructs a >lattice. You have misinterpreted the theory. The electrostatic potential of all of the entities of the host defines the lattice, not the center-of-mass coordinate of the deuterons. I see that this partly reflects your misunderstanding of Eq. 12 and the approximate statement (rn+rp)/2=Rcm. This last equality is a constraint that applies to the nuclear degrees of freedom, but it does not apply to the electrostatic degrees of freedom. >Remember that the internal coordinates of the nucleus has been >"separated" and are not in the problem in any way, shape, or form. What >happens next is equivalent to assuming that "lattice symmetry" also >applies to those degrees of freedom internal to the deuterons.It is a >slight of hand -- not reality. Again, this statement seems to reflect a misunderstanding associated with your interpretation of Eq. 12. >The reality is that the deuterons as >supplied form a totally disordered ensemble with respect to those >internal degrees of freedom, even if they are placed into an ordered >lattice with respect to the center-of-mass. This gets to an important point, implicitly noted by Schwinger. In a true T=0 situation, coherence is the rule, not the exception. This is because entropy achieves its ("zero value") minimum at T=0. For this reason, Schwinger pointed out that in general separating the nuclear degrees of freedom from the electrostatic degrees of freedom using a "simple" factoring of the wave function into these two forms of interaction is not allowed. In point of fact, by requiring symmetry throughout the lattice in which the nuclear force and electrostatic force remain separable except for a shift of the zero of energy (actually of kinetic energy), we have defined a coherent interaction that maintains separability. When it is assumed that the state of zero entropy matches smoothly onto a state of finite entropy in which nuclear and electrostatic factoring occurs (which corresponds to a situation involving no latent heat), it follows that the form of interaction we have defined becomes unique. >Again it is important to note what is being assumed as opposed what is >being demonstated by a calculation. There is no calculation to show >that a rigid shift in zero energy can or will occur. In the case of the >Mossbauer effect to which frequent reference is made, the lattice does >recoil much as Scott describes, but there is a very important difference >in that case centering on the word "recoil." For the cold fusion case >as Scott describes it there is no recoil because there is no emission. By recoil, I am really referring to a discontinuous change in momentum of periodically ordered regions relative to disordered regions. In the case of surfaces, this results in a redistribution of charge, modification of the associated dipole layer (and work function), and a redefinition of the electrostatic zero of the solid. Such a calculation can be carried out using modern band structure computational codes, and given funding, I could carry it out. It would go along way towards explaining a number of important factors. A key point is that the nitty gritty of this can be phrased in the following way: solids do allow for coherent, non-local interaction through coherent charge re-distribution. You do not seem to be aware of this. It is well-known but not emphasized. It is the basis of "Umklapp" scattering (terminology that can be found in most graduate school solid state text books), conductivity, and a host of other phenomena. >I think we need to hear further how we get said recoil. Recoil from >what? > See last comment. >Yes, all the theories to which you make reference have a common >thread centering on concepts of order and coherence that are totally >unrealistic for the systems being described. Sure there can be >some marvelous effects involving long range order at T=0, but these >systems don't actually have that long range order and they are not >at T=0. The T=0 idealization is a limit. Coupling to outside processes may change things. But it is an important starting point that may be significantly more realistic than the two-particle limit that has provided the common starting point in the past. >As I have said many times before, the assumed nuclear >energy release is associated with a change in the way wave functions >for nucleons are correlated within this system. When paired as a >proton and a neutron we have the intial state and when grouped by >fours -- two of each kind -- we have the final state. You can't >describe that transition or learn anything relating it by a calculation >that has the internal nuclear coordinates separated out. That >separation is an implicit assumption that nothing significant happens >with respect to those internal coordinates. As I pointed out above, there does exist a limit at T=0 where a coherent process (defined by the shift in the zero of energy of the nuclear degrees of freedom) in which separability can take place with coupling occurring to the lattice. In the resulting scenario, charge is coherently expelled to the boundaries of the lattice. Again, I suggest you examine the ICCF6 Proceedings paper for a more complete discussion of this. >If nothing changes you are >left with the deuterons you started with and there is no energy release. >When you assume a seamless, direct transition from an ensemble of >deuterons to an ensemble of 4He, you are assuming a degeneracy between >those two states that does not, in fact, exist. The interaction potential, defined by the time evolution of the overlap of the states, determines if the process occurs. In an ordered, T=0, infinite solid, it is reversible, and no energy is released. In the presence of boundaries and lattice imperfections, the interaction becomes irreversible. >Dick Blue > > I will be away until Friday. Scott Chubb From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 17:29:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA08191; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:28:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:28:38 -0700 Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <3623A7AD.68B819B9 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:19:09 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Questions about our universe References: <199810132311.QAA21092 Au.oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"xgF291.0.r_1.r0_8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23301 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ross wrote: So, that binary would gravitate according to; F = G(M)(2M/3)/R^2 = 2GM^2/3R^2 All this does is to change the orbital periods, ie, circular velocities of objects orbiting a star. Hi Ross and Terren, That was an interesting post. Wouldn't the red shift of light from the binary reaching the objects also change? Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 18:18:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA22665; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:13:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:13:23 -0700 Message-Id: <199810140113.UAA16809 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:12:16 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-Message-ID: <"yvwF-1.0.oX5.ng_8s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23302 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Here's the message off the website, supposedly a transcript from the show: > > > You may recall about a year ago... I told you that there was an > > event, a threatening terrible event occured to my family, which > > I could not tell you about. Because of that event, and a succession > > of other events, what you're listening to right now, is my final > > broadcast on the air. This is it folks, I'm going off the air and > > will not return. And what I will tell you now is what I told you > > then. When the time comes when I can tell you what occurred, I > > will tell you, through the press, through the media, of one sort > > or the other. I will explain to you the entire thing, it's not that I > > want to hold anything back from my audience, however, for the > > protection of my family, until it is otherwise revealed, I can't > > discuss it, I won't discuss it. And if you were in my position, you > > would do exactly the same thing. And when you finally hear > > whatever it is, what it is, whenever you hear it, I think you will > > then understand. > > > > At any rate, I wanted to tell you, I didn't want to go without > > saying a word, so I'm telling you now. What you are listening to, > > is MY FINAL BROADCAST. It's been a good run, and you've been a > > great audience, and it's been an absolutely incredible forum. And > > my presumption is, that the forum will continue. At any rate, it > > certainly is my hope, that the forum will continue. > > > > And again when the time comes, when this information can be > > released, you can be sure that I will release it, and I would > > assume because of the magnitude of the forum that I have held, at > > that time, you'll get the whole story. But the time will come > > when I will tell it. > > > > So for now and the foreseeable future, that's it! That is the end of > > this man's broadcast career. So, thank you, and goodbye... > > > > (Art Bell, 2:55 AM, Oct 13, 1998) > >This could just be from his own personal paranoia or other silly personal >reasons he chooses to overdramatize. But there is a wicked hatred out there >in the US against those who work the territory Art Bell visited frequently >on his show. I doubt government spooks worried about him much, as his more >flakey guests probably helped discredit many of the claims regarding what >may have had some national secrecy attached to it from time to time. But >there's another large and demonstrably violent mindset around that thinks >he's a tool of the devil, and, like abortion clinics or homosexuals etc., >constitutes a legitimate target. Remember radio talk show personality Dave >Berg - self proclaimed "loud-mouthed Jew" ? Remember what happened to him? >A full clip from a MAC-10 is what happened to him. > >Freedom of speech is not something to be taken for granted. It's literally >to die for. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI ***{Who is Art Bell. What is his agenda? Is he a right-wing kook, a left-wing kook, a centrist kook, or a libertarian? --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 18:39:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA32689; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:38:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:38:30 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:41:08 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! In-reply-to: <199810140113.UAA16809 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199810140139.SAA25757 smtp2.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: <"jhJVZ2.0.f-7.L209s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23303 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:12 PM 10/13/98 -0600, you wrote: >***{Who is Art Bell. What is his agenda? Is he a right-wing kook, a >left-wing kook, a centrist kook, or a libertarian? --Mitchell Jones}*** > ... or a libertarian kook? --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 20:33:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA08039; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:27:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:27:24 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Barut's paper revision update Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:26:44 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3629179b.11170331 mail-hub> References: <3621EAA0.522656AC verisoft.com.tr> In-Reply-To: <3621EAA0.522656AC verisoft.com.tr> 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: <"34BfX3.0.oy1.-d19s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23304 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:40:16 +0200, Hamdi Ucar wrote: [snip] >and will be at (when Robin Robin van Spaandonk update its copy on its site) > http://users.bigpond.net.au/Ultra-High-Temp-BECs/barut.zip > [snip] Hi all, This is as up to date as the most recent email received from Hamdi. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 20:47:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA16307; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:44:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:44:11 -0700 Message-Id: <199810140344.WAA18968 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:43:45 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-Message-ID: <"rKOWp.0.f-3.Au19s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23305 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 08:12 PM 10/13/98 -0600, you wrote: > >>***{Who is Art Bell? What is his agenda? Is he a right-wing kook, a >>left-wing kook, a centrist kook, or a libertarian? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >> > >... or a libertarian kook? > >--Lynn ***{Sorry Lynn, but I reserve the word "kook" for people who believe that by gathering together into groups they somehow magically acquire rights that none of them would dare to claim as individuals. No individual, for example, has a right to steal, or to enslave, or to counterfeit, but many people think that by gathering together into a group, they can legitimately elect an official and empower him to steal, to enslave, or to counterfeit. I use the word "kook" to describe such people. On the other hand, those who believe that groups have no rights other than those explicitly delegated to them by their members, I call "libertarians." --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 20:56:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA17722; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:47:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:47:20 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810140139.SAA25757 smtp2.asu.edu> References: <199810140113.UAA16809 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:16:15 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-Message-ID: <"_vSgi3.0.fK4.1x19s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23306 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 08:12 PM 10/13/98 -0600, you wrote: > >>***{Who is Art Bell. What is his agenda? Is he a right-wing kook, a >>left-wing kook, a centrist kook, or a libertarian? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >> > >... or a libertarian kook? > >--Lynn Hey, that was going to be my answer! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 20:57:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA19488; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:50:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:50:12 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Famous CF hot water heater 4000 years old? Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:50:47 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3628150b.10514642 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: <"cs-wt3.0.2m4.az19s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23307 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In the book "Gods of the New Millennium" by Alan F. Alford, there is a color plate (5) of a block of Andesite, from the Puma Punka site at Tiwanaku in Bolivia. This block of stone contains a narrow channel with multiple "drilled" perpendicular holes at regular intervals. Imagine my surprise and delight when upon looking up the composition of Andesite I discovered that it contains a considerable proportion of the mineral Andesine which just happens to have a triclinic lattice that would, as I have proposed, be ideal for CF. This gives me the strong impression that the blocks comprised part of a hot water heater. Water passing through narrow channels and holes in intimate contact with the stone would be subject to either a D + H -> He3 reaction or perhaps H + "some atom in the stone" -> "something else" reaction. Whether or not the ancients understood the process, or just knew that water in contact with this type of rock got warm is anyone's guess. In any case it would appear that this may be both an explanation of the purpose of the ruins (local bathhouse, or perhaps just multi-purpose hot water source?), as well as a confirmation of CF and an indication of how one might well proceed in harnessing the process. andesine is a sodium calcium aluminium silicate. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 21:18:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA31249; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:14:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:14:08 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810140113.UAA16809 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:36:34 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-Message-ID: <"JKAvF1.0.1e7.FK29s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23308 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell - > ***{Who is Art Bell. What is his agenda? Is he a > right-wing kook, a left-wing kook, a centrist kook, or > a libertarian? --Mitchell Jones}*** He claimed to be Libertarian. The show was not especially political, but tended to consist of a stream of guests generally from the lunatic fringe of new age thought. Psychics, Richard Hoaglund, that kind of thing. But on rare occasions he'd have guest who actually did some serious minded research into UFOs, cryptozoology, - and even anomalous physics. I liked more that the show just existed than to actually listen to it, and I'm sorry it's gone. There needs to be that kind of thing around IMHO, despite the fact that most people think it's all crap. There's a certain value to having a forum for diverse and controversial points of view, as members of this list well know. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 21:23:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA00742; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:19:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:19:22 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:29:55 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Additional Corroboration of Joseph Newman's Theory of the Gyroscopic Massergy Resent-Message-ID: <"79Dss.0.JB.8P29s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23309 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Additional Corroboration of Joseph Newman's Theory of the Gyroscopic Massergy October 13, 1998 To the People of the World: There has been additional verification of my life's work: Note: Prior to the publishing of my work in the late 1970s, culminating with the publication of my fundamental book in 1984, all scientific books stated in essence that: "THE MAGNETIC LINES OF FORCE ARE IMAGINARY." Today it was announced on national news and via the Associated Press that three U.S. physicists were awarded the Nobel Prize for the "discovery that ordinary electrons acting together in STRONG MAGNETIC FIELDS and very low temperatures can CONDENSE INTO NEW TYPES OF COMPOSITE SUBATOMIC PARTICLES THAT FUNCTION AS A FLUID." It is obvious by their own words that the above effect would _not_ occur without the STRONG MAGNETIC FIELDS. Note: On pages 16-18 of my book (The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman) I state repeatedly that current and magnetic fields act as a FLUID. On page 20 I state: "THE MAGNETIC FIELD CONSISTS OF GYROSCOPIC-TYPE PARTICLES WHICH ARE THE MECHANICAL ESSENCE OF E=MC^2 AND REPRESENT AN ORDERLY FLOW OF KINETIC ENERGY." [I am describing the essence of a "FLUID".] The Associated Press article states, "The three men discovered a new form of quantum Fluid ... they (the fluids) can reveal more about the inner structure of matter." The articles also states, "...why this is so important is that it has to do with why the universe is the way it is." Question: Isn't it curious that from pages 1-14 of my book I repeatedly prove that a magnetic field consists of GYROSCOPIC PARTICLES MOVING AND SPINNING AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT. Then on the first page of Chapter 4 of my book, paragraph 14, I state: "SUCH ENERGY IN THE FORM OF GYROSCOPIC PARTICLES IS THE BASIC BUILDING BLOCK OF ALL MATTER AND PROVIDES THE BASIS FOR THE CONCEPTUAL INTERFACE BETWEEN ENERGY AND MATTER." Up to page 21 I describe how matter and magnetic fields are comprised of GYROSCOPIC PARTICLES and feature a picture of a large, 10,000-lb primitive prototype which I originally constructed to prove the truth of what I have described. On page 21 I state: "I CONSIDER THE TECHNICAL PROCESS TO BE 10,000 TIMES MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE PRIMITIVE, WORKING PROTOTYPES." The recent AP announcement of the three physicists awarded the Nobel Prize for proving that Magnetic Fields (in very cold temperatures) and electrons produces matter proves THE POINT I HAVE MADE ABOVE. Also, refer to Chapter 16 entitled "Gravity", pages 91-95: On page 95 I specifically state: "I SIT IN AWE UPON THE REALIZATION OF THIS INGENIOUS MECHANISM THAT IS SO SIMPLE THAT IT BEFUDDLES THE MIND." Magnetic and Electric Fields are indeed equal. They are one and the same! The basic mechanism of nature is ingenious because all Matter is composed of one type Gyroscopic-Action-Particle. By travelling in varying directions, such particles create a force influence upon one another and thereby cause them to gyrate with respect to one another. As a result, this mechanical action and varying numbers of Gyroscopic Particles then create infinite types of matter. Throughout pages 112-153 of the Chapter entitled "Astronomy", I prove and state on page 116: "IN ESSENCE, EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE MOVES IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE GYROSCOPIC-ACTION-ENTITY COMPOSITION OF THEIR RESPECTIVE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS." On page 140 I state: "THIS BASIC GYROSCOPIC-ACTION-ENTITY PREVAILS THROUGHOUT OUT ENTIRE UNIVERSE AND, IN A MECHANICAL SENSE, IT ELECTROMAGNETICALLY COUPLES THE UNIVERSE INTO A SINGLE ENTITY OR UNIVERSAL ENERGY MACHINE." And from page 281: "IT DOES NOT SEEM IMPROBABLY TO ME THAT THE GYROSCOPIC ENERGY COMPRISING ELECTRICAL AND MAGNETIC FIELDS OF MATTER-IN-MOTION CAN BE UTILIZED IN THE PROPER MATHEMATICAL COMBINATIONS AND PROPORTIONS TO CREATE *ANY* SUBSTANCE IN THE UNIVERSE." Today's AP News announcement of three physicists doing EXACTLY THAT, PROVES MY LIFE'S WORK FOR HUMANITY CORRECT! My book consists of more than 600 pages of truth and conspiracy against you the people by the "old boy network of power brokers." Question: Isn't it curious that you the people know of my life's work for humanity and yet the recent news media and Nobel prize 'alumni' pretend that they know nothing of my life's work for you and humanity? I fight on with the help of a few TRUE FRIENDS and YOU. Question: When will you the People of the World join me in large numbers? I will be demonstrating an operational Energy Machine in Phoenix during the beginning of November. My intent is for individuals to be able to come and view this technology at their convenience. When I am relocated in Phoenix, I will be publishing on the Internet my new telephone and address. I invite everyone to visit me in Phoenix and join me in my service to you and humanity. Love to Humanity, Joseph W. Newman (303) 814-3403 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 23:22:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA07935; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:20:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:20:07 -0700 Message-ID: <053501bdf73a$8762b9c0$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Subject: Re: 150 kj Ultracapacitor Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:42:37 -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: <"CAAkz.0.tx1.LA49s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23310 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What materials are used in this? -----Original Message----- From: Bob Horst To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, October 12, 1998 11:50 PM Subject: 150 kj Ultracapacitor >Just saw an interesting ad in EE Times from Maxwell technologies for a >150 kj ultracapacitor. It can deliver over 12 KW for 5 seconds. It is >95 Farads at 56 volts, and made up of 28 separate 2.3 V ultracapacitors >in series. It will sell for around $5000 in small quantities. Tim >Taylor would be proud to own one of these babies. > >They also have smaller versions. See http://www.powercache.com > >These might be useful in some experiments that are trying to use >batteries to supply the starting power. It should be harder to fool >them with strange charging currents (or was that the reason for using >batteries in the first place?) Too bad the voltage is so low (and the >price so high), or we could suggest them to Correa. > >-- Bob Horst > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 23:22:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA07998; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:20:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:20:17 -0700 Message-ID: <053c01bdf73a$8defaaa0$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Subject: Re: Jacques Benveniste's Water Memory Etc. Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:40:26 -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: <"KSMTj1.0.ry1.WA49s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23311 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: How much brainpower does smell use compared to the other senses, it is the least studied isn't it? It seems to me in many animals smell is critical to finding healthy food, but I bet those are the same animals with strong sense of smell. >At temperatures around 37 C water molecules can >form "clusters/patterns" that are as innumerable as snowflakes, each with a >unique signature that can be "smelled". > >Next time you're in the kitchen, note the aroma >of food that has molecules that couldn't possibly be coming off as >outgassing vapors, or how livestock can smell water miles from a waterhole. > >Fido uses this phenomenon to Brand you car tires with a personalized >signature. And you think the magnetic strip on your credit card has memory? >:-) > >Regards, Frederick > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 23:23:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA10561; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:22:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:22:42 -0700 Message-ID: <36243ECA.1E50 ca-ois.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:03:54 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski Reply-To: jimostr ca-ois.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! References: <199810140344.WAA18968 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vvOz12.0.sa2.oC49s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23313 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >At 08:12 PM 10/13/98 -0600, you wrote: > > > >>***{Who is Art Bell? What is his agenda? Is he a right-wing kook, a > >>left-wing kook, a centrist kook, or a libertarian? --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > >> > > > >... or a libertarian kook? > > > >--Lynn > > ***{Sorry Lynn, but I reserve the word "kook" for people who believe that > by gathering together into groups they somehow magically acquire rights > that none of them would dare to claim as individuals. No individual, for > example, has a right to steal, or to enslave, or to counterfeit, but many > people think that by gathering together into a group, they can legitimately > elect an official and empower him to steal, to enslave, or to counterfeit. > I use the word "kook" to describe such people. If any of these "kooks" try to enslave, rob or cheat you in some kind of systematic way (such as by being so numerous and powerfull that they , in summary , amount to the de-facto "government" ) - do you then have the right to shoot any of their armed representatives (cops)? If not, then how would one prevent such armed representatives of kookdom from interfering with one's enjoyment and proprietary right to drive on the PUBLIC Rights-of-way known as highways? How would one prevent such armed representatives of kookdom from knocking your door down in the middle of the night in search of substances that only THEY are allowed to be in possession of? In short , how does one who is a slave contradict the idea that his masters have the RIGHT to keep him enslaved , poor and confused, without at the same time declaring that armed force will be met with armed force (the "militia")? It's one thing to talk, a completely DIFFERENT thing to ACT on principle. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 13 23:24:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA08034; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:20:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:20:22 -0700 Message-ID: <053d01bdf73a$8ef310e0$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:42:09 -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: <"8DJ1x2.0.Mz1.aA49s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23312 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Don't you remember randi quaid in lampoons vacation, his metal plate? (grin) I wonder seriously though if there is any correlated data of people with metal plates in thier bodies? >At 09:56 PM 10/12/98 -0600,Frederick Sparber wrote: > >>Including the ability to demodulate UHF (AM) signals. That ringing/hash you >>think is Tinnitus may be your local UHF tv Video signal under the right >>atmospheric conditions. :-) >> >>Regards, Frederick >> >So, if I wear a metal helmet my tinnitus should disappear? > >Ed Strojny > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 00:24:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA23886; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:22:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:22:03 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:23:39 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <199810131745.KAA13849 smtp2.asu.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"ZEgrd2.0.3r5.Q459s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23314 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Lynn Kurtz wrote: > At 09:04 AM 10/13/98 +0200, you wrote: > > >equation that any scientist will understand, and says what scientists > >all know, that with uncorrelated error sources, the total % error of a > >quantity calculated from several measured variables is the sum of the > >% errors in those variables. This arises from the mathematics of error > >propagation. > > Perhaps this was referring to a specific formula in the paper? It is > certainly not true generally, or even usually. For a simple example, if the > power in a DC circuit is computed by P = i^2R and i is measured with 2% and > R with 3% error, the absloute error in the calculated value of P is > approximately given by (a little differential calculus here): > > dP = 2iR di + i^2 dR, where di = .02i, dR = .03R > > so > > dP = 2iR(.02 i) + i^2(.03R) = .04 i^2 R + .03 i^R = .07 i^R = .07P > > In this case we have a possible 7% error, not 2% + 3% = 5%. Yeah, well, didn't want to make it too detailed. You could express that formula as I*I*R, and add all their errors. But you are right of course. Nothing is quite as simple as one might think. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 02:17:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA10871; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:14:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:14:08 -0700 Message-Id: <36247A79.F6977E97 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:18:33 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Robin van Spaandonk Cc: vortex Subject: Re: Barut's paper revision update References: <3621EAA0.522656AC verisoft.com.tr> <3629179b.11170331@mail-hub> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UZzLt2.0.jf2.Wj69s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23315 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sorry, I think it could be more convenient to you fech it from the updated site http://www.geocities.com/rainforest/6660/barut.zip, instead of a mail attachement. and I forget to send you a message about it. For clearance, I am posting the latest copy to your box. Again, sorry for the overhead. Regards, hamdi ucar Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:40:16 +0200, Hamdi Ucar wrote: > [snip] > >and will be at (when Robin Robin van Spaandonk update its copy on its site) > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/Ultra-High-Temp-BECs/barut.zip > > > [snip] > Hi all, > > This is as up to date as the most recent email received from Hamdi. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 02:53:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA01906; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:51:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:51:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <03fb01bdf757$85b3a400$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Jacques Benveniste's Water Memory Etc. Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:46:20 -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: <"gwxIb.0.iT.eG79s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23316 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Bill Wallace To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 12:22 AM Subject: Re: Jacques Benveniste's Water Memory Etc. Bill Wallace wrote: >How much brainpower does smell use compared to the other senses, it is the >least studied isn't it? Good question. Bloodhounds don't seem to be overly bright, but they can smell a track left by a child's shoes on a sidewalk several days old. Is atmospheric water vapor collecting on the track "amplifying" the scent for them? >It seems to me in many animals smell is critical to >finding healthy food, but I bet those are the same animals with strong sense >of smell. The dogs that sniff out drugs aren't finding "healthy food", are they? But it's a living. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 03:10:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA02252; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <040001bdf759$f4dfce60$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 04:03:47 -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: <"PWk7C2.0.6Z.-W79s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23317 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Bill Wallace To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 12:23 AM Subject: Re: OBRL - Jacques Benveniste Wins Court Decision (fwd) Bill Wallace wrote: >Don't you remember randi quaid in lampoons vacation, his metal plate? >(grin) Sorry I missed out on that one, Bill. The human ear can hear sounds down to femto watts/cm^2 through the eardrum and through the middle ear mechanism. The direct action of EM fields in the cochlea can be "sensed" down around 10^-21 watts/cm^2. Thats getting close to the cutoff threshold for an 85 foot Dish at the VLA Radio-Telescope facility. :-) If I was to subscribe to ESP capability the inner ear with that level of sensitivity,would be the most likely "receiver". IOW, I might hear your thought waves even if you were on the Moon. :-) Then again with a kid from Acne High going by with a BOOM BOX at FOOL VOLUME you could probably hear it on Mars. :-) >I wonder seriously though if there is any correlated data of people with >metal plates in thier bodies? Arcs and sparks at airport metal-detectors? :-( Regards, Frederick > > >>At 09:56 PM 10/12/98 -0600,Frederick Sparber wrote: >> >>>Including the ability to demodulate UHF (AM) signals. That ringing/hash >you >>>think is Tinnitus may be your local UHF tv Video signal under the right >>>atmospheric conditions. :-) >>> >>>Regards, Frederick >>> >>So, if I wear a metal helmet my tinnitus should disappear? >> >>Ed Strojny >> > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 03:21:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA19936; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:20:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:20:48 -0700 Message-ID: <042801bdf75c$3f718ca0$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: MHD Vortex Generator Question Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 04:20:06 -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: <"GdMHg2.0.Jt4.0i79s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23318 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex If one wanted to cause a conductive fluid like molten tin to swirl inside a ceramic (or metal) pipe about 15 cm diameter and 60 cm long to create a vortex/cavity; How can this be done with Electrical currents and magnetic fields? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 03:59:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA24285; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:58:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:58:33 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981014060051.009502f0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 06:00:51 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: MHD Vortex Generator Question Cc: "George" In-Reply-To: <042801bdf75c$3f718ca0$afb4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"-Cofh.0.Nx5.PF89s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23319 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:20 AM 10/14/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >If one wanted to cause a conductive fluid like molten tin to swirl inside a >pipe... If you could stand to place a conductive rod down the center of a metal pipe, I think you could achieve swirl by wrapping a solenoid coil around the outside of the pipe, creating an axial B in the pipe, and flowing current radially from the OD to the central rod. The result would be a homopolar motor where the liquid metal functioned like the disk in Faraday's famous experiments. 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 Oct 14 04:19:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA29974; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 04:18:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 04:18:48 -0700 Message-ID: <043b01bdf764$5c0eb560$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: MHD Vortex Generator Question Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 05:16:52 -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: <"DlFJs3.0.GK7.NY89s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23320 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scott Little To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: George Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 5:00 AM Subject: Re: MHD Vortex Generator Question Scott wrote: >At 04:20 AM 10/14/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > >>If one wanted to cause a conductive fluid like molten tin to swirl inside a >>pipe... > >If you could stand to place a conductive rod down the center of a metal >pipe, I think you could achieve swirl by wrapping a solenoid coil around >the outside of the pipe, creating an axial B in the pipe, and flowing >current radially from the OD to the central rod. The result would be a >homopolar motor where the liquid metal functioned like the disk in >Faraday's famous experiments. Good idea, Scott, but I need the center to be hollow. However, to show my hand, I want to blast Microwaves down through the Hollow Cavity which poses the question that if I had substantial Microwave Power with the right mode, would it swirl the molten metal and create the cavity itself, especially if there was an external magnetic coil? A SuperPower Microwave Vortex Generator, for molten Lithium Hydride(~= 700 C), 1H1 + 3Li7 ---> 2 He4 +17.3 Mev,or D + Li7 ---> 2 He4 + n + 15.02 Mev or maybe some ZPE Pumping? A 2.45 Gigahertz "Faraday Pump"? :-) Regards, Frederick > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) >little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 04:48:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA02875; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 04:46:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 04:46:22 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3628150b.10514642 mail-hub> References: Conversation <3628150b.10514642 mail-hub> with last message <3628150b.10514642@mail-hub> Priority: Normal X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Mike Connolly" Subject: Re: Famous CF hot water heater 4000 years old? Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 06:48:07 PDT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"rHHaY1.0.hi.Dy89s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23321 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: as per george carlin, i hope you meant a cold water heater as even the ancients would have no need to heat hot water (maybe a hot water cooler?!) thanks G'DAY! Mike Connolly Bulk Feed Tank Product Manager GRAIN SYSTEMS, INC. P.O. BOX 20 Assumption, IL 62510 PH: 217.226.4421 FAX: 217.226.4420 U.S. FAX: 800.800.5329 E-MAIL: mconnolly grainsystems.com ---------- > In the book "Gods of the New Millennium" by Alan F. Alford, there is a > color plate (5) of a block of Andesite, from the Puma Punka site at > Tiwanaku in Bolivia. This block of stone contains a narrow channel > with multiple "drilled" perpendicular holes at regular intervals. > > Imagine my surprise and delight when upon looking up the composition > of Andesite I discovered that it contains a considerable proportion of > the mineral Andesine which just happens to have a triclinic lattice > that would, as I have proposed, be ideal for CF. > > This gives me the strong impression that the blocks comprised part of > a hot water heater. Water passing through narrow channels and holes in > intimate contact with the stone would be subject to either a D + H -> > He3 reaction or perhaps H + "some atom in the stone" -> "something > else" reaction. > > Whether or not the ancients understood the process, or just knew that > water in contact with this type of rock got warm is anyone's guess. > In any case it would appear that this may be both an explanation of > the purpose of the ruins (local bathhouse, or perhaps just > multi-purpose hot water source?), as well as a confirmation of CF and > an indication of how one might well proceed in harnessing the process. > > andesine is a sodium calcium aluminium silicate. > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 07:31:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA18605; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:29:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:29:19 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:27:40 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: News from New Energy Symposium Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810141030_MC2-5CA9-6F4 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"y1GUq2.0.WY4.-KB9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23322 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little asks: Jed, do you have any details of the calorimetry being used at SRI on this experiment? No I don't and I wish I did. I'll ask Case next time I talk to him. You might ask McKubre, George or Akira Kawasaki. Are they using Case's one-point temperature measurement or something more rigorous. I think it is more rigorous but I am not sure. It could hardly be less rigorous, could it? They are preparing a second run. I think the main focus has been on helium. I said that Case stresses the importance of the shape of the container, and he advises Scott Little to stick closely to the geometry of containers that Case himself has used. Scott writes: That's news. When I was doing the experiments, Case didn't see anything wrong with the shape of my container. Yes, it was news to him as well. He says he spent several frustrating weeks trying to scale up, and he found out the shape of the vessel was more important then he realized. He kept destroying batches of material. A result that depends on the vessel shape sounds suspiciously like an artifact, but in his present run, the temperature elevation is fluctuating between a 30 and 40 deg C, and Slack & Case say that no thermal artifact could produce such a high number. He has made a great deal of progress since he last communicated with us. I hope he succeeds in the next run with the large calorimeter and $1,000 worth of material. I hope he does not blow himself up. The new calorimeter is better designed with the electric heating element well insulated from the gas. Judging by photos, the new cell looks professionally fabricated. But it holds much more gas, and a cryogenic Dewar is fragile. An industrial cell could easily be made from heavy duty steel canisters and operated with as much safety as today's compressed natural gas cylinders. If SRI's result has been obtained in a rigorous calorimeter, I'm interested in resuming this experiment. My instinct would be to wait a few weeks for results from the big calorimeter. It should not take long to fix the last pinhole leak and fire 'er up. He is thinking about leaving the deuterium gas canister attached to the cell with a trickle of gas to replace the loss. He monitors pressure, of course. As long as the cell pressure remains well over atmospheric pressure, there is no danger of air and oxygen leaking in and causing an explosion. If self-sustaining CF heat is generated, I hope it can be carried off safely. That depends on the capacity and inside exposure of the tubes that are filled with water to produce steam. An experiment on this scale is tricky and dangerous. I wish he could make a smaller self-sustaining cell, but he says that would be difficult. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 07:31:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA18801; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:29:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:29:43 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:27:29 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810141030_MC2-5CA9-6F2 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"9rwZo3.0.ab4.MLB9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23323 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Dieter Britz now believes the error in McKubre's calorimeter is 0.4%. He originally said it was 3%, so he is an order of magnitude closer to the truth, and I will not argue the difference between 0.1 and 0.4. He writes: I have wondered how people can claim 0.1% absolute accuracy anyway . . . Well, Dieter, instead of wondering you might ask Mike McKubre, because that is what he claims in the papers I quoted. I know better than to argue the point. I know when I am licked! I once tried to convince you that Pons and Fleischmann use more than one thermocouple. I showed you statements and schematics from the peer reviewed literature and conference preceding, and an e-mail message from Miles, who was looking at a P&F cell when he wrote it, but none of that made the slightest dent in your assurance. You told me you could not be sure the message from Miles was real. Now you will say you cannot be sure the papers actually say "errors are the greater of 10 mW or 0.1%" and it goes without saying you will refuse to look at the papers or ask McKubre, so I bow out of the discussion. Doesn't McKubre read this list, and could maybe comment? I do not think he reads this list. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 08:10:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA32470; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:06:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:06:25 -0700 Message-Id: <199810141507.KAA27302 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:06:10 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Jacques Benveniste's Water Memory Etc. Resent-Message-ID: <"xIBux3.0.3x7.ltB9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23324 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At temperatures around 37 C water molecules can >form "clusters/patterns" that are as innumerable as snowflakes, each with a >unique signature that can be "smelled". ***{I don't know what your source is on this, but I don't believe it. A sense of smell would be useless if it gave a different signal for each of billions of different water molecule configurations. That would be of as little biological utility as a sense of sight which treated each 1 cycle difference in light frequency as a different color. Natural selection would operate to eliminate individual animals whose senses made these sorts of utterly useless distinctions. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Next time you're in the kitchen, note the aroma >of food that has molecules that couldn't possibly be coming off as >outgassing vapors, or how livestock can smell water miles from a waterhole. > >Fido uses this phenomenon to Brand you car tires with a personalized >signature. And you think the magnetic strip on your credit card has memory? >:-) > >Regards, Frederick > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 09:08:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA20126; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:02:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:02:12 -0700 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com, "ALAN P. BLOOD" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:34:29 -0600 Message-ID: X-Mailer: YAM 2.0 Preview5 - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck - http://www.yam.ch Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: dielectrophoresis and MISER effect (fwd) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"BPYXx3.0.Lw4.2iC9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23325 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This may be related to water memory. Pat# is: 5,711,950 Ron *** Forwarded message, originally written by VGammill ygammil1 san.rr.com on 13-Oct-98 *** Thanks to Char and Rog for very interesting contributions. The MISER effect seems to have much in common with the induction of compressionalwaves in crystals (piezoelectric) or in transducers. Many years ago Ito tinker with these using hollow iron-nickel rods. A few days ago Ihad a meeting with Lee Lorenzen who has a recently granted US patent for the manufacture of clustered water. According to Lee, clustered water is a natural component of all living things. Their natural frequencies provide the unit currency for intracellular communication. These clusters consist of five and six membered hydrogen-bonded rings, verifiable by O-17 NMR. He induces these clusters in water with 90 gigahertz EM. The clustering purportedly lowers impedance and surface tension. Lee is very protective of his technology so I do not know much more than that about this science. I do know that this structure in water helps guide the quaternary structure of proteins and is an integral part of the DNA molecule. Lee says that microwaves break up the clusters as does heat and ethylene oxide. Certain minerals such as germanium may well seed these clusters. When I make interferon I use sodium dodecyl sulfate. This relaxes the structure such that it is less friable, less subject to torsional forces with mechanical stirring. Triton X-100 and nonoxynol (the antimicrobial spermicide) work the same way. These same detergents are used to attack membranes for DNA extraction. I am very wary of the use of any synthetic surfactants: extremely small amounts can have powerful, long-acting biological effects. Hans Nieper's Revolution in Technology and Society (p. 242) reports the immediate increase in serum triglycerides and coronary infarction rates as soon as detergents are introduced into a culture. Cell membranes are probably further corrupted by the introduction of trans-fatty acids from partial hydrogenation. Cancer is usually associated with the reduction of membrane potenials. Patients with hyperkalemic (high K+) diseases (Parkinson, Addison) have reduced cancer rates, and patients with hypokalemic (low K+) diseases (alcoholism, obesity, stress) have increased cancer rates. Too, sodium pump activity has been shown to be restored in RBCs in cancer patients in complete response. [Cites available on request] Now the questions. Could the structuring/clustering (or lack thereof) of water play any part in the uptake of electromagnetic energy? Could our uses of detergents and quaternary ammonium salts affect our cellular milieu in ways that Rife did not have to contend? Vincent Gammill ScD *** End of forwarded message *** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 09:28:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28678; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:23:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:23:43 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:30:25 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: MHD Vortex Generator Question Cc: "George" Resent-Message-ID: <"WW1jq2.0.-_6.E0D9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23326 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:20 AM 10/14/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >If one wanted to cause a conductive fluid like molten tin to swirl inside a >ceramic (or metal) >pipe about 15 cm diameter and 60 cm long to create a vortex/cavity; How can >this be done with Electrical currents and magnetic fields? > >Regards, Frederick One possibility is to place one or more pair of DC electrodes around the outside of the cylinder and position magnets on the bottom with fields going upward parallel to the cylinder axis, with N field cutting the radial anode current and S field cutting the radial cathode current, or vice versa. You could insert a stirrer from the bottom, like a blender. Need a high temp seal. The simplest option is just to spin the whole cylinder. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 10:07:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13319; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:03:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:03:30 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:01:57 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Wired magazine will report on CF Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810141304_MC2-5CA5-C7A4 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"rE-Kb3.0.yF3.XbD9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23328 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The November issue of Wired magazine will have an article about cold fusion. It should be on the newsstands next week. Ed Storms reviewed a draft, and he says it is pretty good. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 10:09:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA12233; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:01:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:01:20 -0700 Message-ID: <047601bdf794$2ca6eec0$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: MHD Vortex Generator Question Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:00:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"KLp9a3.0.--2.VZD9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23327 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 Cc: George Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 10:28 AM Subject: Re: MHD Vortex Generator Question Horace wrote: >At 4:20 AM 10/14/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>If one wanted to cause a conductive fluid like molten tin to swirl inside a >>ceramic (or metal) >>pipe about 15 cm diameter and 60 cm long to create a vortex/cavity; How can >>this be done with Electrical currents and magnetic fields? >> >>Regards, Frederick > > >One possibility is to place one or more pair of DC electrodes around the >outside of the cylinder and position magnets on the bottom with fields >going upward parallel to the cylinder axis, with N field cutting the radial >anode current and S field cutting the radial cathode current, or vice >versa. Now you're talking the Faraday Pump used in the nuclear/space industry for pumping liquid metals, IOW an MHD Generator in reverse. A current flowing across a channel with a perpendicular magnetic field pumps the liquid metal down the channel. I haven't seen much on these in the past 30 years though. > >You could insert a stirrer from the bottom, like a blender. Need a high >temp seal. That be the problem. > >The simplest option is just to spin the whole cylinder. Maybe not. The magnetron feed line to the molten LiH cavity (about 30 torr vapor pressure at 700 C)could be a lower temp rotary seal, but if the E x H field of the 12 cm microwaves will cause enough drag on the molten LiH to generate the cavity then no rotary seals would be required, thus a passive system. Then with Thermo-PhotoVoltaics feeding back to power the 5 Megawatt Magnetron, a totally passive system with the D-Li7 reaction neutrons fissioning Boron-10: (n + 5B-10 ---> He + 3Li7 + 3.4 Mev)for propulsion. :-) Regards, Frederick >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 10:11:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17233; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:07:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:07:18 -0700 Message-ID: <048101bdf795$02f46200$afb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: , , "ALAN P. BLOOD" Subject: Re: dielectrophoresis and MISER effect (fwd) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:06:27 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"gGRy7.0.bC4.5fD9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23329 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: R. Wormus To: vortex-l eskimo.com ; ALAN P. BLOOD Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 10:07 AM Subject: Re: dielectrophoresis and MISER effect (fwd) Ron Wormus wrote: >This may be related to water memory. Pat# is: 5,711,950 >Ron Snip Message. Good Stuff! Thanks Ron! Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 10:19:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA13202; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:01:32 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: McKubre on Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810141304_MC2-5CA5-C7A2 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"6IDrW1.0.9E3.vkD9s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23330 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Mike McKubre says that the power level of the Case cell was not measured rigorously, although they did a better job than Case. He says the power level was not as high as 15 watts, but he did not say how high it was. He is "reasonably confident that there is excess heat, even more confident that there is helium production, and that the two are quantitatively related." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 10:18:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA23371; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:13:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:13:49 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:20:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: MHD Vortex Generator Question Cc: "George" Resent-Message-ID: <"wYJvw2.0.4j5.ClD9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23331 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:00 AM 10/14/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >-----Original Message----- >From: Horace Heffner >To: vortex-l eskimo.com >Cc: George >Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 10:28 AM >Subject: Re: MHD Vortex Generator Question > >Horace wrote: > > >>At 4:20 AM 10/14/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >>>To: Vortex >>> >>>If one wanted to cause a conductive fluid like molten tin to swirl inside >a >>>ceramic (or metal) >>>pipe about 15 cm diameter and 60 cm long to create a vortex/cavity; How >can >>>this be done with Electrical currents and magnetic fields? >>> >>>Regards, Frederick >> >> >>One possibility is to place one or more pair of DC electrodes around the >>outside of the cylinder and position magnets on the bottom with fields >>going upward parallel to the cylinder axis, with N field cutting the radial >>anode current and S field cutting the radial cathode current, or vice >>versa. > >Now you're talking the Faraday Pump used in the >nuclear/space industry for pumping liquid metals, IOW an MHD Generator in >reverse. > >A current flowing across a channel with a perpendicular magnetic field pumps >the liquid metal down the channel. I haven't seen much on these in the past >30 years though. >> >>You could insert a stirrer from the bottom, like a blender. Need a high >>temp seal. > >That be the problem. >> >>The simplest option is just to spin the whole cylinder. > >Maybe not. The magnetron feed line to the molten LiH cavity (about 30 torr >vapor pressure at 700 C)could be a lower temp rotary seal, No, no, no! I mean rotate the magetron and all. No seals. Use brushes to supply the power to the magnetron. >but if the E x H >field of the 12 cm microwaves will >cause enough drag on the molten LiH to generate the cavity then no rotary >seals would be required, thus a passive system. > >Then with Thermo-PhotoVoltaics feeding back to power the 5 Megawatt >Magnetron, a totally passive system with the D-Li7 reaction neutrons >fissioning Boron-10: > >(n + 5B-10 ---> He + 3Li7 + 3.4 Mev)for propulsion. :-) > >Regards, Frederick > >>Regards, >> >>Horace Heffner >> >> >> Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 14:47:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA27902; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:41:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:41:53 -0700 Message-Id: <199810142141.RAA16234 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Wired magazine will report on CF Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 17:40:51 -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: <"lq-1_1.0.pp6.WgH9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23332 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >The November issue of Wired magazine will have an article about cold fusion. >It should be on the newsstands next week. Ed Storms reviewed a draft, and he >says it is pretty good. I have heard that the magazine with the article will be released on October 17th. I have not seen the article, but I am told it comes to two primary conclusions: A. Cold fusion is real (whatever the theoretical explanation of the nuclear and heat phenomena turn out to be) and B. It is important. Of course, we knew that back in 1991, but it is nice to know that at least one good journalist, Charles Platt, has independently reached the same conclusion. Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Ph: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 15:51:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA17174; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:47:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:47:18 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:54:09 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-Message-ID: <"Jq3t_1.0.wB4.rdI9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23333 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: More on Art Bell: Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 15:53:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA19881; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:50:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:50:56 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:53:27 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Errors in calculated values X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199810142251.PAA10468 smtp2.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: <"4jjyT1.0.Ss4.EhI9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23334 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a recent thread on flow and static calorimeter accuracy, there have been statements to the effect that you can add the percentage errors in the measured inputs to get approximately the percentage error in the calculated formula. Not only is this not true, but small errors in the measurements can introduce startlingly large errors in the calculations. Here is an example the group might find relevant. Suppose you have liquid flowing through a reaction vessel at constant flow rate and input temperature T1. The output temperature T2 = T1 + delta T, where the delta T increase in temperature is caused by the reaction vessel. For example, lets assume that T1 is 50, and T2 is 60, and that we have an ideally balanced system where the difference of 10 is accounted for by the reaction/inputs to the vessel. Nothing is anomolous; everything is in balance. We now measure T1 and T2 with devices known to be accurate to 1%. In worst case, we might have T1 1% too large and T2 1% too small, for readings of T1 = 60.6 and T2 = 49.5. We then calculate: delta T = 60.6 - 49.5 = 11.1. This gives a relative error of (11.1 - 10)/10 = .11 or 11% in our calculated value of delta T. The situation gets worse if we try to measure smaller delta T values. For example, suppose our system is in balance with T1 = 50 and T2 = 52 for a balanced delta T of 2. Again, using 1% worst case errors we might get T1 = 52.52 and T2 = 49.5 for a delta T of 3.02. Now our error is: (3.02 - 2)/2 = 1.02/2 = .51 or 51%. That from 1% devices. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 16:07:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA26447; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:05:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:05:13 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Famous CF hot water heater 4000 years old? Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:06:40 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36262e65.82561619 mail-hub> References: <3628150b.10514642 mail-hub> with last message <3628150b.10514642@mail-hub> 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: <"3gpyp2.0.6T6.euI9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23335 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 14 Oct 98 06:48:07 PDT, Mike Connolly wrote: >as per george carlin, i hope you meant a cold water heater as even > >the ancients would have no need to heat hot water (maybe a hot water >cooler?!) [snip] . Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 16:14:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA28892; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:11:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:11:36 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Barut's paper revision update Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:13:05 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36272feb.82951710 mail-hub> References: <3621EAA0.522656AC verisoft.com.tr> <3629179b.11170331@mail-hub> <36247A79.F6977E97@verisoft.com.tr> In-Reply-To: <36247A79.F6977E97 verisoft.com.tr> 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: <"yMA0P.0.M37.e-I9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23336 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:18:33 +0200, Hamdi Ucar wrote: >Sorry, I think it could be more convenient to you fech it from the updated site > http://www.geocities.com/rainforest/6660/barut.zip, instead of a mail attachement. [snip] Ok, updated. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 17:10:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA17092; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:04:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:04:37 -0700 Message-ID: <36252F7F.7A68 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:10:55 -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: Chubb: more on band state theory 10.14.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PFyQ02.0.vA4.ImJ9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23337 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Chubb: Blue: more on band state theory 10.13.98 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:56:48 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net It seems rather pointless to try to discuss the claimed CANR observations within the context of a theory that describes a system at T=0. WE DO NOT HAVE A SYSTEM THAT IS AT T=0!!!!! Scott Chubb's assumptions bring the PdD lattice into a state that is maximally ordered. As a result there is a coherence in wave functions that simply is too good to be true. It is not true, in fact, and that is in part why the system shows none of the physical effects that Scott describes. Let's look specifically at the question of the ordering of the deuteron wave functions. The deuterons come in a jar from some commercial supplier. If you examine the wave functions for those deuterons as delivered, you will find maximum disorder with respect to the nuclear orientation. Now you put them through some chemical process that loads the Pd lattice with deuterons. What is the state of the lattice deuterons after loading with respect to internal coordinates? We need not speculate. It is something that can be determined experimentally. It is something that has been studied in a variety of circumstances, and what have we learned? It is very difficult to bring any sort of order to those deuterons. They are very, very stubborn about remaining disordered! Suppose you cool the lattice to T=0. Will that remove all disorder from the nuclear wave functions? As a practical fact, the answer is no, at least not very quickly. So the T=0 condition to which Scott Chubb makes reference is so difficult to achieve, it is rather pointless to consider it. The facts are: (1)The lattice is not at T=0. (2)The nuclear degrees of freedom are decoupled from the lattice. Now it seems to me that a meaningful contribution to the theory of cold fusion has to address the fact that "free particle" physics still is the best approximation to what is actually going on with the nuclear wave functions. I don't see that we are free to assume otherwise without some very serious justifications. Of course, you can assume your way into all sorts of wonderful quantum effects, but I think we have to maintain some contact with actual observations on this system and/or similar systems. I've been around actual laboratory experiments dealing with nuclear orientation and I've been around actual laboratory experiments dealing with millikelven temperatures. I know what it takes to even begin to approach the sort of conditions that Scott Chubb wants us to assume just happen by chance. I'd like to see some evidence to support the key features of the Chubb assumptions. I'd like a concrete explanation of how nuclear orientation is achieved for the PdD system. Uttering the words T=0 does not get us there, not by a long shot. Even after we reach the required T=0 condition by just assuming it, I have great difficulty with the concept that we suddenly induce a transition from the T=0 state to a very much hotter state without losing all the conditions that characterize only the T=0 state. That is a real sleight of hand. Do we, for example, ever pass through a state which has hot 4He in a cold lattice? As I read Scotts reply, I think he has slipped in the notion that, in fact, the lattice does not receive any energy from the nuclei, except off camera, so to speak. Finally, I think we should go through a simple excercise of predicting a temperature dependence for the cold fusion reaction rate to see just how well the Chubb theory measures up to actual observations. If T=0 is the assumed "ideal" then I'd be led to guess that T not equal to zero is disruptive, lowers the ordering, and reduces the coherence. Have I missed something? Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 18:05:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12632; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:52:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:52:42 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:46:39 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: Electrolysis ...then burning H and O ... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"CoBk2.0.B53.PTK9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23338 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., Can someone please give us a simple breakdown of input output for a] electrolysis of water.... presume some level, ie., 1.48 volts, suitable electrolyte concentration .... b] burning resultant 2H and O ? It would be best if there is some 'common' type of unit[s] ... ie., volts, amps, watts... watt-seconds = 'X' amount of H and O AND Burning the 2H and O and the thermal watts-seconds Am I getting this through clearly? I want us all to be able to compare apples and apples.... Thanks, John Schnurer From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 18:54:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA31508; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:48:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:48:23 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:45:04 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Errors in calculated values Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810142148_MC2-5CC2-E493 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"M0Rtg.0.Di7.cHL9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23339 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Lynn Kurtz writes: In a recent thread on flow and static calorimeter accuracy, there have been statements to the effect that you can add the percentage errors in the measured inputs to get approximately the percentage error in the calculated formula. Well, there was one statement like that, made by Britz, and he quickly retracted. I am sure he understood the issue but his statement was a little fuzzy and it gave the impression that percentages can be added. I certainly never said they can be added, and neither did McKubre, so there is no controversy here. Not only is this not true, but small errors in the measurements can introduce startlingly large errors in the calculations. That's true! Here is an example . . . lets assume that T1 is 50, and T2 is 60, and that we have an ideally balanced system where the difference of 10 is accounted for by the reaction/inputs to the vessel. Nothing is anomalous; everything is in balance. We now measure T1 and T2 with devices known to be accurate to 1%. In worst case, we might have T1 1% too large and T2 1% too small, for readings of T1 = 60.6 and T2 = 49.5. That's a good example. However, everyone should bear in mind that when McKubre wrote his error is 10 milliwatts or 0.1%, he understood this, and he meant that the total worst-case error is only 1 part in 1000. The errors for the individual components, like the thermocouples and the scale that weighs the water, are incredibly small -- much lower than 0.1%. That may seem surprising to people who have only used off-the-shelf laboratory thermocouples and thermistors, but you should bear in mind that McKubre uses the best thermocouples money can buy. The thermocouples and the dedicated electronics that come with them cost as much as luxury automobile, $50,000 to $100,000 I believe. For that kind of money you get amazing accuracy, precision and reliability. You get two orders of magnitude better performance than the Hewlett Packard equipment we have been using lately, which is mighty impressive to me. You could keep pushing this. I suppose there must be a way to invest a million dollars in temperature measurements to achieve 0.001% accuracy with flowing water. Eventually you will run into the limits of the pumping technology or quantum effects or who-knows-what, which would make it fundamentally impossible to improve. I do not know where the limits are but I suspect they are at picowatts or below. I think that is the power added by water flow friction through the cell. I do know that below a half-watt the problem suddenly becomes much harder and much more expensive, mainly because of the heat loss problems described in the literature. That is why people selected the watt standard. They picked a unit of heat which was reasonably easy to measure with 19th century technology. They could have used something a thousand times bigger or smaller for the work-a-day basic unit, just as we use the millimeter in linear measurements and the milliliter for volume. Why milliliters and not centiliters or microliters? Because anyone can measure to the nearest milliliter with hand tools, without fuss or muss. You can always spend more, improve the instruments, and raise the ante. That is why I found it weird that an experienced scientist like Britz would declare arbitrarily that you can only achieve 3% accuracy! He reconsidered, and now he agrees it is more like 0.4%. He must have realized that when you throw a few hundred thousand dollars at the problem, you can push the precision an order of magnitude, and SRI has thrown millions at this problem. If Britz reconsiders again and does his homework he will realize McKubre is not kidding about the 0.1%. That from 1% devices. Yes, but remember we are not talking about 1% devices. We are talking about 0.001% devices on output temperature and 0.0001% devices for input electricity and the mass of water. (Something in that range, as I recall). Actually, I recall that McKubre said that 0.1% overall accuracy is conservative. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 21:07:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA21022; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:58:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:58:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <362563C3.924 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:53:56 -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: Chubb: Blue: corrected, more on band state theory 10.13.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Trxvj2.0.O85.BBN9s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23340 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Chubb on Blue 10.12.98 comments Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:47:36 -0400 From: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil To: rmforall earthlink.net Rich, please distribute this message to Vortex-L members and others on your distribution list. Please disregard my last message (if you haven't sent it yet); the following response to Dick Blue is slightly different from my last message. Dick Blue, I do think that some private communication would save some time concerning confusion that seems to be present with regard to your interpretation of our theory. >You could have proven me wrong by actually constructing the nuclear wave >functions you employ in your calculations in at least a sketchy manner. >What you wrote down was simply incorrect in that you have a position >coordinate for the nuclear center of mass and then position coordinates >for both the neutron and the proton. That's one too many position >coordinates. The system does not have that many degrees of freedom. You seem to be referring to Eq. 12 of our BYU conference Proceedings paper (AIP Conf Proc 228, [ed Jones et al, AIP, New York, 1991], 704.) In point of fact, you seem to have actually "misinterpreted" this equation. Here, the reference implicitly is to a many-body system, involving an outside force, provided by the lattice, acting on a "two-particle" system. The total system in fact involves all of the degrees of freedom associated with the lattice. For simplicity, however, the problem can be recast in a form in which the lattice possesses a momentum (and lattice coordinates), and the nucleons possess momenta (and coordinates). This is different than the free space system where two nucleons interact among themselves. In fairness to you, I suppose it is fair to say that the discussion of this point (which is well-known in a variety of contexts associated with solid state physics) was somewhat terse. >However, what I find truly objectionable is this concept that there >is a nuclear potential and an electrostatic potential that can somehow >go their separate ways without remaining functionally related to the >same set of coordinates. You apply the 1/N factor (N beng the number of >lattice points) to the electrostatic potential and ignore that for the >nuclear part, thus achieving the magical reduction in repulsion >without acknowledging that you have simply scaled the ENTIRE potential. > I think you should check out the ICCF6 Proceedings paper to gain a more complete understanding of this point. In fact, what bothers you here is associated with coherence--the coherence that is manifestly implicit in a peridocally ordered system at T=0. >> Initially, some of the details of the theory were not precisely stated. >> The motivation, however, has remained intact. Initially, there was a >> tacit assumption that was not stated. Temperature=0 conditions are >> assumed and maintained within the bulk material, where lattice symmetry >> is assumed to prevail. In other words, not only is lattice symmetry >> required, but to maintain lattice symmetry, it is assumed that no >> excitation of the lattice or any of the entities within the lattice is >> allowed. When this assumption is made, only a very restrictive set of >> potential avenues for interaction exist: coherent ("Umklapp") processes >> in which momentum is transferred >> elastically directly to the lattice (for example through lattice recoil >> [as in the Mossbauer effect] or a redefinition of the boundaries of the >> lattice) and energy is transferred through a constant shift of the zero >> of energy of the ordered lattice, relative to its surroundings. It is >> well-known that these kinds of processes: 1. exist, and 2. provide a >> means for maintaining lattice symmetry. To maintain lattice symmetry at >> T=0, these are required. When they do apply, they lead to an important >> selection rule: coherent nuclear processes occur in which initial and >> final states always possess ground state nuclei, with energy released >> through processes which are initiated at the boundaries of the solid. >> This is discussed in more detail in our ICCF6 Proceedings paper. It is >> the formal justification of the "bosons in and bosons out" selection >> rule that bothered you so much and of our prediction that although bulk >> properties affect the behavior CANR's, in the cases under consideration, >> the energy release appears to be initiated in the surface regions of a >> lattice. > >Scott is glossing over a very significant problem here when he refers to >"lattice symmetry." All he is actually considering is the >center-of-mass coordinate of the deuterons for which he constructs a >lattice. You have misinterpreted the theory. The electrostatic potential of all of the entities of the host defines the lattice, not the center-of-mass coordinate of the deuterons. I see that this partly reflects your misunderstanding of Eq. 12 and the approximate statement (rn+rp)/2-Rn=Rcm. (Here, Rn=the coordinate of a lattice point; and the statement is approximate because it applies in the idealization in which proton and neutron have equal masses.) >Remember that the internal coordinates of the nucleus has been >"separated" and are not in the problem in any way, shape, or form. What >happens next is equivalent to assuming that "lattice symmetry" also >applies to those degrees of freedom internal to the deuterons.It is a >slight of hand -- not reality. Again, this statement seems to reflect a misunderstanding associated with your interpretation of Eq. 12. >The reality is that the deuterons as >supplied form a totally disordered ensemble with respect to those >internal degrees of freedom, even if they are placed into an ordered >lattice with respect to the center-of-mass. This gets to an important point, implicitly noted by Schwinger. In a true T=0 situation, coherence is the rule, not the exception. This is because entropy achieves its ("zero value") minimum at T=0. For this reason, Schwinger pointed out that in general separating the nuclear degrees of freedom from the electrostatic degrees of freedom using a "simple" factoring of the wave function into these two forms of interaction is not allowed. In point of fact, by requiring symmetry throughout the lattice, in which the nuclear force and electrostatic force remain separable except for a shift of the zero of energy (actually of kinetic energy), we have defined a coherent interaction that maintains separability. When it is assumed that the state of zero entropy matches smoothly onto a state of finite entropy in which nuclear and electrostatic factoring occurs (which corresponds to a situation involving no latent heat), it follows that the form of interaction we have defined becomes unique. >Again it is important to note what is being assumed as opposed what is >being demonstated by a calculation. There is no calculation to show >that a rigid shift in zero energy can or will occur. In the case of the >Mossbauer effect to which frequent reference is made, the lattice does >recoil much as Scott describes, but there is a very important difference >in that case centering on the word "recoil." For the cold fusion case >as Scott describes it there is no recoil because there is no emission. By recoil, I am really referring to a discontinuous change in momentum of periodically ordered regions relative to disordered regions. In the case of surfaces, this results in a redistribution of charge, modification of the associated dipole layer (and work function), and a redefinition of the electrostatic zero of the solid. Such a calculation can be carried out using modern band structure computational codes, and given funding, I could carry it out. It would go a long way towards explaining a number of important factors. A key point is that the nitty gritty of this can be phrased in the following way: solids do allow for coherent, non-local interaction through coherent charge re-distribution. You do not seem to be aware of this. It is well-known but not emphasized. It is the basis of "Umklapp" scattering (terminology that can be found in most graduate school solid state text books), conductivity, and a host of other phenomena. >I think we need to hear further how we get said recoil. Recoil from >what? > See last comment. >Yes, all the theories to which you make reference have a common >thread centering on concepts of order and coherence that are totally >unrealistic for the systems being described. Sure there can be >some marvelous effects involving long range order at T=0, but these >systems don't actually have that long range order and they are not >at T=0. The T=0 idealization is a limit. Coupling to outside processes may change things. But it is an important starting point that may be significantly more realistic than the two-particle limit that has provided the common starting point in the past. >As I have said many times before, the assumed nuclear >energy release is associated with a change in the way wave functions >for nucleons are correlated within this system. When paired as a >proton and a neutron we have the intial state and when grouped by >fours -- two of each kind -- we have the final state. You can't >describe that transition or learn anything relating it by a calculation >that has the internal nuclear coordinates separated out. That >separation is an implicit assumption that nothing significant happens >with respect to those internal coordinates. As I pointed out above, there does exist a limit at T=0 where a coherent process (defined by the shift in the zero of energy of the nuclear degrees of freedom), in which separability can take place with coupling occurring to the lattice. In the resulting scenario, charge is coherently expelled to the boundaries of the lattice. Again, I suggest you examine the ICCF6 Proceedings paper for a more complete discussion of this. >If nothing changes you are >left with the deuterons you started with and there is no energy release. >When you assume a seamless, direct transition from an ensemble of >deuterons to an ensemble of 4He, you are assuming a degeneracy between >those two states that does not, in fact, exist. The interaction potential, defined by the time evolution of the overlap of the states, determines if the process occurs. In an ordered, T=0, infinite solid, it is reversible, and no energy is released. In the presence of boundaries and lattice imperfections, the interaction becomes irreversible. >Dick Blue > > I will be away until Friday. Scott Chubb From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 21:49:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA23856; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:45:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:39:05 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Spinning magnet strangeness Resent-Message-ID: <"Y8x4o.0.gq5.AtN9s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23341 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There was a crosspost here recently from a NG about an alleged replication of something Bearden supposedly cooked up, and eccentric disc with magnets on the rim spinning inside a circular ring of magnets. It supposedly lost weight and frazzled electrical equipment. Scalar wave generator, or just NG flamebait? This is similar to the Hamel stuff, where wobbly elements bring opposing N poles near each other in a circular net motion. I was just wondering since this stuff doesn't sound too hard to replicate, especially when an array of coils could sequentially fire and "rotate" the point of highest magnetic field density or repulsion at speeds much faster than any physically rotating mass of permanent magnets can manage. Does anyone have any actual experience with a similar device? How about opinions - anyone think there could be the slightest chance there's anything to it? I mean, it occurs to me that ordinary electric motors are "similar devices". Sure enough, if I turn on the old fan on my desk, a nearby TV set gets snow on it. But seriously... - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 22:30:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA10261; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:29:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:29:01 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981015012843.009f0ea0 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 01:28:43 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"PzAP61.0.6W2.SWO9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23342 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 06:39 PM 10/14/98 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: > >Does anyone have any actual experience with a similar device? How about >opinions - anyone think there could be the slightest chance there's >anything to it? I mean, it occurs to me that ordinary electric motors are >"similar devices". Sure enough, if I turn on the old fan on my desk, a >nearby TV set gets snow on it. But seriously... > This will sound totally off-the-wall Rick, but in the interests of science and simplicity, how about weighing some motors, powered ... then unpowered ... in various orientations and/or loads? Colin Quinney. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 14 23:51:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA06374; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:48:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:48:22 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981015015012.00947e50 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 01:50:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Electrolysis ...then burning H and O ... In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"38G5O3.0.PZ1.rgP9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23343 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I've done these calculations enough times... Total electrical input power to cell = V*I (watts) Fraction of this power used to split water = 1.48*I (watts) Remainder goes into heat in the electrolyte = (V-1.48)*I (watts) If the H2 & O2 thus produced was burned AND condensed into liquid water at the same rate that it came out of the cell, the resulting heat power obtained would be = 1.48*I (watts). Since it takes 2 electrons to split a water molecule, the number of water molecules being split every second is given by I/2e (where e is the electronic charge...1.602E-19 coulombs). This works out to I*3.12E18 water molecules per second. That is equal to I*.336 grams of water per hour. Each water molecule that is split makes 1.5 total molecules of gas (one H2 and one-half of an O2). Thus, using the ideal gas law and assuming that room temp is 298K, we can predict that the total flow rate of gas (hydrogen and oxygen mixed together) coming from the cell will be 0.19*I milliliters/second. For example, say we have a cell that's drawing 1 amp at 5 volts. total Pin = V*I = 5 watts "gas power" = 1.48*I = 1.48 watts waste heat = (V-1.48)*I = 3.52 watts number of water molecules being split per second = 3.12E18*I = 3.12E18 grams of water split per hour = I*.336 = .336 grams flow rate of H2 and O2 gas from cell = 0.19*I = 0.19 milliliters/second Remember, the "gas power" is initially present as a flow of chemical energy in the form of the H2 and O2 gas. It leaves the cell. Only the waste heat power remains in the cell. Later, if you burn the H2 and O2 and condense the water vapor back to a liquid you will turn the flow of chemical energy into I*1.48 watts of heat. If you want watt-seconds (i.e. joules) just multiply all my power numbers above by the length of time in seconds that you operate the cell. That will convert power (watts) into energy (joules). The H2 and O2 mixture produced by an electrolysis cell is HIGHLY explosive. 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 Oct 14 23:53:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA09488; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:53:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:53:14 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 02:52:27 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Errors in calculated values Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810150254_MC2-5CC5-52C8 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"HhPuA2.0.5K2.PlP9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23344 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed said: >> Yes, but remember we are not talking about 1% devices. We are talking about 0.001% devices on output temperature and 0.0001% devices for input electricity and the mass of water. (Something in that range, as I recall). Actually, I recall that McKubre said that 0.1% overall accuracy is conservative. - Jed << All this extreme accuracy can be bypassed by using comparative or nul-balancing techniques. I once designed and marketed a differential pressure gauge (for balancing the air flow in i.c. engines) to 1.5mm water difference between 2 flowmeters. The thing was made of latex and bent wire and fitted into a 50mm dia case. The scale was 40mm long and you could drop it on to a concrete floor without damaging the movement. So you don't always have to spend $$$$ to get experimental accuracy. The technique used by Scott and others where the same equipment is used with different sources of heat/energy is one such approach. Another might be to run 2 identical apparatuses (sp?) simultaneously and measure the difference between the various parameters with a standard heater in one kit and the experimental process in the other. In this way you can get away with 2 low-cost calorimeters and simplified instruments and still have a sensitive measure of any ou effect. Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 00:19:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA19835; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:16:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:16:33 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:18:11 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <199810141030_MC2-5CA9-6F2 compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"aMAUa1.0.qr4.G5Q9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23345 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Dieter Britz now believes the error in McKubre's calorimeter is > 0.4%. He originally said it was 3%, so he is an order of magnitude > closer to the truth, and I will not argue the difference between 0.1 > and 0.4. He writes: I have wondered how people can claim 0.1% > absolute accuracy anyway . . . Well, Dieter, instead of wondering > you might ask Mike McKubre, because that is what he claims in the > papers I quoted. I know better than to argue the point. I know when You really are a master at distortion, starry droog. I originally said I'd guess at 1%, perhaps (!) as much as 3; but I'd accept the 1%. That figure has been my working figure in this discussion. I have not backed down to 0.4%; I wrote that that is the minimum figure, to which must be added some more errors, which I can't quantify as % without some calculations. I do read papers, and I have that one by McKubre of 1994. Don't you have it? It may be that he has been more optimistic at conference talks - one often is - but it seems significant to me that when he goes into a real journal, he gets more careful. It does focus the mind wonderfully to have to go past a referee. > I am licked! I once tried to convince you that Pons and Fleischmann > use more than one thermocouple. I showed you statements and > schematics from the peer reviewed literature and conference > preceding, and an e-mail message from Miles, who was looking at a > P&F cell when he wrote it, but none of that made the slightest dent > in your assurance. You told me you could not be sure the message > from Miles was real. Now you will say you cannot be sure the papers You showed me no such things, your memory is playing tricks. You kept asserting that everybody knew they used lots of thermocouples, why don't I telephone them etc bla; you did send me a statement by Miles. I never doubted that it was from Miles, but it WAS second-hand, not a message to me. That I thought it might be a fake is the product of your own mind, not mine. I never said so, or thought it. You based a whole story about me in IE on this fabrication, and a shoddy piece of journalism it was (I wouldn't mind a well written expose, and might have responded to it, but not in this case; I have seen much better writing from you). My point at the time was, and still is, that in all real publications by F&P, they show a figure with a single thermistor inside the cell. As I say, in papers one is most careful, so this would seem to indicate that they only use a single one; or maybe that they have recycled that figure and neglected to say that several thermistors were used. I can't tell. Messages passed on to me through others are nothing but hearsay. This seems reasonable to me, but it enraged you, you seemed to take that personally. I wish I could get the straight dope from Fleischmann, but he does not communicate with me. And Rothwell, you know very well that I do not cover conference proceedings, which tend to be the ONLY thing you yourself take notice of. > actually say "errors are the greater of 10 mW or 0.1%" and it goes This too is grabbed out of the air. I never did refer to "10 mW", it's one of your own repeated themes. It may be a real figure, I am not doubting that. > Doesn't McKubre read this list, and could maybe comment? > > I do not think he reads this list. Thata's a pity, he could straighten this out. My guess is that he would not be quite so gung ho as Rothwell, McK being a scientist, not an afficionado. He wants to know what's going on, not solely to prove a particular point. Let me add, just so you don't again go off at a tangent: I have said that the single thermistor shown in F&P's papers has been justified by them, at the time to my satisfaction, by their experiments with mixing times. These showed that a single thermistor is enough. It seems now that Ed Storms has evidence that it is not, but that's not me saying it, it's Ed. I wrote at the time that whatever weaknesses there are in F&P's papers, they do not arise from the use of a single thermistor (I am paraphrasing). As well, I wrote during the last few days that McKubre's excess heat shown in that paper from 1994 do not depend on the difference between 0.1 and 1% for significance. I mention these things so that Rothwell cannot (reasonably) go off and claim that Britz thinks he has found fatal flaws in these experiments. I accept their measurements - and draw my own conclusions, as is my right. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 00:59:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA27298; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:58:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:58:01 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981015075943.0068a574 atlantic.net> X-Sender: johmann atlantic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:59:43 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-Message-ID: <"5CwRQ3.0.Ng6.8iQ9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23346 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: After reading the first 240 messages posted by Art Bell listeners at his website regarding his sudden quitting, and after further reflection, I'm inclined to believe that the problem lies more with Art Bell than with the alleged threat to his "family". First of all, Art doesn't have any children, as far as I know, so what "family" is he talking about? A few people commented about the recent decline in the quality of Art Bell's show, and I had noticed the decline myself, since for over a month now I haven't seen a single show description for which I wanted to listen (his shows are archived at http://ww2.broadcast.com/artbell). Also, as a few people noted, Art Bell is presumably rich, and he could afford bodyguards. Also, he lives in a small, isolated town, and the police chief is a personal friend. So as some people remarked, any small threat can be dealt with; so then, as some were speculating, is it *Big Brother* who is threatening him? Well, possibly, because Art doesn't always toe the party line, like when he had the show that did a good job of exposing the fact that TWA800 was shot down by the Navy, presumably by accident. But overall, despite the many people who imagine Art is some big threat to the government, I don't see it that way: he's pretty much establishment in his political talk. So here is my best guess as to what is really going on: Art is suffering from internal conflicts that he doesn't understand, and he has exaggerated some crank threats against him and his "family" into his excuse to leave his show. He probably needs to get away for an extended period, as a form of therapy for himself. I hope he gets well. If the above guess is incorrect, then my next-best guess as to what is really going on, is: Someone is blackmailing him, in which case it is probably Big Brother. If both above guesses are incorrect, then I don't want to guess anymore (three strikes and you're out). Kurt Johmann -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 03:29:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA30301; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:27:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:27:16 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981015012843.009f0ea0 inforamp.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:26:31 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness Resent-Message-ID: <"TOgFj.0.NP7.4uS9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23347 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Colin - > This will sound totally off-the-wall Rick, but in > the interests of science and simplicity, how about > weighing some motors, powered ... then unpowered > ... in various orientations and/or loads? Assumptions can and will bite you, but I think it's a fairly safe one to say that over time there have been so many motorized machines built that critically depended in some way on mass and/or weight that the effect would have been noticed. However I think most small motors have 2 or 4 coil stators which, although working rotationally with respect to the moving rotor, the fields could be seen to be simply switching back and forth between 90 degree orientations and not really rotating themselves. I think it needs several coils going off sequentially to really create a truly rotating field. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 04:54:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA24812; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 04:53:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 04:53:20 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:51:51 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810150754_MC2-5CC4-C99C compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"wmJ0q.0.W36.m8U9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23348 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Dieter Britz writes: My point at the time was, and still is, that in all real publications by F&P, they show a figure with a single thermistor inside the cell. Right. Except for Transactions of Fusion Technology, Vol. 26, p. 329, but after listing that issue for a while you decided to remove it from your database because although it was peer-reviewed, it not quite peer reviewed enough, as I recall. It is subtle distinction! And since you have banished it to the outer darkness you will not refer to it even to establish an elementary matter-of-fact such as the number of thermocouples in a cell, or the author's first name, or his address, let us say. Pardon me, but I find it difficult to deal with such rigid yet mercurial rules. One minute the rules cannot be bent even to count the number of components, and the next minute we arbitrarily dismiss 65 peer-reviewed papers. It feels a little like Alice in Wonderland. You showed me no such things, your memory is playing tricks. You kept asserting that everybody knew they used lots of thermocouples, why don't I telephone them etc bla; you did send me a statement by Miles. I never doubted that it was from Miles, but it WAS second-hand, not a message to me. Uh huh. Well, if you never doubted it, you should learn to choose your words more carefully, because your response to me was: You keep on about Miles; the only info I have "from" him comes through you, and you can undoubtedly understand why I don't regard that as trustworthy. I think that any normal person would take that to mean that you do not regard me as a trustworthy source of information and you doubt the message is from Miles. What else could it mean? I cannot imagine any other interpretation. Furthermore, you never retracted or explained what you had in mind, so I assume you still doubt it. Perhaps I misunderstand, but if so, it is your fault. You need to choose your words more carefully and when confusion arises, you need to explain yourself. Now I think I'll drop the subject. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 04:54:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA25357; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 04:53:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 04:53:55 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:51:39 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Errors in calculated values Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810150754_MC2-5CC4-C99B compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"bhYXL2.0.oB6.I9U9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23349 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Norman Horwood writes: All this extreme accuracy can be bypassed by using comparative or nul-balancing techniques. Yes. And you can also establish extreme accuracy with an Seebeck electronic calorimeter, which has no water temperature or flow rates to worry about. However, I think that McKubre felt he should measure the effect using standard, long-established textbook methods. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 05:19:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA30199; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 05:07:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 05:07:15 -0700 Message-ID: <000501bdf834$3ff8cde0$8cb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Fire In The Hole? Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:05:52 -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: <"s-cid2.0.nN7.oLU9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23350 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The calculation of energy flow in a waveguide (hole): watts/area = E^2/377 So,if you try to put kilowatts of microwave energy through a small hole/cavity in a block of Lithium Hydride or Deuteride or a vortex/cavity in the molten Hydride/Deuteride when the hole diameter is 0.586 to 0.766 times the wavelength, the field E gets well above 3.3E6 volts/meter, thus setting up a plasma discharge. Then: H + Li7 ---> 2 He4 + 17.3 Mev Or D + Li7 ---> 2 He4 + neutron + 15.02 Mev Could be better than a bowl of Chili. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 06:35:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA31375; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:33:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:33:10 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981015093255.0098b7e0 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:32:55 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.5.32.19981015012843.009f0ea0 inforamp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"CIPJg.0.5g7.LcV9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23351 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:26 AM 10/15/98 -1000, Rick wrote: . However I think most small motors have 2 or 4 coil >stators which, although working rotationally with respect to the moving >rotor, the fields could be seen to be simply switching back and forth >between 90 degree orientations and not really rotating themselves. I think >it needs several coils going off sequentially to really create a truly >rotating field. > Ok. Then how about using powered and un-powered stepper motors. Remove the armatures. Wasn't NASA funding research into something similar to that? (Maybe the idea isn't so crazy.) Does anyone remember the actual NASA experiment(s)? Colin Quinney From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 07:31:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA17479; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:22:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:22:37 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:24:16 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <199810150754_MC2-5CC4-C99C compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Dk0H31.0.xG4.jKW9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23352 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > To: Vortex Dieter Britz writes: My point at the time was, and still > is, that in all real publications by F&P, they show a figure with a > single thermistor inside the cell. Right. Except for Transactions > of Fusion Technology, Vol. 26, p. 329, but after listing that issue > for a while you decided to remove it from your database because > although it was peer-reviewed, it not quite peer reviewed enough, as > I recall. It is subtle distinction! And since you have banished it > to the outer darkness you will not refer to it even to establish an > elementary matter-of-fact such as the number of thermocouples in a > cell, or the author's first name, or his address, let us say. Pardon > me, but I find it difficult to deal with such rigid yet mercurial > rules. One minute the rules cannot be bent even to count the number > of components, and the next minute we arbitrarily dismiss 65 > peer-reviewed papers. It feels a little like Alice in Wonderland. I am not sure what you mean by the stuff about first names etc, but never mind. I did keep those Transactions, in a separate file (would be a pity to throw it away after all that typing), accessible to all. I have that paper in front of me, and I can't see any statement on p.329 about multiple thermistors. Which line is it on, on that page, please? I do see, on p.328, line 10, a reference to Fig. 5, which is the same old figure with one thermistor. Also, on p.329, they make a point of the relatively short vertical mixing time and the fact that the cell behaves as a "well stirred tank", which seems to me to be a justification for the single-point measurement; at the bottom of the page (secondd-last line) they in fact use the words "single point". Had they been using an array of thermistors, they would also have had to define what they mean by the cell temperature {\theta}_1. Mind you, I am not criticising F&P (or would you prefer Martin & Stan?), I respect them; but I pedantically insist that you are wrong when you say that they write about multiple thermistors and everybody should know. We know only from you. I have of course explained why I "banished" those Transactions. When you read the papers, it is clear that very little, if any, refereeing took place - may I take it that you have read them yourself? But as I say, they were not banished very far away. > doubted that it was from Miles, but it WAS second-hand, not a message to > me. > > Uh huh. Well, if you never doubted it, you should learn to choose your words > more carefully, because your response to me was: > > You keep on about Miles; the only info I have "from" him comes through > you, and you can undoubtedly understand why I don't regard that as > trustworthy. > > I think that any normal person would take that to mean that you do not regard > me as a trustworthy source of information and you doubt the message is from > Miles. What else could it mean? I cannot imagine any other interpretation. > Furthermore, you never retracted or explained what you had in mind, so I > assume you still doubt it. I suppose I should say "Touche!". The fact is, I don't trust you, and I have pretty good reason. I wrote that in a careless moment, I admit it, and yes, I should choose my words more carefully. Still, I'd like to be told by F or P himself how many thermistors they use; that would then be a "private communication". Hearsay is not, no matter how reliable the source. I hope you won't drop the subject until you have told me where on p.329 that stuff is - I really would like to know! But then, by all means, let's drop it. We have previously spoiled the air in this list and I don't want to do it again. We two just can't agree on much at all. -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 07:32:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20834; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:29:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:29:56 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981015092952.006ee9dc mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:29:52 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: References: <199810141030_MC2-5CA9-6F2 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"kMDg71.0.N55.ZRW9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23353 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What's a "starry droog"? Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 07:32:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20921; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:30:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:30:07 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981015093347.006f9a5c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:33:47 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Errors in calculated values In-Reply-To: <199810150754_MC2-5CC4-C99B compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"r_dx5.0.d65.kRW9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23354 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:51 10/15/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Yes. And you can also establish extreme accuracy with an Seebeck electronic >calorimeter, which has no water temperature or flow rates to worry about. However, there is still a temperature to worry about...the bath temperature. The typical Seebeck calorimeter is outwardly indistinguishable from an isoperibolic calorimeter. You place the cell inside the Seebeck envelope and then place that assembly in a constant temperature bath. The function of the Seebeck envelope is to provide a "perfect" measure of the delta-T between the cell environment and the bath. It replaces the single (or multiple) temperature sensor(s) in the cell in normal isoperibolic calorimetry. The stability of a Seebeck calorimeter's reading is critically dependent upon the stability of the bath temperature. The one we used to have here at EarthTech (made by Thermonetics) was exceedlingly sensitive to bath temperature because of its low thermal impedance. In other words, 1 watt of power dissipated in the envelope created a relatively small delta-T, say 0.1C, across the envelope. To measure that 1 watt with a 1% relative stability, the bath stability would have to be 1% of 0.1C or 0.001C. Seebeck calorimetry is no panacea. 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 Oct 15 07:56:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA00483; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:53:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:53:11 -0700 Message-ID: <36260C82.1DB1D964 bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:53:54 -0400 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: Gravity Theory Survives Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"k2dgC.0.w6.MnW9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23355 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: http://www.newscientist.com/cgi-bin/pageserver.cgi?/ns/981017/nsatellite.html Let's cool it By Charles Seife Gravity appears to be working as everyone always thought, much to physicists' relief. The unexpected slowing of distant spacecraft reported last month may have a simple explanation. It could be caused by heat, say a physicist and an astronomer. In September, John Anderson of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory near Los Angeles announced that the spacecraft--Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11, Ulysses and perhaps Galileo--were slowing down faster than expected as they travelled away from the Sun. Physicists wondered if this meant they would have to rewrite the equations of gravity (This Week, 12 September, p 4). But now two scientists have suggested an alternative solution. The spacecraft have plutonium-based radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) to power them. Resistance in the spacecraft's circuits turns some of the electrical power produced by the RTGs into heat. To get rid of it, the spacecraft are fitted with louvred fins that open when they get hot and radiate the heat away, according to Edward Murphy, an astronomer at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. The radiators face away from the Sun, so most radiation is emitted in this direction. Murphy says the departing photons give the spacecraft a small push in the opposite direction, towards the Sun, slowing them down. He believes the amount of radiation leaving the spacecraft could easily account for the observed push. "It's pretty close, and within observational errors," he says. Jonathan Katz of Washington University in St Louis, Missouri, also blames heat--in this case, the heat wasted because of the RTGs' inefficiency at turning thermal energy into electricity. He points out that the satellites have large antennas that point to the Earth, and that the RTGs sit just off to the side. "The radiation can bounce off the back of the antenna and push the spacecraft towards Earth," he says. Both Katz and Murphy have submitted their calculations to Physical Review Letters. But Anderson, who had last month ruled out a heat effect as the cause of the deceleration, is still unconvinced by the new arguments. "You can't get the force you need," he says. From New Scientist, 17 October 1998 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 08:06:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05314; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:04:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:04:06 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981015110424.0225e100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:04:24 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: References: <199810150754_MC2-5CC4-C99C compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"VWc1B2.0.xI1.bxW9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23357 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:24 PM 10/15/98 +0200, Dieter Britz wrote: > >I have of course explained why I "banished" those Transactions. When >you read the papers, it is clear that very little, if any, refereeing >took place - may I take it that you have read them yourself? But as I >say, they were not banished very far away. Actually the Transactions were peer reviewed. The original ICCF-4 meeting was followed by the papers in four (4) volumes put our by EPRI and the US Navy. About a third (estimate) of the papers were reviewed an made it to the Transactions assembled by the American Nuclear Society. I submitted four papers which made the four volume set, of which two made it to the Transactions if memory serves. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 08:06:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05075; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:03:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:03:45 -0700 Message-ID: <004601bdf84c$eb741c20$8cb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Award-winning weekly news from around the world (http://www.newscientist.com/c Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:01:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BDF81A.6DE982E0" 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: <"CWBHm1.0.9F1.GxW9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23356 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_01BDF81A.6DE982E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hot Fusion is in Big Trouble. http://www.newscientist.com/cgi-bin/pageserver.cgi?/ns/981017/nfusion.html ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BDF81A.6DE982E0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=" Award-winning weekly news from around the world.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=" Award-winning weekly news from around the world.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=3Dhttp://www.newscientist.com/cgi-bin/pageserver.cgi?/ns/981017/nfusi= on.html Modified=3D00D235944CF8BD019D ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BDF81A.6DE982E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 08:38:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18134; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:35:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:35:03 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:33:17 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Electrolysis ...then burning H and Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810151136_MC2-5CCB-9A11 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Nkk6-3.0.CR4.cOX9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23359 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little listed specific values for ordinary water (light water): Total electrical input power to cell = V*I (watts) Fraction of this power used to split water = 1.48*I (watts) Remainder goes into heat in the electrolyte = (V-1.48)*I (watts) . . . Last month I posted the general rules for any electrolyte; that is, Faraday's laws: 1. The weight of a given element liberated at an electrode during electrolysis is directly proportional to the quantity of electricity [amperes] which passes through the solution. 2. When the same quantity of electricity passes through solutions of different electrolytes, the weights of substances liberated at the electrodes are directly proportional to their equivalent weights. - F. Hess, "Chemistry Made Simple," (Doubleday, 1984), p. 88 The quantity of electricity required to deposit one equivalent weight (atomic weight/valence) of any element is 96,500 coulombs, or one faraday. Coulombs are amperes multiplied by seconds. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 08:39:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18046; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:34:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:34:51 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:33:38 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810151136_MC2-5CCB-9A12 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"XlVtG2.0.mP4.ROX9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23358 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Dieter Britz asks: I can't see any statement on p.329 about multiple thermistors. Which line is it on, on that page, please? Sorry, it wasn't clear. They report radial and axial mixing took ~3 seconds and ~20 seconds respectively. That was not based on theory; they measured mixing, but they do not say so here. They said they designed the Kel-F cell components to "ensure there are no stagnant zones in the electrolyte," and they describe other steps to ensure that cells behave "like well-stirred tanks." The fact is, I don't trust you, and I have pretty good reason. No doubt, and I could not care less about this comely & amiable reason. But the issue here is that in one message you claim you do not trust trust me, and in the next you contradict yourself. Make up your mind. Still, I'd like to be told by F or P himself how many thermistors they use . . . Then you should ask F or P. . . . that would then be a "private communication". Hearsay is not, no matter how reliable the source. Since we must speak by the card or equivocation will undo us, let me point out that hearsay is, "evidence based on the reports of others rather than the personal knowledge of a witness." The witness in this case was Melvin Miles and, as he explained, he was looking at a cell provided to him by Pons and Fleischmann, so his statements were based on personal knowledge. Your doubts about his authorship can only be resolved by contacting him directly. It is logically impossible for me to prove that the message is not counterfeit, because I would have to be the counterfeiter myself, if anyone is. It is like asking me to prove that I was not standing in the woods last night at 3 a.m. with no witnesses. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 08:43:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA21136; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:39:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:39:46 -0700 Message-ID: <36261790.264B interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:41:20 -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: Gravity Theory Survives References: <36260C82.1DB1D964 bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xeTIh2.0.z95.1TX9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23360 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > (snip) > In September, John Anderson of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory near > Los Angeles announced that the spacecraft--Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11, > Ulysses and perhaps Galileo--were slowing down faster than expected > as they travelled away from the Sun. Physicists wondered if this > meant they would have to rewrite the equations of gravity (This > Week, 12 September, p 4). Thanks for the post, Terry! Thermal photon thrust is certainly a possible answer. However, I wonder if Anderson's orbital calculations take proper account of ALL the other matter in the solar system. OK, so they know the mass and the location of the LARGER chunks in the solar system - but, do they know the mass and orbital location of all of: cometary fragments, dust and vapor meteors of all sizes ALL asteroids and their location "solar wind" mass resident INSIDE and OUTSIDE of orbit Now, I know these guys are smart enough not to treat the orbit of a "far from the sun" probe like a central point-mass problem - but, do their orbital programs really handle the chaotic distribution of solar system mass? As a "far" probe moves away from the sun, more and more mass is inside the orbit, less and less is outside the orbit. It seems like a fantastically hard problem to me to program the computers to do these calculations down to the nth degree! Am I all wet here, and do you folks see no problem here?? Frank (no celestial mechanics expert) Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 08:53:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA26915; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:50:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:50:40 -0700 Message-ID: <007301bdf853$833c8f00$8cb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:50:14 -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: <"ytWyf2.0.Ra6.GdX9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23361 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, October 15, 1998 9:43 AM Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives Frank Stenger wrote: >Terry Blanton wrote: >> >(snip) > >> In September, John Anderson of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory near >> Los Angeles announced that the spacecraft--Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11, >> Ulysses and perhaps Galileo--were slowing down faster than expected >> as they travelled away from the Sun. > Snip Frank's Lucid Questions/Points. "Frame Dragging" Frank, pure and simple. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Frank (no celestial mechanics expert) Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 09:03:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA31302; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:59:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:59:49 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:58:20 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810151200_MC2-5CD2-70DA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"MvM9z1.0.ve7.qlX9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23362 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little asks "What's a 'starry droog'?" It means friend, or comrade. It was invented by Anthony Burgess in the novel "A Clockwork Orange" (1962). He derived it from Russian. Burgess had a remarkable knowledge of language and linguistics. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 09:04:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA32680; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:02:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:02:31 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:58:39 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810151203_MC2-5CCE-5FF5 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"jOAUy1.0.M-7.KoX9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23364 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little asks "What's a 'starry droog'?" It means friend, or comrade. It was invented by Anthony Burgess in the novel "A Clockwork Orange" (1962). He derived it from Russian. Burgess had a remarkable knowledge of language and linguistics. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 09:06:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA32584; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:02:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:02:22 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:58:51 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Errors in calculated values Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810151203_MC2-5CCE-5FF6 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"HkuRg3.0.ny7.CoX9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23363 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Regarding Seebeck calorimeters, Scott Little writes: However, there is still a temperature to worry about...the bath temperature. Right, but in my experience, it is easier to maintain a stable temperature and good mixing in a large body of water compared to, say, the cross section of a 20 to 60 ml/minute flow. The typical Seebeck calorimeter is outwardly indistinguishable from an isoperibolic calorimeter. Well . . . the heat flow is measured independently everywhere in the envelope, so variations in temperatures caused by local hot spots do not affect the instrument. That's an important feature you do not find in most isoperibolic calorimeters. Plus it has a wide range of operating temperatures. Seebeck calorimetry is no panacea. Right. I think it is the best tool for high precision measurements, but then I see no reason to make high precision measurements of cold fusion cells. It is a great tool for a pointless job. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 09:13:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA04297; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:10:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:10:30 -0700 Message-Id: <36262F0B.1649DC6C verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:21:15 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives References: <36260C82.1DB1D964 bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zNKPV1.0.131.rvX9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23365 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > From: > > http://www.newscientist.com/cgi-bin/pageserver.cgi?/ns/981017/nsatellite.html > > Let's cool it > > By Charles Seife > Gravity appears to be working as everyone always thought, much to > physicists' relief. The unexpected slowing of distant spacecraft > reported last month may have a simple explanation. It could be > caused by heat, say a physicist and an astronomer. > [snip] Yes, I read the paper last week. (http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9810015). It seem this hypothesis is logical because 3 kW of thermal energy is still radiated by the plutonium battery. But gravitational anomaly hypothesis could not be dropped immediately. The same methodological problem arise in the O/U and on other unconventional research. We do mistake when we drop the case when we found a _possible_ solution to the anomaly we observed. Instead, we must be sure that conventional solution is _actually_ oc curring before drop the unconventional hypothesis. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 09:30:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA08162; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:21:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:21:08 -0700 Message-ID: <01BDF81D.493593F0 uzl.ucdavis.edu> From: Dan Quickert To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Spinning magnet strangeness Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:21:57 -0700 Encoding: 25 TEXT, 46 UUENCODE X-MS-Attachment: WINMAIL.DAT 0 00-00-1980 00:00 Resent-Message-ID: <"-xIML2.0.P_1.p3Y9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23366 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: (if you see an attachment to this message, please ignore it - it's a Microsoft Mail relic) Rick Monteverde wrote: Does anyone have any actual experience with a similar device? How about opinions - anyone think there could be the slightest chance there's anything to it? Rick, I think there's something to it. It's just a hunch, but there may be something to spinning a field rapidly through 'space' [also interesting things with opposing ('cancelling') fields]. Back in March '97 I asked both Freenrg and Vortex how to create a rotating mag field, and a fairly long thread ensued, in which several methods were discussed - you came up with one yourself. I can forward pertinent parts of that old thread to you if you like (I have things archived by general topic here). I have not been able to construct anything for testing, though. SMOT came along shortly thereafter, capturing the hearts, minds, and labs of most of us magnet-heads; and now I have neither space nor time for experiments for a while. Dan Quickert begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT M>)\^( H0`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <` M& ```$E032Y-:6-R;W-O9G0 36%I;"Y.;W1E`#$(`0V ! `"`````@`"``$$ MD 8`' $```$````,`````P``, ,````+``\.``````(!_P\!````10`````` M``"!*Q^DOJ,0&9UN`-T!#U0"`````'9O"UL0&5S:VEM;RYC;VT`4TU4 M4 !V;W)T97 M;$!E"UL0&5S:VEM;RYC;VTG`````@$+, $` M```9````4TU44#I63U)415 M3$!%4TM)34\N0T]-``````,``#D`````"P! M. $````"`?8/`0````0````````#,C,!!( !`" ```!213H@4W!I;FYI;F<@ M;6%G;F5T('-T,`* DNA8W```>`!X,`0````4` M``!33510`````!X`'PP!````%P```&1E<75I8VME``@0`0```&4````H24993U53145!3D%45$%# M2$U%3E143U1(25--15-304=%+%!,14%314E'3D]214E4+4E44T%-24-23U-/ M1E1-04E,4D5,24,I4DE#2TU/3E1%5D521$574D]413I$3T5304Y9``````(! M"1 !````V ,``-0#```=! ``3%I&=;7(TD7_``H!#P(5`J0#Y 7K`H,`4!,# M5 (`8V *P'-E=.XR!@`&PP*#,@/&!Q,"@Q(S$P]F- ]Z:&5LT0,@1&QG`H!] M"H (SQ\)V0* "H$-L0M ;F `C 5'1O'(!H! `@!X%S(&%G92P@"U!E8>$1\"!I9VX%L!WQ M!4"J+1YQ)P0 8070:04`^&]S;P& != +< ,@%Z!:;!]0*0J%"H52'U!K,P70 M`B%E= 20#; @=_L#8"'P.@J%(S :# J@(H)R8P5 1&\'D0!P&S!NOQN0$< B M$"42&Z DH'4'0+ 97AP!G$)\&,B4>T>@&@?$0"0;0,0"L$-L/)V'U!E/PJ' M&BLC3R16W$AO!^ !H A ="D>*B_I)'1O< N :0(@!" >L/LE)1S!;B&@', $ MD!N0!:! =6QD(&(ODAN0<\D@4&=H(?!S="BO*;__) L1L2<",!,>\"PO,V\D M _LE(2^R9QR"'H HGQJ4(0GZ+ J%22^J'O$?D > .$EF+CN 'N)J=3&P'Q%H MZG4G`& =@&(L`# %`,#W)@`PT3R;\ JP\2<0)R!;!T ?D!X`(>%_%Z QL#AC.%($("=#+I!PXQ^ M.&(H)V,TXA9 .&%$)RE!5'-=+ J%0F\`T"&@"X ?T7(1L$*P.?8W.X$=T&L) M ## (I G<*I&"=)R02%N,+!6%T'_)I E@"NA')$%`!W (? ?$?\B@1O@.&(` MP#B 06,= $H"^T%!"W!R0A$7,$0S2S$PL-T)\',*4$S!1^%W'-!(07\1\"(1 M)F$\L 1P1+$P,F3]! !C/@`1\#"P'K ;,D70\0> ('5P1,4E81LQ$>$\;&8] M 5'1`Z "$')WOPL1'9 $D$01'%(*L70$(/\?H!RQ&^ N@#"A3A4, ?@_5NF92=1!)! H4+Q M7 %> =`#T``0````4```!213H ``````,`#33]-P``*)[X ` end From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 09:56:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA26500; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:52:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:52:13 -0700 Message-Id: <199810151652.LAA25092 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:51:52 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Resent-Message-ID: <"epW932.0.nT6.xWY9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23367 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >What's a "starry droog"? ***{It is a non-standard transliteration of a Russian phrase meaning "old friend," unless I miss my guess. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 10:22:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17651; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:19:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:19:09 -0700 From: Chuck Davis To: Kurt Johmann Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:19:45 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981015075943.0068a574 atlantic.net> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"SDzTp.0.XJ4.CwY9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23368 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 15-Oct-98, Kurt Johmann wrote: >[...] >First of all, Art doesn't have any children, as far as I know, so what >"family" is he talking about? He's mentioned his young son, many times. Whom do you think tore up his Geo Metro? -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 10:52:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA05212; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:49:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:49:08 -0700 Message-Id: <199810151749.MAA26488 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:49:06 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives Resent-Message-ID: <"NwYLc3.0.6H1.JMZ9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23369 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Terry Blanton wrote: >> >(snip) > >> In September, John Anderson of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory near >> Los Angeles announced that the spacecraft--Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11, >> Ulysses and perhaps Galileo--were slowing down faster than expected >> as they travelled away from the Sun. Physicists wondered if this >> meant they would have to rewrite the equations of gravity (This >> Week, 12 September, p 4). > >Thanks for the post, Terry! > >Thermal photon thrust is certainly a possible answer. However, I wonder >if Anderson's orbital calculations take proper account of ALL the other >matter in the solar system. OK, so they know the mass and the location >of the LARGER chunks in the solar system - but, do they know the mass >and orbital location of all of: > cometary fragments, dust and vapor > > meteors of all sizes > > ALL asteroids and their location > > "solar wind" mass resident INSIDE and OUTSIDE of orbit > >Now, I know these guys are smart enough not to treat the orbit of a >"far from the sun" probe like a central point-mass problem - but, do >their orbital programs really handle the chaotic distribution of >solar system mass? As a "far" probe moves away from the sun, more >and more mass is inside the orbit, less and less is outside the orbit. >It seems like a fantastically hard problem to me to program the >computers to do these calculations down to the nth degree! >Am I all wet here, and do you folks see no problem here? ***{In the absence of specific data and detailed calculations your theory sounds plausible. As the mass behind the probe increases, its outward speed will obviously slow relative to the speed it would have had if that mass had remained constant. My objection to this idea, however, is simply that NASA would be foolish to attempt space probes if the best trajectory calculations they had came from programs that lumped all the the mass of the solar system into the center of the sun. It is obvious that you can't put a probe into orbit around Venus, or Mars, or Jupiter, etc., unless you have programs that take into account the constantly changing position of each planet in its orbit as the probe moves. The program would have to calculate the mass and position of each significant gravitaing object in the solar system at each instant, and would have to calculate the vector resultant of all their influences on the probe, in order to project its trajectory. Writing a program to juggle such variables would be a real bitch, and it would probably have to run on a supercomputer, but I think we can safely assume that it has been done. Thus the radiation braking hypothesis looks like a better try at explaining this. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Frank (no celestial mechanics expert) Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 11:43:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA09143; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:39:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:39:37 -0700 Message-ID: <362641FD.A71 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:42:05 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives References: <199810151749.MAA26488 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5lvTA3.0.hE2.e5a9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23370 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > (snip) > NASA would be foolish to attempt space probes if the best trajectory > calculations they had came from programs that lumped all the the mass of > the solar system into the center of the sun. It is obvious that you can't > put a probe into orbit around Venus, or Mars, or Jupiter, etc., unless you > have programs that take into account the constantly changing position of > each planet in its orbit as the probe moves. The program would have to > calculate the mass and position of each significant gravitaing object in > the solar system at each instant, and would have to calculate the vector > resultant of all their influences on the probe, in order to project its > trajectory. Writing a program to juggle such variables would be a real > bitch, and it would probably have to run on a supercomputer, but I think we > can safely assume that it has been done. Thus the radiation braking > hypothesis looks like a better try at explaining this. --Mitchell Jones}*** Your words ring true, Mitchell. I was wondering if real-world orbit calculations use a technique called "perturbation theory"? I know little of this but doesn't it more or less concentrate on the masses having the greatest effect on a body and ignore masses on the fringe of significance? So often, some form of mid-course guidance is used on space probes to tweek the orbit as it moves toward the target body. Maybe when the probes are far from a major mass, the global mass of the whole solar system becomes more important and I wonder if the calculation programs can and do handle this well? Oh well, maybe it's a combination of many such effects - when you think about it, it's probably fairly easy to estimate the total thermal power being radiated from the probe, but it seems a bit of a sticky problem in its own right to know the details of the directional power emission. I'm thinking here of the change in surface emissivities with exposure to the space environment and just plain old thermal aging of emitter surfaces. OK, I'll shut up now and let my old agency figure it out! Frank Stenger > > > > >Frank (no celestial mechanics expert) Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 12:32:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA00035; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:26:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:26:47 -0700 Message-ID: <362667FE.4C38 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:24:14 -0700 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Reply-To: stk sunherald.infi.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xXwD_.0.S.sna9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23371 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > I was just wondering since this stuff doesn't sound too hard to replicate, > especially when an array of coils could sequentially fire and "rotate" the > point of highest magnetic field density or repulsion at speeds much faster > than any physically rotating mass of permanent magnets can manage. I've been putting together a setup somewhat like the one from the NG recently. I will let you know my results. I don't think there will be anything special about them though. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 12:32:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA01591; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:29:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:29:23 -0700 Message-ID: <362668B8.10BA sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:27:20 -0700 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Reply-To: stk sunherald.infi.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2neJ9.0.fO.Iqa9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23372 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > Assumptions can and will bite you, but I think it's a fairly safe one to > say that over time there have been so many motorized machines built that > critically depended in some way on mass and/or weight that the effect would > have been noticed. However I think most small motors have 2 or 4 coil > stators which, although working rotationally with respect to the moving > rotor, the fields could be seen to be simply switching back and forth > between 90 degree orientations and not really rotating themselves. I think > it needs several coils going off sequentially to really create a truly > rotating field. I have a motor stator with six coils. Would you like me to try this out? Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 13:47:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12669; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:44:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:44:04 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981015204523.006742cc atlantic.net> X-Sender: johmann atlantic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:45:23 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-Message-ID: <"v9fo7.0.a53.Iwb9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23373 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Chuck Davis writes: >>First of all, Art doesn't have any children, as far as I know, so what >>"family" is he talking about? > >He's mentioned his young son, many times. Whom do you think tore up >his Geo Metro? Okay, I missed hearing Art mention him. And there was no mention of any children in the 240 posts I read. Kurt Johmann -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 14:05:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA25134; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:01:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:01:46 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:09:12 -0400 Message-ID: <01bdf880$0ea37e60$0c6cd626 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: <"bKEZ33.0.V86.uAc9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23374 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Rick, An idea that I have been working on might lead one to expect unbalanced forces in cases like the described experiment. It's not my highest priority at the moment, so I don't think I'll be able to do an experiment soon, but I would be very interested in any results from similar tests. If my idea is correct, actual rotation of magnetic material would be required, spinning the field would have completely different effects. - The original post was from: ecogen iol.ie (Chris Eccles) - You could get an idea of whether this post describes an actual experiment by sending an email requesting further details. - I have done considerable work recently on a new experiment measuring the magnitude of the longitudinal ( or Ampere ) force in a Marinov motor like current configuration, but with straight rather than circular conductors forming a fixed loop on top of an electronic balance. I showed the results to Kooistra and Phipps at the recent I.E. conference. Basically what I found was that the longitudinal force exists but was about 1/4 of the Lorentz force in a modified Marinov configuration. With straight conductors the longitudinal force was essentially zero with the standard Marinov magnet placement. If anyone is interested, I could get the graphs and pictures posted on our web site. The description is pretty limited as yet but the configuration is simple. - Regards, George Holz - george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 14:22:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA00952; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:17:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:17:38 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:16:44 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Errors in calculated values Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810151718_MC2-5CCC-97A6 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"40gjw2.0.mE.nPc9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23375 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed said: NH: >> All this extreme accuracy can be bypassed by using comparative or nul-balancing techniques. Jed: >> Yes. And you can also establish extreme accuracy with an Seebeck electronic calorimeter, which has no water temperature or flow rates to worry about. However, I think that McKubre felt he should measure the effect using standard, long-established textbook methods. << Sure, but what I was getting at is that whatever the intrinsic accuracy of the equipment, using back-to-back simultaneous experiments, one side with the unknown process - the other with a standard calibrated heat source, the accuracy of instrumentation is cancelled out and you get the difference absolutely. Norman Horwood From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 15:02:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20094; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:59:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:59:20 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:00:48 -0700 Message-Id: <199810152200.PAA27512 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: SOHO is Back on Line with 9/12 instruments so far Resent-Message-ID: <"b97rZ1.0.tv4.t0d9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23376 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: SOHONEWS - October 15, 1998 --------------------------- The following text is a press release from ESA and NASA. Don Savage Headquarters, Washington, DC October 14, 1998 (Phone: 202/358-1727) Bill Steigerwald Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD (Phone: 301/286-5017) Simon Vermeer European Space Agency Headquarters, Paris, France (Phone: 33-1-5369-7155) RELEASE: 98-190 SOHO IS NEARLY BACK IN BUSINESS High-quality new pictures of the Sun, taken earlier this week from the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO), have raised hopes that the mission may soon be returned to scientific operations. Engineers have successfully reactivated nine of the 12 instruments on the European Space Agency (ESA)/NASA SOHO mission, which has been out of commission for nearly four months after contact was lost on June 24. Images from the Michelson Doppler Imager and the Extreme Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope on SOHO are posted on the Internet at: http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov "Scientists on both sides of the Atlantic have waited anxiously for the recovery of SOHO," commented Roger Bonnet, ESA's director of science. "Thanks to the extraordinary determination and skill of ESA and NASA personnel, with industrial contractors and scientific teams also playing their part, the world has recovered its chief watchdog on the Sun. SOHO is needed more than ever, because the Sun is rapidly becoming stormier with a mounting count of sunspots." "It's very exciting to see these images again after so many weeks of concern. We hope that all the SOHO scientific instruments can be returned to the same level of health, so we can resume normal scientific operations in the near future," said Dr. Joseph Gurman, the U.S. project scientist for SOHO, and co- investigator on the Extreme Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope (EIT). "As of today, nine of the 12 instruments on board SOHO have been turned on. Four of them are already fully functional; the other five are still undergoing careful recommissioning activities. But so far no signs of damage due to thermal stress during the deep freeze have been detected. I tip my hat to the engineers who built this spacecraft and these sensitive but robust instruments," said Dr. Bernhard Fleck, the ESA project scientist for SOHO. The remaining three instruments will be switched on over the next few weeks.. The images are the latest success for the team during a complex, challenging recovery sequence. On July 23, SOHO was located using radar techniques with the 305-meter Arecibo, Puerto Rico, radio telescope of the U.S. National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center as a transmitter and a 70-meter dish of the NASA Deep Space Network as a receiver. SOHO first responded to radio transmissions on August 3, and telemetry from SOHO was received August 8, telling controllers the condition of the spacecraft and its instruments. The spacecraft's frozen hydrazine fuel was gradually thawed, and on September 16, SOHO's thrusters were fired to stop its spin and to place it in the correct orientation towards the Sun. Prior to the interruption, instruments on SOHO had taken about two million images of the Sun, an activity representing over a terabyte (a trillion bytes) of data. After its launch on Dec. 2, 1995, SOHO revolutionized solar science by its special ability to observe simultaneously the interior and atmosphere of the Sun, and particles in the solar wind and the Sun's outer atmosphere. SOHO observations have been the subject of more than 200 papers submitted to refereed, scientific journals. Apart from discoveries about flows of gas inside the Sun, giant "tornadoes" of hot, electrically charged gas, and clashing magnetic field- lines, SOHO also proved its worth as the chief watchdog for the Sun, giving early warning of eruptions that could affect the Earth. SOHO operates at a special vantage point 1.5 million kilometers (about one million miles) out in space, on the sunward side of the Earth. The spacecraft was built in Europe and it carries both European and American instruments, with international science teams. SOHO was launched on an Atlas IIAS rocket and is operated from NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. In April 1998, SOHO's scientists celebrated two years of successful operations and the decision of ESA and NASA to extend the mission to 2003. The extension enables SOHO to observe intense solar activity, expected when the count of sunspots rises to a maximum around the year 2000. - end - The first EIT image taken in the Fe IX/X line at 171 A is available at: http://sohowww.estec.esa.nl/operations/Recovery/eit_171_981013.gif and http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/operations/Recovery/eit_171_981013. gif The MDI image can be found at: http://soi.stanford.edu The latest SOHO EIT images can be found on the Web at: http://umbra.nascom.nasa.gov/eit/eit_full_res.html Details about the operations and about SOHO in general, can be found at: http://sohowww.estec.esa.nl and http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov Information on the recovery of SOHO can be found at: http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/operations/Recovery//operations/Rec overy/ * * * NASA press releases and other information are available automatically by sending an Internet electronic mail message to domo hq.nasa.gov. In the body of the message (not the subject line) users should type the words "subscribe press-release" (no quotes). The system will reply with a confirmation via E-mail of each subscription. A second automatic message will include additional information on the service. NASA releases also are available via CompuServe using the command GO NASA. To unsubscribe from this mailing list, address an E-mail message to domo hq.nasa.gov, leave the subject blank, and type only "unsubscribe press-release" (no quotes) in the body of the message. _____________________________________________________________________________ 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 Thu Oct 15 16:13:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA08611; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:10:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:10:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:12:59 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives Resent-Message-ID: <"HHUEJ1.0.S62.h3e9s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23377 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:21 PM 10/15/98, Hamdi Ucar wrote: >Terry Blanton wrote: > >> From: >> >> http://www.newscientist.com/cgi-bin/pageserver.cgi?/ns/981017/nsatellite.html >> >> Let's cool it >> >> By Charles Seife >> Gravity appears to be working as everyone always thought, much to >> physicists' relief. The unexpected slowing of distant spacecraft >> reported last month may have a simple explanation. It could be >> caused by heat, say a physicist and an astronomer. >> > >[snip] > >Yes, I read the paper last week. (http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9810015). >It seem this hypothesis is logical because 3 kW of thermal energy is still >radiated by the plutonium battery. But gravitational anomaly hypothesis >could not be dropped immediately. The same methodological problem arise in >the O/U and on other unconventional research. We do mistake when we drop >the case when we found a _possible_ solution to the anomaly we observed. >Instead, we must be sure that conventional solution is _actually_ >occurring before drop the unconventional hypothesis. > >Regards, > >hamdi ucar Thanks for the reference Hamdi. Are you sure about the 3KW for Pioneer 10? If so, there is probably some difficulty in showing why the acceleration was not *greater.* Using as a starting point the givens; F = m a, a = 8.5x10^-8 cm/s^2, the 250 kg estimate in the above article for the weight of pioneer 10, a 0.108 kg-f/N conversion factor, and the value 2.94x109 W/kg-f for photonic thrust, the derivation of which I posted here earlier, we have: F = (250 kg)(8.5x10^-10 m/s^2) = 2.125x10^-7 N F = (0.108 kg-f/N)(2.125x10^-7 N) = 2.3x10^-8 kg-f The power to produce this thrust is: P =(2.94x109 W/kg-f)(2.3x10^-8 kg-f) = 67.47 W We know from the above article the Pioneer 10 antenna produces 9 W radiated RF towards earth, so we need to account for 67.47 W + 9 W = 76.47 W. Pioneer 10 circuits consume a steady 80 W, so the generator must produce much more power, and we can use the figure you give of 3 kW. The above article states that "A large 1.65 meter diameter antenna covers most of the earth facing side." It does not matter how much power is consumed by the spacecraft circuits, or otherwise dumped into space, the sum total of the power produced by the generator, including both heat and electrical, wil be radiated into space. Since the antenna is cool, it creates a shadow zone where very little of that radiated heat can go. Therefore, even if that heat is radiated isotropically, a large portion can not be radiated towards earth because of the shielding effect of the antenna. To fully account for the acceleration by photon radiation, only 76.47/3000 W, or 2.5 percent of the radiation need be unbalanced in the direction away from the solar system. Given the large antenna diameter, the 3000 W total nuclear power figure seems excessive. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 16:20:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24293; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:17:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:17:03 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:18:29 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36268248.169597327 mail-hub> References: <000a01bdf65b$a423ac20$9d4ad3d0 default> In-Reply-To: <000a01bdf65b$a423ac20$9d4ad3d0 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: <"8bMP2.0.Nx5.k9e9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23378 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:24:00 -0400, Mike Carrell wrote: [snip] >Jeff Kooistra showed courage in going live with a series of demonstrations >derived from the Marinov motor. His setups, excellent basement physics >making good use of styrofoam cups, showed some seriously anomalous effects. >His climax showed that under certain circumstances, the current ring and the >centrally suspended magnets rotated in the SAME direction -- not what one >would expect from Newton's third law. All this is also on video tape. In a >post-session discussion, some of the notable physicists present very >carefully did not engage that particular effect. [snip] Hi Mike, Is it possible that when both parts of the motor rotate in the same direction, it is coupling to the Earth's magnetic field, or is the Earth's field too weak to explain the effect? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 16:34:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA32731; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:31:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:31:41 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <362668B8.10BA sunherald.infi.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:30:19 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness Resent-Message-ID: <"O-6Sg3.0.8_7.RNe9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23379 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kyle - > I have a motor stator with six coils. > Would you like me to try this out? I wouldn't bother. Besides, Goerge has a good point when he says that the actual spinning of magnetic material might be involved here. Good luck on your replication attempt. I thought it would be a good use for all those SMOT magnets if that's what you're using. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 16:41:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA03142; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:38:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:38:03 -0700 Message-ID: <3626A31F.4DEE sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:36:31 -0700 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Reply-To: stk sunherald.infi.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"g_LIQ3.0._m.QTe9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23380 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > I wouldn't bother. Besides, Goerge has a good point when he says that the > actual spinning of magnetic material might be involved here. As I suspected: no effect. I'll try it with rotating magnets though, in the same setup used by Chris Eccles. My disk is finished, and I am in the process of gluing the magnets on it. I'll probably spin it up tommorow. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 17:03:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA13620; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:58:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:58:58 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:00:26 -0700 Message-Id: <199810160000.RAA12515 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: Gravity Theory Survives Resent-Message-ID: <"SAval.0.gK3.1ne9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23381 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Terry Blanton wrote: >> >(snip) > >> In September, John Anderson of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory near >> Los Angeles announced that the spacecraft--Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11, >> Ulysses and perhaps Galileo--were slowing down faster than expected >> as they travelled away from the Sun. Physicists wondered if this >> meant they would have to rewrite the equations of gravity (This >> Week, 12 September, p 4). > >Thanks for the post, Terry! > >Thermal photon thrust is certainly a possible answer. However, I wonder >if Anderson's orbital calculations take proper account of ALL the other >matter in the solar system. Pretty much they do have it all nailed down. As for tiny objects, some would accelerate the craft and some would decelerate the craft, and only when close enough to be important. So no net effect should be expected. Also, Anderson in the original paper already considered the radiation of heat from the RTG's. The problem with that association is that the radiation has been dropping by the half life decay profile, but the gravitational acceleration has been constant. So they don't fit. There is still a problem. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 17:12:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA19468; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:10:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:10:22 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:17:30 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium Resent-Message-ID: <"q9YOU3.0.1m4.jxe9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23382 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:24:00 -0400, Mike Carrell wrote: [snip] >Jeff Kooistra showed courage in going live with a series of demonstrations >derived from the Marinov motor. His setups, excellent basement physics >making good use of styrofoam cups, showed some seriously anomalous effects. >His climax showed that under certain circumstances, the current ring and the >centrally suspended magnets rotated in the SAME direction -- not what one >would expect from Newton's third law. All this is also on video tape. In a >post-session discussion, some of the notable physicists present very >carefully did not engage that particular effect. [snip] I would very much like to know if Jeff got the Marinov motor working continuously in DC mode completely hands off. That is to say continuously revolving with pure DC power supplied to the brushes, without manual manipulation or mechanical brush oscillation that might make and break contact as well as having the risk of applying torque in a rhythmical ratchet-like fashion. It would be very much appreciated to hear the details of exactly what Jeff did demonstrate. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 17:41:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA01353; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:40:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:40:03 -0700 Message-Id: <3626A693.534DA2BC verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 03:51:15 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Shctf2.0.3L.YNf9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23383 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace and all, There was an earlier paper on the subject "gr-qc/9809070" Comment on ``Indication, from Pioneer 10/11, Galileo, and Ulysses Data, of an Apparent Anomalous, Weak, Long-Range Acceleration'' Authors: J. I. Katz (Department of Physics and McDonnell Center for the Space Sciences, Washington U., St. Louis, MO) which I mixed with the gr-qc/9810015. Actually I had should give the first reference. >From the paper (gr-qc/9809070): "Then the electric power at launch of 220 W\cite{A98} implied a thermal power of 3.67 kW and a waste heat of 3.45 kW. In 1997 the thermal power, decaying with the half life of Pu$^{238}$ of 87.74 y, was 2.99 kW and the electrical power of 80 W\cite{A98} implied a waste heat of 2.91 kW." Please read this paper, which probably claim the same thing appeared on Newscientist. Horace Heffner wrote: > Are you sure about the 3 kW for Pioneer 10? If so, there is probably some > difficulty in showing why the acceleration was not *greater.* Horace, this is from the paper confirming my 3 kW figure. "Then the electric power at launch of 220 W\cite{A98} implied a thermal power of 3.67 kW and a waste heat of 3.45 kW. In 1997 the thermal power, decaying with the half life of Pu$^{238}$ of 87.74 y, was 2.99 kW and the electrical power of 80 W\cite{A98} implied a waste heat of 2.91 kW." you wrote: > F = (250 kg)(8.5x10^-10 m/s^2) = 2.125x10^-7 N > F = (0.108 kg-f/N)(2.125x10^-7 N) = 2.3x10^-8 kg-f > The power to produce this thrust is: > P =(2.94x109 W/kg-f)(2.3x10^-8 kg-f) = 67.47 W >We know from the above article the Pioneer 10 antenna produces 9 W radiated >RF towards earth, so we need to account for 67.47 W + 9 W = 76.47 W. You are quite correct as the paper say: "The power of a collimated beam sufficient to explain the reported anomalous acceleration $a_P$ is 85 W\cite{}{A98}." you wrote: > Since the antenna is cool, it >creates a shadow zone where very little of that radiated heat can go. >Therefore, even if that heat is radiated isotropically, a large portion can >not be radiated towards earth because of the shielding effect of the >antenna. > To fully account for the acceleration by photon radiation, only 76.47/3000 W, > or 2.5 percent of the radiation need be unbalanced in the direction away > from the solar system. Given the large antenna diameter, the 3000 W total > nuclear power figure seems excessive. Paper says: The same force can be obtained from the present rejected waste heat if it is radiated with a $\langle \cos \theta \rangle =0.029$ , where $\theta $ is the angle between the direction of radiation and a ray from the Sun. Such an asymmetry is quite mod est, and would in fact be difficult to avoid unless great care were taken (for which there was no reason). Any components of recoil force orthogonal to the spin axis are averaged to zero by the spin. This axis and the net force point towards the Earth, and at the present great distances this closely aligns them with the Sun; the Solar alignment is almost exact after averaging over Earth's orbit Maybe not too excessive. Paper's explaination seems ok to me. You decide. Note: Actually later paper "9810015" appears based on heat dissipated from electric power part not from the direct heat dissipated from the RTG. This one did not convince me either, a slight anisotropic radiation from heat sinks at 67W seem do not suffice for such a propulsion. But the reflection from back of antenna is a good argument on 9809070. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 17:56:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09230; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:55:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:55:12 -0700 Message-Id: <3626AA78.87B7B63C verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 04:07:52 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives References: <199810160000.RAA12515 Au.oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vUYtq.0.3G2.mbf9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23384 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ross Tessien wrote: [snip] > Also, Anderson in the original paper already considered the radiation of > heat from the RTG's. The problem with that association is that the > radiation has been dropping by the half life decay profile, but the > gravitational acceleration has been constant. So they don't fit. > > There is still a problem. > > Ross Tessien This not pose a problem: Inital power is 3.67W. skip the first 10 years, then drop to 3.42 kW. The current power is 2.99 kW. the difference is only 13%. Not so significant. Also such difference would be compansated partially by decreasing the solar radiation pressure on the antenna. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 18:30:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA26301; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:28:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:28:29 -0700 Message-ID: <00ee01bdf8a4$3858a360$8cb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:27:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"CByAF.0.oQ6.y4g9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23385 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Hamdi Ucar To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, October 15, 1998 6:42 PM Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives If you want to see how the automatic waste heat regulation system works, check U.S. Patents: 3,801,446 Sparber et al 3,931,532 NASA 3,964,902 NASA 4,011,104 Hughes 5,219,516 Thermocore Looks like it works. :-) Regards, Frederick Hamdi wrote: >Hi Horace and all, > >There was an earlier paper on the subject "gr-qc/9809070" > Comment on ``Indication, from Pioneer 10/11, Galileo, and Ulysses Data, > of an Apparent Anomalous, Weak, Long-Range Acceleration'' > > Authors: J. I. Katz (Department of Physics and McDonnell Center for the Space > Sciences, Washington U., St. Louis, MO) > >which I mixed with the gr-qc/9810015. Actually I had should give the first reference. > >>From the paper (gr-qc/9809070): > >"Then the electric power at launch of 220 W\cite{A98} implied a thermal power >of 3.67 kW and a waste heat of 3.45 kW. In 1997 the thermal power, decaying >with the half life of Pu$^{238}$ of 87.74 y, was 2.99 kW and the electrical >power of 80 W\cite{A98} implied a waste heat of 2.91 kW." > >Please read this paper, which probably claim the same thing appeared on Newscientist. > >Horace Heffner wrote: > >> Are you sure about the 3 kW for Pioneer 10? If so, there is probably some >> difficulty in showing why the acceleration was not *greater.* > >Horace, this is from the paper confirming my 3 kW figure. > >"Then the electric power at launch of 220 W\cite{A98} implied a thermal power >of 3.67 kW and a waste heat of 3.45 kW. In 1997 the thermal power, decaying >with the half life of Pu$^{238}$ of 87.74 y, was 2.99 kW and the electrical >power of 80 W\cite{A98} implied a waste heat of 2.91 kW." > >you wrote: > >> F = (250 kg)(8.5x10^-10 m/s^2) = 2.125x10^-7 N > >> F = (0.108 kg-f/N)(2.125x10^-7 N) = 2.3x10^-8 kg-f > >> The power to produce this thrust is: > >> P =(2.94x109 W/kg-f)(2.3x10^-8 kg-f) = 67.47 W > >>We know from the above article the Pioneer 10 antenna produces 9 W radiated >>RF towards earth, so we need to account for 67.47 W + 9 W = 76.47 W. > > >You are quite correct as the paper say: > >"The power of a collimated beam sufficient to explain the reported anomalous acceleration $a_P$ is 85 W\cite{}{A98}." > >you wrote: > >> Since the antenna is cool, it >>creates a shadow zone where very little of that radiated heat can go. >>Therefore, even if that heat is radiated isotropically, a large portion can >>not be radiated towards earth because of the shielding effect of the >>antenna. > >> To fully account for the acceleration by photon radiation, only 76.47/3000 W, >> or 2.5 percent of the radiation need be unbalanced in the direction away >> from the solar system. Given the large antenna diameter, the 3000 W total >> nuclear power figure seems excessive. > >Paper says: > >The same force can be obtained from the present rejected waste heat if it is radiated with a $\langle \cos \theta \rangle =0.029$ , where $\theta $ is the angle between the direction of radiation and a ray from the Sun. Such an asymmetry is quite modest, and would in fact be difficult to avoid unless great care were taken (for which there was no reason). Any components of recoil force orthogonal to the spin axis are averaged to zero by the spin. This axis and the net force point towards the Earth, and at the present great distances this closely aligns them with the Sun; the Solar alignment is almost exact after averaging over Earth's orbit > >Maybe not too excessive. Paper's explaination seems ok to me. You decide. > >Note: >Actually later paper "9810015" appears based on heat dissipated from electric power part not from the direct heat dissipated from the RTG. This one did not convince me either, a slight anisotropic radiation from heat sinks at 67W seem do not suffice for such a propulsion. But the reflection from back of antenna is a good argument on 9809070. > >Regards, > >hamdi ucar > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 19:40:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24378; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:37:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:37:56 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3626A31F.4DEE sunherald.infi.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:36:41 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness Resent-Message-ID: <"-h2ft1.0.py5.36h9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23386 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kyle - > I'll probably spin it up > tommorow. Looking forward to hearing about your results. I seriously doubt there's anything to this, and that the original post by Eccles to the NG was some sort of hoax or flamebait. The name Chris Eccles is vaguely familar to me somehow, but I don't remember where from - maybe Freenrg-L from a year or so ago. I sent e-mail to C.E. today requesting clarification on what's up with this. Don't really expect an answer, but we'll see. Spin 'er up and let us know. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 20:07:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA04765; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:05:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:05:43 -0700 Message-ID: <010c01bdf8b1$cfd22ec0$8cb4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re; Gravity is Back? Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:05:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"TnE5l2.0.BA1.6Wh9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23387 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The Gravitational Red Shift F = Fo[1+(Phi)/c^2] where(Phi) = - GM/R, Tested with the Mossbauer Effect and observations of the Sun. and the speed of light c' = c[1 + (Phi)/c'^2] implies that as a spacecraft distances itself from a Star or Solar System it should accelerate. Since K.E. = 1/2 mv^2 and E = mc'^2 conservation of momentum and energy requires that the mass lessens and the craft speeds up. Extrapolation shows that c' = (1/eo'*uo')^1/2 where eo' & uo' are proportional to (Phi),about half-way to Alpha Centauri c' is about 57*c, and will slow down to c as it enters the A.C. gravitational field. Might also explain why recent discoveries say that expansion of the universe is speeding up at the outer edges. Now that's Warp. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 21:23:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA01322; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:21:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:21:19 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981016122504.00a58dc0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:25:04 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness In-Reply-To: <01bdf880$0ea37e60$0c6cd626 george.varisys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9TjKf3.0.UK.-ci9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23388 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: George (I think) wrote: >I have done considerable work recently on a new >experiment measuring the magnitude of the longitudinal >( or Ampere ) force in a Marinov motor like current >configuration, but with straight rather than circular >conductors forming a fixed loop on top of an >electronic balance. I showed the results to Kooistra >and Phipps at the recent I.E. conference. Basically >what I found was that the longitudinal force exists but >was about 1/4 of the Lorentz force in a modified Marinov >configuration. With straight conductors the longitudinal >force was essentially zero with the standard Marinov >magnet placement. If anyone is interested, I could get the >graphs and pictures posted on our web site. ... Sounds mighty interesting to me. Please do! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 22:05:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA16917; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:59:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:59:20 -0700 Message-ID: <3626C60B.CD9 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:05:31 -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: Storms: Blue: CF debate 10.15.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vWadN1.0.F84.dAj9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23389 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Storms 10/13/98 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:27:08 -0600 From: Edmund Storms To: rmforall earthlink.net Reply to Dick Blue (10/13/98) by Ed Storms Since this reply has not yet been posted by Rich, I would like to add my two cents to the Blue-Scott discussion which is appended at the end. > Perhaps Ed Storms is just too much of a gentlemen to be fully engaged > in the sorting of fact from fiction. This process should not be seen > merely as a personal attack on an individual who asserts some new > experimental claim. It is a necessary effort to screen results. You > have been unwilling to do any screening, so you are left with an > assortment that includes a great deal of bogus information. It's no > wonder progress is so slow as far too much experimental effort is being > wasted in pursuit of dead ends. Why, thank you Dick, although I think I should feel damned by faint praise. As I noted, I do sort good data from questionable data, as you will notice if you bother to read my reviews. However, we naturally have a different criteria of which is which. Blue and Hansen would reject Miles-Bush, while I find this work believable. I presume Dick would reject all transmutation claims, but I find many to be well done and highly suggestive of a new aspect of CANR. So, once again, the issue is not whether the necessary analysis is being done, it is a matter of a basic willingness to consider the possibility of a new phenomenon. Dick would, on many occasions, throw the baby out with the bath water. In fact, progress is slow, not because time is being wasted on dead-end research, but because so few people with skill and modern equipment are in the field. This problem stems totally from premature rejection of the claims by the conventional scientific establishment, including Dick Blue. If we had a large and growing collection of observation, as is the case with fields accepted by science, we could debate the merits of each claim more effectively. However, in this case, we have only a few studies showing some of the basic relationships. For example, the quantitative relationship between helium and heat has been shown by only two independent studies, both of which were able to produce only small amounts of heat. Dick would have us reject both studies, just because the amount of heat was small, hence not proving by itself the claims for excess energy. If the skeptics had not caused all support for the field to dry up, we might have many such studies to choose from at this point, and we could easily pick the best to discuss. > > Yes, we all would like better nuclear detection results. We take what > > we can get. The problem has always been that great effort is taken to > > set up a good detection experiment, but the palladium is dead because it > > was a bad piece or because people trained in detection have no idea how > > to do electrochemistry. Until robust samples are available, we will > > have to make do with what is available. > > So this has given a needed excuse to dismiss a lot of negative evidence > from the nuclear measurements. Each time a radiation detector is > brought near the palladium, it plays dead. I see a real problem here. > Everything you describe about the CANR process seems to indicate that it > should be possible to get a little bit of a reaction going without ever > reaching the level of sensitivity for the calorimetry. I would expect > that some samples that appear "dead" as far as an excess heat signal is > concerned may well still be reactive at a very low level, perhaps for > just a short period of time. That should still provide an opportunity > for the much more sensitive radiation detector to catch a signal. > However, that does not seem to happen. What does Dick want to see? The effect simply does not produce significant radiation. I can not help this, that is the way of nature. On the other hand, some radiation is seen, and efforts have been and are being taken to explore this window in more detail. For Dick to say that no radiation is seen is simply not true and demonstrates a lack of knowledge on his part. > > Yes, the rates are low, and yes, they don’t have much significance, > > except for the almost obsessive focus on neutron emission in some > > quarters. However, the results cited were done by experts in the neutron > > detection field and are worth considering in any explanation. I grant, > > the results are not sufficiently certain to make them the total basis > > for a theory. Once again, we are into shades of gray, not right and > > wrong. > > I don't like to "accept" a result just because it comes from > measurements by a so-called expert. I would rather evaluate actual > experimental data and discuss the conditions of the measurements to > arrive at an understanding as to what can or cannot be relied upon. In > the case of the reported neutron energy spectra, I would point out that > the measurements are difficult, because the detectors employed do not, > in fact, yield information regarding the neutron energy very directly. > The pulse-height spectra have to be unfolded to get the claimed result. > What is, I believe, being overlooked is the fact that at the very low > detection rates an appreciable fraction of the detector response is > actually gamma rays rather than neutrons. Of course there was some > electronic discrimination against the gamma signals, but the technique > has some definite limitations which I am very familiar with. It is not > 100% efficient. It's only 99% efficient. So if the gamma flux is being > detected at 100 times the neutron rate, the final data is still a 50-50 > mix of neutrons and gammas. Do you see the problem for low rate > measurements? In the context of my reply, an "expert" is someone who has spent enough time with his particular apparatus that he knows when the output signal is real and when it is not. When Prof. Takahashi tells me that his neutron detector sees neutrons of 2.45 MeV, I believe him. He has spent years refining the detector and has much more experience knowing whether gamma rays affect the signal than you or I. Just because Dick Blue can propose an error does not mean that this error has not been considered by an equally intelligent and careful worker and eliminated to the necessary degree. Does Dick Blue think everyone else is so easily fooled? > Yes, there is indeed low level radiation present! If you take a > commercial sample of palladium of the purist sort and place a detector > next to it you will learn that it is RADIOACTIVE!!! Photographic film > is useful for certain types of studies. I am not making a blanket > condemnation of every measurement that ever used film as a radiation > detector. What I wish to suggest is, however, that with respect to > definitive determinations of CANR the limitations of this technique are > sufficient to rule out such measurements as establishing any essential > feature of CANR. The data obtained with film packs do not determine the > intensity, the energy spectrum, the radiation type, or the timing > relative to chemical events. I would not trust it with respect to the > spatial distribution of radiation sources either, unless the intensities > are higher than seems to be the case. There are ways for generating > bogus signals. It would be much better if the film results were > confirmed by other means. Of course, everything is radioactive in that context, if for no other reason than K39 and radon are everywhere. The presence of low level radioactivity is not the issue. Also not the issue is whether the use of photographic detection of radioactivity is definitive in answering major questions about CANR. Of course, the energy spectra, and spatial and time resolutions are not shown. What is important is that significant radiation of some sort is present under conditions where it is not expected. Other, more informative detectors are now being used to fill in the details. > I know of nothing to suggest that a coherent electron structure would do > anything to enhance CANR as claimed. There is a serious disconnect > between the electronic wave functions and the nuclear wave functions -- > something I am waiting to hear addressed by anyone. Part of the > disconnect, as I see it, has to do with the fact that not all atomic > electrons are conduction electrons and not all participate in a > transition to a superconducting state, even should there be one. To do > anything to the nucleus, a electron has to be at the nucleus at the > specific reactive site in the palladium sample. A coherent electron on > the moon is not going to account for the CANR. Now should the > effects you suggest ever be real, I would suggest that calorimetry is > still not the best way to detect something of this sort. Show me an > Electron Capture decay that is sensitive to something like this, and you > could turn me into a believer real fast. Ironically, George Miley > relies on EC decay to "prove" that there is a form of CANR. He must, > however, assume that this decay is unperturbed. I also would sit up and > pay attention if anyone were producing anomalous X-ray spectra via > electrolysis of Pd. Good, I see we have several methods to produce a convert. I, also, look forward to such experiments being done. Meanwhile, I am willing to evaluate and be impressed by other types of evidence. Would you consider the change in tritium decay rate produced by a chemical environment, as shown by O. J. A. Reifenschweiler (Fusion Technol. 31 (1997) 291), to be important? > We clearly are approaching this from two different points of view. You > are assuming that the "excess heat" is a real, physical phenomenon, > while I am still waiting to see more conclusive and complete evidence. > I suspect that the "excess heat" is largely an artifact of the > technique, so I am curious about details of the observations that you > may not see as significant clues. Now you make reference to the "onset" > of the production of excess heat, as it were that easily recognized. I > am not sure there is, in fact, a definitive way to recognize such an > onset, at least not in much of the data I have examined. As I said > before regarding the Miles-Bush data, the runs that yield a null result > look very much like the runs that show an excess. There is no place you > can point your finger to say that's where it begins to show the excess. > There is no clear "onset" that provides a signal large relative to the > "noise". It's things like replenishing the D2O that produce a signal > that catches the eye. Of course, the effect is impossible to see when the amount of excess is small, such as in the Miles-Bush data. In addition, they did not set out to show this effect. Why not look at results obtained at high excess power levels and where the effect was explored in detail? McKubre and I both have published data which clearly show the effect. The effect can also be seen in a large data set as shown in my first review paper. The Miles-Bush results, admittedly, produced only a small amount of excess. If this were the only evidence for the effect, you would have a point. However, when all of the data from many sources (many giving huge values), are taken together to demonstrate the existence of a phenomenon, then the Miles-Bush data can be seen as being real and used to show the relationship between the small, but real, amount of heat and helium production. Once a phenomenon is accepted, we in science have never needed every subsequent study to be so well done as to answer every possible objection. > Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that there is no real CANR > effect. How would the data from your experiments differ from what you > have been describing? Because of the "noise" which you acknowledge is > present you would get variable results. If you plotted the integral > "excess heat" for each of many runs as a histogram you would get a > distribution. What does that distribution look like? It may well have > a tail out on the positive side, but so what? > So you acknowledge that people have been rejecting marginal results and > not reporting them, preferring to publish only data showing a large > "effect." That is precisely what I have been driving at. Unless we > can actually see ALL the data we are not likely to be able to tell just > what is going on in these experiments. My current hypothesis is that > positive results are being generated by an improper selection of data. > To prove me wrong we need to see the distribution from which the > published sample is drawn. > > You take comfort, it seems, in having data from which the marginal > results have been removed, as if that were a good thing. I am > suggesting that it is actually a significant distortion of the > information being published about CANR. We need to be able to evaluate > just how results are being sorted into the "yes" and "no" bins. In > particular the kinds of information that you are relying on to arrive at > a description of the CANR process may not be as well determined as you > suggest. We seem to be hung-up on this issue. I wish, indeed plead with Dick to read the literature which can be accessed through the bibliography in my reviews. If I were to attempt to plot a histogram as Dick suggests, I would produce a bimodal plot. There would be a sharply peaked curve centering near zero with a small tail on the positive side. Then comes a gap followed by another curve. This second curve has a broad peak near 500 mW and extends with rapidly decreasing frequency up to about 75 watts excess. Because a variety of sample sizes containing a variety of active sites were used to obtain these data, the shape of this second curve has no fundamental meaning. If we were seeing only the first curve near zero, as Dick would suggest is the case, I would agree, data selection or random variations might be the explanation. However, the second peak provides an indication that something else is going on. In addition, which region a particular sample falls depends on a clear relationship to its ability to acquire deuterium. Thus, two independent properties (excess energy production and ability to acquire deuterium) both self-select the samples into the same two sets. Can you explain how this can happen by a random process? Perhaps I should not ask such a question because I think you have the talent to explain anything to fit your beliefs. Blue-Scott Chubb Discussion Several facts about the state of deuterium in the palladium-deuterium compound need to be recognized. 1. The presence of a lattice automatically restrains the deuterons to a degree of order. 2. The actual nuclear-active lattice is probably PdD2, a structure in which the deuterons are paired. Such pairing would produce additional ordering. 3. The distance between the deuterons within these pairs is expected to be less than the distance within the gaseous D2 molecule. 4. It is impossible to attribute the temperature coefficient of excess energy production (which is positive) to the nuclear process because temperature will also change the amount of nuclear-active material present. Ed. Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 22:10:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA20016; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:06:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:06:50 -0700 Message-ID: <3626C7DC.D57 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:13:16 -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 Subject: Abrams: Physics book sale now online 10.15.98 Content-Type: message/news Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"5n7mG2.0.fu4.fHj9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23390 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Message-ID: <36258E08.89D aol.com> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:54:16 -0500 From: Harvey Abrams Reply-To: Olympicbks aol.com Organization: Harvey Abrams-BOOKS X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Physics book sale now online Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: sc2.vicon.net Path: nntp.earthlink.net!newsbackup.it.earthlink.net!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!nntprelay.mathworks.com!uunet!in4.uu.net!news!sc2.vicon.net Xref: nntp.earthlink.net sci.physics.fusion:24362 I have added Catalog 18 - Physics & Mathematics Books - (and Physics Journals), to my web site. You can now view the 700 books at my web site. Buy what you need for your collection. 2700 journals available. Harvey Abrams-BOOKS PO Box 732 State College, PA USA 16804 email: Olympicbks aol.com http://www.vicon.net/~olympic/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 22:55:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA00867; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:54:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:54:47 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:01:51 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Re; Gravity is Back? Cc: "George" Resent-Message-ID: <"oMvwq3.0.TD.d-j9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23391 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:05 PM 10/15/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >The Gravitational Red Shift F = Fo[1+(Phi)/c^2] >where(Phi) = - GM/R, Tested with the Mossbauer Effect and observations of >the Sun. > >and the speed of light c' = c[1 + (Phi)/c'^2] >implies that as a spacecraft distances itself from a Star or Solar System it >should accelerate. > >Since K.E. = 1/2 mv^2 and E = mc'^2 conservation of momentum and energy >requires that the mass lessens and the craft speeds up. > >Extrapolation shows that c' = (1/eo'*uo')^1/2 where eo' & uo' are >proportional to (Phi),about half-way to Alpha Centauri c' is about 57*c, >and will slow down to c as it enters the A.C. gravitational field. > >Might also explain why recent discoveries say that expansion of the universe >is speeding up at the outer edges. > >Now that's Warp. :-) > >Regards, Frederick Very neat concept. The effect might be even more marked than that. The clocks must appear to speed up, so light emission must be blue shifted. If the light is blue shifted the red shift to here would appear to be less, the distant emitters would be thought to be closer than they are. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 23:06:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA03409; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:04:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:04:24 -0700 Message-ID: <19981016060535.23354.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:05:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"qExgc.0.4r.e7k9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23392 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A couple of comments on this topic: 1. Seebeck calorimetry is not sensitive to changes in the external bath temperature, if it is well designed. Seebeck calorimetry is designed to be insensitive to local changes in both the internal and external temperature distributions over the calorimeter envelop. This is why Seebeck calorimetry is good. Of course, nothing is ideal in reality. Seebeck calorimetry requires lots (order of 1000 or more) thermocouples. The thermocouples must have sufficiently linear response. And the calorimeter envelope, which is the thermal impedance across which flow of heat develops a temperature difference, must be extremely uniform; the whole concept of Seebeck calorimetry depends on the same delta T for the same local heat flux, no matter where. Finally, Seebeck calorimetry depends on measurements of small temperature differences, so it is sensitive to error enhancement by subtraction. 2. I, too, had wondered about Pons and Fleischmann's drawings that always show only one temperature measuring device in their cell. This is especially puzzling in view of Fleischmann's conspicuous (and correct emphasis) on the absolute necessity that the temperature be uniformized to a high degree as a premise of their isoperibolic calorimetry. It seems to me that they would want to measure T at several points to verify temperature uniformity. It also seems to me that, even if they did not want to draw multiple sensors in their figure, the figure and/or text would call out "one of many" or something to the effect, if indeed there were more than one sensor. 3. I want to emphasize the importance of confirming uniformity in P&F cells. P&F rely on fluid mixing by rising electrolysis bubbles. Maybe it indeed works well most of the time. However, I know that fluid thermal convective motion is subject to sudden changes from one pattern to another. It can be chaotic (unpredictable, discontinuous changes from one behavior to another). Remember, chaos theory started with (the new) Lorentz, who tried to better explain the behavior of weather systems (thermally driven fluid convection). == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 23:38:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA10274; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:37:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:37:04 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981016063839.00686790 atlantic.net> X-Sender: johmann atlantic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 02:38:39 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-Message-ID: <"pnK3Z3.0.SW2.Gck9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23393 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I just read the following post by Ian Goddard on the newsgroup misc.activism.progressive, regarding Art Bell. I've copied the entire post by Ian Goddard below (none of the following text is mine): Below are two posts, the first, from "alt.fan.art-bell," claims to be from Art Bell, it has his real email address as sender but traces to a server (execpc.com) that doesn't seem to be connected to Art Bell, as far as I can determine. Messages that seem to be "real Bells" trace to news aol.com, as they should. I therefore suspect that it is a BOGUS Bell post; but the content is interesting. The post, over two weeks old, claims to quote an AP article that claims that Art Bell is being blackmailed by "Clinton operatives." Is this a real AP article? Can anyone confirm? On-line AP ar- chives that I can find only go back for 2 weeks. I suspect that it is a BOGUS post with a BOGUS article. But even if that is the case, that it was posted three weeks before the latest Bell news and mentions blackmail is of note. It could well be part of the campaign to threaten Art Bell and may also be some kind of fasle or true lead. The second post is a month older than the first post quoted below, and it quotes an article from The Wichita Eagle (which I have confirmed (http://newslibrary.infi.net/wichita) to be genuine), which talks about a letter sent to Bell that con- tained threats and a bogus claim that a powder in the letter was anthrax. Bell posted the threatening letter to his web- site, but the FBI told him to take it down. Art said that the threats indicated that the author knew what he does in his private life, which suggests surveillance. Does anyone have the threatening letter that Bell posted? Author: Art Bell Email: artbell aol.com Date: 1998/09/28 Forums: alt.fan.art-bell Message-ID: <6ummfi$6jh newsops.execpc.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset Mime-Version: 1.0 Organization: http://www.artbell.com Reply-To: artbell aol.com X-Complaints-To: abuse execpc.com X-Trace: daily-planet.newsops.execpc.com 906943794 6769 (None) 169.207.95.25 Radio Host Art Bell BLACKMAILED by Clinton Operatives By JOHNSON GLENN Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sources close to the Clinton Whitehouse are denying a report that late-night radio host Art Bell has been blackmailed by a group close to the president. The report asserts that Bell, a successful radio talk show host with a late-night audience of 20 Million listeners, was black-mailed in order to secure commentary favorable to Clinton. Sources said that materials connecting Bell and his cousin, new-age guru Frederick Lenz, were used to threaten Bell. Lenz, known as "RAMA" to a cult following, was deceased earlier this year in an apparent suicide. The incident remains under investigation. Of note in the report was Bell's rapid turnaround in his position regarding the Clinton issue. In his August 17th show, Bell called for Clinton's resignation following the President's now infamous apolgy. Bell now supports the President. Bell was reportedly so intimidated by the initial threat that he feigned an injury during a broadcast, and he remained off the air for days to consider options. He has since tightly controlled his broadcasts and limits open-line calling on the topic while remaining favorable to the Clinton Administration. The Whitehouse has denied all knowledge of the incident. Ringing Art's Bell Author: nightingale Email: lotus usa.net Date: 1998/08/28 Forums: alt.fan.art-bell Message-ID: <35E61782.A48EF16A usa.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset MIME-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:36:14 PDT Organization: Home Network Source: The Wichita Eagle Date: Aug 27 1998 Header: 20 FBI agents on hoax case Sub-header: The search for the person responsible for the State Office Building anthrax scare has stretched to the Nevada home of syndicated talk show host Art Bell. Byline: Hurst Laviana A task force of 20 FBI agents has been assembled to follow up on 160 leads in the hunt for whoever was responsible for last week's anthrax scare at the Finney State Office Building in Wichita, federal agents said Wednesday. The investigation has stretched as far as Nevada, where a talk-show host specializing in topics such as alien sightings and conspiracy theories received a copy of the same threat note that accompanied a harmless white powder that was scattered in the Wichita office building. The note falsely claimed the powder was anthrax, a deadly biological toxin. Larry McCormick, special agent in charge of FBI offices in Kansas and western Missouri, said investigators are focusing their efforts on a rambling anti-government letter that accompanied copies of the threat note that were sent to the Nevada radio host and to a Wichita television station. The FBI is convinced that the letters, which appeared to be identical, were written by the same person who claimed responsibility for the Aug. 18 anthrax threat. Although there was no authentic danger to the public, authorities closed the office building for two days, idling hundreds of government workers and inconveniencing thousands of patrons. A group calling itself the Brothers for the Freedom of Americans claimed responsibility. The letters sent by the group claimed it is affiliated with "Christian Identity" militia orgnizations in the United States and revolutionaries in Northern Ireland, the FBI said. McCormick said the first letter arrived at KWCH-TV, Channel 12, a day after the anthrax scare. A second later arrived at the home of radio personality Art Bell, whose late-night talk show is carried on more than 300 stations including KFH-1330 AM in Wichita. Both letters consisted of 11 pages and were mailed in Wichita on the day of the scare, the FBI said. Both copies of the letter are being examined by the FBI lab in Washington, D.C. Bell said he had no idea why the letter was sent to him. "And I'm not at all happy about it," he said in an interview from his home in Pahrump, Nev. "You might imagine it a hoax, but it didn't read like a hoax. It read like somebody who was aware of what he was doing. ... There were specific demands and there were specific threats." Bell said that when his wife opened the letter, the first thing she noticed were the words, "Congratulations -- you've been infected." State Office Building workers reported seeing the same words on the note found inside the building on Aug. 18. McCormick said chemical tests showed that the powder left in the building was a common household substance that was not being publicly identified by the FBI. "It is non-toxic, it is non-hazardous, and it could be found in any house," he said. McCormick said the contents of the letter were not being disclosed, but that "it just sort of rambles on about their anti-government beliefs." Bell said that was a good characterization of the letter he received. After reading it, he said, he posted a copy to his Internet Web site so people in Wichita could see what the threats entailed. "The FBI came to see me the next day with evidence bags and gloves," he said. Bell said he complied with the FBI's request to temporarily remove the letter from the Web site after agents told him it could interfere with their investigation. Bell also said he was complying with the FBI's request not to discuss specifics of the letter. McCormick said he didn't know exactly how much powder was spread throughout the building, but that "it wasn't buckets. Handfuls might be the way to put it." Agents are continuing to seek help from the public, who can forward information by calling Crime Stoppers anonymously at 267-2111. Bill Seck, who heads the FBI office in Wichita, said the federal government takes threats seriously in light of the Oklahoma City bombing and other acts of terrorism both at home and abroad. McCormick said he has not yet tried to determine a cost of the State Office Building investigation. "Those bills will add up, but I can't (give) you a number," he said. He said he has not heard of any other cases involving anthrax scares. "We do have strange people throughout this country who do strange things," he said. "There are none that that are directly related to this." IAN: Why, if the FBI is on the case, would Bell still be so afraid that he figures that he must quite his stellar career? If the terrorists had to use a bogus anthrax scare, it suggests that they do not have black- mail power over him, and as such, have to resort to other terror tactics. This suggests that the terrorists are as powerful as the Federal government, since it seems that Bell has determined that the FBI is not capable of protecting his family against them. ___________________________________________ IAN GODDARD'S ANTI-AUTHORITARIAN JOURNAL ------------------------------------------- http://www.erols.com/igoddard/journal.htm - the critics are raving - "Shouldn't this be expunged?...[since] it is spreading fear and suspicion of the government." Lesley Stahl (CBS - 60 Minutes) Call the police! Newsday reports that "another site linked to Goddard's" is linked to another site that "pictures a woman's bare derrierre." BTW, I'm still (drool) looking for that site On CNN, a Federal official said Goddard's TWA 800 inquiry has caused "real damage." ergo: stopping Goddard amage control GIVING THE BIG LIE A BLACK EYE WITH THE FIST OF ANALYTICAL INQUIRY __________________________________________ IAN GODDARD'S ANTI-AUTHORITARIAN JOURNAL ------------------------------------------ http://www.erols.com/igoddard/journal.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 23:46:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA12683; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:45:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:45:03 -0700 Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:46:40 +0200 (MET DST) From: britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981015092952.006ee9dc mail.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"RC9Go3.0.063.kjk9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23394 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Scott Little wrote: > > What's a "starry droog"? It's an expression whose ring I like. It comes out of Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess, where the roughneck teenagers speak a Russian-laced jargon. This one means old friend (which he actually is not). Another one I like is "I viddied it with my own glazzies", which I think I don't need to translate. All horrorshow (another nice one, from khorosho = good or well). -- Dieter Britz. Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 15 23:51:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA14225; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:48:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:48:25 -0700 Message-ID: <3626DFA8.7FAC earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:54:49 -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: vjs uhheph.phys.hawaii.edu, sarfatti@well.com, ggglobus@uci.edu, info csicop.org, Vortex-L@eskimo.com, JosephHRowe@compuserve.com Subject: Murray: Stenger: Atomic Reality to Quantum Mind list? 10.15.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eBnR3.0.BU3.vmk9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23395 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oct. 15, 1998 Hello Prof. Stenger, I sent your article "Quantum Quackery", Victor J. Stenger, which was on the miningco.com physics site, to Jack Sarfatti [sarfatti well.com] and Gordon G. Globus [ggglobus uci.edu], who are very active in the Quantum Mind discussion group, for rather avant garde speculations on extensions of QM to consciousness and various expanded notions of "physical reality". I hope you will send your Atomic Reality to them, to open up some intelligent, if perhaps far-flung discussions. I took the time to send them the intro from your web page. Qualia are the quandry. You view in your visual space of awareness these little black marks on a white background, and automatically and remarkably swiftly spoken words and subtle, interlocked meanings arise in awareness. Your Atomic Reality itself can exist in your awareness and in that of others only as qualia, appearing as momentary, ever-evolving experiences in awareness. How then, can any theory explain awareness, the only blackboard on which any equations can be scrawled in instantly shifting chalk marks? Is this not inevitably a fundamental issue of circular reasoning? To put it another way, how can we justify applying any conceptual schemes whatsoever to awareness itself? The problem is even more recondrite when account is taken of expanded states of awareness, which I can assure you, based on my direct experience, certainly exist, and exist indeed most robustly and fundamentally. It is true that most attempts to apply QM to consciousness are shallow and misguided, and I am sure that your criticisms, which I have not yet read, are mostly very right on. By the way, I am a scientific layman, having earned a B.S. in physics and history at M.I.T in 1964, and I am a mystic, however, one who has perused with pleasure every issue of The Skeptical Inquirer for some fifteen years. Now, a confession, for what it's worth, I am convinced that I have had many precognitive dreams, about very ordinary events of the next two days. I am fully aware of all the ways to very reasonably dispute this claim. I suggest the only way to settle this is for each observer to become convinced by their own dream explorations. Similarly, only each observer can become convinced by their own success of the reality of remote viewing. Roahn Wynar, a physicist at the U. of Texas, Austin, has accumulated dozen of number of attempted RV posts for his skeptical but fair web site for RV test images, open to all. So you can examine them at leisure for some 20 targets this year. I find some of the posts to be very evocative, such as two for the display tower at a car race. http://storm.ph.utexas.edu/~rwynar/RemoteViewing.html For a completely fresh approach to exploring the nature of reality, I recommend a work of genius, Time, Space, and Knowledge (1977), Tarthang Tulku. 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 Oct 15 23:52:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA15826; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:51:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:51:17 -0700 Message-ID: <3626E051.78D3 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:57:37 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sarfatti well.com, ggglobus@uci.edu, JosephHRowe@compuserve.com, physics.guide miningco.com, info@csicop.org, Vortex-L@eskimo.com, vjs uhheph.phys.hawaii.edu Subject: Stenger: Atomic Reality QM theory 10.15.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9Al2I1.0.9t3.bpk9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23396 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oct. 15, 1998 Prof. Victor J. Stenger, U. of Hawaii, Honolulu 96822 808-956-2942 vjs uhheph.phys.hawaii.edu http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/vjs/ Victor J. Stenger is professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Hawaii and the author of Not By Design: The Origin of the Universe (Prometheus Books, 1988) and Physics and Psychics: The Search for a World Beyond the Senses (Prometheus Books, 1990). This paper is based on his latest book, The Unconscious Quantum: Metaphysics in Modern Physics and Cosmology, {Prometheus Books, 1995). http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/vjs/www/void.html ATOMIC REALITY The ancient picture of atoms and the void, interacting only by means of local processes, was brought to fruition in the development of the Standard Model of quarks, leptons, and gauge bosons. The Standard Model utilizes the Feynman spacetime picture in which elementary particles travel along definite paths in spacetime. Long range forces are mediated by particle exchange and require no holistic, metaphysical fields. Fields appear only as mathematical operators in the theory and have no direct connection to observations. Time reversibility at the fundamental level helps explain the puzzles and paradoxes of quantum phenomena and allows the "virtual" particles exchanged to be considered "real." The absence of any competing paradigms in particle physics, and the negligible role played by other ontological schemes in developing these paradigms, makes atoms and the void a viable candidate for "ultimate reality." Here are html versions of the chapters that have been drafted. Comments are welcome. Please note that these are tentative and should not be quoted, copied, or re-distributed, in whole or in part, without permission. Note that Greek letters and other special symbols may not be reproduced. Summary and Outline This is a short working outline that on 7/20/98 relaced the longer summary/outlines. These can still be found at the end of the chapters. 1. Constructing Reality 2. Atoms and Forms 3. Truth or Consequences 4. The Classical Paradigms 5. The Relativity Paradigms 6. The Quantum Paradigms 7. QED 8. The Standard Paradigm 9. The Particle Ontology This document contains links to figures that have not yet been placed on the Web. 10. The Platonic and Field Ontolgies. This chapter is in preparation. I will be happy to distribute the current draft to anyone interested, but will not put on the Web until finished. Bibliography You are invited to join in the discussion of this work by subscribing to the list avoid-l. Just send: subscribe avoid-l first_name last_name to: listproc hawaii.edu This is a moderated list, so you will not be inundated with email. Return to VJS Home Page. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 02:39:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA16423; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 02:38:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 02:38:27 -0700 Message-ID: <36271191.5B51 skylink.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 02:27:45 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"anRQI2.0.T04.IGn9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23397 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Some thoughts about the experiment described in the message attached below. Magnetic flux is cut/switched between north-south poles as the rotor spins. This induces an E field in the air gap. There is a resulting crossed E-B field in the air gap as well as angular momentum in the EM field in the air gap. The crossed E-B field and momentum in the air gap is oscillating in time, and also due to the slight eccentricity of the disk also has a magnitude variation which is rotating in space. The disk has a constant average rotational velocity, but experiences an oscillating torque due to push-pull from the magnetic forces. The mechanical disk has an oscillating angular velocity. Angular momentum is being exchanged between the mechanical disk and the EM field in the air gap. The gravitomagnetic field is measured in dimensions of spin density (angular momentum/cubic-meter). A time varying gravitomagnetic field must be created by the oscillating torque on the disk and the on-going exchange of angular momentum between the disk and the air gap. The gravitomagnetic field also may be accentuated by the rotating spatial variation due to the eccentricity of the disk. A time varying gravitomagnetic field induces a time varying gravitoelectric field. The induced gravitoelectric field may act to create a shielding effect on the static gravitoelectric field of the earth. Regards, Robert Stirniman ========================= Horace Heffner wrote: > > Here is the post: > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > From: ecogen iol.ie (Chris Eccles) > Newsgroups: sci.physics.electromag > Subject: Mystified by Results > Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 08:49:02 +0100 > Organization: genesis > Message-ID: <1dgf37j.1qva74l1r4wg9uN dialup-042.ennis.iol.ie> > NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-042.ennis.iol.ie > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > X-Newsreader: MacSOUP 2.3 > Lines: 44 > Xref: hub1.ispnews.com sci.physics.electromag:8005 > > I don't often post to news but, this time, I feel that someone out there > might offer me an answer to a wierd outcome of an experiment. > > I have spent my entire career in mainstream physics research and have > always been amused (often annoyed) by the "crankies" who believe in > teleportation, spoon-bending, etc etc etc, and have consistently held > the view that these fringe things belong firmly outside what I call > physics. > > A few weeks back, my lab assistant got some stuff off the net about a > "magneto-gravity" device, accompanied by some notes by Tom Bearden. > This swatch of paper was lying about in the lab office and I happened to > read it. Out of nothing but bemused interest, I said to my team, "Lets > build this crap and see what happens...." > > We constructed a variant of the device shown in the drawings which > accompanied the data. This consisted of a Duralumin disc (350mm dia) > which could be spun on a motor shaft, using a Picador bearing which we > had lying about. The disc was made to spin 1.5mm eccentric and was > fitted with twelve button magnets around its periphery, with all their N > poles facing outwards, by fixing the magnets to 90-degree offcuts of > alloy angle. The whole thing was then mechanically balanced by adding > extra thin strips of copper busbar (!) to compensate for the > eccenticity. When tested, the disc displayed some imbalance but this > was easily corrected until we had it running smoothly at 2850 rpm from a > mains-powered 750W motor. So far so good. > > We then rigged an enclosing fence of alloy strip around the disc, on > which we mounted twelve more button magnets with their S poles facing > inwards. The clearance between the disc-mounted magnets and the > peripheral ones varied by ±0.75mm as the disc turned. > > The whole shazam was mounted on an acrylic baseplate and weighed. It > was 14.26 kg. When we switched the motor in, the weird shit happened. > The balance showed a loss of grav mass of the assembly of some 550 grams > (3.85%) and every computer terminal and fluorescent lamp in the lab went > ape ! > > Is this real, or should I take a holiday ? > > Can anyone offer an explanation ? > > Chris > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 05:03:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA04708; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 04:59:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 04:59:41 -0700 Message-Id: <199810161159.HAA22850 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 07:58:37 -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: <"uRJ072.0.D91.hKp9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23398 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Is it possible that when both parts of the motor rotate in the same >direction, it is coupling to the Earth's magnetic field, or is the >Earth's field too weak to explain the effect? I do not think Earths field can explain the effect because the magnet does NOT rotate by itself suspended from the nylon thread. This is a most amazing demonstration -- a warning to so many others who have adopted the "Holy writ" of Fizzix. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 05:05:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA06987; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 05:04:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 05:04:49 -0700 Message-Id: <199810161204.IAA23755 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: Spinning magnet strangeness Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:43:12 -0400 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: <"BEM-23.0.5j1.XPp9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23399 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: George, I would like to see more about the linear Marinov motor. I enjoyed meeting you at the conference. Ed Wall NERL You wrote: > If anyone is interested, I could get the > graphs and pictures posted on our web site. The description is > pretty limited as yet but the configuration is simple. > - > Regards, > George Holz - george varisys.com > Varitronics Systems > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 07:56:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA29541; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:54:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:54:10 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981016095356.006f67ec mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:53:56 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <19981016060535.23354.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WE15A3.0.SD7.Hur9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23400 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 23:05 10/15/98 -0700, Michael Schaffer wrote: >1. Seebeck calorimetry is not sensitive to changes in the external >bath temperature, if it is well designed. Odd, it seems to me that Seebeck calorimetry IS sensitive to the external bath temperature in a manner analogous to the way that flow calorimetry is sensitive to the temperature of the inlet water. In the latter case, because of the significant heat capacity of the contents of the calorimeter, a step change in the inlet water temperature appears directly as an step change in the observed delta-T equal of equal magnitude. The same situation exists in a Seebeck calorimeter...how can you design it away? Jed, points out: >Right, but in my experience, it is easier to maintain a stable temperature and >good mixing in a large body of water compared to, say, the cross section of a >20 to 60 ml/minute flow. That may be correct for some system designs (like Ben Bush's) but the Seebeck calorimeter we had (from Thermonetics) had a water jacket around it thru which you had to flow constant temperature water...so it was in the same boat as flow calorimetry. My contention is that Seebeck calorimetry is not fundamentally less sensitive to a reference temperature than other methods of calorimetry. Do you disagree with this, Michael? 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 Oct 16 08:15:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05838; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:13:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:13:58 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981016111404.007d1810 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:14:04 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981016095356.006f67ec mail.eden.com> References: <19981016060535.23354.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"yeHGl.0.8R1.qAs9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23401 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:53 AM 10/16/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >My contention is that Seebeck calorimetry is not fundamentally less >sensitive to a reference temperature than other methods of calorimetry. We have found Seebeck calorimetry very sensitive, but the large amounts of heat loss in some systems may alter the reactions observed (or desired) for cold fusion systems, as we have reported at ICCF-4, ICCF-7 and elsewhere. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 09:53:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA20677; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:51:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:51:37 -0700 Message-Id: <199810161652.LAA19894 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:51:37 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Resent-Message-ID: <"r2w4c1.0.-25.Oct9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23403 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 23:05 10/15/98 -0700, Michael Schaffer wrote: > >>1. Seebeck calorimetry is not sensitive to changes in the external >>bath temperature, if it is well designed. > >Odd, it seems to me that Seebeck calorimetry IS sensitive to the external >bath temperature in a manner analogous to the way that flow calorimetry is >sensitive to the temperature of the inlet water. In the latter case, >because of the significant heat capacity of the contents of the >calorimeter, a step change in the inlet water temperature appears directly >as an step change in the observed delta-T equal of equal magnitude. ***{Scott, it seems to me that the delta-T in flow calorimetry would be essentially unaffected by an increase or decrease in the inlet water temperature. If, for example, 10 ml/sec is flowing through a cell that is outputting 10 cal/sec, then the equilibrium delta-T is going to be about 1 degree C across a relatively wide range of inlet water temperatures, because the specific heat of water doesn't vary by much under normal conditions. There will, of course, be a brief decline in the delta-T in response to an increase in the inlet temperature, while the calorimeter's contents are brought up to the new equilibrium temperature. But once the new equilibrium is achieved, the delta-T will be essentially the same as before--assuming, of course, that the heat output of the cell is not sensitive to temperature. --Mitchell Jones}*** The >same situation exists in a Seebeck calorimeter...how can you design it away? > >Jed, points out: > >>Right, but in my experience, it is easier to maintain a stable temperature >and >>good mixing in a large body of water compared to, say, the cross section of a >>20 to 60 ml/minute flow. > >That may be correct for some system designs (like Ben Bush's) but the >Seebeck calorimeter we had (from Thermonetics) had a water jacket around it >thru which you had to flow constant temperature water...so it was in the >same boat as flow calorimetry. > >My contention is that Seebeck calorimetry is not fundamentally less >sensitive to a reference temperature than other methods of calorimetry. Do >you disagree with this, Michael? > > > >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 Oct 16 09:54:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA18842; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:46:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:46:45 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:53:55 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gravity Theory Survives Resent-Message-ID: <"sOUd-2.0.Fc4.rXt9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23402 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:51 AM 10/16/98, Hamdi Ucar wrote: >Hi Horace and all, > >There was an earlier paper on the subject "gr-qc/9809070" > Comment on ``Indication, from Pioneer 10/11, Galileo, and Ulysses Data, > of an Apparent Anomalous, Weak, Long-Range Acceleration'' > > Authors: J. I. Katz (Department of Physics and McDonnell Center for >the Space > Sciences, Washington U., St. Louis, MO) Thanks for all the info Hamdi. Maybe the antenna is made of mesh? Also some of the heat must be absorbed and conducted throught the dish. In any event, there appears to be plenty of radiation momentum to accomodate the observed acceleration. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 10:42:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA15461; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:40:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:40:26 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981016124208.006ee690 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:42:08 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <199810161652.LAA19894 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"COijK3.0.-m3.9Ku9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23405 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:51 10/16/98 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{Scott, it seems to me that the delta-T in flow calorimetry would be >essentially unaffected by an increase or decrease in the inlet water >temperature.... >There will, of course, be a brief decline in the delta-T in >response to an increase in the inlet temperature, while the calorimeter's >contents are brought up to the new equilibrium temperature. But once the >new equilibrium is achieved, the delta-T will be essentially the same as >before Correct, but it is the "brief decline" that is the subject of my concern. In practice, one manages to keep the inlet water temperature nominally constant but there is a certain level of random fluctuation that occurs...i.e. the temperature is not perfectly steady, it is noisy. Because of the relatively high inertia (heat capacity) of the calorimeter contents, that noise shows up directly in the measured delta-T signal. Seebeck calorimeters have exactly the same problem. 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 Oct 16 10:42:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13939; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:39:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:39:06 -0700 Message-ID: <362784F8.5E86DCF4 bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:40:08 -0400 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Auroral Gap Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2TpWy3.0.dP3.wIu9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23404 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Something strange is happenin'. Maybe an imminent poleshift? Maybe this is what Art Bell is hiding from? From: http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast16oct98_1.htm Surprising gap in auroral oval puzzles scientists Opening may be linked to events in space Oct. 16, 1998: A small gap in the aurora borealis has scientists wondering what's really happening deeper in space. "Right here, at local midnight, you have this gap where things should be happening," explained Dr. James Spann of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center. "Something special may be happening back in the magnetosphere. The truth is, we don't know." The gap is described this week in "A new auroral feature: The nightside gap," the cover story of the Oct. 15 issue of Geophysical Research Letters. The lead author is Damien Chua, a graduate student at the University of Washington, who discovered the gap using the Ultraviolet Imager aboard the Polar spacecraft. Or maybe it's just HAARP hum. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 10:43:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA15595; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:40:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:40:36 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981016124406.006f52f0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:44:06 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981016111404.007d1810 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981016095356.006f67ec mail.eden.com> <19981016060535.23354.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"43-hR2.0.Qp3.IKu9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23406 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:14 10/16/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > We have found Seebeck calorimetry very sensitive, but the >large amounts of heat loss in some systems may alter >the reactions observed (or desired) for cold fusion >systems, as we have reported at ICCF-4, ICCF-7 and elsewhere. This possible drawback has also been associated with water-flow calorimeters and, in both cases, a simple solution exists: Place the cell inside an insulating enclosure and then place that assembly inside the calorimeter chamber. In this way you can have almost any cell temperature you want, a large unmonitored delta-T will exist across the walls of the insulating enclosure, and all the heat leaving the cell will still be collected and measured by the calorimeter. I employed this technique in my Case experiments. The chamber temperature was typically 180C and yet the water-temp in the water flow calorimeter was only ~40C. A layer of fiberglass insulation separated the cell from the wrap-around heat exchanger. An unavoidable drawback of this technique is a long RC time constant. Such is life. 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 Oct 16 11:20:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA15140; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:15:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:15:27 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:22:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: More about Art Bell Resent-Message-ID: <"dOoW01.0.xh3.zqu9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23407 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Points to various news releases: Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 11:32:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA12583; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:20:16 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810161424_MC2-5CF7-3934 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"41pzm1.0.O43.F1v9s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23408 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: That may be correct for some system designs (like Ben Bush's) but the Seebeck calorimeter we had (from Thermonetics) had a water jacket around it thru which you had to flow constant temperature water...so it was in the same boat as flow calorimetry. Hmmm . . . Did you try a stirrer in the water jacket? How big was the jacket? How narrow was thermostat range for the constant temperature water cooler? - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 12:10:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA26752; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:02:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:02:05 -0700 Message-ID: <36278BA2.23CB earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:08:34 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Chubb: Blue: band state theory 10.16.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"TQ_j-1.0.gX6.iWv9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23409 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Chubb: more on band state theory 10.14.98 Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:29:04 -0400 From: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil To: rmforall earthlink.net CC: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil At 06:14 PM 10/14/98 -0500, you wrote: >Subject: Re: Chubb: Blue: more on band state theory 10.13.98 > Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:56:48 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > >It seems rather pointless to try to discuss the claimed CANR >observations within the context of a theory that describes a >system at T=0. WE DO NOT HAVE A SYSTEM THAT IS AT T=0!!!!! This is a fundamental point of disagreement. A number of important phenomena in solids (most notably electrical conductivity and heat conduction) are based on pictures in which, at room temperature, key characteristics of the T=0 limit are dominant. (For example, electron holes in semi-conductors occur directly as a result of a cooperative [coherent] flow of [negative] charge in response to an applied field.) What makes this picture work is that the low-lying excited states and the associated timescales involved with coupling to them preserve the coherence of the underlying ground state. As a result, although it is certainly true that we are not with the T=0, key coherent effects associated with this state can signficantly impact the behavior of the system at room temperature. These coherent effects simply have no counter-part in the free space systems that seem to be at the heart of the picture that provides your intuition concerning the relevant quantum mechanics. > >Scott Chubb's assumptions bring the PdD lattice into a state >that is maximally ordered. As a result there is a coherence >in wave functions that simply is too good to be true. You said this, not me. In point of fact, it seems that you are admitting that if these states become occupied, "miracles" can occur. Is this correct? >It is not true, in fact, and that is in part why the system >shows none of the physical effects that Scott describes. In fact, there is significant evidence (apparently not known by you) in support of the notion that these kinds of states do become occupied in 3d and 4d transition metal systems. In particular, occupation of H and D by ion band states has been used to explain vibrational spectra on Ni and Cu surfaces and to explain H and D diffusion in Nb. More importantly, rigid band filling arguments (associated with the electronic structure of PdD near full loading) require that energetically occupation of ion band states becomes favorable in fully-loaded PdD. (This last point is discussed in our ICCF3 Proceedings paper.) > >Let's look specifically at the question of the ordering of >the deuteron wave functions. The deuterons come in a jar >from some commercial supplier. If you examine the wave >functions for those deuterons as delivered, you will find >maximum disorder with respect to the nuclear orientation. >Now you put them through some chemical process that loads >the Pd lattice with deuterons. What is the state of the >lattice deuterons after loading with respect to internal >coordinates? > >We need not speculate. It is something that can be determined >experimentally. It is something that has been studied >in a variety of circumstances, and what have we learned? >It is very difficult to bring any sort of order to those >deuterons. They are very, very stubborn about remaining >disordered! This is not true near full-loading of PdD. In fact, you are incorrect. It has been known since the late 1970's that near full-loading of PdD, the D preferentially occupy octahedral sites (located midway, horizontally and vertically between Pd atoms) within the Pd FCC lattice. It is also well-known why it is difficult to obtain this full loading (at room temperature) because of the high chemical potential involved; while at low temperature, it is easy to obtain this loading. The key point however is not associated with the "stubborness" of the loading and that this leads to disorder. In fact, if the ion band states become occupied, the "stubborness" associated with the loading process is eliminated, and this, in fact, is the reason that the ion band states become occupied! > >Suppose you cool the lattice to T=0. Will that remove >all disorder from the nuclear wave functions? As a practical >fact, the answer is no, at least not very quickly. So >the T=0 condition to which Scott Chubb makes reference >is so difficult to achieve, it is rather pointless to >consider it. The nuclear wave functions already are at T=0, effectively, even at room temperature. This is because it requires thousands of electron volts to excite the nuclei out of their ground states. >The facts are: (1)The lattice is not >at T=0. ( This is true. But the coherent effects, as I have pointed out above, are expected to persist for the reasons described above. >2)The nuclear degrees of freedom are decoupled >from the lattice. > Not when a coherent redistribution of charge and shift of electrostatic zero takes place. >Now it seems to me that a meaningful contribution to the theory >of cold fusion has to address the fact that "free particle" >physics still is the best approximation to what is actually >going on with the nuclear wave functions. I don't see that >we are free to assume otherwise without some very serious >justifications. Of course, you can assume your way into all >sorts of wonderful quantum effects, but I think we have to >maintain some contact with actual observations on this system >and/or similar systems. I put it to you that the coherent effects associated with ordered PdD alter profoundly the "free particle" picture that you have, and that your "picture" is not realisitic as a consequence. The picture I put forth is consistent with the underlying transport of heat and charge, the known anomalous behavior of H and D with respect to these forms of transport in PdD, and the governing electronic structure of PdD. The resulting theory has predictive power that is consistent with a number of observations and has been applied by us to make these predictions prior to their being observed. > >I've been around actual laboratory experiments dealing with >nuclear orientation and I've been around actual laboratory >experiments dealing with millikelven temperatures. I know >what it takes to even begin to approach the sort of conditions >that Scott Chubb wants us to assume just happen by chance. >I'd like to see some evidence to support the key features >of the Chubb assumptions. I think you it would be useful to look at the Hydrogen in Metals literature. In particular, you might take a look at Wicke and Brodowsky's article in Alefield and Volkl's "Hydrogen in Metalls II" book (1979, Springer) or in some of the other review articles associated with H and D transport in PdD and other transition metals. You also might re-examine some of the later papers with an open mind. >I'd like a concrete explanation >of how nuclear orientation is achieved for the PdD system. >Uttering the words T=0 does not get us there, not by a >long shot. But it does change the playing field. Looking at a many-body calculation (such as the ones outlined in our Fusion Technol, 1993 paper) does give an explanation. >Even after we reach the required T=0 condition by just >assuming it, I have great difficulty with the concept that >we suddenly induce a transition from the T=0 state to >a very much hotter state without losing all the conditions >that characterize only the T=0 state. In the bulk, the T=0 state persists. Melting occurs at the boundaries. This is the reason it looks like heating occurs at the boundaries. >That is a real >sleight of hand. Do we, for example, ever pass through >a state which has hot 4He in a cold lattice? The 4He is "found" as conventional 4He where the heat is release outside the cold lattice. >As I read Scotts reply, I think he has slipped in the >notion that, in fact, the lattice does not receive any >energy from the nuclei, except off camera, so to speak. Right! At T=0 in the bulk, this is the case. In fact, phonons do get excited at finite T. These do heat up the lattice. >Finally, I think we should go through a simple excercise of >predicting a temperature dependence for the cold fusion >reaction rate to see just how well the Chubb theory measures >up to actual observations. If T=0 is the assumed "ideal" >then I'd be led to guess that T not equal to zero is disruptive, >lowers the ordering, and reduces the coherence. Have I >missed something? > >Dick Blue > > I think we are making progress. Scott Chubb From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 12:38:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA12273; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:34:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:34:04 -0700 Message-ID: <3627931A.10C6 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:40:26 -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, jhuntres@tenagra.com Subject: Y2K: Huntress: optimistic re electric power 10.16.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"IfXDk.0.f_2.h-v9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23410 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Houston Energy/finished Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:06:03 -0500 From: Jon Huntress To: rmforall earthlink.net [Rich Murray: Jon Huntress is an able, open-minded writer, whose job in Houston at Tenagra Corp. is to post one or two dozen articles from the world press every day about the Y2K crisis on www.year2000.com. Like me, he is a dedicated student of the Course in Miracles. Larry Delgado, the mayor of Santa Fe, will hold a Santa Fe summit in a few weeks to get reports from many agencies and businesses about the local problems of Y2K.] Rich, In the NM Y2K office, for this year they got triple the staff and triple the funding, but the legislature forgot to undo the sunset provision so the office was going out of business, until the governor resurrected it with an executive order, which he has to do every 60 days, I think. Because the Y2K office is so tenuous, some people don't listen to anything they say. Jon The World Energy Conference: Houston I'd been looking forward to the big World Energy Conference, which Houston hosted Sept. 14-18. With 130 nations present, it would be a good place to see how the rest of the world was doing with fixing their computers and embedded systems for their utilities - or so I thought. I got my conference materials and began looking for the seminars on the problem and couldn't find any. Then I checked the white papers submitted to the conference. There were about 250 papers presented on almost every conceivable topic, including nuclear fusion and methane hydrides on the ocean floor, but there was nothing about the year 2000 problem. I went down to the vendor exhibits to see if there was a different story there. EPRI (Electrical Power Research Institute) was there and handed me the only Year 2000 brochure I found on the whole vendor floor. The only energy problem these people seemed to be interested in was the low price of oil. Except for one notable exception, the year 2000 was not an issue, not even a footnote, at the World Energy Conference. The one exception was the release of the NERC report on the state of U.S. electric utilities. (NERC stands for North American Electric Reliability Council and includes the area of Canada and a little of Mexico.) The report is generally optimistic about the status of the electrical utilities in North America and their ability to deal with the year 2000 problem. It was announced at the conference on Thursday morning by Deputy Secretary of Energy Elizabeth Moler, along with a panel of people representing every aspect of the electrical industry. At the same time, it was put on NERC's website as an 88-page pdf document, which you can download at http://www.nerc.com. An outline of the report was discussed and the panel answered questions from an audience I estimated at 75 to 150 people. During the question time several people from the press wanted to know if the level of year 2000 remediation work around the country was uniform and who the laggards were and how could we get them to move a little faster. After the questions, the meeting ended and the panel went to the pressroom for a briefing. Almost immediately, writers for the news bureaus posted several articles on the report. Since the report was released, several authors have criticized it for being too optimistic and not detailing the reasons for optimism. But the reasons were there. The NERC has responses from 75% of the industry, has measured their progress for two months and based on this can make a prognosis of the speed of the fix. They have concluded that there is enough time left for all utilities to be Y2K ready by June 30, 1999. "Y2K Ready" the report defines as, "...a system or component (that) has been determined to be suitable for continued use into the year 2000." As of now, 28% of the testing of components has been completed. What they have found is that only 1% to 2% of the devices or components exhibit year 2000 anomalies, and few of those devices or components will shut down their system. Also, there aren't thousands or even hundreds of industry operating systems but only dozens. The NERC did conclude that progress needs to be accelerated, and there was also concern for the 25% of the industry that had not yet responded. In many cases, we were told, this is because their lawyers told them not to respond due to fear of litigation. In fact, it was pointed out by Secretary Moler that the only group to oppose the information sharing bill then before Congress was the Trial Lawyers Association. Michael Gent, President of the NERC, told me one of the most difficult things they were dealing with was getting their findings out to the public. He is hoping their web site will get a lot of traffic. When they release their next report in December, the NERC will list the companies that have responded. If you don't see your utility there, it might be a good idea to call them up and ask them why, and mention that you read the NERC report. But the industry is more than a quarter finished, the susceptible chip count is low and the failure rate for the systems they are part of is even lower. On top of that, the NERC is making sure there is enough fuel to run the plants, plus a surplus. They are also checking into the Y2K status of the information systems of the utilities so there won't be problems with billing or account management. It should make you feel better that 88% of the Y2K project managers report to a vice president. Executive buy-in is the single most important factor in a successful year 2000 project. The nuclear plants were in even better shape than the industry as a whole, according to the NERC, taking its information from The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Nuclear Energy Institute. The nuclear power industry has been working at the fix longer and they are much more highly regulated. It is also harder to change anything in a nuclear plant when it comes to upgrading it. I confirmed this down on the display floor. I talked to people at the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission and Framatome Technologies, which make and operate the French nuclear reactors. The United States gets about a quarter of its power from nuclear plants, but the French use nuclear power for 70% of their energy needs and have been building reactors all along. At the AEC booth I was told that our reactors were safe and the French reactors should be safe, too, because they were based on an older, well proven Westinghouse design. The last reactor to come on line in the U.S. started in 1995 with safety and control systems designed 20 years before. The man from the NRC told me they were very conservative when it came to certifying new systems for nuclear power. In the French exhibit it took me awhile to get to the technician (the woman in charge didn't speak English), but he confirmed what I had been told. The French reactors are of one design that differs only in scale, coming in three output levels. I asked him about embedded logic in the plants and he told me there was almost none, nearly everything was analog. He told me that it was not by plan but rather a fortuitous accident. They had been slow in changing the design of their plants, and just hadn't gotten around to upgrading the systemswith a lot of embedded logic, when someone realized it would be to everyone's advantage if they put off the upgrades until after 2000. Surrounded by the opulence of the energy companies' technology and ability helped me remember to keep Y2K in the proper context. It is an important problem but it isn't the only important problem in the world. Fixing it is expensive, estimated to take 44% of the IT budgets for the next year, and while that's a lot of money, for many of these companies it is a lot less money than they spend on other things, such as exploration. I would have felt better if they had spent a little more time and money to tell people what they were doing about the year 2000 problem, but other than myself and maybe one or two others, nobody seemed to be asking. The tech people I talked to all knew what their companies were doing about the problem and that everything was on schedule. To the energy industry, Y2K is just another business problem. I was reminded that the tail doesn't wag the dog. But later that morning at the luncheon, Patrick Wood, the head of the Public Utilities Commission in Texas, told me he thought the report was a whitewash, although he said he didn't know if it was a deep whitewash or just a coat of paint. The situation in Texas is a little different. Most people know we have an Eastern and a Western power grid. But there is also a third grid, called the ERCOT Interconnection, that actually covers most of Texas. Mr. Wood doesn't like what he is hearing from the disparate parts of his grid and is worried about getting them all working together. Who do you believe, the government, the people in the industry or the consultants? The consultants are claiming you have to find every single last potential problem and test it, which is overkill. But if you hire them and they miss one, guess who is liable? I hope it doesn't come as a surprise to anyone, but the government has been known to claim things were better than they subsequently turned out to be. I don't know what the situation is in Texas, but I knew some people in other parts of the country and I spent the weekend calling electrical engineers. What I found was that the NERC report is probably right on the money for most of the country. There is enough time left, and what they are finding is not that disturbing. The people I talked to just aren't finding any problems in chips where the clock function isn't used, and they are finding very few problems with the systems that do use dates. Very soon now someone is going to say out loud that you don't really have to check every chip or system if a hundred others just like it have been checked and nothing has turned up. Electric people have a lot of experience dealing with outages. A former engineer for Pacificorp told me that when there are five generators in a plant, all are independent of each other so that one or more can be down at any time. If they have identical systems and the first two-test fine, do you really have to test the other three? If time is pressing and if your consultant budget is a little thin and your plant people tell you they have a work-around, you might just put checking those three units on the back burner. Electric plants are like the railroads. They are old technology. I have checked the RR switches on the main line near me and none of them have chips, just big bronze padlocks, probably the same ones they used when my father was a boy. I could, all by myself, switch a train on a manual or computer-controlled switch in 15 minutes with a sledge hammer. (The switch would continue to be operational, too.) Give me an hour and I could figure out a way to do it without using the hammer. To make a rail switch work you only have to move two rails (designed to be movable) three inches. Peter de Jager used a similar example at the SPG conference in San Francisco. He asked, "what would you do if you owned a small business and all your mainframe programs died?" Do you just lock the doors? No, you run down to the computer store and buy 50 copies of Quicken and you set up your core functions again. You can be up and taking money in a few hours. This is why buying a year's worth of food is probably a bad investment unless you're really into camping. The findings that are starting to come out now just don't warrant that level of anxiety. The December report from the NERC and the January look-forward failures will give us a much better picture of where we really stand. Best practices, Jon Huntress From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 12:54:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA20598; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:50:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:50:02 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981016145356.006edef4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:53:56 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <199810161424_MC2-5CF7-3934 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"TVnBb1.0.l15.fDw9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23411 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 14:20 10/16/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Scott Little writes: > > That may be correct for some system designs (like Ben Bush's) but the > Seebeck calorimeter we had (from Thermonetics) had a water jacket around > it thru which you had to flow constant temperature water...so it was in > the same boat as flow calorimetry. > >Hmmm . . . Did you try a stirrer in the water jacket? How big was the jacket? >How narrow was thermostat range for the constant temperature water cooler? The water jacket was a real long piece of 1/4" Cu tubing epoxy-bonded in a serpentine manner all over the outer surface (all 6 sides) of the calorimeter. Flexible tubes conveyed the water to and from the openable lid of the thing. Thus, flowing water through it was the only option. We had to get the inlet water steady to within 0.01C before the calorimeter readings were satisfactorily stable. Ben's approach of simply lowering the calorimeter into a well-stirred well-regulated bath sounds better. 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 Oct 16 13:21:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA29431; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:06:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:06:18 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981016150907.006f9bdc mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:09:07 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Seebeck calorimeter construction Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"hC8Hm2.0.fB7.wSw9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23412 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I am interested in constructing custom-sized Seebeck calorimeters. Can anyone suggest a practical method (or ANY method) of fabricating the necessary panels? The basic idea is to make a composite panel consising of two thermally conductive skins separated by a modest amount of insulation. Then you need to install hundreds of thermocouples such that half the junctions are thermally connected, but not electrically shorted, to one skin (spread evenly over the surface of the skin) and the other half of the junctions are similarly connected to the other skin and ALL of the junctions are connected in series such that a delta-T across the panel creates a total output voltage which is the sum of the thermoelectric voltages of all of the junctions in the panel. Michael S makes a good point that the thermal resistance of the panel needs to be quite uniform over its area and stable. 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 Oct 16 14:06:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19063; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:58:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:58:34 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <36271191.5B51 skylink.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:57:15 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD Resent-Message-ID: <"jyFtw.0.hf4.vDx9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23413 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert - In other words, you think that spinning a disc with magnets on it against some stator magnets cancels gravity? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 14:45:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA22117; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:38:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:38:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810161159.HAA22850 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:22:15 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium Resent-Message-ID: <"3wQnd2.0.UP5.3px9s" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23414 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gene - > This is a most amazing demonstration -- a > warning to so many others who have adopted the > "Holy writ" of Fizzix. You know how some of us would love to have a drop-dead solid gizmo displaying just such a warning on our benchtops. Do you know if details adequate for replication are forthcoming? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 16:58:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA14168; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:51:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:51:51 -0700 Message-Id: <199810162351.TAA15631 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Cc: "Jeff Kooistra" <75202.2023 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:54:45 -0400 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: <"N4ur2.0.FT3.Mmz9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23415 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jeff Kooistra produced a video with various configurations of the motor demonstrated that I viewed several times before the conference. I sent a copy to Scott Little which led to some good discussion between Jeff, Scott and myself. The magnet rotor has a "locked" position in which it comes to rest that was discussed on Vortex a while back, but if memory serves, no one was able to make the ring spin. Jeff seems to be able to do this easily and repeatedly. He uses mercury brushes. The copper ring used for a stator with the rotor immobile turns robustly and continuously with continuous current (no commutation). One strange result is that when the mercury brushes are moved to the inside of the stator, the rotation direction reverses. The strangest result is when the stator and rotor are both allowed to turn, they do not turn in opposite directions. The reaction force is not at all apparent. In one test, he uses flimsy foil brushes to contact a stationary wire stator. The hefty rotor reacts robustly and no reaction force is seen on the brushes at all. He then tries to use one of the brushes to slow down the rotation of the rotor and you can see that no braking from the flaccid foil is possible. IOW, reaction forces are not found in the wires leading to the brushes, nor in the brushes. Ed Wall NERL ---------- > From: Horace Heffner > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium > Date: Thursday, October 15, 1998 8:17 PM > > On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:24:00 -0400, Mike Carrell wrote: > [snip] > >Jeff Kooistra showed courage in going live with a series of demonstrations > >derived from the Marinov motor. His setups, excellent basement physics > >making good use of styrofoam cups, showed some seriously anomalous effects. > >His climax showed that under certain circumstances, the current ring and the > >centrally suspended magnets rotated in the SAME direction -- not what one > >would expect from Newton's third law. All this is also on video tape. In a > >post-session discussion, some of the notable physicists present very > >carefully did not engage that particular effect. > [snip] > > I would very much like to know if Jeff got the Marinov motor working > continuously in DC mode completely hands off. That is to say continuously > revolving with pure DC power supplied to the brushes, without manual > manipulation or mechanical brush oscillation that might make and break > contact as well as having the risk of applying torque in a rhythmical > ratchet-like fashion. > > It would be very much appreciated to hear the details of exactly what Jeff > did demonstrate. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 19:21:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA25161; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:15:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:15:07 -0700 Message-ID: <000a01bdf973$e46017e0$228f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: NYTimes (http://search.nytimes.com/books/search/bin/fastweb?getdoc+book-rev+boo Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:13:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01BDF941.7BA763C0" 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: <"Q4fyS.0.296.gs_9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23417 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_000D_01BDF941.7BA763C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 =20 =20 =20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ = =20 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY; AMID THE BLAZE OF NOON . . . DARK, DARK, = DARK=20 Date: September 27, 1987, Sunday, Late City Final Edition = Section 7; Page 32, Column 1; Book Review Desk=20 Byline: By TIMOTHY FERRIS; Timothy Ferris, a professor of = journalism at the University of California, Berkeley, is writing a new = book, ''Coming of Age in the Milky Way.''=20 Lead: LEAD: DARKNESS AT NIGHT A Riddle of the Universe. By = Edward Harrison. Illustrated. 290 pp. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard = University Press. $25.=20 Text:=20 DARKNESS AT NIGHT A Riddle of the Universe. By Edward Harrison. = Illustrated. 290 pp. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. $25.=20 SO many scientific discoveries require the aid of giant = telescopes, particle accelerators, DNA sequencers and similar fancy = hardware that it is refreshing to consider that so grand a matter as the = boundaries of the universe can be investigated with only the unaided = human eye. Anyone who has looked up at the stars has performed the = necessary observation. The night sky is dark. The question is why. If = the universe is more or less uniformly populated by stars scattered out = across infinite space, then in every direction we look our line of sight = should, sooner or later, encounter a star. Some stars would be closer = than others, of course, but wherever we looked we would ultimately see a = star. When we calculate the total amount of starlight that would then = reach Earth, we find that the night sky should be a blindingly bright = sheet of light.=20 Then why is it dark? This riddle, known as ''Olbers's paradox'' = after the 19th-century German astronomer Wilhelm Olbers, is explored by = Edward Harrison in ''Darkness at Night.'' Mr. Harrison, a professor of = physics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, is perhaps best = known as the author of ''Cosmology,'' an estimable semitechnical guide = to the study of the universe that bristles with generous asides and = incitations to independent thought. He became intrigued by the riddle of = the dark night sky more than 20 years ago. ''I must admit,'' he writes = in this succinct and capable book, ''that I still do not know all the = answers.''=20 The riddle begins with the assumption that the universe is = infinite and populated by an infinite number of stars. We can, of = course, suggest that the universe is not spatially infinite and comes to = an end somewhere, but the notion of an edge to space is paradoxical. As = Plato's friend Archytas of Tarentum asked, in the fourth century B.C., = ''If I am at the extremity of the heaven of the fixed stars, can I = stretch outward my hand or staff? It is absurd to suppose that I could = not; and if I can, what is outside must be either body or space. We may = then in the same way get to the outside of that again, and so on; and if = there is always a new place to which the staff may be held out, this = clearly involves extension without limit.''=20 Alternately, we might imagine that the universe consists of a = finite number of stars surrounded by infinite, empty space. The night = sky then would be dark because we would see past the stars into an = infinite starless void. This model of the universe, favored by the = ancient Stoic philosophers, was revived in the early 20th century when = astronomers discovered we are living in a galaxy, which some thought to = be the entire universe. But since then billions more galaxies have been = photographed, with no sign as yet of an end to them.=20 Another possibility is that the universe is enclosed, so that = when we look past the stars we encounter the inner walls of its shell. = The Renaissance astronomer Johannes Kepler favored this hypothesis, but = more recently it foundered on the laws of thermodynamics: given infinite = time, the shining stars would heat up the walls around the cosmos until = they glowed as brilliantly as stars, and the sky would be bright at = night after all.=20 When the expansion of the universe was discovered in 1929, that = in turn was put forth as a solution to Olbers's paradox. The expansion = shifts the wavelength of light coming from distant stars down into the = invisible frequencies of the infrared, creating, it was thought, a kind = of heat sink capable of soaking up infinite starlight. I myself = concluded, in a book published in 1977, that the expansion of the = universe resolved Olbers's paradox. But I was mistaken; one can = calculate that infinite multitudes of stars would overwhelm even the = darkening effect of cosmic expansion.=20 What, then, is the answer? Part of it lies in the fact that the = universe is finite in time, if not in space. The first stars are = estimated to have begun shining some 15 billion years ago. When we look = farther away than 15 billion light years, therefore, we see the darkness = that prevailed before the first starlight dawned. So darkness at night = tells us that the universe is not infinitely old. Still, questions = remain. Deep-sky photographic plates are clogged with the images of = galaxies, each home to hundreds of billions of stars; why do they not = set the night sky ablaze, even if the darkness of early cosmic history = stands behind them? Mr. Harrison has an answer, but to state it here = seems as unfair as giving away the final chapter of a mystery story. = Better to read his book - this is a pleasant assignment for any reader, = technically inclined or not, who wonders at the mystery of the dark = night sky.=20 =20 Return to the Books Home Page=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------- = =20 Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | = Marketplace=20 Quick News | Page One Plus | International | National/N.Y. | = Business | Technology | Science | Sports | Weather | Editorial | Op-Ed | = Arts | Automobiles | Books | Diversions | Job Market | Real Estate | = Travel=20 Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | New York Today=20 Copyright 1997 The New York Times Company=20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01BDF941.7BA763C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable NYTimes
 

 3Dbanner
3Dtoolbar =

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY; AMID THE BLAZE OF NOON . . . = DARK,=20 DARK, DARK

Date: September 27, 1987, = Sunday, Late=20 City Final Edition Section 7; Page 32, Column 1; = Book=20 Review Desk
Byline: By TIMOTHY FERRIS; = Timothy=20 Ferris, a professor of journalism at the University of = California,=20 Berkeley, is writing a new book, ''Coming of Age in the Milky=20 Way.''
Lead: LEAD: DARKNESS AT NIGHT A = Riddle of=20 the Universe. By Edward Harrison. Illustrated. 290 pp. = Cambridge, Mass.:=20 Harvard University Press. $25.
Text:=20

DARKNESS AT NIGHT A Riddle of the Universe. By Edward = Harrison.=20 Illustrated. 290 pp. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. = $25.=20

SO many scientific discoveries require the aid of giant = telescopes,=20 particle accelerators, DNA sequencers and similar fancy hardware = that it=20 is refreshing to consider that so grand a matter as the = boundaries of=20 the universe can be investigated with only the unaided human = eye. Anyone=20 who has looked up at the stars has performed the necessary = observation.=20 The night sky is dark. The question is why. If the universe is = more or=20 less uniformly populated by stars scattered out across infinite = space,=20 then in every direction we look our line of sight should, sooner = or=20 later, encounter a star. Some stars would be closer than others, = of=20 course, but wherever we looked we would ultimately see a star. = When we=20 calculate the total amount of starlight that would then reach = Earth, we=20 find that the night sky should be a blindingly bright sheet of = light.=20

Then why is it dark? This riddle, known as ''Olbers's = paradox'' after=20 the 19th-century German astronomer Wilhelm Olbers, is explored = by Edward=20 Harrison in ''Darkness at Night.'' Mr. Harrison, a professor of = physics=20 at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, is perhaps best = known as=20 the author of ''Cosmology,'' an estimable semitechnical guide to = the=20 study of the universe that bristles with generous asides and = incitations=20 to independent thought. He became intrigued by the riddle of the = dark=20 night sky more than 20 years ago. ''I must admit,'' he writes in = this=20 succinct and capable book, ''that I still do not know all the = answers.''=20 =20

The riddle begins with the assumption that the universe is = infinite=20 and populated by an infinite number of stars. We can, of course, = suggest=20 that the universe is not spatially infinite and comes to an end=20 somewhere, but the notion of an edge to space is paradoxical. As = Plato's=20 friend Archytas of Tarentum asked, in the fourth century B.C., = ''If I am=20 at the extremity of the heaven of the fixed stars, can I stretch = outward=20 my hand or staff? It is absurd to suppose that I could not; and = if I=20 can, what is outside must be either body or space. We may then = in the=20 same way get to the outside of that again, and so on; and if = there is=20 always a new place to which the staff may be held out, this = clearly=20 involves extension without limit.''=20

Alternately, we might imagine that the universe consists of a = finite=20 number of stars surrounded by infinite, empty space. The night = sky then=20 would be dark because we would see past the stars into an = infinite=20 starless void. This model of the universe, favored by the = ancient Stoic=20 philosophers, was revived in the early 20th century when = astronomers=20 discovered we are living in a galaxy, which some thought to be = the=20 entire universe. But since then billions more galaxies have been = photographed, with no sign as yet of an end to them.=20

Another possibility is that the universe is enclosed, so that = when we=20 look past the stars we encounter the inner walls of its shell. = The=20 Renaissance astronomer Johannes Kepler favored this hypothesis, = but more=20 recently it foundered on the laws of thermodynamics: given = infinite=20 time, the shining stars would heat up the walls around the = cosmos until=20 they glowed as brilliantly as stars, and the sky would be bright = at=20 night after all.=20

When the expansion of the universe was discovered in 1929, = that in=20 turn was put forth as a solution to Olbers's paradox. The = expansion=20 shifts the wavelength of light coming from distant stars down = into the=20 invisible frequencies of the infrared, creating, it was thought, = a kind=20 of heat sink capable of soaking up infinite starlight. I myself=20 concluded, in a book published in 1977, that the expansion of = the=20 universe resolved Olbers's paradox. But I was mistaken; one can=20 calculate that infinite multitudes of stars would overwhelm even = the=20 darkening effect of cosmic expansion.=20

What, then, is the answer? Part of it lies in the fact that = the=20 universe is finite in time, if not in space. The first stars are = estimated to have begun shining some 15 billion years ago. When = we look=20 farther away than 15 billion light years, therefore, we see the = darkness=20 that prevailed before the first starlight dawned. So darkness at = night=20 tells us that the universe is not infinitely old. Still, = questions=20 remain. Deep-sky photographic plates are clogged with the images = of=20 galaxies, each home to hundreds of billions of stars; why do = they not=20 set the night sky ablaze, even if the darkness of early cosmic = history=20 stands behind them? Mr. Harrison has an answer, but to state it = here=20 seems as unfair as giving away the final chapter of a mystery = story.=20 Better to read his book - this is a pleasant assignment for any = reader,=20 technically inclined or not, who wonders at the mystery of the = dark=20 night sky.=20

=20



Return to the Books = Home=20 Page=20

Home | Site Index = |=20 Site Search | = Forums | Archives | Marketplace=20

Quick News | = Page One Plus | International | National/N.Y. | Business | Technology | Science | Sports | Weather | Editorial | Op-Ed | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Diversions | Job Market | = Real Estate | Travel=20

Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | = New York=20 Today=20

Copyright=20 1997 The New York Times Company=20 =

= ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01BDF941.7BA763C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 19:23:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24666; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:13:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:13:45 -0700 Message-ID: <3627FAD6.54B8 skylink.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:03:02 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"A41El3.0.K16.Pr_9s" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23416 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > In other words, you think that spinning a disc with magnets on it against > some stator magnets cancels gravity? Well Rick, yes I do think maybe so. The experimental design is of course not at all practical as a motor. You don't generally want torque variations, and neither do you want eccentricty in your rotor. So why would any practical person build it to begin with? Maybe it can be interesting to be a little eccentric. I do doubt that the magnitude of the results claimed will result at the rotation speeds of the experiment (about 2800 rpm). Much more exciting maybe at 50000 rpm or more. Balance it well and spin it up. Centrifuge motors or high speed machine-tool spindle motors can do the trick. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 21:24:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA00022; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 21:20:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 21:20:52 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981017042319.00914c5c 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: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:23:19 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: NYTimes (http://search.nytimes.com/books/search/bin/fastweb?getdoc+book-rev+boo Resent-Message-ID: <"gb3ST1.0.B.Zi1As" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23418 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:13 PM 10/16/98 -0600,Frederick Sparber wrote: > An interesting post. This reminded me of a cartoon in a recent issue of American Scientist: A picture of a rock in space with a sign that says, "This Universe guaranteed for Eternity or Infinity whichever comes first." Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 22:22:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA14124; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:22:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:22:09 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000a01bdf973$e46017e0$228f85ce default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:20:51 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: NYTimes (http://search.nytimes.com/books/search/bin/fastweb?getdoc+book-rev+boo Resent-Message-ID: <"NFkfs2.0.cS3.0c2As" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23419 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick - I can't understand the reasoning behind Olbers' paradox. I see it like a fractal system of increasingly divided and shrinking dots like a Cantor dust, and a fractal structure with gaps will have those gaps "all the way down" (paraphrasing the lady's comment regarding the tortoises in the first chapter of "A Brief History of Time"). In other words, there will always be gaps and therefore some darkness, even if with an infinite depth of field. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 16 22:52:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA22309; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:50:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:50:26 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3627FAD6.54B8 skylink.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:49:12 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD Resent-Message-ID: <"MNEwd3.0.US5.X03As" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23420 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert - > Well Rick, yes I do think maybe so. The > experimental design is of course not at all > practical as a motor. You don't generally want > torque variations, and neither do you want > eccentricty in your rotor. So why would any > practical person build it to begin with? Maybe it > can be interesting to be a little eccentric. I agree with you on this. There have been millions of electric motors in use in delicately balanced machinery of one kind or another for all of this century, and if there were an anomaly of the kind we're talking about here in those motors, it would have been found by now. I'm very careful with that kind of statement, by the way. I don't say things like "if it (CF, for instance) were true, we'd have seen it on the news", etc. I'm confident that the assumptions behind the motor statement are solid. But your point about an odd and otherwise 'useless' arrangement of materials, geometry, and motion sounds valid to me, at least in the sense that there *could* be something lurking in there and it has a vastly smaller chance of being reliable reproduced and noticed. There is a simple thing to do here: reproduce it. Kyle says he's working on it, so I hope we hear from him soon. > I do doubt that the magnitude of the results claimed > will result at the rotation speeds of the > experiment (about 2800 rpm). Much more > exciting maybe at 50000 rpm or more. Balance it > well and spin it up. Centrifuge motors or high > speed machine-tool spindle motors can do the > trick. One might also do tricks with the positioning of the magnets in a non-eccentric arrangement to make the phase where the magnets come close together travel around the circumference at a phase speed well in excess of the actual rotation speed. 2k of disk rpm could buy 16k of magnets-in-opposition phase rpm. Try drawing this on paper with a difference of one magnet bwtween rotor and stator to see it clearly. For example, try 7 on the stator and 8 on the rotor. The phase travels 8x the rpm. ( <- is that right?) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 01:38:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA16003; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 01:36:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 01:36:16 -0700 Message-ID: <362857BC.4B53 keelynet.com> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 03:39:24 -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 DallasTexas.net CC: wrc CDEPOT.NET, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Just another Ripoff Artist Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9f9rd2.0.vv3._R5As" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23421 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Folks! I am very disturbed and disappointed that one of our own, or so I and many others thought, is trying to capitalize on the KeelyNet files by selling them on CD. He is well aware that KeelyNet was never for profit and that is why all our information has always been free for everyone. Wesley Crosiar is the guy and is apparently too lazy to get a real job like the rest of us, preferring to rip off others and hope he can get by with it unscathed. I will post all the KeelyNet files to the website as zip files so anyone can download them for free AS THEY WERE INTENDED and not let him get by with this cheap ripoff ploy...so save your money and come to http://www.keelynet.com/main.htm in about 2 weeks and I'll have it all FOR FREE!!!! Keep your money or donate what you think the files are worth to the ORIGINAL KeelyNet...but it ain't for sale like this. Bill Beatty, Rene Mueller and David Jonsson have maintained the mirror sites for years now, so send them some bucks, but don't support this kind of ripoff. See the main page above for the mirror site addresses where you can get the files singly but for free as they were intended. Wesley, shame on you, what has taken you over? Money?? We all have our problems but to steal and try to profit from work you never did. Don't you think if I wanted KeelyNet to be a for profit venture I would have done the CDs myself?? Long ago?? I am discussing the matter with my lawyer as I do own the name and I did not nor will I ever now give you permission to use it for your sales scam. You will be instructed to remove the KeelyNet name from your site and from all the files you are selling since that is mine. The contents of the files are free to share as originally intended but I won't have you using the name to promote your own scam. For shame, people take note of this please and tell all your friends to NOT BUY KEELYNET FILES FROM THIS WEBSITE...as they are wasting their money because I will now TAKE PAINS to get the zip files posted at the KeelyNet site so EVERYONE can have them FREELY, without charge and from the ORIGINAL KEELYNET, not some scam page out for personal profit....pitiful...I am so disappointed...all for money too.... Tell your friends and repost this if you want, but I detest con artists and this willingness by some to do anything for a buck. How disgusting. http://www.energyresearchco.com/energyre/cgi-bin/shoppingcart/shoppingcart.cgi?page=keelynet.frame.htm&cart_id=984302317916%%cart_id%% http://www.energyresearchco.com/energyre/cgi-bin/shoppingcart/shoppingcart.cgi?page=keelynet.frame.htm&cart_id=984302317916%%cart_id%% InterNic Whois found the owner of this scam site to be: Domain Name: ENERGYRESEARCHCO.COM Administrative Contact: Crosiar, Wesley WC2172 wrc CDEPOT.NET 209-754-4742 -- Jerry Wayne Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 03:26:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA27505; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 03:21:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 03:21:14 -0700 Message-ID: <002d01bdf9b7$d1046720$6a8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Accelerating-Decelerating Light & Interstellar Travel Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 04:20:45 -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: <"E9KyM2.0.cj6.Q-6As" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23422 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Going by the Gravitational Redshift of Light by our Sun: dc/c ~= 1.0E-6 meters/sec/meter, as light leaves the Sun or Solar System it accelerates at a rate of 1.0E-6 meters/sec/meter and as it enters another gravitational field it decelerates in a like manner. Thus in going about 2 light years (2.0E16 meters) the velocity is 2.0E10 + 3.0E8 = 2.03E10 meters/second, or about 68.0*c, ie., WARP 68! :-) The good news is that as it approaches the next gravitational mass that is "Warping Space" it will decelerate at a comparable rate,depending on the Redshift equation, -GM/R/c^2. In addition to this as c increases the mass of the spacecraft will decrease and its velocity will increase: m' = E/c'^2 and K.E. = 1/2 m'v'^2 so that energy and momentum are conserved. Thus, travel speeds be enormous without getting close to local lightspeed. The upshot of this conjecture is that, although the measured distances in the Universe are most likely accurate, the times assumed for light to traverse these distances may be grossly in error. I think. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 05:00:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA08050; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 04:53:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 04:53:01 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981017195705.00a63220 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:57:05 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Marinov Motor In-Reply-To: <199810162351.TAA15631 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"nYLrt2.0.iz1.SK8As" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23423 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Wall wrote : >...no one was able to >make the ring spin. Jeff seems to be able to do this easily and >repeatedly. He uses mercury brushes. The copper ring used for a stator >with the rotor immobile turns robustly and continuously with continuous >current (no commutation). I can't quite picture this. Is the copper ring which you call the "stator", now the rotor ? If so please let it be called the rotor or better still the ring (after all it was the rotor in Marinov's original). Holding the "rotor" immobile sounds like it should now be called the "stator". If this is the case then why do you say there is "no commutation"? Surely mercury brushes are commutators ? >One strange result is that when the mercury >brushes are moved to the inside of the stator, the rotation direction >reverses. This is not very strange, and it is rather dissapointing. This was after all the CRUCIAL TEST (if I were Mich or Marinov I should use the latin for this!) of the force being non-lorentzian. The fact that the rotation direction changes suggests that it is the slight radial path of the current as it flows from the surface of the copper ring into the centre of the copper of the ring, that is producing the majority of the rotation force (as this is the only current path that is reversed by moving the brushes). I think if you look carefully, this path can interact with leakage flux to produce a standard lorentzian turning force. Hopefully there is some non-lorentzian force there also to be sought out, but it looks as though the lorentzian is dominant in this case. >The strangest result is when the stator and rotor are both >allowed to turn, they do not turn in opposite directions. Alas, I do not know what the "stator" and "rotor" are here. It seems like they are both rotors now! :) Please use words indicating the parts - magnet, ring, mercury bath, foil brush, etc. Is the mercury bath (I'm assuming a bath as per Marinov) suspended so that it can swing around also? >The reaction force is not at all apparent. > >In one test, he uses flimsy foil brushes to contact a stationary wire >stator. The hefty rotor reacts robustly and no reaction force is seen on >the brushes at all. He then tries to use one of the brushes to slow down >the rotation of the rotor and you can see that no braking from the flaccid >foil is possible. IOW, reaction forces are not found in the wires leading >to the brushes, nor in the brushes. Is this a continous turning? (I can't imagine it is). If not then was the apparatus turned around on the table or something to check for the earths magnetic field effect ? (if the rotation direction reverses on turning it around then it was the earths field - and the reaction force on that is hardly going to be detectable since it acts on the whole earth!) By the way, what are Jeff's mercury brushes like ? Marinov used a single, completely circular, ring trough and simply floated the copper ring in it. The current passed mainly through the copper as it is a much better conductor. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 06:08:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA18269; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 05:56:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 05:56:27 -0700 Message-ID: <003901bdf9cd$7ee216c0$6a8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Pioneer 10 in Warp Drive? Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 06:55:55 -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: <"V2cQ8.0.IT4.wF9As" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23424 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The Gravitational Redshift at the surface of the Sun: GM/(R*c^2) = 6.67E-11*2.0E30/(7.0E8*9.0E16)= 2.1E-6. At the Pioneer 10 distance ~1.0E13 meters from the Sun: WARP = (1.0E13*2.1E-6 + 3.0E8)/3.0E8 = 1.07 For conservation of Energy (m'= E/c'^2)and Momentum (K.E.= 1/2 m'*v'^2) the mass of the spacecraft is reduced by: (WARP)^1/2 = (1.07)^1/2 = (launch mass/1.0346) and the velocity increase of the spacecraft equal: (WARP)^1/4 = (1.07)^1/4 = 1.0172*launch velocity. However, the reverse thrust caused by the heat radiation from the RTG is counteracting the WARP-SPEED increase making it hard to measure. Do you buy this,Horace? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 07:42:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08997; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 07:28:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 07:28:39 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981017143738.00de714c popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:37:38 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Accelerating-Decelerating Light & Interstellar Travel Resent-Message-ID: <"RriUg2.0.VC2.McAAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23425 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; What does dc/c represent? Are there any references for this? Dennis At 04:20 AM 10/17/98 -0600, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >Going by the Gravitational Redshift of Light by our Sun: > >dc/c ~= 1.0E-6 meters/sec/meter, as light leaves the Sun or Solar System it >accelerates at a rate of 1.0E-6 meters/sec/meter and as it enters another >gravitational field it decelerates in a like manner. > >Thus in going about 2 light years (2.0E16 meters) the velocity is 2.0E10 + >3.0E8 = 2.03E10 meters/second, or about 68.0*c, ie., WARP 68! :-) > >The good news is that as it approaches the >next gravitational mass that is "Warping Space" >it will decelerate at a comparable rate,depending on the Redshift equation, >-GM/R/c^2. > >In addition to this as c increases the mass of the spacecraft will decrease >and its velocity will increase: > >m' = E/c'^2 and K.E. = 1/2 m'v'^2 so that energy and momentum are conserved. > >Thus, travel speeds be enormous without getting close to local lightspeed. > >The upshot of this conjecture is that, although the measured distances in >the Universe are most likely accurate, the times assumed for light to >traverse these distances may be grossly in error. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 09:08:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA00827; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:02:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:02:06 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 08:09:19 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium Cc: "Jeff Kooistra" <75202.2023 compuserve.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"4jEJb3.0.rC.-zBAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23427 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:54 PM 10/16/98, Ed Wall wrote: >Jeff Kooistra produced a video with various configurations of the motor >demonstrated that I viewed several times before the conference. I sent a >copy to Scott Little which led to some good discussion between Jeff, Scott >and myself. Is this tape proprietary or can it be copied and distributed freely? > >The magnet rotor has a "locked" position in which it comes to rest that was >discussed on Vortex a while back, but if memory serves, no one was able to >make the ring spin. Jeff seems to be able to do this easily and >repeatedly. He uses mercury brushes. The copper ring used for a stator You mean copper ring used for a rotor, i.e. armature? That was Mairnov's motor. It appears the context has changed? It is well known, fully discussed here, that the central magnets (Marinov's stator, apparently now Jeff's rotor) will turn due to the Lorentz force between the leakage field from central magnets and the brush current feed. >with the rotor immobile turns robustly and continuously with continuous >current (no commutation). One strange result is that when the mercury >brushes are moved to the inside of the stator, the rotation direction >reverses. The strangest result is when the stator and rotor are both >allowed to turn, they do not turn in opposite directions. The reaction >force is not at all apparent. No mystery here. The magnets turn due to the Lorentz force with the current feed to the brushes (brush to *either* the inside or outside - makes no difference, magnets will rotate the same direction for given brush polarity and magnet orientation) The copper ring turns due to Lorentz force at current bend in ring at the brush point. > >In one test, he uses flimsy foil brushes to contact a stationary wire >stator. The hefty rotor reacts robustly and no reaction force is seen on >the brushes at all. How were these force measured? Sounds like simple observational error. There must be force there. One might be deceived by the *amount* that is there because most of the force may be with the feed wires to the foil brushes. It depends on the field geometry of the leakage flux, and the comparative length of the foil brushes. >He then tries to use one of the brushes to slow down >the rotation of the rotor and you can see that no braking from the flaccid >foil is possible. Clear sign that most of the force is between the magnets and the current feed wires to the brushes. >IOW, reaction forces are not found in the wires leading >to the brushes, nor in the brushes. [snip] This is more evidence of simple observationl error, or a failure to measure. Thanks very much for the informtion about the demo Ed. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 09:10:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA28633; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 08:39:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 08:39:51 -0700 Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 11:33:51 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: KYLE>>>> eccentric....Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"UGaVr1.0.I_6.7fBAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23426 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., It is possible the eccenticity is DESIRED ... it may be a symmetrical rotor will not exhibit the effect.... Most motors are balanced... and few pursue non balanced devices, except is some cases of vibration generators or 'shakers' ... this may explain non observance to date in more conventional rotors. On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Robert - > > > Well Rick, yes I do think maybe so. The > > experimental design is of course not at all > > practical as a motor. You don't generally want > > torque variations, DEP DEP !!! and neither do you want > > eccentricty in your rotor. So why would any > > practical person build it to begin with? Maybe it > > can be interesting to be a little eccentric. > The imbalance may be the reason it operates.... > There is a simple thing to do here: reproduce it. Kyle says he's working on > it, so I hope we hear from him soon. TO KYLE: Make it off center!!! :) > > > I do doubt that the magnitude of the results claimed > > will result at the rotation speeds of the > > experiment (about 2800 rpm). Much more > > exciting maybe at 50000 rpm or more. -------------------------- NO! Balance it > > well and spin it up. Centrifuge motors or high > > speed machine-tool spindle motors can do the > > trick. > ------------------------ Don't fix it yet.... if it ain't broke! > One might also do tricks with the positioning of the magnets in a > non-eccentric arrangement to make the phase where the magnets come close > together travel around the circumference at a phase speed well in excess of > the actual rotation speed. 2k of disk rpm could buy 16k of > magnets-in-opposition phase rpm. Try drawing this on paper with a > difference of one magnet bwtween rotor and stator to see it clearly. For > example, try 7 on the stator and 8 on the rotor. The phase travels 8x the > rpm. ( <- is that right?) > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 09:18:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA11712; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:17:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:17:20 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 08:24:33 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Resent-Message-ID: <"fXJQd2.0.os2.FCCAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23428 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:57 PM 10/17/98, John Winterflood wrote: >Ed Wall wrote : > >>...no one was able to >>make the ring spin. Jeff seems to be able to do this easily and >>repeatedly. He uses mercury brushes. The copper ring used for a stator >>with the rotor immobile turns robustly and continuously with continuous >>current (no commutation). > >I can't quite picture this. Is the copper ring which you call the >"stator", now the rotor ? If so please let it be called the rotor >or better still the ring (after all it was the rotor in Marinov's >original). Holding the "rotor" immobile sounds like it should now >be called the "stator". Yes, this is confusing. Better to refer to the component names as magnets, rings brushes, etc., and use the terms stator and rotor only in context of a specific experiment. > >If this is the case then why do you say there is "no commutation"? >Surely mercury brushes are commutators ? Oh... wait a second. I think I see what this means. I may have to retract my prior statement about the central magnets turning due to forces on the brush current feeds. If the central magets are still paried like so: N S | | S N then, yes, commutation must occur in the sense that the current direction or at least amount of current must change in the brush feeds in synch with the magnet rotation. I wonder if Jeff put the magnets into this posititon for this specific test: N N | | S S > >>One strange result is that when the mercury >>brushes are moved to the inside of the stator, the rotation direction >>reverses. > >This is not very strange, and it is rather dissapointing. This >was after all the CRUCIAL TEST (if I were Mich or Marinov I should >use the latin for this!) of the force being non-lorentzian. [Snip] Amen. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 09:40:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA22109; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:37:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:37:14 -0700 Message-Id: <199810171637.MAA15355 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: "Jeff Kooistra" <75202.2023 compuserve.com>, Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:39:59 -0400 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: <"TGTKw1.0.NP5.vUCAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23429 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- > From: John Winterflood > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Marinov Motor > Date: Saturday, October 17, 1998 7:57 AM > > Ed Wall wrote : > > >...no one was able to > >make the ring spin. Jeff seems to be able to do this easily and > >repeatedly. He uses mercury brushes. The copper ring used for a stator > >with the rotor immobile turns robustly and continuously with continuous > >current (no commutation). John Winterwood wrote: > I can't quite picture this. Is the copper ring which you call the > "stator", now the rotor ? If so please let it be called the rotor > or better still the ring (after all it was the rotor in Marinov's > original). Holding the "rotor" immobile sounds like it should now > be called the "stator". > > If this is the case then why do you say there is "no commutation"? > Surely mercury brushes are commutators ? > A commutator changes the direction of the electric current. The mercury brushes merely transfer the current from the outside circuit conductors to and from the ring. There is no change in current flow pattern as the ring turns. The current enters one side of the ring through the first mercury brush, splits into approximately equal amounts, travels to the opposite side of the ring and rejoins to exit through the second mercury brush. A stator is stationary (except in the 'motor in a wheel' design), so I should call it something else, because this spins when allowed to do so. > >One strange result is that when the mercury > >brushes are moved to the inside of the stator, the rotation direction > >reverses. > > This is not very strange, and it is rather dissapointing. This > was after all the CRUCIAL TEST (if I were Mich or Marinov I should > use the latin for this!) of the force being non-lorentzian. The > fact that the rotation direction changes suggests that it is the > slight radial path of the current as it flows from the surface of > the copper ring into the centre of the copper of the ring, that > is producing the majority of the rotation force (as this is the > only current path that is reversed by moving the brushes). I > think if you look carefully, this path can interact with leakage > flux to produce a standard lorentzian turning force. Hopefully > there is some non-lorentzian force there also to be sought out, > but it looks as though the lorentzian is dominant in this case. > The simple hypothesis of the current transversing the ring in its path, giving rise to a 'delta-r' component in which Lorentz force might find purchase, is shown to be inadequate qualitatively by replacing the ring with substantial delta-r with a ring with a very small delta-r and noting that the torque induced on the rotor for equal current is apparently the same. The change in delta-r is from about half-inch to about 1/16". The expected corresponding change in induced torque should be directly proportional, but it is not. > >The strangest result is when the stator and rotor are both > >allowed to turn, they do not turn in opposite directions. > > Alas, I do not know what the "stator" and "rotor" are here. > It seems like they are both rotors now! :) Please use words > indicating the parts - magnet, ring, mercury bath, foil brush, > etc. Is the mercury bath (I'm assuming a bath as per Marinov) > suspended so that it can swing around also? > A video is with a thousand emails. Let's forget Marinov's initial design in its details and focus on the basic feature of the split current of the ring and the magnetic toroid rotor. It would be confusing to rename parts because in one configuration the rotor is held stationary or the ring is held stationary or neither is held stationary. There are, at most, two moving parts, which I shall refer to as the ring and the rotor. The mercury brushes are brushes. A brush is not the pool of mercury that Marinov used (that pool was not used by Kooistra). It transfers current from a stationary conductor to a moving ring. It is perhaps a cm in diameter. > >The reaction force is not at all apparent. > > > >In one test, he uses flimsy foil brushes to contact a stationary wire > >stator. The hefty rotor reacts robustly and no reaction force is seen on > >the brushes at all. He then tries to use one of the brushes to slow down > >the rotation of the rotor and you can see that no braking from the flaccid > >foil is possible. IOW, reaction forces are not found in the wires leading > >to the brushes, nor in the brushes. > > Is this a continous turning? (I can't imagine it is). Once again, I repeat. It is continuous turning. Ask Scott Little. It is robust. It spins fast. The ring spins a full 360 degrees, many times, over and over, without stopping, without a change in current direction by way of brushes or alternating waveforms or anything else. > By the way, what are Jeff's mercury brushes like ? Marinov > used a single, completely circular, ring trough and simply > floated the copper ring in it. The current passed mainly > through the copper as it is a much better conductor. The ring (when allowed to move) is suspended by a styrofoam cup, to which it is glued. The cup is suspended by a thread. The only forms of counter torque when running are windage, the mercury brush adhesion and the torsion of the thread. The rotor is also suspended by a thread when it is allowed to spin. The ring does not spin when the rotor is in the "locked" position. Jeff Kooistra demonstrates with an apparatus that allows both the ring and rotor to spin at the same time that when DC current is applied via mercury brushes to the ring that the ring and the rotor will rotate in the same direction at the same time, causing one to reject the notion that reaction force is in the ring when torque is induced on the rotor. The previous demonstration in which flimsy foil brushes are shown to exhibit no reaction forces when contacting a stationary ring show that no reaction force is seen in the outside circuit. To believe that the reaction force is manifest only in those portions of the circuit that are held fixed (not foil or mercury) is an exercise in Clintonian logic (formerly known as pretzel logic), blind wishful thinking, or simply ignorance. Jeff has built variations which do employ commutators, which cause the rotor to turn past the "locked" positions but these are not the object of my discussion. I urge you to simply build one of these things. It could be done in the time it takes to compose a few emails. Ed Wall NERL From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 10:18:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA31008; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:05:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:05:45 -0700 Message-Id: <199810171705.NAA18787 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Cc: "Jeff Kooistra" <75202.2023 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:08:35 -0400 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: <"oGiYh2.0.Pa7.evCAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23430 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- > From: Horace Heffner > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Cc: Jeff Kooistra <75202.2023 compuserve.com> > Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium > Date: Saturday, October 17, 1998 12:09 PM > > At 7:54 PM 10/16/98, Ed Wall wrote: > >Jeff Kooistra produced a video with various configurations of the motor > >demonstrated that I viewed several times before the conference. I sent a > >copy to Scott Little which led to some good discussion between Jeff, Scott > >and myself. > > Is this tape proprietary or can it be copied and distributed freely? Jeff has not expressed verbally or in writing any intend to restrict its circulation. > > > > >The magnet rotor has a "locked" position in which it comes to rest that was > >discussed on Vortex a while back, but if memory serves, no one was able to > >make the ring spin. Jeff seems to be able to do this easily and > >repeatedly. He uses mercury brushes. The copper ring used for a stator > > > You mean copper ring used for a rotor, i.e. armature? That was Mairnov's > motor. It appears the context has changed? > > It is well known, fully discussed here, that the central magnets (Marinov's > stator, apparently now Jeff's rotor) will turn due to the Lorentz force > between the leakage field from central magnets and the brush current feed. > See my post to Winterflood. > > >with the rotor immobile turns robustly and continuously with continuous > >current (no commutation). One strange result is that when the mercury > >brushes are moved to the inside of the stator, the rotation direction > >reverses. The strangest result is when the stator and rotor are both > >allowed to turn, they do not turn in opposite directions. The reaction > >force is not at all apparent. > > > No mystery here. The magnets turn due to the Lorentz force with the > current feed to the brushes (brush to *either* the inside or outside - > makes no difference, magnets will rotate the same direction for given brush > polarity and magnet orientation) The copper ring turns due to Lorentz > force at current bend in ring at the brush point. This bend is a function of the width of the ring. With different rings, the torque induced on the rotor (the magnets) is the same, so this bend is not the seat of reaction force. Indeed, if it were, the ring would turn in a direction opposite to the direction the magnet toroid rotates. In fact, both ring and magnet are seen turning IN THE SAME DIRECTION when both are allowed to rotate. > > > > > >In one test, he uses flimsy foil brushes to contact a stationary wire > >stator. The hefty rotor reacts robustly and no reaction force is seen on > >the brushes at all. > > > How were these force measured? Sounds like simple observational error. > There must be force there. One might be deceived by the *amount* that is > there because most of the force may be with the feed wires to the foil > brushes. It depends on the field geometry of the leakage flux, and the > comparative length of the foil brushes. > Insistence does not create observation. These brushes are cut from foil, about 1/4" wide and a couple of inches long, not quite as floppy as cooked spagetti. Force from a magnetic field is proportional to the strength of the field. The field is much stronger near the magnet. The part of the circuit consisting of the foil brushes is much closer to the magnet than the rest of the circuit, so the putative Lortentz force acting on the non-ring circuit would act most strongly on the foil. Contrary to expectation, there is no noticeable deflection of the extremely easy to bend foil conductors. > > > >He then tries to use one of the brushes to slow down > >the rotation of the rotor and you can see that no braking from the flaccid > >foil is possible. > > > Clear sign that most of the force is between the magnets and the current > feed wires to the brushes. > Yes, if you assume that the Lorentz force selectively is manifest in one portion of the stationary circuit preferring rigid conductors to flexible, opposite to magnetic field strength expectation. You should see the video. > > >IOW, reaction forces are not found in the wires leading > >to the brushes, nor in the brushes. > [snip] > > This is more evidence of simple observationl error, or a failure to measure. > > Thanks very much for the informtion about the demo Ed. You're quite welcome. Both Jeff and I are open to the idea that Lorentz force could be used to explain reactions observed, but we do not see how. It would be helpful if we were all working with a similar demonstration model or viewing the same video. The video could be improved, but it's pretty good. I have one commutated Kooistra motor here and am still getting parts to build the motor that Jeff shows in the video. Ed Wall NERL From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 10:19:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA02704; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:18:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:18:20 -0700 Message-Id: <3628DDBC.854F095F verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 20:11:08 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pioneer 10 in Warp Drive? References: <003901bdf9cd$7ee216c0$6a8f85ce default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zBkwc1.0.-f.S5DAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23432 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J Sparber wrote: > To: Vortex > > The Gravitational Redshift at the surface of the Sun: > GM/(R*c^2) = 6.67E-11*2.0E30/(7.0E8*9.0E16)= 2.1E-6. > > At the Pioneer 10 distance ~1.0E13 meters from the Sun: > > WARP = (1.0E13*2.1E-6 + 3.0E8)/3.0E8 = 1.07 > This calculation seems does not correct to me, as the gravitational force decrease with distance, not constant, it should take integral to calculate the total redshift at the pioneer distance instead of multiplying. Roughly, it will be little more than at the earth distance, taking account the newton formula. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 10:21:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA02784; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:18:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:18:25 -0700 Message-Id: <3628E25C.53E03B53 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 20:30:52 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: KYLE>>>> eccentric....Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kG4oK1.0.Lh.W5DAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23433 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Schnurer wrote: > Dear Vo., > > It is possible the eccenticity is DESIRED ... it may be a > symmetrical rotor will not exhibit the effect.... > Most motors are balanced... and few pursue non balanced devices, > except is some cases of vibration generators or 'shakers' ... this may > explain non observance to date in more conventional rotors. > [snip] Yes, it was explicitly said on the original posting that eccentricity is the design feature. But the disk was sensitively balanced to compensate the eccentricity caused unbalance. Also take account the great centrifugal force on the magnet which can affect the their fixations, the glue, etc., causing unbalance on high speeds. In principle, no plastic or deferrable material should be used on rotor. It is predictable that rotor magnets could vibrate the stator cage, when it found a resonating frequency. if it occur, rotor could collide he stator and cause damage. So, use rigid and tough material as possible. [snip] > > Don't fix it yet.... if it ain't broke! [snip] Very good recommendation. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 10:22:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA32235; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:10:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:10:56 -0700 Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <36288719.58065474 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:01:29 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Accelerating-Decelerating Light & Interstellar Travel References: <002d01bdf9b7$d1046720$6a8f85ce default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="y" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="y" Resent-Message-ID: <"zxqz_1.0.bt7.V-CAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23431 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Frederick, I really enjoyed your two posts, very thought-provoking: From: "Frederick J Sparber" Subject: Re: Accelerating-Decelerating Light & Interstellar Travel Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 04:20:45 -0600 ... m' = E/c'^2 and K.E. = 1/2 m'v'^2 so that energy and momentum are conserved. ... Regards, Frederick From: "Frederick J Sparber" Subject: Re: Pioneer 10 in Warp Drive? Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 06:55:55 -0600 The Gravitational Redshift at the surface of the Sun: GM/(R*c^2) = 6.67E-11*2.0E30/(7.0E8*9.0E16)= 2.1E-6. ... Do you buy this,Horace? :-) Regards, Frederick I'm enclosing the following material for comment by vortex. Jack Smith From: "David de Hilster" Subject: Calculations: AD Explains Pioneer Slowdown Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:27:55 -0700 EXTRA GRAVITATIONAL TUG The force that causes a planet's perihelion advance is also responsible for the Pioneer spacecraft slow-down[1]. HERE ARE THE AUTODYNAMICS NUMBERS: F = m a (1) F = force, m = mass, a = acceleration F = m Mo G/ r^2 (2) Classical Mechanics Mo = Solar mass, G = Gravitational constant, r = radius or distance This equation is used to calculate the motion of all bodies in the Solar System and beyond. F' = m' a' (3) F' = m' M'o G/ r^2 (4) Autodynamics The ['] means "increased" >From (1) and (2) we have: a = Mo G/ r^2 (5) >From (3) and (4) we have: a' = M'o G/ r^2 (6) Dividing (6) by (5) a'/a = (M'o G/ r^2) / ( Mo G/r^2) = M'o/Mo (7) But M'o = Mo + Moin (8) Moin = Solar mass increment Equation (7) is written: a' = a [ (Mo + Moin)/ Mo] (9) a' = a ( 1 + Moin/Mo) (10) The term Moin/Mo represents the increasing acceleration per AD compared to Classical Mechanics; that is what is actually used. It is important for the reader to note that the term Moin/Mo is note only dependent on Moin, but also on Mo. (We codify this phrase as "Ph."). In section E4 in the AD book [2] one finds the value for the solar mass increase per century as follows: Ic = 6.4617 10^25 gr/century. In Appendix 14 the Sun's mass is given as Mo = 1.987 10^33 gr. Given that Pioneer traveled 25 years, we will take Ic/4 as the solar mass increment. Moin/Mo = (6.4617/4 10^25) / 1.987 10^33 = 0.8 10^-8 (11) This value is 10 times smaller than the value found in [1] equal to 8.5 10^-8 cm/s^2. For "Ph" the value of a century will be used: Moin/Mo = 6.4617 10^25 / 1.987 10^33 = 3.3 10^-8 (12) This is of the same order of magnitude as < Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:30:54 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Pioneer 10 in Warp Drive? Cc: "George" Resent-Message-ID: <"6m3n13.0.mh1.SADAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23434 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:55 AM 10/17/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >The Gravitational Redshift at the surface of the Sun: >GM/(R*c^2) = 6.67E-11*2.0E30/(7.0E8*9.0E16)= 2.1E-6. > >At the Pioneer 10 distance ~1.0E13 meters from the Sun: > >WARP = (1.0E13*2.1E-6 + 3.0E8)/3.0E8 = 1.07 WARP?? > >For conservation of Energy (m'= E/c'^2)and Momentum (K.E.= 1/2 m'*v'^2) the >mass of the spacecraft is reduced by: > >(WARP)^1/2 = (1.07)^1/2 = (launch mass/1.0346) > >and the velocity increase of the spacecraft equal: > >(WARP)^1/4 = (1.07)^1/4 = 1.0172*launch velocity. > >However, the reverse thrust caused by the heat radiation from the RTG is >counteracting the >WARP-SPEED increase making it hard to measure. > >Do you buy this,Horace? :-) > >Regards, Frederick I'll buy most anything, but I think warp speed above 1.0 would be extremely difficult to measure. 8^) I don't understand your derivation. GR is over my head, but that hasn't stopped me before. 8^) >From our reference frame we should see the force on the satellite as: Fgr = G m m'/d^2.00000016 as opposed to the Newtonian: Fn = G m m'/d^2 So the ratio: Fgr/Fn = d^2/d^2.00000016 = d^(-0.00000016) To see what this means at low relative velocity: Fgr/Fn i (at 10^i m) 1 0.99999963 2 0.99999926 3 0.99999889 4 0.99999853 5 0.99999816 6 0.99999779 7 0.99999742 8 0.99999705 9 0.99999668 10 0.99999632 11 0.99999595 12 0.99999558 13 0.99999521 <--- Pioneer 10 14 0.99999484 15 0.99999447 20 0.99999263 25 0.99999079 30 0.99998895 50 0.99998158 100 0.99996316 150 0.99994474 200 0.99992632 So, the change in apparent force due to GR appears to be very small, even at astronomical distances. The only way to significanly change the apparent force or acceleration is to change the relative mass by achieving high relative velocity. True? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 10:46:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA09360; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:27:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:27:14 -0700 Message-ID: <007001bdf9f3$50033ac0$6a8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Accelerating-Decelerating Light & Interstellar Travel Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 11:26:03 -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: <"Z-nZ3.0.xH2.nDDAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23435 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Dennis C. Lee To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, October 17, 1998 8:31 AM Subject: Re: Accelerating-Decelerating Light & Interstellar Travel Dennis wrote: >Hi; > >What does dc/c represent? Are there any references for this? c is the velocity of light. dc (delta c) is the minute change in lightspeed in a gravitational potential GM/(R*c^2). The references would be in the literature on the effect of the Gravitational Redshift on Light. Regards, Frederick > >Dennis > >At 04:20 AM 10/17/98 -0600, you wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>Going by the Gravitational Redshift of Light by our Sun: >> >>dc/c ~= 1.0E-6 meters/sec/meter, as light leaves the Sun or Solar System it >>accelerates at a rate of 1.0E-6 meters/sec/meter and as it enters another >>gravitational field it decelerates in a like manner. >> >>Thus in going about 2 light years (2.0E16 meters) the velocity is 2.0E10 + >>3.0E8 = 2.03E10 meters/second, or about 68.0*c, ie., WARP 68! :-) >> >>The good news is that as it approaches the >>next gravitational mass that is "Warping Space" >>it will decelerate at a comparable rate,depending on the Redshift equation, >>-GM/R/c^2. >> >>In addition to this as c increases the mass of the spacecraft will decrease >>and its velocity will increase: >> >>m' = E/c'^2 and K.E. = 1/2 m'v'^2 so that energy and momentum are conserved. >> >>Thus, travel speeds be enormous without getting close to local lightspeed. >> >>The upshot of this conjecture is that, although the measured distances in >>the Universe are most likely accurate, the times assumed for light to >>traverse these distances may be grossly in error. > > >Tall Ships >http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 10:46:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA16569; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:45:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:45:08 -0700 Message-Id: <3628E8B2.13EDCAEA verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 20:57:54 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Unbalance Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sQroR2.0.o24.ZUDAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23436 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, Some notes may help to explore spinning-magnetic disks anomalies: If you recall the Podklednov's experiment, the effect is maximized when the disk wobbled at certain frequency while it slowed slowly. Because the unstable state, this rotation frequency could not be sustained. Also the wobble is assumed to the unbalance o n the disk. I had pointed on this, the possibility that the wobble was not caused by the unbalance and even was caused by mechanical reasons, may have important role on the so-called gravity shielding effect. >From my experimentation experience, I feel the second harmonic on oscillations have great importance, maybe help to break the symmetry between interactions, and allow weird things happens. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 10:52:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA18212; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:47:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:47:06 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981017174837.006906fc atlantic.net> X-Sender: johmann atlantic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:48:37 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: Just another Ripoff Artist Resent-Message-ID: <"X4xQM3.0.PS4.OWDAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23437 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jerry W. Decker writes: >I am very disturbed and disappointed that one of our own, or so I and >many others thought, is trying to capitalize on the KeelyNet files by >selling them on CD. He is well aware that KeelyNet was never for profit >and that is why all our information has always been free for everyone. > >Wesley Crosiar is the guy and is apparently too lazy to get a real job >like the rest of us, preferring to rip off others and hope he can get by >with it unscathed. Jerry, I think you're wrong about this, and being mean-spirited needlessly. Wesley Crosiar, who is a complete stranger to me, is, in effect, helping to further distribute KeelyNet by selling its files in a more convenient format (CD-ROM). Don't begrudge Wesley from making a buck (or trying to make a buck), from distributing KeelyNet information. And look within yourself, Jerry: is your rabid reaction against Wesley merely your way of saying, "If I can't make any money off of KeelyNet, then I'll be damned if anyone else will!" Kurt Johmann -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 11:51:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA04173; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 11:47:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 11:47:07 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:54:21 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Resent-Message-ID: <"sLZha3.0._01.gOEAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23438 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: "I wonder if Jeff put the magnets into this posititon for this specific test: N N | | S S" That wouldn't do it either. The force from the opposing brush feed current should cancel. There must be friction between the ring and magnet. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 11:59:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA06773; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 11:58:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 11:58:22 -0700 Message-ID: <00a501bdfa00$0b6bcc80$6a8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re; Does The Gravitational Potential Create The Aether? Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:57:48 -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: <"YxzmH.0.lf1.EZEAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23439 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Is the Gravitational Potential Field , GM/(R*c^2) or GM/[R*(eo*uo)] Where G is 6.67E-11 the gravitational constant, M is the mass of a Black Hole, Star, or Planet or such, and R is the radius from the point of mass concentration. IOW, if the Sun collapsed to a Neutron Star radius R, of about 5 kilometers, the Gravitational Potential GM/[R*(eo'*uo')] would be enough that ALL of the light would be Redshifted to the point that it would be invisible. Or stated in another way, without mass/gravity there wouldn't be any Aether, which would be a spin on Einstein's adage, "Matter Warps Space", corrupted to, Matter/Gravity creates the Aether in Empty Space and thus creates a Speed-of-Light Gradient? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 12:14:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA09472; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:10:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:10:45 -0700 Message-ID: <3628ECA4.59F8 keelynet.com> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:14:44 -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: johmann atlantic.net Subject: Re: Just another Ripoff Artist References: <1.5.4.32.19981017174837.006906fc atlantic.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"o8n2w.0.vJ2.rkEAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23440 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Kurt! Not at all...people miss the point, as usual...KeelyNet was, is and never will be about MONEY...it is about information and correlations, freely distributed, period. Rabid reaction...puhleeze...comprehension of purpose.....some can get it, while it escapes others COMPLETELY.. -- Jerry Wayne Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 13:33:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30616; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:18:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:18:52 -0700 Message-ID: <3628FB3D.448229B4 ro.com> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 15:17:01 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unbalance References: <3628E8B2.13EDCAEA verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"P2LZ_1.0._T7.hkFAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23441 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hamdi Ucar wrote: > Hi, > > Some notes may help to explore spinning-magnetic disks anomalies: > > If you recall the Podklednov's experiment, the effect is maximized when the disk wobbled at certain frequency while it slowed slowly. Because the unstable state, this rotation frequency could not be sustained. Also the wobble is assumed to the unbalance on the disk. I had pointed on this, the possibility that the wobble was not caused by the unbalance and even was caused by mechanical reasons, may have important role on the so-called gravity shielding effect. > > >From my experimentation experience, I feel the second harmonic on oscillations have great importance, maybe help to break the symmetry between interactions, and allow weird things happens. > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar Interestingly, Dr. Podkletnov mentioned to me that several disks self-destructed due to excessive mechanical stress. He balanced the disks (I assume) as carefully as possible, yet the eccentricity could still be small, but there none-the-less. -- Regards, Patrick V. Reavis From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 16:24:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA24558; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:05:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:05:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <36293CFB.7493 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 17:57:31 -0700 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Reply-To: stk sunherald.infi.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: KYLE>>>> eccentric....Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pZCln1.0.a_5.-AIAs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23442 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Schnurer wrote: > > Dear Vo., > > It is possible the eccenticity is DESIRED ... it may be a > symmetrical rotor will not exhibit the effect.... > Most motors are balanced... and few pursue non balanced devices, > except is some cases of vibration generators or 'shakers' ... this may > explain non observance to date in more conventional rotors. Hmmm...I didn't think of that. I will try an experiment with an eccentric rotor. BTW: I wonder if it was meant to have an eccentric (as in off-center) disk, or eccentric as in inclined disk. Maybe try both? > TO KYLE: Make it off center!!! :) Will do. IMPORTANT: Do not use contact cement for gluing the magnets to a rotor like this!!! I tried, and lost most of my magnets. Use fast set epoxy glue. I tested this out and it worked well. Now to get more magnets ... Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 16:28:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA25945; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:27:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:27:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3628FB3D.448229B4 ro.com> References: <3628E8B2.13EDCAEA verisoft.com.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:07:05 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Unbalance Resent-Message-ID: <"MkvEk2.0.JL6.7VIAs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23443 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Patrick - > Interestingly, Dr. Podkletnov mentioned to me that > several disks self-destructed due to excessive > mechanical stress. He balanced the disks (I > assume) as carefully as possible, yet the > eccentricity could still be small, but there > none-the-less. Wouldn't that just be typical? - Where the effect is caused not by the highly unusual nature of the special fancy components in the experiment, but by the unwanted and rather mundane 'error' in the setup? So everyone else (like NASA) does an excellent job of balancing, and they get nothing. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 16:34:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA09755; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:25:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:25:35 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810171637.MAA15355 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:45:53 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Resent-Message-ID: <"Pg_HH1.0.BO2.kTIAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23444 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed - > The simple hypothesis of the current transversing > the ring in its path, giving rise to a 'delta-r' > component in which Lorentz force might find > purchase, is shown to be inadequate qualitatively > by replacing the ring with substantial delta-r > with a ring with a very small delta-r and noting > that the torque induced on the rotor for equal > current is apparently the same. The change in > delta-r is from about half-inch to about 1/16". > The expected corresponding change in induced > torque should be directly proportional, but it is > not. Well yeah, if you put it in terms of a transverse current being necessary. But such currents are in no way necessary to account for the effect conventionally at the point of a given current element (very short segment of wire) in question near the brushes. There's summing of forces from current elements more distant from the point under examination that have to be accounted for at that same point as well. Lorentzian force vectors *summed* for a segment in the vicinity of a right angled (or just bent) wire can be off-perpendicular for this reason. You can even find this special case illustrated in some basic physics texts (the kind I hang out with ). The forces from different parts of the wire add vectorially and sum to a new vector which may have a substantial component parallel to one of the legs of the bent wire. Remember the force arising from current in the single segment *itself* is always perpendicular to that segment, but the *sum* (a whole new vector) reacting on that segment from nearby sources in addition to the original is *not* required to perpendicular. This happens throughout and near the bend, no matter how sharp and how without-transverse-currents it is. The reversal of the rotor direction with the brushes on the inside clinches it. This is not strange behavior. I think this does amount to an important insight into homopolars in general though, of which Jeff's 'stator' and ring turning together is a special case. And that is that the description of homopolars one often hears where they operate because of transverse currents in the magnetic field is at least partially wrong in some sense. I remember we were conceptually shrinking the disc of a homopolar to a diminishingly thin ring with its entire volume out close to the brushes on the rim to see the effect that the transverse currents couldn't be the whole story. Isn't it pretty convincing by now that they are not? Makes me wonder about the "silence" on the subject by some attendees after the demonstration. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 16:44:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA16001; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:40:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:40:27 -0700 From: Chuck Davis To: Sunil Gupta CC: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:40:57 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <024e01bdfa1a$29726b20$2000a8c0 tequila.monsoon.com> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Re: Art Bell MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"E6VKX3.0.xv3.hhIAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23445 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 17-Oct-98, Sunil Gupta wrote: >Looks like the Economist has the real scoop on why Bell quit: > http://www.economist.com/editorial/justforyou/current/index_us3986.html $#!+ I wonder who spiked it? -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 18:17:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA06596; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:11:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:11:18 -0700 Message-Id: <36295146.DA814B9F verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:24:06 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Art Bell References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Ly2Gy3.0.-c1.s0KAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23446 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, this copy of what I got from http://www.economist.com/editorial/justforyou/current/index_us3986.html Note the " Transfer interrupted!" is coded in the page. Appears as a nasy joke(?). - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - UNITED STATES Over and out F R O M A N U N D I S C L O S E D L O C A T I O N Search archive FOR 14 years, from his house in Pahrump, Nevada, Art Bell has been the voice of truth for up to 10m Americans who have listened to his late-night radio programme. The truth, as his audience saw it, was the news they didn’t want you to know: the fleet of flying saucers at Area 51, the real messages of crop circles, the hidden third secret of Fatima, government experiments gone horribly wrong and irrefutable signs of the end of the world. Mr Bell made Cydonia, the alleged pyramids on Mars, as well known as the Grand Canyon to his devotees, who started Art Bell clubs across the country and made 21m visits to his website this year alone. His programme reached more than 400 radio stations across America. But on October 13th, citing a “threatening, terrible event” that had happened to his family, Mr Bell abruptly announced that he was leaving the air. “What you are listening to is my final broadcast,” he said at the end of the programme. He promised that, if he could, he would eventually tell his audience the story of why he had left. In the meantime, the conspiracy community is in an ecstasy of paranoia. Speculation runs the gamut from CIA hit-squads to UFO abduction. The Economist, however, has learned the real reason why Art Bell left. A government programme targeting ========================================================= Transfer interrupted! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Chuck Davis wrote: > On 17-Oct-98, Sunil Gupta wrote: > >Looks like the Economist has the real scoop on why Bell quit: > > > http://www.economist.com/editorial/justforyou/current/index_us3986.html > > $#!+ I wonder who spiked it? > -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 18:42:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA13574; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:36:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:36:09 -0700 Message-ID: <0bbb01bdfa37$7e1b3720$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Subject: Re: Unbalance Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 21:31:29 -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: <"6Kw4z1.0.0K3.8OKAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23447 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Some notes may help to explore spinning-magnetic disks anomalies: > >If you recall the Podklednov's experiment, the effect is maximized when the disk wobbled at certain frequency while it slowed slowly. Because the unstable state, this rotation frequency could not be sustained. Also the wobble is assumed to the unbalance on the disk. I had pointed on this, the possibility that the wobble was not caused by the unbalance and even was caused by mechanical reasons, may have important role on the so-called gravity shielding effect. OK, what was the frequency of the wobble then, can you give further details? Certainly there are mathematical models we can construct, what where the forces and elements involved, what was the magnetic strenghts, angular momentums, etc etc. The devil is always in the details. >>From my experimentation experience, I feel the second harmonic on oscillations have great importance, maybe help to break the symmetry between interactions, and allow weird things happens. So what was the wobble frequency then? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 18:49:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA13601; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:36:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:36:11 -0700 Message-ID: <0bbc01bdfa37$7f696200$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Subject: Re: Unbalance Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 21:34:40 -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: <"ElmkX1.0.MK3.AOKAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23448 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lets get down to the atomic level, which elements have the most eccentricity in their atomic spins? >Interestingly, Dr. Podkletnov mentioned to me that several disks self-destructed due to excessive mechanical stress. He balanced the disks (I assume) as carefully as possible, yet the eccentricity could still be small, but there none-the-less. > >-- >Regards, >Patrick V. Reavis > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 20:13:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA07226; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:54:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:54:33 -0700 Message-ID: <19981018025308.25124.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:53:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"R8iev3.0.mm1.eXLAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23449 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Re unbalanced rotating disk with magnets, just when we expect important results to be reported with clarity, we get: >>The whole shazam was mounted on an acrylic baseplate and weighed. It was 14.26 kg. When we switched the motor in, the weird shit happened. The balance showed a loss of grav mass of the assembly of some 550 grams (3.85%) and every computer terminal and fluorescent lamp in the lab went ape ! No description of the "shit" that "happened". No description of how the mass change was measured. The writer is certainly not a scientist. My hypothesis is that, if this is not just a prank, is that he used an electronic balance, and that the electromagnetic variations that affected the lamp and computer terminal also affected the electronic balance. Don't waste too much time on this one until "Chris" tells us something useful. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 20:37:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA16990; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 20:33:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 20:33:14 -0700 Message-ID: <19981018033425.21947.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 20:34:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"ABy-_.0.O94.w5MAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23450 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael Schaffer wrote: >>1. Seebeck calorimetry is not sensitive to changes in the external >>bath temperature, if it is well designed. Scott Little replied: >>Odd, it seems to me that Seebeck calorimetry IS sensitive to the external bath temperature in a manner analogous to the way that flow calorimetry is sensitive to the temperature of the inlet water. In the latter case, because of the significant heat capacity of the contents of the calorimeter, a step change in the inlet water temperature appears directly as an step change in the observed delta-T equal of equal magnitude. The same situation exists in a Seebeck calorimeter...how can you design it away? I see your point. I was thinking only about accuracy once equilibrium is reached, after the delta-T of the outside bath. Of course, one can measure one's step or impulse function and reconstruct a truer version of the heat flow. Mitchell Swartz is correct about this when calorimeter changes occur on a time scale that interferes with the measurements one is trying to make. Mitchell Jones wrote And Scott responded: >>Correct, but it is the "brief decline" that is the subject of my concern. In practice, one manages to keep the inlet water temperature nominally constant but there is a certain level of random fluctuation that occurs...i.e. the temperature is not perfectly steady, it is noisy. Because of the relatively high inertia (heat capacity) of the calorimeter contents, that noise shows up directly in the measured delta-T signal. Seebeck calorimeters have exactly the same problem. The noise on the flowing water might be reduced by passing the cooling water first through a thermal inertia filter. I suggest packing the interior of your inlet pipe with lots of tacks. Use the copper ones to minimize corrosion. There must be a better design, but it's better than nothing. Just a big container of tacks is no good; the water flowing along different paths often comes out in distinct "blobs" of different temperatures, rather than as a well mixed stream. Finally, I don't know how to guarentee uniformity of thermal conductivity across a sheet of material in order to make a Seebeck calorimeter. I've thought about it some, but I haven't come up with any solution. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 17 23:13:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA12827; Sat, 17 Oct 1998 23:07:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 23:07:46 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <0bbc01bdfa37$7f696200$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 20:06:30 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Unbalance Resent-Message-ID: <"2AYnR.0.L83.nMOAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23451 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill - > Lets get down to the atomic level, which elements > have the most eccentricity in their atomic > spins?Lets get down to the atomic level, which > elements have the most eccentricity in their > atomic spins? H.W. Wallace thougt that odd spin nuclii made the best stuff. He used brass in his experiments, and says in the patent that copper in the alloy is composed of isotopes that have an odd (3/2) spin. Some isotopes in the zinc and lead contribute too. So brass might be good. I was wondering about bismuth, which has an odd Z, but I don't know about nucleon numbers for Bi isotopes. Anyone? > So what was the wobble frequency then? The disc was spun up to 5k rpm if I recall, and I think there was something by EEP said that a disc would "sing" at some point. Initial chilling can sometimes induce a ringing in solids, but if this was something to do with the spin, then that's probably the frequency. But the drive solenoids could have contributed some vibration too. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 01:16:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA27710; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 01:03:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 01:03:23 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981018081243.00e09178 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:12:43 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Re; Does The Gravitational Potential Create The Aether? Resent-Message-ID: <"ush6o2.0.pm6.B3QAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23452 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 12:57 PM 10/17/98 -0600, you wrote: >Or stated in another way, without mass/gravity >there wouldn't be any Aether, which would be a spin on Einstein's adage, >"Matter Warps Space", >corrupted to, Matter/Gravity creates the Aether in Empty Space and thus >creates a Speed-of-Light Gradient? Actienic (undifferentiated - Triple Concordant Flow of electricity, magnetism and gravity) Rays of Light from the sun interacts with mass and produces gravity. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 04:02:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA16247; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:01:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:01:20 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 01:00:01 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: He's still mystified by results Resent-Message-ID: <"_Nuoq2.0.mz3._fSAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23453 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris Eccles has popsted a follow-up to the original article in sci.physics.electromag, which has understandably caused quite a stir: --------------------------------------------------------------- > Since the first test of the device, we have not done a great deal but > the interest shown by subscribers to this group (reflected in the > pile of email I have received) has made me reserve some more lab > time for further investigations. > > To the many who wrote to me (rightly sceptical) I have to say > unequivocally that this is NOT some kind of hoax. It's nowhere near > April 1st and I am 50 years old, a serious researcher with a healthy > career in mainstream electronic physics, and not given to the kind > of tom-foolery that belongs in the student common-room during > rag-week. > > What we are talking about here is the possibility of some kind of > hitherto-unknown relationship between dynamically-changing > tensor fields. Magnetism, particularly intrinsic, remanent > magnetism, is one of the few phenomena that remain relatively > badly delineated by current quantum theory and I, for one, am > prepared to admit that there are huge holes in my own fundamental > understanding of it. If a simple, but rarely-occuring-in-nature, > juxtaposition of non-scalar fields is capable of either creating (or > destroying) spin-2, zero mass mediating particles, then there is > the real possibility of manipulating and engineering the > gravitational field. It becomes an exciting prospect but not one > which should lead any of us into assuming that the Sinclaire device > actually manifests such an effect. > > The secondary EM effects are quite interesting. Has anyone else > built anything which comes close to displaying the same anomalies ? > > Please feel free to email me direct and suggest guidelines for a > concerted research pathway on this. There is too much indiscipline > and disorganisation in "fringe" physics for anyone to feel secure > about such work. Lack of published matter in mainstream journals > (for obvious and valid reasons) gives rise to the feeling that one is > trying to "swim through treacle" even commencing such a > programme of research. > > It is, I think, fundamentally important to distinguish between a > mass-shielding effect (where a device purports to alter the > measured strength of the Earth's [or any] grav field "above" the > device), and an effect which indicates that an entire, > physically-linked, chunk of equipment can be made to behave as > though it has shed grav mass. The one case illustrates that a tensor > field can be manipulated vectorally (and few would find fault with > the math of this); the other possibly is suggesting that a property of > matter which we have all believed to be sacrosanct and > writ-in-stone for several centuries is, in fact, a deal more woolly > than we believed it to be. > > I remain very puzzled. --------------------------------------------------------------- I've done a Deja News author profile on Eccles, and he seems to present the kind of personna online who doesn't seem likely to be doing this for a hoax. Of course you never know what's up with people on the net. But he's taken neither the skepto-path nor fringie positions in previous posts, and has in fact posted little in the way of physics or engineering posts, though one post on ZPE seemed like he really does have some scientific background. Since I am in need of a small centrifuge casting mold for a client's project, I am going to go ahead and line the thing I'm building with a bunch of SMOT magnets and see if I can make my fluorescent lights go ape. Kyle, keep going and take a look at this. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 04:26:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA19036; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:11:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:11:19 -0700 Message-ID: <19981018111554.11224.rocketmail send104.yahoomail.com> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:15:54 -0700 (PDT) From: ron kita Subject: B/motors as the start of A/G To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"xf50j2.0.Hf4.MpSAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23454 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ball bearing motors as the starting point for antigravity???????? A ball bearing motor is a one-piece motor that could "POSSIBLY" couple to space. Construction time --less than 15 minutes.... works every time. Parts list: 2 used skateboard bearings 2 small hose clamps to fit exterior of bearings 1 -3/8 or 5/16 inch rod to fit very snugly into bearings ....rod length 8 to 10 inches 1 wooden 2X4" approx one foot long 1 set automotive jumper cables SAFTEY GEAR....you will be drawing very large amps from a car battery...can be a dangerous situation. Note: Two copper tabs must be a fixed to the clamps to allow passage of current from outside race into bearings...along rod...current exits external race of second bearing mounted 8 inches down rod. Constructed device will look like a BARBELL on a 2X4...with conductor tabs. Operation: Clip one jumper cable to right tab...spin rod with thumb (direction of spin is NOT important)... While rod is thumb spun....clip on other jumper.... you should see the Ball bearing motor...spin at 200 to 500 rpms...running only for a few seconds is wise. Some people claim that the bearings are the stator.. ...but I DON T THINK SO TIM. The possibility of space reaction coupling?????? Best, Ron Kita anyone who can t get this experiment to work...probably can t boil water. Please note..the use of the word "possibility". Experimentus ipse loquitor...the experiment speaks for itself. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 04:26:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA20803; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:23:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:23:06 -0700 Message-Id: <199810181122.HAA16180 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: New Energy Symposium Date: Sun, 18 Oct 98 07:22:10 -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: <"_1wE41.0.z45.Q-SAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23455 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Gene - > > > This is a most amazing demonstration -- a > > warning to so many others who have adopted the > > "Holy writ" of Fizzix. > >You know how some of us would love to have a drop-dead solid gizmo >displaying just such a warning on our benchtops. Do you know if details >adequate for replication are forthcoming? > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI We will try to get full details written up by Jeff and/or Ed Wall. It is really avery simple device. Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 04:48:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA22850; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:37:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:37:44 -0700 Message-Id: <3629E41F.79E4D46B verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:50:39 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Re: Unbalance References: <0bbb01bdfa37$7e1b3720$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"r4FAj3.0.ya5.7CTAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23456 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill Wallace wrote: > > >Some notes may help to explore spinning-magnetic disks anomalies: > > > >If you recall the Podklednov's experiment, the effect is maximized when the > disk wobbled at certain frequency while it slowed slowly. Because the > unstable state, this rotation frequency could not be sustained. Also the > wobble is assumed to the unbalance on the disk. I had pointed on this, the > possibility that the wobble was not caused by the unbalance and even was > caused by mechanical reasons, may have important role on the so-called > gravity shielding effect. > > OK, what was the frequency of the wobble then, can you give further details? > Certainly there are mathematical models we can construct, what where the > forces and elements involved, what was the magnetic strenghts, angular > momentums, etc etc. The devil is always in the details. > This an excerpt from Original Podkletnov/Levit MSU-Chem 95 Paper which is located at Pete Skeggs' site. "During the time when the rotation speed was decreased from 5000 to 3500 rpm using the solenoids as braking tools, the shielding effect reached maximum values and the weight loss of the samples was from 1.9 to 2-1% depending on the position of the sample from the outer edge of the disk. These peak values were measured during 25-30 seconds as the speed decreased rather quickly. Because of considerable vibration of the disk at the rotation speed close to 3000-3300 rpm further braking was done very quickly in order to avoid unbalanced rotation, and the measurements of weight could not be carried out." > >>From my experimentation experience, I feel the second harmonic on > >> oscillations have great importance, maybe help to break the symmetry > >> between interactions, and allow weird things happens. > > So what was the wobble frequency then? This is not from electro-mechanical experiments but from electronics experiments working with coils. These are from 400 kHz to 10 MHz range that I saw the presence of the second harmonic coincides with unusual results. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 04:51:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA24636; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:47:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:47:10 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19981018111554.11224.rocketmail send104.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 01:45:56 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: B/motors as the start of A/G Resent-Message-ID: <"LZtA12.0.r06.zKTAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23457 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ron - This is a device that Marinov described. People do say it's the bearings, but I don't know about that either. I think it's ordinary Lorentz force as in the other Marinov motor, but that's just me. Neat demo though. > anyone who can t get this experiment to work > ...probably can t boil water. - As a matter of fact I *do* have a hard time boiling water without burning it or the pot or myself. I'll take your word for it that this one works. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 04:58:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA27050; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:57:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:57:55 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981018120652.00dc7b84 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:06:52 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: B/motors as the start of A/G Resent-Message-ID: <"okXUH2.0.Uc6.3VTAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23458 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; What? No Corbino effect axial magnetic field? Dennis At 04:15 AM 10/18/98 -0700, you wrote: >Ball bearing motors as the starting point for >antigravity???????? > >A ball bearing motor is a one-piece motor that >could "POSSIBLY" couple to space. >Construction time --less than 15 minutes.... >works every time. >Parts list: >2 used skateboard bearings >2 small hose clamps to fit exterior of bearings >1 -3/8 or 5/16 inch rod to fit very snugly into bearings >....rod length 8 to 10 inches >1 wooden 2X4" approx one foot long >1 set automotive jumper cables >SAFTEY GEAR....you will be drawing very large amps from a car >battery...can be a dangerous situation. >Note: Two copper tabs must be a fixed to the clamps >to allow passage of current from outside race into >bearings...along rod...current exits external race >of second bearing mounted 8 inches down rod. >Constructed device will look like a BARBELL on >a 2X4...with conductor tabs. >Operation: >Clip one jumper cable to right tab...spin rod with >thumb (direction of spin is NOT important)... >While rod is thumb spun....clip on other jumper.... >you should see the Ball bearing motor...spin >at 200 to 500 rpms...running only for a few seconds is wise. >Some people claim that the bearings are the stator.. >...but I DON T THINK SO TIM. >The possibility of space reaction coupling?????? >Best, >Ron Kita >anyone who can t get this experiment to work...probably can t boil >water. >Please note..the use of the word "possibility". >Experimentus ipse loquitor...the experiment speaks >for itself. > > > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 05:26:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA29332; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 05:15:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 05:15:35 -0700 Message-Id: <3629ECFE.FB877E61 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:28:30 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unbalance (correction) References: <0bbb01bdfa37$7e1b3720$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> <3629E41F.79E4D46B@verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Guq4d2.0.EA7.dlTAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23459 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It appears that I recalled incorrectly the original report. There is no statement that the effect is maximized when vibrations occurs at 3300-3000 Hz range. My previous post contains the subject. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 06:16:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA04375; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 06:11:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 06:11:28 -0700 Message-Id: <199810181311.JAA25167 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 09:14:47 -0400 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: <"tKOTC.0.H41._ZUAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23460 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Horace Heffner > > I wrote: > > "I wonder if Jeff put the magnets into this posititon for this specific test: > > N N > | | > S S" > Actually, his rotor is: N S | | S N > > That wouldn't do it either. The force from the opposing brush feed current > should cancel. There must be friction between the ring and magnet. The ring is hanging, suspended by a fine fishing line of several feet length that builds up counter torque fairly rapidly. There is no friction between the ring and magnet, unless you consider windage to be that. Ed Wall NERL From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 06:40:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA08154; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 06:35:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 06:35:09 -0700 Message-ID: <0d0f01bdfa9b$f3744480$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Subject: Re: Sci.electromag post-FWD Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:55:05 -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: <"yuY1A3.0.K_1.9wUAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23461 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I will give you the fact that the measure of gravity could be a fluke, but how would you explain how these EM variations affected a lamp across the room, that would seem to defy the inverse square law? >Re unbalanced rotating disk with magnets, just when we expect >important results to be reported with clarity, we get: > >>>The whole shazam was mounted on an acrylic baseplate and weighed. >It was 14.26 kg. When we switched the motor in, the weird shit >happened. The balance showed a loss of grav mass of the assembly of >some 550 grams (3.85%) and every computer terminal and fluorescent >lamp in the lab went ape ! > >No description of the "shit" that "happened". No description of how >the mass change was measured. The writer is certainly not a scientist. > >My hypothesis is that, if this is not just a prank, is that he used an >electronic balance, and that the electromagnetic variations that >affected the lamp and computer terminal also affected the electronic >balance. > >Don't waste too much time on this one until "Chris" tells us something >useful. >== >Michael J. Schaffer > > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 06:40:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA08200; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 06:35:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 06:35:19 -0700 Message-ID: <0d1501bdfa9b$f6bb8040$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Subject: Re: Unbalance Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 09:33:44 -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: <"YkB5c3.0.-_1.LwUAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23462 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > Lets get down to the atomic level, which > > elements have the most eccentricity in their > > atomic spins? > >H.W. Wallace thougt that odd spin nuclii made the best stuff. He used brass >in his experiments, and says in the patent that copper in the alloy is >composed of isotopes that have an odd (3/2) spin. Some isotopes in the zinc >and lead contribute too. This gets back to some of searles ideas, perhaps the spins of different elements working off each other create a unified effect much more than any could do in the pure state. I have been talking with a physicist about muon spin, and there are ways to get them into phase , the most conventional is to flip 180 degress the muon itself, or the less conventional and less well known method is to flip what is around the muon to get it back into phase, perhaps altering one of the elements in the mixture will amplify a force applied and magnify it to the other elements at the atomic level. Perhaps getting the precessions in phase of the zinc or lead will cause the copper to precess in phase as well. So brass might be good. I was wondering about >bismuth, which has an odd Z, but I don't know about nucleon numbers for Bi >isotopes. Anyone? That is what is really frustrating, I cannot find any periodic table of the elements showing angular momentums or magnetic moments (for the gyromagnetic ratios) and several other properties on any SI charts, does ANYONE know where we can get this information? Webelements does not have enough data. Certianly there must be a chart somewhere that gives practically every known property of all the elements? > > So what was the wobble frequency then? > >The disc was spun up to 5k rpm if I recall, and I think there was something >by EEP said that a disc would "sing" at some point. Initial chilling can >sometimes induce a ringing in solids, but if this was something to do with >the spin, then that's probably the frequency. But the drive solenoids could >have contributed some vibration too. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 08:41:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA29399; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:33:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:33:49 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 07:41:08 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Resent-Message-ID: <"SXiVR1.0.GB7.TfWAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23463 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:14 AM 10/18/98, Ed Wall wrote: [snip] > >The ring is hanging, suspended by a fine fishing line of several feet >length that builds up counter torque fairly rapidly. There is no friction >between the ring and magnet, unless you consider windage to be that. How is the magnet suspended? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 09:09:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA02594; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 09:01:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 09:01:26 -0700 Message-Id: <199810181601.MAA13398 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 12:04:46 -0400 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: <"Cfj7b3.0.Ne.L3XAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23464 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- > From: Horace Heffner > At 9:14 AM 10/18/98, Ed Wall wrote: > [snip] > > > >The ring is hanging, suspended by a fine fishing line of several feet > >length that builds up counter torque fairly rapidly. There is no friction > >between the ring and magnet, unless you consider windage to be that. > > How is the magnet suspended? > Same way, by a thread. The actual method is that the ring is glued to the top of an inverted styrofoam cup that has a drinking straw piece glued to the bottom of the cup, sticking upwards, perpendicular to the bottom surface. The top of the straw, has two small holes pierced into which two pieces of fishing line are tied. Those two lines run parallel to the line that is tied to the magnet toroid that runs through the straw, so the ring and the magnet can move independently with very minimal mechanical interaction, so I am corrected on that aspect. A slight friction may occur when the magnet fishing line rubs the inside of the straw. Ed Wall NERL From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 10:24:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA27931; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:23:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:23:28 -0700 Message-ID: <19981018172205.15576.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:22:05 -0700 (PDT) From: ron kita Subject: Antigravity Motor Picture To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"Gq7YK3.0.Jq6.EGYAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23465 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There is a picture of an Antigravity Motor in the New York Herald Tribune November 20 ,1955pp 1 and 36. Picture was taken at General Dynamics-Convair. You can also find picture in Anitgravity Handbook first edition by Dave Hatcher Childress. Enjoy, Ron Kita ...I have so much fun fooling myself...why would I want to fool anyone else! BTW:Title of NYHT article--Conquest of Gravity Aim of Top Scientists in U.S. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 12:35:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03133; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 12:32:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 12:32:38 -0700 Message-Id: <362A5307.71CEC7FD verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:43:51 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: tr Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Eccles Cc: vortex Subject: Re: Mystified by Results Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Tb74l1.0.tm.L9aAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23466 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Chris Eccles, I am very happy to see your subsequent posting on news group. I think the theoretical investigation of the phenomenon is hardy possible this time, although there are many recent works on electromagnetic-gravitational interaction, but none of them offers a guideline to exploration of their theory by experimentation, mostly based on high-energies, at Planck or subatomic scale, which can not be carried out easily to macroscopic scale. Certainly, this phenomenon require a new-physics, and will find little interest or acceptance on main-stream physics. As may you know, o ne of few experimental scientific paper is belong to E.E. Podkletnov, appearing as gravitational anomaly based on spinning superconductor disk. To access to the paper and to other related literature you may go to Pete Skeggs' site, www.inetarena.com/~noet ic/pls/. You may correspond with Dr, Giorgio Fontana, ( Giorgio Fontana ) which is theoretically investigating the gravitation anomalies found at Podkletnov experiment and published a paper on this! subject as A possibility of emission of high frequency gravitational radiation from d-wave to s-wave type superconductor junctions. http://xxx.lanl.gov/html/gr-qc/9804069. I had corresponded him once, I am sure he will interest to the phenomenon that you obtained if you contact him, and may offer significant support to uncover the interaction. Beside, I have many idea to explore the nature of the effect that you experiencing, but first of all, I strongly document every aspect of you setup, take detailed photos, etc. If you attempt to build a duplicate setup, it is highly probable that you may n ot obtain the same result. Even the original setup may not run again, for example by slight change on environmental conditions, temperature, humidity, placement of the setup on the bench, position of attached instruments, etc. Do not underestimate importa nce of such conditions. There are many cause that a duplicate device may not work, by for example by slight change of rotor and stator, mechanical resonance frequencies. May the effect is primarily dependant to slight vibration of the stator case, producing second harmonic which create an further dynamical asymmetry on the magnetic interaction. So like the elasticity of the cage, difference between strength of magnets and slight polarization/orientation differences. Of course I hope the effect is insensitive to such deviations and mainly based on the given design features. In this stage, the most important to do is very carefully document everything belong the setup, material properties, exact environment conditions, placement on the bench, a photo of the whole bench and the lab may also extremely helpful when reproducing p roblems arise, and nobody can help you to find desperately the missing thing or the difference causing the failure, but the photos. An other very secure way to obtain complete documentation is allowing multiple scientists, students, material and electrica l engineers does their independent documentation. After completing the full documentation, and may post it somewhere private or public for reasons that many breakthroughs are lost because they fail to do this by secrecy arguments. The second duty I think to check reproducibility of the experiment. Never attempt to optimize things, or fix some faults appears the exp. run better if they fixed. Do not fix anything! Please beware that you may receive some negative feedback from institution and from other colleagues, and you may discouraged to continue or investigate the phenomenon. Please do not forget that middle-age minds are still effective in our society. Third thing before the investigate the effect is build a duplicate device, by the same team or by another based on the documentation prepared. this is the best way to check the completeness of the documentation. If the duplicate works, big congratulations . you may work with this duplicate to investigate the effect. I don't know what is the cause, but this seems a typical behaviour that best result are obtained just in the beginning, and hardy tend to be improved by subsequent efforts. This is why I try to discourage you to play and tune with the original device. Maybe the next things to do, but it could be very expensive is try to build the device with high graded materials as ones used on national laboratories. Of course an other important part of the experiment is properly determine and measure the anomalous behaviours. Most of sceptical will attack you by arguments as measurement errors and by undetermined/unisolated conditions like air flow, electrical interf erence on measuring meters, etc. So these arguments may cause some headaches while you more involved to the research and while try to carry the work to a full academic base. Now, most of the fun is around the experiment: - Measure the rotation speed. and plot the mass variation vs rotation speed. - Turn off the motor while the anomaly is exhibiting and observe the anomaly does or not disappear when the main power is absent on the motor. - Smoke test, how the air around the device behave. If enclosing the setup inside a box may affect the phenomenon but using a closed smoke filled box at proximity of the setup may show further signs about the interaction. - Inclined setup. try to incline the device 45, 90, 180 (upside-down) if the everything enough rigid and strongly fixed. do not attempt to do this with the original setup. It may affect its mechanics and you may never restore the original tunings. - As the device is not electromagnetically friendly, you may experience further hazards while trying to electrically shielding the setup. Please keep in mind that any microwaves even terahertz radiation can be emitted by the unknown mechanism and maybe ha zardous to the health. frequencies above 400-1000 GHz are very difficult to detect, and there is no effective method to detect (weak) radiation above 30 THz until far infrared photons according to my knowledge. More later. Expect hear more of you, many of us (weird-science enthusiasts) are waiting a preliminary description of your setup or the reference that the design is based. Please post it soon as possible, even some of us, (may as you are aware) are already build some setup based to details that you gave on your first posting. Best regards, hamdi ucar (electrical/computer engineer) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 13:26:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA13886; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 13:20:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 13:20:17 -0700 Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:18:37 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Seebeck wall conductivity Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810181621_MC2-5D07-3DB9 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Gmzup3.0.uO3.1saAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23467 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Michael Schaffer writes: Finally, I don't know how to guarantee uniformity of thermal conductivity across a sheet of material in order to make a Seebeck calorimeter. I've thought about it some, but I haven't come up with any solution. I do not understand why uniform conductivity is important. If one section of the wall impedes heat, the heat will escape from another section instead. The thermocouples in all sections are linked head-to-tail anyway, so you cannot tell which part of the wall is most conductive, and the total voltage change should be about the same no matter where the heat comes out. I suppose a large difference in conductivity might skew the response. You could test this with an unbalanced thermal mass. Wrap a resistance heater in insulation except for one side, and putting the open side close to one wall of Seebeck calorimeter. Compare this to the performance with the same resistance heater at the same power level suspended in the middle of the calorimeter without insulation. Scott Little asked about building a Seebeck calorimeter. I would not recommend it. Oriani spent months building his. If you can afford to buy, I think you should. If you cannot afford one perhaps you think carefully about why you are trying to achieve high precision. I would concentrate on improving CF materials instead. Boost the signal, don't worry about reducing the noise. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 15:04:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA30752; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:45:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:45:16 -0700 Message-Id: <362A7285.145F23E0 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:58:13 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: tr Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Mystified by results (Chris Eccles 3'rd posting) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_3l5c.0.KW7.i5cAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23468 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi All, This is the copy of Chris Eccles's third posting on the spinning magnet-disk experiment. http://x14.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=402463926&CONTEXT=908745760.1298727201&hitnum=0 Regards, hamdi ucar ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: Mystified by results Author: Chris Eccles Email: ecogen iol.ie Date: 1998/10/18 Forums: sci.physics.electromag I have just been told by someone in the lab that what we actually have built is nearly a replica of something called the Searl Levi-Disk. It is exceedingly difficult to get any sound and reliable information from anyone on this device ! I appreciate the email from Mr Sterniman; it seems well-reasoned and I am replying soon when I have attempted to set the math of it straight in my own terms. I am unused to newsgroups and their etiquette, and I hope regular readers will forgive the inevitable confusion of a novitiate ? It seems that we can summarise as follows: ----------------------------------------- When the flux of an N-pole cuts the flux of an S-pole such that the tensor fields experience the maximum tendency to repel (pi/2), we create an electric field in whatever gap exists between the sources of the flux. We will also, a priori, because of the fact that the disk does not rotate its magnets in concentricity with those on the outer wall, be setting up a variation of transfer of angular momentum of the electromagnetic field associated with the electric field cutting flux all the time the disk is turning. This eccentricity has an interesting locus and traces out a cylindrical path of wall-thickness equal to twice the original eccentricity of the magnet ring on the disk (when stationary). We are going to run the device again soon, using a remote spring balance to ascertain the apparent mass loss so that there is no chance of an interaction between the pan balance and the device. Also, in answer to many queries, "No, it's not electromagnetic interference from the motor which caused the strange effects." Running the motor free is fine. It came from a vacuum pump which had been running in the lab for ages ! Anyway, after thirty years in physics, I've yet to encounter a 50Hz mains induction motor that could dim-out flu-tubes and blow up LCD's. More news when we have it. Please keep ideas flowing in - this device threatens to prevent me from building the HV/HF switches which we are supposed to be producing !!!!! Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 15:50:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA19145; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:49:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:49:12 -0700 Message-ID: <362A7042.E7E5F683 ro.com> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:48:35 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unbalance References: <3628E8B2.13EDCAEA verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GvO361.0.2h4.d1dAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23469 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > Patrick - > > > Interestingly, Dr. Podkletnov mentioned to me that > > several disks self-destructed due to excessive > > mechanical stress. He balanced the disks (I > > assume) as carefully as possible, yet the > > eccentricity could still be small, but there > > none-the-less. > > Wouldn't that just be typical? - Where the effect is caused not by the > highly unusual nature of the special fancy components in the experiment, > but by the unwanted and rather mundane 'error' in the setup? So everyone > else (like NASA) does an excellent job of balancing, and they get nothing. > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI Rick, I worked with the Delta-G team (as a volunteer) that was investigating the Podkletnov's experiment. When my tour of duty ended in August, the team had yet to produce a superconducting disk to the size specifications as set forth by Dr. Podkletnov (~12 in diameter), therefore the question of balance is moot. I've not received any correspondence from the team regarding this, so I'll take the lack of information as a sign that that hurdle has not yet been cleared. -- Regards, Patrick V. Reavis From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 15:54:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA20281; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:50:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:50:56 -0700 Message-ID: <362A70AD.298A3BB ro.com> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:50:21 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unbalance References: <0bbc01bdfa37$7f696200$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"oOyHP1.0.ny4.F3dAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23470 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill Wallace wrote: > Lets get down to the atomic level, which elements have the most eccentricity > in their atomic spins? > > >Interestingly, Dr. Podkletnov mentioned to me that several disks > self-destructed due to excessive mechanical stress. He balanced the disks > (I assume) as carefully as possible, yet the eccentricity could still be > small, but there none-the-less. > > > >-- > >Regards, > >Patrick V. Reavis > > > > Sorry Bill, But I have absolutely no idea! ;^} -- Regards, Patrick V. Reavis From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 17:09:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12358; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:08:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 17:08:33 -0700 Message-ID: <362A9ECA.78E9 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:07:06 -0700 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Reply-To: stk sunherald.infi.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Status report: Eccles replication Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OC2vQ1.0.013.0CeAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23471 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: All: I have nearly finished my second attempt to replicate the "Eccles experiment." I have tested the new rotor with the epoxy glue and it spins well. John Schnurer: I have made the disk off center, as in the original post by Eccles. I will finish the design up tommorow, or tuesday, since I had to order more magnets. They should be here by then. When I complete my replication, I will post the design and results, complete with every detail. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 19:31:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA21175; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:29:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:29:24 -0700 Message-ID: <19981019022759.6271.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:27:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Seebeck wall conductivity To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"_AXsk2.0.YA5.3GgAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23472 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael Schaffer writes: Finally, I don't know how to guarantee uniformity of thermal conductivity across a sheet of material in order to make a Seebeck calorimeter. I've thought about it some, but I haven't come up with any solution. Jed responded: I do not understand why uniform conductivity is important. If one section of the wall impedes heat, the heat will escape from another section instead. The thermocouples in all sections are linked head-to-tail anyway, so you cannot tell which part of the wall is most conductive, and the total voltage change should be about the same no matter where the heat comes out. I suppose a large difference in conductivity might skew the response. Schaffer responds: The thermocouples are linked as you say, so total voltage is proportional to the sum of all the delta_Ts. But, how do you convert this single voltage into heat flowing across the wall? You can do this only if each individual thermocouple represents the same elemental delta-q (heat flow) per unit delta--T. Therefore, each and every thermocouple must represent one and the same ratio of the (wall area)/(wall thickness). Otherwise the total signal will depend on (wall area)/(wall thickness) in the region where most of the heat is going through the wall, and not on one unique number. The Seebeck calorimeter is supposed to be built so that its one and only voltage signal is INDEPENDENT of where the heat is generated inside and through which parts of the wall it leaks out. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 19:37:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24074; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:34:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:34:46 -0700 Message-ID: <19981019023556.17937.rocketmail send1b.yahoomail.com> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:35:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: He's still mystified by results To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"ZpGOm1.0.3u5.5LgAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23473 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If he is so mystified and is such a good scientist, then why doesn't he write us more than just this??? If he was so startled that he didn't make good observations, then he should GO BACK TO THE LAB ASAP and write down his observations! The apparatus is already built. >>The whole shazam was mounted on an acrylic baseplate and weighed. It was 14.26 kg. When we switched the motor in, the weird shit happened. The balance showed a loss of grav mass of the assembly of some 550 grams (3.85%) and every computer terminal and fluorescent lamp in the lab went ape ! This is not a report of an experiment (IMHO). == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 20:08:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA00168; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:05:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:05:54 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981018224556.00964990 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:45:56 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: Antigravity Motor Picture In-Reply-To: <19981018172205.15576.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"W6haB3.0.N2.GogAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23474 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:22 AM 10/18/98 -0700, Ron Kita wrote: >There is a picture of an Antigravity Motor in >the New York Herald Tribune November 20 ,1955pp >1 and 36. Picture was taken at General Dynamics-Convair. >You can also find picture in Anitgravity Handbook >first edition by Dave Hatcher Childress. >Enjoy, >Ron Kita >...I have so much fun fooling myself...why would I >want to fool anyone else! >BTW:Title of NYHT article--Conquest of Gravity Aim >of Top Scientists in U.S. > (Interesting. ) It's on page 156-7 in the Antigravity Handbook [above]. Just underneath it are the 3 Laws of Physics by Dunlap: 1./ Fact is solidified opinion. 2./ Facts may weaken under extreme pressure. 3./ Truth is elastic. But what I really want to know is... Who was Dunlap? Other things I want to know are: 1./ What did you fool yourself about? 2./ Does it pertain to anything on Vo.? 3./ What is the ultimate meaning of life? Best Regards, Colin Quinney From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 21:06:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA19060; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:03:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:03:57 -0700 From: Chuck Davis To: mind-l aquathought.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:05:51 -0700 Message-ID: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Art Bell (fwd) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"9olqt3.0.kf4.jehAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23475 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Message received today: "Yesterday afternoon, Thursday, October 15, I had a wonderful surprise: my friend and colleague, Art Bell, called. We had perhaps the best off-air conversation in a year. Among other items, Art and I discussed not only his abrupt, shocking "resignation" Tuesday morning ... but the reasons. I will not divulge details, except to say that his (to many of his friends) completely enigmatic actions are sincere; they are NOT mere "hype" for "Coast-to-Coast"; they are NOT "positioning" for some mysterious, behind-the-scenes contract negotiations with Premiere (his parent network). They are simply rooted in a complex family problem, which has been building to a crisis for a year ... and which climaxed so "messily", on Monday night. There are government agendas and conspiracies. But I am satisfied -- from a first-hand conversation with my friend -- that this is not one of them! Unless we clearly separate this truth from all the rumors, we are lost; the serious subjects and agendas discussed on "Coast-to-Coast" will be totally negated and ignored, if we do not firmly distinguish a personal crisis from a "black-ops" project. The good -- actually, great! -- news: Art will be back. With time and a much clearer head, as well as much outside assistance, he can see a way clear to deal with the delicate issues which precipitated this emergency, and he assures me, he will return to both the Show and the audience he loves. As well he should. Richard C. Hoagland Oct 16, 1998 ----- Free e-mail group hosting at http://www.eGroups.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For the absolute lowest price on Video/PC Games visit: http://ads.egroups.com/click/58/1/bottomdollar Subscribe, unsubscribe, opt for a daily digest, or start a new e-group at http://www.eGroups.com -- Free Web-based e-mail groups. -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 18 23:27:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA26283; Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:26:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:26:35 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19981019023556.17937.rocketmail send1b.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:25:29 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: He's still mystified by results Resent-Message-ID: <"rnt5d1.0.aQ6.RkjAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23476 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael - > If he is so mystified and is such a good scientist, > then why doesn't he write us more than just > this??? If he was so startled that he didn't make > good observations, then he should GO BACK TO > THE LAB ASAP and write down his observations! > The apparatus is already built. He presents a good personna online (as did Greg Watson, if I recall), but I tend to agree with you. I built a similar device and tested it today, and saw no unusual effects. I'm not ready to call this a hoax yet, as there could well be some missing parameters which are crucial to replicating the phenomena. But we've been here so many times before, and I've seen nothing in the way of evidence that this is any different. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 00:23:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA02753; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:20:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:20:22 -0700 Message-ID: <19981019072438.8706.rocketmail send103.yahoomail.com> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:24:38 -0700 (PDT) From: ron kita Subject: Antigravity motors/McAllister Patent To: stk sunherald.infi.net Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"XhHZb1.0.xg.rWkAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23477 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There was a patent issued to Roy McAllister in the 1970 s ...actually a space drive that used air to unbalance a very high speed rotor. The motor was a high speed vacuum cleaner motor. Will try to find patent number. Note: The device can use captive RECYCLED air... the effect is NOT aerodynamic! Best, Ron Kita Antigravitics_R_US _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 00:30:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA04554; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:28:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:28:11 -0700 Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:44:13 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Mystified by results (Chris Eccles 3'rd posting) Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810190329_MC2-5D0F-7F36 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"gG9cN.0._61.AekAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23478 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Chris, >> Please keep ideas flowing in - this device threatens to prevent me from building the HV/HF switches which we are supposed to be producing !!!!! Chris << I may be miles off here, but surely the eccentricity of the rings of magnets can be achieved by making the outer(stator) ring eccentric to the rotor, which can then be concentric and intrinsically balanced. The magnetic effect of the relative change in gap will be the same as the concentric ring moves through the varying gaps of the fixed outer ring. Yes??? It will then be easy to change the degree of eccentricity by simply moving the outer ring towards and away from the centre of rotation. BTW, I had a similar experience in my old workshop when trying to get the Meyer cell to work. It turned out to be the induced em field resonating with a local mains wiring and this blew up the cb and played tricks with the lighting. I should have used screened cable!! Norman Horwood. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 01:31:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA14467; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 01:30:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 01:30:32 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810190329_MC2-5D0F-7F36 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:29:12 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Mystified by results (Chris Eccles 3'rd posting) Resent-Message-ID: <"KiGTd2.0.wX3.dYlAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23479 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Norman - > I may be miles off here, but surely the > eccentricity of the rings of magnets can be > achieved by making the outer(stator) ring > eccentric to the rotor, which can then be > concentric and intrinsically balanced. Think twice and build it once. ;) I wish I had taken my own advice above, because it wasn't until I had the thing assembled when I re-realized that the point where the magnets are at their nearest was itself supposed to be travelling around at the speed of the disc. That point becomes stationary in the eccentric stator configuration. After I rebuilt it correctly with the rotor magnets shimmed out in eccentric configuration, I tried holding a fluorescent light fixture up to within an inch or so of the magnet gaps. While the light did not "go ape" nor exhibit even the slightest unusual behavior, I'm beginning to think that there was in fact at least one lower primate present. And I believe his name might have been: - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 07:33:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA25244; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 07:20:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 07:20:46 -0700 Message-ID: <01cf01bdfb6b$97745d20$6a8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: OFF TOPIC: Microsoft Menu for Today Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 08:19:27 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"sfXnJ1.0.KA6.-gqAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23480 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Breakfast: APPLE-SAUCE Dinner: APPLE-DUMPLINGS SUPPER: APPLE-PIE (ala MODEM) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 08:14:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14157; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 08:12:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 08:12:37 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox2.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <362B5733.AC98F7D4 css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:13:55 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Re: Just another Ripoff Artist References: <362857BC.4B53 keelynet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Jpoe12.0.7T3.aRrAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23481 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jerry W. Decker wrote: > I am very disturbed and disappointed that one of our own, or so I and > many others thought, is trying to capitalize on the KeelyNet files by > selling them on CD. He is well aware that KeelyNet was never for profit > and that is why all our information has always been free for everyone. Funny part is the same rules don't seem to apply...... > This site and its contents copyright (C) 1998 Energy Research Company; > all rights reserved. Any and all trademarks, patents, etc. are property of > their respective owners. Any duplication of this site and/or its material is > restricted. Hang in there Jerry. Instead of stopping the sale of this CD, work out a licensing arrangement. A fool and his/her money are soon parted no matter what you do. Might as well get a piece of the action. 8^) If he doesn't want to play nice, you could always hit back by posting for free everything he is selling on his site.... ha ha ha. Morbid curiosity got me to go take a look and everything as far as I can tell is public domain. Here is a good one..... He is reselling Joseph Newman's motor plans and movie. Sucker bet says Joe ain't getting his cut..... ha ha ha. Poor sap probably has no idea how much email he's going to get now...... Here you go Evan : > Email sales energyresearchco.com LOL -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune" -Nicholas Ling From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 09:40:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA15559; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:38:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:38:14 -0700 Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:35:42 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Mystified by results (Chris Eccles 3'rd posting) Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199810191239_MC2-5D21-258A compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"hPotl2.0.do3.rhsAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23482 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick, >> the point where the magnets are at their nearest was itself supposed to be travelling around at the speed of the disc. That point becomes stationary in the eccentric stator configuration. << Yes, but the relative magnetic flux variation is identical in both configurations, so the effect, if any should be the same. If there was any reaction with external mag field, such as the earth's or any local due to power wiring etc. then there would be a slight difference due to the eccentricity of the rotating component. I must be being thick not to see your explanation! %-(. Norman Horwood From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 09:46:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA16704; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:40:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:40:44 -0700 Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:38:36 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Seebeck wall conductivity Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810191241_MC2-5D29-BDD4 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"dKAba2.0.u44.BksAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23483 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Michael Schaffer writes: . . . each and every thermocouple must represent one and the same ratio of the (wall area)/(wall thickness). Ah, yes. I see the point. I was thinking that as long as each thermocouple had a similar response, and the response was linear at different temperatures, that would suffice. My mistake. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 09:46:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17407; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:41:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:41:57 -0700 Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:38:59 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Newman accused of stealing prototype Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810191243_MC2-5D2C-8FEB compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"rXEz1.0.eF4.IlsAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23484 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex In a bizarre twist of events, Joseph Newman has been accused of stealing his own property. The man seems to have a talent for stirring up controversy. Read all about it in a hysterically funny document by a man named Biss: http://www.syc.org/e/skeptic/newman.htm Which is linked to: http://www.syc.org/e/skeptic/biss.htm Maybe other people will not see the humor, but it appeals to my rather hard-boiled sensibilities. (I get a kick out of reading the crime section of the newspapers too.) The document is followed by an indignant response by Soule, which is even funnier in its own way. The story is hilarious but vaguely alarming, because there is, I reckon, a 0.035% chance that the machine is real. That would make the story a tragedy, or tragicomedy. I hope that some other real anomalous energy device pans out and sweeps Newman and the rest of the Obfuscation Gang into the trash heap of history. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 11:07:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA28884; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:59:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:59:13 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:10:01 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Just another Ripoff Artist Resent-Message-ID: <"a-PCV.0.A37.mttAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23486 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A >Jerry W. Decker wrote: >> I am very disturbed and disappointed that one of our own, or so I and >> many others thought, is trying to capitalize on the KeelyNet files by >> selling them on CD. He is well aware that KeelyNet was never for profit >> and that is why all our information has always been free for everyone. > >Funny part is the same rules don't seem to apply...... > >> This site and its contents copyright (C) 1998 Energy Research Company; >> all rights reserved. Any and all trademarks, patents, etc. are property of >> their respective owners. Any duplication of this site and/or its material is >> restricted. > >Hang in there Jerry. Instead of stopping the sale of this CD, work out a >licensing arrangement. A fool and his/her money are soon parted no matter what >you do. Might as well get a piece of the action. 8^) > >If he doesn't want to play nice, you could always hit back by posting for free >everything he is selling on his site.... ha ha ha. Morbid curiosity got me to >go take a look and everything as far as I can tell is public domain. > >Here is a good one..... He is reselling Joseph Newman's motor plans and >movie. >Sucker bet says Joe ain't getting his cut..... ha ha ha. Poor sap probably has >no idea how much email he's going to get now...... > >Here you go Evan : >> Email sales energyresearchco.com > >LOL > > LOL!!!! :-) Thanks for the update, John!!! I'll have to "give it an email-go!" And thanks for your comments --- I appreciate your obvious and demonstrated sensitivity to primary theft. You are a credit to anyone interested in removing the Disclosure Barrier which has proven such a hinderance to innovators throughout history. Thanks again! My best to you, Evan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 11:11:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA28808; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:59:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:59:07 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:09:48 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Biss accused of attempting to steal prototype Resent-Message-ID: <"Ur0fF3.0.-17.gttAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23485 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >To: Vortex > >In a bizarre twist of events, Joseph Newman has been accused of stealing his >own property. The man seems to have a talent for stirring up controversy. Read >all about it in a hysterically funny document by a man named Biss: > >http://www.syc.org/e/skeptic/newman.htm > >Which is linked to: > >http://www.syc.org/e/skeptic/biss.htm > >Maybe other people will not see the humor, but it appeals to my rather >hard-boiled sensibilities. (I get a kick out of reading the crime section of >the newspapers too.) The document is followed by an indignant response by >Soule', which is even funnier in its own way. The story is hilarious but >vaguely alarming, because there is, I reckon, a 0.035% chance that the machine >is real. That would make the story a tragedy, or tragicomedy. I hope that some >other real anomalous energy device pans out and sweeps Newman and the rest of >the Obfuscation Gang into the trash heap of history. > >- Jed LOL!!! Dear Jed, I suppose I'd rather be in the "trash heap of history" than "lounging in the dung heap of history" -- your speciality! [just a joke, of course -- like your own! :-) ] Also, Jed, your above comment is misleading (if not inaccurate) --- the "indignant response" was written by Joseph Newman, not myself. I also appreciate your "mathematical" calculation, but interestingly enough, someone else had mentioned a 0.0375% chance and someone else had mentioned a 4.9391% chance and still someone else had mentioned a 62.484% chance -- no doubt they were not aware of your "calculation." :-) In case anyone might be having difficulty reading the fine print on the above website, I'll post Joseph Newman's response in full: Joseph Newman responds to Norman Biss To the People of the United States and the World: Mr. Norman Biss is a liar, an alcoholic, an idiot, and an attempted thief himself --- BY HIS OWN WORDS. Therefore, those who represent the company for which Mr. Biss works are also attempted thieves since Mr. Biss does not do anything without the permission and blessing of his boss. Note the obvious deception in Mr. Biss's claim (disclaimer) at the conclusion of his letter: "...and in no way is this information to be construed as being written by the company that I am employed by." Note that the lying and thieving position of Norman Biss, his boss, and the company for which Mr. Biss works is exemplified with the following words stated by Mr. Biss: "These drawings are copyrighted and patent is pending!" [Sidebar comment: if Joseph Newman's technology is so "worthless" as Mr. Biss attempts to claim in his letter, then why would Mr. Biss be so emphatic in stating that "These drawings are copyrighted and patent is pending!"?] No one would go to the trouble of "copyrighting and patenting" if they had proof or an honest belief that my PIONEERING ENERGY INVENTION did not work. The people who had witnessed the prototype operate as I claimed it would work and who wanted to steal this technology would, however, so act. The lying Norman Biss knows that company representatives tested the prototype on the Wednesday prior to the Thursday that I left with the machine. On their own, they tested the new machine with their own Dynamometer and the impressive results caused a "big smile to break out on the face of his boss, Joe Pugliese. At that moment, Mr. Pugliese emphatically told me, "Joe, I AM IMPRESSED!" and then he hurriedly walked away to his front office. I witnessed this and anyone who says otherwise is a LIAR! To my great anger, I returned to the company on Thursday and discovered that individuals at the company had completely disassembled the Motor; they had cut wires from the commutator, and an on-site technician told me that he was afraid that I would find that the Motor was not wired correctly as he was not certain what he was doing on this type of Motor. I had previously told Joe Pugliese -- the owner of the company -- that I would be taking my Motor on Friday back to Colorado. Joe Pugliese had on several occasions asked me to allow engineers from General Electric to come witness the test and I said "no" since I did not trust representatives from General Electric. In fact, as a subcontractor, Joe Pugliese's company wrapped large motors for General Electric Corporation. I was certain that individuals at Pugliese's company had disassembled my Motor on Thursday -- without my knowledge or permission -- hoping that I would leave it there when I left on Friday. [I also had disclosed to company representatives how one could build the Newman Motor without using permanent magnets!] The following information below, to and from my attorneys, dated August 3 and August 7, 1998 and August 11, 1998 consist of Confidential Documents which were signed by Norman Biss and Joe Pugliese. The Confidential Documents prove that both Norman Biss and Joe Pugliese are liars and attempted thieves of my technology and deliberate slanderers of my name. In fact, Joe Pugliese has demonstrated the type of "scum" he personally is when he called my wife in Colorado and directly threatened her as explained in my letter to my attorney of August 11, 1998. Joe Pugliese even lied to his own attorney when Pugliese stated that he had NOT signed ANY Confidential Documents regarding my work --- when, in fact, Pugliese has signed THREE SEPARATE DOCUMENTS. One of these Documents consists of two pages and includes all of his workers within the scope of the agreement; moreover, it is quite clear that everything belongs to me if I even doubt that they are in violation of the agreement described below. Note: The lying, thieving, Norm Biss states that he would like to contact Roger Hastings who, in fact, is another thief of my work and who also violated Confidential Disclosure Documents of which I have record. This is indicative of the old saying, "Birds of a feather, flock together." These corrupt people at the Pugliese company deliberately attempted to mess up this Prototype Motor after I had made an agreement with them in good faith --- after THEY had first contacted me and saying that they wanted to assist me following their reading of my fundamental book. Accordingly, I have removed ALL of the coil wrappings designed by their design team, and I have been rewrapping the coil according to my teachings. By his lying, it should be obvious that Biss's criticisms of my involvement in the Motor's construction is the exact reverse of what Biss claims. In fact, Biss was totally incompetent in what he did and I told him this many times. The forthcoming demonstration of my Motor will prove who is the "Teacher" and who is the "student". The truth of this new technology will be shown on public display by the first of next month in Phoenix, Arizona. Everyone will be invited to come at their leisure and see this Motor operate. The letters to/from my attorneys follow as do the Confidential Documents signed by Norm Biss and Joe Pugliese. The Documents prove that they are liars, thieves, and the "scum of the earth." [SIGNED] Joseph Westley Newman 3 A.M., Friday Morning, October 2, 1998 Postscript: My inventive ability as well as my honesty is well documented in my fundamental book, The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman. The inaccurate, insulting, and lying comments of Norm Biss will be publicly exposed for what they are when I soon demonstrate this revolutionary technology for the entire world. ________________________________________ LAW OFFICES OF MURPHY AND SHEPARD 235 Ratliff Street Lucedale, Mississippi 39452 August 3, 1998 MEMORANDUM To: Mr. Joe Pugliese Re: Joseph W. Newman Please be advised that I represent Joseph W. Newman, with whom you executed a contract on 2 June 1998 and that I am sending you this memorandum at his request. (It is my understanding that he will hand deliver this to you.) First, let me state that I have known Joe for many years and have found him to be straightforward and honest. He says what he means and he means what he says. He values honesty and abhors dishonesty. While he believes that you and he can have a mutually-profitable relationship, he is concerned that you are considering breaching your agreement with him. You should not do that. The agreement is clear: He gets the first machine built, and you get the next. Further, your right to manufacture the machine is dependent upon your first producing TWO prototypes as soon as possible. It is my understanding that you have not been able to build the first machine without Joe's help and that he has willingly given it to you. He stands ready to work with you on completing this machine and building the second unit, but this must be done as soon as possible. You are, therefore, strongly urged to honor your agreement with Joe. (If you have changed your mind and do not want to build the second unit, then you must release the first unit to Joe, and he will release you from the contract. Joe hopes, however, that you want to proceed with this project, for the benefit of both of you.) Sincerely, [SIGNED] Robert P. Shepard _________________________________________ LAW OFFICES OF MURPHY AND SHEPARD 235 Ratliff Street Lucedale, Mississippi 39452 August 7, 1998 Attn: Mr. Joe Pugliese Re: Joseph W. Newman Dear Mr. Pugliese, As you know, I represent Mr. Joseph W. Newman It is my understanding that you have decided not to honor your agreement with Mr. Newman and have instead breached the agreement. It is also my understanding that you have made threats to file criminal charges against Mr. Newman. While you and he may have a civil dispute, this is not a criminal matter. If you make the serious mistake of filing criminal charges against him, he will sue you for defamation, false arrest, malicious prosecution, and any other claim his lawyers can conceive. You are further advised that you executed a Confidential Disclosure Agreement on Mr. Newman's machine, which prohibits you from disclosing how it was built or attempting to sell a copy of it. If you refuse to honor that agreement, you will be sued for bad faith breach of contract, and Mr. Newman will seek actual and punitive damages from you personally and your company. Sincerely, [SIGNED] Robert P. Shepard _________________________________________ NEWMAN ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION 2050 Vineyard Drive Castle Rock, Colorado 80104 (303) 814-3403 August 11, 1998 Ms. Tamra Palmer Attorney-at-Law Denver, Colorado Dear Ms. Palmer, I have a potential business problem which may be immediate in nature, or nonexistent for which I may need your services. Please see Exhibit A (an outline of said potential problem) provided by my long-time local attorney from my previous location of residence in Mississippi. This material was addressed to Joe Pugliese via his company. See also Exhibits B, C, & D which prove that Joe Pugliese and his top technical representative, Norm Biss, both signed Binding Trade Secret Papers which include any employees of Pugliese's company. Note that ALL test results and manufacturing information they have gathered or anything to do with my Confidential Disclosures to them should be immediately returned to me. Also note, ". . . or in the event that such breach appears to be imminent possibility . . ." I can sue them. The facts prove this to be the case: See Exhibit E of Contract signed by Joe Pugliese on June 2, 1998 to make two (2) Prototypes "AS SOON AS POSSIBLE." Fact: The company representatives were NOT proceeding very fast according to the terms and spirit of the original Contract, so therefore I took $6,000.00 worth of magnets (at my own expense), myself hired a worker, and we went to work at Pugliese's company for close to five (5) weeks. On Thursday, August 6, 1998 a Pugliese's company employee - Greg - gladly and eagerly helped me load into my automobile my nearly-completed Prototype which I and my hired worker had previously constructed over the last five weeks. More than 90% of the work was done by the two of us. My above-mentioned magnets and my Trade Secret Innovations were employed in the unit's construction. The First Prototype constructed is and was definitely mine. For whatever reason, Joe Pugliese had chosen to violate the original Agreement dated June 2, 1998, and he did not build the second unit for himself. However, after I left the facility last Thursday (August 6, 1998) with my prototype which was loaded into my automobile by an employee of Joe Pugliese, I returned to my hotel to check out. At that time, the same employee who assisted me with loading my prototype appeared at the check out desk of my hotel and told me that Joe Pugliese had told him to get me and said Prototype back in his building or he was "out the door." He added that Joe Pugliese had said that the "PROTOTYPE WOULD STAY IN HIS BUILDING." I angrily objected to these words and gave the employee a copy of the Contract signed by Joe Pugliese and a copy of the letter from Bob Shepard, my previous local attorney (in Mississippi). I then left for Castle Rock, Colorado to attend my son's Birthday this 10th day of August, 1998. Several hours west of Pugliese's company, I stopped and contacted my wife by telephone and learned that she was terribly upset. She told me that: Joe Pugliese had called her and has angrily and repeatedly shouted at her about six times: "YOU HAD BETTER GET YOUR HUSBAND TO BRING THAT PROTOTYPE BACK BY TOMORROW MORNING OR I WILL HAVE YOUR HUSBAND ARRESTED IN FRONT OF YOU AND YOUR CHILD." And Joe Pugliese added in a very threatening tone of voice: "I KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE." These actions are clearly extortion and since there would be telephone records of Mr. Pugliese's interstate telephone call from his state of residence to Castle Rock, Colorado, I assume that his threatening actions would constitute a violation of Federal Law. The actions of Joe Pugliese are clearly in violation of the Contract which we signed on June 2, 1998. The facts tell me that Mr. Pugliese is doing something unscrupulous behind my back and in total violation of all the Contracts which he signed with me on June 1st and June 2nd, 1998. I would appreciate it if you would notify Mr. Pugliese of these facts, that ALL originals and copies of all test results and manufacturing information they have gathered or anything to do with my Confidential Disclosures to them should be immediately returned to me, and that if he even attempts to so act as he personally threatened to my wife, then: I will sue Mr. Pugliese for SLANDER, for EXTORTION, for DELIBERATE INTERFERENCE WITH MY BUSINESS, for the VIOLATION OF OUR CONTRACTS, and for the ATTEMPTED THEFT OF MY PROTOTYPE BUILT BY MY EFFORTS, SWEAT, AND IDEAS. Please forward to me a copy of your letter to Mr. Pugliese. Sincerely, [SIGNED] Joseph Westley Newman ____________________________________ POTENTIAL CONTRACT BETWEEN: Joseph Newman and his Motor Company and Joe Pugliese and his Motor Company: Joe Pugliese has the option to start production of the ENERGY MACHINE INVENTION of Joseph Newman for a given area after: First building two (2) Prototypes of Drawing, given to Norm Biss, as soon as possible. One (1) Prototype goes to Joseph Newman and one (1) to Joe Pugliese. No one can sell the Energy Invention other than Joseph Newman as people he contracts to do so as Distributors, even if Joe Pugliese and/or his company choose to produce it --- when and if the contract is consummated. In that event, Joe Pugliese chooses the following area for Production for which Joseph Newman and his assignees make sales of Energy Invention in said area. If Joe Pugliese cannot produce said Invention relative to the demand of said area, then an additional manufacturer can be contracted with to meet the demand. If this Contract is consummated as stated above, then Joseph Newman or his assignees receives 25% of the profit of Joe Pugliese's production of the Joseph Newman Energy Invention. [SIGNED] Joe Pugliese [SIGNED] Joseph Newman June 2, 1998 _______________________________________ NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT This agreement is entered between Joseph Westley Newman (hereinafter referred to as "Newman") and "Name of Joe Pugliese's Company" (hereinafter referred to as "contractor") this 1 day of June, 1998. Whereas, Newman is engaged in the development, manufacture and sale of products which involve the development and utilization of information not generally known in the industry or industries in which Newman is or may become engaged; which information may, without limitation, include information to research, development, inventions, manufacture, purchasing, accounting, engineering, marketing, merchandising and selling (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the secret information"); Whereas, in performing its functions for Newman, contractor will necessarily be given access to secret information, which will be identified by Newman as such; Whereas, the use of the secret information by, or its disclosure to, any person or organization other than Newman and Newman's employees or contractors would be highly detrimental and damaging to Newman; and Whereas, the contractor seeks to perform services or provide products or materials to Newman which may be paid for by Newman; Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties agree as follows: Section 1. Nondisclosure of secret information. a. Nondisclosure. The contractor agrees that neither it nor any of its subsidiaries, divisions, employers, employees, principals, agents, independent contractors or other persons or organizations over which it has control, will at any time during or after its relationship with Newman, directly or indirectly use any secret information for any purposes not associated with Newman's activities or disseminate or disclose any of the secret information to any person or organization not connected with Newman, without the express written consent of Newman. Contractor also agrees that it will undertake all necessary and appropriate steps to ensure that the secrecy of the secret information in its possession will be maintained. b. Return of documents. Upon termination of its relationship with Newman, the contractor agrees that all documents, records, notebooks and similar repositories of or containing secret information, including copies thereof, then in its possession, whether prepared by it or others, will be left with Newman. c. Noncompetition. After termination of its relationship with Newman, contractor agrees that neither it nor any of its subsidiaries, divisions, employers, employees, principals, agents, independent contractors or other persons or organizations over which it has control, will, directly or indirectly, render services to any person or organization in, or about to become engaged in, the research or development, production, marketing or selling of a product, process or service of Newman, without the express written consent of Newman; nor will contractor, its subsidiaries, divisions, employers, employees, principals, agents, independent contractors or other persons or organizations over which it has control, directly or indirectly, become engaged in the research or development, production, marketing or selling of a product, process or service which resembles or competes with a product, process or service of Newman, without the express written consent of Newman. Section 2. Enforcement. In the event that the contractor shall breach this nondisclosure agreement, or in the event that such breach appears to be an imminent possibility, Newman shall be entitled to all legal and equitable remedies afforded it by law as a result thereof, and may, in addition to any and all other forms of relief, recover from contractor all reasonable costs and attorneys' fees encountered by it in seeking any such remedy. Section 3. Binding effect. This agreement shall be governed for all purposes by the laws of the State of Mississippi. If any provision of this agreement is declared void, or otherwise unenforceable, such provision shall be deemed to have been severed from this agreement, which shall otherwise remain in full force and effect. In witness whereof, the parties executed the foregoing agreement on the date first shown above. [SIGNED] Joseph Westley Newman [SIGNED] Joseph Pugliese _______________________________________ TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN We, the undersigned, on this day of June 1, 1998, are being shown and having explained to us a new energy device which has energy output greater than energy input (by use of Magnetic Energy) and which has U.S. and foreign patents pending. We are being shown this in strict confidence and we will not disclose this information to anyone else. We also agree that any improvements or inventions which we may develop from or as a result of the disclosures we have been shown and had explained to us will be the sole property of Joseph Westley Newman. [SIGNED] Norman M. Biss [SIGNED] Joseph Pugliese Date: June 1, 1998 JOSEPH W. NEWMAN Newman Energy Technologies Corp. 2050 Vineyard Drive Castle Rock, Colorado 80104 (303) 814-3403 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 11:43:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA21982; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:39:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:39:32 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox2.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <362B87BC.F1EC2D2E css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:41:00 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Newman accused of stealing prototype References: <199810191243_MC2-5D2C-8FEB compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pSabR.0.HN5.ZTuAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23487 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > Maybe other people will not see the humor, but it appeals to my rather > hard-boiled sensibilities. (I get a kick out of reading the crime section of > the newspapers too.) The document is followed by an indignant response by > Soule, which is even funnier in its own way. Priceless. Absolutely priceless. Thanks for sharing. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune" -Nicholas Ling From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 11:54:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26958; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:48:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:48:33 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:59:09 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Biss accused of attempting to steal prototype Resent-Message-ID: <"3-FzD2.0.wa6.0cuAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23488 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Jed Rothwell wrote: >> Maybe other people will not see the humor, but it appeals to my rather >> hard-boiled sensibilities. (I get a kick out of reading the crime section of >> the newspapers too.) The document is followed by an indignant response by >> Soule, which is even funnier in its own way. > >Priceless. Absolutely priceless. Thanks for sharing. > > >-- > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > John E. Steck > Senior Mechanical Engineer > Rapid Tooling Applications > Motorola, Libertyville, IL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > I certainly agree, John. Thanks again for demonstrating your sensitivity to attempted primary theft. I appreciate your understanding of the nature of primary property! Best regards, Evan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 12:01:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA29783; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:53:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:53:04 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <362B8AE4.BA176904 css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:54:28 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Just another Ripoff Artist References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6wSpk.0.9H7.FguAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23489 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > And thanks for your comments --- I appreciate your obvious and demonstrated > sensitivity to primary theft. You are a credit to anyone interested in > removing the Disclosure Barrier which has proven such a hinderance to > innovators throughout history. bla bla bla ..... Creditibility = 0 -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune" -Nicholas Ling From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 12:27:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA12916; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:25:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:25:09 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810191239_MC2-5D21-258A compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:23:46 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Mystified by results (Chris Eccles 3'rd posting) Resent-Message-ID: <"aKINr1.0.b93.J8vAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23490 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Norman - I was assuming having the varying magnetic intensity waving around in space had something to do with causing the phenomena by making scalar magnetic waves or something. The more I think about this in light of experiments I've run so far and some of the posts here, I think the two main phenomena can be reduced to mundane causes, unless further evidence from Eccles falsifies what I'm basing my conclusions on. Lights going ape: Having a ring of magnets all pulling on each other at regular intervals on the disc's revolving path makes for quite a jumpy load on the motor. I didn't realize this until I set it up and noticed how these forces quickly add up from the multiple magnets. I wasn't able to reproduce the flickering effect with the large 1/2 hp motor and small SMOT magnets I used, but I've seen the resonant effect before on my fluorescent lights when the branch circuit they're on is loaded up from lights and oven and such, and I kick in my vacuum pump motor. The lights flicker in harmony with the cyclic load on the pump. Eccles did say he used a vacuum pump motor, which are usually 1/3 HP and up. But he didn't spec the magnets nor their absolute air gap measurement nor the motor, so the stickyness of his rotor relative to his motor's strength can't be estimated. I'm sure phasing between motor torque variance and disc resistance also matters in this regard. Driving the rotor with an air motor or other isolation techniques, or perhaps even a larger motor on an unloaded branch circuit would falsify this one if the effect still obtained. Weight loss: Simply aerodynamic, unless he's covered it up and it still works. Revolving discs fling air off tangentally. A partial vacuum results, and air moves in to fill it. If the path from below is blocked by the motor and frame and so forth, the unobstructed colum above will be the area producing the net force (don't anybody try to 'correct' me with textbook Magnus and Bernoulli arguments, I know what I mean and you do too). I didn't hang my rather hefty rig in a balance, but a large sheet of flexible Sintra plastic placed over it at one point clearly revealed the magnitude of the flow, and it was substantial enough for the force to be in the territory of the results Eccles reported. Apparently Robert Stirniman briefed Eccles on the induction of electrical stress in the gap area. This is probably a very low voltage effect. I tried to see something with smoke in a jar, but if there was any effect from my setup it was too weak to visibly effect very delicate settled smoke patterns. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 12:29:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA13795; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:26:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:26:04 -0700 Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:23:21 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Biss accused . . . Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810191527_MC2-5D31-63FB compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"aEYJH2.0.BN3.99vAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23491 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Evan: What do the terms "primary theft" and "primary property" mean? I do not see them in my dictionaries. (Seriously asking.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 12:33:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA18099; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:30:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:30:08 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:40:48 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Just another Ripoff Artist Resent-Message-ID: <"oGXhe2.0.QQ4.-CvAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23492 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Evan Soule wrote: >> And thanks for your comments --- I appreciate your obvious and demonstrated >> sensitivity to primary theft. You are a credit to anyone interested in >> removing the Disclosure Barrier which has proven such a hinderance to >> innovators throughout history. > >bla bla bla ..... Creditibility = 0 > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > John E. Steck > Senior Mechanical Engineer > Rapid Tooling Applications > Motorola, Libertyville, IL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And a hearty bla, bla, bla to you too, my good friend! LOL!!! Methinks you are much too harsh on yourself --- I would say your credibility rates at least a "1". Of course, if you fail to give credit to the rightful innovator of a given technology, then your "credit-ibility" (your term) would equal 0. Best regards, Evan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 12:44:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA23341; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:40:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:40:19 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:38:05 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) Resent-Message-ID: <"o9nBs1.0.Xi5.YMvAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23493 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Oops, correction: Eccles did spec the motor: 750 Watts. Unless his magnets were large and close or the motor is actually nearly burned out, that does suggest it would have no trouble turning a mildly sticky rotor without loading up and flickering the lights. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 12:49:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA27891; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:47:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:47:10 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:57:50 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Biss accused . . . Resent-Message-ID: <"H65J8.0.Sp6.ySvAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23494 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >To: Vortex > >Evan: > >What do the terms "primary theft" and "primary property" mean? I do not >see them in my dictionaries. > >(Seriously asking.) > >- Jed Dear Jed, Property comes in three forms -- [Per the concepts of A.J. Galambos.] 1) Primordial Property [e.g., your physical body] 2) Primary Property [e.g., your thoughts and ideas] 3) Secondary Property [e.g., the tangible derivatives of your Primary Property] An example of primordial theft would be murder; an example of primary theft would be theft of another's innovation (via claim) without credit; and an example of secondary theft would be the theft of one's automobile (by another). Best regards, Evan Soule' From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 13:07:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04864; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:05:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:05:08 -0700 Message-ID: <362BB740.52B0 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:03:44 -0700 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Reply-To: stk sunherald.infi.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"19j361.0.tB1.pjvAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23495 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > Oops, correction: Eccles did spec the motor: 750 Watts. Unless his magnets > were large and close or the motor is actually nearly burned out, that does > suggest it would have no trouble turning a mildly sticky rotor without > loading up and flickering the lights. BTW Rick, what sized magnets did you use in your replication? What were they made of? (Barium ferrite, alnico, etc.) Any info on replications would be appreciated. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 14:09:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25928; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:56:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:56:05 -0700 Message-ID: <362BA7F0.5DF2 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:58:24 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [Fwd: report on IE seminar] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GzExd1.0.0L6.aTwAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23496 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If you guys miss my friend Frank Znidarsic's inimitable reporting, then savor the following: (Frank Stenger) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: > > You can post to vortex if you like as I am not currently on the list > Frank Z > > Report on "Infinite Energy's" New Energy and Cold Fusion Symposium. The > symposium was held on October > 11th at the Center of New Hampshire Convention Center. > > John and I enjoyed the scenic fall drive to New Hampshire. It was a pleasure > to get out an view the vibrant > colors of the trees. The day before Eugene Mallove told me, "The Seminar will > be fun." We were looking > forward to it. > > The seminar lasted from 8 AM until 9:30 PM. It was long and drawn out. After > dinner, I was beat. At > one point during an extended presentation of the Marinov motor I just got up > and took a walk outside. There I > met Peter Glueck who was also doing the same. He gave John and I large color > pictures of Yuri's latest > constructions. I gave Peter one of my CD-ROMS in return. I hope he likes it. > I plan to post Peter's pictures on > my web site. > > During the seminar many topics were presented, including what causes thunder, > conspiracies, the Marinov > Motor, and electromagnetic anomalies. This went on for hours. I had to ask, > "What does this have to do with > new energy?" > > Hal Fox presented a brief to the point overview of his work with Ken > Shoulders. Hal Fox is of the opinion the > Shoulder's technology has great potential. I remember about 15 years ago when > Hal Puthoff was working with > Shoulders at Jupiter Technologies. This technology has been a long time > coming and it is still not here. Will it > ever become commercial? I don't know. At the end of Hal Fox's discussion I > asked, "Hal, Do you believe that > Shoulder's electron clusters are superconductive?" Fox answered, "Yes they > are superconductive and > superfludic." I believe that this is a most important point. That's why I > brought it up. > > Las Case presented his gas phase heavy water deuterium cell. He explained > that the technology will be proven > shortly. We have all heard this before. > > Jed Rothwell explained that cold fusion technology was being developed by > older people and as they die off the > technology will be lost. > > The Kinetic Furnace was sitting to the rear of the conference room. I > understand that it does not produce > anomalous energy after being transported on a truck. Did it ever produce > anomalous energy? I found out that > one of the inventors had died. Jed's point stuck home. > > I was waiting for CETI to show up. To my disappointment they never came. We > can only speculate why. > > It was a pleasure to hear Dr. Edmund Storm's speak. John and I had traveled > to Santa Fee N.M. about two > years ago to visit Dr. Storms. This was our second meeting and it was again > pleasure. Storm's explained in his > lecture that he had gone as far as he could with his own resources and that > the field was now on "life support." I > could not agree more. It has been three years since Power Gen. Where are the > commercial products? Gene > Mallove said that there are many papers on the subject and no more papers are > needed. Working prototypes are > needed. > > I believe that the electrolytic and gas phase cold fusion teleologies have now > gone as far as they can and that > they are proving to be none commercial. If the field is to be rescued > dramatic new approaches must be taken. I > met Dr. Storms in the hall before his lecture. I told him this. I explained > that my work has lead me to believe > that there was a link between superconductivity, cold fusion, and gravity. > Dr. Storms informed me that he was > preparing an experiment to look for room temperature superconductivity within > palladium electrodes. He was > not going to present this in his lecture. I told him that I would ask about > it. He did mention it in his lecture. No > one seemed to notice or grasp this most important point. During the seminar I > wrote a note to Dr. Storms telling > him why I felt his tests for superconductivity were of the utmost importance. > This note was passed up to him. > He must have noticed because he joined John and I for lunch. During this > lunch break I explained that the test > for superconductivity was a very important step. Once it is understood that > process is superconductive other > more robust superconductivie technologies can be developed. I explained to > Dr. Storms what I believe the > basic superconductive processes were. He explained that noone had ever tired > the one approach in the > reduction of nuclear waste. I outlined our work with cryogenic radio > frequency cold fusion technologies. I also > explained that our group was limited and without funding. Dr. Storm's told > me, "If I detect Superconductivity you will be > the first to know!" > > John and I followed this meeting up with a letter to ENECO and Dr. Storms. I > wait with baited breath for the > results of Dr. Storm's tests. I also wonder what is going on at the > University of Buffalo. I have not heard from > them since Dr. Chung reported her finding of negative resistance in carbon > fiber room temperature composite > superconductors. I hope the field does not die and that it takes on dramatic > new approaches soon. > > Frank Znidarsic > fznidarsic aol.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 14:18:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA02747; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:12:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:12:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:14:13 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: ecogen iol.ie cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Eccles: 12x mains freq from load variation? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"3o7102.0.hg.FjwAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23497 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Another suggestion: look at the motor current with an oscilloscope. The torques produced by the magnets should vibrate the rotor at 12x the RPMs of the motor. Most induction motors approach synchrony with the AC line frequency (or 1/2 freq, depending on motor pole geometry.) The back EMF from the wiggling rotor should produce a high-frequency signal on the power system in your building. But this should have only a TINY effect on flourescent lamps. However, any effect would be communicated via the power lines. Suggested test: first produce the phenomena, then suddenly disconnect the AC power from the motor. Do the flourescent lamps cease their strange behavior instantly? Or does their behavior slowly vanish as the RPMs of the rotor decrease? If the change is instant, then perhaps the interference is travelling via the AC lines, and not through space. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 19 14:32:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA13615; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:29:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:29:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:28:21 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Eccles' motor... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"m8Axz.0.MK3.UywAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23498 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I invited Mr. Eccles to subscribe here. Below are a couple of my messages to Eccles and to S.P.E. The stuff about gasoline engines is only HALF in jest. If Mr. Eccles' device is truely anomalous, then perhaps the interference produced with flourescent lamps will also affect the spark in an engine. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Author: bbeaty Date: 1998/10/16 Newsgroup: sci.physics.electromag In article <19981013210247.08267.00000330 ng139.aol.com>, jlsem aol.com (JLSEM) wrote: > >> The whole shazam was mounted on an acrylic baseplate and weighed. It > >> was 14.26 kg. When we switched the motor in, the weird shit happened. > >> The balance showed a loss of grav mass of the assembly of some 550 grams > >> (3.85%) and every computer terminal and fluorescent lamp in the lab went > >> ape ! > > There may be a slight aerodynamic lift generated by the spinning disc. To eliminate aerodynamic lift, eliminate the air jets by putting the whole thing inside a big plastic baggie. If no "reaction mass" can be ejected, then no aerodynamic reaction forces can arise. While its in the baggie, why not reproduce the conditions which led to the Podkletnov antigravity claims: spread some pipe-smoke around. If there is a column of "weight loss" above the device, the smoke will indicate a rising air column. The effects on the CRTs and lighting is more interesting than the weight change. Spinning magnets should not do such things. Are you certain that the source of the oddity is not the drive motor itself? Brush noise or something? To eliminate this possibility, try operating the device without the magnets rotor disk installed. Does the motor alone cause the CRTs and lighting to act weird? Harder: run the disk with a gasoline engine, does it still make the CRTs go wild? Speaking of gasoline motors: any UFO gravity drive worth its salt must be able to stall an automobile from hundreds of feet away. Why not bring a gas mower or leaf blower into the lab, fire it up, and see if your device can make it stall out. Or maybe make it run ragged. If the "engine stalling" field is not spherical in shape, then you can use a gasoline engine as a sensor, and scan it back and forth in order to map the shape of sparkplug-damping emissions. Turn your device on and off rapidly, and send Morse code to the gas engine via waves of car-stall effect. Tap out "Klaatu Barrata Nikto" for the benefit of any who might already be monitoring this sort of transmission... Then go see: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird.html ((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William Beaty bbeaty microscan.com Software Engineer http://www.microscan.com Microscan Inc. 425-226-5700 x1135 Renton, WA Is the field of interference spherical in shape? If a hand-held flourescent lamp is affected, then use the lamp to probe the maximum extent of the field, and to graph its shape. Ah, additional suggestion: Wrap your whole device in aluminum foil or place it in a sheild cabinet. Do flourescent lights still respond? There are rumors that these fringe-science magnet devices produce effects which are not stopped by a faraday cage. How could a Ball Lighting affect a somewhat-shielded car engine? Perhaps it affects the spark plasma, even though the spark is buried deep within the combustion chamber. If your device will still make the flourescent lighting "go ape" while operating within a good electrical shield, or if it affects a portable flourescent light placed within a shield, then THAT would be something to talk about. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 15:10:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA02747; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:04:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:04:51 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <362BB7D6.711A7561 css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:06:14 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Eccles' motor... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"v5zLi1.0.qg.2UxAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23499 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: > Spinning magnets should not do such things. Stationary magnets can.... Take apart a dead hard drive and harvest the read/write magnets. The older the better (they just don't make 'em like they used to...) I suggest wearing safety glasses when handling them just in case they slip out of your hands. They can shatter on impact from as little as 1 foot apart, strong buggers. I have found an effective distortion range of 3-5 feet from a monitor once removed from their shielding loop. Can only venture a guess as to why the spinning might create a large field potential however. Perhaps the field lines overlap/collide/combine in high rpm turbine configuration? A magnetic frame drag? -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune" -Nicholas Ling From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 15:13:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA06080; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:10:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:10:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:11:54 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mystified by results (Chris Eccles 3'rd posting) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"diMLk1.0.uU1.JZxAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23500 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: Rick - > Having a ring of magnets all pulling on each other at regular intervals on > the disc's revolving path makes for quite a jumpy load on the motor. I > didn't realize this until I set it up and noticed how these forces quickly > add up from the multiple magnets. Hey, great minds think alike? I emailed Eccles about this a few minutes before reading your message. I'm familiar with this effect from working with a rotary gap on a homemade tesla coil. I ran it with an AC synchronous induction motor, with multiple points on the rotary contactor. Just below synchrony, the rotor speed would beat with the unfiltered AC which drove the rest of the coil. hHe corona display on the main coil would make a "wowwwwwwowwwwwwowwww" sound at the beat frequency, and then would "lock on" to 60Hz and run smoothly. Flourescent lamps turn on and off at 120 hz. If there is a small pulse riding on the AC waveform, and if this pulse gets near the turn-on time of the tubes, it will fire them prematurely, and the average light will be brighter. If there is a superimposed waveform drifting in phase with the AC mains voltage, then the flourescent lightning will flash at a multiple of the the beat frequency. Since it is interacting with the nonlinear "firing" of the gas discharge, then even a very small signal could make the tubes flash dim and bright. Eccles' experiment could flicker the lights in his whole building. > Simply aerodynamic, unless he's covered it up and it still works. Revolving > discs fling air off tangentally. A partial vacuum results, and air moves in > to fill it. And so a new AG experimenter's rule should be: ALWAYS PUT YOUR WHOLE EXPERIMENT INSIDE A PLASTIC BAGGIE. (A big bag o' budgies weighs the same whether the birds are in flight or roosting on the bottom.) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 19 15:23:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11460; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:21:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:21:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:23:09 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Ay3H82.0.wo2.wjxAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23501 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Oops, correction: Eccles did spec the motor: 750 Watts. Unless his magnets > were large and close or the motor is actually nearly burned out, that does > suggest it would have no trouble turning a mildly sticky rotor without > loading up and flickering the lights. It might be interesting to try injecting a 12 x 60hz sine wave into a building electrical outlet, then adjust the frequency to give a drifting phase. I suspect that even a very small signal would cause flourescent lighting to vary noticably in brightness at the beat frequency. Could this be an idea for a new kind of prank device? Sell them in the Johnson Smith catalog, next to X-ray specs and face-blackening soap. Who says AG research has no practical results! :) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 19 15:29:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA14054; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:26:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:26:46 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <362A9ECA.78E9 sunherald.infi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:25:27 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Status report: Eccles replication Resent-Message-ID: <"cziLa.0.PR3.coxAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23502 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Apologies if this is a repeat, it appeared to be stuck in my mail queue from Sunday evening. ------------------------------------------------------ Kyle - > When I complete my replication, I will post the > design and results, complete with every detail. Good luck. I just completed a version of the device as described, and saw no unusual effects. My fluorescents were unaffected by it even when it was running on the benchtop just underneath them. I also tried it tilted up sideways. No balance measurements were taken, as the entire rig is rather ponderous since it was designed to serve as a casting centrifuge. Eccles didn't give the magnet specifications nor the gap distance, only the eccentricity. My magnets were the grade 5 "SMOT" magnets, and the gap was a minimum of 5mm and a maximum of 11mm. 12 magnets with their N poles facing outwards were arranged eccentrically inside of a 10" aluminum pan spun at 1100 rpm within a stator arrangement of 12 similar magnets with their S poles facing in. At least I got my small casting centrifuge done, so I'll make some money with the thing as a consolation. Course, I was sort of looking forward to that trip to Mars... I remain of the opinion that Mr. Eccles is having a bit of fun with us until I see solid credible evidence to the contrary, like a good third party replication. So far, he has not released enough details to do that anyway, so here we are, stuck in physics anomaly limbo again. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 15:30:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA14386; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:27:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:27:57 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:26:43 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) Resent-Message-ID: <"1s_1Z2.0.hW3.jpxAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23503 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kyle - I used .75 x .375 x .25 ceramic grade 5 magnets, polarized on the .75 x .375 face. 12 such magnets were taped to the inside near-vertical rim of a 10" aluminum cake pan with their N faces outward (S face towards the center of the pan), and were shimmed out from zero to a max of 6mm from the inner surface of the pan's rim face to provide eccentricity. Stator magnets were mounted in a circular arrangement on a platform just outside the pan with their S faces towards the pan. Total gaps ranged from about 5mm to 11mm, all air except the cake pan wall of thin aluminum. Motor speed was rated at 1725 and 1100-something rpm at it's two speed settings. I ran at the higher setting for the most part, thinking it was the slower setting the whole time, having confused an orange wire with a blue one. I'm not colorblind, just sort of... dumb. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 16:59:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA25107; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:56:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:56:40 -0700 Message-Id: <362BD1E1.94EDC0C8 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:57:21 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: tr Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7ahV42.0.686.t6zAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23504 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A William Beaty wrote: > > On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > > > Oops, correction: Eccles did spec the motor: 750 Watts. Unless his magnets > > were large and close or the motor is actually nearly burned out, that does > > suggest it would have no trouble turning a mildly sticky rotor without > > loading up and flickering the lights. > > It might be interesting to try injecting a 12 x 60hz sine wave into a > building electrical outlet, then adjust the frequency to give a drifting > phase. I suspect that even a very small signal would cause flourescent > lighting to vary noticably in brightness at the beat frequency. Could > this be an idea for a new kind of prank device? Sell them in the Johnson > Smith catalog, next to X-ray specs and face-blackening soap. Who says AG > research has no practical results! :) > Are you really serious? Don't you exaggerating things little bit. 12 x 60 Hz makes 720 Hz. or 2x, 1440 Hz. Assuming the main power resistance could be neglected (not be more than 0.1 Ohms), remain its inductance, and this one should be neglected at audio frequencies, unless one try to see these signal on scope with mV range. This will l not produce tens of volts ripples! If the main power was sensitive to audio frequency loading, a tuned hair dryer would blow up a power station nearby! :) Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 17:02:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA25892; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:57:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:57:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:59:23 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Plans for working Free Energy devices, $29!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"MDM6L.0.IK6.z7zAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23505 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Just by coincidence, I added this to my Free Energy FAQ a couple of weeks ago: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/fefaq.html Q6: BUT.. BUT.. *PLANS* FOR F/E DEVICES ARE FOR SALE! A: As of 10/98, no proven F/E device exists. Hundreds of amateurs are hotly pursuing anything which could lead to success. There are several free-energy prizes, but so far nobody has won any of them. Yet some mail-order companies sell plans for working free energy devices. THESE ARE A LIE AND A RIPOFF! The companies pretend that the devices really work. They don't say "speculative," or "unproven", or "experiment only, not a practical energy source". They are dishonest by omission. Some companies are even flatly dishonest, and they suggest that their devices could power a home or a car. But they cannot even run a flashlight. Their prices are high, which might be reasonable if the devices were real. But since they don't work, the high price is simply a way to maximize the ripoff. Suppose it was 1890 ( before the Wright brothers.) Would you buy plans for a genuine, "working" flying machine? If so, you would waste your money. Powered flying machines were the long-sought goal of many experimenters. They were not something people built from mail-order plans! Or suppose it was 1930, would you buy plans for a "genuine" atomic generator to run your home? I certainly hope not. Therefor, "vote with your wallet," and don't send any money to dishonest "free energy plans" companies. If you already have wasted money, then please do something about it: contact the mail fraud division of the US post office. Mail-order ripoffs are a federal crime. On the other hand, there are companies with more integrity which sell mail-order booklets and information packets at reasonable prices. They provide information for amateur researchers. They don't promise to reveal the long-sought secrets which would allow you to walk off with the "Zenergy" O/U prize. They don't sell expensive plans for "working" gravitational energy generators which can run a home or car. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 19 17:49:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA13385; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:47:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:47:03 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:54:28 -0400 Message-ID: <01bdfbc4$30962530$0c6cd626 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: <"Q_OGU.0.2H3.5szAs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23506 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Wall wrote: >I would like to see more about the linear Marinov motor. I enjoyed meeting >you at the conference. - Yes, one of the best aspects of the conference was meeting so many of the people I have previously known only through email. I will try to get my experimental results posted soon. - >The magnet rotor has a "locked" position in which it comes to rest that was >discussed on Vortex a while back, but if memory serves, no one was able to >make the ring spin. Jeff seems to be able to do this easily and >repeatedly. He uses mercury brushes. The copper ring used for a stator >with the rotor immobile turns robustly and continuously with continuous >current (no commutation). One strange result is that when the mercury >brushes are moved to the inside of the stator, the rotation direction >reverses. The strangest result is when the stator and rotor are both >allowed to turn, they do not turn in opposite directions. The reaction >force is not at all apparent. - Jeff originally claimed that he obtained strong turning effects with an aluminum foil shell type ring with foil brushes. The foil ring is important because it essentially eliminates the homopolar type Lorentz force on the perpendicular current in the width of a ring at the contact point. Jeff is aware of this effect and indicated that some of his experiments were showing that the homopolar force could be quite strong. - Jeff and I have both tried to duplicate his original foil result using thin copper tape and Hg brushes without consistent results. In my tests the force on the ring was never enough to cause continuous rotation, and the direction of the partial rotation changed with the alignment of the ring relative to the magnets. - During my later electronic balance experiments I realized what was happening. If the foil ring is closer to one set of magnets, the Lorentz forces on the ring are no longer in balance between the opposing sides. I'm not going to try to diagram this with text, but consider that for points above and below the ring contact along the ring, the forces would be for example directed ( in and CW ) below and ( out and CW ) above. The CW forces would no longer balance with the CCW forces from the other magnet at the other side of the ring when the ring is not equally distant from both magnets. I believe that in Jeff's earlier experiments the magnet to ring spacings were not closely controlled and that misalignment was the main cause of the strong turning. - After all this I still think that there is a weak longitudinal force present in these ring with magnet and contact on opposite side experiments. The longitudinal force here is in the opposite direction to the Lorentz force on the thickness current in the foil, but the mechanical precision required and the difficulty of proving the balancing of the Lorentz forces makes this experiment too difficult to be convincing. The balance experiments seem to be much more clear-cut because of their quantitative nature and the elimination of ring curvature in proximity to the magnets. - Horace Heffner wrote about the wide ring and magnet turning in the same direction: >No mystery here. The magnets turn due to the Lorentz force with the >current feed to the brushes (brush to *either* the inside or outside - >makes no difference, magnets will rotate the same direction for given brush >polarity and magnet orientation) The copper ring turns due to Lorentz >force at the current bend in the ring at the brush point. - I agree with this analysis, and I tried to explain this to Jeff at the meeting. I think Jeff might agree with this eventually except for the following observation. - Ed also wrote: >In one test, he uses flimsy foil brushes to contact a stationary wire >stator. The hefty rotor reacts robustly and no reaction force is seen on >the brushes at all. He then tries to use one of the brushes to slow down >the rotation of the rotor and you can see that no braking from the flaccid >foil is possible. IOW, reaction forces are not found in the wires leading >to the brushes, nor in the brushes. - This is quite impressive on the video tape, but as Horace indicates, it is a qualitative observation. I would also note that Jeff and I have both observed that the force diminishes rapidly with distance from the magnet. The relatively wide fixed ring in this experiment, being closer to the magnet, would provide most of the force. ( Note- Jeff, can you try it with a fixed foil ring to eliminate this objection) - Tentative conclusions: -The Marinov motor works mostly on Lorentz force with only a small longitudinal force component. According to the balance experiments, the longitudinal force would cause rotation in the opposite direction to what is observed. -The longitudinal force can be increased by smaller ring radius(in std. cfg.), higher magnet field gradient, wider rings ( increases gradient effect ), and placing the magnets on the same side of the ring as the lead wire. -Since the Lorentz force is dominant in the Marinov rotating magnet experiments done so far, the observation of back emf in the current experiments does not prove that the longitudinal force creates a back emf. If we can invent a configuration which balances out the Lorentz forces but not the longitudinal forces, which I think is possible, the back emf measurement will be very interesting. - George Holz - george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 18:19:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA12527; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <02b901bdfbc6$a924cea0$6a8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: The ENIAC Story (http://ftp.arl.mil/~mike/comphist/eniac-story.html) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:11:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008D_01BDFB94.51E5FB00" 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: <"aPpGv1.0.f33.nI-As" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23507 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_008D_01BDFB94.51E5FB00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The name Eccles, rang a bell for me in regard to the Eccles-Jordan Trigger circuit. A wbe search using the keywords "Eccles-Jordan" brought up this interesting article. FJS http://ftp.arl.mil/~mike/comphist/eniac-story.html ------=_NextPart_000_008D_01BDFB94.51E5FB00 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="The ENIAC Story (2).url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="The ENIAC Story (2).url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://ftp.arl.mil/~mike/comphist/eniac-story.html Modified=4057D831C6FBBD011F ------=_NextPart_000_008D_01BDFB94.51E5FB00-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 19:27:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24246; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:25:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:25:41 -0700 Message-ID: <362BF6E0.FA2B689E fc.net> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:35:13 -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 Subject: Re: Biss accused . . . X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UaCgb1.0.fw5.bI_As" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23508 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > Property comes in three forms -- > [Per the concepts of A.J. Galambos.] > > 1) Primordial Property [e.g., your physical body] > > 2) Primary Property [e.g., your thoughts and ideas] > > 3) Secondary Property [e.g., the tangible derivatives of your > Primary Property] > > An example of primordial theft would be murder; an example of > primary theft > would be theft of another's innovation (via claim) without credit; > and an > example of secondary theft would be the theft of one's automobile > (by > another). --Ergo, Evan, when you use Peewee Herman's great line: "I know you are but what am I" as a retort and claim it as your own by not acknowleding prior discovery, you're guilty of the theft of "Primary Property" per your own reference. -- John Fields, Austin Instruments, Inc. El Presidente Austin, Republic of Texas "I speak for the company" http://www.austininstruments.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 21:11:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA06541; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:09:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:09:00 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:19:48 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Property Resent-Message-ID: <"Y2Qw43.0.5c1.Rp0Bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23509 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Evan Soule' wrote: > >> Property comes in three forms -- >> [Per the concepts of A.J. Galambos.] >> >> 1) Primordial Property [e.g., your physical body] >> >> 2) Primary Property [e.g., your thoughts and ideas] >> >> 3) Secondary Property [e.g., the tangible derivatives of your >> Primary Property] >> >> An example of primordial theft would be murder; an example of >> primary theft >> would be theft of another's innovation (via claim) without credit; >> and an >> example of secondary theft would be the theft of one's automobile >> (by >> another). > >--Ergo, Evan, when you use Peewee Herman's great line: "I know you >are but what am I" as a retort and claim it as your own by not >acknowleding prior discovery, you're guilty of the theft of >"Primary Property" per your own reference. > >-- > >John Fields, Austin Instruments, Inc. >El Presidente Austin, Republic of Texas >"I speak for the company" http://www.austininstruments.com John, If you specifically attribute/claim authorship to/by yourself of something knowing that it was authored by another, then you would be guilty of the theft of primary property. Evan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 19 22:14:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA26987; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:13:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:13:32 -0700 Message-ID: <030401bdfbe8$3c749660$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:12:27 -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: <"OrVsc3.0.Vb6.xl1Bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23510 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Along playing pranks, what have you heard about these sonic nausea devices? Do they actually work? >On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > >> Oops, correction: Eccles did spec the motor: 750 Watts. Unless his magnets >> were large and close or the motor is actually nearly burned out, that does >> suggest it would have no trouble turning a mildly sticky rotor without >> loading up and flickering the lights. > >It might be interesting to try injecting a 12 x 60hz sine wave into a >building electrical outlet, then adjust the frequency to give a drifting >phase. I suspect that even a very small signal would cause flourescent >lighting to vary noticably in brightness at the beat frequency. Could >this be an idea for a new kind of prank device? Sell them in the Johnson >Smith catalog, next to X-ray specs and face-blackening soap. Who says AG >research has no practical results! :) > > >((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 20 00:50:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA08942; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:50:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:50:15 -0700 Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 03:48:47 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: BBC report on CF Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Message-ID: <199810200351_MC2-5D3A-5D63 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"fFUrq.0.eB2.t24Bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23511 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You all may be interested to hear of this morning's extended interviews by the BBC 'Today' programme with Fleischmann, McKubre and others going right back to the first P & F report of CF and tracing the progress to date. It rounded off by a confirmation by McKubre that many major institutions in the USA, including Govt. are actively continuing to research the CF ou phenomenon which may well be being developed in the military field. Fleischmann was very laid back and said that he would "take to the grave" his reasons why the field has been suppressed! Norman Horwood From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 07:38:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA04949; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 07:36:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 07:36:04 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981020093947.00706368 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:39:47 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy In-Reply-To: <19981018033425.21947.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4o0Hd2.0.9D1.K_9Bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23512 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 20:34 10/17/98 -0700, Michael Schaffer wrote: >Finally, I don't know how to guarentee uniformity of thermal >conductivity across a sheet of material in order to make a Seebeck >calorimeter. I've thought about it some, but I haven't come up with >any solution. I think one needs to use a uniform thickness of a stable relatively non-conductive material, like G-10 sheet. If you used thin sheets of foam, for example, you could run into problems with aging effects on the gas contained in the foam cells...not to mention moisture absorption effects. How about this: A sheet of, say, 1/8" thick G-10, perforated with small holes on a regular grid spacing, say 1/2". Lace up the sheet by threading fine (~0.005" dia) thermocouple wire thru the holes and make the junctions via spot welding on both sides. As you look as one side of the sheet, you'll see chromel wire emerge from one hole, bend and lie flat against the sheet and head towards a second hole. Halfway there it ends and is welded to alumel wire which continues on and goes down through the second hole. On the back the reverse process occurs so that chromel wire again emerges from the third hole. The process repeats until all the holes in the sheet are laced up with thermocouples in series. Now, on each side of this panel, smear the laced up sheet with thermally conductive epoxy and lay on a sheet of, say, 5 mil Kapton (a good electrical insulator that is thin enough to be a minimal thermal barrier). Apply more conductive epoxy to the exposed side of the Kapton and lay on a sheet of aluminum or copper, maybe 0.020" thick (1/2 mm). Press the sandwich under significant pressure to expel excess epoxy and cure it. Now we have a 1/8" G-10 sheet with more-or-less thermally homogeneous skins applied to it which are populated with the required TC junctions. Improvements? 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 Oct 20 10:26:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA06798; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:14:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:14:25 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981020131605.00cc29b0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:16:05 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Award-winning weekly news from around the world (http://www.newscientist.com/c In-Reply-To: <004601bdf84c$eb741c20$8cb4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"T7fqL1.0.1g1.lJCBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23513 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:01 AM 10/15/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >Hot Fusion is in Big Trouble. Actually, ITER is in trouble, but unfortunately some countries are still trying to save the project. In "big" science timing is everything. ITER has made a number of key decisions with incredibly bad timing. Due to the nature of the project, there hasn't been any one scientist in a position to blow the whistle and tell the bureaucrats that these decisions need to be delayed or revisited. Maybe now Japan or Europe will come up with a restructured prodject with a single technical lead, or the US will fund a project that takes into account discoveries made during the ITER design phase. 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 Oct 20 10:41:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA20074; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:39:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:39:44 -0700 Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:37:58 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: The ENIAC Story Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810201340_MC2-5D50-CF0A compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"dAzTa1.0.Tv4.VhCBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23514 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex re: http://ftp.arl.mil/~mike/comphist This site also has an audio recording of Von Neumann giving a speech at the dedication of the Navy's NORD computer, December 2, 1954. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 12:36:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA18041; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:28:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:28:15 -0700 Message-ID: <362D001A.3CA3 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:26:50 -0700 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Reply-To: stk sunherald.infi.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Eccles replication: results Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"v9KMb.0.mP4.DHEBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23515 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: All: I have tested Chris Eccles' "magneto-gravity device" with negative results. I used an old blender motor, attatched an old phonograph record to the shaft, and using bits of wooden quarter round moulding attached 9 magnets around the perimeter. These magnets were ceramic type, round, 1 1/8" diameter with a small hole in the center. The N pole faced outwards from the disk. For the stator, I used a ring of galvanized steel "vegetable and vine mesh". I attached small SMOT type magnets around the perimeter (9 total) with the S poles facing in. The separation between rotor and disk was ~1cm and varied up to 2mm (more than Eccles' 1.75mm eccentricity). I spun the rotor up to ~2500-3000rpm, and saw no effect on my lab's flourescent lights which were maybe 6.5 feet overhead. I turned on a nearby FM radio, and heard no interference. Possible explanations for no effect: 1. Eccles generated a BS story. 2. The magnets needed are some other type 3. More than 9 magnets are needed. 4. ??? add idea here I have not yet weighed the contraption, but I will fairly soon. Suggestions? Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 13:10:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA31367; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:01:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:01:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:03:09 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) In-Reply-To: <362BD1E1.94EDC0C8 verisoft.com.tr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"_rest3.0.1g7.RmEBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23516 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 20 Oct 1998, Hamdi Ucar wrote: > billb wrote: > > It might be interesting to try injecting a 12 x 60hz sine wave into a > > building electrical outlet, then adjust the frequency to give a drifting > > phase. I suspect that even a very small signal would cause flourescent > > lighting to vary noticably in brightness at the beat frequency. Could > > this be an idea for a new kind of prank device? Sell them in the Johnson > > Smith catalog, next to X-ray specs and face-blackening soap. Who says AG > > research has no practical results! :) > > Are you really serious? Don't you exaggerating things little bit. 12 x > 60 Hz makes 720 Hz. or 2x, 1440 Hz. Assuming the main power resistance > could be neglected (not be more than 0.1 Ohms), remain its inductance, > and this one should be neglected at audio frequencies, unless one try to > see these signal on scope with mV range. This will l not produce tens of > volts ripples! You're right, my idea would only work if the mains impedance was significantly large at 720 hz, or if the flourescent lights were extremely sensitive to small voltages during their turn-on phase angle. Yet this sort of effect DOES occur with the pulses from a triac dimmer: as the dimmer is adjusted, at particular settings it changes the brightness of flourescent lamps on adjacent circuits. However, the fast risetime of chopped current from the triac acts like a spike with energy at RF frequencies, which might not be shorted out by the impedance of the building's transformer. It's analogous to a heart pacemaker: a small kick at the right time can have large effects. If a couple of amps at 719HZ is injected into a power outlet, the small changes of line voltage will act to periodically advance and retard the turn-on phase of flourescent lights on that circuit, so the brightness will vary. However, this effect might be too small to be visible. > If the main power was sensitive to audio frequency loading, a tuned hair > dryer would blow up a power station nearby! :) But if main power has significant series impedance, then one load can send signals to an adjacent load on the same circuit. This would be a small effect, unless the load was nonlinear and therefor sensitive to small signals at particular phases. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 20 13:13:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA03174; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:10:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:10:01 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:17:13 -0400 Message-ID: <01bdfc66$9f922220$0c6cd626 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: <"iQXVj.0.Tn.OuEBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23517 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I made the following comment in my last posting. >Jeff and I have both tried to duplicate his >original foil result using thin copper tape and Hg brushes without >consistent results. In my tests the force on the ring was never >enough to cause continuous rotation, and the direction of the >partial rotation changed with the alignment of the ring relative >to the magnets. - Jeff replied: >>In my case, this doesn't even rise to the level of "try" yet. I put a >>shell on a form but I don't even know if I had electrical contact all the >>way around, nor if I was pushing much current through it. Also, I can't >>duplicate with Hg brushes what I did with the foil ones since I can't put >>the Hg brushes in the midplane of the shell. - I have been exchanging lengthy emails with Jeff. Our interpretations of various experiments are somewhat different as they flow from different experimental experiences. Jeff does not wish to draw any conclusions as yet. Perhaps we will agree eventually. - George Holz - george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 13:35:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12757; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:29:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:29:35 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981020153338.0070eb34 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:33:38 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Marinov Motor In-Reply-To: <01bdfc66$9f922220$0c6cd626 george.varisys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9Glz-1.0.973.kAFBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23518 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 16:17 10/20/98 -0400, George Holz wrote: >I have been exchanging lengthy emails with Jeff. Our interpretations >of various experiments are somewhat different as they flow >from different experimental experiences. Jeff does not wish >to draw any conclusions as yet. Perhaps we will agree eventually. Please keep it up, George. I would like to see the Marinov motor thing resolved. 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 Oct 20 13:48:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19568; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:42:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:42:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:42:43 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Lazer welder parts for sale Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"BTctu.0.dn4.XMFBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23519 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Reply privately to this person (he's not a subscriber) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:14:06 -0700 (PDT) From: dilligaf To: billb eskimo.com Subject: Lazer welder parts Dear Bill, My name is Robert. I recently had the pleasure of dismantling anoutdated, barely used, laser welder.This welder had a maximum output of 3 kilo volts. There were 3 huge industrial capacitors and 3 big transformers inside it. Also there were 2 nice size coils inside. I would like to sell these items, but can't find a good bulletin board to post them on. I scrap metal for a hobbie but thought someone out there might find a better use for these items. I will sell them at a very resonable price, cheaper than an indavidual could make them homemade. Could you please help me in finding a good bulletin board or a buyer for these items? Thankyou for your time. I can be reached through www.dilligaf rocketmail . com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 13:56:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23538; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:47:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:47:58 -0700 Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:45:52 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: BBC report on CF / Correa Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810201648_MC2-5D4C-162E compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"PIs0b3.0.bl5.yRFBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23520 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Norman Horwood reports: Fleischmann was very laid back and said that he would "take to the grave" his reasons why the field has been suppressed! Although I admire and respect Fleischmann for his work, and I have deep affection for him as a human being, I think he should cut the crap and tell us what he knows. I say enlist public support, get the press on your side, or shut up and take what's coming to you. I doubt he knows much that I don't know. Obviously the field has been suppressed. All new ideas are suppressed, including meek, conventional ones like a new flavor of breakfast cereal or a minor engineering change in telephone equipment. Ask anyone who has worked at a cereal company or a telephone equipment manufacturer. Everywhere you go, you find politics, jealousy, rivalry, vested interests, the 'Not Invented Here' syndrome and other dysfunctional behavior that prevents innovation. People are people and taken all in all, ya' gotta love 'em. They are smarter than most primates! People are "the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals!" as Hamlet said. Anyway, my point is, I do not think anything special has been done to derail cold fusion, and little was done at high levels. Most of the derailment took place at the laboratory level, mostly in the laboratories of the cold fusion scientists themselves, if truth be told. Fleischmann caused a few of the problems himself, although most of the blame lies elsewhere. I hate to say so, and Fleischmann does not like to hear it from me, but that's my honest opinion. Okay, at the higher levels authorities did spread lies about CF and they published fake data. Yeah, they fired some government scientists, they ordering the best Navy scientists to quit. They harassed and terrorizing low-level people who wanted to attend conferences or publish papers. But that's nothing special. They did the same thing to a woman who wanted to study the effect of AIDS in women. It's the sort of story you hear all the time. Some young kid fresh out of school straightens out the inventory and cleans up the computer. The boss fires him because he makes the boss look bad for screwing things up in the first place. That's how people act. That's how turf wars are won and lost. A fight over the pencil procurement policy at IBM or the Department of Labor ends the same way: one side wins, the other side gets shafted. The hot fusion people won and the cold fusion people lost. Playing by the standard rules, the cold fusion people got the frozen boot. Unfortunately the stakes are higher in this game than most, but the hot fusion people do not realize it. They think that CF is just another 50-year-long academic research project with no practical application and no importance in the real world. Many CF scientists seemed determined to make CF into that kind of program. I shall never forget the chilling moment when a speaker at ICCF6 boasted "we have no businessmen and no reporters at this conference!" and the audience applauded. I knew they were doomed. It was like standing in the court of Versailles and hearing the French aristocrats whoop and cheer Marie Antoinette for telling the peasants to go eat cake. Some CF scientists even today brag that they are not interested in money. They attack me for seeking investors and profit. From my point of view, they do not want to work for a living. They do not want honest pay for honest labor, which I find contemptible. You might say this is a clash between the old fashioned Protestant American work ethic (mine) and the ancient Mandarin and Greek traditions of academia, in which money was considered filthy lucre beneath the dignity of Philosopher Kings. During the New Energy Symposium, Correa complained bitterly about the way businessmen have treated him. They backed out of agreements; they took a demo system and let it sit six months without testing; they tried to gyp him with unreasonable terms. He appears to think he has been singled out for special unfair treatment. I told him any businessman has similar experiences. He responded that inventors contribute more to society than other folks. They run greater risks, so they should be given special dispensation and extra large rewards. If society does not want to put inventors on a pedestal, he feels that he, for one, he has the right to withhold the fruits of his genius from society. "The world does not deserve what I have, because people want to steal it from me," I think he said. That irked me. I told him he has a right to withhold the fruits of his labor, but in that case he should stave. If he contributes nothing, he deserves nothing. As for the 'risks' he runs, I know farmers and fishermen who risk their lives to give us the fruit of their labor. That's real fruit from real trees: the kind you fall out of. The kind you trim with a chainsaw and maybe cut your hand off when you slip in the mud. Nobody gives farmers or migrant workers special dispensation. People steal from them every day. Fortunately for rest of us, they do not go into a snit and stop working. In his lecture, Correa said he despises the little man -- the common man -- for his constricted thinking and his unwillingness to look at new ideas. I said the common man is your customer. You are his servant. If you cannot entice him to look at your new ideas and buy your goods, you do not deserve to make a living. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 14:11:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA02090; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:07:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:07:44 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:14:22 -0400 Message-ID: <01bdfc6e$9bb69c00$0c6cd626 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: <"6Tq_M1.0.XW.UkFBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23521 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kyle asked for suggestions. - For both your and Rick's replication attempts I have the impression that you are using relatively weak magnets. Eccles was very vague, calling them button magnets. The effect should scale at least linearly with the strength of the magnets. Use stronger magnets. Don't assume that the spinning magnets are the only important feature of the device. The magnets were shimmed with copper and backed up by a hefty Al alloy disk. My ideas would suggest that these features might be important as well. - George Holz - george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 14:26:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA10118; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:22:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:22:25 -0700 Message-ID: <362D067F.19F1 ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:54:07 -0700 From: Akira Kawasaki Reply-To: "aki ix.netcom.com"@netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: On the current status of palladium based CF replication Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fToqR2.0.tT2.FyFBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23522 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 20, 1998 To Vortex: I think it is appropriate now to pass on here my information on the Cold Fusion situation arising out of palladium and deuterium loading. So far I am concerned, "Cold Fusion" as a nuclear process has been confirmed. It is no longer an academic subject to be argued about. To be furthur researched? YES. But CF is now entering the engineering stage of scale up feasability studies with appropriate capitalization which is about ready to move. I speak from the peanut gallery. For some time now, the long time CF relationship between Russ George and SRI/McKubre has been under some strains since ICCF-7. This seems to have been cleared up and furthur work is progressing & moving smoothly. Case mentioned at Mallove's Symposium, both on and off the presentation, several matters. Plus there are extra items. 1. Shortly after ICCF-7, Russ initiated working with Case to attempt replication of the Pd catalyst fusion reaction. 2. Russ made the replication cells from his own available materials. 3. Russ prevailed upon SRI/McKubre to use their facilities/ instrumentation for the replication effort. This was granted and work proceeded. 4. Scott Little was attempting his replication at the same time at Earth-Tech with Case. 5. The first attempt by Russ to run the cell resulted in failure. The cell was isotropically configured like Earth Tech's. SRI was ready to quit. Russ tried a replication experiment with closer approximation of Case's cell --- i.e. a non-isotropic cell. This worked, as Case reported at the Symposium. 6. With a non-isotropic cell, what was set out to be measured was not so much excess heat which was there but now harder to exactly quantify. Rather, what was being measured for closely, with an in-line spectrometer, was the "nuclear-ash" of a supposed fusion reaction, Helium-4. 7. Together with a blank identical cell indicating a background helium-4 way below atmospheric 5.5 ppm, the experiment began. After a while, the helium-4 level began to climb as the blank cell remaind at the same low level. After a few days, the cell helium reached the same level as atmosheric background, and it kept climbing. Eventually, it went to around 11+ ppm as Case mentioned. All this occurred in July, 1998. 8. Things have moved along since: a. Furthur replication effort, using Russ's cells, are underway at SRI and Pacific Northwest Laboratories. DARPA for SRI and Private funding for Russ & PNL. More exacting heat measurements experiments will be incorporated. b. As a result of Russ George's collaborative efforts, duplicate Arata cells, long delayed, had arrived at SRI for replication experiment since about August. Results from them should be coming out soon. c. A Sonofusion cell from E-quest tech has been left with Takahashi & Arata for testing and confirmatuion subject to repairs (they ignored instructions). So I believe CF matters are moving along. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 15:36:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA09283; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:31:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:31:54 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:38:59 -0400 Message-ID: <01bdfc7a$6e224030$0c6cd626 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: <"dlXtN.0.vG2.OzGBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23523 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Colin, You asked: - That the aluminum disk could be part of the system. A Wallace effect in the aluminum disk? - No, I wasn't thinking of a Wallace effect. I don't want to say too much about this at this very early stage in my thinking, but the effect would be ZPE related. - Regards, George Holz - george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 16:03:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA18293; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:50:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:50:42 -0700 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Eccles replication: results Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 22:51:21 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <362d1364.600085102 24.192.1.20> References: <362D001A.3CA3 sunherald.infi.net> In-Reply-To: <362D001A.3CA3 sunherald.infi.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: <"G9elV2.0.fT4.1FHBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23524 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:26:50 -0700, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: [snip] >Possible explanations for no effect: > >1. Eccles generated a BS story. >2. The magnets needed are some other type >3. More than 9 magnets are needed. >4. ??? add idea here > >I have not yet weighed the contraption, but I will fairly soon. >Suggestions? This is interesting in that it shows that the effect (if there is one) may not be due to the magnets alone. I suggest you use the same materials as in the original experiment. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 16:51:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA09554; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:47:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:47:13 -0700 Message-ID: <007f01bdfc83$e3404fc0$93b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" , Subject: Re; Aneutronic Deuterium Burning Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:46:00 -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: <"amH0X1.0.CL2.14IBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23525 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I agree with Akira Kawasaki's optimism on CF progress, and particularly on how the Helium "ash" from a D-D ---> He4 = 24 Mev can be found without a burst of gamma's or neutrons. The Proton-Electron-Proton ---> Deuterium reaction is known in Stellar Burning, however the reaction cross section is vanishingly small because a quasi-neutron reaction must occur first: 1, 1H1 + electron + neutrino-antineutrino pair ---> oH1* a Quasineutron. 2, oH1* + 1H1 ---> D + e- + antineutrino + neutrino + energy, with most of the energy (undetectable)carried off by the neutrinos. Given the 2.0E-4 joule/kg on the Sun, these reactions are probably just as likely (under the proper conditions) at/near room temperature. A more probable reaction involving Deuterium which is known to have reaction cross sections many orders of magnitude above Protium: 1, 1H2 + e + neutrino-antineutrino pair ---> oH2* a Quasidineutron. 2, oH2* + D ---> 2 He4 + e- + antineutrino + neutrino + 24 Mev. Again with most of the 24 Mev energy carried off by the virtually undetectable neutrinos. In either case ZPE extraction, dE = hbar/dt due to electron-proton or electron-deuteron electromagnetic interaction should occur as the quasineutron or quasidineutron is formed. Judging by 75% of the neutrinos from the Sun being unaccounted for, ZPE reaction/heat is more likely than formation and/or reaction of the Quasineutron particles. >From an Energy Return On Investment standpoint, it looks like COLD FUSION is a better deal. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 20 18:07:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA07147; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:04:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:04:26 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <01bdfc6e$9bb69c00$0c6cd626 george.varisys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:03:08 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Mystified by results (correction) Resent-Message-ID: <"gF4to.0.al1.PCJBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23526 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: George - > For both your and Rick's replication attempts I have > the impression that you are using relatively weak > magnets. I thought I gave the impression that I was using 12 pairs of grade 5 ceramics with a a gap ranging from 5 to 11 millimeters. That's pretty specific, and not really all that weak. It might be the case though relative to Eccles' device as you imply because those "button magnets" might be 3/4" neodymiums and the gaps were only 1 to 1.5 millimeter for all we know. That sure could make a big difference - like loading up the rotor with lots more physical resistance to rotation which might tend to cause the lights to flicker. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 00:12:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA01637; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:11:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:11:10 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981021071342.00902474 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 03:13:42 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Re; Aneutronic Deuterium Burning Resent-Message-ID: <"NbW9V2.0.VP.EaOBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23527 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:46 PM 10/20/98 -0600,Frederick Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > > >Judging by 75% of the neutrinos from the Sun being unaccounted for, ZPE >reaction/heat is more likely than formation and/or reaction of the >Quasineutron particles. > > >Regards, Frederick > How do "they" arrive at a figure of "75% of the neutrinos from the Sun being unaccounted for" when "they" can only detect the tiniest fraction of the neutrinos allegedly produced? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 02:19:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA28883; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:18:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:18:54 -0700 Message-ID: <00a101bdfcd3$c0e9f8e0$93b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Re; Aneutronic Deuterium Burning Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 03:18:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"9wOYh3.0.837.zRQBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23529 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Edwin Strojny To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wednesday, October 21, 1998 1:13 AM Subject: Re: Re; Aneutronic Deuterium Burning Ed Strojny wrote: >At 05:46 PM 10/20/98 -0600,Frederick Sparber wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >> >>Judging by 75% of the neutrinos from the Sun being unaccounted for, ZPE >>reaction/heat is more likely than formation and/or reaction of the >>Quasineutron particles. >> >> >>Regards, Frederick >> >How do "they" arrive at a figure of "75% of the neutrinos from the Sun being >unaccounted for" when "they" can only detect the tiniest fraction of the >neutrinos allegedly produced? Process of Elimination,Ed? To eliminate means to go potty? :-) Regards, Frederick > >Ed Strojny > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 02:19:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA28856; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:18:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:18:52 -0700 Message-ID: <00a001bdfcd3$bfdd6ae0$93b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: The Big Questions (http://science.msfc.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/quests.htm) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 03:15:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01BDFCA1.00638BE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"b__HH1.0.b27.xRQBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23528 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BDFCA1.00638BE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ed Strojny Asks about The Missing Neutrinos. Process of Elimination, Ed? :-) http://science.msfc.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/quests.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BDFCA1.00638BE0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="The Big Questions.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="The Big Questions.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://science.msfc.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/quests.htm Modified=A0D7EEE1D2FCBD01D2 ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BDFCA1.00638BE0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 03:54:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA13053; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 03:53:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 03:53:26 -0700 Message-ID: <00f101bdfce0$f5d08800$93b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: The Neutrino and the SNP (http://snodaq.phy.queensu.ca/SNO/neutrino.html) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:52:07 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00EB_01BDFCAE.8E22DB40" Resent-Message-ID: <"0SvBk2.0.tB3.cqRBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23530 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00EB_01BDFCAE.8E22DB40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A good site on "The Solar Neutrino Problem",Ed. I'm beginning to think that the near-surface of the Sun is where the 3.86E26 watts of Solar Energy (2.0E-4 watts/kg) is coming from,rather than the "thermonuclear core",and it's mostly ZPE. FJS http://snodaq.phy.queensu.ca/SNO/neutrino.html ------=_NextPart_000_00EB_01BDFCAE.8E22DB40 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="The Neutrino and the SNP.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="The Neutrino and the SNP.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://snodaq.phy.queensu.ca/SNO/neutrino.html Modified=6078CE2BDFFCBD016A ------=_NextPart_000_00EB_01BDFCAE.8E22DB40-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 04:34:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA22100; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:33:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:33:59 -0700 Message-ID: <010201bdfce6$a03ef4c0$93b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Motoritis Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 05:32:47 -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: <"krjTb1.0.EP5.dQSBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23531 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex With the constant preoccupation with Motors, Newman, Marinov, and others, it might be timely to change the List from Vortex-L to Motor-L, or better yet, Motor-ola! Hee, Hee, John. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 05:51:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA06494; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 05:49:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 05:49:40 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:47:47 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Mizuno will respond to Marett Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810210850_MC2-5D69-624B compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"dYqrh1.0.Kb1.aXTBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23532 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; Mizuno We got the paper from David Marett (and that *is* how you spell his name after all). It is "Aqueous Arc Experiment: Results Presentation." It will be published in the next issue of I.E. in December, I think. In the meanwhile, we sent a copy to Mizuno and Ohmori, and I spoke with Mizuno yesterday. Marett thinks the excess heat Ohmori observed was an artifact caused by increased insulation from bubbles. When the experiment is run for more than 6 minutes, the difference between the control experiment and the plasma arc experiment disappear. Mizuno disputed that. He says they now have longer data sets which continue to show a large difference. He also says Marett has the temperature set wrong, and he criticizes Marett for using the wrong materials. I explained that Marett used a variety of materials and finally settled on an aluminum cathode and a thoriated tungsten anode which is quite different from the original. For one thing, anode and cathode are reversed. My impression is that this a control experiment to prove the effect is an artifact of the calorimetry, and earlier tests were closer to the original. Anyway, Mizuno will write a critique in Japanese, which is easier for him, and I'll translate it for Marett. He should have it in about a week. I would not want to see Marett or Mizuno rush. We want to facilitate cooperation and a dialog, and we want to print both sides. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 08:07:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA25573; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:02:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:02:58 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <362DF7F0.C2081DAA css.mot.com> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:04:16 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Eccles replication: results References: <362D001A.3CA3 sunherald.infi.net> <362d1364.600085102@24.192.1.20> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mQ19S1.0.VF6.XUVBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23533 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > This is interesting in that it shows that the effect (if there is one) > may not be due to the magnets alone. I suggest you use the same > materials as in the original experiment. The effect may be facilitated by the magnets, however. Similar idea, but different configuration is the Parr Gravity Wheel Experiment by Dan Davidson. Skip 3/4 of the page down to figure 8. A weight reduction is claimed with that setup too. I've traded emails with Dan and have read his book "Shape Power", but I have not replicated his findings. I do not necessarily agree with his conclusions, but I think the design is in the ballpark. IMO the effect is real as it has been noted in several similar, but unrelated setups. Common denominators in all the weight reduction experiments reported so far: -> Rotational system -> Higher RPMs -> Superconducting or magnetic element -> Fractional weight reduction 2-24% -> Harmonic tone or audible indication when setup is operating in optimal range -> Chaotic fluctuation of measured reductions To me this screams vortex structure, but a vortex structure of what? Resonance seems to be the only conclusion I've been able to come to, but it is more gut intuition than fact. In my minds eye, when I try and picture what is happening, I keep wanting to visualize a pot of boiling water and the chaotic transition zone where bubbles form. Swap out the heat source with the turbine, swap the surface defect seed with the superconductor or magnets, and correlate the weight reduction envelope with the bubble formation statics and dynamics. My impression is these devices are blowing resonance smoke rings in the path of least resistance... up. Gravity phase transition? Common sense seems not to agree, but I can't shake the analogy. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he get's for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 09:18:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA20001; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:15:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:15:29 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:16:45 -0700 Message-Id: <199810211616.JAA26813 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: The Neutrino and the SNP (http://snodaq.phy.queensu.ca/SNO/neutrino.html) Resent-Message-ID: <"wd7lB1.0.Lu4.WYWBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23534 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >A good site on "The Solar Neutrino Problem",Ed. >I'm beginning to think that the near-surface of the Sun is where the 3.86E26 >watts of Solar Energy (2.0E-4 watts/kg) is coming from,rather than the >"thermonuclear core",and it's mostly ZPE. FJS > >http://snodaq.phy.queensu.ca/SNO/neutrino.html The problem is actually very simple. All you need to recognize is that action begets reaction. In this case, the resonances we call particles are accelerated away from one another in fusion reaction due to aether emission, something you are forced to accept in an aether resonance model. But that means that you accelerated, or, "heated" the two particles, but you also heated "spacetime". We don't have the notion that spacetime could heat because we can't measure it in the laboratory. You would have to notice that all of the matter released in a fusion reaction was heating the walls of the building a tiny amount. In the sun, however, there is plenty of distance along a radial line before any aether emitted in the core can exit the surface. So, spacetime is able to thermalize with all of the matter in the sun. The energy released in a fusion reaction is really, E = 2mc^2 But half of the energy goes into the particle resonances, and half goes into spacetime. The sun is the only place large enough that we can later observe the entire solar radiance to notice the heat imparted to spacetime, and determine the total power being emitted. That spacetime turbuelence can heat matter, ie ionize it, is apparent just outside of the sun's surface where high ionization states are common as atoms are accelerated across the transition region. The accelerations are *mass* proportional. The heating is mass proportional. These are obviously interactions with mass, and only spacetime does that. The only reason the SNP is an issue, is because we fail to recognize the importance of spacetime in the overall scheme of how matter behaves. We think in terms of matter being stuff, and empty space being nothingness. This idea is silly, to be blunt. If you step back from what you believe, you will recognize that believing in force fields is equally as silly as believing in the earth being flat, and God turning the crank on the celestial spheres to rotate the planets around the flat earth at the center of his universe. There is no foundation behind the idea of force fields. This notion is simply an admission that the foundations for our physical thinking do not penetrate into what is happening to a deeper extent, so at the level of "why" matter is accelerated, we give up, and we will just assume force fields to be doing it. Study waves in an ocean. Then there is no discontinuity, anywhere. And, the solar neutrino problem, isn't a problem any longer because you will expect that if a resonance in aether was accelerated in one direciton, then some other kind of resonance in aether was accelerated in another direction. Thus, you will expect that we must account for the energy both of the matter we see, and of the spacetime we do not see. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 10:41:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25474; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:34:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:34:34 -0700 Message-ID: <362E2979.ACEAEA27 gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:35:50 +0000 From: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk (John Allan) Reply-To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Energy March in DC References: <199810202010.NAA03653 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OccbP3.0.pD6.fiXBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23535 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Received this from the people putting the energy march on in Washington DC. Much is said about the environmental movement's lack of support for CF or new energy technologies. The group is promoting the idea of additional funds for both as part of a future energy plan. It would be good if a mature representative of CF or NE was involved and representing the community at the march, if only to show good face and make good connections for the future. The negative opinion the renewable people have is based on a lack of acc urate opinion, the far too obvious cranks or the usual free energy hyperbole. Over to you Eugene Mallove? I am sure that they would fit you on the bill. >From having followed the build up to the campaign, it is interesting to find out how many speakers will drop out because they cannot be paid. It is a small start up group but with a good direction. They seem to have sorted out their inner wranglings and CF/NE has come through on their agenda for this and next years campaign. It is expanding internationally. it should be recognsed that the environmental movement is very much split in two between the highly establishmentary and conservative big groups and the grassroots frontliners. I have found an almost universal support and awareness that they could possibly be political, scientific and corporate suppression of new energy technologies amongst the hard edge of the greens. Useful vocal political support to have on one's side. They also ask if anyone can organise a local event for them to send details or contact them. John Allan, London From: Richard Lasken subject: March for Peace I just wanted to remind you that The March for Peaceful Energy is happening this Saturday 10/24. So come out if your in the area. MARCH * FOR * PEACEFUL * ENERGY OCTOBER 24, 1998 - United Nations Day Lincoln Memorial to Capitol Rally Presenting: Citizens Peaceful Energy Plan "Global Peace through a New Energy Policy" Gathering at Lincoln Memorial before Noon Highlights: * PeaceWalk to Capitol * CPEP presentation at Capitol 2:00 P.M. * Civil Action sponsored by MFPE: * "Power Down for Peace" * "World Prayer/Meditation" at 2:22 P.M * Speakers and Music on the Mall We will be meeting in front of the Lincoln Memorial between 11:30 am and 12:00 pm. We will then be marching to the Capitol Building for a 1:00 pm rally to let the world know that it is time we get away from war causing and polluting energy sources and switch to more peaceful means. The itinerary is as follows: At Lincoln Memorial 11:30 Nathan Phillips will play a drum ceremony 11:59 Think Green, Think Clean Meditation 12:00 Depart to Capitol At Capitol: 12:30-1:15 Robert Charels Blues Band plays 1:00 Marchers arrive at Capitol 1:15 Scott Sklar - Solar Energy Industry Association National BioEnergy Industry Association National Hydropower Association 1:30 John Nolt - Author--Down to Earth 1:40 Michelle Montague - American Wind Energy Association 1:45 Bernadette Geyer - Fuel Cells 2000 1:50 Remy Chevalier - Electrifying Times Magazine 2:00 Karl Gawell - Geothermal Energy Association 2:10 Burl Haigwood - Clean Fuels Foundation 2:15 Richard Lasken reads CPEP DC Solar 2:22-12:33 BK meditation and Power Down 2:35 Anna Aurilio - U.S. PIRG 2:45 Will Thomas - Proposition One 2:50 Dafna Laurie - Institute for Policy Studies 2:55 John Judge - War Resisters League 3:05 David Williams - Global Emergency Alert Responce 3:15-5:00 Musical Celebration of Peaceful Energy 3:15 - 3:45 Sharon Perez-Abreu and Joel Landy 3:45 - 4:30 De Nada 4:30 - 5:00 Robert Charels Blues Band ************************************************************* The day after the march there will be a meeting to discuss a campaign strategy for the coming year leading to next year's international March for Peaceful Energy. The meeting will be on Sunday, October 25, 1998 at 2:00 p.m. in room 1104 Stamp Student Union at the University of Maryland College Park campus. All parties who are interested in the success of the March for Peaceful Energy are advised to attend this meeting. If you are coming in from out of town for the march please stay for the meeting if possible. Please RSVP and let us know you are coming via: E-mail: Richard Lasken at PlantSeedK aol.com Send us a letter at: MFPE meeting c/o UMCP Stamp Student Union Box 73 College Park, MD 20742 Or call Richard Lasken at (301)345-3454. You may leave your message on the voice mail. Refreshments will be served. Directions: From Baltimore and points north: 95 South Exit at Rt. 1 towards College Park Drive about 2 miles and turn right on Campus Drive Go around the circle and stay on Campus Drive. Continue until you can turn right and turn. (Library Lane) You will be in-between the parking garage and the Adele H. Stamp Student Union Park and come inside. From Richmond and points south: 95 North Exit at Rt. 1 towards College Park (right before the 495 split) Follow directions above Please pass this message on to anyone in the Washington area who would be interested in the March for Peaceful Energy. ************************************************************************* Richard Lasken - 301-345-3454 plantseedK aol.com - http://www.peacefulenergy.org D.C. Solar........... University of Maryland From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 10:42:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA29775; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:39:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:39:26 -0700 Message-ID: <362E23C8.47D5 ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:11:20 -0700 From: Akira Kawasaki Reply-To: "aki ix.netcom.com"@netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mizuno will respond to Marett References: <199810210850_MC2-5D69-624B compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"EVgmH1.0.vG7.CnXBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23536 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 21, 1998 Jed Rothwell wrote: > > We got the paper from David Marett (and that *is* how you spell his >name after all). It is "Aqueous Arc Experiment: Results Presentation." >It will be published in the next issue of I.E. in December, I think. In >the meanwhile, we sent a copy to Mizuno and Ohmori, and I spoke with >Mizuno yesterday. > > Marett thinks the excess heat Ohmori observed was an artifact caused >by increased insulation from bubbles. When the experiment is run for >more than 6 minutes, the difference between the control experiment and >the plasma arc experiment disappear. Mizu no disputed that. He says they >now have longer data sets which continue to show a large difference. He >also says Marett has the temperature set wrong, and he criticizes >Marett for using the wrong materials. Well you know, back in August, I asked Ohmori why the materials used were selected in the first place. No answer. In fact he barely furnished any new information since experimentsa were still under way he sez. At the ICCF-7, both Ohmori & Mizuno gave similar papers using different materials on the arcing phenomena. Ohmori gave an oral presentation and Mizuno gave a Poster. > I explained that Marett used a variety of materials and finally >settled on an aluminum cathode and a thoriated tungsten anode which is >quite different from the original. For one thing, anode and cathode are >reversed. What is the reasoning process behind any selection? I opted to use tungsten electrodes for both cathode and anode. But electrolysis raises a lot of questions, answers to which I would like to have before zapping foward. I've done a little already. >My impression is that this a control experiment to prove the effect is >an artifact of the calorimetry, and earlier tests were closer to the >original. Marett's Symposium presentation showed a very similar chart to that Ohmori presented to show excess heat compared with an electric heater. Then he presented his extended experiments seeming to prove that there were no excess heat in the larger sense. The details escapes me but his paper should be interesting reading. >Anyway, Mizuno will write a critique in Japanese, which is easier for >him, and I'll translate it for Marett. He should have it in about a >week. I would not want to see Marett or Mizuno rush. We want to >facilitate cooperation and a dialog, and we want to print both sides. Jed, while you are at it, try to get Ohmori to respond also. It is his ICCF-7 presentation that started this interest. Also, it wouldn't hurt to get Reiko Otoya to comment on their reports. She was an early Hokkaido U.'s (same as Ohmori & Mizuno) experimenter that reported excess heat and transmutation on a non-arcing electrolysis of K2CO3 using nickel electrodes and light water. As I remember reading, she had a running demo at the ICCF Conference in Maui, Hawaii. -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 10:47:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA00992; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:45:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:45:55 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <362E1E27.40BAF3A1 css.mot.com> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:47:19 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: New resource to find out of print books Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MUNpr3.0.FF.ItXBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23537 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Barnesandnoble.com new look features old books Barnesandnoble.com Tuesday launched an expanded Web site, offering more than four million titles, new and old. Through an agreement with Advanced Book Exchange customers will have access to more than two million used and antiquarian titles. Many of the books are one-of-a-kind and are sold on a first-come, first-serve basis. ABE will update the database multiple times daily so consumers will get the most current information on available selections. Another agreement, with Northern Light Technology LLC will provide access to millions of newspaper and magazine articles for a fee ranging from $1 to $3. Blue Mountain Arts will also be on the site, offering inspirational books and free all-occasion email greeting cards. The book seller's makeover also adds features already offered by Amazon.com , including customer-written reviews and recommendations based on other books purchased. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he get's for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 11:17:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA15683; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:13:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:13:13 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:11:31 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: On the current status of palladium CF . Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810211414_MC2-5D5B-2C5E compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"qzNIN3.0.Zq3.tGYBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23538 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex AK wrote: 6. With a non-isotropic cell, what was set out to be measured was not so much excess heat which was there but now harder to exactly quantify. With this cell in this setup it is difficult to quantify, because the setup is designed to measure helium. It isn't inherently difficult. 7. Together with a blank identical cell indicating a background helium-4 way below atmospheric 5.5 ppm, the experiment began. After a while, the helium-4 level began to climb as the blank cell remained at the same low level. The active cell generated helium and it also grew hotter than the blank, indicating excess heat. McKubre emphasizes that these are preliminary results. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 11:24:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04909; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: "Noel Whitney" < iol.ie> From: "Noel Whitney" To: Subject: BBC report on CF/Correa. Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:20:27 +0100 Message-ID: <01bdfd1f$7a4508c0$LocalHost default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01BDFD27.DC0970C0" 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: <"Mn52L3.0.dC1.AMYBs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23539 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_000A_01BDFD27.DC0970C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ref; Norman Horwoods report/ Jed rothwell, Please excuse my ignorance but I am not sure who created this fine tome = ( Norman or Jed.) but i amin complete agreement with both its content = and tone. For the last 6 years I have tried to get to a position of an agreement = with any inventor of a new technology in the area of high efficiency = energy ( Note - No over unity specified or needed!). First Try ; Stanley Meyer - Need i say more - $300,000 spent on a = contract to build 2 high speed Hydrogen Burner assemblies for = demonstration, 1 for the U.S. and 1 for Europe, He to provide the "Water = splitting" electronics, Wonder of wonders when we shipped the equipment = to America he suddenly found that the bolts did not have pink spots on = them and by the way he was still working on the electronics, Many people still believe that he could do what he said but with a = pocket greatly depleated of funds I believe he had nothing!. God rest my old friend Admiral Sir Anthony Griffen whos heart was broken = in this endevour. Tony - I think of you often. Second Try;Does anyone remember John Bedini - The over units Resonant = battery system which could support an external load! Supported in writing by Colonel Bearden in the U.S. and by many others = in the literature. I made a copy of this at great expense - It did not = work!- I made contact with J.B. in Idaho and after several attempts made = a date for a meeting, I travelled to The far side of U.S. -a pretty good = trip from Ireland , sat in my Motel for 2 days and he never turned up!, = he never rang to say he would not turn up, and when I finally got an = answer at his telephone I was informed he was gone away on a job !.Some = other guy called Watson was believed to have worked on this as well but = nobody seems to have heard from him either- except the usual paranoid = stories - hes being abducted by aliens / men talking to their sleeves - = more like men talking thru their arses! Third attempt!; Correa - established contact spoke several times, seemed = a nice chap . he informed me that he has a large corporation holding = exclusive rights to his tech. and therefore could not enter neogotions, = I had an interest in small portable generators and Hydrogen applications = for his tech but could not get to the table, If its gone screwise now it = only points out once again - If you have some new tech - GET IT OUT - = thru several outlets the more the merrier so it wont bog down. Fourth attempt; Jim Griggs at Hydrosonic pumps- This seemed a good idea = but was very marginal in its output. I believe Eugene Mallove is trying = to get some hard data on this and I will follow up if it develops. Fifth Attempt; Aqua Fuel in Florida and another similar system- = Developed a prototype of this technology and ran energy tests . It = worked out at 10 to 12 times the cost of Diesel - Need I say more. Great = thing to play with not on commercially. Sixth attempt; Gunnerman -A55 Fuels , This Naptha/water fuel mix was = pursued and discussions took place together with due dilegence documents = ( Which they lost!) then they appeared to embroil themselves in = litegation with many parties and were not able or interested in further = discussions , well if you have Caterpillar holding the purse strings who = needs anyone else. Seventh Attempt; Germany calling! - here we went again with a = water/diesel mix system, belive me it was good !, many millions of marks = spent over some 10 years developing it and it worked .lovely clean = emmissions , some savings and a little loss of thermal efficiency, = regretable it was part of a portfolio of inventions including Major = developments in ceramic engine/ compressor work and they took the fromt = line . In the meantime the inventor has retired after a massive heart = attack. Eight attempt; "Powerballs" And to you to madam! - this seemed agreat = idea - I still think its a good idea , Efficiency checks show 15 to 20 = times Heavy Fuel Oil ( HFO ) prices but still there are niche markets = for Hydrogen in this way. But cannot get the people to talk seriously, I was about to say I have lost faith in finding a suitable technology = but I am slipping a little in the faith department at the moment. I understand a U.K physisist called Eccles ( Is he a friend of Minnie = Bannister , Colonel Bloodnock and Griptight Finn - apologies to my = U.K.collegues and even more apologies to my Collegues in the U.S.) ha - = ha 1. has some work ongoing in Ireland but wont talk to Noel Whitney - " = Hes too commercial" - what the hell if new tech wont go commecial its = all a load of rubbish and of only academic interest. I have and continue to have both Government and major Irish = Multinational interest in Hydrogen fuels and their development, in = electrical powergen devices ( For the hydrogen) but so far cannot find = the right party. I had a very open agenda on how we might deal with inventors even = offering to part develop the techs , pass back developed products to the = Us , we keep Europe etc . I am still looking - Is there any one out there - Hello ? hello?, = Hello?. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BDFD27.DC0970C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ref; Norman Horwoods report/ Jed=20 rothwell,
 
Please excuse my ignorance but I am = not sure who=20 created this fine tome ( Norman or Jed.) but i amin complete agreement = with both=20 its content and tone.
For the last 6 years I have tried to = get to a=20 position of an agreement with any inventor of a new technology in the = area of=20 high efficiency energy ( Note - No over unity specified or=20 needed!).
First Try ; Stanley Meyer - Need i = say more -=20 $300,000 spent on a contract to build 2 high speed Hydrogen Burner = assemblies=20 for demonstration, 1 for the U.S. and 1 for Europe, He to provide the=20 "Water splitting" electronics, Wonder of wonders when we = shipped the=20 equipment to America he suddenly found that the bolts did not have pink = spots on=20 them and by the way he was still working on the = electronics,
Many people still believe that he = could do what=20 he said but with a pocket greatly depleated of funds I believe he had=20 nothing!.
God rest my old friend Admiral Sir = Anthony=20 Griffen whos heart was broken in this endevour. Tony - I think of you=20 often. 
 
Second Try;Does anyone remember John = Bedini -=20 The over units Resonant battery system which could support an external=20 load!
Supported in writing by Colonel = Bearden in the=20 U.S. and by many others in the literature. I made a copy of this at = great=20 expense - It did not work!- I made contact with J.B. in Idaho and after = several=20 attempts made a date for a meeting, I travelled to The far side of U.S. = -a=20 pretty good trip from Ireland , sat in my Motel for 2 days and he never = turned=20 up!, he never rang to say he would not turn up, and when I finally got = an answer=20 at his telephone I was informed he was gone away on a job !.Some other = guy=20 called Watson was believed to have worked on this as well but nobody = seems to=20 have heard from him either- except the usual paranoid stories - hes = being=20 abducted by aliens / men talking to their sleeves - more like men = talking thru=20 their arses!
 
Third attempt!; Correa - established = contact=20 spoke several times, seemed a nice chap . he informed me that he has a = large=20 corporation holding exclusive rights to his tech. and therefore could = not enter=20 neogotions, I had an interest in small portable generators and Hydrogen=20 applications for his tech but could not get to the table, If its gone = screwise=20 now it only points out once again - If you have some new tech - GET IT = OUT -=20 thru several outlets the more the merrier so it wont bog = down.
 
Fourth attempt; Jim Griggs at = Hydrosonic pumps-=20 This seemed a good idea but was very marginal in its output. I believe = Eugene=20 Mallove is trying to get some hard data on this and I will follow up if = it=20 develops.
 
Fifth Attempt; Aqua Fuel in Florida = and another=20 similar system- Developed a prototype of this technology and ran energy = tests .=20 It worked out at 10 to 12 times the cost of Diesel - Need I say more. = Great=20 thing to play with not on commercially.
 
Sixth attempt; Gunnerman -A55 Fuels = , This=20 Naptha/water fuel mix was pursued and discussions took place together = with due=20 dilegence documents ( Which they lost!) then they appeared to embroil = themselves=20 in litegation with many parties and were not able or interested in = further=20 discussions , well if you have Caterpillar holding the purse strings who = needs=20 anyone else.
 
Seventh Attempt; Germany calling! - = here we went=20 again with a water/diesel mix system, belive me it was good !, many = millions of=20 marks spent over some 10 years developing it and it worked .lovely clean = emmissions , some savings and a little loss of thermal efficiency, = regretable it=20 was part of a portfolio of inventions including Major developments in = ceramic=20 engine/ compressor work and they took the fromt line . In the meantime = the=20 inventor has retired after a massive heart attack.
 
Eight attempt; = "Powerballs"  And=20 to you to madam! - this seemed agreat idea - I still think its a good = idea ,=20 Efficiency checks show 15 to 20 times Heavy Fuel Oil ( HFO ) prices but = still=20 there are niche markets for Hydrogen in this way.
But cannot get the people to talk=20 seriously,
 
I was about to say I have lost faith = in finding=20 a suitable technology but I am slipping a little in the faith department = at the=20 moment.
I understand a U.K physisist called = Eccles ( Is=20 he a friend of Minnie Bannister , Colonel Bloodnock and Griptight Finn - = apologies to my U.K.collegues and even more apologies to my Collegues in = the=20 U.S.) ha - ha 1. has some work ongoing in Ireland but wont talk to Noel = Whitney=20 - " Hes too commercial" - what the hell if new tech wont go = commecial=20 its all a load of rubbish and of only academic interest.
 
I have and continue to have both = Government and=20 major Irish Multinational interest in Hydrogen fuels and their = development, in=20 electrical powergen devices ( For the hydrogen) but so far cannot find = the right=20 party.
I had a very open agenda on how we = might deal=20 with inventors even offering to part develop the techs , pass back = developed=20 products to the Us , we keep Europe etc .
 
I am still looking - Is there any = one out there=20 - Hello ?  hello?, Hello?.
------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BDFD27.DC0970C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 11:49:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA05394; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:44:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:44:55 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:43:04 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: New resource to find out of print books Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810211445_MC2-5D6E-6869 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"sStbp1.0.7K1.ckYBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23540 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Out of print books are a pain! There should not be such thing anymore. Publishers store the text in computer, and they should print out individual copies at a surcharge. I have been looking for things like collected essays by Van Neumann. He was a famous guy; it is a shame you cannot find his work outside of a university library. This is why society has a short memory and we keep repeating the same dumb mistakes. I read his stuff years ago. It was a great way to learn about computer architecture! It is like reading Faraday's notebooks. I read in the newspaper that some publishers are experimenting with on-demand printing. Maybe that is what Northern Light Technology LLC does? I have been trying to find a long out of print textbook on calorimetry. Scott Little said he would copy it for me but he forgot. Yo, Scott: why don't you mail me the book? I'll copy it and send it back. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 11:51:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA05436; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:45:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:45:02 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:42:55 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Mizuno will respond to Marett Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810211445_MC2-5D6E-6868 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"44jKM2.0.rK1.jkYBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23541 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Akira Kawasaki writes: Well you know, back in August, I asked Ohmori why the materials used were selected in the first place. No answer. In fact he barely furnished any new information since experiments were still under way he sez. I presume you spoke to him in Japanese. He has no excuse for not responding. He is a bad boy! I wrote,"Marett used a variety of materials and finally settled on an aluminum cathode and a thoriated tungsten anode . . ." What is the reasoning process behind any selection? I opted to use tungsten electrodes for both cathode and anode. Marett should have used tungsten for both cathode and anode. He says, "low work function materials such as aluminum copper worked best as cathodes." He does not say in what sense they worked best. Jed, while you are at it, try to get Ohmori to respond also. Right. It will be a joint response. He said he would buzz over to print graphs from Ohmori's computer. I expect a one-page letter with graphs. I suggested they make specific suggestions addressed to Marett. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 12:02:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA14392; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:56:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:56:55 -0700 Message-ID: <362E21F2.873 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:03:30 -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: Kawasaki: Chubb: Storms: four critiques 10.21.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"D4Krj1.0.WW3.rvYBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23542 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Re: Kawasaki: current Pd CF replications 10.20.98 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:40:45 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:54:07 -0700 > From: Akira Kawasaki > Reply-To: "aki ix.netcom.com"@netcom.com > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > > October 20, 1998 To Vortex: > > I think it is appropriate now to pass on here my information on the Cold > Fusion situation arising out of palladium and deuterium loading. > > So far I am concerned, "Cold Fusion" as a nuclear process has been > confirmed. It is no longer an academic subject to be argued about. To be > further researched? YES. But CF is now entering the engineering stage of > scale up feasibility studies with appropriate capitalization which is > about ready to move. I speak from the peanut gallery. > Well, I disagree with Akira Kawasaki as to the confirmation of "Cold Fusion" as a nuclear process. In particular, I would say it's the ultimate folly to launch engineering development, unless you can say quite specifically just what the nuclear process is. Still CF may well be off the table as an academic subject, but that's not because the field has made such great progress. What I find rather strange about the AK report is the assertion that it's rather difficult to measure the expected excess heat so that is dropped from the protocol. Instead, it seems, all that is being measured is what appears to be helium production, as if such measurements are a walk in the park and there need be no concern about other sources of helium. Of course, if you can set up a "blank" which shows no rise in helium level over time, that must prove that the helium seen in an operating device must be coming from cold fusion. I doubt that things are quite that simple and straightforward. I think we need to examine very closely just what is considered a "blank" to see that there are absolutely no differences other than a CF reaction to account for the nonappearance of helium. For example, is the gas stream being evolved from the "blank" identical in composition and volume to the gas stream being evolved from the operating device? Are all the materials employed identical? I would further suggest a simple test to see if the composition of the atmosphere external to the device has any influence on the helium being detected within the apparatus. It's a rather simple test to perform. You build a plastic tent around the apparatus and enrich the helium content of the air within the tent. If you can increase the atmospheric helium concentration by a factor of 1000 and still see no effect internally perhaps you could make a case for the source not being atmospheric helium. Also I still must ask about the analytic technique employed to evaluate helium concentration. Are we stuck with mass spectrometry as the only method that is ever considered? Why is that? For AK's information, I also have my doubts that there actually is a nuclear process that produces only 4He in its ground state. Such specificity of reaction outcome is not the norm in any real physical process of which I am aware. When you actual see something like that happening there is generally a very good reason for it. In the case of cold fusion the reasons put forward are pretty ad hoc in character -- something that shows up only for this particular case and has no more general manifestation. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Chubb: Blue: band state theory 10.16.98 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:16:20 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net I find it rather amazing that after years of discussion with Scott Chubb it is still neccessary to go over some of the basics which keep getting slid under the rug. We are considering a complex system involving many degrees of freedom. As Scott has said, a key part of his theory is to make a Born-Oppenheimer separation to make the problem tractable. Simply stated you have an "atomic" part of the wavefunction that is not influenced by what is going on inside any of the nuclei. Scott addresses that part of the wave function and only that part of the wave function. For his problem the deuterons are just lumps that interact via the electrostatic potential. So he as made them into something equivalent to heavy electrons with some of them moving through the lattice very much like conduction electrons. Now when he speaks of "coherence" in the wave function, all he is thinking about is that part of the wave function that involves the center-of-mass motion of the deuterons. When he suggests I should read the literature on hydrogen in metals, that is absolutely all he has in mind. People have not been suggesting that hydrogen in metals induce nuclear reactions. That's something Scott Chubb dreamed up. Now does the coherence to which he makes reference justify the notion that nuclear reactions will result? I say not. When I use the word "coherence" as it applies to nuclear wave functions, that implies a heck of a lot of things that I can't get Scott to focus on. I want to see the NUCLEAR PART of the WAVE FUNCTION. You know, the part you separated off from the problem back at step one. I agree that the nuclei are generally in their ground state and, thus, at T=0, and I would expect them to stay there no matter how you stir the soup, because it takes a zillion times more energy to excite them than is available from thermal or chemical processes. That is why you can separate off the nuclear degrees of freedom. End of cold fusion discussion, one would think. Now you want to describe a nuclear reaction process within the context of some theory -- say deuteron ion band states in a Pd lattice. That's fine with me, but let's not cheat. Let's bring the nuclear wave functions back into the picture right from the beginning, so we can tell what's true and not true about this system. The point I was trying to make with regard to coherence of the wave functions is that you don't get coherence of the nuclear part of the wave function just by making your ion band state. You did not include the nuclear wave function in the problem. It follows that you can say absolutely nothing meaningful about the nuclear part of the wave function. You see we actually lied when we agreed that the nucleus is at T=0. If you consider the degrees of freedom associated with the orientation of the deuterons, I suspect they are not actually at T=0. The energy differences between the various states of orientation are rather very tiny compared to the lattice temperature so, as I said, we have a maximally disordered system, and no coherence of the nuclear wave functions. You are simply not addressing that part of the problem, when you do the separation. Of course, for most phenomena associated with the said PdD lattice the orientation of the deuterons makes absolutely no difference. There is no interaction with anything that cares which way is up inside a deuteron so that part of the wave function is separated and forgotten. Now, however, we come to a phenomenon that will care about the orientation of the deuterons -- especially if coherence is to play such a significant role as Scott Chubb claims. What he atempts to do, however, is to use something that could possible result from a coherence without admitting that the system is not conducive to the establishment of such a condition. The deuterons are disoriented. There is no coherence in the NUCLEAR PART OF THE WAVE FUNCTION. Ion conduction bands have absolutely nothing to do with this aspect of the problem. You're playing your game in the wrong ball park. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Chubb: Blue: corrected, more on band state theory 10.13.98 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:32:45 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Scott, Is there someplace in your theory where you write down a Hamiltonian for the system including the nuclear interaction potential? All you ever describe is a coulomb potential. Now I want to know how you can get nuclear wave functions to be coherent over distances comparable to many lattice spacings. Just saying that they have that coherence is not going to move me from my position that you are being unrealistic about the way real systems behave. I an not really interested in T=0 approximations, if we are clearly operating in a realm of maximum disorder. Granted that the deuterons are spatially positioned in a lattice. I'll even let you get away with ignoring lattice vibrations. That still does not make the deuterons line up in a lattice with regard to nuclear orientation. Of course that makes no difference as long as all you have in the problem is a coulomb interaction between point particles. What I suggest, however, is that you cannot do nuclear reaction physics that way. A lattice of deuterons is an ordered lattice only with respect to some of its coordinates. It's not right that you should go from that to an implicit assumption that you are dealing with an ordered lattice with respect to all the coordinates. How do you address the deuteron orientation question? I also am unhappy with the notion that the actual reaction does not occur within the lattice. How do you know what is going on at the boundary? Dick Blue Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: CF debate 10.15.98 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:39:27 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > I don't like to "accept" a result just because it comes from > > measurements by a so-called expert. I would rather evaluate actual > > experimental data and discuss the conditions of the measurements to > > arrive at an understanding as to what can or cannot be relied upon. In > > the case of the reported neutron energy spectra, I would point out that > > the measurements are difficult, because the detectors employed do not, > > in fact, yield information regarding the neutron energy very directly. > > The pulse-height spectra have to be unfolded to get the claimed result. > > What is, I believe, being overlooked is the fact that at the very low > > detection rates an appreciable fraction of the detector response is > > actually gamma rays rather than neutrons. Of course there was some > > electronic discrimination against the gamma signals, but the technique > > has some definite limitations which I am very familiar with. It is not > > 100% efficient. It's only 99% efficient. So if the gamma flux is being > > detected at 100 times the neutron rate, the final data is still a 50-50 > > mix of neutrons and gammas. Do you see the problem for low rate > > measurements? > > In the context of my reply, an "expert" is someone who has spent enough > time with his particular apparatus that he knows when the output signal > is real and when it is not. When Prof. Takahashi tells me that his > neutron detector sees neutrons of 2.45 MeV, I believe him. He has spent > years refining the detector and has much more experience knowing whether > gamma rays affect the signal than you or I. Just because Dick Blue can > propose an error does not mean that this error has not been considered > by an equally intelligent and careful worker and eliminated to the > necessary degree. Does Dick Blue think everyone else is so easily > fooled? > Here is a prime example of what I am suggesting is wrong with the way Ed Storms deals with questionable results. If Prof. Takahashi tells him the neutron detector sees neutrons of 2.45 MeV, that becomes a fact that I dare not question. What I was trying to indicate is that I do question the Takahashi claims on the basis of a real limitiation of the technique he employs. I actually have in my possesion, somewhere, copies of the transparancies from a Takahashi talk which detail his electronic methods. I can point to a place in his presentation where he actually shows evidence for the mixing of gamma and neutron reponses at the level I suggest is more or less par. You can only reject about 99% of the gamma rays. It's a fact whether Takahashi and Storms acknowledge it or not. Takahashi's own view-graphs show the problem for anyone who knows where to look. > > > I know of nothing to suggest that a coherent electron structure would do > > anything to enhance CANR as claimed. There is a serious disconnect > > between the electronic wave functions and the nuclear wave functions -- > > something I am waiting to hear addressed by anyone. Part of the > > disconnect, as I see it, has to do with the fact that not all atomic > > electrons are conduction electrons and not all participate in a > > transition to a superconducting state, even should there be one. To do > > anything to the nucleus, a electron has to be at the nucleus at the > > specific reactive site in the palladium sample. A coherent electron on > > the moon is not going to account for the CANR. Now should the > > effects you suggest ever be real, I would suggest that calorimetry is > > still not the best way to detect something of this sort. Show me an > > Electron Capture decay that is sensitive to something like this, and you > > could turn me into a believer real fast. Ironically, George Miley > > relies on EC decay to "prove" that there is a form of CANR. He must, > > however, assume that this decay is unperturbed. I also would sit up and > > pay attention if anyone were producing anomalous X-ray spectra via > > electrolysis of Pd. > > Good, I see we have several methods to produce a convert. I, also, look > forward to such experiments being done. Meanwhile, I am willing to > evaluate and be impressed by other types of evidence. > > Would you consider the change in tritium decay rate produced by a > chemical environment, as shown by O. J. A. Reifenschweiler (Fusion > Technol. 31 (1997) 291), to be important? > I have read the Reifenshweiler paper and I commented at great length on the obvious problems with these results at the time they first appeared in CF circles. It is but another very marginal experiment that is being sadly misinterpreted. As you should understand, the detector in this case is not actually responding to betas from tritium. They do not reach said detector. Instead the response has to be due to secondary radiation, basically bremstrahlung arising from the stopping of betas in the matrix which surrounds the tritium at the time of decay. Also the detection geometry is very bad such that changes in effective source position can have a large effect on detected rates. Now, if you change the chemical composition of the material in which the tritium resides or transport tritium from one location to another, that may well change the rate being recorded by the detector. Let me suggest that the conditions of the experiment clearly are causeing just the sort of changes that can account for the observed rate variations. It is not neccessary to resort to a CANR process to explain the data. > The Miles-Bush results, admittedly, produced only a small amount of > excess. If this were the only evidence for the effect, you would have a > point. However, when all of the data from many sources (many giving huge > values), are taken together to demonstrate the existence of a > phenomenon, then the Miles-Bush data can be seen as being real and used > to show the relationship between the small, but real, amount of heat and > helium production. Once a phenomenon is accepted, we in science have > never needed every subsequent study to be so well done as to answer > every possible objection. > Why do we have this ongoing shell game? Either the Miles-Bush calorimetry is up to stuff or it is not. When I suggest that perhaps the excess heat claim arising from these data is on shakey ground you want to direct our attention elsewhere. > > Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that there is no real CANR > > effect. How would the data from your experiments differ from what you > > have been describing? Because of the "noise" which you acknowledge is > > present you would get variable results. If you plotted the integral > > "excess heat" for each of many runs as a histogram you would get a > > distribution. What does that distribution look like? It may well have > > a tail out on the positive side, but so what? > > So you acknowledge that people have been rejecting marginal results and > > not reporting them, preferring to publish only data showing a large > > "effect." That is precisely what I have been driving at. Unless we > > can actually see ALL the data we are not likely to be able to tell just > > what is going on in these experiments. My current hypothesis is that > > positive results are being generated by an improper selection of data. > > To prove me wrong we need to see the distribution from which the > > published sample is drawn. > > > > You take comfort, it seems, in having data from which the marginal > > results have been removed, as if that were a good thing. I am > > suggesting that it is actually a significant distortion of the > > information being published about CANR. We need to be able to evaluate > > just how results are being sorted into the "yes" and "no" bins. In > > particular the kinds of information that you are relying on to arrive at > > a description of the CANR process may not be as well determined as you > > suggest. > > We seem to be hung-up on this issue. I wish, indeed plead with Dick to > read the literature which can be accessed through the bibliography in my > reviews. If I were to attempt to plot a histogram as Dick suggests, I > would produce a bimodal plot. There would be a sharply peaked curve > centering near zero with a small tail on the positive side. Then comes > a gap followed by another curve. This second curve has a broad peak near > 500 mW and extends with rapidly decreasing frequency up to about 75 > watts excess. Because a variety of sample sizes containing a variety of > active sites were used to obtain these data, the shape of this second > curve has no fundamental meaning. If we were seeing only the first curve > near zero, as Dick would suggest is the case, I would agree, data > selection or random variations might be the explanation. However, the > second peak provides an indication that something else is going on. In > addition, which region a particular sample falls depends on a clear > relationship to its ability to acquire deuterium. Thus, two independent > properties (excess energy production and ability to acquire deuterium) > both self-select the samples into the same two sets. Can you explain how > this can happen by a random process? Perhaps I should not ask such a > question because I think you have the talent to explain anything to fit > your beliefs. > OK, so you claim that a histogram of your results shows a clear separation between runs that yield no excess heat and one that show an effect. It's only taken nine years to get anyone to say that unambiguously. I agree that a second peak requires some further explanation, and you may actually have given us a significant clue. You suggest that apparent excess energy production correlates with ability to acquire deuterium. Let's assume that you mean the "good" runs show higher loading. How do you determine that? > Blue-Scott Chubb Discussion > Several facts about the state of deuterium in the palladium-deuterium > compound need to be recognized. > > 1. The presence of a lattice automatically restrains the deuterons to a > degree of order. > 2. The actual nuclear-active lattice is probably PdD2, a structure in > which the deuterons are paired. Such pairing would produce additional > ordering. > 3. The distance between the deuterons within these pairs is expected to > be less than the distance within the gaseous D2 molecule. > 4. It is impossible to attribute the temperature coefficient of excess > energy production (which is positive) to the nuclear process because > temperature will also change the amount of nuclear-active material > present. > I believe these four points do nothing to address the points I have been raising with Scott Chubb. In particular (2) is an unproven assertion. An expectation that the deuteron spacing is lessened relative to that of D2 molecules is of little significance unless and until it is quantified and verified. Should it actually be true what sort of increase in fusion rate would follow? More importantly what would make the fusion process different from my expectations which involve neutron emission? The sort of ordering refered to in (1) is not sufficient to account for any coherence in the nuclear wave function. Until the orientation of the deuterons is considered, as well as their position in a lattice, we still have nothing of significance to address. I might also point out that we clearly are dealing with a very soft lattice with respect to the position of the deuterons, so to suggest a great deal of coherence over many lattice spacings is pretty unrealistic, as well. Finally, Ed Storms is looking for an excuse to say that there is no reason to expect anything other than a random response to changes in temperature. If the data is all noise anyway, it's quite reasonable to expect no very specific dependences on any of the experimental parameters. By the way, has anyone forgotten that the preferred mode of excitation for these cells is one in which the power input varies randomly with time? Random inputs and random outputs with no established dependence on any experimental parameters -- strange stuff this CANR. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 12:11:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA20696; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:05:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:05:00 -0700 Message-ID: <362E3EB9.EDD6D60E gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:06:35 +0000 From: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk (John Allan) Reply-To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Chris Eccles/Keely "rip off"+others Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fViFA2.0.H35.S1ZBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23543 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: With regards to Chris Eccles; as from his email address, he is based in the British Isles. (.ie is Ireland). There used to be a Chris Eccles that ran a free energy group that met in a pub in Brighton. The style he presented himself with is very similar to the bumptious style of these emails. If it is the same guy then I would say it is extremely likely to be BS. And certainly the claim that he has spent his career in mainstream physics is. This business of Wesley Crosiar (wrc cdepot.net 209-754-4742) selling Keelynet stuff brings to light again the need for some sort of international advisory body, charter or council regulating and setting standards for this field. Perhaps it could have some sort of " approved " certification for sites requiring a caveat. Has anyone contacted the Patent Office to alert them that he is selling patents as well? I cant think that is lawful and sure they are protected and it would only be a local call from someone in the States. I have to laugh when Crosiar, who is unnamed on the site and without phone no., says; " This site and its contents copyright (C) 1998 Energy Research Company; all rights reserved. Any duplication of this site and/or its material is restricted. " One has to face it, either folk on this discussion are going to do it, or someone else is, and who knows best? there are now numerous societies established all around the world, it might be something that could bind them altogether, raise the profile of this pursuit and avoid the conflict and damage unaccountable behaviour has done to this field of science. An IINE? Sure, I can see all sort of obstacles and shortcomings likely to arise but as a starting point I would suggest using the model the ANS uses. The ANS Code of Ethics The Fundamental Principles ANS members uphold and advance the integrity, honour and dignity of their professions by: • using their knowledge and skill for the advancement of human welfare • being honest and impartial and serving with fidelity the public, their employees, and clients • striving to increase the competence and prestige of their professions • supporting the professional and technical societies of their disciplines. The Fundamental Codes 1.ANS members shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public in the performance of their professional duties. 2.ANS members shall perform services only in the areas if their competence. 3.ANS members shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner. 4.ANS members shall act in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees and shall avoid conflicts of interest. 5.ANS members shall build their professional reputation on the merit of their services and shall not compete unfairly with others. 6.ANS members shall act in such a manner as to uphold and enhance the honour, integrity, and dignity of the professions. 7.ANS members shall continue their professional development throughout their careers and shall provide opportunities for the professional development of those persons under their supervision. Code of Ethics from: http://www.ans.org/ans/code.ethics.html Complete by-laws from: http://www.ans.org/ans/bylaws.rules/main.html John Allan Energy Solutions 79 Pitcairn House St Thomas Square London E9 6PU T:+44 181 533 5880 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 13:31:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23821; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:29:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:29:00 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:36:23 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: On the current status of palladium based CF replication Resent-Message-ID: <"U3Iat.0.0q5.BGaBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23544 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 2:54 PM 10/20/98, Akira Kawasaki wrote: [snip report] >So I believe CF matters are moving along. > >-AK- Thanks for the very encouraging report. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 13:39:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA27212; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:34:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:34:52 -0700 Message-ID: <362E53C1.6F230497 gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:36:24 +0000 From: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk (John Allan) Reply-To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Eccles/Noel Whitney/Horwood et al References: <199810211902.MAA18941 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4IlwM1.0.0f6.gLaBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23545 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Oh! I think I made a mistake. Is Chris Eccles not the same person who was in business with Christopher Davies that Norman Horwood mentioned earlier this year. I think I got two different people mixed up. He claimed to have an over-unity electrolysis cell around the time of the Equinox " It Runs on Water " programme. About 10 times over-unity with some sort of theory. I have to check my notes. I put him in touch with Christopher Davies, a utility broker in the City of London and Livery Company man, who was interested in financing this field. He had contacted me originally, via Equinox, after seeing the programme and being interested in Meyer's work which I did not recommend investing in. I made a business agreement on the basis of an exchange of letters with Eccles who immediately reneged upon it when Davies attempted successfully to circumvent me. They went into some sort of business contract and Davies shelled out £10,000 to being with to buy equipment and I have not spoken to either since although have the latter's contact details if anyone is interested. Eccles was staying on a Farm in Southern Ireland hence the .i.e. address ringing bells. We might have a real regular conman on our hands, if it is him, I would appreciate his new address. Now, regarding Noel Whitney; when I spoke to him he claimed to have spent £150,000 chasing after Stan Meyer, Norman Horwood said last year that he had spent £250,000, Now it is £300,000. When I asked Stan Meyer about how much a contract would cost he quoted me $125,000 but never asked for it all up front. He would be willing to work to contract according to however much he was paid and how satisfied the commissioning party was. He made it clear that he would never release anything but a finished production article and could not say - or make promises - when that would be. I have waited for Noel Whitney to provide evidence to substantiate his claims and would be interested to see the contract he signed. As much as I am concerned at innovators trying to profit from unsubstantiated claims of over-unity energy; I am also recognizing the pattern of expansively the financially over-unity claims of investors into this field. Noel Whitney was not considered a friend by Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin, whose name he cannot even spell correctly. I can tell you precisely what he thought about Mr Noel Whitney. • What is this " tome " he refers to, is it a report on Stan Meyer's work? • I would still like to see it if it was the report Infinite Energy and Jeane Manning mentioned earlier. Again this, along with Mr Jed Rothwell comments about Dr Correa again underline the need for some impartial and probably not for profit organization to act as a mediator to this field. Commercial interest alone is not the answer. The potential of owning such a technology in a not for profit body committed to ethical development or in the public domain is huge. Jed's comments about the trials of business people are, of course, entirely accurate and I too find it hard to warm to someone speaking lowly of " common people ", if that is what he said. He is also correct to establish that the field of energy technologies is a special case with special needs and exceptional rewards. The problems of the marriage between business and innovation are not going to leave us hence the need for some guiding body with institutional public domain funding rather than commercial finance. A " peace-making force ". It could even act to screen or accredit reliable investors. • It seems to me that the sort of money that is all too attracted to this field is as unreliable and idiosyncratic as the proponents. • If Mr Noel Whitney is going to make financial claims, then is he willing to substantiate them publicly? If he is not, I would suggest that he and his opinions must be viewed as discredited and unreliable. Sorry, Noel but my wonder is how on earth any businessman could have duped himself into signing such a contract; • unless he was up to something else altogether. I have other infirmation on Noel Whitney that I would like to confirm with him publicly, if he wishes. It is easy to make up huge expense accounts. I charge £250 an hour in consultancy. I must have run up 1,000s of hours by now. If I was to account that at full commercial rates it would run into £100,000s. It would be bullshit if I was to claim my efforts are therefor worth £300,000 and I would caution the gullible from accepting any such claims until it is substantiated. John Allan, The Think of a Number, Double It and Add a Bit School of Accounting, London. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 13:55:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA05414; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:51:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:51:56 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <01bdfd1f$7a4508c0$LocalHost default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:50:25 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: BBC report on CF/Correa. Resent-Message-ID: <"L23Zh1.0.DK1.hbaBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23546 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Noel - A search on Eccles' postings on the net found messages by him claiming to be a Brit working in Ireland on a project to "solve the energy crisis". Sounds like the same guy. This recent magnet spinner anomaly he reported on sci.physics.electromag is almost certainly a case of mistaking simple mundane phenomena for something unusual, at best unintentionally. This and your comments, if they are true, are all poor indicators of the likelyhood that anything useful will be coming from this source either. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 13:57:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA05833; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:53:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:53:22 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:50:14 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Chris Eccles/Keely "rip off"+others Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810211654_MC2-5D76-1727 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"7-23U1.0.-Q1.1daBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23547 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex John Allan, well informed as ever, writes: Has anyone contacted the Patent Office to alert them that he is selling patents as well? I cant think that is lawful and sure they are protected and it would only be a local call from someone in the States. Ha, ha! Very funny. The British Library sold me a bunch of patents. Contact: Patents Information Services The British Library Science Reference and Information Service (SRIS) http://minos.bl.uk/services/sris/patents.html Patent Express The British Library 25 Southampton Buildings London WC2A 1AW United Kingdom Tel. (Customer Services): +44 171 412 7992 Fax: +44 171 412 7930 Fax (US toll-free number): 1 800 325 2221 (The Library Connection, Virgina) Email: patent-express bl.uk http://minos.bl.uk/services/bsds/dsc/pexpress.html Do a quick web search and you will find maybe a hundred other firms searching and selling patents. I recommend the B.L. The prices are reasonable and the service is fast. If you just want a look-see at a recent patent on the web, I think IBM provides that for free nowadays. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 14:06:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA10948; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:02:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:02:10 -0700 Message-ID: <362E5A2B.81115E23 gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:03:47 +0000 From: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk (John Allan) Reply-To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Fleischmann/cheap books Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"IWjEH2.0.Vg2.FlaBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23548 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Actually it is now cheaper to print books on a one off basis up to about a few thousand copies. Kodak, I think but check, invented a process that goes straight from disk to a completed fully professional softback book via something that looks like a hugely elongated office photocopier. This might be useful for anyone wanting to print useful very low circulation or uncommercial but useful works and I am sure someone in publishing will be able to tell you about it. It created quite a stir amongst small press when it was released last year. Printing one-off to order is a reality. Bill you could print off vortex archives and turn them into books. With regards to Fleischmann's reluctance to discuss the fineries, I once asked him what military uses CF had and he said there were a couple. I suggested that cheap Tritium was one and asked what was the other? He would not discuss this but said that he thought the whole research and development should have been done under high security or secrecy. Could this be why? How could CF be used with Military interests in mind. Presumably, the energy could be converted into use in warheads? Sometimes I wonder if the whole CF debacle was not some deliberate staged event to send the hounds of in the wrong direction and Dr Fleischmann was not just the fall guy. I am not so sure the work was that original. On the other hand, I am told it also has the look of the sort of cover up when the military has got interests and wants the field to itself. John Allan, London From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 14:35:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA23710; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:31:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:31:48 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:29:25 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Eccles/Noel Whitney/Horwood et al Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810211732_MC2-5D6E-716D compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"OeOHA.0.Oo5.4BbBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23549 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex John Allan write of Correa: . . . I too find it hard to warm to someone speaking lowly of " common people ", if that is what he said. I believe that was an exact quote from Correa's talk: "the little man, the common man." I do not the audio tapes yet so it may be a little different. I wish the audio/visual people would get on the stick and get me the goods so I can transcribe Cavicchio. . . . Mr Jed Rothwell comments about Dr Correa again underline the need for some impartial and probably not for profit organization to act as a mediator to this field. Commercial interest alone is not the answer. Gee . . . That's strange. Commercial interest works wonderfully well for software, food, shipbuilding, railroads, aircraft, automobiles, steelmaking, video tape rentals, building construction . . . These economic sectors in the aggregate are much larger than energy. What is so special about energy that keeps the normal economic laws from working? I understand why some areas of the economy are special. For example, highway construction is losing proposition without gas taxes or tolls, and tolls are a pain in the butt. Healthcare is peculiar because most people will pay any amount to live, and the number of doctors may be artificially limited by the number of medical schools. But I cannot see why energy requires special economic rules. The potential of owning such a technology in a not for profit body committed to ethical development or in the public domain is huge. I have three problems with this: 1. No two people will agree on what is ethical. 2. I cannot see why ethics applies to buying energy more than it applies to buying karaoke equipment or fish stew. 3. I would not trust public institutions, government bodies, "not for profit organizations" that supposedly act as mediators, "Nature" magazine, or any other institution. They are all run by people, and people can be corrupt, evil, stupid, ineffective, or just plain wrong. Non-profit organizations are no more ethical than corporations. They are necessary because some social needs are not met by commercial organizations. Give any organization the power to regulate CF -- give it any say in the matter -- and it will be corrupted (Acton's dictum). The editors at "Nature" and Sci Am., are as corrupt as the worst corporate power mongers I have ever encountered. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 14:41:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA25438; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:36:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:36:46 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981021164055.00702558 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:40:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: New resource to find out of print books In-Reply-To: <199810211445_MC2-5D6E-6869 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2EHyC2.0.KD6.jFbBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23550 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 14:43 10/21/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >I have been trying to find a long out of print textbook on calorimetry. Scott >Little said he would copy it for me but he forgot. Yo, Scott: why don't you >mail me the book? I'll copy it and send it back. "Calorimetry: Fundamentals and Practice" lives in the Chemistry Library at UT. I did copy it for myself and intended to run you off a copy of the 8.5x11's but forgot. I'll have my slave...er assistant do that tomorrow and mail it to you. Also, I have registered a "want" for it with Advanced Book Exchange (abebooks.com) but haven't gotten any hits yet. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 14:51:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA32399; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:48:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:48:07 -0700 Message-ID: <01d101bdfd3c$68dcae40$93b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press (http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:47:06 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01CE_01BDFD0A.1E391680" 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: <"hPt9D3.0.-v7.MQbBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23551 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_01CE_01BDFD0A.1E391680 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Radioactive Bugs Found at Hanford. Nothing said about worms that eat radwastes though. :-) FJS http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID=SCIENCE&STORYID=APIS6ON47000 ------=_NextPart_000_01CE_01BDFD0A.1E391680 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="The Wire - Breaking News from the Associated Press.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID=SCIENCE&STORYID=APIS6ON47000 Modified=A0867F103CFDBD01AC ------=_NextPart_000_01CE_01BDFD0A.1E391680-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 14:53:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA01421; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:50:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:50:39 -0700 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <362E57E9.D73 ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:53:45 -0700 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: Russ George Subject: Re: On the current status of palladium CF . References: <199810211414_MC2-5D5B-2C5E compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FoC0q3.0.0M.kSbBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23552 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: October 21, 1998 Jed Rothwell wrote: > With this cell in this setup it is difficult to quantify, because the setup is designed to measure helium. It isn't inherently difficult. I agree. As I understand it, the next series of independant replications at both labs will be setup to cover excess heat and look for He-3. > The active cell generated helium and it also grew hotter than the blank, indicating >excess heat. I think they felt that, agreed. But it's not something that can be written in a paper like that and be acceptable. > McKubre emphasizes that these are preliminary results. McKubre can say anything he wants. Unless I hear and it is proved otherwise, it was Russ George who proposed, prepared, setup, ran, and got the results from his Case replication experiment. All the while in an improverished situation. Case admits to this at the Symposium. Passell is witness to it, Tanzella of SRI can admit to it. And others. Case worked along with Russ to see the positive He4 results. There is now peace and harmony. Forget the personal gritty stuff. The Mother's Milk of Science like politics, funding is flowing for the great objectives of science. And greater results are forthcoming to buttress the first replication. There are cooperative agreements and a "team" effort underway by everybody concerned, including SRI/McKubre. I speak from the peanut gallery and like what is transpiring. There should be a greater paper coming out of the latest efforts. And if nothing comes of all this? Back to talking about magnetism, fields, and strange effects. My apologies to those involved in that field. I find it fascinating also. I keep all my 'Pachinko' balls on a magnetron magnet. :) -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 15:21:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11152; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:14:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:14:28 -0700 Message-ID: <19981021221540.20394.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:15:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Jerry Wayne Decker Subject: your 'fluctuatoin coherence' post To: tv juno.com Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"vQJUH3.0.8k2.3pbBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23553 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Tim! OUTSTANDING POST TO VORTEX...thanks for sharing those insights, I concur completely!!! _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 15:28:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA16813; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:26:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:26:25 -0700 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <362E6079.652E ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:30:17 -0700 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mizuno will respond to Marett References: <199810211445_MC2-5D6E-6868 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"R_Cwz1.0.Y64.G-bBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23554 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: October 21, 1998 Jed Rothwell wrote: > I presume you spoke to him in Japanese. He has no excuse for not > responding. Well the excuse probably is in the ongoing nature of the thing at the time. I e-mailed him in Japanese. Also he does not know me from a hole in the ground. And the hermit kingdom has its ways. Picked up an Australian sold Japanese word processor that works on the internet pretty good --- not that I write the stuff all the time. They also have an internet add-on word processor that automatically detects and translates internet material in Chinese, Korean, and Japanese. It can be downloaded for a free trial use. Look for a NJWIN website. Lots of asian websites including Japanese science and scientists. No time to keep visiting them all. > Right. It will be a joint response. He said he would buzz over to >print graphs from Ohmori's computer. I expect a one-page letter with >graphs. I suggested they make specific suggestions addressed to Marett. Better that they, with you the intermediary, start communicating with Marett on the arcing experiment. Internationalize the damn thing. Marett took the effort to carry out a series of experiments in search of their claims. The search for truth is not proprietary. Let's see what's there without any reflection on anybody's stature. Yes I realize you have a scarcity of time but made the suggestion anyway. -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 16:01:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA31457; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:58:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:58:38 -0700 Message-Id: <199810212300.TAA12007 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: Eccles/Noel Whitney/Horwood et al Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:01:36 -0400 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: <"WEj2M3.0.Ph7.TScBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23555 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com > Subject: Eccles/Noel Whitney/Horwood et al > Date: Wednesday, October 21, 1998 5:29 PM > > To: Vortex > > John Allan write of Correa: > > . . . I too find it hard to warm to someone speaking lowly of " common > people ", if that is what he said. > > I believe that was an exact quote from Correa's talk: "the little man, the > common man." I do not the audio tapes yet so it may be a little different. I > wish the audio/visual people would get on the stick and get me the goods so I > can transcribe Cavicchio. The exact quote from the Correa text given at the recent conference in Manchester (Usages of Physics and the Inventor's Health): "So then, maybe I have a difficult nature, maybe I suffer from inventor's disease, maybe I have made a mistake - but at least I will be able to say, it failed not because of our lack of trying. And this, once more, underlines my notion - much disputed by some - that the problem of this field of alternative energy is not one of lacking a ready-made product, or not being able to fire the imagination of people. The problem is a political one, and a problem also of the sheer incomprehension of what is at stake in science, both by the lay people who elect politicians and governing bodies, and by established scientists who dispell judgements without even bothering to attempt to understand the material at hand. Against this state of affairs, all I can say is "Balderdash!" For it is in the hands of the common man to do something about it, and yet the problem is precisely the common man, the little man in each and all of us." Ed Wall NERL From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 16:47:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA18185; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:44:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:44:54 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:38:53 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: "Noel Whitney" antioch-college.edu cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: BBC report on CF/Correa. In-Reply-To: <01bdfd1f$7a4508c0$LocalHost default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-Yjyb2.0.xR4.q7dBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23556 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Can you send this to us in ASCII.... and turn OFF the HTML generator? Thanks. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 17:17:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA31614; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:15:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:15:53 -0700 Message-ID: <362E879C.B6008687 gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:17:22 +0000 From: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk (John Allan) Reply-To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Jed - well informed as ever References: <199810212141.OAA28118 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dGoYR2.0.tj7.uadBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23557 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Ha, ha! Very funny. The British Library sold me a bunch of patents. Jed, the people you bought your patents from *are* The Patent Office. The UK Patent Office is in the basement of The British Library ( Science and Business Department ) in Southampton Buildings as is the Trademark Office. The SRIS is the department that deals with all business inquiries and is the first doorin the corridor to your left as you pass security. > I cannot see why energy requires special economic rules. • Energy is special because without it there would be no other sectors. In fact, there would be no civilisation and there will be no future. The financial value of it is kept artificial low and the full costs are excluded from any economic model being used today. What is the cost of the destruction of a planet, the loss of species, the Gulf War? What is the cost of the suffering and carnage from lack and conflict? It is hardly " fish stew ". In fact, access to energy or to technology with which to produce power is being and always has been used as a weapon of domination. Where there is power, there is Power. Especially at present by those self interest groups profiting from the domination of " corporatism ", for want of a better word, over the poeple of the world and at the cost of the environment. I suggest you revise your Adam Smith. We do not have a global economy at present; we only have a global robbery. We do not know capitalism yet, we are ruled by pirates and gangsters. By the way; • what financial interest do you have in brokering new energy technologies and finance? Imagine the difference abundant energy would create, a political secure world for a start if it was available universally. That is not in the interest of many of the industries that you mention. I would certainly argue against the notion that " corporatism " works for any of those industries you have mentioned, it certainly does not work for the people of this world and environment. Short-term instincts, usuary, speculation, the unaccountability of corporate behaviour, are obstacles to real development. With regards to ethics, I cannot think of any responsible or legitimate businessman or corporation that would neither agree upon nor profit from joining a professional body. • Why are you so allergic to the thought? • Are you acting unaccountably or in an unethical manner? Although I would agree that entropy is as solid a law in sociology as it is in material sciences, I believe that humanity largely shares a common morality as enshrine in the religions and philosophical codes of all peoples. Given that from time to time there is dispute, this is where a written charter and contracts become very useful. As do disciplinary measures, they are inavoidable if any progress is to be made beyond a certain point. History has been propelled by small groups of individuals united by common interest in righteousness. • So what is this " tome " on Stanley Meyer Norman refers to? • Is it public domain or still ' secret "? • Are the usual half truth and exaggerations bandied about going to be substantiate before they multiply like a smear of bacteria over the truth. • You seem to act quickly to try and discredit me even at the risk of embarassing yourself again, why? I will refer your comments back to Dr Correa to discover what point he intended to make, you have a habit of misrepresenting individual that are not present to defend themselves. Interestingly, I was accused off-line of anti-semitism by Mitchell Jones, - " because [you Jed] were so obviously Jewish " - for my invesigation into your modus operandi, Jed. I must admit, I did not even know, think to ask or presume any relationship. I have no disrespect for Judaism, and share some common blood, but I draw my line at Mammonism which I think is what I think you are saying is good. I cannot believe that you really mean what you say. John Allan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 17:34:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA02406; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:25:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:25:51 -0700 Message-ID: <362E7BFA.BF681F3F cwnet.com> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:28:09 -0700 From: Jones Beene Reply-To: jonesb9 cwnet.com Organization: IdeaWorks Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 (Macintosh; U; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "vortex-l eskimo.com vortex news group" Subject: Re: Fleischman's reluctance Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eA59N.0.Nb.EkdBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23558 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Allan wrote: > With regards to Fleischmann's reluctance to discuss the fineries, I once > asked him what military uses CF had and he said there were a couple. I > suggested that cheap Tritium was one and asked what was the other? He > would not discuss this but said that he thought the whole research and > development should have been done under high security or secrecy. > > Could this be why? How could CF be used with Military interests in > mind. Presumably, the energy could be converted into use in warheads? For what it's worth, here is some anecdotal informaion that relates the issue of nonproliferation, which surpisingly is seldom mentioned as the reason for top level indifference to the cold fusion field. A short time after the P&F announcement, I had been trying to interview anyone at the "Rad Lab" (Lawrence Berkeley, near where I live) who had experience with electrochemistry and deuterium: only to get a severe cold shoulder. Later I ran into a grad student who worked there was told that the deafening silence had to do with "weapons research." This was puzzling as most of that work is done at Livermore. It turns out that it was a computer simulation which was going on rather than the real thing. After some further prying, here is my best guess about the tie-in to CF - and let me say in advance that it is based on speculation and coincidence, as I have NO inside information. First, there apparently is an old and relatively low tech process to enrich natural uranium to the 4-5% U235 level but no further - but you don't even need this step as so-called "fuel grade" material can be bought openly overseas. Secondly, deuterium can be made to "spall" or give up its neutron much easier than the textbooks say (remember the thread on vortex several months ago concerning deuterium "stripping?"). It is also likely that the stripping reaction is much quicker in nanoseconds than an actual U235 fission. This is very important, as fission is actually a rather slow process on that small scale. Putting two and two together, then, the big unanswered question would be the possibility of a chain reaction in a uranium deuteride of low enrichment (fuel grade). If every U235 fission in such a fuel causes multiple stripping reactions, due to spallation by the fission fragments, we have a scary situation. In technical terms, the criticality issue boils down to this comparison: whereas with highly enriched fuel, each fission (slowly) gives up several surplus fast neutrons that must be thermalized, a deuterated fuel (quickly) gives several slowish neutrons that can be used sooner but, catch-22, many are lost to U238 (captured). Its' all a very complicated numbers game - and that's where the computers come in, since now we can't openly test these ideas with a real device. Admittedly, this whole line of reasoning sounds a little stretched, but every physicist that I have mentioned it to seems to be looking around for the men-in-black (and I'm not a conspiracy freak). Certainly, it would be absolutely terrifying if true, as Russia may be dumping fuel grade uranium with impunity. More to the point, it seems to me that the response of mainstream science to CF goes beyond the 'not invented here' syndrome (though that is a factor, too). I read most of the physics journals and am constantly amazed by the sheer volume of research that gets funded on every minutiae of science remotely tangential to military uses. Everything, that is, except CF. Whether or not this particular speculation above explains some of the apparent lack of interest by the research funders, I suggest that at some level the government is kept very well informed about all developments that involve deuterium because of the issue of nonproliferation. Is CF the tip of a much bigger iceberg? Heard any strange clicking on your phone recently? Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 21 18:45:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA32123; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:40:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:40:26 -0700 Message-ID: <023a01bdfd5c$dd1c9b60$93b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: A-Bomb WWW Museum ~ June,1995 (http://www.csi.ad.jp/ABOMB/index.html) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:39:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003D_01BDFD2A.89D60400" 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: <"R3EM23.0.qr7.9qeBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23559 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_003D_01BDFD2A.89D60400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Perhaps this would be an appropriate response to Jones Beene's speculation about "BOOSTED FISSION" using Deuterium or Tritium in FISSION Bombs. Encyclopedia Britannica covers this in the article on A Bombs. FJS http://www.csi.ad.jp/ABOMB/index.html ------=_NextPart_000_003D_01BDFD2A.89D60400 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="A-Bomb WWW Museum ~ June,1995.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="A-Bomb WWW Museum ~ June,1995.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.csi.ad.jp/ABOMB/index.html Modified=A02880075CFDBD0166 ------=_NextPart_000_003D_01BDFD2A.89D60400-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 02:36:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA05891; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 02:35:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 02:35:04 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:42:34 -0800 To: From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: BBC report on CF/Correa. Resent-Message-ID: <"NmXRH.0.zR1.8nlBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23560 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 7:20 PM 10/21/98, Noel Whitney wrote: [snip] > ... if new tech wont go commecial its all a load of rubbish and of only > academic interest. > [snip] A good summary of things as they are in the "free energy" arena. If any free energy technology close to commercial feasibility were made known then various members of this group would hot on it in terms of technical evaluation. Nothing much has surfaced yet it in "independent replications" it appears, except lots of negative results. Though the tenacity and vision of entrepreneurs like Jed and you are laudible, it appears to me you are a bit ahead of your time. There is a lot of smoke but no fire yet. There seems to be increasingly more stick twirlers and increasingly more smoke, so it is hopefully just a matter of time before some fire develops. Meanwhile, there is a lot going on renewable resource areas, especially in wind power and solar cells. Commercial ventures outside the US, especially in Europe, are often sccessful. Also of possible interest in the near future, practical room temperature superconductors would be a collosal development in the energy arena. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 04:43:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA27395; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 04:42:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 04:42:05 -0700 Message-Id: <362F1A1C.536DB5CA verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:42:20 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: tr Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Space and Family (eprint: hep-ph/9810417) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Y6N_R2.0.rh6.DenBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23561 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, This is a highly remarkable paper. Consist of an discrete geometric approach to fermions, as did T. Lockyer. Again using cubic geometry. It is further remarkable the "Acknowledgements" section: "Acknowledgements With this paper my scientific efforts come to an end. After 18 years of hard work I have not been able to find a reasonable position in physics." Paper is available as usual at LANL or CERN archives. (http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9810417) Please note that CERN archive gives PDF format as default. Regards, hamdi ucar High Energy Physics - Phenomenology abstract hep-ph/9810417 From: Bodo Lampe Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:01:19 GMT (27kb) Space and Family Authors: Bodo Lampe Comments: Latex, 33 pages, 11 Figures Report-no: MPI-PhT/98-144 Geometrical pictures for the family structure of fundamental particles are developed. They indicate that there might be a relation between the family repetition structure and the number of space dimensions. ------------------------------------ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 06:10:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA20104; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 06:08:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 06:08:40 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981022091052.00ca1d50 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:10:52 -0400 To: jonesb9 cwnet.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Fleischman's reluctance Cc: "vortex-l eskimo.com vortex news group" In-Reply-To: <362E7BFA.BF681F3F cwnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"0A4033.0.kv4.OvoBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23562 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:28 PM 10/21/98 -0700, Jones Beene wrote: >Putting two and two together, then, the big unanswered question would be the >possibility of a chain reaction in a uranium deuteride of low enrichment (fuel >grade). CANDU (Canadian Deuterium) reactors use natural Uranium fuel and heavy water (D2O) as a coolant and moderator. (They also use graphite.) So you don't even need fuel grade Uranium to get a chain reaction if you use deuterium as a moderator. As to whether it is possible to cause prompt criticality using natural uranium deuteride, I don't know and won't guess. But the computer on your desktop is probably sufficient to do the modelling. 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 Oct 22 06:55:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA06061; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 06:53:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 06:53:03 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981022095323.0090f310 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:53:23 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: BBC report on CF / Correa In-Reply-To: <199810201648_MC2-5D4C-162E compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"MYRaM3.0.cU1._YpBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23563 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:45 PM 10/20/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Anyway, my point is, I do not think anything special has been done to derail >cold fusion, and little was done at high levels. Most of the derailment took >place at the laboratory level, mostly in the laboratories of the cold fusion >scientists themselves, if truth be told. Mr. Rothwell conveniently ignores the ERAB report, the obfuscation by the Patent Office, and the attacks by the press; which it is observed were all done at the highest levels. In fact, much of the derailment was by the barkers who claimed there were "kilowatts", whereas there were only milliwatts to watts. These false claims have led to unrealistic expectations rather than slow methodical science and engineering work actually requisite for the new field. Those who have, or continue to, work(ed) in the field are not to blame - despite the now-routine and frothy fingerpointing by Mr. Rothwell. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 07:48:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA32420; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:45:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:45:57 -0700 Message-ID: <362F44FB.1E622F70 ro.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:45:15 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: BBC report on CF/Correa. References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"torh21.0.Ow7.aKqBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23564 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > laudible, it appears to me you are a bit ahead of your time. There is a > lot of smoke but no fire yet. There seems to be increasingly more stick > twirlers and increasingly more smoke, so it is hopefully just a matter of > time before some fire develops. Unfortunately, where there's been smoke, there've been mirrors, too. ;^} -- Regards, Patrick V. Reavis From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 08:19:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12347; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:17:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:17:17 -0700 Message-Id: <199810221519.LAA18824 mercury.mv.net> Subject: [Off Topic]Technology Challenged Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 11:16:13 -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: <"e5v1l1.0.q03.ynqBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23565 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: "technologically challenged" >Just in case you think you are TC (technologically challenged). The > following is an excerpt taken from a Wall Street Journal article: > >1. Compaq is considering changing the command "Press Any Key" to >"Press Return Key" because of the flood of calls asking where the "Any" >key >is. > >2. AST technical support had a caller complaining that her mouse was >hard to control with the dust cover on. The cover turned out to be the >plastic bag the mouse was packaged in. > >3. Another Compaq technician received a call from a man complaining that >the system wouldn't read word processing files from his old diskettes. >After trouble-shooting for magnets and heat failed to diagnose the >problem, it was found that the customer had labeled the diskettes, then >rolled them >into the typewriter to type the labels. > >4. Another AST customer was asked to send a copy of her defective >diskettes. A >few days later a letter arrived from the customer along with photocopies >of >the floppies.. > >5. A Dell technician advised his customer to put his troubled floppy >back in the drive and close the door. The customer asked the tech to >hold >on and was heard putting the phone down, getting up and crossing the >room >to close the door to his room. > >6. Another Dell customer called to say he couldn't get his computer to >fax >anything. After 40 minutes of trouble-shooting, the technician >discovered >the man was trying to fax a piece of paper by holding it in front of the >monitor screen and hitting the "send" key. > >7. Yet another Dell customer called to complain that his keyboard no >longer worked. He had cleaned it up by filling up his tub with soap and >water and soaking the keyboard for a day, then removing all the keys and >washing them individually. > >8. A Dell technician received a call from a customer who was enraged >because his computer had told him he was "bad and an invalid". The >tech explained that the computer's "bad command" and "invalid" responses >shouldn't >be taken personally. > >9. A confused caller to IBM was having troubles printing documents. >He told the technician that the computer had said it "couldn't find >printer". >The user had also tried turning the computer screen to face the printer - >but that his computer still couldn't "see" the printer. > >10. An exasperated caller to Dell Computer Tech Support couldn't get >her new Dell Computer to turn on. After ensuring the computer was >plugged in, the technician asked her what happened when she pushed the >power button. > >Her response, "I pushed and pushed on this foot pedal and nothing >happens." The "foot pedal" turned out to be the computer's mouse. > >11. Another customer called Compaq tech support to say her brand-new >computer wouldn't work. She said she unpacked the unit, plugged it >in and sat there for 20 minutes waiting for something to happen. When >asked what >happened when she pressed the power switch, she asked "What power >switch?" > >12. True story from a Novell NetWire SysOp: > > Caller: "Hello, is this Tech Support?" > Tech: "Yes, it is. How may I help you?" > Caller: "The cup holder on my PC is broken and I am within my >warranty > period. How do I go about getting that fixed?" > Tech: "I'm sorry, but did you say a cup holder?" > Caller: "Yes, it's attached to the front of my computer." > Tech: "Please excuse me if I seem a bit stumped, It's because I >am. Did > you receive this as part of a promotional, at a trade >show? How did > you get this cup holder? Does it have any trademark >on it?" > Caller: "It came with my computer, I don't know anything about a >promotional. > It just has '4X' on it." > > At this point the Tech Rep had to mute the caller, because he > couldn't stand it. He was laughing too hard. The caller had been >using the > load drawer of the CD-ROM drive as a cup holder, and snapped it off >the drive! > >13. Another IBM customer had troubles installing software and rang >for support. "I put in the first disk, and that was OK. It said to put >in >the >second disk, and I had some problems with the disk. When it said to >put in the third disk - I couldn't even fit it in..." The user hadn't >realized that "Insert Disk 2" meant to remove Disk 1 first. > >14. In a similar incident, a customer had followed the instructions >for installing software. The instructions said to remove the disk from >its cover and insert into the drive. The user had physically removed >the casing of the disk and wondered why there were problems. > > > > > > >--------- End forwarded message ---------- > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 08:28:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15739; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:25:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:25:30 -0700 Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:22:23 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Jed - well informed as ever Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810221126_MC2-5D93-8B71 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"4_2CL2.0.kr3.evqBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23567 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex John Allan, amusing as ever, writes: the people you bought your patents from *are* The Patent Office. The UK Patent Office is in the basement of The British Library ( Science and Business Department ) in Southampton Buildings as is the Trademark Office. Well, if it is the Patent Office they operate under a different name. And they sell U.S. patents too! Their Virginia office is next door to *our* Patent Office, and I happen to know they go next door to our government facilities where they use our copy machines to copy our patents which they sell to me for $3, which ain't rightly theirs to sell nohow, them bein' furriners an' all. Anyway they do not have a monopoly on the business. Anyone is free to sell copies of patents, and I think that's a good thing. Energy is special because without it there would be no other sectors. In fact, there would be no civilisation and there will be no future. You are thinking of agriculture, not energy. Civilization predates the energy sector by 11,000 years. There was no energy sector until 1712 (Newcomen) unless you count small water and windmills. Anyway, we are as much dependent upon telephones and microcomputers as energy. If Intel, IBM and Microsoft disappear civilization will collapse and we will starve. It is a frightening thought! What is the cost of the destruction of a planet, the loss of species, the Gulf War? What is the cost of the suffering and carnage from lack and conflict? That's agriculture again. It destroys more land and causes more pollution than any other industry. Only a few wars have been fought over oil, but countless wars have been fought for agricultural land, fresh water and Lebensraum. But you do not see proposals to regulate grocery stores and farms with public institutions, government bodies, or not-for-profit organizations. The trend is the other direction. U.S. agriculture is being deregulated. The Georgia peanut crop is still largely regulated which is why we pay too much for peanuts. It is hardly " fish stew ". More wars have been fought over fish and fish stew than oil. In fact, access to energy or to technology with which to produce power is being and always has been used as a weapon of domination. Where there is power, there is Power. You want power? Think Microsoft. Think General Motors and ADM (a giant agro-business). Your statement applies to all industry and all commercial enterprises, not only energy. If we must special economic rules for energy, we will have to apply them to all economic sectors. . . . what financial interest do you have in brokering new energy technologies and finance? None! Nobody has any interest in brokering new energy technologies. They do not exist yet, unless you count alternative energy like solar photovoltaics. They were in invented at AT&T in February 1940, which is not new by my standards. Imagine the difference abundant energy would create, a political secure world for a start if it was available universally. That is not in the interest of many of the industries that you mention. Of course not! But so what? Microcomputers were not in the interest of IBM or DEC, but IBM could not stop Compaq and Dell. In 1900 U.S. railroads were the most powerful corporations on earth. They lorded over the Congress, industry and the farmers. They were unstoppable powers . . . until automobiles came along and took away most of their business. In 1960 jet airplanes took away the rest of their passenger business, and the Pennsylvania Railroad -- one of the most feared, most profitable, most powerful -- went bankrupt. It wasn't in their interest, but the consumers and voters did not care about their interests. If cold fusion or some other o-u device can be commercialized and Exxon tries to oppose it or ignore it, in twenty years Exxon will join the Pennsylvania Railroad. I would certainly argue against the notion that " corporatism " works for any of those industries you have mentioned, it certainly does not work for the people of this world and environment. When a corporation stops working for people (for its customers), the people wave their hands and a few years later the corporation is history. The CEO of IBM is the servant of his customers. He has no more power over them than a shoe-shine man or a kid flipping burgers. Corporate executives sometimes develop the illusion that they have power, and they can dictate to their customers. Many people (including you) fall for this nonsense. But when the market changes, and new technology comes along, huge corporations are wiped out in a few years. Look what happened to IBM. The other day Compaq bought DEC! . . . I cannot think of any responsible or legitimate businessman or corporation that would neither agree upon nor profit from joining a professional body. Why are you so allergic to the thought? Because, As Groucho Marx said, I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member. I distrust professional bodies. Are you acting unaccountably or in an unethical manner? If I was, would I tell you? Although I would agree that entropy is as solid a law in sociology as it is in material sciences, I believe that humanity largely shares a common morality as enshrine in the religions and philosophical codes of all peoples. You should study anthropology. One man's morality is another man's poison. Even in our own narrow culture here in Atlanta, some people boast about the way they discipline their children & pull them out of school to educate them home. Whereas others, including me, think that is barbaric child abuse. So what is this " tome " on Stanley Meyer Norman refers to? Is it public domain or still ' secret "? If it is secret would we tell you? That's another stupid question, like "are you acting unaccountably or in an unethical manner?" Do you cheat on your taxes? Have you murdered anyone lately? Do you have any shameful secrets about your sex life that you would like to share with our studio audience? . . . Mammonism which I think is what I think you are saying is good. Ha! Another reason to study anthropology. One man's work ethic is another man's Mammonism. I call it honest work for honest pay, you call it grim exploitation and mindless consumerism. Hey, there is a lot to be said for worshiping mammary glands. It goes back to prehistoric fertility fetishes. Mother Earth and all that . . . I cannot believe that you really mean what you say. Yet another reason to study anthropology! You will soon wonder whether you yourself mean what you say. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 08:30:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15580; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:25:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:25:00 -0700 Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:22:06 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Correa quote Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810221126_MC2-5D93-8B70 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"K2qqR2.0.Ep3.AvqBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23566 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex That's a marvelous quote from Correa. I disagree with his sentiments, but I am awed by his mastery of English as a second language. Smart people can write well in a second or third language. Look at Conrad, Nabokov, Von Neumann, Fleischmann . . . Here is the quote again, in a neat, 80-column paragraph: So then, maybe I have a difficult nature, maybe I suffer from inventor's disease, maybe I have made a mistake - but at least I will be able to say, it failed not because of our lack of trying. And this, once more, underlines my notion - much disputed by some - that the problem of this field of alternative energy is not one of lacking a ready-made product, or not being able to fire the imagination of people. The problem is a political one, and a problem also of the sheer incomprehension of what is at stake in science, both by the lay people who elect politicians and governing bodies, and by established scientists who dispel judgements without even bothering to attempt to understand the material at hand. Against this state of affairs, all I can say is "Balderdash!" For it is in the hands of the common man to do something about it, and yet the problem is precisely the common man, the little man in each and all of us. I think he meant "dispense" rather than "dispel." I agree with most of this. It is a political problem cause by incomprehension, but it is Correa's job to ignite the imagination of potential customers. If he does not have the time or the ability to do that, he should give a device to Scott Little or to me, we will do it for him. I wonder if he picked up the term 'inventor's disease' from me? He suffers from it himself, and like most victims he does not recognize his own problem. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 10:15:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA30226; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:02:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:02:45 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981022165555.2ecfa26a aapi.co.uk> X-Sender: jcollins aapi.co.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Collins Subject: Re: Jed - well informed as ever Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:05:29 +0100 Resent-Message-ID: <"HCSK-1.0.9O7.qKsBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23569 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:22 22/10/98 -0400, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >John Allan, amusing as ever, writes: > Energy is special because without it there would be no other sectors. > In fact, there would be no civilisation and there will be no future. > >You are thinking of agriculture, not energy. Civilization predates the energy >sector by 11,000 years. There was no energy sector until 1712 (Newcomen) >unless you count small water and windmills. Sorry, Jed, but I must point out that Johann Bessler (aka Orffyreus) was also there in 1712 with his "perpetual motion" machine. Strange that two totally different ideas should have crystallized into working machines in the same year of 1712. It was probably the summer as well, certainly we know that Bessler announced his invention on 6th June and Newcomen had a working engine in July of the same year. John Author of 'Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?' - for more information and details on ordering, visit my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 10:15:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA29550; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:00:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:00:14 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981022104944.0070e478 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:49:44 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Brown's Rad Remediation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"G3OUS2.0.UD7.SIsBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23568 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The latest IE contains the promised article about Paul Brown's radioactive remediation technique, which turns out to be photodisintegration of nuclei. Hit a nucleus with a photon whose energy is greater than the depth of the nuclear potential well and you can make one or more nucleons come out....standard physics, as advertised. Brown gives various examples of the threshold photon energies required for this process: 2-15 MeV depending on the nuclide. As far as I can see, there is no description of his method for creating a significant flux of photons in this energy range energy. Nor is there any discussion of the cost of producing such flux. However, there is a little bit of data contained in an experiment report from Brown: A micro-Curie Cs-137 source was "treated with a 40 mAmp beam". Since photons don't have charge, he must be talking about the electron current in an x-ray tube. But clearly he can't be making MeV-energy photons directly. If the accelating potential on the tube was, say, 5 million volts (which would produce x-rays ranging up to 5 MeV), the tube power at 40 mA would be 100,000 watts!! The tube alone would have to be room-sized to dissipate the power and to stand off the voltage. OK, maybe he's blasting the nuclei with very high fluxes of lower energy photons and relying on near-simultaneous absorption of several photons to get the necessary energy into the nucleus. This would work if he could get several photons to arrive within the nuclear relaxation time, which is probably on the order of 10^-16 seconds (if that long). Fortunately Brown says, "The beam flux density was on the order of 2X10^15 photons/cm^2-sec". In the article he gives typical cross-sections of nuclei for photo-disintegration and they vary widely. A medium-high value is 150 millibarns. With such a cross section, each nucleus in the sample will be struck by a photon from Brown's beam approximately once per century. Brown does go on to say that this treatment changed the activity of the Cs-137 source from 220 kcpm (kilocounts per minute) to 1000 kcpm but, in view of the above, I can only conclude that either (1) he is just making serious measurement errors or (2) some other process is responsible for the observed changes. 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 Oct 22 10:49:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA14622; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:45:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:45:33 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981022134727.00cb2cb0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:47:27 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981022104944.0070e478 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NONIu2.0.Oa3.wysBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23570 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:49 AM 10/22/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >Fortunately Brown says, "The beam flux density was on the order of 2X10^15 >photons/cm^2-sec". In the article he gives typical cross-sections of >nuclei for photo-disintegration and they vary widely. A medium-high value >is 150 millibarns. With such a cross section, each nucleus in the sample >will be struck by a photon from Brown's beam approximately once per century. >Brown does go on to say that this treatment changed the activity of the >Cs-137 source from 220 kcpm (kilocounts per minute) to 1000 kcpm but, in >view of the above, I can only conclude that either (1) he is just making >serious measurement errors or (2) some other process is responsible for the >observed changes. I think you are being too much of a skeptic here. Cs-137 has a half-life of 30 years. It decays to Ba-137 which has a metastable state with a half-life of two and one-half minutes. (I don't know what the branching ratio on the decay is, but it both an electron and a gamma are thus possible.) However, the half-life says that 2.28% of the atoms decay each year, and 0.0002637% of the atoms decay each hour. To increase the decay rate by a factor of 4.5, he has to stimulate at least 3.5 times that many, or about one in a million each hour. (Of course, you would also need a correction for sample bulk--the atoms most likely to be exposed are near the surface, and elecrons they emit are more likely to be detected, but I think he would have to be working in kilogram quantities before that became noticeable.) In any case the data does seem consistant, but notice that using Paul Brown's data, it would take over five years to cut the radiation in half. 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 Oct 22 12:14:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA20029; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:12:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:12:41 -0700 Message-Id: <199810221913.OAA21192 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:12:47 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Lost vortex replies Resent-Message-ID: <"TZKQj.0.pu4.eEuBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23571 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A week or so ago the following post appeared in my e-mail. When I responded to it, my response went out as a private e-mail to jimostr ca-ois.com, rather than as a post to vortex-l eskimo.com. That was contrary to my intentions, as I had intended to post it. Examining the header information on the post to which I was responding, I see what happened: my e-mail program picked up the address on the "From" line and sent the response to it. Since the "From" line reads: "Jim Ostrowski ," that's what got picked up and that's where my response went. My conclusion is that the vortex-l software is causing some replies to be lost because it is putting the address of the original sender in the "From" line. The address in the "From" line should be "vortex-l eskimo.com" for all e-mails that are sent out by the vortex-l list server. If some go out with the address of the original sender in the "From" line, those posts will be diverted to e-mail, and the threads will be killed. If this is being done intentionally, it is not significantly different than simply deep-sixing a post without comment, because in either case a false impression is created among readers of the list that no response was posted, and many readers will falsely assume that the person whose position had been challenged was intimidated into silence. On the other hand, if these events are due to a programming glitch, it needs to be corrected. --Mitchell Jones Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:22:43 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:03:54 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski Reply-To: jimostr ca-ois.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23313 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com X-UIDL: 87bb6b67cb92c18810acd349b436169c Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >At 08:12 PM 10/13/98 -0600, you wrote: > > > >>***{Who is Art Bell? What is his agenda? Is he a right-wing kook, a > >>left-wing kook, a centrist kook, or a libertarian? --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > >> > > > >... or a libertarian kook? > > > >--Lynn > > ***{Sorry Lynn, but I reserve the word "kook" for people who believe that > by gathering together into groups they somehow magically acquire rights > that none of them would dare to claim as individuals. No individual, for > example, has a right to steal, or to enslave, or to counterfeit, but many > people think that by gathering together into a group, they can legitimately > elect an official and empower him to steal, to enslave, or to counterfeit. > I use the word "kook" to describe such people. If any of these "kooks" try to enslave, rob or cheat you in some kind of systematic way (such as by being so numerous and powerfull that they , in summary , amount to the de-facto "government" ) - do you then have the right to shoot any of their armed representatives (cops)? If not, then how would one prevent such armed representatives of kookdom from interfering with one's enjoyment and proprietary right to drive on the PUBLIC Rights-of-way known as highways? How would one prevent such armed representatives of kookdom from knocking your door down in the middle of the night in search of substances that only THEY are allowed to be in possession of? In short , how does one who is a slave contradict the idea that his masters have the RIGHT to keep him enslaved , poor and confused, without at the same time declaring that armed force will be met with armed force (the "militia")? It's one thing to talk, a completely DIFFERENT thing to ACT on principle. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 12:27:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA06226; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:22:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:22:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810221913.OAA21196 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:12:49 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Yet another post improperly diverted to e-mail Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id MAA06185 Resent-Message-ID: <"xmhdi2.0.5X1.rNuBs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23572 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: An early version of the following post was sent out by me yesterday, and was diverted to e-mail--essentially shit-canned without comment--by substituting the sender's return address for the vortex return address. What has happened here is that a misrepresentation of my behavior was sent out by John Allan to every person on this list and, when I attempted to correct that misrepresentation, the correction went out only to the person who committed the misrepresentation in the first place! If this is being done deliberately by Bill Beatty in a misguided attempt to remove controversy from this list, I would suggest that some rethinking is in order. This policy needs to be stated openly so it can be discussed, rather than implemented in secret. People need to know what is happening to their posts and why threads are inexplicably dying. --Mitchell Jones >> Ha, ha! Very funny. The British Library sold me a bunch of patents. > >Jed, > >the people you bought your patents from *are* The Patent Office. > >The UK Patent Office is in the basement of The British Library ( Science and >Business Department ) in Southampton Buildings as is the Trademark Office. > >The SRIS is the department that deals with all business inquiries and is the >first doorin the corridor to your left as you pass security. > >> I cannot see why energy requires special economic rules. > >• Energy is special because without it there would be no other sectors. In >fact, >there would be no civilisation and there will be no future. > >The financial value of it is kept artificial low and the full costs are >excluded >from any economic model being used today. What is the cost of the destruction >of >a planet, the loss of species, the Gulf War? What is the cost of the suffering >and carnage from lack and conflict? > >It is hardly " fish stew ". In fact, access to energy or to technology with >which >to produce power is being and always has been used as a weapon of domination. >Where there is power, there is Power. Especially at present by those self >interest groups profiting from the domination of " corporatism ", for want of a >better word, over the poeple of the world and at the cost of the environment. > >I suggest you revise your Adam Smith. We do not have a global economy at >present; we only have a global robbery. We do not know capitalism yet, we are >ruled by pirates and gangsters. > >By the way; > >• what financial interest do you have in brokering new energy technologies and >finance? > >Imagine the difference abundant energy would create, a political secure world >for >a start if it was available universally. That is not in the interest of many >of >the industries that you mention. > >I would certainly argue against the notion that " corporatism " works for any >of >those industries you have mentioned, it certainly does not work for the people >of >this world and environment. Short-term instincts, usuary, speculation, the >unaccountability of corporate behaviour, are obstacles to real development. > >With regards to ethics, I cannot think of any responsible or legitimate >businessman or corporation that would neither agree upon nor profit from >joining >a professional body. > >• Why are you so allergic to the thought? > >• Are you acting unaccountably or in an unethical manner? > >Although I would agree that entropy is as solid a law in sociology as it is in >material sciences, I believe that humanity largely shares a common morality as >enshrine in the religions and philosophical codes of all peoples. Given that >from time to time there is dispute, this is where a written charter and >contracts >become very useful. As do disciplinary measures, they are inavoidable if any >progress is to be made beyond a certain point. > >History has been propelled by small groups of individuals united by common >interest in righteousness. > >• So what is this " tome " on Stanley Meyer Norman refers to? > >• Is it public domain or still ' secret "? > >• Are the usual half truth and exaggerations bandied about going to be >substantiate before they multiply like a smear of bacteria over the truth. > >• You seem to act quickly to try and discredit me even at the risk of >embarassing >yourself again, why? > >I will refer your comments back to Dr Correa to discover what point he intended >to make, you have a habit of misrepresenting individual that are not present to >defend themselves. > >Interestingly, I was accused off-line of anti-semitism by Mitchell Jones, - " ***{First, I would note that what I said to you via a private e-mail is not an appropriate subject of discussion in a public forum unless you first ascertain whether or not I object to your going public with it. You did not do that, and I consider your failure to do so to be unethical. The reason I raised that point with you in private was simply that mere suspicions are not a fit topic for public discussion. They are divisive, off-topic, speculative, inflammatory, and have nothing to do with science. Yet here we are, after more than a month of seeming quiescence, discussing this in a public forum, thanks to you. Second, I did not "accuse" you: I raised the *possibility* that you were anti-Semitic because your substantive accusations against Jed made no sense to me and because I had been told, in a private e-mail from a third party, that you are inclined toward conspiratorial ravings of the sort that are frequently associated with anti-Semitism. When you denied that you were anti-Semitic, I accepted your denial and thought no more about the matter. However, the fact that you have brought this subject up again, more than a month later and quite unprovoked, makes me wonder if I was not close to the mark after all. As for your protestations that you have some Jewish blood, I can only note that some of the most virulent anti-Semites in world history, including Hitler and Torquemada, could have made that claim. --Mitchell Jones}*** >because [you Jed] were so obviously Jewish " - for my invesigation into your >modus operandi, Jed. I must admit, I did not even know, think to ask or >presume >any relationship. > >I have no disrespect for Judaism, and share some common blood, but I draw my >line >at Mammonism which I think is what I think you are saying is good. > >I cannot believe that you really mean what you say. > >John Allan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 12:37:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28294; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:34:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:34:27 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <362F8907.47DF1B15 css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:35:35 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies References: <199810221913.OAA21192 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5BjR2.0.0w6.3ZuBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23573 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > in either case a false impression is created > among readers of the list that no response was posted, and many readers > will falsely assume that the person whose position had been challenged was > intimidated into silence. Mitch- Every challenge does not need to be justified with a reply. This is why flame wars self perpetuate. I am sorry you feel silence indicates intimidation. Sometimes it is just intelligently expressed disagreement. There is no need to clog the bandwith here with egos, this isn't Argument-L. Don't worry, I wont think any less of you if you don't reply to this.... 8^) -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 12:40:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA30794; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:38:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:38:48 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <362F8A25.59E69C58 css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:40:21 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Yet another post improperly diverted to e-mail References: <199810221913.OAA21196 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aT5bh.0._W7.7duBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23574 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > People need to know what is happening to their > posts and why threads are inexplicably dying. Here is quick fix.: watch what you are doing. If you are too angry to READ what you are sending, you shouldn't send it. No conspiracy, unless your sub-conscious is trying to subvert your higher functions and seize control.... -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 12:44:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA32053; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:41:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:41:08 -0700 Message-ID: <01BDFDB9.5CEC77A0 uzl.ucdavis.edu> From: Dan Quickert To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Lost vortex replies Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:41:59 -0700 Encoding: 19 TEXT Resent-Message-ID: <"x-jBW2.0.jq7.JfuBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23575 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell, Perhaps it was best that your message got sent privately? The issue discussed seems rather far off-topic to me :-) However: If you look at the complete header information, there is a "Reply-To" field, which is set by the list server to vortex-l eskimo.com. That is the address to which many/most e-mail programs will send the reply. Sometimes when replying to someone on the list, people also send a copy to the person they're addressing - so the recipient will get _two_ messages. One message will have the Reply-To as "vortex-l eskimo.com", the other one will have "joe asdf.com". Could that be what happened in your case? If you then replied to the latter message, it would of course not go to the vortex list. Dan Quickert From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 13:02:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA06427; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:55:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:55:57 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981022150000.00711b28 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:00:00 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981022134727.00cb2cb0 spectre.mitre.org> References: <3.0.1.32.19981022104944.0070e478 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"vqEQk.0.La1.DtuBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23576 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 13:47 10/22/98 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote: >I think you are being too much of a skeptic here. I hope you're right. >To increase the decay rate by a factor of 4.5..... Just a minute. Brown claims to remove 1 neutron from Cs-137, thus converting it to Cs-136 which has a 13 day half-life. The 220 kcpm --> 1000 kcpm was just an observation he made in his experimentation which indicated a substantial increase in radioactivity. It was not intended as a measure of the half-life reduction. 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 Oct 22 13:03:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07006; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:57:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:57:18 -0700 Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:53:53 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Bessler versus Newcomen Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810221558_MC2-5D91-CE28 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"MkWbz.0.Cj1.TuuBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23577 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex John Collins points out: Johann Bessler (aka Orffyreus) was also there in 1712 with his "perpetual motion" machine. Strange that two totally different ideas should have crystallized into working machines in the same year of 1712. It was probably the summer as well, certainly we know that Bessler announced his invention on 6th June and Newcomen had a working engine in July of the same year. That is interesting! Consider the fate of the two inventions: Newcomen succeeded commercially, Bessler failed. Yet they had equally good prospects -- assuming Bessler's machine worked. Neither of them had a patent. Newcomen could not patent his engine because Savery had been granted a broad patent in 1698 for his vacuum steam pump. Instead of being upset with Savery, Newcomen went into business with him. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 13:19:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA16555; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:15:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:15:13 -0700 Message-ID: <362F9214.70071833 bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:14:12 -0400 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [off topic] SONY Dream Factory Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QrEPl1.0.Q24.G9vBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23578 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gnorts, Vorts! Those with an interest in the paranormal may wish to visit: http://www.forteantimes.com/artic/115/sonypsi.html to read an article about the closing of SONY's "Dream Factory", a research laboratory on ESP! The results of their efforts seem to have proven the validity of the phenomenon beyond a shadow of a doubt. Quoting: The ESPER lab's greatest success, Sako went on to explain, had come in the field of clairvoyance, the ability to get information about physical objects or distant events that is beyond the reach of the ordinary senses. In one series of experiments, clairvoyance was defined as the ability to "see" letters and drawings on a target piece of paper without the use of sight. One subject was a 10-year-old schoolgirl. Children, Sako explained, are better at such things as clairvoyance than adults. Sako then described his amazing experiment. He would take a piece of paper about 1.5in (3.8cm) square and write or draw something on it. He would then fold it once, twice, three times and then crumple it up. Afterward the experimenter would hand the tiny wad of paper with the target on it to the subject to hold pinched between two fingers, or place the piece of paper in the subject's ear. Sako did not smile. Was he pulling our legs? At first I thought this must be a relic behaviour from using a Sony Walkman but, after further reflection ­ and a look at a paper written by Sako on 'Clairvoyance and Synesthesia' in Journal of International Society of Life Information Science (March 1997) ­ I concluded that this experimental method must be based on the belief that clairvoyance could be due to synæsthesia, a crossing of the senses [see FT113:28-31]. Perhaps the ear could 'see' what was written on the paper? But Sako's own research on the subject showed only the slimmest evidence of synæsthesia in clairvoyance. In a total of 20 trials, there were only two examples for which the first sensation of the target was not visual, but hearing and smell. The best method, Sako told the audience, was "in the ear." We were into deep weirdness here. And when Sako said best, he meant best. In 35 trials, the recognition rate was an astonishing 97.1 per cent; a success rate unheard of in western parapsychology experiments. There were 18 perfectly matching responses, noted Sako, including the equation "1+ 2= 5" (a result which led Sako to comment "It's wrong, but right".) Sixteen responses were so "closely matching" that most western experimenters would likely call them perfect hits. There was one false response. It was too good to be true. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 14:04:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA02251; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:59:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:59:39 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Marinov Motor Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:07:02 -0400 Message-ID: <01bdfdff$ea784400$0c6cd626 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: <"Pag5k.0.1Z.wovBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23579 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ed Wall wrote: >In one test, he uses flimsy foil brushes to contact a stationary wire >stator. The hefty rotor reacts robustly and no reaction force is seen on >the brushes at all. He then tries to use one of the brushes to slow down >the rotation of the rotor and you can see that no braking from the flaccid >foil is possible. IOW, reaction forces are not found in the wires leading >to the brushes, nor in the brushes. - I replied: This is quite impressive on the video tape, but as Horace indicates, it is a qualitative observation. I would also note that Jeff and I have both observed that the force diminishes rapidly with distance from the magnet. The relatively wide fixed ring in this experiment, being closer to the magnet, would provide most of the force. ( Note- Jeff, can you try it with a fixed foil ring to eliminate this objection) And Jeff has corrected my comment with: >Ah, that's where the misunderstanding comes from. In the part of the video >where I use the foil leads, it was just after the part where I'd >substituted a thin piece of wire for the copper ring to show the magnets >respond about the same regardless of ring width. I brushed the flimsy >leads against the bare spots on the wire ring, not on a wide copper one, >and for that matter, the leads actually stroked the top of the wire. Also, >if you review the video, you can see that the ring wasn't secured down >firmly by anything other than a tiny piece of tape--I never have seen much >of reaction forces on the rings, either. - Jeff also objected to calling this a qualitative observation since it is essentially a binary comparison of magnitude. I don't quite agree, but the word definition is clearly not the point here. This observation remains hard to explain by either Lorentz or longitudinal forces. I'm going to view the tape again and I may try to duplicate the test. - George Holz - george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 14:05:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA04091; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:03:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:03:40 -0700 Message-Id: <199810222104.QAA23705 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:03:46 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Yet another post improperly diverted to e-mail Resent-Message-ID: <"YCMJO2.0.d_.gsvBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23581 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> People need to know what is happening to their >> posts and why threads are inexplicably dying. > >Here is quick fix.: watch what you are doing. If you are too angry to READ >what >you are sending, you shouldn't send it. ***{This is just silly. The purpose of sending a message by hitting "Reply" is to turn the function of filling in the "To" and "From" lines over to the e-mail program. For the record: nothing I encounter on usenet makes me angry. I have been doing this for too long, and I have seen too much. I regard usenet as an open sewer, and I do not become angry when I see a turd floating in an open sewer. I do find it frustrating, however, that when I get an e-mail from vortex I cannot simply hit "Reply" and expect my response to go to the list. Whether these bogus "From" and "Reply to" lines are due to programming glitches or deliberate attempts by Bill Beatty to surreptitiously nudge controversial material offline, the result is that I am forced to double-check the "To" line on every post before I hit the send button. That is a waste of my time that I would prefer to avoid. --Mitchell Jones}*** No conspiracy, unless your >sub-conscious is trying to subvert your higher functions and seize >control.... ***{Joking or not, I am not sure why you used the word "conspiracy" here. If Bill Beatty is using these bogus "From" and "Reply to" lines to kill threads, it isn't a "conspiracy." (How can Bill Beatty conspire with himself?) --Mitchell Jones}*** > >-- > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > John E. Steck > Senior Mechanical Engineer > Rapid Tooling Applications > Motorola, Libertyville, IL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets > for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 14:05:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA04062; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:03:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:03:38 -0700 Message-Id: <199810222104.QAA23702 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:03:44 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies Resent-Message-ID: <"zCAFX2.0.L_.fsvBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23580 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> in either case a false impression is created >> among readers of the list that no response was posted, and many readers >> will falsely assume that the person whose position had been challenged was >> intimidated into silence. > >Mitch- > >Every challenge does not need to be justified with a reply. This is why flame >wars self perpetuate. ***{In my opinion, flame wars perpetuate themselves because most people do not use killfiles, or do not use them properly. When I am flamed in a usenet group, I reply once with a post in which I explicitly consign the offending individual to my killfile, and explain why. His name is added to a list of killfile inmates which is part of my signature and included with every post. Result: it is apparent to all that I am simply not reading posts from that individual. For those who are interested, here is the signature that I am currently using: ===================================================== Notice: My posts are an invitation to those who wish to engage in reasoned dialogue, and readers are encouraged to supply any facts or logic which they think may refute my conclusions or my reasoning. They should, however, confine their comments to substantive matters. Reasoned discourse is a polite and non-emotional exploration of evidence and logic, not a put-down contest. Thus I am not interested in a respondent's unsupported assertions, or in his wishful thinking, or in his educational credentials, or in his claims or insinuations about his or my mental state; nor am I interested in insulting, derisive, or mocking comments. While anyone is of course free to post anything he likes, I am also free to not read material which does not interest me. Thus when I encounter, in a reply that has been posted to me, clear evidence that the respondent intends to engage in a put-down contest or to otherwise waste my time, I will simply place the offending party in my killfile and be done with him. Present inmates of my killfile are: Scott Nudds; John Fields; Mati Meron; Fred Kasner; Steve Walz; Robert Erck. ===================================================== I have found that the above technique is very effective in discouraging flame wars. At the same time, it does not encourage people to assume that I have been intimidated into silence, as many people will otherwise happily do. --Mitchell Jones}*** I am sorry you feel silence indicates intimidation. ***{I don't, but it is a fact that many others do feel that way. Since the people in question tend to be lowlifes who use ambiguity as an excuse to believe what they want to believe, I prefer to remove that ambiguity. --Mitchell Jones}*** >Sometimes it is just intelligently expressed disagreement. There is no need to >clog the bandwith here with egos, this isn't Argument-L. ***{True enough. But an unambiguous silence is to be preferred over an ambiguous one. Thus at least one response to a flame is required to remove that ambiguity. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Don't worry, I wont think any less of you if you don't reply to this.... 8^) ***{This is an interesting subject, and on-topic in every group, because it addresses universal concerns. Of course I will reply. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >-- > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > John E. Steck > Senior Mechanical Engineer > Rapid Tooling Applications > Motorola, Libertyville, IL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets > for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 14:06:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA04124; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:03:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:03:41 -0700 Message-Id: <199810222104.QAA23708 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:03:48 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: RE: Lost vortex replies Resent-Message-ID: <"MsvwL2.0.401.isvBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23582 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Mitchell, > >Perhaps it was best that your message got sent privately? The issue >discussed seems rather far off-topic to me :-) ***{I do not consider the subject of oppression and how to respond to it to be off topci in a list that is concerned with unorthodox technology such as the P & F cell or the Newman motor, both of which have unarguably been the objects of oppression. In any case, the issue that I want to raise vis-a-vis these lost replies is simply one of openness. Are these diversions of posts to e-mail occurring due to software glitches, or are they deliberate and surreptitious attempts to "moderate" this list? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >However: > >If you look at the complete header information, there is a "Reply-To" >field, which is set by the list server to vortex-l eskimo.com. That is the >address to which many/most e-mail programs will send the reply. ***{Yes, and both fields seem to vary. Sometimes "From" specifies "vortex-l eskimo.com" and sometimes it specifies the e-mail address of the original sender. Likewise for the "Reply-To" line. The issue remains: are these variations due to programming glitches or are they a list management subterfuge? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Sometimes when replying to someone on the list, people also send a copy to >the person they're addressing - so the recipient will get _two_ messages. >One message will have the Reply-To as "vortex-l eskimo.com", the other one >will have "joe asdf.com". Could that be what happened in your case? If you >then replied to the latter message, it would of course not go to the vortex >list. ***{Nope. That's not what happened. I replied to a post from the vortex server, and my reply was diverted to e-mail. The issue is not what happened, but why. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Dan Quickert From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 14:38:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA17152; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:36:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:36:01 -0700 Message-ID: <005b01bdfe04$22a93240$a31a010a ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:37:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 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-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA17113 Resent-Message-ID: <"Q41g71.0.qB4._KwBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23583 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>If you look at the complete header information, there is a "Reply-To" >>field, which is set by the list server to vortex-l eskimo.com. That is the >>address to which many/most e-mail programs will send the reply. > >***{Yes, and both fields seem to vary. Sometimes "From" specifies >"vortex-l eskimo.com" and sometimes it specifies the e-mail address of the >original sender. Likewise for the "Reply-To" line. The issue remains: are >these variations due to programming glitches or are they a list management >subterfuge? --Mitchell Jones}*** I'm not seeing any switches like this on my end. It might be a mail server somewhere in YOUR path. Perhaps some mailer, somewhere, is replacing the Reply-To field with the From field, for whatever reason. It's not showing up in my copies of Vortex. Craig Haynie Houston From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 14:57:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA24927; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:53:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:53:31 -0700 Message-Id: <199810222154.QAA24821 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:53:37 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Witchcraft Resent-Message-ID: <"FqYBq3.0.J56.QbwBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23584 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I submit the following article as further evidence of the philosophical collapse of Western Civilization, and as an indication that economic collapse and utter ruination lie not too very far ahead. We had better come up with some sort of energy generating technology that can be utilized by individuals in the interim, because otherwise our prospects are dim indeed. --Mitchell Jones **************************************************** Southwestern High School was thrown into turmoil yesterday when a ninth-grader accused her classmate, an admitted practicing witch who is the daughter of a witch, of putting a hex on her. In an incident seemingly more appropriate for a Halloween tale than for a public school, Jamie Schoonover, a 15-year-old freshman, was sent home yesterday with an official city schools discipline form, which cited the reason for the referral as "casting a spell on a student." Earl L. Lee, principal of the Alpha Academy that comprises the school's ninth grade, has summoned the parents of both girls to his office today to sort everything out. "This is the first case I've ever had like this in 29 years," Lee said. "This is totally new to me." Schoonover said it's all a misunderstanding. She would never cast a spell because the principles of Wicca, a form of neo-paganism that she and her mother practice, dictate that whatever you do, good or evil, returns to you threefold. "If she was to go ahead and cast some evil spell, she would look at it coming back to her three times over," said her mother, Colleen Harper. "I don't think that she'd want to do that." Harper says she believes her daughter has become a target because of her religious beliefs, which are not respected by school officials. "I'm highly upset because this is a faith we practice as devoutly as a Christian would practice Christianity," she said. But school officials say the disciplinary action taken against Schoonover is not about religion. "The student was suspended for allegedly threatening other students, which is a violationof the student discipline code, which was established by the Baltimore City school board," said Vanessa Pyatt, a city schools spokeswoman. "The nature of the threat -- casting a spell or whatever -- that doesn't enter into it right now." Lee said the incident began yesterday morning before school. A group of five or six students ran up to him, consoling a girl who was in tears, he said. "The other child was crying so hard I couldn't get anything out of her," he said. "I've never seen a child so upset about anything. I thought she had been in a fight or something, the way she was hysterical and out of control. "They said this new girl at school, who was a witch, who practices Satanism, had cast a spell on her," Lee said. When Lee got back to his office, Schoonover was waiting for him. "I began to question her. I said, `What is this about, you casting a spell on a child?' She said, `I know howto do it, but I would never cast a spell on a child.' "I asked her, Do you practice witchcraft?' And she said, `Yes, I practice witchcraft,'" he said. "It's just so new to us that a child openly admits she practices witchcraft. It's very bizarre to us. So, we wanted to get the parents involved, to see if they had any knowledge of it." Not only does Harper know about it, she practices witchcraft with the girl. Harper, a transsexual who was Schoonover's father but now calls herself her mother, has been a practitioner of Wicca for a year, after dabbling in it for five or so years. "We're not Satanists, simply because Satan is a Christian concept and we don't have anything to do with Christianity," Harper said. "Unfortunately, there are too many superstitions that have been encouraged by Hollywood's depiction of witchcraft." Wicca is a benign religious practice closely associated with nature and nature's cycles, she said. That confusion is at the root of the problem, Schoonover said. According to her version of events, she and friends were sitting around a tree when they noticed other girls had written their own names on rocks there. One of her friends wanted to cross out the names, so Schoonover lent the friend a white-out pen. After crossing out the names, the friend wrote, "Life is a virtue of death." "The girls came over and they thought I had put a spell on them," Schoonover said. "I said, `No, I didn't put a spell on anybody.' " One of the girls began to cry. "That girl was scared stiff," Schoonover said. "She was crying and crying. She would just get scared of me looking over at her." Lee said he was troubled by Schoonover's admission that she practices witchcraft and by the effect that knowledge is having on some students. "Because of the information the child was giving us, we felt it was necessary to send a letter home and to talk with her parents about how it is affecting other children in the school," he said. "The child said she practiced witchcraft, so we want additional information about this witchcraft, whether it's a true religion or not. I have to do some further research." **************************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 15:00:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26150; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:56:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:56:08 -0700 Message-ID: <362FC5C2.4DC sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:54:42 -0700 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Reply-To: stk sunherald.infi.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RF amplifier Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4_AGp3.0.QO6.tdwBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23585 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: All: Anyone here know where I can get schematics for a ~100MHz ~100watt amplifier? Thanks, Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 15:21:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04356; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:17:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:17:13 -0700 Message-ID: <032701bdfe01$0de25100$93b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: , Cc: "George" Subject: Re: [off topic] SONY Dream Factory Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:15:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"lfOS4.0.x31.exwBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23586 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Terry Blanton To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, October 22, 1998 2:19 PM Subject: [off topic] SONY Dream Factory Terry wrote: >Gnorts, Vorts! > >Those with an interest in the paranormal may wish to visit: > >http://www.forteantimes.com/artic/115/sonypsi.html Some snipping. >He would take a piece of paper about 1.5in (3.8cm) >square and write or draw something on it. He would then fold it >once, twice, three times and then crumple it up. Afterward the >experimenter would hand the tiny wad of paper with the target on it >to the subject to hold pinched between two fingers, or place the >piece of paper in the subject's ear. >In a >total of 20 trials, there were only two examples for which the first >sensation of the target was not visual, but hearing and smell. > >The best method, Sako told the audience, was "in the ear." We were >into deep weirdness here. And when Sako said best, he meant best. In >35 trials, the recognition rate was an astonishing 97.1 per cent; a >success rate unheard of in western parapsychology experiments. There >were 18 perfectly matching responses, noted >Sako, The threshold of hearing (zero db)is 1.0E-16 watts/cm^2 ACOUSTIC THROUGH THE EARDRUM AND MIDDLE EAR. The Cochlear sterocillia can "electrically" sense the 0.025 ev thermal vibrations in the cochlear fluids. A 0.025 volt/meter EM wave in air has a power flow of E^2/377 (watts/meter^2) = 1.65E-6 watts/meter^2 or 1.65E-10 watts/cm^2. A microvolt/meter (zero db in EM measurements) easily measured with electronics equipment would be comparable to about 2.7E-19 watts/cm^2. You can probably hear that kind of signal from the "brainwaves" of the person that wrote on the paper before he stuck it in your ear. :-) If you ran some PSI tests on "Rover" you would probably find that his keen sense of hearing and smell would make him PARANORMAL. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 15:33:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA12167; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:30:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:30:31 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981022183052.0088fcb0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:30:52 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981022104944.0070e478 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Vsce-.0.0-2.68xBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23587 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:49 AM 10/22/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > Hit a nucleus with a photon whose energy is greater than the depth of the >nuclear potential well and you can make one or more nucleons come >out....standard physics, as advertised. >.... I can only conclude that either (1) he is just making >serious measurement errors or (2) some other process is responsible for the >observed changes. Not consistent logically. ========================================================= > >A micro-Curie Cs-137 source was "treated with a 40 mAmp beam". Since >photons don't have charge, he must be talking about the electron current in >an x-ray tube. But clearly he can't be making MeV-energy photons directly. > If the accelating potential on the tube was, say, 5 million volts (which >would produce x-rays ranging up to 5 MeV), the tube power at 40 mA would be >100,000 watts!! The tube alone would have to be room-sized to dissipate >the power and to stand off the voltage. Probably a misprint, with 40 microamperes being the current. ;-)X Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 17:05:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA18695; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:03:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:03:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:04:44 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Repressing the vortex "REPLY-TO" line In-Reply-To: <199810222104.QAA23708 mail11.jump.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"2nOPl3.0._Z4.sUyBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23589 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A On Thu, 22 Oct 1998, Mitchell Jones wrote: > ***{I do not consider the subject of oppression and how to respond to it to > be off topci in a list that is concerned with unorthodox technology such as > the P & F cell or the Newman motor, both of which have unarguably been the > objects of oppression. *SCIENTIFIC SUPPRESSION* is on-topic. Politics in general is often flame-bait, and should be discussed via private mail. > In any case, the issue that I want to raise > vis-a-vis these lost replies is simply one of openness. Are these > diversions of posts to e-mail occurring due to software glitches, They occur because your email program put the wrong address in the "TO:" line of your outgoing message. I think this occurs because some subscribers already have a "REPLY-TO:" line in the messages they send to vortex-L. Here is the partial header from the message you attached: From: Jim Ostrowski Reply-To: jimostr ca-ois.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23313 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Yes, the "FROM:" line does not say "vortex-L". This is correct, otherwise the original author of the message would be hidden. As a result, your email program inbox would not display the authors of any vortex-L messages, and you'd just see a long list of "vortex-L eskimo.com" Notice that the "REPLY-TO" line is directing your reply to Jim O., rather than to the list. I am fairly sure that this happens whenever an incoming message has a pre-existing REPLY-TO line. The listserver then passes that line along to the subscribership, unaltered. On the other hand, if an incoming message has no REPLY-TO line, then the listserver inserts this: "REPLY-TO: vortex-l eskimo.com" If I understand this correctly, then the culprit is Jim O's email program. His REPLY-TO option is turned on, and this tells vortex-L to suppress its own. I wouldn't be suprised if other subscribers have the same problem... Yep. In the last bunch of messages, the following authors have their REPLY-TO option turned on. jimostr ca-ois.com jdecker keelynet.com jonesb9 cwnet.com jclark dcn.davis.ca.us rmforall earthlink.net WHen we reply to a message from the above folks, our email programs will insert the author's address in the TO: line. If we don't notice this, then our message will go to the author, rather than to vortex-L. A bug, or a feature? :) > or are they deliberate and surreptitious attempts to "moderate" this > list? Last month when the internet (or eskimo.com?) ate some of your vortex-L messages , you voiced suspicions that I was making them vanish. I explained how the "moderate mode" on this software actually works. Did you miss that message? > ***{Yes, and both fields seem to vary. Sometimes "From" specifies > "vortex-l eskimo.com" and sometimes it specifies the e-mail address of the > original sender. Might you have some examples of this bug? I've not seen it before. My own email inbox displays the "from" line of all messages, and these are always the author's name or email address. I've never before seen a message from "vortex-L eskimo.com". Be aware that email messages usually have both a "FROM:" line, and also a "from" line with no colon. "from" is always the first line of the header, and it gives the routing information. "FROM:" is buried deeper, and gives the return address of the author of the message. Some email programs may not save the "from" line and the routing informatino. > Likewise for the "Reply-To" line. The issue remains: are > these variations due to programming glitches or are they a list management > subterfuge? --Mitchell Jones}*** There is no "list management." There is only me. Why not say what you mean: "or is Bill Beaty trying to confuse me and divert my messages?" The answer is no, Bill Beaty cannot review individual messages for distribution unless full-moderation mode is turned on, and in that case *ALL* vortex-L messages in your inbox will be listed as forwarded, coming from WILLIAM BEATY, rather than from the actual authors. It's a big pain, and you can't tell who wrote what, unless you open every single message. In general, it's the sender's responsibility to verify that their email program has supplied the correct "TO:" line in an outgoing message. It is EXTREMELY UNWISE to trust your mail program to get it right. There are many stories about people who accidentally sent intimate or insulting messages to exactly the wrong people, not realizing that they were responding to a message with a big "CC:" list, or with multiple recipients in the "TO:" line. So..... if anyone wants to post inflammatory assertions on vortex-L and then suppress the replies of their opponents, just turn on your "REPLY-TO" option. Your opponents will never notice that they replied to you in private, and sent nothing to the list. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com www.eskimo.com/~billb EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 17:52:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA03068; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:49:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:49:51 -0700 Message-ID: <362FD33D.7027 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:52:13 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: stk sunherald.infi.net CC: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: RF amplifier References: <362FC5C2.4DC sunherald.infi.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Gb6bJ2.0.pl.kAzBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23590 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > All: > > Anyone here know where I can get schematics for a ~100MHz ~100watt > amplifier? Kyle, the best info for this is any recent copy (my 1984 edition is typical) of "The Radio Amateur's Handbook". Look in the VHF, UHF transmitting section. A friendly "ham radio person" or maybe your local library may provide a copy. Use good structural practice to avoid stray radiation or - be very afraid - the FCC will get you if you don't watch out! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 18:13:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA13716; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:12:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:12:09 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810222154.QAA24821 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 15:10:48 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Witchcraft Resent-Message-ID: <"G9ay73.0.5M3.dVzBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23591 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell - > We had better come up with some sort of energy > generating technology that can be utilized by > individuals in the interim, because otherwise our > prospects are dim indeed. Gee, if it's all going to pot in the next few minutes anyway because there are schoolylard disagreements, why even bother? I would submit comments you posted with the article as evidence that *some* people simply have an very negative outlook, are always going to find what they are looking for every time they open a newspaper or watch TV (that's what they're selling there after all, duh...) and the rest doesn't matter. C'mon, cheer up. Oh, and do we still think that the ultimate Evil One himself, William Beaty, is casting spells on your messages so they arrive at the wrong destinations? (Visions of Bill B. in his Halloween Satan outfit, raising his pitchfork and howling with laughter as Mitchell and the rest of us suffer the horrible *flames* resulting from all our intentionally misdirected e-mail. Trick or Treat!) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 18:38:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA00616; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:31:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:31:59 -0700 Message-ID: <038701bdfe24$bf7d9c80$93b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Spooky teleportation study brings future closer -October 22, 1998 (http://www.c Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:30:10 -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_0384_01BDFDF2.74DB8B60" Resent-Message-ID: <"Eik-l2.0.U9.DozBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23592 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_0384_01BDFDF2.74DB8B60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If Terry Blanton thinks man's vestigal brain-ear Transceiver "PSI" ability from when we were aquatic creatures is *strange*, get a load of what Cal Tech is doing with photons. :-) FJS http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9810/22/science.teleport.reut/ ------=_NextPart_000_0384_01BDFDF2.74DB8B60 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Spooky teleportation study brings future closer -October 22, 1998.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Spooky teleportation study brings future closer -October 22, 1998.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9810/22/science.teleport.reut/ Modified=C073E58C23FEBD0183 ------=_NextPart_000_0384_01BDFDF2.74DB8B60-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 18:46:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA07188; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:44:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:44:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:45:46 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Repressing the vortex "REPLY-TO" line In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"jHtqu1.0.Em1.hzzBs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23593 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 22 Oct 1998, William Beaty wrote: > Yep. In the last bunch of messages, the following authors have their > REPLY-TO option turned on. I searched for more, and found these: William Beaty energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk Noel Whitney < iol.ie> jonesb9 cwnet.com commengr bellsouth.net stk sunherald.infi.net Hold it. *I'M* on that list! But the PINE mailer doesn't have that option. Yet in my sentmail box, some of my messages have REPLY-TO and some do not. > So..... if anyone wants to post inflammatory assertions on vortex-L and > then suppress the replies of their opponents, just turn on your "REPLY-TO" > option. Your opponents will never notice that they replied to you in > private, and sent nothing to the list. The above comment was supposed to have a big " :) " after 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 Thu Oct 22 19:17:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22742; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:12:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:12:56 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 21:23:32 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Witchcraft -- and a touch of humor..... Resent-Message-ID: <"iRASL2.0.6Z5.cO-Bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23594 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell - > > > We had better come up with some sort of energy > > generating technology that can be utilized by > > individuals in the interim, because otherwise our > > prospects are dim indeed. > >Gee, if it's all going to pot in the next few minutes anyway because there >are schoolylard disagreements, why even bother? I would submit comments you >posted with the article as evidence that *some* people simply have an very >negative outlook, are always going to find what they are looking for every >time they open a newspaper or watch TV (that's what they're selling there >after all, duh...) and the rest doesn't matter. > >C'mon, cheer up. Oh, and do we still think that the ultimate Evil One >himself, William Beaty, is casting spells on your messages so they arrive >at the wrong destinations? > >(Visions of Bill B. in his Halloween Satan outfit, raising his pitchfork >and howling with laughter as Mitchell and >the rest of us suffer the horrible *flames* resulting from all our >intentionally misdirected e-mail. Trick or Treat!) > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI Rick, Maybe what is needed to 'balance out' all this witchcraft is a touch of humor.... it's Friday, so what the hell...... O.K.... tiny "drum roll"...... A Golfing Accident A couple of women were playing golf one sunny Saturday morning. The first of the twosome teed off and watched in horror as her ball headed directly toward a foursome of men playing the next hole. Indeed, the ball hit one of the men, and he immediately clasped his hands together at his crotch, fell to the ground and proceeded to roll around in evident agony. The woman rushed down to the man and immediately began to apologize. She explained that she was a physical therapist: "Please allow me to help. I'm a physical therapist and I know I could relieve your pain if you'd just allow me!" she told him earnestly. "Ummph, oooh, nnooo, I'll be all right. I'll be fine in a few minutes," he replied breathlessly as he remained in the fetal position still clasping his hands together at his crotch. But she persisted, and he finally allowed her to help him. She gently took his hands away and laid them to the side, she loosened his pants, and she put her hands inside. She began to massage his crotch. She then asked him: "How does that feel?" To which he replied: "It feels great, but my thumb still hurts like hell!" From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 19:59:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA06792; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:57:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:57:57 -0700 Message-Id: <199810230259.WAA11306 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Wired Magazine 11/98: Cold Fusion Article Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 22:56:39 -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: <"GLshH2.0.wf1.o2_Bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23595 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vortexians: The cold fusion article in Wired Magazine by Charles Platt has just come out in the November issue. Magazines with the article should begin to appear on newsstands in the next few days as the old issue (October) is replaced. Today we were sent a fax of the article, "Dirty Science: The Strange Rebirth of Cold Fusion," by the Wired reprint service. The feature article spans 18 pages. It is one of the very best general media accounts of cold fusion to date. Charles Platt is to be congratulated for his excellent treatment. Get it, read it, think about it. I will not spoil your reading of it by telling you much about it -- except to say that it is brutally frank and that it will open many eyes. Best wishes, Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Ph: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 20:08:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09434; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:03:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:03:09 -0700 Message-ID: <362FED26.495C ca-ois.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:42:47 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski Reply-To: jimostr ca-ois.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies References: <199810221913.OAA21192 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RCxNS3.0.JJ2.j7_Bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23596 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > A week or so ago the following post appeared in my e-mail. When I responded > to it, my response went out as a private e-mail to jimostr ca-ois.com, > rather than as a post to vortex-l eskimo.com. That was contrary to my > intentions, as I had intended to post it. Ya shoulda made sure vortex-l eskimo.com was in the "Mail to:" box then. Examining the header information > on the post to which I was responding, I see what happened: my e-mail > program picked up the address on the "From" line and sent the response to > it. Since the "From" line reads: "Jim Ostrowski ," > that's what got picked up and that's where my response went. Uh-huh. > My conclusion > is that the vortex-l software is causing some replies to be lost because it > is putting the address of the original sender in the "From" line. How did you arrive at THAT conclusion ? You just said a minit ago: > my e-mail > program picked up the address on the "From" line and sent the response to > it. This means you just weren't paying attention to what your email program was doing. > The > address in the "From" line should be "vortex-l eskimo.com" for all e-mails > that are sent out by the vortex-l list server. If some go out with the > address of the original sender in the "From" line, those posts will be > diverted to e-mail, and the threads will be killed. If this is being done > intentionally, it is not significantly different than simply deep-sixing a > post without comment, because in either case a false impression is created > among readers of the list that no response was posted, and many readers > will falsely assume that the person whose position had been challenged was > intimidated into silence. Jeez. Does anybody here think I intimidated Mitchell into silence? Actually I thought we had a rather nice private e-mail discussion , Mitchell. I really though a lot about your suggesstion that I relocate to New Zealand, instead of complaining about the gov't here so much. On the other hand, if these events are due to a > programming glitch, it needs to be corrected. The programming glitch I think is in your email program. My intention was to carry that discusion off line and even remember suggesting that to you. You complied apparently and didn't mention that you thought you were being repressed somehow. This one has nothing to do with Bill setting up any weird mail cancelling program. Anyway , Hello and cheers to all vortexers. Sorry I haven't posted anything lately, been working on updating my website and learning the html thing. Nothing really new to report on the ftl front but my renditions of the Sansbury Experiment at http://www.ca-ois.com/jimostr has got a couple of physicists arguing about the "shoulder effect". These guys agree though a retest should be done. Ummm let's see, the two FTL evidenciary Sansbury scope screen shots are now available in gif format. I'm working on the definitive Philip B. Wright Interoscitor and will let everyion know when it is up and running. Enjoying everyone's posts, lurking as I have been. Oh, Kyle McAllister please let me know your site address again I lost it somewhere, sorry. Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 22:23:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA15421; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:19:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:19:50 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981023011954.008a1cb0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 01:19:54 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981022104944.0070e478 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"EZgBw1.0.Im3.r71Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23597 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:49 AM 10/22/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >But clearly he can't be making MeV-energy photons directly. > If the accelating potential on the tube was, say, 5 million volts (which >would produce x-rays ranging up to 5 MeV), the tube power at 40 mA would be >100,000 watts!! The tube alone would have to be room-sized to dissipate >the power and to stand off the voltage. Still don't understand the skepticism here. (the electrical current issue was discussed in the previous post) Linear accelerators are available to 25 MeV although usually 6 to 10 MeV are more usual. There are even van de Graff machines which can deliver circa 3 MeV. These megavoltage devices (implying > 1 MeV) are standard equipment throughout the world and are used routinely and daily, including for the comprehensive, adjuvant, and palliative treatment of solid cancers. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA18832; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:26:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:26:30 -0700 Message-ID: <19981023052840.13618.rocketmail send102.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:28:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Flow and static calorimeter accuracy To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"Sgd0o1.0.yb4.xD1Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23598 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >I think one needs to use a uniform thickness of a stable relatively non-conductive material, like G-10 sheet. If you used thin sheets of foam, for example, you could run into problems with aging effects on the gas contained in the foam cells...not to mention moisture absorption effects. Yes, those are problems I had in mind. >How about this: A sheet of, say, 1/8" thick G-10, perforated with small holes on a regular grid spacing, say 1/2". Lace up the sheet by threading fine (~0.005" dia) thermocouple wire thru the holes and make the junctions via spot welding on both sides. As you look as one side of the sheet, you'll see chromel wire emerge from one hole, bend and lie flat against the sheet and head towards a second hole. Halfway there it ends and is welded to alumel wire which continues on and goes down through the second hole. On the back the reverse process occurs so that chromel wire again emerges from the third hole. The process repeats until all the holes in the sheet are laced up with thermocouples in series. >Now, on each side of this panel, smear the laced up sheet with thermally conductive epoxy and lay on a sheet of, say, 5 mil Kapton (a good electrical insulator that is thin enough to be a minimal thermal barrier). Apply more conductive epoxy to the exposed side of the Kapton and lay on a sheet of aluminum or copper, maybe 0.020" thick (1/2 mm). Press the sandwich under significant pressure to expel excess epoxy and cure it. Now we have a 1/8" G-10 sheet with more-or-less thermally homogeneous skins applied to it which are populated with the required TC junctions. I don't think you have enough uniformity, for a couple of reasons. 1) There might be fairly large air bubbles trapped between your sheets. If so, you don't know whether some thermocouples are under a bubble and read low (because less heat flows across the G-10 sheet there) relative to the heat flowing through the rest of the square of area that the thermocouple represents. Or, a big bubble might cover some of that square area, and the amount of heat flowing through the square would be less than one would believe based on that thermocouple's voltage. Now, the bubbles might average out in a calibration. But what if one side of the calorimeter had more bubbles than the others. Then the calorimeter would no longer be insensitive to the location of the heat source inside. Similarly if one or a few major fractions of of the box had especially more or especially fewer bubbles. 2) I don't know how much more conductive thermally conducting epoxy is than G-10 sheet. Maybe 10 times more? Anyway, the thermocouples junctions cannot be made to lie evenly on the surface of the sheet (or can they?). So, the thermal impedance depends on how far the junction is from the G-10 surface. If this distance is less than 10% of the G-10 thickness, and the epoxy is 10 times more conductive, then we have only a 1% error. Maybe it is easier to skip all the layers, etc., and just use the air. This is what Oriani did. The TC junctions are exposed to air on each side of the wall. Here I think the key is to avoid temperature gradients between where the junctions actually are and the wall. Also, one must ensure that the TCs are not affected by thermal radiation any differently than the wall. Hmmm, this doesn't sound easy, either. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 23:09:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA00598; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:05:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:05:38 -0700 Message-ID: <19981023060643.16186.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:06:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"JBJMJ.0.G9.oo1Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23599 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Brown's idea indeed transmutes nucleii by photo dinsintegration. However, he does not address details. Even if the photodisintegration cross section is as large as 0.1 barn, that's still small. It means that the photon will travel about 1 meter on average before it produces a photodisintegration. Therefore, to not loose too many of those photons, which cost energy to make, the radioactive target must be about a 2 m diameter sphere at a minimum. Unfortunately, a 2-10 MeV photon stops long before that, in roughly 10 cm, by interactions with the electrons (e.g. ordinary x-ray shielding). The disparity of nuclear vs electron process cross sections condemns this technique to energy inefficiency. True, the one liberated neutron can produce a second transmutation, but that cannot overcome the large loss outlined above. The photo of Brown's apparatus in IE did not look capable of housing a multi MV x-ray source. But maybe I am wrong, and there are compact betatrons. A multi MV linear accelerator or van de Graff is quite a bit bigger than Brown's racks. One thing I will say in favor of photodisintegration: you don't need a neutron source (fission or fusion reactor, or heavy ion linear accelerator and spallation target). Several people (myself included in the 1970s) have studied transmutation of fission waste by one technique or another. Most considered using neutrons and (n,gamma) reactions. This works if the target isotope has a large neutron cross section, and if the result of the (n,gamma) yields a stable or short lived isotope. One must remove the "clean" product nucleii before they absorb a neutron themselves, since the subsequent product is often radioactive again! Similar considerations apply to photodisintegration. The neutron bombardment method would work for I-129 because it has a 30-some barn cross section. However, both Sr-90 and Cs-137 have cross sections under 1 barn, and too many neutrons just rattle around and eventually escape the target and get absorbed in surrounding structure (which gets activated). The race against Nature is tough. Both of these latter two isotopes have about 30 yr half lives. This means that in 150 yr their activity will be less than 1% of today's level by natural decay alone. After 900 yr the activity will be 1 billion times less (10^9). By that time fission reactor waste hazard is dominated by Pu. In principle, low-tech engineered structures in a dry climate can contain the waste for 1000 yr; the Egyptian pyramids are an example of 5000 yr containment of organic materials, some of which are fragile. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 22 23:46:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA09404; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:45:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:45:15 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981023014727.009521d0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 01:47:27 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981023011954.008a1cb0 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981022104944.0070e478 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"sGR6e.0.sI2.xN2Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23600 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:19 AM 10/23/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>The tube alone would have to be room-sized to dissipate >>the power and to stand off the voltage. > > Still don't understand the skepticism here. You're right that Mev machines are in common usage but they're BIG. I've worked around a 3 MeV VdG before and it would fill a typical bedroom. In Gene's editorial, Brown's machine is described as a "high-energy x-ray machine". To my knowledge, x-ray tubes go up to maybe several hundred kilovolts but not up into the millions. Anyway, since there're some differences of opinion here, let's just ask Dr. Brown about the photon source. Does anybody have an email address for him? Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 00:07:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA14239; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 00:05:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 00:05:51 -0700 Message-ID: <36302610.F7F ca-ois.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:45:36 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski Reply-To: jimostr ca-ois.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"NtVfZ2.0.PU3.Eh2Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23601 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Dear Vortex, Has any one had experience with the so- called Taos Hum type phenomena? I haven't any recently , but there are two interesting spots in CA where one would expect nothing but the sound of the wind or perhaps birds or coyotes. I heard a "hum" that seemingly came from under the ground at both of these spots. There are definitely some unusual elements about both of these places, besides the intermittant humming that I heard while camped out at both locales for several weeks. Now this hum is said to be a subjective phenomena and not everyone can hear it, but others who were in my company could hear it too and it wasn't always there , particularly not on weekends. Besides this, it would stop for several minutes at a time and abruptly resume. I'll relate the more recent experience first. Between March and late June of 1995 I decided to take a rather extended vacation in the California Desert. This was a sort of "working" vacation where the enterprise I was engaged in at the time allowed me to telecommute via cellphone/internet mail connection. I had this nice Dodge Van which was the tow vehicle for my RV type trailer. For anyone interested in such details , here are specific directions to this very beautiful but mysterious location that I will describe thereafter: >From Lancaster , CA head east on "L" street about 24 miles to 240th street , way the hell out in the desert and turn right on 240th. Continue south about one mile and look for a dirt road (may not be marked anymore) which is actually "K" street. Go left here, and proceed 9/10ths of a mile and stop. Get out of your vehicle and look for any signs of a path that I made through the brush and chapparal to the top of a low rising knoll directly south , towards the San Gabriel mountain range in the distance. When I visited this area again in May of this year, I forgot to check for the 9/10th of a mile spot just mentioned and could find no sign of any kind of path whatsoever, but I expect the wind and rain have done their work over these few years and it is gone. At any rate this 9/10ths mile point will get you in the general vicinity so now head more or less south maybe a couple hundred yards to the highest point within that range of yardage. >From this high point a good pair of binoculars should help you see the following features: 1. Two "Pyramids" at 152 degrees S/SW. These are actually the tops of two mountain peaks maybe 8 or 9 miles distant. The illusion that they are pyramids is created by the fact that you ar on a sort of plateau, but a rather strange one that appears to slope UPWARD in the direction to the peaks , but just 30 more degrees towards due south it most definitely is sloping downward toward the valley between you and the San Gabriel Mountain Range , about 20 miles distant. 2. A "Mystery Base" ala area 51 at about 180 degrees...really! This base is complete with 3 upturned parabolic reflectors approximately 30 -50 feet in diameter. You may be able to see parked vehicles and some activity by the base personnel. On maps of the area this is marked as some kind of "airport" as if it were a convenient landing strip for light planes or something like that. NO WAY. Another interesting feature of this "airport" site is a really odd looking building a mile or so to the east of all the satellite dishes. It is rectangular in shape with a square hole at the bottom center sort of similar in general appearance to the Arch de' Triumph in Paris. The central square hole faces back in a straight line to a wing shape structure closer to the the main buildings on the base. While I was there in '95 I decided to check this place out by driving up to it. You do this just by getting back on 240th and proceeding for 8 miles, then theres a road to the left again about a mile so this base exactly lines up with our "spot" 180 deg. There were absolutely no signs saying anything or giving any clue as to what this palce was on the road leading up to the locked gate. When I got there I told that guard who appeared in a brownish uniform that I was a highly qualified RF FCC emissions spec technician looking for a job , and that I was driving by and just happened to notice all the parabolic reflecting antennas and was wondering if they could use any help. I was told "We don't have any such personell here". "You don't have any RF technicians?" "No." "What kind of things do you do here?" "Test." With this rather terse statement I got the distinct impression that I was not welcome in his little world , so I thanked him and turned tail. Later I came to realize that what I said must have sounded fishy to him because from the nearby roads, (the N-S 240th or the E-W El Mirage road) , the parabolic reflectors are not at all visible. it is only when you can get some elevation looking down on the base with good binoculars (we're talking 8 miles) that you can see them. Gee wiz it's getting late so will close for now and tell y'all about the other spot in NORTHERN CA later. Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 01:09:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA23731; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 01:07:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 01:07:26 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981023080153.27af8d72 aapi.co.uk> X-Sender: jcollins aapi.co.uk (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Collins Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:11:26 +0100 Resent-Message-ID: <"EINlb3.0.eo5.za3Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23602 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 15:53 22/10/98 -0400, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >John Collins points out: > > Johann Bessler (aka Orffyreus) was also there in 1712 with his > "perpetual motion" machine. Strange that two totally different ideas > should have crystallized into working machines in the same year of 1712. > It was probably the summer as well, certainly we know that Bessler > announced his invention on 6th June and Newcomen had a working engine in > July of the same year. > >That is interesting! Consider the fate of the two inventions: Newcomen >succeeded commercially, Bessler failed. Yet they had equally good prospects -- >assuming Bessler's machine worked. Neither of them had a patent. Newcomen >could not patent his engine because Savery had been granted a broad patent in >1698 for his vacuum steam pump. Instead of being upset with Savery, Newcomen >went into business with him. > >- Jed And Newcomen was just as paranoid as Bessler about losing his secret to the competition. He wouldn't allow any of the many visiters to his works at Dudley to see how the machine operated. They had to be content with watching the impressive flow of water cascading out of the machine building, not to mention the pall of smoke which hung around the area, caused by the coal-fired boiler. One foreign dignitary arrived with his complete entourage from London (over 100 miles away by horse and carriage) and was turned away without seeing anything. The parallels between the characters of the two men and their differing destinies are striking. One must assume the reasons for Bessler's failure and Newcomen's success lay in the acceptance of the scientific principles which lay behind the two inventions. John > > Author of 'Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?' - for more information and details on ordering, visit my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 01:29:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA28391; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 01:24:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 01:24:20 -0700 Message-ID: <19981023082530.2625.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.73.204.24] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Meyer fuel cell output Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 01:25:30 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"j_4Hl1.0.Xx6.qq3Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23603 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi John, What was the best output that Meyer got with his fuel cells. If Chris Eccles claims 10 times over unity that is some claim. Anyone know what volume of hydrogen+oxygen gas would be required to power a 1600cc engine in idle mode? Because it is so volatile I imagine the amount of gas would be very little. The contruction of my test water fuel cell is coming along now. The capacitor plates and container have been completed. The electronics are built and need testing. The wire and coils still need to be ordered and wound. I will keep you posted of my progress. Rob King ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 04:15:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA23524; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 04:10:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 04:10:04 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <36302610.F7F ca-ois.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 01:08:35 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Resent-Message-ID: <"oingj.0.Il5.9G6Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23604 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jim - My copy of the Antigravity Handbook (which I keep with me at all times) has pictures of some weird stuff attributed to Lockheed and others out there around Hesperia, which looks on the map to be pretty near there. One is of what appears to be a massive sunken structure, perhaps an entrance to some large underground structure. The source of these "photos" is pretty silly, but there probably are some large secret underground facilities run by the Mil or their big contractors. But they're supposed to be a secret, so don't give them away, ok? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 05:14:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA10003; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 05:13:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 05:13:40 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981023081354.007dfbc0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:13:54 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981023014727.009521d0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981023011954.008a1cb0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981022104944.0070e478 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ICtNz2.0.DS2.pB7Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23605 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:47 AM 10/23/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >You're right that Mev machines are in common usage but they're BIG. I've >worked around a 3 MeV VdG before and it would fill a typical bedroom. Sometimes even two rooms. ;-)X The 3 MeV van de Graff which we use subtends two floors. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 06:10:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA26048; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 06:09:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 06:09:30 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981023081325.00715450 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:13:25 -0500 To: info nucsol.com From: Scott Little Subject: photoremediation Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"shyXU3.0.pM6.908Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23606 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dr. Paul Brown Nuclear Solutions Dear Dr. Brown, I read with interest the article about your technology in the latest issue of Infinite Energy. I readily accept the photodisintegration phenomenon but I have difficulty believing that a suitable source of Mev-range photons is technically feasible. Without revealing proprietary information, can you provide some general information on your photon source? For example, what is the average energy of the photons used to treat Cs-137? What kind of machine generates these photons? How much electrical energy is consumed by the photon machine in treating 1 gram of Cs-137? I look forward to your reply. Thank you very much. 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 Oct 23 06:55:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA07739; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 06:53:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 06:53:34 -0700 Message-Id: <199810231354.JAA15207 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 09:51:44 -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: <"D8In3.0.pu1.Nf8Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23607 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Anyway, since there're some differences of opinion here, let's just ask Dr. >Brown about the photon source. Does anybody have an email address for him? C'mon Scott! Are you too cheap to use your phone to call Dr. Brown and ask him any questions you wish? His phone number, address, and WWW site are clearly indicated in the banner of the article. Why don't you talk to the man before you dump on him with your skepticism? While you're at it, why don't you ask him about the 75 watt nuclear battery that he has in the past operated continuously for two months, which has only 1.1 Curie of strontium-90 in it. This was discussed by him on pages 52-53 of IE #13 and 14. There is, he states, a discrepancy between the kinetic energy of the radioactive emissions (30 milliwatts), versus the 75 watt output of the battery. He has a formula in the article to "explain it away" as the "magnetic energy" of the motion of the charged particles. I buy his data, but I am not sure I buy the explanation. It seems to me that this might be a rather profound O/U device, don't you think? Maybe other Vortexians can explain how 30 milliwatts of particle kinetic energy can translate to 75 watts of electrical output. Best wishes, Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Ph: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 07:20:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA18061; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:18:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:18:14 -0700 Message-ID: <36309064.B4BF7683 bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:19:16 -0400 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: [Fwd: UFO UpDate: Art Bell is Back] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------B25F36F54907F3E1D0A7F494" Resent-Message-ID: <"dDMCv3.0.2Q4.b09Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23608 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. --------------B25F36F54907F3E1D0A7F494 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >From Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS). Looks like AB hoaxed it all. Terry <><><><><><><><><><><> --------------B25F36F54907F3E1D0A7F494 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from mail3.bellsouth.net (mail3.bellsouth.net [205.152.32.6]) by mail.atl.bellsouth.net (8.8.8-spamdog/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA18124; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:32:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp1.globalserve.net (smtp1.globalserve.net [209.90.144.2]) by mail3.bellsouth.net (8.8.8-spamdog/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA13325; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:32:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from buddy-guy (dialin1186.toronto.globalserve.net [209.90.134.169]) by smtp1.globalserve.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id WAA15619; Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:20:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from updates globalserve.net) Message-Id: <4.1.19981022204936.04dffbd0 mail.globalserve.net> X-Sender: updates mail.globalserve.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:54:16 -0400 To: updates globalserve.net From: UFO UpDates - Toronto Subject: UFO UpDate: Art Bell is Back Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Stig Agermose To: updates globalserve.net Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 23:57:56 +0200 Subject: [CAUS updates] - Art Bell is Back--Hip Hip Oy Vay! Dear CAUS Subscribers: CAUS just received the following e-mail from a subscriber in the know: "Well Peter, it's official. Art Bell just signed a new contract and should be returning to the air waves shortly. As I understand it, Art's new contract will be announced October 26th, or he'll be back on the air that date. That's the good news! The bad news is that Art's claim that his family is threatened is phoney baloney. His family is just fine." "Art has told us that if we were in his shoes, we'd do the same thing. I suppose he means by that if there was that much money at stake, we'd lie to America like he did. You know .... he may just be right. I suppose most of us would gladly sell our soul if the money was right. I guess in his case, it was." Peter A. Gersten Director \_______________________________________________/ UFO UpDates - Toronto - updates globalserve.net A UFO & Related Phenomena E-Mail List operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp - 416-691-0716 UFO UpDates Archives are available at http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates MUFON Ontario's Home Page: http://www.globalserve.net/~updates/mufon/ --------------B25F36F54907F3E1D0A7F494-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 07:54:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA26927; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:51:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:51:19 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981023095444.0070bb0c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:54:44 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation In-Reply-To: <199810231354.JAA15207 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Q9myB.0.Ta6.MV9Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23609 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:51 10/23/98 -0000, E.F. Mallove wrote: >Why don't you talk to the man before you dump on him with your skepticism? He asked for it! Why didn't he at least give SOME description of what is clearly the most critical part of his technology: the photon source. If Brown's technology IS feasible, his photon source is the real secret. I just can't believe that he would completely omit any mention of such a great achievement from his article. >...has only 1.1 Curie of strontium-90 in it. a discrepancy >between the kinetic energy of the radioactive emissions (30 milliwatts), versus >the 75 watt output of the battery. It looks ever worse (better) than that! I get only 3.56 milliwatts from 1.1 Curies of Sr-90. Each beta has 0.546 Mev of energy and 1.1 Curies produces 4.07E10/sec of them. 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 Oct 23 08:01:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30883; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:59:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:59:27 -0700 Message-Id: <199810231500.LAA29923 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Press Release on Wired CF Article Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 10:58:10 -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="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA30804 Resent-Message-ID: <"Tfblz2.0.GY7.Cd9Cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23610 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: € € € PRESS RELEASE € € € Wired Magazine¹s Expose¹ of the Cold Fusion Scandal FROM: Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Phone: 603-228-4516; Fax: 603-224-5975 http://www.infinite-energy.com and New Energy Research Laboratory (NERL) Bow Technologies Center Bow, New Hampshire October 23, 1998 Concord, NH ‹ Wired Magazine, the high-tech journal of the digital age, takes a giant leap forward for truth in science journalism with its latest issue. Charles Platt¹s 18-page expose¹ article in the November 1998 Wired, ³Dirty Science: The Strange Re birth of Cold Fusion² makes it abundantly clear that the world very likely is facing an energy and scientific revolution of unprecedented scale. Infinite Energy magazine initiated Platt¹s interest in the subject, as he recounts. Platt also identifies one of the key problems for cold fusion, which is not the lack of results or significant publication, but the refusal of key opinion-molding science journals to publish scientific papers with rock-solid findings that are at odds with supposedly bullet-proof theories of modern physics and chemistry. Platt faults science journalist Gary Taubes, who assaulted the reputations of scientists at Texas A&M University in 1990, and later in his negative book, with what quickly proved to be totally false allegations of fraud. Platt discusses the work of scien tists at Los Alamos National Laboratory and elsewhere that refute the allegations. When asked, Platt told Infinite Energy magazine that Taubes refused to allow his comments to Platt to be published. Infinite Energy Magazine is proud to have contributed to the one of the best single journalistic accounts on the cold fusion scandal since the famous Fleischmann and Pons press conference at the University of Utah on March 23, 1989. Infinite Energy¹s Edi tor-in-Chief, Dr. Eugene Mallove encouraged author Charles Platt to explore cold fusion and draw his own conclusions, and he did. Platt writes: ³At most, the story of cold fusion represents a colossal conspiracy of denial. At least, it is one of the str angest untold stories in 20th -century science.² Of course, Infinite Energy magazine agrees with the first possibility, but readers of Platt¹s seminal investigative report can decide for themselves. To investigate the cold fusion scandal, Platt traveled to cold fusion companies and interviewed some of the hundreds of scientists who work in this field as heroes unsung by the general media, such as The New York Times ‹ which continues to act as though cold fusion science and technology do not exist. Platt attended the Seventh International Conference on Cold Fusion in Vancouver, British Columbia in April 1998 to see for himself whether cold fusion evidence is real, or whether hundreds of scientists ar e engaged in mass-delusion. It is unfortunate that other science journalists did not attend ICCF7, preferring as they do to follow the path of least resistance, which is to say ‹ to do nothing. Perhaps after reading the expose¹ by Charles Platt, they wil l have second thoughts. But don't hold your breath! *** END *** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 09:12:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA21891; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:09:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:09:42 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981023120927.007d4130 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:09:27 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981023095444.0070bb0c mail.eden.com> References: <199810231354.JAA15207 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"S5KRE.0.RL5.2fACs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23611 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:54 AM 10/23/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >At 09:51 10/23/98 -0000, E.F. Mallove wrote: > >>Why don't you talk to the man before you dump on him with your skepticism? > >He asked for it! Why didn't he at least give SOME description of what is >clearly the most critical part of his technology: the photon source. If >Brown's technology IS feasible, his photon source is the real secret. I >just can't believe that he would completely omit any mention of such a >great achievement from his article. > >>...has only 1.1 Curie of strontium-90 in it. a discrepancy >>between the kinetic energy of the radioactive emissions (30 milliwatts), >versus >the 75 watt output of the battery. > >It looks ever worse (better) than that! I get only 3.56 milliwatts from >1.1 Curies of Sr-90. Each beta has 0.546 Mev of energy and 1.1 Curies >produces 4.07E10/sec of them. > IMO Dr. Brown did not "ask for it". And cant see why the photon source matters, either. Scott's calculation is a good effort, but inaccurate. Strontium 90 (which I have used scores of times for local comprehensive adjuvant irradiaton of human pterygia) decays with a half life of 28 years to form the isotope Yttrium 90. Thereafter 90Y decays in 64 hours. The former distingration yields electrons of maximum energy 0.54 MeV as Scott correctly states, however, the latter reaction yields 2.27 MeV. Sr90 thus yields a well-known local energy absorbed per distingration of effectively ~1.1 MeV. So the local energy deposited is about twice what Scott calcualtes, and is circa 7.2 milliwatts for the stated materials and quantities. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 09:21:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28474; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:17:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:17:22 -0700 Message-ID: <36309F88.4783 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:23:53 -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: Chubb: Blue: band state theory 10.22.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wUboc.0.Yy6.FmACs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23612 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Kawasaki: Chubb: Storms: four critiques 10.21.98 Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:11:17 -0400 From: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil To: rmforall earthlink.net CC: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil > Subject: Re: Chubb: Blue: band state theory 10.16.98 > Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:16:20 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > >I find it rather amazing that after years of discussion with >Scott Chubb it is still neccessary to go over some of the >basics which keep getting slid under the rug. Things have progressed. Possibly, it would be useful (given your later comments) if you looked in some detail at my last two messages. Where you claim we are "sliding things under the rug," I infer from your comments that your major criticism has to do with a key point: transferring energy from the nuclear degrees of freedom to the electrostatic degrees of freedom. Is this correct? > >We are considering a complex system involving many degrees >of freedom. As Scott has said, a key part of his theory is >to make a Born-Oppenheimer separation to make the problem >tractable. Simply stated you have an "atomic" part of the >wavefunction that is not influenced by what is going on >inside any of the nuclei. Scott addresses that part of the >wave function and only that part of the wave function. This is a gross over-simplification and mistatement. The nuclear portion of the wave function is addressed. But we have not emphasized it. This is covered in our Fusion Technology 1990 or 1993 papers. However, we have not discussed the nature of the coherence associated with the nuclear reaction (as outlined below) except in passing in the ICCF6 Proceedings paper. >For his problem the deuterons are just lumps that interact via >the electrostatic potential. Again, it is simply untrue that we have treated the deuterons as lumps. I think it would be useful to focus on the important point, the process of transferring energy to the lattice and the associated nuclear coherence. >So he as made them into something equivalent to heavy >electrons with some of them moving through the lattice >very much like conduction electrons. I suppose from the perspective of one used to thinking in terms of "free particles", you might envision them as "heavy electrons" because deuterons are 4000 times heavier than electrons. And they do behave like conduction electrons. But, in point of fact, this perspective misses an important point. In the very limiting situation where the picture applies, only a very small fraction of a deuteron occupies each unit cell, while normally, one thinks of a situation in which integer numbers of electrons are present in each cell. From this perspective, the deuteron is actually an extremely "light" electron because it is more like a "wave" than a particle and the concept of light or heavy has little relevance. >Now when he speaks >of "coherence" in the wave function, all he is thinking >about is that part of the wave function that involves the >center-of-mass motion of the deuterons. Not true; I pointed out that at T=0, coherence is the rule, not the exception. And I alluded to the fact that Schwinger pointed out that in general separating the nuclear degrees of freedom from the electrostatic degrees of freedom using a "simple" factoring of the wave function into these two forms of interaction is not allowed. In particular, in these comments, I was alluding explicitly to the fact that in a true T=0 situation, it is not possible, in general, to apply Born-Oppenheimer separability. This is because at T=0, it simply is not necessarily the case the coherent nuclear interactions and coherent electrostatic interactions will proceed on very different timescales. I think this is the fundamental point of disagreement between us. It has nothing to do with whether or not I am considering the nuclear problem. We are in fact doing this. The bone of contention that has been the sore point over the years is that initially we did not provide a mechanism for explaining how it is possible to maintain very different timescales for nuclear and electrostatic interaction (which is required in order for Born Oppenheimer separability to be meaningful) and to have energy released to the environment. The key point that is new that I do not think you appreciate is that we are suggesting a way of accomplishing this. This is provided by a coherent interaction that keeps both the nuclear and electrostatic portions of the wave function in their ground states. General interactions do not allow this to happen. But there is a very specific, size dependent one that does. It works in the following way: 1. Because the centers of mass of potential nuclear by-products and reactants are found at all periodically equivalent locations, overlap between potential nuclei occurs at all periodically equivalent locations; 2. This overlap can be evaluated using a standard strong force model, subject to the constraint that the zero of kinetic energy of the deuteron+deuteron system be shifted upwards by 23.8 MeV relative to the zero of kinetic energy of the ground state 4He system; 3. But to be consistent with the requirement that periodic order be maintained, the associated reaction must be viewed as occurring at all periodically equivalent locations at once (which is equivalent to requiring that each nuclear wave function is also in a band state). The missing ingredient in this description is that the nuclear as well as the electrostatic portions of the wave function occupy band states. In normal situations, because of the short range nature of the strong force, it might appear that to require the nuclear portion to be in a band state is absurd. In fact, when it is required that the interaction not raise the energy of the system or result in disruptions in periodic order and that latent heat not be introduced, 1. Born Oppenheimer separability is required, and 2. the nuclear portions of the wave function must occupy band states. How this comes about is a separate issue, involving, amoung other things, order-preserving ("Umklapp-like") elastic recoil processes in which potentially large amounts of momentum are transferred to the nuclear portions of the interaction, for example. The final point is once the nuclear reactions are distributed, how does energy become distributed to the lattice. There is a unique way to accomplish this: through a shift of the zero of energy through a "recoil process" in which residual (positive and negative) charge builds up at the boundaries of the ordered, crystalline solid, as I have discussed previously. >When he suggests I should read the literature on hydrogen in metals, that >is absolutely all he has in mind. No, I think you should also re-read our papers, especially our later papers. >People have not been suggesting that hydrogen in metals induce nuclear >reactions. No, but people have identified anomalous quantum phenomena that illustrate that your picture of D-loading in Pd is seriously flawed. And it was in this context that I made my comment. >That's something Scott Chubb dreamed up. Now does the >coherence to which he makes reference justify the notion >that nuclear reactions will result? I say not. I hope that the comments I have included above provide some useful input concerning what I believe to be relevant about the question of coherence. >When I use the word "coherence" as it applies to nuclear >wave functions, that implies a heck of a lot of things that >I can't get Scott to focus on. I want to see the NUCLEAR >PART of the WAVE FUNCTION. I hope this message provides comments that illustrate to you that I have focused on this question. >You know, the part you separated >off from the problem back at step one. Again, see my earlier comments. >I agree that the nuclei are generally in their ground state >and, thus, at T=0, and I would expect them to stay there >no matter how you stir the soup, because it takes a zillion >times more energy to excite them than is available from >thermal or chemical processes. That is why you can separate >off the nuclear degrees of freedom. End of cold fusion >discussion, one would think. > >Now you want to describe a nuclear reaction process within >the context of some theory -- say deuteron ion band states >in a Pd lattice. That's fine with me, but let's not cheat. >Let's bring the nuclear wave functions back into the picture >right from the beginning, so we can tell what's true and not >true about this system. I hope my comments have provided some clarification concerning this point. > >The point I was trying to make with regard to coherence of >the wave functions is that you don't get coherence of the >nuclear part of the wave function just by making your ion >band state. You did not include the nuclear wave function >in the problem. Initially, we did not do this. And the assertion of Born-Oppenheimer separability, by itself, not only does not do this, it makes potential nuclear reactions impossible unless other factors are considered. The problem of maintaining a ground state that is coherent and periodically ordered, on the other hand, in a finite solid does lead to a situation in which Born-Oppenheimer separability can be maintained and the associated nuclei occupy band states. >It follows that you can say absolutely >nothing meaningful about the nuclear part of the wave function. > >You see we actually lied when we agreed that the nucleus is >at T=0. If you consider the degrees of freedom associated >with the orientation of the deuterons, I suspect they are >not actually at T=0. The energy differences between the >various states of orientation are rather very tiny compared >to the lattice temperature so, as I said, we have a maximally >disordered system, and no coherence of the nuclear wave >functions. You are simply not addressing that part of the >problem, when you do the separation. There are magnetic anisotropies associated with orientation that may very well be important in triggering potential reactions. >Of course, for most phenomena associated with the said PdD >lattice the orientation of the deuterons makes absolutely >no difference. There is no interaction with anything that >cares which way is up inside a deuteron so that part of the >wave function is separated and forgotten. > >Now, however, we come to a phenomenon that will care about >the orientation of the deuterons -- especially if coherence >is to play such a significant role as Scott Chubb claims. >What he atempts to do, however, is to use something that >could possible result from a coherence without admitting >that the system is not conducive to the establishment of >such a condition. The deuterons are disoriented. There >is no coherence in the NUCLEAR PART OF THE WAVE FUNCTION. See above; and note the comments about maintaining the ground state. Also, note that I also was throwing up a "red flag" deliberately to point out that the "naive" picture of deuterons as particles with arbitrary orientations is exactly that, "naive." >Ion conduction bands have absolutely nothing to do with >this aspect of the problem. You're playing your game >in the wrong ball park. > >Dick Blue I thought we were making progress. I am not so sure, based on these last comments. However, I do see from the next set of comments that maybe we are making progress. Anyhow, it probably would be helpful, I think, if both of us would spend less time on tirades concerning points of confusion and more time dealing with genuine points of disagreement. (I do note in passing that my comments about your looking at the Hydrogen in Metals literature could be construed as being condescending; I did not mean for them to be taken in this way, and I apologize if they were.) > >Subject: Re: Chubb: Blue: corrected, more on band state theory 10.13.98 > Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:32:45 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > > >Scott, >Is there someplace in your theory where you write down >a Hamiltonian for the system including the nuclear >interaction potential? This is done in our Fusion Technol 1990 paper but not in a way that incorporates the coherence of the nuclear wave functions. In the ICCF6 Proceedings, this is done more rigorously. >All you ever describe is a >coulomb potential. Now I want to know how you can >get nuclear wave functions to be coherent over distances >comparable to many lattice spacings. Just saying >that they have that coherence is not going to move >me from my position that you are being unrealistic >about the way real systems behave. The calculation proceeds as follows: 1. assume the strong interaction occurs as it normally does but that the resulting energy release is distributed to all periodically equivalent locations (because the initial and final state nuclei occupy also occupy band states), 2. distribute this energy through a (coherent) shift of the kinetic energy zero of each unit cell relative to the zero of kinetic energy of the region surrounding the solid, 3. this is equivalent to shifting the chemical potentials of the electrons and ions relative to the electrostatic zero of the solid (which leads to a coherent redistribution of charge at the boundaries of the solid). >I an not really >interested in T=0 approximations, if we are clearly >operating in a realm of maximum disorder. > >Granted that the deuterons are spatially positioned >in a lattice. I'll even let you get away with >ignoring lattice vibrations. That still does not >make the deuterons line up in a lattice with regard >to nuclear orientation. Of course that makes no >difference as long as all you have in the problem >is a coulomb interaction between point particles. >What I suggest, however, is that you cannot do >nuclear reaction physics that way. The only "change" is to say that you really can not say where the reaction is occurring. You can say that it is occurring on the average at all periodically equivalent locations in the solid. >A lattice of deuterons is an ordered lattice only >with respect to some of its coordinates. It's not >right that you should go from that to an implicit >assumption that you are dealing with an ordered >lattice with respect to all the coordinates. This is an excellent point. See my comments from the previous message about maintaining the system in its ground state. > >How do you address the deuteron orientation question? > >I also am unhappy with the notion that the actual >reaction does not occur within the lattice. How >do you know what is going on at the boundary? > >Dick Blue Charge neutrality, on a unit cell by unit cell basis, determines where the boundary begins and ends. The reason the reaction proceeds in the manner that is suggested is that the proposed mechanism maintains the conditions required by the ground state. When these conditions hold, energy is minimized in the bulk region, while charge is released outside this region. This can (and probably does) involve a redefinition of where the bulk region begins and ends. There is an important subsidiary effect: when the scenario that I have described holds, crack formation within the bulk (and the associated energy costs) are minimized with maximal disorder occurring outside the bulk. This is consistent with what is observed. The scenario that I have presented is most rigorous in the low temperature limit. At higher temperatures, other, competing energy dissipation channels become accessible. Dr. Scott R. Chubb Code 7252 Naval Research Laboratory Washington, D.C. 20375-5351 PHONE: 202-767-5270, FAX: 202-767-3303 EMAIL: chubb ccf.nrl.navy.mil, chubb@neptune.nrl.navy.mil From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 09:37:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA04276; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:33:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:33:56 -0700 Message-ID: <3630A362.7AA3 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:40:18 -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: Storms: Blue: CF debate 10.23.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"J98mq2.0.k21.q_ACs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23613 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: CF debate 10.15.98 Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:57:22 +0000 From: Edmund Storms To: rmforall earthlink.net To Rich et al. Reply to Dick Blue > In the context of my reply, an "expert" is someone who has spent enough > time with his particular apparatus that he knows when the output signal > is real and when it is not. When Prof. Takahashi tells me that his > neutron detector sees neutrons of 2.45 MeV, I believe him. He has spent > years refining the detector and has much more experience knowing whether > gamma rays affect the signal than you or I. Just because Dick Blue can > propose an error does not mean that this error has not been considered > by an equally intelligent and careful worker and eliminated to the > necessary degree. Does Dick Blue think everyone else is so easily > fooled? > Here is a prime example of what I am suggesting is wrong with the way Ed Storms deals with questionable results. If Prof. Takahashi tells him the neutron detector sees neutrons of 2.45 MeV, that becomes a fact that I dare not question. What I was trying to indicate is that I do question the Takahashi claims on the basis of a real limitiation of the technique he employs. I actually have in my possesion, somewhere, copies of the transparancies from a Takahashi talk which detail his electronic methods. I can point to a place in his presentation where he actually shows evidence for the mixing of gamma and neutron reponses at the level I suggest is more or less par. You can only reject about 99% of the gamma rays. It's a fact whether Takahashi and Storms acknowledge it or not. Takahashi's own view-graphs show the problem for anyone who knows where to look. --Tell me Dick, what would you have me do instead? Takahashi says, “of course gamma rays have an effect but I have taken this into account”. So you say, Takahashi does not know where to look but you do. Why should I trust your assertion any more than you trust Takahashi to know what he is doing? The problem is that you are so sure no such neutrons can be emitted that you will find the slightest reason to reject the claims. On the other hand, Takahashi has no reason to claim to see such an emission if it were not present. You see, the same knife cuts both ways. If this were the only observation of 2.45 MeV neutrons or if such an observation were critical to accepting the CANR claims, I would feel more enthusiasm for debating this point. As it is, this is only one more example of the great difference in how you and I evaluate experimental results.-- I have read the Reifenshweiler paper and I commented at great length on the obvious problems with these results at the time they first appeared in CF circles. It is but another very marginal experiment that is being sadly misinterpreted. As you should understand, the detector in this case is not actually responding to betas from tritium. They do not reach said detector. Instead the response has to be due to secondary radiation, basically bremstrahlung arising from the stopping of betas in the matrix which surrounds the tritium at the time of decay. Also the detection geometry is very bad such that changes in effective source position can have a large effect on detected rates. Now, if you change the chemical composition of the material in which the tritium resides or transport tritium from one location to another, that may well change the rate being recorded by the detector. Let me suggest that the conditions of the experiment clearly are causeing just the sort of changes that can account for the observed rate variations. It is not neccessary to resort to a CANR process to explain the data. --You may have a point here. However, Reifenshweiler makes a gooid case for the size of the crystals being too small to stop beta emission.-- > The Miles-Bush results, admittedly, produced only a small amount of > excess. If this were the only evidence for the effect, you would have a > point. However, when all of the data from many sources (many giving > huge values), are taken together to demonstrate the existence of a > phenomenon, then the Miles-Bush data can be seen as being real and used > to show the relationship between the small, but real, amount of heat and > helium production. Once a phenomenon is accepted, we in science have > never needed every subsequent study to be so well done as to answer > every possible objection. > Why do we have this ongoing shell game? Either the Miles-Bush calorimetry is up to stuff or it is not. When I suggest that perhaps the excess heat claim arising from these data is on shakey ground you want to direct our attention elsewhere. --It is no shell game. The world is not black and white. Some data are compelling and some are supportive. Shades of gray exist in between. The Miles-Bush data are good and they demonstrate what they intend to demonstrate. However, to accept the initial claims for a nuclear reaction, which I accept, more data are required and especially data having a greater magnitude. Fortunately, such data are available so I do not need to use the Miles-Bush data to do anything more than show a general, not exact, relationship between heat production and helium generation. This relationship is consistent with an energy production near but not necessarily equal to a fusion-type reaction. Other possibilities can be considered but this is a good step toward believing a fusion-type reaction is the source of heat.-- > We seem to be hung-up on this issue. I wish, indeed plead with Dick to > read the literature which can be accessed through the bibliography in my > reviews. If I were to attempt to plot a histogram as Dick suggests, I > would produce a bimodal plot. There would be a sharply peaked curve > centering near zero with a small tail on the positive side. Then comes > a gap followed by another curve. This second curve has a broad peak near > 500 mW and extends with rapidly decreasing frequency up to about 75 > watts excess. Because a variety of sample sizes containing a variety of > active sites were used to obtain these data, the shape of this second > curve has no fundamental meaning. If we were seeing only the first curve > near zero, as Dick would suggest is the case, I would agree, data > selection or random variations might be the explanation. However, the > second peak provides an indication that something else is going on. In > addition, which region a particular sample falls depends on a clear > relationship to its ability to acquire deuterium. Thus, two independent > properties (excess energy production and ability to acquire deuterium) > both self-select the samples into the same two sets. Can you explain how > this can happen by a random process? Perhaps I should not ask such a > question because I think you have the talent to explain anything to fit > your beliefs. > OK, so you claim that a histogram of your results shows a clear separation between runs that yield no excess heat and one that show an effect. It's only taken nine years to get anyone to say that unambiguously. I agree that a second peak requires some further explanation, and you may actually have given us a significant clue. You suggest that apparent excess energy production correlates with ability to acquire deuterium. Let's assume that you mean the "good" runs show higher loading. How do you determine that? --The reason for the nine year delay is obvious. It takes time to obtain data in this field. However, you can see this effect in any data which were obtained using the same geometry. The comparison also has to be made at the same applied current. The effect is present in the SRI data, for example. However, as you point out, few people report their negative results so the peak clustering near zero generally has few points. The composition, in my case, is determined by measuring the oxygen remaining in a closed cell after the D has gone into the Pd. The fact that you needed to ask this question indicates to me that you have not read my papers. If you would seed me your address by private e-mail, I will mail copies.-- > Blue-Scott Chubb Discussion > Several facts about the state of deuterium in the palladium-deuterium > compound need to be recognized. > > 1. The presence of a lattice automatically restrains the deuterons to a > degree of order. > 2. The actual nuclear-active lattice is probably PdD2, a structure in > which the deuterons are paired. Such pairing would produce additional > ordering. > 3. The distance between the deuterons within these pairs is expected to > be less than the distance within the gaseous D2 molecule. > 4. It is impossible to attribute the temperature coefficient of excess > energy production (which is positive) to the nuclear process because > temperature will also change the amount of nuclear-active material > present. > I believe these four points do nothing to address the points I have been raising with Scott Chubb. In particular (2) is an unproven assertion. (True, but very likely true based on observation) An expectation that the deuteron spacing is lessened relative to that of D2 molecules is of little significance unless and until it is quantified and verified. --Still, it is likely and worth considering.-- Should it actually be true what sort of increase in fusion rate would follow? More importantly what would make the fusion process different from my expectations which involve neutron emission? --Perhaps it is not fusion at all but alpha emission from a deuteron activated heavy nuclei. Can you see your way clear to examine this possibility?-- The sort of ordering refered to in (1) is not sufficient to account for any coherence in the nuclear wave function. Until the orientation of the deuterons is considered, as well as their position in a lattice, we still have nothing of significance to address. I might also point out that we clearly are dealing with a very soft lattice with respect to the position of the deuterons, so to suggest a great deal of coherence over many lattice spacings is pretty unrealistic, as well. --If you mean by soft, the atoms are free to move, then I agree. This freedom, rather than being a negative to coherence, I suggest would allow atoms to move easily and do what their neighbors were doing, hence allow a common action. After all, an electron is “soft” in this way yet it can form Cooper pairs and, as such, move freely in a “coherent” manner. I agree, none of this argument would seem to allow the magnitude of coherence you require to affect the nucleus.-- Finally, Ed Storms is looking for an excuse to say that there is no reason to expect anything other than a random response to changes in temperature. If the data is all noise anyway, it's quite reasonable to expect no very specific dependences on any of the experimental parameters. By the way, has anyone forgotten that the preferred mode of excitation for these cells is one in which the power input varies randomly with time? Random inputs and random outputs with no established dependence on any experimental parameters -- strange stuff this CANR. --On the contrary, I expect, and indeed find, the effect to have a positive temperature coefficient which is caused, I believe, by increased stability of the nuclear-active regions as temperature is increased. “All noise anyway” is your conclusion, not mine. The overall power input is not random with time. The output power is random within a narrow range but with a net excess power. The effect is seen at constant applied power as well as when the power level is changed. Dick Blue is like a man who will not start on a trip unless he has a map and, once the map is chosen, he will follow it come Hell or high-water. I, on the other hand, am trying to draw the map. To do so, I need to go down blind alleys, speculate on what might be over the next hill, and take some shortcuts. This describes a basic difference in viewing life-experiences, and it is the reason why we will never agree on where to go or how to get there.-- Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 09:45:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA09793; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:42:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:42:04 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:49:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies Resent-Message-ID: <"PpG033.0.tO2.R7BCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23615 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I wasn't going to say anything about this, but I just can't resist throwing my 2 cents worth into the pot. At 2:35 PM 10/22/98, John Steck wrote: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> in either case a false impression is created >> among readers of the list that no response was posted, and many readers >> will falsely assume that the person whose position had been challenged was >> intimidated into silence. > >Mitch- > >Every challenge does not need to be justified with a reply. Yes, yes, yes! Protracted debate generally accompishes very little except using up a lot of bandwidth. In matters of physics, the business of this list, this is especially so, as experiments are the ultimate arbiters. Opinion can't change physical reality (that's my opinion. 8^) The great thing about this list has been the cooperation and mutual support, not the debate The opening words of the Desiderata are brought to mind by this issue: "Go placidly amid the noise & haste, & remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible without surrender be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly & clearly; listen to others; even the dull & ignorant; they too have their story. Avoid loud and agressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit. ..." It could have been written yesterday, yet is dated 1692. Speaking for myself, silence is not surrender. I wouldn't expect that of others either. Silence generally comes when all there is to be said has been said. My times of silence have not, nor are ever likely to be, the result of initimidation from the list. Beyond that, demands of the day, or of my family, are far more likely sources of silence or brief hurried responses than anything said on a list. Like others, I see a lot of postings I personally would rather not spend the time to discuss at all. There are so many great ideas to discuss and explore. I have never had any use for a killfile. My difficulty at times has been selecting which threads to read in the time available. Well there's my two cents worth. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 09:45:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA09702; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:41:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:41:51 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981023114549.0070989c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:45:49 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981023120927.007d4130 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981023095444.0070bb0c mail.eden.com> <199810231354.JAA15207 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2vDOu3.0.PN2.E7BCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23614 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:09 10/23/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > IMO Dr. Brown did not "ask for it". > And cant see why the photon source matters, either. Brown's article is analogous to a hot fusion proponent explaining how the fusion process in our sun works and ending with a glowing summary of how wonderful this new energy process will be for mankind....without even mentioning how he plans to make a practical hot fusion reaction occur here on earth. The problem of rad waste has received a tremendous amount of attention over the last few decades. It is a certainty that nuclear physicists have evaluated photodisintegration as a remediation technique. The fact that it is not in widespread use implies that it must not be practical. Perhaps the energy cost is too high. Perhaps it is nearly impossible to obtain the necessary flux of Mev photons. This critical issue should have been the central theme of Brown's article. Instead he completely omits any mention of it! >The former distingration yields electrons of maximum >energy 0.54 MeV as Scott correctly states, however, the latter reaction >yields 2.27 MeV. Thank you. In that case, since the short-lived Y-90 will be in equilibrium with the Sr-90, wouldn't we get 2.27+0.54 MeV out for every Sr-90 decay? If so that works out to about 18 milliwatts from 1.1 Ci of Sr-90 (I'm talking about the total power emitted by the isotope system). 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 Oct 23 09:53:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA15262; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:49:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:49:10 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981023124919.007d7730 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:49:19 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981023114549.0070989c mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981023120927.007d4130 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19981023095444.0070bb0c mail.eden.com> <199810231354.JAA15207 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ip4WS2.0.Kk3.5EBCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23616 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:45 AM 10/23/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >>The former distingration yields electrons of maximum >>energy 0.54 MeV as Scott correctly states, however, the latter reaction >>yields 2.27 MeV. > >Thank you. In that case, since the short-lived Y-90 will be in equilibrium >with the Sr-90, wouldn't we get 2.27+0.54 MeV out for every Sr-90 decay? >If so that works out to about 18 milliwatts from 1.1 Ci of Sr-90 (I'm >talking about the total power emitted by the isotope system). Scott: The numbers which I posted are those which are actually measured. You might try "The Physics of Radiology", Harold Johns, Cunningham, Thomas publisher (Ill.) (1981) page 740. as one place to corroborate this. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 09:54:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA16798; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:51:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:51:01 -0700 Message-ID: <3630A76D.6F84 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:57:33 -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, jimostr@ca-ois.com Subject: Murray: Ostrowski: Taos Hum in Santa Fe 10.23.98 References: <36302610.F7F ca-ois.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"HyXeg3.0.O64.qFBCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23617 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Oct. 23, 1998 Hello Jim Ostrowski, Yes, my friend Sondra and I had the classic Taos Hum experience one night in 1995 or 1996, about midnight, in her small old adobe home two blocks from St. Francis Drive, a four-lane highway in the middle of Santa Fe, about a half-mile south of the arroyo of the Santa Fe River. We both heard a very low-pitched vibrating sound, not loud but definitely present, which we couldn't find a source for in the house, nor outside. We even walked around the block, wondering if a big truck was idling nearby, in the calm, quiet night. We noticed the sound for hours. It kept Sondra awake. I've noticed it a few other times, in various locations, sometimes while in meditation, and guess it may be a subtle psychic phenomenon. Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 09:58:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA21005; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:56:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:56:41 -0700 Message-Id: <199810231657.LAA13499 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:56:39 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Witchcraft Resent-Message-ID: <"kdHth2.0.z75.8LBCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23618 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell - > > > We had better come up with some sort of energy > > generating technology that can be utilized by > > individuals in the interim, because otherwise our > > prospects are dim indeed. > >Gee, if it's all going to pot in the next few minutes anyway because there >are schoolylard disagreements, why even bother? ***{That's obviously not what I said. Why not respond to what was actually posted, Rick? --Mitchell Jones}*** I would submit comments you >posted with the article as evidence that *some* people simply have an very >negative outlook, are always going to find what they are looking for every >time they open a newspaper or watch TV (that's what they're selling there >after all, duh...) and the rest doesn't matter. ***{And your comments, above, are merely evidence that you would be better off responding to what is actually posted. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >C'mon, cheer up. Oh, and do we still think that the ultimate Evil One >himself, William Beaty, is casting spells on your messages so they arrive >at the wrong destinations? ***{I didn't say that, either. --MJ}*** > >(Visions of Bill B. in his Halloween Satan outfit, raising his pitchfork >and howling with laughter as Mitchell and >the rest of us suffer the horrible *flames* resulting from all our >intentionally misdirected e-mail. Trick or Treat!) ***{Communication is facilitated when one responds to what is actually said, rather than to fantasy images that exist only in ones own mind. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 10:11:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA27216; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:08:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:08:50 -0700 Message-ID: <3630B84F.8FF1C9D ping.be> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 19:09:35 +0200 From: Robert HOFFMANN Reply-To: R.Hoffmann ping.be X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Interesting update on the site of J-L Naudin References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"bpADp1.0.se6.WWBCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23619 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Free Energy Generator (COP=1.35) from Nicolay Zaev http://members.aol.com/jnaudin509/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 10:20:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA32212; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:18:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:18:06 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <3630BA9F.50C9385B css.mot.com> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:19:27 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Geometry Reference Site Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_vxs71.0.1t7.CfBCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23620 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vorts- Researching geometric constructs? Check out The Geometry Juckyard: Neat site. Haven't had to go back to the search engine since finding it. 8^) -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 10:59:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA14503; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:57:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:57:05 -0700 Message-Id: <199810231758.MAA14965 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:57:03 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies Resent-Message-ID: <"ixIj22.0.WY3.mDCCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23621 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >> A week or so ago the following post appeared in my e-mail. When I responded >> to it, my response went out as a private e-mail to jimostr ca-ois.com, >> rather than as a post to vortex-l eskimo.com. That was contrary to my >> intentions, as I had intended to post it. > >Ya shoulda made sure vortex-l eskimo.com was in the "Mail to:" box then. > > Examining the header information >> on the post to which I was responding, I see what happened: my e-mail >> program picked up the address on the "From" line and sent the response to >> it. Since the "From" line reads: "Jim Ostrowski ," >> that's what got picked up and that's where my response went. > >Uh-huh. > >> My conclusion >> is that the vortex-l software is causing some replies to be lost because it >> is putting the address of the original sender in the "From" line. > >How did you arrive at THAT conclusion ? You just said a minit ago: > >> my e-mail >> program picked up the address on the "From" line and sent the response to >> it. ***{I wanted my reply to go to vortex-l eskimo.com. When it didn't, I assumed that was because the address on the "From" line was the address of the original sender--e.g., you--rather than vortex-l. It turns out, however, that the problem arises a bit differently. When the original sender of the message--you, in this case--has a "Reply-To" line and puts his personal e-mail address there rather than the address of vortex-l, he causes responses to his post to be diverted to e-mail rather than to the list. Here, for example, is the header information from your current post (the one to which I am now responding): Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:03:10 -0700 Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:42:47 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski Reply-To: jimostr ca-ois.com <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23596 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com X-UIDL: 8cf091dfd6ce01dba035d1aa0766572e Note in the above that your "Reply-To" line is set to divert responses to private e-mail rather than to the list. (I have inserted left arrows to point out the problem.) What you need to do, if you want to participate in public discussion on the list, is to set "Reply-To" to direct responses to "vortex-l eskimo.com" rather than to "jimostr@ca-ois.com." --Mitchell Jones}*** > >This means you just weren't paying attention to what your email program >was doing. ***{I wouldn't have to if you would set your e-mail program up with the correct "Reply-To" address, now would I? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >> The >> address in the "From" line should be "vortex-l eskimo.com" for all e-mails >> that are sent out by the vortex-l list server. If some go out with the >> address of the original sender in the "From" line, those posts will be >> diverted to e-mail, and the threads will be killed. If this is being done >> intentionally, it is not significantly different than simply deep-sixing a >> post without comment, because in either case a false impression is created >> among readers of the list that no response was posted, and many readers >> will falsely assume that the person whose position had been challenged was >> intimidated into silence. > >Jeez. Does anybody here think I intimidated Mitchell into silence? ***{Relax, Jim. I wasn't tense when I wrote that, and there is no reason for you to be tense when you read it. A real problem exists here, and the goal is to solve it, nothing more. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Actually I thought we had a rather nice private e-mail discussion , >Mitchell. >I really thought a lot about your suggesstion that I relocate to New >Zealand, instead of >complaining about the gov't here so much. ***{I also thought we had a nice discussion, but I thought we were having a *public* discussion. I was interested not merely in your thoughts and responses, but also in the thoughts and responses of others. Bill Beatty says such discussions are "flame bait," but I think the deterioration and impending collapse of this civilization is too important a topic to be set aside on a trivial account such as that. It is a tragedy that the best and the brightest people in this society are now seriously considering flight to another country as a viable option, in preference to enduring the tyranny that is being fastened down upon us. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > On the other hand, if these events are due to a >> programming glitch, it needs to be corrected. > >The programming glitch I think is in your email program. My intention >was to carry that discusion off line and even remember suggesting that >to you. You complied apparently and didn't mention that you thought >you were being repressed somehow. ***{Herewith, between the lines of asterisks, is the post in which you made that suggestion: ********************************************** Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:27:12 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski Reply-To: jimostr ca-ois.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! X-UIDL: e0dc39fafba4a59069fc5ce78cdadf7d Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >If any of these "kooks" try to enslave, rob or cheat you in some kind of > >systematic way > >(such as by being so numerous and powerfull that they , in summary , > >amount to the de-facto "government" ) - do you then have the right to > >shoot any of their armed representatives (cops)? > > ***{What one has a *right* to do and what one ought to do are not > necessarily the same thing. Oppressed peoples obviously have a right to > resist oppression, but it is an unfortunate fact that in most cases armed > resistance is futile and hence idiotic. Well if we look at the recent examples such as Waco and the Randy Weaver conflict in hindsight you could say Weaver and Koresh were idiots. On the other hand thier examples serve as lessons for the rest of us to study as to how NOT to go about resisting ruthless power. This can lead to positive strategies that have a better chance of working. When the oppression is severe, the > best course of action is generally to emigrate (flee) to a country where > you will receive better treatment. When the degree of oppression is less, > or when relocating is not a viable option, the proper response may be to > hunker down and try to ride out the bad times. --Mitchell Jones}*** > Hunker down? Isn't that what weaver did? > > ***{As noted above, if you cannot leave the country, then in most cases you > can't prevent it. Armed revolution is almost never a viable option, and > those who recommend it are almost invariably idiots. It makes precisely as > much sense as telling a robber, as you stare at the muzzle of his gun, that > he has no right to take your wallet. --Mitchell Jones}*** It's interesting that in the Weaver case the gov't never admitted wrongoing but Weaver got I think a couple of million for his trauma. (a "refund" - in a way). Most robbers do not give refunds. > ***{To repeat: if there is a country where things are significantly better, > go there. ("Where freedom is, there is my county.") Otherwise, be prepared > to suffer. --Mitchell Jones}*** > I've been told on more than one occasion that if I don't like the way things are here, leave. I'm doing the best I can to rig up my RV with antigravity pontoons and outfit it for spaceflight, but it may take a little while before it's ready. In the meantime guess I'll have to "hunker down" as you say. > > > >It's one thing to talk, a completely DIFFERENT thing to ACT on > >principle. > > ***{It is possible to act on principle without ignoring the realities of > the situation. Those who respond to mild oppression by shooting cops are > idiots, and those who respond to severe oppression by shooting cops, when > emigration is a viable option, are also idiots. --Mitchell Jones}*** > Well Weaver then may have been an idiot. but I think that is a rather cruel armchair quarterback's criticism of someone who was acting out of priciple within the confines of his OWN HOME. None of us were there. We better take this off line , Mitchell, if you want to continue this. Someone here is bound to object to such off topic musings. Jim O. > > > >Jim Ostrowski ********************************************** Note in the above your suggestion, near the end, that "We better take this off line." The clear implication is that you thought we were online. However, if you will go back to the top of the post and examine your "Reply-To" line, you will discover that you already had it set to take my response offline. It is set to direct my reply to your private e-mail address, rather than to vortex. Likewise, if you will go back to your very first post on this subject, you will discover the same thing: that your "Reply-To" line was set to take replies offline, rather than to vortex. Bottom line: you need to change your "Reply-To" setting to read "vortex-l eskimo.com" when you reply to a post on this list. Otherwise, everybody who intends to respond to you on the list will have to manually intervene to prevent their posts from being directed offline. That is a pain, and it can only be avoided if you set things up properly at your end. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >This one has nothing to do with Bill setting up any weird mail >cancelling program. ***{Absolutely. It has to do with Jim Ostrovski setting up his "Repy-To" to divert replies offline. :-) --MJ}*** > >Anyway , Hello and cheers to all vortexers. Sorry I haven't posted >anything lately, been working on updating my website and learning the >html thing. Nothing really new to report on the ftl front but my >renditions of the Sansbury Experiment at http://www.ca-ois.com/jimostr >has got a couple of physicists arguing about the "shoulder effect". >These guys agree though a retest should be done. > > Ummm let's see, the two FTL evidenciary Sansbury scope screen shots are >now available in gif format. I'm working on the definitive Philip B. >Wright Interoscitor and will let everyion know when it is up and >running. > >Enjoying everyone's posts, lurking as I have been. > >Oh, Kyle McAllister please let me know your site address again I lost it >somewhere, sorry. > >Jim O. ***{By the way: your "Reply-To" is *still* set to direct replies offline. I had to manually intervene to ensure that this post went to the list rather than merely to you. Doing that is a pain, and the best solution is for everybody to set "Reply-To" to read "vortex-l eskimo.com" when they post to the list. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 11:05:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17020; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:03:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:03:54 -0700 Message-Id: <199810231804.NAA15067 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:03:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Repressing the vortex "REPLY-TO" line Resent-Message-ID: <"RqsV52.0.l94.9KCCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23622 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Thu, 22 Oct 1998, Mitchell Jones wrote: >> ***{I do not consider the subject of oppression and how to respond to it to >> be off topci in a list that is concerned with unorthodox technology such as >> the P & F cell or the Newman motor, both of which have unarguably been the >> objects of oppression. > >*SCIENTIFIC SUPPRESSION* is on-topic. Politics in general is often >flame-bait, and should be discussed via private mail. ***{It is difficult to draw the line, since the scientific suppression arises from a root cause that lies in general politics--to wit: the fact that average people today have no clearer idea of the nature of human rights than did their stone-age ancestors. They think nothing of using state power to steal personal property (e.g., via conscription), or intellectual property (e.g., via the patent-law obstacle course), or material property (e.g., via environmental restrictions). The public "education" system has produced a generation of mindless, "dumbed-down" savages who can scarcely read or write, who escape from deserved self-loathing via drugs, deafening "music," and gang-related violence, rather than by efforts at self-improvement, and who believe in witches and demons and worship trees (as a consequence of mindless absorption of "green" propaganda). Like their barbarian predecessors who overran the Roman empire, they are a phenomenon which civilization cannot survive, and one which it will not survive. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >> In any case, the issue that I want to raise >> vis-a-vis these lost replies is simply one of openness. Are these >> diversions of posts to e-mail occurring due to software glitches, > > >They occur because your email program put the wrong address in the "TO:" >line of your outgoing message. I think this occurs because some >subscribers already have a "REPLY-TO:" line in the messages they send to >vortex-L. > >Here is the partial header from the message you attached: > > From: Jim Ostrowski > Reply-To: jimostr ca-ois.com > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Art Bell quits broadcasting! > Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com > X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23313 > X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com > Precedence: list > Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com > >Yes, the "FROM:" line does not say "vortex-L". This is correct, otherwise >the original author of the message would be hidden. As a result, your >email program inbox would not display the authors of any vortex-L >messages, and you'd just see a long list of "vortex-L eskimo.com" > >Notice that the "REPLY-TO" line is directing your reply to Jim O., rather >than to the list. I am fairly sure that this happens whenever an incoming >message has a pre-existing REPLY-TO line. The listserver then passes that >line along to the subscribership, unaltered. On the other hand, if an >incoming message has no REPLY-TO line, then the listserver inserts this: >"REPLY-TO: vortex-l eskimo.com" > >If I understand this correctly, then the culprit is Jim O's email program. >His REPLY-TO option is turned on, and this tells vortex-L to suppress its >own. I wouldn't be suprised if other subscribers have the same problem... >Yep. In the last bunch of messages, the following authors have their >REPLY-TO option turned on. > > jimostr ca-ois.com > jdecker keelynet.com > jonesb9 cwnet.com > jclark dcn.davis.ca.us > rmforall earthlink.net > >WHen we reply to a message from the above folks, our email programs will >insert the author's address in the TO: line. If we don't notice this, >then our message will go to the author, rather than to vortex-L. > >A bug, or a feature? :) ***{A feature which apparently becomes a bug when not properly understood. As such, it is a matter which merits discussion, and your comments are appreciated. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >> or are they deliberate and surreptitious attempts to "moderate" this >> list? > >Last month when the internet (or eskimo.com?) ate some of your vortex-L >messages , you voiced suspicions that I was making them vanish. I >explained how the "moderate mode" on this software actually works. Did >you miss that message? ***{No. But the problem continued, and as a result my concerns continued. It didn't happen often enough that I was willing to bring it up again, until yesterday. I simply assumed that the server glitch that you mentioned at one point was continuing to strike occasionally, and ignored it. Finally, the other day, the accumulated frustration drew my attention back to the problem, and resulted in the post to which you are responding. The suspicions to which you refer were due to the fact that you are in a position to control the flow of posts to this list and that you sometimes take it upon yourself to do so. As a result, vanishing posts or misdirected posts can be due to two causes: the actions of software, or to your actions. That is simply the reality, and the suspicions were a reflection of that reality. No offense was intended. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >> ***{Yes, and both fields seem to vary. Sometimes "From" specifies >> "vortex-l eskimo.com" and sometimes it specifies the e-mail address of the >> original sender. > >Might you have some examples of this bug? I've not seen it before. My >own email inbox displays the "from" line of all messages, and these are >always the author's name or email address. I've never before seen a >message from "vortex-L eskimo.com". ***{Your point is well taken. Looking back at four or five posts, I failed to find an example. I should have looked back before agreeing with the earlier statement, but I relied on memory instead. --Mitchell Jones}*** Be aware that email messages usually >have both a "FROM:" line, and also a "from" line with no colon. "from" is >always the first line of the header, and it gives the routing information. >"FROM:" is buried deeper, and gives the return address of the author of >the message. Some email programs may not save the "from" line and the >routing information. > >> Likewise for the "Reply-To" line. The issue remains: are >> these variations due to programming glitches or are they a list management >> subterfuge? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >There is no "list management." There is only me. Why not say what you >mean: "or is Bill Beaty trying to confuse me and divert my messages?" ***{That is not what I meant. I never for a moment considered the possibility that you had singled me out for special treatment. My assumption was that you might be in the mode of diverting to e-mail *all* messages that you considered to be inappropriate or off-topic, regardless of whether they came from me or from someone else. --Mitchell Jones}*** >The answer is no, Bill Beaty cannot review individual messages for >distribution unless full-moderation mode is turned on, and in that case >*ALL* vortex-L messages in your inbox will be listed as forwarded, coming >from WILLIAM BEATY, rather than from the actual authors. It's a big pain, >and you can't tell who wrote what, unless you open every single message. > >In general, it's the sender's responsibility to verify that their email >program has supplied the correct "TO:" line in an outgoing message. It is >EXTREMELY UNWISE to trust your mail program to get it right. ***{Correct. The problem here seems to be the misuse, by those who have it, of the "Reply-To" option. The only way to deal with that misuse is to look at the "To" line of your message before it goes out, and make sure that it says what you want it to say. Thus you are right in cautioning people to check before hitting the send button, and I will try to do that in the future. (If it works, then I will no longer be compelled to annoy you with suspicions. :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** There are >many stories about people who accidentally sent intimate or insulting >messages to exactly the wrong people, not realizing that they were >responding to a message with a big "CC:" list, or with multiple recipients >in the "TO:" line. > >So..... if anyone wants to post inflammatory assertions on vortex-L and >then suppress the replies of their opponents, just turn on your "REPLY-TO" >option. Your opponents will never notice that they replied to you in >private, and sent nothing to the list. ***{You are probably joking here, but this would apparently work, if the recipient trusted his e-mail program to fill in the "To" line. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 23 11:13:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA20403; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:11:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:11:44 -0700 Message-ID: <003201bdfeb0$ca8169e0$a31a010a ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:12:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 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-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id LAA20340 Resent-Message-ID: <"xSzmr1.0.i-4.VRCCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23623 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Mitchell Jones To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, October 23, 1998 1:00 PM Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies >Note in the above that your "Reply-To" line is set to divert responses to >private e-mail rather than to the list. (I have inserted left arrows to >point out the problem.) What you need to do, if you want to participate in >public discussion on the list, is to set "Reply-To" to direct responses to >"vortex-l eskimo.com" rather than to "jimostr@ca-ois.com." Actually, according to Bill Beaty, the sender is supposed to leave the 'Reply-To' line BLANK, and then the List-Server will put the appropriate 'Reply-To' line in the message. Craig Haynie From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 11:16:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA21612; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:14:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:14:11 -0700 Message-Id: <199810231815.OAA11555 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Brown's Rad Remediation Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 14:13:04 -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: <"Vv07_2.0.WH5.oTCCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23624 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: >It is a certainty that nuclear physicists have >evaluated photodisintegration as a remediation technique. If it is a certainty, then cite me the references! Are you saying that Brown et al who have filed for patents did not explore this issue? > The fact that it >is not in widespread use implies that it must not be practical. BULLSHIT! There are lots of very practical things to be devloped (including cold fusion) that have not yet emerged in the marketplace. Jed has cited these historical examples over and over again. Don't you ever listen or learn? > Perhaps >the energy cost is too high. Perhaps it is nearly impossible to obtain the >necessary flux of Mev photons. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. Get the facts from Brown..... then talk. > This critical issue should have been the >central theme of Brown's article. Instead he completely omits any mention >of it! If you had been at the CF/NE Symposium, you could have had Paul talk to you all day long. Well, there is always the telephone. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 11:36:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA22011; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810231829.NAA15600 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:28:04 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Resent-Message-ID: <"tGg0s1.0.qN5.OlCCs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23625 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Dear Vortex, > >Has any one had experience with the so- called Taos Hum type phenomena? > >I haven't any recently , but there are two interesting spots in CA where >one would expect nothing but the sound of the wind or perhaps birds or >coyotes. I heard a "hum" that seemingly came from under the ground at >both of these spots. ***{Very interesting. For years I would hear a sound that resembled the vibration of a diesel motor while lying in bed at night with my ear to the pillow. The sound seemed to come from the ground, through the floor of the house, and into the bed. I turned off all power to the house by flipping the main breaker, and the sound continued. I got dressed in the middle of the night and drove every road within a mile of my house (I live out in the sticks). The sound never went away. It seemed to come from everywhere. Finally, I drove a steel rod into the ground and put my ear to it. Result: I could hear the sound coming up through the rod. I could tell it wasn't tinnitis because the sound sometimes ceased abruptly, as would be the case if an actual diesel motor were to shut off. The tentative theory I finally came up with is this: there is a big diesel motor somewhere which comes on when the water level falls below the allowable minimum in a pumped storage system. The motor runs a pump, which fills the reservoir to the point where a limit switch trips, shutting off the water. The sound seems to come from the ground because the water mains are underground, and carry the sound to every house that is supplied by the system. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > There are definitely some unusual elements about both of these places, >besides the intermittant humming that I heard while camped out at both >locales for several weeks. > >Now this hum is said to be a subjective phenomena and not everyone can >hear it, but others who were in my company could hear it too and it >wasn't always there , particularly not on weekends. ***{You were probably camped over a water line that feeds a pumped storage system. The facility that it supplies probably runs a skeleton crew on weekends, uses less water, and thus the reservoir does not have to be refilled as often on weekends. --Mitchell Jones}*** Besides this, it >would stop for several minutes at a time >and abruptly resume. ***{This suggests a small reservoir that is quickly depleted during times of high usage. --MJ}*** > >I'll relate the more recent experience first. > >Between March and late June of 1995 I decided to take a rather extended >vacation in the California Desert. This was a sort of "working" vacation >where the enterprise I was engaged in at the time allowed me to >telecommute via cellphone/internet mail connection. I had this nice >Dodge Van which was the tow vehicle for my RV type trailer. > >For anyone interested in such details , here are specific directions to >this very beautiful but mysterious location that I will describe >thereafter: > >>From Lancaster , CA head east on "L" street about 24 miles to 240th >street , way the hell out in the desert and turn right on 240th. >Continue south about one mile and look for a dirt road (may not be >marked anymore) which is actually "K" street. Go left here, >and proceed 9/10ths of a mile and stop. Get out of your vehicle and look >for any signs >of a path that I made through the brush and chapparal to the top of a >low rising knoll >directly south , towards the San Gabriel mountain range in the distance. > >When I visited this area again in May of this year, I forgot to check >for the 9/10th of >a mile spot just mentioned and could find no sign of any kind of path >whatsoever, but >I expect the wind and rain have done their work over these few years and >it is gone. >At any rate this 9/10ths mile point will get you in the general vicinity >so now head >more or less south maybe a couple hundred yards to the highest point >within that range >of yardage. > >>From this high point a good pair of binoculars should help you see the >following features: > >1. Two "Pyramids" at 152 degrees S/SW. These are actually the tops of >two mountain peaks >maybe 8 or 9 miles distant. The illusion that they are pyramids is >created by the fact that you ar on a sort of plateau, but a rather >strange one that appears to slope UPWARD >in the direction to the peaks , but just 30 more degrees towards due >south it most definitely is sloping downward toward the valley between >you and the San Gabriel Mountain Range , about 20 miles distant. > >2. A "Mystery Base" ala area 51 at about 180 degrees...really! ***{This fits. A military base is going to have its own water supply system, particularly an isolated base out in the desert. And a military base is going to work a normal 5-day week, with most personnel having the weekends off. Result: less water usage on weekends and thus less need to replenish pumped storage by turning on pump motors. --Mitchell Jones}*** This >base is complete with 3 upturned parabolic reflectors approximately 30 >-50 feet in diameter. You may be able to see parked vehicles and some >activity by the base personnel. On maps of the area this is marked as >some kind of "airport" as if it were a convenient landing strip >for light planes or something like that. NO WAY. > >Another interesting feature of this "airport" site is a really odd >looking building a mile or so to the east of all the satellite dishes. >It is rectangular in shape with a square hole at the bottom center sort >of similar in general appearance to the Arch de' Triumph in Paris. The >central square hole faces back in a straight line to a wing shape >structure closer to the the main buildings on the base. > > While I was there in '95 I decided to check this place out by driving >up to it. You do this just by getting back on 240th and proceeding for 8 >miles, then theres a road to the left again about a mile so this base >exactly lines up with our "spot" 180 deg. > >There were absolutely no signs saying anything or giving any clue as to >what this palce was on the road leading up to the locked gate. When I >got there I told that guard who appeared in a brownish uniform that I >was a highly qualified RF FCC emissions spec technician looking for a >job , and that I was driving by and just happened to notice all the >parabolic reflecting antennas and was wondering if they could use any >help. I was told "We don't have any such personell here". > >"You don't have any RF technicians?" > >"No." > >"What kind of things do you do here?" > >"Test." > >With this rather terse statement I got the distinct impression that I >was not welcome in his little world , so I thanked him and turned >tail. > >Later I came to realize that what I said must have sounded fishy to him >because from the nearby roads, (the N-S 240th or the E-W El Mirage road) >, the parabolic reflectors are not at all visible. it is only when you >can get some elevation looking down on the base with good binoculars >(we're talking 8 miles) that you can see them. > >Gee wiz it's getting late so will close for now and tell y'all about >the other spot >in NORTHERN CA later. > >Jim O. ***{Note: I had to manually intervene to direct this reply to the list--again. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 11:34:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA31626; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:31:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:31:37 -0700 Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:01:02 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810231432_MC2-5DB2-3F2C compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"LkeJa2.0.0k7.8kCCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23626 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex John Collins writes: And Newcomen was just as paranoid as Bessler about losing his secret to the competition. He wouldn't allow any of the many visiters to his works at Dudley to see how the machine operated. But the secret soon got out and other people began building steam engines. One must assume the reasons for Bessler's failure and Newcomen's success lay in the acceptance of the scientific principles which lay behind the two inventions. I do not see how that could be. The scientific principles were not established for another 150 years. In 1700 heat theory still consisted of concepts like "incensed and inflamed air," "the intercourse of two contraries," and " frustrated ascent of water." (From "Heat Engines" J. F. Sandfort.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 11:41:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA05606; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:39:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:39:13 -0700 Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:05:57 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Message from Mizuno Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810231439_MC2-5DBB-3014 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"rBCua1.0.MN1.GrCCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23627 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; Mizuno Mizuno has written a short preliminary note in response to David Marett. I do not fully understand the scientific content of the message, so I have asked Mizuno to elaborate. Here is a translation with some corrections and editing based on follow up messages. I think we should ask Mizuno for some samples of his tungsten cathode material. There are a number of gross differences between Marett's experiment and Ohmori's, to the point where you can no longer call this a replication. The one thing, Marett is using an aluminum cathode with a tungsten anode in some tests. In some cases he pairs a tungsten anode with a stainless-steel or nickel anode. Perhaps I misunderstand Marett, but I thought he made these large changes after he failed to observe excess heat with a close replication. In other words, he saw no excess heat so he began experimenting with a wider range of materials, and he continued to see an artifact which looked like 142% excess heat, comparing arc to control. Mizuno does not think the control experiment is valid, for reasons described below. Incidentally, I wrote this document with voice input, and it was a breeze. I recommend voice input for technical translation. You look at the source document, read a sentence, translate by voice, and then look back at the screen. The voice input program is working better with a new $70 microphone. Robin van Spaandonk suggested that I use the "Grammatik" feature built into WordPerfect to check for peculiar words generated by the voice input program. This technique works well. - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Summary of Recent Ohmori Arc Discharge Experiments Larger excess heat generation has been observed with the tungsten/light water system during arc discharge electrolysis. The arc discharge begins when electrolyte temperature reaches 75 ~ 80 degrees C., a few minutes after the discharge begins the fluid begins rapid boiling. Excess heat measurements commence when the arc forms and continue for 30 minutes. A variety of electrolytes have been tested including solutions of 0.25 ~ 0.5M Na2SO4, K2SO4, K2CO3, Rb2CO3, Cs2CO3, and 0.1M BaOH. Electrolysis voltage is set at 160V with a constant voltage power supply. Input is 75 ~ 120 watts. With 120 watts, excess heat as high as 122 W (202%) has been observed. The lowest excess heat percent observed over the course of a 30 minute run was 138%. During this measurement period, excess heat did not decline. No such trend was observed, so it is assumed that heat generation would continue for a long time at a steady state. Three representative test results are shown below. The following formula is used to determine excess enthalpy. Excess heat (H) = Wvap + Wsol + Wcell + Wwall- Win Where: Wvap: the amount of heat needed to vaporize the water; determined by measuring the mass electrolyte before and after the experiment. Wsol: heat required to raise the electrolyte solution in the cell to boiling; determined from the mass and specific heat of the electrolyte. Wcell: heat required to raise the container temperature to 100 degrees C., the boiling temperature of electrolyte. This is based on the specific heat of the quartz glass container (0.3 calories/grams) times the mass of the container. [Editor's note: apparently the container weighs 3.5 kg.] Wwall: heat losses over 30 minutes from the electrolysis cell wall to the outside; determined by observing the cooling curves starting at various temperatures, taking a minimum value from the curve. Wout: total output heat. Win: electrolysis electric power consumption; current and voltage are continuously monitored and recorded, power is determined from these instantaneous values. Experiment 1: 0.5M K2CO3 - H2O 100 cc, average electric input = 0.48 amps Wwall = 104 KJ Wvap = 112.8 KJ Wsol = 17.8 KJ Wcell = 4.4 KJ Wout = 239 KJ Win = 138 KJ Wout/Win = 1.73 [Editor's note: there was an arithmetic error in the original.] Experiment 2: 0.25M Rb2CO3 - H2O 100 cc, average electric input = 0.59 amps Wwall = 104 KJ Wvap = 218 KJ Wsol = 17.8 KJ Wcell = 4.4 KJ Wout = 344.2 KJ Win = 170 KJ Wout/Win = 2.02 Experiment 2: 0.5M K2CO3 - H2O 100 cc, average electric input = 0.54 amps Wwall = 104 KJ Wvap = 159 KJ Wsol = 17.8 KJ Wcell = 4.4 KJ Wout = 285.2 KJ Win = 155 KJ Wout/Win = 1.84 Similar results were obtained in more than 50 other runs. Regarding the paper by David Marett you sent: I have difficulty judging this because the measurement techniques are not described in detail, but Let me speculate about some potential problems. 1. There are a number of critical differences in materials and conditions. First of all, electrolysis temperature is too low. Cathode materials are different (Al versus W). The solution and geometry (size of container, shape, positioning of electrodes) and other factors are different. In particular, we have use a variety of electrodes, however as of this time we have only observed continuous excess heat when using tungsten electrodes. 2. One cannot make sweeping generalizations, but it appears these factors prevent excess heat. 3. In Marett's experiment, during the first. After electrolysis begins 142% excess heat is apparently observed. This is ascribed to increase insulation caused by bubbles in the cell. I have doubts about this hypothesis. 4. According to the paper, the cell is calibrated with heater input. However, during electrolysis heat is carried off by the evolving hydrogen gas, so I have doubts about the validity of this calibration method Based on the differences listed above, in my judgment Marett is not measuring under the same conditions we do. I would not expect to see excess heat evolution in his experiment. If he could contact me directly I would be happy to discuss the experiment in greater detail. Tadahiko Mizuno Division of Quantum Energy Engineering, Research group of Nuclear System Engineering, Laboratory of Nuclear Material System, Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, Kita-ku, North 13, West-8, Sapporo 060-8628 JAPAN Tel: 81-11-706-6689, Fax: 81-11-706-7835 E-mail:mizuno qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 11:46:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA08360; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:44:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:44:01 -0700 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <3630CE91.A7F99CC5 css.mot.com> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:44:33 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies References: <199810231758.MAA14965 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"E-4i-1.0.L22.mvCCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23628 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vorts- When editing preferences in Netscape, under identity, the 'Reply-to' states: Reply-to address (only needed if different from email address): The reply email address is assumed to be identical to one you are sending from unless you WANT specify a different one. Not sure where it is in other programs, but it should be left blank. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 12:22:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA27165; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:20:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:20:00 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981023142350.00713b04 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:23:50 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Dr Brown's reply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"sfie_2.0.He6.URDCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23629 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dr Brown has given me a prompt, informative reply (reproduced below) to my query sent earlier today. He has not addressed the issues of practicality (i.e. $/gram of Cs-137) but he certainly did satisfy my curiosity about what kinds of machines could be used to generate high energy photons. I will continue the discussion with him and report back here periodically. From: "Paul Brown" To: Subject: photoremediation Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:39:25 -0600 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Hello Scott Little, 10 MeV photons are typically generated by electron linacs. Such linacs are readily available for medical and industrial use and manufactured by companies such as Varian. A quick review of the Thomas Register under the heading "accelerators:electron" lists several other manufacturers. For instance the Varian models are avaialble up to 30 KW at 10 MeV. Of course, the photons are generated by directing the electron beam onto a high Z target such as tungsten. Many hospitals have such 10 MeV x-ray machines. Continuous power linacs with beam energies of 10 MeV have been built with beam currents as high as 100 milliamp (that is a 1 MW beam energy). This particular high power unit is only 18 meters long. The simplest way to generate the 10MeV electrons is with a betatron. This is simply a transformer with the secondary replaced by a torroid. A vacuum is pulled, electrons are introduced by a filament, and the electrons act as a shorted turn secondary while power is delivered to the primary. Such simple betatrons work well up to energies of 300 MeV, before synchrtron radiation is a problem. Neutron sources such as Am-Be radioisotope sources or D-T gas tube accelerators are readily avaialbe and fairly cheap. Simply placing a nickel target in the neutron flux produces monochromatic gammas at 14 MeV. A 3 KW gas tube accelerator is about the size of a refrigerator and produces 10^11 neutrons/cm^2/second. It is best to treat samples for the (gamma,n) reaction at an energy about 2 MeV above the threshold. This is typically about the peak cross-section and the greatest yield. For most of the radioisotopes, this means a maximum beam energy of 10 MeV. Greater beam energy may be used, however, other reactions, and problems result and this overall reduces the efficiency of the system. Infinite Energy should be publishing my conference presentation in their next issue, which has many specific details as well as gamma spectoscopic analysis of the Cs-136 product. Also listed are some 18 (g,n) reactions for the major constituents of nuclear waste. Later, Paul Brown 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 Oct 23 12:39:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA05225; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:36:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:36:57 -0700 Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:33:32 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Message from Mizuno - corrections Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810231537_MC2-5DBB-3BF9 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"TtF-_.0.VH1.OhDCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23631 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; Mizuno This is a little confusing: 1. There are a number of critical differences in materials and conditions. . . . The solution and geometry (size of container, shape, positioning of electrodes) and other factors are different. "Solution" here means fluid, electrolyte: 1. There are a number of critical differences in materials and conditions. . . . The electrolyte and geometry . . . Item three should read: 3. In Marett's experiment, during the first phase of electrolysis apparent 142% excess heat is observed. This is ascribed to increased insulation caused by bubbles in the cell. I have doubts about this hypothesis. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 12:46:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24921; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:41:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:41:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981023191955.2e0f902e aapi.co.uk> X-Sender: jcollins aapi.co.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Collins Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:29:31 +0100 Resent-Message-ID: <"y3bp9.0.J56.YlDCs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23630 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 14:01 23/10/98 -0400, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >John Collins writes: > > And Newcomen was just as paranoid as Bessler about losing his secret to > the competition. He wouldn't allow any of the many visiters to his > works at Dudley to see how the machine operated. > >But the secret soon got out and other people began building steam engines. > > > One must assume the reasons for Bessler's failure and Newcomen's success > lay in the acceptance of the scientific principles which lay behind the > two inventions. > >I do not see how that could be. The scientific principles were not established >for another 150 years. In 1700 heat theory still consisted of concepts like >"incensed and inflamed air," "the intercourse of two contraries," and " >frustrated ascent of water." (From "Heat Engines" J. F. Sandfort.) > >- Jed >Sorry - bad grammer! I meant that even then (1712) perpetual motion was believed to be impossible so Bessler was in a no win situation, whereas Newcomen was dealing with a clearly demonstrable effect i.e (as you say)"frustrated ascent of water". So Newcomen's machine did not upset any scientific assumptions, unlike Bessler's. It occurs to me that Denis Papin was first into energy, because he designed and built his "digester" which was a steam cooker. He also built a steam powered pump. There were reputed to have been experiments carried out by Papin in which he devised a steam operated boat on the lake in Germany at the Karl the Landgrave of Hesse Kassel's Castle, but the evidence is largely circumstantial. Papin went a similar way to poor old Bessler, finally disappearing from sight in the slums of London at an unknown date. John > Author of 'Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?' - for more information and details on ordering, visit my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 13:57:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09680; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:54:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:54:43 -0700 Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 16:52:10 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810231655_MC2-5DBB-9111 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"sBXq23.0.2N2.IqECs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23632 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex John Collins writes: I meant that even then (1712) perpetual motion was believed to be impossible so Bessler was in a no win situation, whereas Newcomen was dealing with a clearly demonstrable effect . . . Perpetual motion was believed impossible, but the issue was not as settled as it is today. People were aware of apparent counterexamples, like the heat of the sun. By 1700 people realized that if the sun was undergoing combustion it would last only a few thousand years, yet it seemed to be going much longer. . . . i.e (as you say)"frustrated ascent of water". Actually, I think that phrase refers to Savery's pump, which worked by creating a vacuum, so it stopped functioning below 10 meters (34 feet). Newcomen solved the problem. So Newcomen's machine did not upset any scientific assumptions, unlike Bessler's. Perhaps, but I really do not think this is an issue, even today. If you can build a working Bessler machine you'll convince the world in a few weeks despite scientific assumptions. You will have great difficulty convincing scientists, but you'll quickly convince the people who matter. Bessler could have done the same. It occurs to me that Denis Papin was first into energy . . . There were reputed to have been experiments carried out by Papin in which he devised a steam operated boat on the lake in Germany at the Karl the Landgrave of Hesse Kassel's Castle, but the evidence is largely circumstantial. Savery, Newcomen and his friend Robert Hooke knew Papin's work. According to Britannica, in 1709 Papin "built a man-powered paddle-wheel boat that successfully demonstrated the practicability of using the paddle wheel in place of oars on steam-driven ships." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 14:33:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26590; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:31:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:31:51 -0700 Message-ID: <3630F5E8.2DB2 interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:32:24 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies References: <199810231758.MAA14965 mail11.jump.net> <3630CE91.A7F99CC5@css.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mp9lw3.0.KV6.6NFCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23633 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Steck wrote: > > Vorts- > > When editing preferences in Netscape, under identity, the 'Reply-to' ....(snip)..... should be left blank. Thanks John, I see mine is indeed blank. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 17:14:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA14114; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:12:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:12:12 -0700 Message-Id: <199810240013.TAA23028 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 19:12:13 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies Resent-Message-ID: <"ul41P.0.MS3.RjHCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23634 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Vorts- > >When editing preferences in Netscape, under identity, the 'Reply-to' states: > > Reply-to address (only needed if different from email address): > >The reply email address is assumed to be identical to one you are sending from >unless you WANT specify a different one. Not sure where it is in other >programs, but it should be left blank. ***{Not if you want replies to go to vortex rather than to your private e-mail address. Instead, you should set "Reply-To" equal to "vortex-l. eskimo.com." Leaving it blank may work on some e-mail readers, but if anyone does this he needs to check carefully to be sure replies are going to the list. I believe that the default will in most cases bring replies back to your private e-mail address rather than to vortex. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >-- > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > John E. Steck > Senior Mechanical Engineer > Rapid Tooling Applications > Motorola, Libertyville, IL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets > for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 17:15:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA14137; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:12:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:12:14 -0700 Message-Id: <199810240013.TAA23031 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 19:12:15 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies Resent-Message-ID: <"bdizN.0.oS3.TjHCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23635 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I wasn't going to say anything about this, but I just can't resist throwing >my 2 cents worth into the pot. > >At 2:35 PM 10/22/98, John Steck wrote: >>Mitchell Jones wrote: >>> in either case a false impression is created >>> among readers of the list that no response was posted, and many readers >>> will falsely assume that the person whose position had been challenged was >>> intimidated into silence. >> >>Mitch- >> >>Every challenge does not need to be justified with a reply. > >Yes, yes, yes! ***{This is a tempest in a teapot, signifying nothing. I never claimed that every challenge needs to be responded to, nor implied it, nor believed it. The above quoted statement was given in response to a very specific stimulus--to wit: Jim Ostrovski asked me if resistance to oppression justified shooting cops, or words to that effect. Silence, under those circumstances, could reasonably be taken as an indication that I advocate the shooting of cops. The reason: a person who advocates shooting cops is unlikely to say so in public, while a person who does not advocate it is very likely to say so. Therefore silence was not a viable option, in my opinion. Thus I posted a response indicating in no uncertain terms my view of persons who want Americans to grab their guns and rush to the barricades: I consider them to be idiots. The right to self-defense is real, but the mere fact that we all have that right does not mean we ought to exercise it in response to every transgression against our rights. Revolution is no way to deal with the tyranny that is being fastened down upon us. Given the drooling imbecility exhibited routinely by "militia" leaders, there is no reason to suppose that if a revolution took place and was successful, they would establish a government that would be any better than the one that is oppressing us now. Thus the correct course of action, in my view, is to watch the abomination in Washington DC very closely with one eye, while checking out a nation to flee to with the other. Shooting cops is an option for idiots, and will bring disaster down on the heads of those who advocate it or attempt it. Saying that is not an endorsement of the cops, or a blanket condemnation of "militias." It is simply a fact that armed resistance didn't work in Nazi Germany, and it won't work in Fascist America, either. Those who head down that road are virtually guaranteed to wreck their lives. --Mitchell Jones}*** Protracted debate generally accompishes very little except >using up a lot of bandwidth. ***{That's only because you used the word "generally" in the sentence, thereby leaving open the possibility that you are talking about debates involving human refuse from the "general public." (Usenet, for example, is an open sewer precisely because it is open to anyone.) If you limit the application of your statement to politely stated substantive debates/arguments between intelligent, rational, and knowledgeable people, your statement is false. --Mitchell Jones}*** In matters of physics, the business of this >list, this is especially so, as experiments are the ultimate arbiters. ***{No, in such cases it is especially *not* so, because in such cases the likelihood of an exchange of views between rational people is very high, and the benefits of such exchanges are very great. The fact that experimentally determined data must be taken into account does not alter the fact that protracted argument is necessary at all stages in the scientific process, in order to arrive at the truth. The process begins with experimentation. Then, after all the experiments are done, mathematical physicists must identify the curve-fitted formulae which best express the data that were collected. And after such formulae have been identified, theoretical physicists--if any were still to exist--would then be called upon to construct the appropriate visual models of mechanical causation, so that those formulae might be understood. This entire process, from start to finish, is utterly dependent on the cut and thrust of argument and debate. Argument is necessary to identify potential flaws in experimental designs, so that alternative interpretations can be constructed and new experiments can be designed to test them. Likewise, when alternative mathematical constructs are brought forward and alleged to capture the essence of a result, substantive argumentation among those having knowledge of the matter is necessary to settle on the best of those constructs. And, finally, when alternative visual models are constructed, in an effort to mechanically explain a formula, argumentation among the concerned parties is necessary to settle on the best model. --Mitchell Jones}*** >Opinion can't change physical reality (that's my opinion. 8^) The great >thing about this list has been the cooperation and mutual support, not the >debate. ***{I agree that there has been a dearth of debate on this list, but I consider that to be a criticism, not a compliment. People need to loosen up and let fly. It makes things more interesting. If someone substitutes ad hominems for argument or otherwise demonstrates that his posts are a waste of time, then simply killfile him and forget him. What could be simpler than that? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >The opening words of the Desiderata are brought to mind by this issue: > >"Go placidly amid the noise & haste, & remember what peace there may be in >silence. As far as possible without surrender be on good terms with all >persons. Speak your truth quietly & clearly; listen to others; even the >dull & ignorant; they too have their story. Avoid loud and agressive >persons, they are vexations to the spirit. ..." It could have been written >yesterday, yet is dated 1692. ***{Wooly words that mean whatever we want them to mean are useless as a guide to behavior. It's like telling a novice investor to "buy low and sell high." The real issues do not arise until you start talking about how to tell when a market is low or high. Likewise in the above, the real issues do not arise until you start trying to decide when "noise and haste" should be ignored and when they should not be ignored, or trying to decide when you should talk and when you should listen, or trying to decide how loud is too loud, or how agressive is too aggressive, etc. Pithy sayings sound nice but don't really tell us much. They mostly mean what we want them to mean, as determined by our personal beliefs and values. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Speaking for myself, silence is not surrender. ***{You overgeneralize. Sometimes silence is appropriate, and sometimes it isn't. And, yes, sometimes silence is surrender. Each situation has to be judged on its merits and dealt with accordingly. Careful reasoning based on sound principles, not pithy sayings, is necessary if we want to get through life without a lot of knots on our heads. --Mitchell Jones}*** I wouldn't expect that of >others either. Silence generally comes when all there is to be said has >been said. ***{Silence in the face of evil or dangerous error is inappropriate. When it happens, it is generally because a person who knew better whimped out: he preferred to "be on good terms with all persons," and elected to not make waves. --Mitchell Jones}*** My times of silence have not, nor are ever likely to be, the >result of initimidation from the list. ***{In the vernacular: them's mighty big words, Horace. I would submit, however, that they are far less likely to be true of a man who quotes the Desiderata than of a man who does not. --Mitchell Jones}*** Beyond that, demands of the day, or >of my family, are far more likely sources of silence or brief hurried >responses than anything said on a list. Like others, I see a lot of >postings I personally would rather not spend the time to discuss at all. >There are so many great ideas to discuss and explore. I have never had any >use for a killfile. ***{You did back in the old days when you ventured into the wilds of usenet. Those who do that should remember the words of Hud: "There's a whole lot of crap in this world, boy, and no matter how hard you try you're eventually going to step in some!" That's the purpose of a killfile: to ensure that you don't step in a particular pile of crap more than once. --Mitchell Jones}*** My difficulty at times has been selecting which >threads to read in the time available. > >Well there's my two cents worth. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 19:04:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA21766; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 19:03:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 19:03:44 -0700 Message-ID: <0aa301bdfef2$64462020$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Witchcraft Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 21:22:09 -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: <"O0Xh8.0.sJ5._LJCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23636 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I submit the following article as further evidence of the philosophical >collapse of Western Civilization, and as an indication that economic >collapse and utter ruination lie not too very far ahead. Has that been true in the past with other societys, the predominate culture collapsing sinks everything else, I would think there are many internal changes to several great societys in history without a collapse, I may be wrong. What typically begins to happen when economies fail? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 21:23:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA31113; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 21:19:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 21:19:44 -0700 Message-ID: <36314F71.21C8 ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:54:25 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"F57v52.0.zb7.WLLCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23638 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > [snip] > > The opening words of the Desiderata are brought to mind by this issue: > > "Go placidly amid the noise & haste, & remember what peace there may be in > silence. As far as possible without surrender be on good terms with all > persons. Speak your truth quietly & clearly; listen to others; even the > dull & ignorant; they too have their story. Avoid loud and agressive > persons, they are vexations to the spirit. ..." It could have been written > yesterday, yet is dated 1692. > Didn't someone make a hit tune out of this years ago? I was and am very wary of this as a piece of sound philosophy , and just because it appears on the surface to be sort of reasnoable and is ancient enough to qualify as some kind of piece of classic prose, it leaves me rather flat or worse, mildly nauseated. It doesn't advocate for any cuase (such as truth or justice) in particular but seems to be saying , in summary, "avoid controversy/conflict and those with loud complaints for the sake of comfort and contentedness." An interesting contrast to this "desiderata" (whatever that means) is the piece below, which I read again and again whenever I feel like just "mellowing out" or "going with the flow" - Some may find its Christian oriented message out of place for our times, and posibly confrontational- but I think that's why it's right on: Jim O. " Walk as becometh the Gospel of Christ. You will no longer mind high things, but make yourselves equal to men of low degree.You will no longer value men and women according to their wealth or outward appearances,but according to their virtue,as the love of God appeareth in them...You will be most zealously opposite to that which is opposite to God, You will find it nothing to hazard your lives for God ,in defense of his Truth from error, in defense of your brother or neighbor from oppression or tyranny. " Love makes you no longer your own ,but God's servants,and prompts you to do his will in the punishment of all kinds of exorbitances,whether it be breach of oaths, breach of trusts or any kind of injustice whomsoever,and be no respecter of persons. " You will when need requires,that is, when tyrants and oppressors endeavor by might and force to pervert all laws and compacts among men, and to pervert the Truth of God into a lie,interpreting his sacred word as a Patron of their unjust power, as if any unjust power were of God and were not to be resisted . " I say such insolencies as these will inflame your zeal, and set you all on fire manfully to fight the Lord's Battle,and bring into subjection those abominable injunctions and unGodly courses of men. " Your judgements will be so well informed ,as you will know these things are by God referred to you, and you will not resign them up to Him,but willingly sacrifice your lives and your fortunes ,and all that is near and dear to unto you , rather than suffer his name to be so blasphemed, or your innocent brethren, or your wives or your children to become a prey to wicked and bloodthirsty men . " The politicians of this world would have religious men to be fools, not to resist, by no means,lest you receive damnation: urging God's holy Word while they proceed in their Damnable courses. But,beloved, they will find that true Christians are of all men the most valiant defenders of the just Liberties of their Country, and the most zealous preservers of true Religion , vindicating the Truths of God with their Lives, against all unGodliness and unrighteousness of men,making thereby the whole world to know that true Christianity hates and abhors tyranny , oppression , perjury ,cruelty, deceit and all kinds of filthiness, and true Christians to be the most impartial, and most severe punishers of all kinds of wickedness of any men whatsoever. " [From "The Power of Love" by John Sweeting ,London .September 19,1643] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 21:32:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA30293; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 21:16:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 21:16:39 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981023231857.0095f100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 23:18:57 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: More from Brown Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5n7mL1.0.FP7.dILCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23637 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Paul Brown has been wonderfully forthcoming about his technology. Here's the latest: >From: "Paul Brown" >To: "Scott Little" >Subject: Re: photoremediation >Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 16:08:46 -0600 >Scott Little, > > >>1. What is new about your development? Surely physicists have already >>considered photodisintegration as a possible rad waste remediation, no? > >We have been unable to find anything in the published literature for >application of photo-neutron to waste remediation. Extensive studies using >proton or neutron remediation are in the literature. Patent search also came >up with nothing close. > >>2. Can you provide more details about your present proof-of-principle >>experiment involving Cs-137? You mention in the IE article a beam current >>of 40 mAmp. Is that microamps or milliamps? Was that in an x-ray tube or >>a linac? Do YOU have a MeV-range linac!? What accelerating voltage are >>you using? Are you letting an electron beam strike a hi-Z target to >>produce the photons? What is the mean energy of the photons that hit the >>Cs-137 sample? > >We are using a Tritium gas tube accelerator to produce neutrons. Neutrons >onto nickel target to produce 14 MeV monochromatic photons. We also have a >linac and a betatron. Electrons from either source onto tungsten to produce >broad spectrum bremsstrahlung with max energy of 10 MeV. Mean energy in the >Cs-137 experiment was 14 MeV. I do not think a commercial x-ray tube is >available to such high energies, just the linac type machines. Betatrons >used to be used as x-ray sources but again, not in a conventional style >x-ray tube. Linacs use rf acceleration rather than DC potential. Betatron >does not require rf and simply runs at 60 Hz. > >>What kind of detector(s) are you using to assay the Cs-137? >Germanium detector, Canberra equipment. Also have NaI detectors as well as >windowless gas counters. But the gamma spectroscopis analysis provided by >Ge. Specifically we have: Canberra Model 3503 MCA, Model 7404 Alpha >Spectrometer, Model 2404F Alpha/Beta/Gamma System, Desktop Inspector Gamma >Spectroscopic Analysis, 4 inch thick walled lead pig, many detectors, >scintillations counters, ionization chambers; Ludlum Model 2600 >Spectrometer, etc. > >>Are you looking at the 660 keV gamma? >Results of Cs-137 sample: photo-peaks at 340.6 KeV, 818.5 KeV and 1048.1 KeV >which are gamma rays from Cs-136. Photo-peak of 667.7 kEv from Cs-132 >reacted from Cs-133 (beam energy too high). Cs-137 presetn also with >photo-peak at 661.7 KeV. Usual background present such as K-40 and Bi-214. I >presented this data which will be published in the next issue of Infinite >Energy. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 22:46:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA20308; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:43:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:43:51 -0700 Message-ID: <3631642D.484 ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:22:53 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies References: <199810240013.TAA23031 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"jE6iM.0.Az4.MaMCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23639 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > > ***{This is a tempest in a teapot, signifying nothing. I never claimed that > every challenge needs to be responded to, nor implied it, nor believed it. > The above quoted statement was given in response to a very specific > stimulus--to wit: Jim Ostrovski asked me if resistance to oppression > justified shooting cops, or words to that effect. Silence, under those > circumstances, could reasonably be taken as an indication that I advocate > the shooting of cops. I do not see why anyone would think that at all. If I came out and actually advocated shooting cops and no one said anything , then we might have a different situation. As it was, I just asked the question, the fact that no responses appeared on the list does not indicate anything at all and I really doubt if anyone thought YOU were advocating cop shooting, Mitchell. To the contrary it more likely appeared that I was. The fact is I do not think people should initiate violaence under any circumstances, against cops or anyone else. However , I do think there is good cause to be armed and ready to defend oneself at all times. This means the open carrying of firearms by a militant citizenry in view of the gang warfare going on in the streets of many large American cities, which is a direct result of what cops do to create the climate for such activity in the first place (enforcing legislative enactments makeing the possesion of drugs by others besides certain classes of people illegal). I hope this clears this all up and we can go on to the more scientific topics this list is supposed to be for. I will be glad to talk with you about this further if you wish off line , Mitchell. Ok I am going to try turning off my reply to prefersnce and leave it blank . If this causes problems for my more personal contacts with friends not on the list it's going back on, so be advised. YOU are responsible for how YOUR machine handles outgoing mail, Not me. Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 23 22:57:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA24925; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:55:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:55:17 -0700 Message-ID: <36317A19.58923AD4 gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 06:57:10 +0000 From: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk (John Allan) Reply-To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: The Mitchell Jones Conspiracy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ZP0wx3.0.K56.4lMCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23640 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: As previous holder of the Wasted Bandwidth Award 1998, could I ceremoniously hand it over to Mr Mitchell Jones in recognition for his stalwart efforts regarding his problems with his emailer... And as someone with The Mark of The Beast stamped on his forehead for having the wrong " reply to: ", can I just say that mine works just fine. No more please. Now, When on Earth did "witches and demons and worshipping trees" become synonymous with Green Politics? Certainly not in the Middle Ages when all that sort of stuff was much more popular... Is this just some sort of seasonal loop out? Are we to have civilization without trees? Mitchell Jones wrote: > and who believe in witches and demons and worship trees > (as a consequence of mindless absorption of "green" propaganda). > Like their barbarian predecessors who overran the Roman empire, > they are a phenomenon which civilization cannot survive, and > one which it will not survive. --Mitchell Jones}*** Of course, as a Scot I am offended by this thoroughly anti-barbarianist statement. The Celtic Society was a highly develop society with deep environmental awarness we could learn much from today whose skills in ceramics and fine metalwork are still unmatched today. Greatest minds from Athens, Alexandria, Africa and the Middle East all came to study at our halls of learning. Rome fell on its own sword as will today's empires. Famous quote: Asked what he thought about Western Civilisation Gandhi answered, " I think it would be a good idea ". From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 00:06:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA10250; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 00:05:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 00:05:48 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 02:16:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Witchcraft Resent-Message-ID: <"XAaxf3.0.4W2.BnNCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23641 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >>I submit the following article as further evidence of the philosophical >>collapse of Western Civilization, and as an indication that economic >>collapse and utter ruination lie not too very far ahead. > >Has that been true in the past with other societys, the predominate culture >collapsing sinks everything else, I would think there are many internal >changes to several great societys in history without a collapse, I may be >wrong. What typically begins to happen when economies fail? It was the philosopher Robert LeFevre who once said, "Civilizations are born Stoic and die Epicurean." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 00:14:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA12760; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 00:13:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 00:13:20 -0700 Message-ID: <008d01bdff1d$afc37a40$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Photoremediation Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 01:11:56 -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: <"opN6R.0.C73.GuNCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23642 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Production of Photo-neutrons dates back to the 1940's when Antimony 124 (1.70 Mev Gamma) was used to knock a neutron off of Beryllium (167 Mev) Gammas from other isotopes were used to remove the neutron from Deuterium (2.23 Mev). In a fission reaction about 160 Mev is released in producing the Cesium 137 and another radioactive fragment such as Strontium 90. Electron bombardment of tungsten at 14 Mev is about 1% efficient in producing the required photons, thus you have invested at least 1400 Mev in producing a photon that has to be 100%efficient in producing a neutron to neutralize Cs 137 (times a factor of 4 for power generation losses = 5600 Mev)? Certainly it will "work" but is it a good investment? Wouldn't it be cheaper to "Soak" the salts of the radioisotopes in D2O or a Deuterated Oil,and let their decay betas and gammas do the CF thing making them Self-Cleaning? It might be a bit slower, but cheaper. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 01:13:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA25671; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 01:12:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 01:12:26 -0700 Message-Id: <199810240813.DAA26173 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 03:12:29 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: The Mitchell Jones Conspiracy Resent-Message-ID: <"B2VMa1.0.0H6.flOCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23643 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >As previous holder of the Wasted Bandwidth Award 1998, could I >ceremoniously hand it over to Mr Mitchell Jones in recognition for his >stalwart efforts regarding his problems with his emailer... ***{The problem had been irritating me for several months, and now it is solved. That's not wasted bandwidth in my book. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >And as someone with The Mark of The Beast stamped on his forehead for >having the wrong " reply to: ", can I just say that mine works just >fine. ***{It doesn't work with my e-mailer. Prior to manual intervention, this post was set to go to your private e-mail address, not to vortex, and I suspect the same would be true for virtually everyone else, were they to attempt to reply to your post. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >No more please. ***{If you don't want to talk about it, then don't talk about it. :-) --MJ}*** [tongue-in-cheek chit-chat deleted] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 01:33:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA28178; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 01:32:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 01:32:18 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981024163639.00a77ea0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 16:36:39 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" In-Reply-To: <36302610.F7F ca-ois.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gHZCQ.0.7u6.H2PCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23644 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote :- >Now this hum is said to be a subjective phenomena and not everyone can >hear it, but others who were in my company could hear it too and it >wasn't always there , particularly not on weekends. Besides this, it >would stop for several minutes at a time >and abruptly resume. If it is not subjective, then it should be possible to plant a microphone or geophone in the ground, and get a waveform on a CRO or whatever. If you plant three geophones some distance apart, and measure the phase delay between two pairs of them (due to the finite propagation velocity of sound through soil), you could get a vector pointing to the source. If you do this twice at distant locations to obtain two vectors, you should be able to triangulate the location of the generator. Sounds like a fun project for a weeks holliday out in the wild! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 05:10:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA19565; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 05:09:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 05:09:57 -0700 Message-ID: <00ab01bdff47$1ecaa5c0$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Photoremediation in HRE-1 using D2O? Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 06:08:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"bFOIX2.0.dn4.LESCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23645 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The "Homogeneous Reactor Experiment No.1 (HRE-1),Oak Ridge, 1952-1954 was a recirculating-fuel-type reactor that used >90% enriched Uranyl Sulfate dissolved in H2O at 35 grams/kg H2O. The solution was pressurized to 1,000 PSI and operated at 482 degrees F. Gives one pause to wonder if it would "Self-Clean" if D2O had been used instead of H2O,with the Photo-neutrons/CF from the Deuterium taken into account? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 05:52:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA24337; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 05:51:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 05:51:47 -0700 Message-ID: <19981024125646.28268.rocketmail send104.yahoomail.com> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 05:56:46 -0700 (PDT) From: ron kita Subject: Gravity=Lenz s Law To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: antigravnews rocketmail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"75ag_1.0.By5.YrSCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23646 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In an e-mail message from Jim Cox formerly of TRW Space Park and editor of Antigravity News antigravnews rocketmail.com he cited the recent web page of David Jonsson of ELEKTROMAGNIM that gravity is merely a result of Lenz s Law. the web site is http://www.newphysics.se/elektromagnum/physics/jonsson Were the patents issued to Hooper correct, since gravity is merely a case of mutual induction?? I always questioned that NASA DISPROOF of Hooper might have been less than an adequate effort...to put it mildly!!!!!!!! Cheers Ron Kita the ronk files _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 06:10:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA28888; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 06:09:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 06:09:33 -0700 Message-ID: <00c601bdff4f$72997200$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Clean Spent Fuel Rods in The Reactor? Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 07:08:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"euc0c3.0.H37.C6TCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23647 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex If the spent fuel rods were placed in a reactor,wouldn't the "spare" neutrons clean them up after a while? In the CANDU, Robert E.? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 08:13:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA22864; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 08:12:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 08:12:49 -0700 Message-ID: <3631EB38.4EF9 skylink.net> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 07:59:04 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Spooky Teleportation References: <038701bdfe24$bf7d9c80$93b4bfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"iCEZl3.0.za5.mvUCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23648 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Re: Spooky Teleportation > get a load of what Cal Tech is doing with photons. :-) FJS > http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9810/22/science.teleport.reut/ Indeed. We can make a photon at a remote location identically and instantaneously match the quantum state of a local photon. Too bad the state of the local one is a completely random thing. Or is it? And in any case, how does the remote photon instantaneously know about the state of the local photon. Fascinating stuff. A large bibliography of some strangely related information was once put together at the website below. Hundreds of good citations. Evanescent Light-Wave, Atom Mirror Bibliograhphy http://hwilwww.rdec.redstone.army.mil/MICOM/wsd/ST/RES/AO/aobib.html Unfortunately, the web-site has been down for the last four weeks. Also the copy I made of the HTML file has somehow teleported off my unit. If anyone has a copy, please mail it to me. Months of work lost. Time is short. It breaks my heart. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 09:18:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA13017; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 09:17:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 09:17:22 -0700 Message-ID: <3631F85A.63CA ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 08:55:06 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"74zhV3.0.GB3.HsVCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23649 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > Jim - > > My copy of the Antigravity Handbook (which I keep with me at all times) has > pictures of some weird stuff attributed to Lockheed and others out there > around Hesperia, which looks on the map to be pretty near there. One is of > what appears to be a massive sunken structure, perhaps an entrance to some > large underground structure. Hi Rick, I have done some web searching and it appears that the base I discussed is a corporate facility run by General Atomics of San Diego, CA. Ostensibly they supposedly test Remote Piloted Aircraft there. This does not explain the very large upturned parabolic reflectors I saw , which would not be necessary unless such aircraft had the ability to fly into outer space and needed to be tracked with this kind of equipment. Perhaps this is the case but in the months I spent out at that location , I never witnessed any sort of aircraft landing or taking off from there. This does not mean that it never occurred on occasion I suppose , but the big dishes just don't fit the picture painted by General Atomics on their website. Since my location was so remote from the site ,I don't think it had anything to do directly with the hum that could be heard. There was one other thing I forgot to mention (sorry, it was late when I wrote about this and I was sort of tired). There was what appeared to be a large house about a mile and a half or so to the NW, of fairly recent construction according to the general architecture, that looked somewhat like an ordinary dwelling unit except for a four story tower coming up from the approximate middle of the house. I did observe trucks of various kinds coming and going from this structure on occasion so that leads me so believe the tower might have been the housing for an elevator mechanism , maybe. My suspicion is that the whole area undernaeath my campsite of almost four months was more or less hollow with lots of machinery in there providing the hum. That was just my impression but I can in no way prove it. If you haven't already been there , check out http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/bases37.html which is an article written by Phil Schneider (now deceased , murdered according to the header note) who claims to have been involved in the building of many underground bases. He also mentions having been involved in a 1979 shootout with Aliens at the Dulce , NM underground facility. Anyway, back to the General Atomics site I described in the earlier post. I'll draw some gif pictures of what I can recall of the general layout from my vantage point out there and post them to Vortex under this heading. More later , then. Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 09:25:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA15718; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 09:24:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 09:24:27 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981024163301.00e1f4c8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 12:33:01 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Jed - well informed as ever Cc: Alan.CHEAH adecco.com, ahannan@MIT.EDU, deadnuts@deadnuts.com, "apple pie" , lupem@world.std.com, bso@acm.org, blau bluerock.com, DaleSVP@ipa.net, dtassen@c-zone.net, sweetser world.std.com, clsmith@darwin.bu.edu, ccantor@sequenom.com, 76753.3551 compuserve.com, eben@ergeng.com, ehill@world.std.com, Eric Howlett , ejp@world.std.com, wordpros inforamp.net, moy@ziplink.net, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, gjcheah guybutler.com, wellenstein@binah.cc.brandeis.edu, hic world.std.com, jkokor@alum.mit.edu, Jim Hile , jim@msri.org, discjt@servtech.com, John Ranta , jsearl@tako.demon.co.uk, joshprokop worldnet.att.net, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net, kevin.blaker autodesk.com, kpallist@matrox.com, lstelmac@lynx.neu.edu, "drew blue" , Leonard Dvorson , cadman@mediaone.net, ohl world.std.com, 71650.60@compuserve.com, rsmith@itiip.com, 71022.3001 compuserve.com, 73577.123@compuserve.com, thiahadge@aol.com, tcapizzi world.std.com, tom.duff@poweroasis.com, TAFAUL@aol.com, "Lilly" Resent-Message-ID: <"4jpvX3.0.Nr3.wyVCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23650 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:22 AM 10/22/98 -0400, you wrote: >You are thinking of agriculture, not energy. Civilization predates the energy >sector by 11,000 years. There was no energy sector until 1712 (Newcomen) >unless you count small water and windmills. Anyway, we are as much dependent >upon telephones and microcomputers as energy. If Intel, IBM and Microsoft >disappear civilization will collapse and we will starve. It is a frightening >thought! > > > What is the cost of the destruction of a planet, the loss of species, > the Gulf War? What is the cost of the suffering and carnage from lack > and conflict? Here are a few more theories: http://truinsight.com/planetar.htm >That's agriculture again. It destroys more land and causes more pollution than >any other industry. Only a few wars have been fought over oil, but countless >wars have been fought for agricultural land, fresh water and Lebensraum. But >you do not see proposals to regulate grocery stores and farms with public >institutions, government bodies, or not-for-profit organizations. The trend is >the other direction. U.S. agriculture is being deregulated. The Georgia peanut >crop is still largely regulated which is why we pay too much for peanuts. I think we should do something about the global warming situation soon: http://www.ipcc.ch/ Who knows? Maybe global warming is keeping the Antarctic polar icecap small enough that the planetary alignment at 5/5/2000 won't tip the Earth's axis? The wooly mammoths they found perfectly frozen in the arctic region suggests that it has happened before. Once the icecap slips to the equator (in 3-4 hours?), the velocity is calculated to be 16,000 mph. The atmosphere can't keep up and everywhere except the pivot points gets exposed to the vacuum of space. >When a corporation stops working for people (for its customers), the people >wave their hands and a few years later the corporation is history. The CEO of >IBM is the servant of his customers. He has no more power over them than a >shoe-shine man or a kid flipping burgers. Corporate executives sometimes >develop the illusion that they have power, and they can dictate to their >customers. Many people (including you) fall for this nonsense. But when the >market changes, and new technology comes along, huge corporations are wiped >out in a few years. Look what happened to IBM. The other day Compaq bought >DEC! I would say this is the case for conventional energy. Perhaps recent weather patterns will get it into the heads of those who suppress F/E that we might not be in the situation we are in now had they let us do our jobs. I'm ashamed to say that the Texas floods made me think "There you go, you like that? It's probably your own fault!" to the oil people there. > Are you acting unaccountably or in an unethical manner? > >If I was, would I tell you? > > > Although I would agree that entropy is as solid a law in sociology as it > is in material sciences, I believe that humanity largely shares a common > morality as enshrine in the religions and philosophical codes of all > peoples. I'm so concerned about our present situation that I started to read the Bible. Perhaps our best bet would be if we could get a significant number of everyone to be completely honest about everything on a permanent basis. BTW, does anyone know where the exact definition of marrage is, and what the proceedure is, in the Bible? >You should study anthropology. One man's morality is another man's poison. >Even in our own narrow culture here in Atlanta, some people boast about the >way they discipline their children & pull them out of school to educate them >home. Whereas others, including me, think that is barbaric child abuse. Jed, I'd like to hear your opinion of the following situation. Our landlord prepaid a 1% 40 year loan 15 years early. He then tried to triple the rent level on our art community. We spent over $150,000.00 on legal fees to stop his eviction litigation. The MHFA is highly reluctant to release the mortgage, regulatory, and interest subsidy agreements (I tried Freedom of Information - nothing). The BRA also refuses to disclose disposition and representations agreements. Our lawyers refuse to go after these documents. The Bar Overseers refuse to discipline lawyers involved. Our tenants association refuses to do anything other than what the lawyers say. The rest of the tenants think it's hopeless or that somehow the wealthy have the right to be completely unethical (wannabees?). The Mayor and his staff doesn't want to know anything about this situation. I'm the only guy asking about these documents. All the tenants know I have a point but would rather get this thing over with even if it means having to eventually leave from ever increasing rent levels. The landlord probably has no right to do this either. All this for a building and you want to market free energy? BTW, it has become very difficult for mail packages to reach my door lately. Similar description of above: http://www.jeffry.com/technology/bwt/declaration.htm I agree with the view on creativity: http://www.jeffry.com/technology/bwt/cat_mission.htm >If it is secret would we tell you? That's another stupid question, like "are >you acting unaccountably or in an unethical manner?" Do you cheat on your >taxes? Have you murdered anyone lately? Do you have any shameful secrets about >your sex life that you would like to share with our studio audience? Round rain clouds? http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/orbit/april/armageddon2.html Regards; Dennis :( Well, back to the AutoCad LISP programming (freelance). Gotta pay the bills... to people like my wonderful landlord. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 09:40:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA22053; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 09:39:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 09:39:11 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 08:46:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: B/motors as the start of A/G Resent-Message-ID: <"Dr0553.0.RO5.kAWCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23651 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I am posting this somewhat late response due to the fact that in May, 1998 I posted some mistaken ideas about this device. This post is a mea culpa (regarding one of my bad concepts posted here) based upon experiments just now completed. At 4:15 AM 10/18/98, ron kita wrote: >Ball bearing motors as the starting point for >antigravity???????? > >A ball bearing motor is a one-piece motor that >could "POSSIBLY" couple to space. >Construction time --less than 15 minutes.... >works every time. >Parts list: >2 used skateboard bearings >2 small hose clamps to fit exterior of bearings >1 -3/8 or 5/16 inch rod to fit very snugly into bearings >....rod length 8 to 10 inches >1 wooden 2X4" approx one foot long >1 set automotive jumper cables >SAFTEY GEAR....you will be drawing very large amps from a car >battery...can be a dangerous situation. >Note: Two copper tabs must be a fixed to the clamps >to allow passage of current from outside race into >bearings...along rod...current exits external race >of second bearing mounted 8 inches down rod. >Constructed device will look like a BARBELL on >a 2X4...with conductor tabs. >Operation: >Clip one jumper cable to right tab...spin rod with >thumb (direction of spin is NOT important)... >While rod is thumb spun....clip on other jumper.... >you should see the Ball bearing motor...spin >at 200 to 500 rpms...running only for a few seconds is wise. >Some people claim that the bearings are the stator.. >...but I DON T THINK SO TIM. >The possibility of space reaction coupling?????? >Best, >Ron Kita >anyone who can t get this experiment to work...probably can t boil >water. >Please note..the use of the word "possibility". >Experimentus ipse loquitor...the experiment speaks >for itself. A post from me on this subject in the "other Marinov motor" thread last May: Begin quote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: other Marinov motor Cc: Bcc: X-Attachments: At 5:31 PM 5/25/98, William Beaty wrote: >I had seen mention of an earlier Marinov motor based on ball bearings. >There's an article about this on MIKE'S ELECTRIC STUFF > http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~wwl/bbmotor.html [snip] About the "other marinoff motor" I make the following prediction: the device does not work with non-magnetic balls or rollers in the bearings. [snip] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End quote. Below is a quote from the above web page, which is still active. The web page has construction information and photos. Here is some selected material from the web page: Begin quote of web page: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - How does it work ? When current passes from the outer ring of the ballrace to the inner ring via each ball, heat is generated at the point of contact due to the increased resistance. This localised heating causes the ball to expand in the hot area, causing a slight elongation of the ball, pushing against the inner and outer rings of the race. If the ball were stationary, this would cause the bearing to stiffen and sieze up, but when it's rotating (from the initial spin), this elongation causes the ball to push itself further round in the direction of rotation, sustaining the movement. This action happens as a continuous process on all the balls which are in electrical contact with the inner and outer rings. [snip] With a direct current supply, the ball- bearing motor can rotate either left or right. Thus it cannot be an electromagnetic motor, since a DC electromagnetic motor rotates only in one direction, with a given direction of the current. The ball-bearing motor rotates with DC as well as with AC. With a greater current it rotates faster. It is in teresting to note that the resistance of the ball-bearing motor depends on the current, and for higher current it is lower. If the current doubles, say, the applied tension increases only, say, 1.3 times. Here I wish to avoid any confusion between the increase of resistance because of the increase of the rate of rotation, and the decrease of resistance because of the increase of current; although, obviously, a higher current leads to a higher rate of rotation. The torque disappears if the ball-bearings are replaced by box-hearings. At equal applied electrical powers and equal number and size of the balls (i.e., at equal resistance), the torque is bigger for a ball-bearing with bigger bore. A ball-bearing with two times bigger bore has two times bigger torque. Fig,2 shows two ball-bearing motors with a small and a large bore which have almost equal ohmic resistances (of course, the mechanical friction of the bigger motor is greater). By touching both motors, one can immediately feel the difference in their torques. The bigger ball-bearing has greater number of balls and consequently a bigger torque; however, its current (and power) consumption are higher. [snip] References 1. Milroy, R.A. Discussion, J. Appl. Mechanics, vol. 34,1967,p.525. 2. 2. Gruenberg, H. The ball bearing as a motor. Am. J. Phys., vol. 46, 1978, p.1213. 3. Weenink, M.P.H. The electromagnetic torque on axially symmetric rotating metal cylinders and spheres.Appl. Sc. Research, vol. 37, 1981, p.171. 4. van Doom, M.J.M. The electrostatic torque on a rotating conducting sphere. Appl. Sc. Research, vol. 40, 1983, p.327. 5. Mills, A.A. The ball-bearing electric motor. Phys. Educ., vol. 15, 1980, p.102. 6. Marinov, S. The perpetuum mobile is discovered. Nature, vol, 317, 26 Sept. 1985, p.xii. 7. Marinov, S. The Thorny Way of Truth, Part II. East-West, Graz, ist edition 1984, 3rd ed. 1986. At the time of writing, Dr Marinov was at the Institue for Fundamenral Physical Problems, Mouellenfeld- gasse 16, A-8010 Graz, Austria. More info on Stefan Marinov : Institute for New Energy Harold Asdpen's Energy science site - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End quote. I regret to note that Dr. Marinov is now deceased. I am curious as to the term "box bearings". Does this mean roller bearings? In May I posted the idea that possibly the rotation was electromagnetically induced, and caused by hysteresis. The idea was that a ring of magnetization around the current through a given ball would rotate into the current path before subsiding. The current i passing through this now normal magnetic field M would cause a force i x M at the top of the ball and i x -M at the bottom of the ball, thus producing torque. This concept is flawed because the suggested forces are all contained within the ball itself. An imbalanced force implies loss of conservation of angular momentum and conservation of energy. My concept is bad because the force from M on current i results in a balancing force from i against the conductor, i.e. the ball itself. Expermiments done to look for an i x M force imbalance in 12 gage steel wire, using a torsion beam apparatus, found no such force, and especially no force large enough to account for even a small portion of the rotational torque observed with the ball bearing motor. I find the heat explanation hard to believe, yet am at a loss for another explanation. It still think it would be interesting to build a motor using nonpermeable balls or rollers, possibly made from stainless steel. If the motor does not work with roller bearings, or with nonpermeable balls, then it appears to me the rotation can not be thermal expansion induced. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 09:46:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA24605; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 09:44:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 09:44:32 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 08:51:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Resent-Message-ID: <"Cyf_j2.0.H06.lFWCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23652 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:36 PM 10/24/98, John Winterflood wrote: >Jim Ostrowski wrote :- > >>Now this hum is said to be a subjective phenomena and not everyone can >>hear it, but others who were in my company could hear it too and it >>wasn't always there , particularly not on weekends. Besides this, it >>would stop for several minutes at a time >>and abruptly resume. > >If it is not subjective, then it should be possible to plant a >microphone or geophone in the ground, and get a waveform on a >CRO or whatever. > >If you plant three geophones some distance apart, and measure >the phase delay between two pairs of them (due to the finite >propagation velocity of sound through soil), you could get a >vector pointing to the source. > >If you do this twice at distant locations to obtain two vectors, >you should be able to triangulate the location of the generator. > >Sounds like a fun project for a weeks holliday out in the wild! Great idea. However, if the sound is being transmitted by metal pipes, then it will be difficult to do other than locate the pipe. However, if you find a pipe it may be possible, with a lot of effort, to follow it to the source. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 10:12:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA04844; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 10:11:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 10:11:16 -0700 Message-ID: <00fe01bdff71$3684c4a0$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Spooky Teleportation Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 11:10:24 -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: <"wWewB1.0.bB1.peWCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23653 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robert Stirniman To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 9:15 AM Subject: Spooky Teleportation Maybe Jacques Benveniste's water memory "teleportation" is similar to this? Regards, Frederick Robert Stirniman wrote: >Re: Spooky Teleportation >> get a load of what Cal Tech is doing with photons. :-) FJS >> http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9810/22/science.teleport.reut/ > >Indeed. We can make a photon at a remote location >identically and instantaneously match the quantum state >of a local photon. Too bad the state of the local one is >a completely random thing. Or is it? And in any case, how >does the remote photon instantaneously know about the state >of the local photon. Fascinating stuff. > >A large bibliography of some strangely related information was >once put together at the website below. Hundreds of good citations. > >Evanescent Light-Wave, Atom Mirror Bibliograhphy >http://hwilwww.rdec.redstone.army.mil/MICOM/wsd/ST/RES/AO/aobib.html > >Unfortunately, the web-site has been down for the last four >weeks. Also the copy I made of the HTML file has somehow >teleported off my unit. If anyone has a copy, please mail >it to me. Months of work lost. Time is short. It breaks my heart. > >Regards, >Robert Stirniman > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 10:57:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA24761; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 10:56:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 10:56:22 -0700 Message-ID: <36320F84.2685 ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 10:33:56 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" References: <199810231829.NAA15600 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------17442FA73ED" Resent-Message-ID: <"b2O6g.0.e26.5JXCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23654 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. --------------17442FA73ED Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Vorts; Attached is the gif site map, drwan from memory, of the "Mystery Base" - which is alleged as General Atomics Remote Piloted Vehicle test area. The wing structure in the drawing appeared to be a permanent fixture, maybe an antenna,not an airplane. It's alignment with central aperture in the odd arch like building (see inset in gif) about a mile away suggests what ? A target for radiation from the wing like antenna? I can't relate such an arrangement to any type of remote control for unpiloted aircraft that I have ever heard of. Of course , I'm only familiar with the hobby type units run in the cb range of frequencies. Any ideas? Jim O. --------------17442FA73ED Content-Type: image/gif; name="GA-SITE.GIF" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="GA-SITE.GIF" R0lGODdhJwINAZMAAAAAAAAAqgCqAACqqqoAAKoAqtyqAKqqqlVVVQAA/wD/AAD///8AAP8A ////AP///ywAAAAAJwINAQME/vDJSau9OOvNu/9gKI5kaZ5oqq5s675wLM90bd94ru987//A oHBILBqPyOQDwWw6n9CodEqtWq9MpXbL7Xq/L6x4TC5fwei0es0umt/weLVNr9vv+FAzr9nz /4CBgkl+gxKFhomKi4wpiIOPjZKTlJORgZeVmpucdZl/n52io6RHoXmnpaqrrDWpd6+tsrO0 I7GeWSkJu7u1viu8Cb9ot3TFGcG8Sb0gzBbOwMI10MjSHNQkyifJ1N3Wwz/HbOIV3MFI2Bvp D+sm7S3vE/Hy3+71I+bf3uBB5Gr+9PRh03aBIAWDB+shlDAvYbqBCxn2ilguIkUN5wpOVAix 4r2A/s/uZVQHLR7Ej/xgAFwihwyKlexEchwZM5lHgzS5VWyG0GZAnPkIJmDgsKdPDzR/As0p kOnRozUvgqSXUGnRhilPrERgoKvXr2DDih3rFcHLXCXm5VMq1NxPthybxbxpba3EoHXz6ryb VN1cum33/o261OdTtyTXOTssOGsYtLbISp5M1qxWyCICl2QW+O7Utjslhu7AWWZVqqJTD15c Wq/qa9K85f3MGvXgmp5t31aL+PXu1nSI4tlKubhxyyZWam56eCph0IBHw+67+fTq2arbNZ5u 1Lrd30yd/7aeGKj072uEw8Ksx7h7ychLwOwIFztuviNlJ8WKfrzt2tnZ/ocBVBj15t9zACLo XXW6mbSZgOARmIZ6dhD33oVgxUfCfPs0aB90AXrkG38CnVdiiCjedx1fpJ2Y24r/uXageR4m 5pBuB96mBoW4aNgehkAa4KMIHLbW1IusyQhiat21WI6JsSUopZJJvljgk7RR+WGULtKYm1RR Wdnhl1gpwaMx7IHAVZAYDqlHmiEEFV2MzDFYH3nVhHQjfnZOeVWdDdHHJ6ALClalcwZW05hs f9ZxZhsWsvmem2rCmZk2Mo1p1Jhv2XkllDeN5mdRGpGoZ6OkknfOlEemitRCjLraxqPjWNrB mpK6R+kHMDnm668T0LpGpLkWt6sHvQKrbErC/v5jKwe4FkvZsbc+u+y12DabBrHSwncWtdiG +6u2xFjbR7fGfivuuuuSCwa3Yokxrbrs1rusu1/AGxa40Y4F7gbJ2iuwJvh6oW+GHQAw72X/ DuxwKQV3cfBX4Co8WcMZBPzwxolEzMXEZSW8cHLmcmwywaiUjEG/8Yp8Mb0nxwxxyhhbwPK+ LnvLsMw8j+LxFiB3VfHI8qnc89GA/KwFAgA07fTTUEf9NGVSV0111VhLrTHSXH+htBJNLCD2 2GSXbfYCN2d4ttkWw7f222dv3fXcWnxNCBNw5432tHov0HZlfectN92EG2E3EmEHHjffev/t r+JvD1745EEcbgre/pCXnTbFfTseb+ZxG0356HXTDDrZm5fVd+pCn6656KTHDgMDtNdu++24 56777pcj4LrYrAu5OuO/ow277MhXbvrvwfuud/PF+91E1tRXb/312Gev/fbcd+/99+CHL/74 TQe3vOvNWw999JIn7ysA5g+HOfrTqk8888e7Xy/8s55/evNPeNoT7oe+/OlvXfxjg+WMkLgC tkQM0TNezQ64v/itx3kRzKAG4dY+CoIjgenx3wZHOMIOevAXINyRCEnIQvYZ8ITLSuGEVtjC GoLOhDCkhQzRsEA3zM+GQMwcDnMoix2CoYdEaGAQl7i6FxLxfRas0A+ZSMW1DfGJqzCi/tdo WMUuShCLJ9OiF5A4BCV68YxXBCMpxNgFMgrBjGfsYhrVKAo2csGN/ZhiHKs4Rzpywo5bwCMQ 4LhHJoqDdhRAZLAopEgeNHJ2giQdIEsnvwda8pJnCMEjN8nISH7gkS8ApR8tMEkz0QyTqEzl IRVpu2B1oHYXgCUIZFkBUT7AlhloZS09BkpaSjKKPVKlMC85AlbKspfqyd0ub/dKZkrAmc+k 5TE5qctbVnOayfQl7mJXyiR40gfdvEx6hEMUWCJzkduMZjo1oEx1UjOb5Gyk7twJT3WiE57Q nFw4H7bPDc2qnAAF6C7Rac+CWpMD0xxoInmETYJas5MLjWc2/pdpUH1alAYTNJwuEXkmedYz mgtFaD5BGtKIGhSXJC2oNBnaTsr1s3LUrMNL1eSojfoypR6d6CI9MNJzmvShO81lJyUa1HtW 86I8XOk3cTBTZNnBmUfF6UeBmlKhurOkRVVpTrMaU6oeFKtfdemOlCpTGWTUmzntqE692tAN tLWqYbXnNY0JUYLOlaJeReoRbbrUGzS1D2dFa10VGlZtrlOoPeXkMvN5WLa2VJSNLdxfewBV lH5hshcIrJkUawGPOtSu+IpqXm3ZWNHedJ2kvalevRbQvK4BsxXQrCTeOkq/Pq0CUAMBbHVg TNeqYaZDku1sW1pbGyQwhcfV7Vjp/tlX48rHZlkRbXFpkFwKVNcDu81BWptbA+DGdroUvK4E xMuB7OLgnWX15wSEC94wTgC571XuhIbKXeo+lyXMai8442vd237AvDdAZn1n4F32VsKy+o1B blMAYGUB18CbGHCCFbzaSk3Pv8NA8ISV0GBgdTi/G6Yu9zTwYSjOTcMhLsFLtVhix7QYxClm QVON+OKU1JgfKI4xdk1A4wqfWMJ0XHEGbvxBDGTNZEAeAvmOLIjukdjHD+gxkpMMhBYT2Q5X RqGRtxwzKu9XBlmmQ5hrIWVS8izH6aXwMMasQy6buWde1oGVKStdJLB5FmXGLfKiloY574C4 NEAzbpdM/uhCE5rAbtaz7ABwgEYf4M48RrR2eWcDQVvXxpJ+s6ZHx2hHP7rPmQ5wV3mKUgHH Vb5FBrORD/CARrea1ZD2RacbHWsVh7rSanWoYaN6VED/F9OqvgCjX03sWuPZ05/us6EXfF5t vRXQc43sjvnhZ1Ky2tWuNnYrZk3rH+PzoyvN6qnDPQJtg6HauL22uqMsSWR/eNlSu4NStzra xBL21L+m9q3fu+5sc9rdwd63AnOt1W/7lKtfM/dlBR7lfsO63Z5+d3fxcFpw0/vgJ004sNVs bWL7G+LdhkGNFY4Cvtbzrq41tW+nnWqOp9vjDwd5yF0w8jxQ+qHQnKe4ca5a/pavmeHDxnbM ZZ7sFtScDxtdLHo5q3SN6zvgFRB6sfcMcKNPvGsk7wK6KSD1jy864jS/OteyzoWt83fTkmT2 Co5O8Z5zeOMiT/SldUxKeKs9OJEVNMbXDvcX5HnudB8XtCO2dxWQfQtmH6/cA5+Du4+R6XBd OYrr7HbFP93lgFc04+WsedYOlrE57zVLRT/SzGsZ6v2t2uY5j/Y29jz0sIe8znnu9sNrIfGr V/KQk1raz7P03kynrellzXAdO033T+Z9xZt+77gGf6qdPz3m6V6+8RqbjbaP5aid33vg+/6z 0Sc+6o0v7CpvIPud3X5X9y77tda+72Hf/A5rjX3P/hMVrHRt/vo9W9Hhk7n4E8ZiP1B/9sdr 27Vr+HdY9NZ6/zd+KSaAA7h785Va9MV9g3VPhPV+lxd3jAeBEciAAoN+dgaACeaBH3h2HCOC R4B7G2aC/8VnKOB4/AR/Vid/5RcC1TdoT6SCRsCCLXiD+SaBMMSDReCDLXhc4QRIfxVnnUCE RGCEIXZ8OBiExdQzToh805d7U+hzIsCEfxRhdQaEHKiF5baFVcgzV8gCs3d+JLh55JKEJeCF m5CGKyB8QjiGYWR3IxZLbIhqXWiFB3aByZeFA5d+zUQrOWZpYuh/lqeGfUiFmgSIlLCAj4iH NWWIIoWIoWU5f8eIJTeI/lw4S5LICZUXfjXYdmDlW9K2WPqXY52Igi2gLaXUVHKoCXQYi6Vo ijKGdBeogI9FX+0Xho3YX0bWYs0yiyZQi5VwiyogjIsYf6iYcahlTvxHe9W4hqbogrNTiUKo NMpICcxYcorIbg6Id1X1bPknVfdXWOnIgNoYA7LIjT/zjZMQjieAjXfod3/AUe8UbRm3c0WF j+SoiwNZaec3fzvES6M4XKsIgny3j+P2i+tYjZhojWcyf/lYA+4Sb7kkimgYiA1JkIaXNMsX kO24gNcoiBi5eAYZi5+0kNJnifJWcRN5khbnfu14RKHEUzApfoR4ielHev9oVL1YelvkAu5C /o+SYI88AIXjhAEGWJOsmIrOGEjb6FY9OYkF45Rk+ExX2ZEfSYpoxpVd+U1KuUadkIueOJJd yZNfSThMKY5j2YZtGXhxmYxVCYvQWJfFNI6LRjD8CIl7OZPConJBSQtq6UF3SQLUKJinSJg0 CYyjl5gg6ValNnpQ6Zcx2Qg3B4r62HaJdYCiKQul2Hv9eJoVpJW+9oyPCZQRiVfkhm+kUHmD J5oGp5l4JgpzWY4DZ4BNh5qtQJtrBVexaYcxpJtbSZcFyH4SmZeViVgliXBEiZtFhJyOuYug SZy/Z5LxRJqXaW8JOJ1niWU0iJ0z2X8qR26UqZqIpZ14xY6peC2L/slUyvl4vhiUu2aUyHmf KYeZjrWO4TKfflWf9ilQAGlajckKa7igagV6zlmei/CgBfmZfNmXpmmgkQdUAjaedyCgmhSS a8lgFToExjkwHvpJOemZNKeHLNqiLvqiMDo+uhOjNFqj1/OcssmaI1pTk7mj8CiIGemjPyCQ 0AmQfSmk2hefLImkjkSk2keReMmk3heKUvpnkCd52wl+EUVwW5qZ76lfVxqkVTppRRltsUl7 zEdPW7qha8qh4VKiDjmmuDZVOjeN4nmnPIenV8Vcbpotq6mjcjqnDlpRB4eOANp+VNlbCQai IRqoMnBzDJqBv8hORZmoEvpEEnqi00VW/nwqiLZppOdYqfjZp2PnqE36fdKJVc83nIgqbnRF qkejqcVlWLp2pRd3q2VKqP65nuRnqrw1at2XgFFJk9PZivpZW4ooq8iqfqrFnBTYoFOppJdK RMnqq9YKMT+jrNe6rYdoadrKreCambw6oeFaroZQreaarueareraroGAru4ar+dphvJar4VI r/aar3vlMd+qr746rv3qr/oasAJrrwRbsPJ6sAgrpOM6jAv7sDClNAoLsRXKqI1KsRg7A04q khnbsT/Kj/gysR6rhXDKsSN7ss2YomKKsiybAiV7sS0bs7Oksksqszb7oQCqoje7syiasyvL s0Arrv33s0Fb/rQiarRIO5hJu7SRxrRO27RPG7X4KrVUq7NVe7Uwi7VPK7Ja26td+7XkCrZV y7ViG4Bl27Vke7bt9W422rZu+7ZwG7dyO7d0W7eHFrYPqbYCm7Z6W1x827ej9LeAG2SDK7Wy CqnkEpmg+qshSZ2Fa34kOamW2aMZeqoN6biP+2X7eJmZ+G2U+qU/dZiHaKk5mrll966cO7me q46S+ZttmonCOq2mKwSHO3saZqY4OZp6urH/qaezu3CRa6eqG1DFmaXAepPDi4CV+7tvF7yh B7vEm5KjKqoWmbxnirnMS5+Ra1WTe0sHVbyum6rVS6l0CqTZ27ybW5iJC7KtJVWw/jlUJqmk ocuOw3m+t4e6kku+OOdYrnqoNumzX4qr8mu/kJu+wqu/XwW+bXqardu9n0Vc2EvArQmaB9ye CSy9rGhqbAq74MefEvyEXPOyH7yUIfynIwyO3garJ9x4KyyzgtvCnAbDLfvCMmwDKJFFNbwx N6wKNJzDM7DDpdDDPhwDQIyWQywwRTwKQnzELpDEdcTE9uLETQjF9SLFXwgDVkzFfJDFtkjE WlwJXLyMXvzFkxDGKIzFZFzGm8kCZpzGbNDGJIzGeDHHdFzHdnzHeJzHerzHfNzHfvzHgBzI gjzIhFzIdrzGwODGjQDHjfBhjKzIYPDIi+DIkLwIkqwI3JTsp4mpuO77sJecCJmsLLzbnxi8 sJ9sCKGMmM0iwrjrpfP7yiI1oqc8CEtMpqtsvtH6vKE6rGgmu/o1y012ZmpJieK6uvDZqcU6 sxEMRsAcCLUcaA27ckqHpp1MVZw6jr5cW80MCM/8sQ2qvpPHUdR8zOM7zkUarTLczZBEeo/y oOb0vaWMjce6p8zlw+rszbdradQIsvEbqkEloRZLwPesscI4yvvcvuRsqENbzCo8wyVMvvOs VUNpgfm5nsv8uAMdsRFtzVKpnc9ayQkD0vma0SLtYCVdrx8WAQAAAA== --------------17442FA73ED-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 11:04:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA27471; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 11:02:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 11:02:43 -0700 Message-Id: <199810241803.NAA29624 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:02:31 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Resent-Message-ID: <"sy1N73.0.7j6.0PXCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23655 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 4:36 PM 10/24/98, John Winterflood wrote: >>Jim Ostrowski wrote :- >> >>>Now this hum is said to be a subjective phenomena and not everyone can >>>hear it, but others who were in my company could hear it too and it >>>wasn't always there , particularly not on weekends. Besides this, it >>>would stop for several minutes at a time >>>and abruptly resume. >> >>If it is not subjective, then it should be possible to plant a >>microphone or geophone in the ground, and get a waveform on a >>CRO or whatever. >> >>If you plant three geophones some distance apart, and measure >>the phase delay between two pairs of them (due to the finite >>propagation velocity of sound through soil), you could get a >>vector pointing to the source. >> >>If you do this twice at distant locations to obtain two vectors, >>you should be able to triangulate the location of the generator. >> >>Sounds like a fun project for a weeks holliday out in the wild! > > >Great idea. However, if the sound is being transmitted by metal pipes, >then it will be difficult to do other than locate the pipe. However, if >you find a pipe it may be possible, with a lot of effort, to follow it to >the source. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner ***{As I noted in an earlier post, a "hum" seemingly identical to the one described by Jim Osstrovski troubled me for years and, after a lot of thinking, I concluded that the source was a distant diesel engine that was being used to maintain pumped storage in a water reservoir, and that the sound was propagating through the water lines to my house. Lots in my area are from 3 to 10 acres in size, so houses are rather far apart and we are about 10 miles from the nearest incorporated area. Thus there is a widespread system of underground water lines and a sprinkling of pumped storage reservoirs on hillsides, with spacing of about 1 mile. That fact, in my view, explains the fact that the sound seems to come from everywhere. The buried mains are not metal, but large diameter PVC, and the feeds to the houses are smaller diameter PVC. Thus the sound is not propagating through metal, but through the water itself. The proof that a sound is present in my water line is straightforward: my dogs (I raise pit bulls) dig up my water lines. On at least 20 occasions, I have noted a sudden drop in water pressure and, upon walking the line, have found water spurting 10 feet into the air and a happy dog standing over the hole that he had dug. If there were no sound from the lines, my dogs would not know where to dig, and, believe me, they *do* know where to dig! It is very exasperating! --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 11:20:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA00087; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 11:19:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 11:19:17 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981024182200.008fc3c8 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 14:22:00 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Podkletnov Interview by Charles Platt Resent-Message-ID: <"MRIKM1.0.G1.beXCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23656 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Browsing through Wired Magazine to see what it was like (the November Table of Contents is not posted) I used cold fusion in their search engine. Over 2000 hits were made, none of the first twenty had any connection to cold fusion. Suprisingly, an article by Charles Platt came up about Podkletnov's experiments and an interview with him. I downloaded the article; it was an interesting read. I don't remember this article ever being mentioned on Vortex-L. Access to Wired is at www.wiredmagazine.com. Ed Strojny P.S. Cold Fusion was mentioned in the article. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 12:04:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA15955; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 12:03:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 12:03:38 -0700 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <36322551.7E3E ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 12:06:57 -0700 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: editor infinite-energy.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com CC: aki in.netcom.com Subject: Re: Press Release on Wired CF Article References: <199810231500.LAA29923 mercury.mv.net> 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 MAA15934 Resent-Message-ID: <"3fp4C2.0.Cv3.AIYCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23657 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: October 24, 1998 'Gene, Got the magazone, read it, looked at the pics. Question: Did Platt submit for review, any part of the long article he wrote to any one of the individuals mentioned? Exposure of cold fusion to the general public by a large circulation magazine to supposedly technically (and scientific?) oriented demographic group is better than nothing. However, I find a serious lack of credits (actually none) being given to pionnering publications on cold fusion Other than IE or Fusion Technology and their publishers such as Hal Fox, Wayne Green, and Mitchell Swartz, or Lyndon LaRouche (Carol White, Ed.). They have been in the forefront of covering the CF phenomena over the years and not to be mentioned by intentional design or neglect should be corrected. Even the Society for Scientific Exploration gave venue to Storm's unaccepted (by other publications) papers on cold fusion. There are others. I wonder if Platt had the time to look into these, pro and con. Now IE may be happy that the Wired article came out since they seemed to have furnished some information that formed the basis of Platt's article. What of the others? -AK- >E.F. Mallove wrote in his IE Press Release > October 23, 1998 > > Concord, NH ‹ Wired Magazine, the high-tech journal of the digital age, takes a giant leap forward for truth in science journalism with its latest issue. Charles Platt¹s 18-page expose¹ article in the November 1998 Wired ---- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 13:17:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06293; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:16:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:16:06 -0700 Message-Id: <3632354B.DCA5E03A verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 22:15:07 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" References: <3631F85A.63CA@ca-ois.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ZURmw.0.9Y1.5MZCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23658 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > [snip] > > If you haven't already been there , check out > > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/bases37.html > > which is an article written by Phil Schneider (now deceased , murdered > according to the header note) who claims to have been involved in the > building of many underground bases. > He also mentions having been involved in a 1979 shootout with Aliens at > the Dulce , NM underground facility. > If one take this article for making an sci-fi film, it would be far more better than the "Terminator" story. Even the murder of the author is consistent with the given scenario that an underground, technically advanced top gov is in symbiosis with the one on the surface. I think such a thing is not totally impossible, so it could worth to analyse theoretically (socially, politically and technologically if such a scenario could be possible. Even the denial of ET existence is positive argument for this, because the top gov have no reason to bother (when things are uncovered), because it will be insignificant beside of the whole picture. I think the social balance will not be seriously affected when people learn they not living in a true democracy. See my country. People who really matter about the undemocratic issues and how we are unpaired governed are really ineffective politically. I n my country nobody could deny that military is on top of the gov. Actually, military is always less or more a secondary government, having their own initiatives, having their separate laws, separate organizations, separate budgets, , and different philosophy. If they have separate aims respect to their different knowle dge on reality, there could no mechanism to disallow it. Black budgets are not specific to few govs on the world and everybody knows they exists. We are not suffering to much with it existence. So In the history we see how things goes extreme, why it would not occur in future? (or present). The scenario seems me not really unrealistic. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 13:35:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA13286; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:34:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:34:09 -0700 Message-ID: <012301bdff8d$8d5b89a0$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 14:33:19 -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: <"y1kh73.0.WF3.1dZCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23659 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Hamdi Ucar To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 2:18 PM Subject: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" You worry about your Government Hamdi, and I'll worry about ours. Having five brothers and myself that have served a total of 20 years in the military and taken our licks in a few wars, I find it reassuring that there is an authority there to fall back on in time of need. If you want to join up with Ostrowski and his Lunatic Fringe Group, that think everything is THEIR BUSINESS, go chat about it on the Encounters Forum. FJS Hamdi Ucar wrote: >Jim Ostrowski wrote: >> >[snip] >> >> If you haven't already been there , check out >> >> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/bases37.html >> >> which is an article written by Phil Schneider (now deceased , murdered >> according to the header note) who claims to have been involved in the >> building of many underground bases. >> He also mentions having been involved in a 1979 shootout with Aliens at >> the Dulce , NM underground facility. >> > > >If one take this article for making an sci-fi film, it would be far more better than the "Terminator" story. Even the murder of the author is consistent with the given scenario that an underground, technically advanced top gov is in symbiosis with the one on the surface. > >I think such a thing is not totally impossible, so it could worth to analyse theoretically (socially, politically and technologically if such a scenario could be possible. Even the denial of ET existence is positive argument for this, because the top gov have no reason to bother (when things are uncovered), because it will be insignificant beside of the whole picture. > >I think the social balance will not be seriously affected when people learn they not living in a true democracy. See my country. People who really matter about the undemocratic issues and how we are unpaired governed are really ineffective politically. In my country nobody could deny that military is on top of the gov. > >Actually, military is always less or more a secondary government, having their own initiatives, having their separate laws, separate organizations, separate budgets, , and different philosophy. If they have separate aims respect to their different knowledge on reality, there could no mechanism to disallow it. > >Black budgets are not specific to few govs on the world and everybody knows they exists. We are not suffering to much with it existence. So In the history we see how things goes extreme, why it would not occur in future? (or present). > >The scenario seems me not really unrealistic. > >Regards, > >hamdi ucar > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 13:43:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA16387; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:41:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:41:33 -0700 Message-Id: <199810242043.QAA09908 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re:Press Release on Wired CF Article Date: Sat, 24 Oct 98 16:40:28 -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: <"J7zCo3.0.z_3.zjZCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23660 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Akira wrote: >'Gene, > >Got the magazone, read it, looked at the pics. >Question: > >Did Platt submit for review, any part of the long article he wrote to >any one of the individuals mentioned? There was a fact checker who consulted me and others, but I did not see the entire article before it was published. I think one prominent researcher , Ed Storms -- saw the whole thing for a thorough fact check. He was under strict non-dislcosure orders, I understand. He did not dicuss this with me or anyone else I know. The credits and figures were proabably not available to hiim, just the body of the article. > >Exposure of cold fusion to the general public by a large circulation >magazine to supposedly technically (and scientific?) oriented >demographic group is better than nothing. You can say that again! It is among the best articles so far. I await the deafening silence of non-response by the sheep-like journalistic community. >However, I find a serious lack >of credits (actually none) being given to pionnering publications on >cold fusion Other than IE or Fusion Technology and their publishers such >as Hal Fox, Wayne Green, and Mitchell Swartz, or Lyndon LaRouche (Carol >White, Ed.). Platt was able to speak to all of these people at ICCF7, and it was THEIR repsonsibility to impress Platt enough to have him decide to mention them. We asked for our phone number to be included, and it wasn't. Fusion Technology is mentioned via their interview with Miley. The omission of Hal Fox was a serious omission, however. Hal is the patron saint of our field, as far as I am concerned.Mitch Swartz's Cold Fusion Times' www site is there under info resources. Carol White is no longer at 21st Century, and since LaRouche got out of jail, he doesn't allow much CF reporting except for Storms' recent article in his rag.LaRouche is too interested in hot fusion for much CF coverage -- at least that is my impression. Marjorie Hecht is a very capable editor, so maybe we'll see more CF despite LaRouche. As for Wayne Green, he deserves no credit whatsoever. He has no clear knowledge about cold fusion, and his magazine "Cold Fusion" was NOT his idea to begin with, it was mine. He misused money from the investor who started "Cold Fusion." He has declared bankruptcy after stiffing the salaries of some of his (underpaid) former employees. Not an unusual occurence for Green. Anyone who wants some belly laughs is urged to read Green's monthly lunatic rants in '73. The less we hear about Green, the better. He is like dog doo that never gets off your shoe. >They have been in the forefront of covering the CF >phenomena over the years and not to be mentioned by intentional design >or neglect should be corrected. Even the Society for Scientific >Exploration gave venue to Storm's unaccepted (by other publications) >papers on cold fusion. SSE Journal, fine though it is -- one of the best journals in the world, is NOT a regular contributor to cold fusion studies. I find itseditor, Dr. Haisch, a little bit hostile to cold fusion. We were not even thanked for covering the SSE journal and meeeting in a recent issue of IE. SSE no longer reciprocates with ads for IE, so we are pulling their ad that we have been providing free. I also notice that Dr. Haisch recently commented , I think it was in a letter to Discover magazine, that to criticize Einstein's relativity was "crackpot." The SSE editor should never make such a remark. I hope that Hal Puthoff, his close associates, points that out to him. > There are others. I wonder if Platt had the time >to look into these, pro and con. Now IE may be happy that the Wired >article came out since they seemed to have furnished some information >that formed the basis of Platt's article. What of the others? It seems to me to be eminently fair that those who initiated the article and helped the most in forming it should be most prminently mentioned and considered. It came out that way and it seems fair. I hope that answers your questions. > Gene Mallove Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Ph: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 13:48:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19033; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:47:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:47:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:49:19 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" In-Reply-To: <36302610.F7F ca-ois.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xz4vJ3.0.Jf4.jpZCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23661 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 22 Oct 1998, Jim Ostrowski wrote: > got there I told that guard who appeared in a brownish uniform that I > was a highly qualified RF FCC emissions spec technician looking for a > job , and that I was driving by and just happened to notice all the > parabolic reflecting antennas and was wondering if they could use any > help. What a great idea, next time the MIBs come calling, I'll just whip out the old resume and do a hard sell. :) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 24 14:09:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA24603; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 14:08:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 14:08:30 -0700 Message-ID: <3632496F.7389 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 14:41:03 -0700 From: Akira Kawasaki Reply-To: "aki ix.netcom.com"@netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Russ George's new Saturna webpage name References: <00ab01bdff47$1ecaa5c0$8db4bfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"boP5Q3.0.G06.D7aCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23662 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: October 24, 1998 Russ George has changed his website to Saturna Technology (incorporated) to reflect the private funding he has received to extend his success with the Case-type cell replication. The begining content of the website explaina the change. The expanded independant replication effort has started at SRI (cooperatively) and just about to start at Pacific Northwest Laboratories. All are using his cells patterned after Case. Time marches on. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 14:43:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA31405; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 14:42:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 14:42:25 -0700 Message-Id: <199810242144.RAA16779 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 17:45:26 -0400 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: <"iySrk2.0.dg7.0daCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23663 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- > From: Frederick J Sparber > > You worry about your Government Hamdi, and I'll worry about ours. Having > five brothers and myself that have served a total of 20 years in the > military > and taken our licks in a few wars, I find it reassuring that there is an > authority there to fall back on in time of need. We seem to have more problems relating to the government failing us that cannot be justified by some crisis of war, manufactured or not. See http://www.tiac.net/users/kencook/jw_table_of_contents.htm This will give you something to worry about, Mr. Sparber. It might make you wonder why you and your brothers risked your lives when you see who is calling the shots (not that there is no justification for war). Since moving to NH, I have been trying to register my vehicle and get a NH driver's license. The state will not allow it because I live (like many others) in a travel trailer. Since I refuse to commit a crime in order to obtain these legal documents, I am in legal peril. Yeah, it's good to have the government looking out for us. I wonder if Carville had something to do with this. He's got a thing for people in trailers . . . Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 15:03:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA05103; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 15:02:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 15:02:18 -0700 Message-ID: <016701bdff99$dc2c1e80$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 16:01:25 -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: <"v5zT_.0.aF1.fvaCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23664 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Ed Wall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 3:44 PM Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" I was talking about the MILITARY, Ed , Not BUREAUCRATS. :-) Regards, Frederick Ed Wall wrote: >---------- >> From: Frederick J Sparber >> >> You worry about your Government Hamdi, and I'll worry about ours. Having >> five brothers and myself that have served a total of 20 years in the >> military >> and taken our licks in a few wars, I find it reassuring that there is an >> authority there to fall back on in time of need. > >We seem to have more problems relating to the government failing us that >cannot be justified by some crisis of war, manufactured or not. See > >http://www.tiac.net/users/kencook/jw_table_of_contents.htm > >This will give you something to worry about, Mr. Sparber. It might make >you wonder why you and your brothers risked your lives when you see who is >calling the shots (not that there is no justification for war). > >Since moving to NH, I have been trying to register my vehicle and get a NH >driver's license. The state will not allow it because I live (like many >others) in a travel trailer. Since I refuse to commit a crime in order to >obtain these legal documents, I am in legal peril. Yeah, it's good to have >the government looking out for us. > >I wonder if Carville had something to do with this. He's got a thing for >people in trailers . . . > >Ed Wall > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 15:47:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA17072; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 15:46:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 15:46:30 -0700 Message-Id: <199810242248.SAA23625 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:49:55 -0400 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: <"4zdLk1.0.gA4.5ZbCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23665 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick, I'm having a harder time telling them apart these days. :( It's all so federal. Ed ---------- > From: Frederick J Sparber > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Cc: George > Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" > Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 6:01 PM > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Wall > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 3:44 PM > Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" > > I was talking about the MILITARY, Ed , Not BUREAUCRATS. :-) > > Regards, Frederick > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 16:54:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA03413; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 16:53:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 16:53:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <017601bdffa8$108ff3a0$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 17:43:07 -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: <"BMIkp1.0.Fr.1YcCs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23666 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Ed Wall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 4:48 PM Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Ed Wall wrote: > >Frederick, > >I'm having a harder time telling them apart these days. :( > >It's all so federal. > >Ed Agreed, But when I was in the Military putting in 15-hour days man handling Atomic Bombs and on an occasion outrunning an Atomic Artillery shell to boot, for $90,00/month, with $50.00 of it being sent home to help support my family,I got a very stern letter from the IRS warning me that,"if you don't pay that $3.50 you owe us we're going to confiscate your property and possibly send you to jail". :-) Regards, Frederick >> >> I was talking about the MILITARY, Ed , Not BUREAUCRATS. :-) >> >> Regards, Frederick >> >> > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 16:52:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA30727; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 16:51:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 16:51:06 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 15:58:36 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gravity=Lenz s Law Resent-Message-ID: <"25Gl51.0.wV7.fVcCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23667 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:56 AM 10/24/98, ron kita wrote: >In an e-mail message from Jim Cox formerly >of TRW Space Park and editor of Antigravity News > antigravnews rocketmail.com he cited the >recent web page of David Jonsson of ELEKTROMAGNIM >that gravity is merely a result of Lenz s Law. >the web site is http://www.newphysics.se/elektromagnum/physics/jonsson >Were the patents issued to Hooper correct, >since gravity is merely a case of mutual induction?? >I always questioned that NASA DISPROOF of Hooper >might have been less than an adequate effort...to >put it mildly!!!!!!!! >Cheers >Ron Kita [snip] I found the URL of the above page to be: David Jonsson begins with the magnetic flux around a moving electron in the nonrelativistic case: _ _ _ mu0 e v x r B = ----- . ----- 4 Pi 3 r then uses the the following expressions for the classical electron radius re, 2 2 e mu0 e r = ------------------- = -------- e 2 4 Pi m 4 Pi epsilon0 c m e e to obtain: 2 m v e U= ------- 3 He then states: "This reminds very much of the equation of the kinetic energy of the electron. Only 1/6 of the kinetic energy is missing but remember that I haven't included the field inside the electron in the calculus. Can it be so simple that the inertia of the electron is due to Lenz' law only?" This is not a novel idea. (See "the Feynman Lectures in Physics, Vol. II, p. 28-3 ff) The question of how much of the mass of the electron resides in the field of the electron is very much a function of the distribution of charge in the quantum field of the electron, as is the implied radius of the electron. Jonsson appears to simply take for granted the link between gravity and kinetic energy. He appears to assume the energy of the EM field is the source of inirtial mass and thus must be the direct source of gravity. In other words, the above sentence is Jonsson's only attempt to link the conepts of kinetic energy, mass, field energy, gravity, and Lenz' law. This sentence is insufficient to establish any such linkage IMHO. The relation of kinetic energy to Lenz' law is obscure at best. Lenz' law relates to the direction of electromagnetically induced fields. Further, such a mututal induction is a result of changes in dipole fields, thus would obey a 1/r^3 rule, unlike gravity, which is ~ 1/r^2. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 17:09:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA03510; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 17:05:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 17:05:47 -0700 Message-ID: <36326664.8A9 ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 16:44:36 -0700 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" References: <012301bdff8d$8d5b89a0$8db4bfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qC2oR3.0.es.QjcCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23668 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frederick J Sparber wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hamdi Ucar > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 2:18 PM > Subject: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" > > You worry about your Government Hamdi, and I'll worry about ours. Having > five brothers and myself that have served a total of 20 years in the > military > and taken our licks in a few wars, I find it reassuring that there is an > authority there to fall back on in time of need. > If you want to join up with Ostrowski and his Lunatic Fringe Group, that > think everything is THEIR BUSINESS, go chat about it on the Encounters > Forum. > > FJS Hey Fred - Thanks for recognizing my political party affiliation with capital letters like that! Gee we're finally getting some respect ! >; ^)> <- A little devil for you--this of cousre is a rough characatur of the Evil Entity that we at the LFG (I'm gonna LOVE saying "LFG" to all my friends!)of course think is your ultimate Evil Overseer , over there in the Shadow Government <<<<----- (Returning your gratuitous respect). This is going to be so much fun. I can hardly wait for the arrival of your "Ascended Master Adepts" from Zeta Reticuli FBI , CIA , MIB , ... ATF ad infinitum ... vs The _LFG_! Regards, Jim Ostrowski Technical Specialist Class II Intergalactic Conmmunications Division Lunatic Fringe Group #1 Mojave Desert LFG Base Avenue, San Bernardino, CA USA > > Hamdi Ucar wrote: > > >Jim Ostrowski wrote: > >> > >[snip] > >> > >> If you haven't already been there , check out > >> > >> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/bases37.html > >> > >> which is an article written by Phil Schneider (now deceased , murdered > >> according to the header note) who claims to have been involved in the > >> building of many underground bases. > >> He also mentions having been involved in a 1979 shootout with Aliens at > >> the Dulce , NM underground facility. > >> > > > > > >If one take this article for making an sci-fi film, it would be far more > better than the "Terminator" story. Even the murder of the author is > consistent with the given scenario that an underground, technically advanced > top gov is in symbiosis with the one on the surface. > > > >I think such a thing is not totally impossible, so it could worth to > analyse theoretically (socially, politically and technologically if such a > scenario could be possible. Even the denial of ET existence is positive > argument for this, because the top gov have no reason to bother (when things > are uncovered), because it will be insignificant beside of the whole > picture. > > > >I think the social balance will not be seriously affected when people learn > they not living in a true democracy. See my country. People who really > matter about the undemocratic issues and how we are unpaired governed are > really ineffective politically. In my country nobody could deny that > military is on top of the gov. > > > >Actually, military is always less or more a secondary government, having > their own initiatives, having their separate laws, separate organizations, > separate budgets, , and different philosophy. If they have separate aims > respect to their different knowledge on reality, there could no mechanism to > disallow it. > > > >Black budgets are not specific to few govs on the world and everybody knows > they exists. We are not suffering to much with it existence. So In the > history we see how things goes extreme, why it would not occur in future? > (or present). > > > >The scenario seems me not really unrealistic. > > > >Regards, > > > >hamdi ucar > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 18:17:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA31729; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:16:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:16:05 -0700 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <36327CCD.346 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:20:13 -0700 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Press Release on Wired CF Article References: <199810242043.QAA09908 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Xlz-a1.0.fl7.KldCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23669 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 24, 1998 'Gene, you wrote in part, > LaRouche is too interested in hot fusion for much CF coverage -- > at least that is my impression. Not quite. For Cold Fusion content, I subscribed to 21st Century. The LaRouch group used the subscription list to solicit support for LaRouche activities --- which I am out of completely. But they did send a pro cold fusion manual published a few years ago. > As for Wayne Green, he deserves no credit whatsoever. He has no clear > knowledge about cold fusion, and his magazine "Cold Fusion" was NOT > > his idea to begin with, it was mine. Not a serious question, but knowing him as you describe him, what induced you to pick him in the first place? > Anyone who wants some belly laughs is urged to read > Green's monthly lunatic rants in '73. You know, I was reading his editorials and magazine '73 since he first started many solar cycles ago. It predates CF by almost thirty years. I liked his irreverant-sort of Amateur Ham writing sytle then. Very readable --- sort like Art Bell of print. So I do not hold him in any negative light personally. I know you have had difficulties with him. > I hope that answers your questions. Thanks. I do not mind credit being given where deserved as IE and Fusion Technology. I just felt so much was left out of efforts of others to publicize the CF effort over the years that it had to be mentioned as throughly as possible. It was not as if nobody was trying. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 18:29:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA03392; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:28:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:28:32 -0700 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 09:29:55 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19981025093407.2337c288 pacific.net.sg> X-Sender: mpowers8 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: "Mpowers8 pacific.net.sg" Subject: Re: Lost vortex replies Resent-Message-ID: <"7ubB23.0.wq._wdCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23670 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello John Mitchell, I have seen you have send many scientific subject to me.Anyway, thanks for that. Today I have somethings new that is I am looking for a bachelor age 37-40 who has the same background like you. I am interested to make friend with him. So far do you have any friend working in Singapore who is still a bachelor and wish to have girl friend. Please let me know in your next e-mail. Here is myself introduction. I am a chinese, age 37, height 152cm, weight 49kg. Waiting for your reply. Thanks. 25-10-98. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 18:40:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA10331; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:39:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:39:45 -0700 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 09:41:13 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19981025094527.2df7f936 pacific.net.sg> X-Sender: mpowers8 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: "Mpowers8 pacific.net.sg" Subject: Re: Jed - well informed as ever Resent-Message-ID: <"ZUhrf2.0.BX2.T5eCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23671 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello Jed Rothwell, Thanks for sending me alot of e-mail. But today I have a different topic about social life. I am interested in making friend with white people who is a bachelor age 37-40. So far do you have any friends working in Singapore which you can introduce to me. But of course he must be a professioner with good background. Here is myself introduction. I am a chinese age 37, weight 49kg, Height 152cm. You can send me as many name list as possible so that I can contact them. Thanks. 25-10-98. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 18:49:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA14621; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:47:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:47:45 -0700 Message-ID: <363276A5.7EC5 earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 19:53:57 -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: Y2K: Yardeni: global recession 9.21.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DnytD3.0.Fa3.0DeCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23672 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: YEAR 2000 RECESSION? "Prepare for the worst. Hope for the best." Dr. Edward Yardeni Version 8.1, September 21, 1998 Incorporating Y2K Reporter No. 1-27 Table Of Contents Yardeni's Y2K Reporter - Part One - Chapter 1: The Problem I.The Recession II.The Problem In Brief III.Bill Gates To The Rescue? IV.Business Leaders Sound The Alarm V.Clinton's Y2K Council Too Weak VI.Some Good News VII.Investing For Y2K Recession Chapter 2: Electric Power Systems I.The Energy Grid II.Nuclear Power To The People III.Power Makes The World Go Round Chapter 3: Telecommunications & Embedded Systems I.Telcos Hit The Mute Button II.Embedded Chips: Invasion Of The Body Snatchers Chapter 4: Transportation I.FAA: On A Wing And A Prayer II.Y2K Drill At The FAA III.FAA At Risk IV.Y2K "No Fly Zones" V.The Global Positioning System - Part Two - Chapter 5: Banking & Credit I.The Fed Prepares For The Worst II.Greenspan Sees "Inevitable Difficulties" III.G10 Bank Officials Warn Of Global Chaos IV.Bankers Read Riot Act V.Will Retailers Be On-Line? Chapter 6: Corporate Disclosure I.SEC Responds To Y2K Pressure II.The Full Monty III.Adequate Disclosure? IV.Where Are The CPAs? Chapter 7: Government Progress I.Will Uncle Sam Compute? II.State Of The States Chapter 8: Government Agencies I.No Plan B At IRS II.Social Security III.Is DOD DOA? Chapter 9: Global I.Crisis Distracts Asians II.No Global Warming Over Y2K Appendix: Questionnaire To Assess Compliance Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM I. The Recession Recession Odds Are Rising The Year 2000 Problem (Y2K) is a very serious threat to the US economy. Indeed, it is bound to disrupt the entire global economy. If the disruptions are significant and widespread, then a global recession is likely. Currently, I believe there is a 70% chance of such a worldwide recession, which could last at least 12 months starting in January 2000 and could be at least as severe as the 1973-74 global recession. That downturn was caused by the OPEC oil crisis, which is a useful analogy for thinking about the potential economic consequences of Y2K. Just as oil is a vital resource for our global economy, so is information. If the supply of information is disrupted, many economic activities will be impaired, if not entirely halted. The goal of this netbook is to assess and update the likelihood of a year 2000 recession. I first began studying the Year 2000 Problem during the summer of 1997. In my topical study dated July 1997, I concluded that there is a 30% chance of a worldwide recession in 2000. In Congressional testimony on November 4, 1997, I raised the odds of a recession to 40%, based on numerous disturbing documents I found on the Internet, particularly on the web sites of several important government agencies, including the Federal Aviation Administration, the Internal Revenue Service, and the General Accounting Office. In early January 1998, after reading the US federal government's third quarterly Y2K progress report for the three-month period ended November 15, 1997 and released on December 15, 1997, I wrote that I would most likely raise the recession odds to 60%. I would do so if the fourth quarterly federal progress report, compiled by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), continued to suggest that vital computer systems operated by the government might not be ready for the century date change. [Y2K Reporter #11, January 5, 1998.] OMB released its fourth progress report on March 10, 1998 for the three-month period ended February 15, 1998. After studying it very carefully, I concluded that there is an increasing chance that vital government services will be delayed, disrupted, pared, and curtailed in 2000. (See Chapter 7.) This precarious situation implies that foreign governments, as well as many business organizations around the world may fail to meet the deadline too. Therefore, I raised the odds of a severe global recession to 60% on March 16, 1998. On June 29, 1998, I raised the probability of a global recession to 70%. There are three major reasons why I did so back then: 1) The response to the Year 2000 Problem from our global leaders was pathetic. There was no leadership coming from the United States or any other of the G8 nations. They were doing virtually nothing to increase global awareness, to accelerate the pace of remediation, or to prepare for the potential failure of vital systems. 2) The US government was making progress, but the pace was too slow. No one was setting national priorities and preparing national contingency plans. Key government regulators--including the Federal Communications Commission, the Securities & Exchange Commission, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission--all admitted that even they didn’t have the necessary information to assess the gravity of the situation. It was widely assumed that companies will be ready for the century date change. However, given the lack of adequate disclosure, this was a naively optimistic assumption. 3) There was virtually no information available on progress outside the United States. The level of awareness was dangerously low in most countries. The bits of information that were available suggested that many government agencies and business entities around the world were at risk of failing to fix 100% of their mission-critical systems in time. As of August 1998, I still see a 70% chance of a severe global recession. I am the first to admit that there is nothing scientific about my assessment. It is not based on a rigorous global economic model. It is simply my own subjective evaluation of the situation, as documented in this netbook. I am assigning a probability to a Y2K recession scenario to communicate my level of conviction and concern. A Recession 1999? The recession could begin before January 1, 2000, perhaps during the second half of 1999, if the public becomes alarmed and takes precautions. If stock prices fall sharply in 1999, in anticipation of a recession in 2000, the resulting loss in confidence could cause consumers to retrench in 1999 and trigger a recession sooner as well. It could start in 1999 if bankers cause a credit crunch by refusing to lend to companies that are most at risk of failing in 2000. [Jay Golter and Paloma Hawry, "What Every Loan Officer Needs to Know about the Year 2000 Computer (But Doesn't Know How to Ask), FDIC Banking Review, March 1998.] If these companies are not bailed out by their key vendors or customers, they might start failing during 1999. Fortressing Edward Goldberg, executive vice president of operations, services and technology for Merrill Lynch, warned in mid-April 1998 that his company "just won’t do business" with any other broker or vendor that doesn’t pass industrywide Y2K testing that began during the summer of 1998. His comment, reported by Reuters (April 15, 1998), suggests that Y2K-compliant companies may start to join together in Y2K "fortresses" and shut out businesses that are not expected to be ready for the century date change. Such a fortressing trend could very well cause a recession in 1999 if the Y2K barbarians are left to die outside of the fortress gates. How Severe A Y2K Recession? My basic premise is that most computer systems will be fixed in time, but some important ones won't be ready. The question, then, is whether the resulting disruptions will be significant enough to cause a recession. If so, then how severe could it be? I am using the 1973-74 oil-crisis recession as a possible analogy. Information is just as vital as oil for running our economies. If information is harder to obtain, the amount of commercial and financial transactions, i.e., GDP, we can support will necessarily be reduced. In the United States, real GDP dropped 3.7% from peak to trough during 1973-74. I estimate that an identical drop, starting in 2000, would reduce real GDP by $300 billion, back to where it was in early 1998, or three years prior to the end of 2000. Is this too pessimistic, or realistic? Actually, in my opinion, it might be too optimistic to believe that the information gridlock won't be even more damaging, sending us further back in time, when the level of GDP that our information systems supported was even lower. Therefore, I predict that, in the United States, real GDP could fall 5% from peak to trough over a 12-24 month period starting late in 1999. Division Of Labor The IT revolution of the past four decades has contributed greatly to our global prosperity. I recognize that there are some who question whether computers have really contributed to productivity. I have no such doubts. Without computers, none of our most dynamic companies would exist today. Microsoft, SAP, Dell, and Toshiba would not exist, nor would the jobs they've created. FedEx, Wal-Mart, and Deutsche Bank would exist today without computers, but they would all be much smaller. And, of course, governments could not play such large roles in our economies without IT systems. Our global and domestic markets for financial securities, commodities, products, and services depend completely on the smooth functioning of the vast IT infrastructure. Information is the life blood of our domestic and global markets. If the information flow is severely disrupted by Y2K, then markets will allocate and utilize resources inefficiently. Market participants will be forced to spend more time and money obtaining the information that was instantly available at almost no cost before the market was disrupted. The division of labor could be radically upset by Y2K. This process is the very foundation of economic prosperity and progress based on the exchange of goods and services produced as a result of our comparative advantage. We all either thrive, or have the potential to do so, by producing the goods and services that we are especially endowed, qualified, or trained to produce. We exchange the fruits of our labor for the goods and services that are better made by others. IT systems have expanded the size of the markets and the opportunities for an even greater division of labor. Just-in-time manufacturing, outsourcing, and globalization are the most obvious modern extensions of the division of labor. Now imagine a world in which those IT systems either are impaired or completely fail. Suddenly, we may all be forced to do without goods and services that can no longer be produced for us by others. We can attempt to make them ourselves, but in most cases this will be impossible. If it is possible, the cost and time of doing so will be enormous. There are no low-tech alternatives if our high-tech information systems fail in 2000. We simply cannot manually collect, sort, store, process, and analyze all the data we must have to support, let alone grow, our global economy. A Deflationary Recession If a Y2K recession is coming, it will be deflationary, unlike the 1973-74 recession, in which many prices and wages increased sharply, led by soaring oil prices. Economists labeled the subsequent period of slow growth and high inflation "stagflation." With inflation rates falling close to zero in most industrial nations, a 2000 recession could easily push us over the edge into deflation: 1) The financial crisis in Asia has pushed that region into a recession that is likely to last through 1999. [Topical Study #41, "Asia's Great Leap: Forward Or Backward?" February 10, 1998, Topical Study #40, "Is Asia Minor?" November 17, 1997.] 2) As a result of Asian currency devaluations, US import prices are falling and depressing producer prices in the US. Indeed, I do expect deflation in the PPI in 1998 and 1999. 3) Oil prices tumbled in early 1998, partly because crude oil demand in Asia fell by at least one million barrels a day. ["Oil demand: Is Asia minor?" Weekly Economic Briefing, December 3, 1997.] 4) Japan has been in a depression since 1990 and is experiencing some deflation even now. The 10-year bond yield in Japan is under 2%. Could Y2K efforts boost inflation by depressing productivity and raising labor costs? I doubt it. In today's highly competitive markets, higher labor costs are more likely to hurt profits than to be passed through to prices. A Trillion Here. A Trillion There How much might the US price deflator fall in 2000? Conceivably, prices might drop 5% in a deflation scenario. If real GDP drops as much, then a 10% decline in nominal GDP would amount to a loss of nearly $1 trillion. Is this a worst-case scenario? Maybe, maybe not. By the way, this $1 trillion potential loss estimate is just for the US, and before litigation fees and damages, which may also exceed $1 trillion. Stock investors might lose at least $1 trillion if stock prices drop as they do in every recession. The Dow Jones Industrial Average peaked at 1026.82 during January 1973. It plunged 42% to a trough of 596.5 during December 1974. The bear market lasted 23 months. A similar drop in the Dow from the July 17, 1998 record peak of 9337.97, would put it at 5450. It's Not Too Late Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that such a scenario is inevitable. I am not predicting the end of life on the planet earth. It is not too late to minimize the impact of the Y2K problem on our global economy. Besides, even if key systems miss the deadline, we must push harder to fix them now so they might be ready sooner in 2000, which is better than later. Let's recognize that Y2K is an emergency situation that requires immediate attention and enormous resources. Let's mobilize these resources. Let's stop pretending that Y2K isn't a major threat to our way of life. There is too much at stake for such uninformed wishful thinking. Perhaps, the time has come to act as though we are preparing for a war. This may seem extreme and unnecessary. However, if we prepare for plausible worst-case Y2K scenarios, then perhaps we can avoid at least some of them. Seven-Point Plan In April 1998, I drafted a seven-point Y2K strategic plan. It was not targeted at fixing the computer problem, but rather on preparing for the inevitable disruptions when the problem is not completely fixed in time: 1) Year 2000 Alliance. I called on the leaders of the Group of Eight (G8) to form a Y2K Global Alliance to coordinate both national and multinational campaigns. The Alliance should be broadened to include all 29 members of the OECD and selected representatives of the United Nations. On June 27, 1998, the United Nations passed a resolution, appealing to all member states to cooperate on global awareness initiatives. This was a good first step, but world governing bodies needed to take a giant leap forward to prepare for Y2K. 2) Commander-In-Chief. I argued that the Y2K Alliance should use the expertise of military personnel. They have the necessary training and experience for marshaling and mobilizing resources for such a potentially huge global campaign. The G8 should appoint a Y2K Commander-in-Chief. I recognized that no nation will voluntarily empower the Y2K command structure to meddle in its internal affairs prior to a Y2K crisis. However, if a crisis does unfold, the Y2K commander and his staff should be ready to implement contingency and disaster recovery plans, on request, on a global basis. 3) Military Fail-Safe System. My number one concern was the stability of nuclear missle systems. Therefore, I proposed that the military leaders of the United States, other NATO members, and Russia jointly assess the risk of an accidental nuclear missile launch or a provocative false alarm. They should rapidly develop a fail-safe joint communication and intelligence network to eliminate any such risk. Measures must be taken to thwart terrorists, hackers, and other malevolent opportunists from taking advantage of any Y2K chaos. The United States and Russia should place 30-to-50 top nuclear defense officials in each others capitals during the first six months of 2000 to provide on-the-spot confirmation of false alarms to the host government. The world’s nuclear super-powers should enter a new round of nuclear disarmament talks, motivated by Y2K concerns. In 1980, a computer-chip failed at Norad, the US command post in Colorado for assessing nuclear attacks. It generated a false alarm of an all-out Soviet missile attack. As recently as 1995, an American research rocket sent up off the coast of Norway to study the aurora borealis so alarmed the Russians that for the first time in their history, they activated the nuclear suitcase that accompanies the president. [See Brian Hall, "Overkill Is Not Dead," The New York Times, March 15, 1998. The article suggests that despite the end of the Cold War, the United States and Russia still have missiles aimed at each other, and can instantly retarget those that don't have a forwarding address currently.] If the year 2000 started tomorrow, US early-warning radar systems would either fail to detect incoming missiles, or they might erroneously show such an attack. Furthermore, US military forces would be incapable of conducting a Gulf War. The United States should amass significant military peacekeeping forces in flash points around the world, particularly the Arab Gulf, South Korea, and Taiwan. 4) Securing Infrastructure. Y2K "Sector Alliances" should be responsible for the Y2K campaigns in specific global sectors. The top priority must be to secure the supply of electricity worldwide. [Recent examples of the turmoil created by a major power failure are Quebec and Montreal during the winter of 1997/98, and Auckland, New Zealand in early 1998.] Other utilities, including water, gas, sanitation, and telecommunications, must also be secured. Contingency plans for rationing utility usage should be prepared. Other key sectors that may require a global "top-down" approach include government revenue collection and debt servicing, welfare payments, farming, manufacturing, mining, transportation, distribution, retailing, banking, and finance. Y2K "Industry Alliances" should have the power to organize and execute a cooperative and collective battle plan among the world's key industries, including, for example, food, drugs, chemicals, energy, security brokerage and exchanges. 5) Change Freeze. Governments should freeze all legislative, regulatory, and information technology (IT) changes that might divert resources from the effort to prepare government and business computer systems for the century date change. The Industry Alliances should adopt a similar "change freeze." 6) Mandatory Y2K Holiday. The Y2K Alliance should consider requiring all nonessential employees to stay home during the first week of January 2000. Financial markets might have to be closed during this period. This global Y2K holiday would give IT personnel the opportunity to stress test their systems with a slow "reboot," rather than under peak load conditions. They could first test the integrity of basic utility services, especially electricity and telecommunications services. Then they could bring their own systems on-line in a phased sequence that can pinpoint weak links and either repair them quickly or take them immediately "off-line." 7) Emergency Budget. The Year 2000 Alliance Accord should require all participants to fund a Y2K Emergency Budget with an initial minimum balance of $100 billion. They should be prepared to provide much more, if necessary. The budget should be spent on both last-ditch efforts to repair or replace key computer systems around the world and to implement contingency plans once the weakest links have been identified. Conceivably, the funds may be needed to purchase strategic stockpiles of fuel, food, and medical supplies. G8 Responds To Y2K I first proposed my seven-point Y2K plan on April 7, 1998 in the keynote speech at the Year 2000 Roundtable of banking officials sponsored by the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland. My speech was reprinted in the May 4, 1998 issue of The Wall Street Journal. In my speech, I called on the G8 leaders to declare war on Y2K at their May 1998 summit. I was pleased to see that the G8 leaders recognized that Y2K is a significant issue and included it in their communiqué. By doing so, the G8 leaders legitimized this issue and elevated it to a global, rather than just a national, concern. Here is the Y2K statement in the communiqué: "The Year 2000 (or Millennium) "bug" problem, deriving from the way computers deal with the change to the year 2000, presents major challenges to the international community, with vast implications, in particular in the defense, transport, telecommunications, financial services, energy, and environmental sectors, and we noted the vital dependence of some sectors on others. We agreed to take further urgent action and to share information among ourselves and with others that will assist in the near and long term. We shall work closely with business and organizations working in those sectors, which will bear much of the responsibility to address the problem. We will work together in international organizations, such as the World Bank and OECD, to assist developing countries to solve this critical technological problem and prepare for the year 2000." Missing Is Action I was not impressed by the substance of the G8 response to Y2K. The Y2K alliance was an implicit, informal one aimed at sharing information. There was a vague promise of coordinated global action, but nothing specific. No formal organization was established, and no budget was appropriated. Notice that among the vital systems at risk, the G8 statement omitted government systems, especially income support payments and revenue collection. Also not mentioned are manufacturing and distribution information technology systems. The main focus of the G8 leaders seemed to be on fixing the problem, rather than preparing contingency plans if vital computer systems malfunction, as is increasingly likely in my opinion. On May 17, 1998, Reuters reported that after the summit ended, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair announced that there will be a meeting in Moscow of the G8 experts on the millennium bug problem. The date was not specified. In addition, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretian said that the G8 leaders recognized that fixing Y2K was essential to avoid a disaster. Staying Flexible, Stay Tuned I am an optimist by nature. I am not inclined to be an alarmist. Indeed, I have been one of the most vocal stock market bulls on Wall Street for more than 10 years (bio). I am relatively optimistic that most computer systems will be fixed in time. However, I doubt that all computer systems around the world will be 100% fixed. If so, then some will fail, possibly causing widespread disruptions at critical choke points of vital economic systems and a global recession. If my ongoing research confirms this pessimistic hypothesis, then I may raise the odds of a recession. I am very willing to lower the odds if the unfolding story turns out more optimistically. I hope to see more of us giving top priority to fixing Y2K around the world. I've prepared a generic questionnaire to help you assess the progress toward Y2K compliance of your own organization and everyone you depend on including vendors, customers, bankers, borrowers, distributors, utilities, transportation, government, maintenance and security services, etc. We must all assess the impact of Y2K disruptions and prepare contingency plans for plausible worst-case scenarios. Conceivably--though highly unlikely--as the deadline approaches, we may conclude that the economic risks are small and temporary. But with so much at stake, we should prepare for the worst, and thereby realistically hope for the best. If we are not all at least a small part of the solution, we will certainly be a big part of the problem. I would love to be wrong on this issue. I would prefer to find that enough progress is under way over the time remaining so that I can lower the probability of a global recession. Stay tuned: I will continue to review and analyze the latest relevant documents in my Y2K Reporter and to incorporate my findings and conclusions in this netbook. Alarmists Versus Doomsayers The editors of The Wall Street Journal clearly showed that they understand the gravity of Y2K by publishing my keynote speech to the Year 2000 Roundtable at the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland in their May 4, 1998 issue. In my speech, I said that I am a Y2K alarmist. However, I am definitely not a doomsayer. My goal in sounding the alarm is to increase awareness of the enormous risks that are lurking in Y2K. Unfortunately, doomsday scenarios are in the realm of the possible, especially if we fail to seriously assess the risks immediately. However, it is not too late, in my opinion. We can still take actions to avert them. There are some Y2K doomsayers. Undoubtedly, there will be many more as we approach January 1, 2000. Some will promote survivalist behavior. I am promoting collective, community action to prepare for Y2K disruptions and to handle them, if they occur, in a civil, organized, and calm manner. If we are alarmed now and work collectively on the problem, we are less likely to be panicked at the turn of the century. If you think I'm an alarmist about Y2K, consider the following from the Commish himself. Yes, here is what the Commissioner of the IRS told The Wall Street Journal (April 22, 1998) about Y2K: "There's no point in sugarcoating the problem. If we don't fix the century-date problem, we will have a situation scarier than the average disaster movie you might see on a Sunday night. Twenty-one months from now, there could be 90 million taxpayers who won't get their refunds, and 95% of the revenue stream of the United States could be jeopardized." If you still think I am overly alarmed, consider this: When asked about Y2K, Ralph J. Szgenda, the chief information officer of General Motors, told Fortune (April 27, 1998) that there are "catastrophic problems" in every GM plant. I called the reporter to verify this shockingly blunt quote and was informed that the word "catastrophic" was repeated several times during the interview with GM's top IT man. [In 1997, when Chrysler Corp. turned all the clocks to December 31, 1999 at its Sterling Heights Assembly Plant, the security system shut down and wouldn't let anybody out. Detroit Free Press, April 23, 1998.] Simple Logic In the comic-classic movie "What About Bob?" phobic Bob (played by Bill Murray) tells his psychiatrist that there are two kinds of people in the world: those who like Neil Diamond and those who don’t. In my opinion, there are two kinds of people regarding Y2K: those who Get It (GIs) and those who Don’t Get It (DGIs). The GIs, like myself, are pessimistic about the eventual and inevitable outcome. I think most GIs subscribe to the following four logical points: 1) There is a great deal at risk because computers have become so important to the businesses and governments we all depend on. 2) With so little time and so much left to fix, there are bound to be significant disruptions, malfunctions, and crashes in computer systems, including some very vital ones. 3) All systems that fail will do so at the same time. 4) So there is no way it will be business as usual at the start of 2000. Many DGIs believe that everything will be fixed in time because the consequences of failure are obviously so grim. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 18:50:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA15641; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:49:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:49:29 -0700 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 09:51:05 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19981025095518.23374988 pacific.net.sg> X-Sender: mpowers8 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: "Mpowers8 pacific.net.sg" Subject: Re: Accelerating-Decelerating Light & Interstellar Travel Resent-Message-ID: <"yPTQC1.0.Jq3.fEeCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23673 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello J. Spar, You have send many e-mail to me regarding scientific. Thanks for that. Today I have a different topic to discuss with you. Do you have any friends who is working in Singapore wish to make friend with me. He must be a bachelor age 37-40. Have good professioner background. You can find out from your friends whether they have someone who have the same interest can send me an e-mail. I am willing to contact with them. Her is myself introduction. I am a chinese. Age 37, Height 152cm, weight 49kg. Waiting for your reply.Thanks. 25-10-98. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 19:03:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA06622; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 19:01:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 19:01:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <363277C6.485A earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 19:58:46 -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: Y2K; Yardeni URL for netbook 9.21.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MTGnn1.0.Nd1.3QeCs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23674 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: http://www.yardeni.com/y2kbook.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 19:14:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24905; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 19:12:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 19:12:50 -0700 Message-ID: <01b801bdffbc$ddd99280$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Accelerating-Decelerating Light & Interstellar Travel Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 20:12:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"CSs-01.0.356.YaeCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23675 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Mpowers8 pacific.net.sg To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 7:52 PM Subject: Re: Accelerating-Decelerating Light & Interstellar Travel And is your name is Suzie Wong , Right? :-) LOL Powers, you're a riot. BTW. I think you meant Mitchell Jones, not former US Attorney General., John Mitchell. Regards, Frederick Mpowers' friend wrote: >Hello J. Spar, > >You have send many e-mail to me regarding scientific. Thanks for that. Today I >have a different topic to discuss with you. Do you have any friends who is >working >in Singapore wish to make friend with me. He must be a bachelor age 37-40. Have >good professioner background. You can find out from your friends whether they >have someone who have the same interest can send me an e-mail. I am willing to >contact with them. > >Her is myself introduction. I am a chinese. Age 37, Height 152cm, weight >49kg. >Waiting for your reply.Thanks. > >25-10-98. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 24 20:32:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA15914; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 20:30:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 20:30:47 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981024233037.00a353f0 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 23:30:37 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Experimental FTL In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981023231857.0095f100 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"uPZaT2.0.Zu3.cjfCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23676 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Vo, Please give advice and comments re experiment setups. I am concerned that FTL communication devices are not invented. Does an aether pulse or a gravity pulse travel at FTL velocity? Anyone? Excluding theory, how do we prove that? Do we wait for Ross to do an experiment? What if he were hit by a bicycle tomorrow? (Sorry Ross, I did remove a truck, but a bike was there ;-) Surely an experiment as important as this can be set up, and easily too.. And although I'm not a builder-- should any experiment wait for just any one particular person? A successful test would verify Tessien's theories, would it not? Isn't that the type of "stuff" that Vo is all about? Ross Tessien says that any exothermic reaction will create aether, and that it streams out from fusion reactions. I wonder if one of those betatrons or linacs could produce a detectable aether *pulse*. And could it also be directed? Not that I own a Betatron or anything.. and anyway, isn't that particular type of experimental setup for "proof of principle" too expensive? Why can't an x-ray pulse, or a vacuum arc discharge of lower power than a linear accelerator be used to produce a directional pulse of aether? Of course we'll have to use a very sensitive [mechanical] receiver-- how about an electrical series [of hundreds or even thousands] of in-line piezo elements? Would that not be extremely sensitive? But what kind of piezo? Manufactured by? Best prices? Sizes? Vacuum tube electrode materials: Carbon? Tungsten? ...? Please feel free to suggest setup ideas, improvements, etc.. on or off the list. (Preferably on.) Thanks, Colin Quinney From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 01:02:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA12547; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 00:53:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 00:53:30 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 00:00:43 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Press Release on Wired CF Article Resent-Message-ID: <"rPb0D3.0.z33.wZjCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23677 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 6:20 PM 10/24/98, aki ix.netcom.com wrote: >October 24, 1998 > >'Gene, you wrote in part, > >> LaRouche is too interested in hot fusion for much CF coverage -- >> at least that is my impression. > >Not quite. >For Cold Fusion content, I subscribed to 21st Century. The LaRouch group >used the subscription list to solicit support for LaRouche activities >--- which I am out of completely. But they did send a pro cold fusion >manual published a few years ago. [snip] I have a copy of a 173 page 8.5" x 11" volume titled "Cold Fusion: Challenge to U.S. Science Policy", by Lyndon H. Larouche, Jr., Schiller Institute, Inc., SCIENCE POLICY MEMO, August, 1992. This work "proposes that a ""mini-crash program"" of research into anomalous successs in ""cold fusion"" experiments be adopted as a catalyst of a new U.S science-educational policy." It appears to me the message of the volume is that institutions of higher learning need a major attitude adjustment with regard to objectivity, as well as a renewal of literacy with regard to epistemology. I managed to buy the book for 25 cents at a University of Alaska Library book disposal sale. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 02:11:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA29213; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 02:11:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 02:11:08 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <3632EC1A.4A ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 01:15:06 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: hheffner mtaonline.net Subject: Re: Press Release on Wired CF Article References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ZWz9O2.0.F87.xalCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23678 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: October 25, 1998 Vortex, Horace Heffner wrote about the Pro Cold Fusion volume put out by the LaRouche's Schiller Institute. It corroborates my mention. Thanks. Just like anything else, LaRouche has a following and everybody isn't completely irrational (or for that matter, completely logical) as temptation is there to assume. I'm like you Horace, I buy used books (as cheap as possible) for science refernce. I buy new ones also. I find basic science foundations do not change with each new edition as publishers may want to persuade. In fact, with changing editions, some topics become more truncated and less informative. -AK- ps: Wayne Green has a long history in being a publishing pioneer. He founded 'Byte' magazine along with several others. So it is not too out of line for him to have picked up on Eugene Mallove's enthusiasm for a CF publication. In his prime, Wayne was a doer, not "dog do-do" as personally described. I do not know him myself though. > [snip] > I have a copy of a 173 page 8.5" x 11" volume titled "Cold Fusion: > Challenge to U.S. Science Policy", by Lyndon H. Larouche, Jr., >Schiller Institute, Inc., SCIENCE POLICY MEMO, August, 1992. > > This work "proposes that a ""mini-crash program"" of research into > anomalous successs in ""cold fusion"" experiments be adopted as a >catalyst of a new U.S science-educational policy." > > It appears to me the message of the volume is that institutions of > higher learning need a major attitude adjustment with regard to > objectivity, as well as a renewal of literacy with regard to > epistemology. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 03:28:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA08201; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 03:27:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 03:27:45 -0800 Message-ID: <01e301be000a$6165ff60$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Press Release on Wired CF Article Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 04:26:46 -0700 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: <"oRAF.0.302.nimCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23679 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: aki ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: hheffner mtaonline.net Date: Sunday, October 25, 1998 3:13 AM Subject: Re: Press Release on Wired CF Article Akira wrote: >October 25, 1998 > >Vortex, > >I'm like you Horace, I buy used books (as cheap as possible) for science >reference. I buy new ones also. I find basic science foundations do not >change with each new edition as publishers may want to persuade. In >fact, with changing editions, some topics become more truncated and less >informative. How true this is, Akira. Seems that the basic information (or detail)is diluted in each new edition, leaving the opportunity for each new generation of scientists/engineers to re-invent the wheel, about 97% of the time, leaving the remaining 3% (or less) as "new" technology. :-) Regards, Frederick > >-AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 05:25:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA26632; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 05:21:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 05:21:21 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981025133022.00e0783c popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 08:30:22 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com, "Lilly" , WhiteGold@zz.com, WhiteGold lyghtforce.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Planet Tip? Does the government care? Resent-Message-ID: <"Y9Lga3.0.2W6.GNoCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23680 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi; Thanks for the correction. Here is a quote from "5/5/2000 Ice: The Ultimate Disaster" by Richard Noone. Pgs. 318-319 Hugh Auchincloss Brown is not the only one to present evidence that the Antarctic ice mass might contribute to catastrophic earth changes. In The Ocean World of Jacques Cousteau: The White Caps (Vol. 16, p. 38), Captain Cousteau writes that in 1964 J. Tuzo Wilson theorized that periodically, when the accumulation of ice on Antarctica became large and heavy enough, the entire cap broke and slid into the ocean in a catastrophic manner that submerged the continents and sent enough ice to subtropical zones to cool the entire globe substantially. This type of ice surge the engineer Brown shows is sudden. Brown computed that during a pole-shift the polar ice mass would be thrown toward the Earth's point of greatest spin (the Equator) at an approximate speed of 1600 miles per hour. In other words, the ice mass in Antarctica would be displaced to subtropical zones within 3 or 4 hours! Cousteau also points out that before the Antarctic continent was buried beneath the shroud of ice now two-and-one-half miles high, it was first covered with a glacier before acquiring its present ice sheet. In his book Earth Changes Ahead (released as this book went to press), Frank Don discussed Wilson's research: Although some of the ice cover on Antarctica creeps toward the coastal edges and breaks off from the continent as icebergs, the ice-surge theory contends that a massive build-up of ice cover on that polar continent could prevent the heat rising from the earth's interior. The prevention of heat release then warms the bottom layers of the ice sheet, allowing it to slide relatively easily along the ground. This process eventually leads to the icesheets breaking off into the ocean as large sections instead of as smaller icebergs. The immediate consequence of such an ice surge is the triggering of tsunamis and the raising of the level of the world's oceans by as much as 20 to 70 meters, thereby flooding many coastal areas around the world. In addition, it is asserted that an ice surge distorts the earth's rotational balance, for the huge block of floating ice increases the amount of solar radiation reflected back toward interstellar space. This condition in turn results in a dramatic lowering of surface temperatures, a cooling trend, and the beginning of another ice age." The question is, does the government have some kind of master plan to avert this possibility? I propose the following questions be asked should the Men In Black (MIB), or anyone else who may threaten us to stop Free Energy or Antigravity development: 1. What is the Master Plan to avert possible catastrophy from Global Warming or a planetary axis tilt from the icecaps slipping? If they reply that only conventional technology is allowed: 2. You mean that you will not help me to refine my design so it is safe? If they reply no: 3. What will you do if and when the sh*t hits the fan? If they say, we will wish you luck, then we are ducking out in our secret underground bases, sorry you're not invited: At least then we will know that they are either working for some ruthless aliens or, that they are all just a bunch of evil idiots who let they paranoia run amok which will result in our destruction of planetary proportion. Worst case scenario, even ten Tunguska level accidents can't be as bad as a global axis tilt, or an icecap meltdown could it? I want to ask: Professor Searl would you please teach me how to be a flying saucer engineer? If I can build one, I want to start a business selling big icecubes cut out of the South Pole Icecap. Need to build a lake or cool a desert? Big icecubes for sale... $5,000.00 per cubic mile delivered! :) Has the icecap build up problem been solved on Mars? http://www.eagle-net.org/IWP/mars.htm Please read your religious doctrine as is applicable; Dennis At 11:21 PM 10/24/98 -0700, you wrote: >Hi Dennis and all, >At 12:33 PM 10/24/98 -0400, you wrote: > >>Who knows? Maybe global warming is keeping the Antarctic polar icecap small >>enough that the planetary alignment at 5/5/2000 won't tip the Earth's axis? >>The wooly mammoths they found perfectly frozen in the arctic region suggests >>that it has happened before. Once the icecap slips to the equator (in 3-4 >>hours?), the velocity is calculated to be 16,000 mph. The atmosphere can't >>keep up and everywhere except the pivot points gets exposed to the vacuum of >>space. >> >Where would all this energy come from? Tha artic ice is floating so it has >no "fall" to reach the equator. If it could fall 100 m, then its velocity >would only be about 40m/s. If this was coupled to the whole earth, it would >result >in a very small velocity. ( angular momentum of ice ->angular momentum of >ice +earth) 16,000mph sounds like close to the free fall (in vacuum) of an >object to the center of the earth through a hypothetical clear path! >-Dave > > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 07:22:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20510; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 07:21:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 07:21:38 -0800 Message-Id: <199810251523.KAA05440 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Press Release on Wired CF Article Date: Sun, 25 Oct 98 11:20:32 -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: <"LrL-I3.0.D05.18qCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23682 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Akira wrote about Green, > >Not a serious question, but knowing him as you describe him, what >induced you to pick him in the first place? We assumed that he was a legitimate, ethical publsiher, which he turned out not to be. See parallel posting explaining more about this. Bottom line is that had we done adequate due-diligence on Green we would never have lined up with him. > >> Anyone who wants some belly laughs is urged to read >> Green's monthly lunatic rants in '73. > > You know, I was reading his editorials and magazine '73 since he first >started many solar cycles ago. It predates CF by almost thirty years. I >liked his irreverant-sort of Amateur Ham writing sytle then. Very >readable --- sort like Art Bell of print. So I do not hold him in any >negative light personally. I know you have had difficulties with him. Yes, I have serious difficulties with Green. Akira and I will agree to disagree on the matter of Green. > Best, Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 07:24:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20436; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 07:21:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 07:21:31 -0800 Message-Id: <199810251523.KAA05431 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Press Release on Wired CF Article Date: Sun, 25 Oct 98 11:20:25 -0000 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"4icVy.0.C_4.x7qCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23681 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Akira wrote: >ps: Wayne Green has a long history in being a publishing pioneer. He >founded 'Byte' magazine along with several others. Contrary to Green's fraudulent claims, which were found fraudullent in a court case that prohibited him from continuing to claim foundership of Byte, he did NOT found Byte magazine. His first wife, Virginia did along with Carl Helmers. Helmers, who has a successful technical publishing empire down the street from Green's slimy place, told me that the ONLY thing that Green contributed to Byte was its name. For that, he should be "honored," says Helmers -- nothing else. Green had nothing else to do with it. If you or anyone else has questions about Green's background, please contact Carl Helmers of Helmer's Publishing in Peterbrough, NH. He'll tell you all the horror stories about Green. There's a nice little "Yellow Book" -- know to all former WGI employees -- that outlines Green's character -- in Green's own words from the court procedings. It is too bad the book is out of print. Helmer's may be able to get you a copy. If we had read that book BEFORE meeting Green, there is no way in hell that we would have given Green two minutes of our time. >So it is not too out >of line for him to have picked up on Eugene Mallove's enthusiasm for a >CF publication. Green is an unethical opportunist, period. Fortunately, we and cold fusion survived Green's insanity. >In his prime, Wayne was a doer, not "dog do-do" as >personally described. I do not know him myself though. Trust me, if you had extensive personal dealings with Green, you would inevitably come to know him as dog doo and little else. Best, Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 07:48:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30918; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 07:47:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 07:47:48 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981025155702.00e16d58 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 10:57:02 -0500 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net, vortex-L@eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Missing Meyer Patent Info Cc: Eric Howlett , hic@world.std.com, jkokor@alum.mit.edu, discjt servtech.com, jsearl@tako.demon.co.uk, lstelmac@lynx.neu.edu, rsmith itiip.com, 73577.123@compuserve.com, tcapizzi@world.std.com, tom.duff poweroasis.com Resent-Message-ID: <"4ZnA81.0.iY7.ZWqCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23683 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; As I recall, the Meyer hydrogen cell patant with two concentric electrodes was very specific on almost all details of the design except for the thickness of the stainless steel electrode cylinders. Insignificant? Accident? Key piece of info on the design I believe. And probably one of the most difficult parameter's to determine. I think that the electrodes mass chord(s) must be also tuned to the resonant frequency of the water molecule bonds. Keely experimented with Chladni plates to learn how to tune objects dimensionally. Establishing standing electrical resonance waves with the water molecule bonds, which also keeps in sympathic vibration with the electrode mass chord(s), may be a key design feature. Isn't resonance analogus to superconductance? Also, I notice that the electrolysis signal waveform amplitudes was about 1000 V on the final cycle. If the electrolysis process runs cool under these voltage levels, there must be a coherent collisionless vibration keeping the entire cell assembly in synchronous harmony. If I suddenly saw pink dots missing from a prototype, I too would probably be distracted to the point of not being able to get the powersupply tuned. I might think, what is the idea here? Either somebody doesn't understand the higher dimensional laws or they think that they're better, or more powerful, or they won't be noticed by the universe, or what? Isn't a positive energy unit added to a negative energy unit equal to zero? Regards; Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 09:08:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA19931; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 09:07:23 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 09:07:23 -0800 (PST) From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <36334B7F.5757 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 08:02:07 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: editor infinite-energy.com Subject: Re: Press Release on Wired CF Article References: <199810251523.KAA05440 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"09seU.0.Gt4.9hrCs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23684 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: October 25, 1998 'Gene, Thanks for some background information. It always helps to fill in some gaps in the publishing history of cold fusion. More is helpful. Perhaps it and cold fusion will be chronicled in a thoroughly objective manner for the public, and ourselves, to understand soon. Parts of it are lying around already. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 09:22:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA29616; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 09:21:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 09:21:50 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981025171618.2e17bfa8 aapi.co.uk> X-Sender: jcollins aapi.co.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Collins Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 17:25:54 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"glwHH3.0.gE7.jurCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23685 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 16:52 23/10/98 -0400, you wrote: >To: Vortex > Jed wrote: >Perpetual motion was believed impossible, but the issue was not as settled as >it is today. People were aware of apparent counterexamples, like the heat of >the sun. By 1700 people realized that if the sun was undergoing combustion it >would last only a few thousand years, yet it seemed to be going much longer. > Clearly you assume that, like the heat of the sun in your example above, people were looking for perpetual motion that would last for ever - infinite energy? I maintain that they only wanted it to last an apppreciable length of time - until the parts of whatever device they used wore out. True the issue was not as setted as it is today, but then perhaps it is too settled today. Maybe more people should be looking at the evidence so obviously contradictory which manifests itself in Bessler's wheel. The physical actions of the machine appear to contradict what our educationalists tell us, and yet those actions are explicable without having to resort to fraud. If this explanation proves to be correct, then the educationalists and academia in general are incorrect. > So Newcomen's machine did not upset any scientific assumptions, unlike > Bessler's. > >Perhaps, but I really do not think this is an issue, even today. If you can >build a working Bessler machine you'll convince the world in a few weeks >despite scientific assumptions. You will have great difficulty convincing >scientists, but you'll quickly convince the people who matter. Bessler could >have done the same. You don't think that Bessler's machine is an issue today? I believe that it will be. I hope indeed to rebuild Bessler's machine within a very short time, but I believe I could convince the world of the reality of his machine, without having to build a working model, if I explained the reasons why his machine worked, within currently held scientific beliefs. However I have just been made redundant at the age of 53 and it will be increasingly difficult for me to get another job in our ageist society, so forgive me if I hold out on this until I have something to bargain with. John Author of 'Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?' - for more information and details on ordering, visit my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 09:56:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA07952; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 09:56:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 09:56:07 -0800 Message-ID: <3633748B.283316CB gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 18:57:35 +0000 From: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk (John Allan) Reply-To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, quantum@iol.ie Subject: More on Eccles Cell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"hkDPr.0.8y1.sOsCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23686 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A natural follow on from Suzi Wong's mail. I tried to trace Chris Eccles but got a reply from a woman who said she did not know him. I did how ever find postings of his on alt.foreplay and br.masoch under the title " Caning and Pain ". I hasten to add that I do not actually subscribe to either newsgroup but used www.dejanews.com to find any leads. • Mr Whitney, if you have any up to date news on Eccles I would be interested to receive it, as would I substantiation of your claims and evidence of your contracting with Stan Meyer. Eccles claimed to be working on a nickel plated cast iron electrode electrolysis working at a lower voltage. The nickel plating was machined through so as to cut into the iron. No other details that this other than his outfit was called The Genesis Project. He said he wanted to work on building windpower to o/u electrolysis devices but was quick to bail out to defence realted projects when the aforementioned utility broker came on board with money. He also mentioned a small network of scientists in the UK. John Allan Cane and Pain Author: Mr Chris Eccles Email: ecogen iol.ie Date: 1998/03/01 Forums: alt.foreplay where have all the s/m groups gone someone tell me huh ? cre Caning is fun Author: Mr Chris Eccles Email: ecogen iol.ie Date: 1998/03/01 Forums: br.masoch has this group died, or what ? cre michelle honan wrote: > >>Would that be the Mr Chris Eccles ex-Cornwall? > > Sorry, Mr Allan. I think you have a wrong email address. > > >>I believe we have some business to clarify. > >> > >>Sincerely, > >> > >>John Allan > > ??????? Sounds exciting ! > > miccy From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 10:22:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA15729; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 10:21:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 10:21:05 -0800 Message-ID: <363374D5.563C ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 10:58:30 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" References: <012301bdff8d$8d5b89a0$8db4bfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Y_Too.0.er3.GmsCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23687 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frederick J Sparber wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hamdi Ucar > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 2:18 PM > Subject: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" > > You worry about your Government Hamdi, and I'll worry about ours. Having > five brothers and myself that have served a total of 20 years in the > military > and taken our licks in a few wars, I find it reassuring that there is an > authority there to fall back on in time of need. > If you want to join up with Ostrowski and his Lunatic Fringe Group, that > think everything is THEIR BUSINESS, go chat about it on the Encounters > Forum. > > FJS > Dear Frederick, I can appreciate your views which reflect your life experience of co-operation with the government in dutifully paying taxes, serving in the armed forces and so on. It is from this experience, I suppose , that you think people who are not so co-operative as you or perhaps even somewhat hostile to the government deserve to be deported to some country where such non-co-operation or hostility is dealt with by beheading or torture. If this is your response to logical argument that perhaps all your efforts on behalf of the government were misdirections of your life's energy, by those who are in a position to "call the shots" (as Ed Wall suggested) , then I would challenge you herewith to so state once again on line. My bet is that for all of the bravery you may have exhibited during the wars you mentioned , you will not do this one simple thing , ie advocate the idea once again that I should be so deported (and perhaps beheaded), because you yourself know that such an idea is so repugnant to common decency and respect for a fellow native born American and that you yourself do not really believe it. Now maybe I'm wrong about this , because you have never publicly or privately retracted that statement of yours of several months ago. So if you really still believe this - I DARE YOU! Bring it up again. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 10:31:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA19620; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 10:29:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 10:29:54 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981025123208.00960100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:32:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: more Brown Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WBqsy1.0.Po4.YusCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23688 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In response to Brown's latest informative reply to me, I have apologized to him for my initial skepticism about his process. I am now waiting for his estimate of the ultimate cost of treating Cs-137 using photoremediation. Does anybody have handy comparative remediation costs? e.g. burial? launching it into the Sun? 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 Oct 25 10:40:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25559; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 10:38:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 10:38:57 -0800 From: UNIR2B1 aol.com Message-ID: <99eebf1e.36337008 aol.com> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 13:38:00 EST To: piercemark hotmail.com, markland@rockisland.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l eskimo.com, UFOLAWYER1@aol.com, Terri Schoolden , lkvp@mail.awod.com, Sharon , Vince Goetsch <3wishes@wishgranted.com>, Carolyn , johnhoffman@webtv.net, huntfish1 juno.com, cotaylor@cellone.net, PetMagic@aol.com, biotron pacbell.net, rolfehauser@bigfoot.com, candace1@usa.net, goldbug worldaccessnet.com, y2k-survival@infostream.net, cturner npwt.net, SedonaY2K@mail-list.com, nhne@nhne.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: 'PROGRESSIVE COMMUNITY' (RAPIDLY) FORMING... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"nY2f62.0.1F6.01tCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23689 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi-- The following are replies to my query about the 'ideal' community, received from Richard and Vince (a version I edited for brevity), respectively. Would you like to live with these people & their families? I would! Just as a house doesn’t make a home, the cohesion of our ‘community’ won’t consist of 40 acres, but fom the synergy that transpires among those from whom these ideas provoke further contributions. (I will save a few contributions of my own for the next post.) Keep up the good (cerebral) work! --Russ ---------------------------------- 1. Spiritually advanced participants 2. Excellent health of participants 3. Mix of artistic and scientific skills 4. Enough participants to create synergy 5. Sense of purpose beyond self preservation 6. Ability to communicate and help evolve outside communities (service) 7. Sustainable structure within the community for food, energy, and materials 8. Debt free status 9. Balance of private space (participant-owned) and public space (collectively owned) 10. Ability to have fun! ------------------------------- >Hi, Russ >Thank you for spearheading this endeavor. I am married with two children, 7 & 9. >I have been aware of prophesy and earth change info for many years. I took it seriously 9 years ago and moved to Arkansas. As my knowledge and intuition have grown, I am now of the impression that this area may not be where we wish to face the changes. >My wife and I envision that those who have been silently preparing and informing themselves in various ways will now come together, synergistically creating an intentional community of individuals with diverse backgrounds, beliefs and professions. >We envision that people of a certain consciousness level will be drawn to this endeavor, triggered by the wording of these communications. Many will already have been actively seeking a supportive, tolerant group; others will be suddenly ignited to become involved. Although this culmination might seem hasty and precipitous in outward appearance, we believe its rapidity will actually signify immediate recognition among spirits that have been long kindred. We believe that uniqueness of the gifts that each brings will--even to the group’s astonishment--provide the needed resources, systems and facilities. >Community endeavors of the past often have been problematic. Communes suffer from difficulties arising from the pooling of money and belongings. Most states have water and sewer restrictions that inhibit rapid development of multiple residences. People are averse to developing land that they don’t own, but selling individuated tracts can be divisive. However, we have glimpsed a possible solution. >In order to balance individual freedom with collective security, we envision placing the land in a trust. Each party would invest in the trust, and thereby obtain exclusive access to a specified area. Each trustee could then develop his tract without local subdivision restrictions, and bequeath it to his family without taxation. At the same time, stipulations written into the trust would protect the group against any individuals’ using the land inconsistently with the original, collective intent. >In order to effect a quick startup, the initial organization might take the form of an RV community. Next, emergency measures could be prepared. For example, an area could be set aside for collecting used tires and metal roofing for building ‘earth ships’ in case building supplies became scarce. Sleeping gear and four-season tents from military surplus might also serve as inexpensive backup measures. >Food storage facilities should be secured, for both short-term items (esp. nitrogen packed, open-pollinated seeds) and long-term goods, which could be purchased by the truckload, directly from railroad salvage brokers. Food production projects could be implemented in order of priority, such as immediate construction of pit greenhouses and spirulina growing tanks, as well as ‘permaculture’ cultivation of outdoor plants like amaranth (weather permitting). >The community could buy shotcrete machinery etc. for rapid construction of low cost, thermally efficient, super strong monolithic domes (time and events permitting). >Plastic septic systems could be installed and fitted with methane collecting tanks for powering water heaters etc.< --------------- (Now it's your turn to not only imagineer your 'dream community', but to actually coalesce with the people and property required for realize that dream! --Russ) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 11:21:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07923; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 11:20:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 11:20:04 -0800 Message-Id: <199810251921.OAA01115 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: more Brown Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:22:52 -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: <"XZ0j11.0.Ux1.YdtCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23690 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, He was asked at the conference about the cost compared to the value of the energy produced by the fuel that produced the waste. He did not have a quantitative answer then, but assured us that it was commercially feasible. The remediation re-activates the fuel, so it could perhaps be used to fuel at least part of its own remediation. Maintenance cost alone for burial are $2,000/kg/year if memory serves. There are many costs that would be eliminated by remediation. I can understand your skepticism, but it is good to think before pressing the send button. Ed Wall NERL ---------- > From: Scott Little > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: more Brown > Date: Sunday, October 25, 1998 1:32 PM > > In response to Brown's latest informative reply to me, I have apologized to > him for my initial skepticism about his process. > > I am now waiting for his estimate of the ultimate cost of treating Cs-137 > using photoremediation. Does anybody have handy comparative remediation > costs? e.g. burial? launching it into the Sun? > > > 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 Oct 25 11:30:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA11809; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 11:28:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 11:28:31 -0800 Message-ID: <36338A47.736ED367 gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 20:30:25 +0000 From: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk (John Allan) Reply-To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Energy not Agriculture Jed References: <199810251128.DAA08299 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tbfi33.0.Qu2.VltCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23691 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A little off-topic but worthy all the same, No Jed, I would argue it is energy that underpins civilisation, even more so now. What is agriculture but energy supply? Prior to and exclude systematised agriculure humanity was subject to its environment and limited, for example, by how far it could walk in half a day, how much available easily available or free energy there was in its immediate environment and was on a fairly equal footing with each other. The first " work " we do is to shift our corpse about, to use them to exploit our environment and relate to other, for this we need converted solar power in the form of carbo-hydrates. Agriculture was the first large scale management of energy supplies and which ever societies adopted to it rapidly were able to dominate and expand into the environment and over others through the political power of reliable energy supplies. Whether by wheat or by agro-foresty. The same rational applies to the exploitation of natural elements, such as in metal working for armoury, early transportation and military conquest. Success was largely determined by the access to the greatest and most reliable energy supplies. Certainly the opposite is also true as we observe in the most basic of military strategies, to destroy or cut off fuel supplies destroys not only an army but also a societies ability to resist through scorched earth tatics. The pre-eminency of energy whether to pick up a larger stick, send the most horses the furthest, or run the biggest number of tanks or build nuclear bombs is the same in all cases. Further more the shape of energy infrastructure, of which agriculture and transport are subject, determines the shape of society. without energy, there is no production; without production, there is no profit; without profit, there is no commonwealth; without commonwealth, there is nor governance; without governance, there is no society, education, healthcare, defence etc. We see the hierarchy; Energy, industry, Banking, Taxation, Government, Society. I am certianly not " against " industry, profit or governance. The problems in our current " corporatist " system ( because it is neither capitalism or democracy ) are very deeply connected to the despoilation of the planet and the risk of our species's demise. Namely the creation of entirley unaccountable entities more powerful than any democracy and a banking system held in private hands legally bound by the primacy of short term monetary profit while ignoring all other principles. The consummer plays a very small part in determining corporate affairs. The corporations refuse to internalise all their externalities and there is no power of earth to make them do so ( E.g. damage to environment, full costs of resources, full cost of making good/reparations ). If these costs were included " corporatism " would be revealled for what is it, utterly bankrupt and criminal. This dominance, fueled by artificially cheap and abundant energy, is reaching a huge political level on a global scale, for example the MAI agreements that are making transnational corporations such as Monsanto and the Seven Sisters ( Oil cos ) more powerful than individual nation states and able to determine their internal political policies. One petroleum company successfully sued Canada and won £250m damages against its decision to ban a cancinogenic additive. Energy remains a potent political tools on a national and international level. Corporations, equal and greater to nations yet completely unaccountable, are actively engaged in setting world politics and the politics of subject nations, e.g. energy companies in Middle East, Africa and South Amercia. This alone establishes the nned for some ethical ground rules before " free energy " is discovered not after. Without energy there would be no agriculture, especially industrialised agriculture. There would be no deliver of crops to the market. There would be no society as we know it. There are only between 30 and 60 days of public oil supplies, if this was distrupted then the planting harvesting cycles would be distrupted immediately. Any state's power over its citizens lies largely in its ability to maintain superiour energy resources and manage its energy applications. The reference to the power of corporations such as Microsoft evaporates if someone pulls the plug from under them. There residual power lies in how well they have developed social and political power, based on goodwill, and my guess is very little. I cant imagine that turning up at some survialist militia encampment after Y2K and saying, " Hi, I used to be a Microsoft/McDonalds/Amoco exec will get you very far ", although I dont subscribe to that particular fear. We have an artificially large divide between power and people. The economical system is out of control, no one actually knows how it works but what is does is remove power and wealth from the lowest and least defended and move it to the richest and best defended. It is doing so at an increasing rate. This is not a " conspiracy " as such, it is the merely effect the machine was set up to achieve. It is outside of the control of any human being but rest assured we will all pay the price for it. I note with interest the opinions of someone such as George Soros suggesting that money should be return to a standard again not gold but to energy. Neither a new energy technology nor infinite energy is the answer to our problems, it will merely amplify them and hasten the inevitable collapse without some political and legal restructuring. I love the thought of some Pacific Rim or Majority World nation being given " free energy " before the West. How long would you estimate the economy of the West would last? Or more to the point how long would the national or company last? In this scenario, the transnational corporations might play a useful role because they are transnational governments in effect. There are other moves to link the economy to pollution and the right to pollute. Indicidentally, have you noted that the hydro-carbon industry receieves in excessof $300bn subsidies a year? We are skipping over huge tracks of thought here but I hope it clarifies my point. Without understanding the primacy of energy all other thought would be skewed. I see an evolution in energy supply from carbo-hydrate to hydro-carbon, to hydrogen and then, hopefully, to aether - or however we understand the quantum field - but I think to achieve this we are going to have to similarly refine our political, economic and corporate structure, not to mention our spiritual intent. Deeper and more accurate thought require ont he subject. My father was an anthropologist and so I have some grounds for opinion on the matter. I think they were always too busy trying to define what anthrology was to apply it anywhere. Known as the hippies of the social sciences. In America you have " Pure Trust Organisations " I think, which is one alternative vehicle worth looking into. Energy technologies are the multiplication factor in politic power, if some revolutionary energy technology fell into the hands of individuals or a small nation willing to challenge the corporations it would be interesting but I doubt they would be allowed to. Science of all thought should only deal in absolutes not the subjectivities as you bring up. There is a huge difference between your hard work and the moral, ethical and legislative corruption and inevitable fallibility of the current system. Presented as a quick sketch rather than finished thought. John Allan Recommended reading; " When Corporations Rules the Earth " by Daid Korten From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 11:58:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA22835; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 11:56:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 11:56:41 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 11:04:15 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Ball Bearing Motors Resent-Message-ID: <"zTCfF1.0.aa5.u9uCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23692 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 8:56 PM 10/24/98, ron kita wrote: >I am in agreement with you as heat not being the >probable cause of rotation. Actually, I am not saying expansion of the balls is not the reason for the motion, only that it is difficult for me to understand or believe. >To prove this point I made a dumbell out of hollow >copper (two short large diameter copper pipe >sections with end caps) with an iron rod joining >the two copper units. Mercury pools on each end >were used for brushes. When a large current was >put into the barbell...the barbell ends were pulled >to the bottom of the mercury trough..it happened >so quickly that I saw no rotation. >As to not poison my self, I discontinued the experiment >after three runs. Not sure if it had NOT bottomed out >if it would have spun. I am not sure this is an appropriate test of the effect. The expansion is against an inner and outer race. Achiving the expansion, I take it, requires lateral motion of the ball out into a region where the distance btween the two races is larger. It takes a bearing with multiple balls plus the two races to achieve the effect - I think. >Perhaps box bearings represents block bushings...?? >I tried bushings, but the rod welded. Oh. Yes. Hard to see how bushings would work. >Much earlier, I built a one-piece homopolar motor >using large speaker magnets. Central sandwiched disc >was made of iron,and once again brushes were from >a mercury pool.The whole device was enclosed in >plexiglass. Central disc carried mercury droplets >with it when it went into rotation..some have claimed >that there is an opposite force on the brushes....but >in this case probably not. Also Francisco Muller >in his Homopolar experiments proved that the torque >on the one-piece doesn t arise from the external circuit wiring of the >HPG. >Best, >Ron Kita Sounds like Muller made a mistake. The homopolar works due to the *relative* motion of the stator and armature. The motion of the field is immaterial, except to determine how much of the potential is generated in the stator vs the armature. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 12:30:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA32557; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:28:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:28:33 -0800 Message-Id: <199810252029.PAA08188 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: more Brown Date: Sun, 25 Oct 98 16:27:16 -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: <"yW05F2.0.Uy7.kduCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23693 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >In response to Brown's latest informative reply to me, I have apologized to >him for my initial skepticism about his process. Great! Scott Little has proved himself to be a Big Man in this affair -- we already knew he was Big (in height not girth, for those how've met him)! Now, what about my question about the 75 watt output Sr-90 battery with only 1.1 Curies in it? Doesn't that deserve investigation? Best, Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 12:31:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA32606; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:28:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:28:41 -0800 Message-Id: <199810252029.PAA08195 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Date: Sun, 25 Oct 98 16:27:21 -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: <"B0B5x2.0.Iz7.sduCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23694 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >outrunning an Atomic Artillery shell to >boot, How does one "outrun" such a shell? What is the context? Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 12:38:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA05202; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:37:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:37:36 -0800 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 15:31:35 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Rad.....more Brown In-Reply-To: <199810251921.OAA01115 mercury.mv.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"VBGSV1.0.CH1.FmuCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23695 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: y Dear Vo., Just to let you all know, again, the method described by Wm. Barker, for radioactive remediation works, and is simple and not costly. Patent # 4,961,880 I was able to replicate this work. An exposuse of ~ 40,000 volts for 14 hours, a 'one-time-shot' caused an accelerated decay over a period of ~ 9 months. The control is still radioactive, the treated sample is at about background. Read the patent. John From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 13:02:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA11868; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:59:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:59:49 -0800 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 15:53:48 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: electrolysis ... and other stuff... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"_60yn.0.Mv2.55vCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23696 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., If you contact me off line I can supply some of your needs in the areas of electrolysis of water and signal processing... also do not hesitate to request something not listed. I am trying to convert some of my eclectic assortment of components and equipment to cash. 1] porous ceramic substrates for electrodes 2] semipermeable membranes 3] voltage controlled analog continuous time filter ICs [integrated circuits]. This filter IC is low noise 4 pole ANALOG filter, one CV, control voltage, sets corner over 1,000 to 1 range, low end and high end can be set with fixed capacitors. Typical ranges are 1 cps to 1000 cps or 20 cps to 20,000 cps... you get the idea. Top end about 100,000 cps. Voltage noise is in the 30 to 50 n volt [nano volt] range. A second CV sets 'Q' ... from a benign Butterworth not-very-far-from low Q to a nice peaked low pass that works as quite a nice band pass filter... all the way to such a high Q the IC is a fine low disortion sine wave oscillator. This is a bipolar IC, typically run with +/- 15 volt rails, but I have run it at +/- 5. 4] compression circuits, analog, various, IC and discrete-IC mixed designs. 5] electrometer designs, discrete and mixed, in the 100 to 10 fA bias range.... lower with boot strap. 6] log function compressed electrometer 'mixed' design... all parts... works +/- 1 pA to 1 mA ... all analog... I use it to drive zero center meter ... great fun. 7] tunnel diode negative resistance function circuits based on FET of bipolar transistors. 8] tubes and sources for making Ken Shoulders' electron clusters... this is with his express permission. 9] several wavelength conversion materials, phosphors and organics, UV to visible... some with VERY tight output frequencies, some with specific sensitivities, ie., SWUV [short wave UV]- VS- LWUV ... some broad band... and so on. 10] huge range of application circuits, and in nearly every case, the capability to kei-up a set of parts. 11] magnetic materials .... many types, eg., hexagonal crystal 20 micron strontium ferrite magnet powder, virgin. 12] dielectric materials many types, eg., barium titanate powder, virgin .... AND MORE!!! JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 13:31:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA20162; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 13:30:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 13:30:08 -0800 Message-ID: <024101be005e$86168060$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:29:03 -0700 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: <"K3w9Z2.0.ww4.VXvCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23697 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: E.F. Mallove To: VORTEX Date: Sunday, October 25, 1998 1:31 PM Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Gene asks: >>outrunning an Atomic Artillery shell to >>boot, > >How does one "outrun" such a shell? What is the context? With Very Rapid movements of the lower extremities. It was a 2+ ton "wagon" with the shell in it with 12 inch diameter smooth iron wheels in a long narrow sloping tunnel with concrete smooth as glass. I was taking it out to a truck that was to haul it to a plane for transport. At the time HST was contemplating using it in Korea I gather. It was a very real lesson on the laws of acceleration and momentum. Easy to get up to speed, but not easy to stop. When I cleared the end of the tunnel I swung the handle and it went into the dirt where the wheels sank in and it rolled over, before it went over a cliff which they say would've set it off, taking out an Area 51 type atomic storage facility. Regards, Frederick > >Gene Mallove > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 13:59:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA28565; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 13:58:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 13:58:57 -0800 Message-ID: <3633BAEB.CE4E6F51 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 15:57:31 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L Subject: Electromagnetic Bucking waves Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FaxIS2.0.9-6.XyvCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23698 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Maybe one of you can explain this: What are "electromagnetic bucking waves" and how do you generate them? Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 14:50:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA16757; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:49:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:49:04 -0800 From: UNIR2B1 aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 17:49:23 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: electrolysis ... and other stuff... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"rL_im2.0.U54.VhwCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23699 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Wow! Well, please relate how to contact you off-line. --Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 16:38:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA28317; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 16:36:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 16:36:32 -0800 Message-ID: <3633C241.1DD1 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 16:28:49 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electromagnetic Bucking waves References: <3633BAEB.CE4E6F51 sunherald.infi.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Q2ozg1.0.Mw6.GGyCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23700 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > Maybe one of you can explain this: > > What are "electromagnetic bucking waves" and how do you generate them? > Hey Kyle- I'd love to take a stab at this one. I think you could generate EBW's by first meting out a quarter wavelength wire antenna of whatever frequency you desire for such waves. Then, you have oscillator - transmitters of the same spec at both ends and one able to vary phase (variable by adding impedances to the signal "recieved" from the other end) The two ends would have to be monitored by a single timebase device in the middle, say a CRO to detemine when the effect was being generated. So if you observed a maximum of energy being output by both devices AT THE SAME TIME (as observed from the CRO , that energy has to be going anywhwere but back into the driver devices , it is energy that is being expelled from the wire and system. This is 1/EBWs (the inverse of) At minimum energy output from the devices the waves can be said to be fighting (bucking) each other within the wire/system, there would be some percentage of total internal reflection (Line ringing) and unless you are using vacuum tube drivers one or both of the cathode driver fuses , or the driver transistors themselves, will blow ( or an OVP circuit trips). The waves that result from such an arrangement continuing with moderation of some kind however, where output devices are _not_ overstressed , are perfectly feasable and may have been incorporated in some patent or another. What's your Website address again Kyle? Mine's http://www.ca-ois.com/jimostr Regards, Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 18:34:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA15773; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 17:53:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 17:53:34 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3633748B.283316CB gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 15:21:31 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: More on Eccles: Allen digs trash Resent-Message-ID: <"h4Ueg2.0.Ns3.TOzCs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23701 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Allen writes: > I did how ever find postings of his on > alt.foreplay and br.masoch under the title " > Caning and Pain ". > > I hasten to add that I do not actually > subscribe to either newsgroup but used > www.dejanews.com to find any leads. *WHY* is that of any interest here??!! Shame on John Allen for even bringing this up, let alone CROSSPOSTING it!!! And to think we used to complain about people crossposting from SPF?! Folks, we have a new record low here. I also tried to find out something about Eccles and the first thing I did was a DejaNews search, expecting to see some posts on the physics groups or similar, and I also saw those adult NG references. The records are publicly available to anyone who cares to search, but to use a very small subset of one's public postings to try to cast aspersions on them just sucks. Seriously big time. I hasten to add that there are a few adult oriented NGs on my own subscription list at present time, and if John Allen and the rest of the hypocritical morality crusaders out there don't like it, you can alt.go.fuckyourself. DAMN but I'm pissed to see this kind of thing! This is the first time I've ever really felt like unsubscribing to Vortex. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 21:25:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA11290; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 21:23:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 21:23:52 -0800 Message-ID: <3634151D.2E6930B6 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:22:21 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electromagnetic Bucking waves References: <3633BAEB.CE4E6F51 sunherald.infi.net> <3633C241.1DD1@ca-ois.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"BiVb13.0.Fm2.eT0Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23702 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > What's your Website address again Kyle? Well, currently it doesn't seem to exist. It was at: http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/8709/index.htm I haven't been able to access it for a few days. Right now, I'm about ready to can the whole website and conduct my research in private. Lets just say that some personal things have happened recently that have made my outlook on the world a bit more negative. But I'll wait a few days and see how I feel. > > Mine's > http://www.ca-ois.com/jimostr Quite nice. I will be looking up the reference from the website soon. Keep up the good work. Best regards, Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 22:02:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA00697; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:00:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:00:12 -0800 Message-Id: <199810260501.AAA26850 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 98 00:58:59 -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: <"ZU7j02.0.kA.g_0Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23703 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >It was a very real lesson on the laws of acceleration and momentum. Easy to >get up to speed, but not easy to stop. When I cleared the end of the tunnel >I swung the handle and it went into the dirt where the wheels sank in and it >rolled over, before it went over a cliff which they say would've set it off, >taking out >an Area 51 type atomic storage facility. > >Regards, Frederick Wow! I am speechless...Impressed that you were so close to Big Time nuclear energy. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Oct 25 22:22:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA06855; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:17:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:17:04 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981025231900.00967c00 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:19:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: more Brown In-Reply-To: <199810252029.PAA08188 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gra-j2.0.xg1.VF1Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23704 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:27 PM 10/25/98 -0000, E.F. Mallove wrote: >Now, what about my question about the 75 watt output Sr-90 battery with >only 1.1 Curies in it? Doesn't that deserve investigation? It certainly does since it looks like free energy. I'll study your IE coverage and then contact Brown for additional details if necessary. (let me see if I've got this straight: engage brain, THEN start mouth....hey, that might work pretty well!....:) Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 02:15:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA03783; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 02:15:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 02:15:03 -0800 Message-ID: <028d01be00c0$fe5bc320$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 02:13:13 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: <"76e7f.0.1x.ck4Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23705 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: E.F. Mallove To: VORTEX Date: Sunday, October 25, 1998 10:03 PM Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Gene wrote: > >Wow! I am speechless...Impressed that you were so close to Big Time >nuclear energy. Too Close, Gene. :-) In retrospect it's strange about how blasé one can become working around that much energy, especially when you are very young and very stupid. I can see now why those two "Bird Colonels" trying to catch up to help me stop it were Screaming,"DON'T LET GO!" That "Atomic Annie" shell with about a kilogram of fissionable material in it was rated at 15,000 TONS of TNT. It was test fired later (1953) but the 85 ton cannon (17 mile range) proved to be too cumbersome for tactical use. More recent weapons use the 205 mm (8 inch) shell (0.1 to 12 kilotons). Atomic Annie was a 280 mm (11 inch) shell. Regards, Frederick > >Gene Mallove > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 04:13:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA17797; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 04:13:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 04:13:18 -0800 Message-ID: <36345A2D.3FA5 skylink.net> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 03:17:01 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Antigravity Motor Picture References: <19981018172205.15576.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"a36k33.0.-L4.UT6Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23706 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ron kita wrote: > There is a picture of an Antigravity Motor in > the New York Herald Tribune November 20 ,1955pp > 1 and 36. Picture was taken at General Dynamics-Convair. > You can also find picture in Anitgravity Handbook > first edition by Dave Hatcher Childress. This motor is said to be a homopolar generator {HPG). The HPG when operated in a pulse power mode will rather quickly transfer a large amount of angular momentum from its mechanical flywheel into the EM field. Resulting in a gravitomagnetic-gravitoelectric pulse. Maybe not practical as a space drive but possibly a demonstrable gravitational effect. In 1955, this development might have caused a few eyes to open. Maybe it still does. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 07:03:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA11949; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:02:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:02:19 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981026090222.007c92c0 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:02:22 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: Antigravity Motor Picture In-Reply-To: <36345A2D.3FA5 skylink.net> References: <19981018172205.15576.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ykye3.0.nv2.sx8Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23707 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 03:17 AM 10/26/98 -0800, Robert Stirniman wrote: >ron kita wrote: >> There is a picture of an Antigravity Motor in >> the New York Herald Tribune November 20 ,1955pp >> 1 and 36. Picture was taken at General Dynamics-Convair. >> You can also find picture in Anitgravity Handbook >> first edition by Dave Hatcher Childress. > >This motor is said to be a homopolar generator {HPG). >The HPG when operated in a pulse power mode will >rather quickly transfer a large amount of angular >momentum from its mechanical flywheel into the EM field. >Resulting in a gravitomagnetic-gravitoelectric pulse. >Maybe not practical as a space drive but possibly >a demonstrable gravitational effect. In 1955, this >development might have caused a few eyes to open. >Maybe it still does. In the 50's there seemed to be a lot of research into electrogravity. Newspaper and magazine articles abound about aircraft companies doing [or claiming to do] research into electro-gravitics. Did anyone ever contact any of the researchers? Was it just a "popular" thing to do back then, or was this serious research? Everything seems to be conjecture. Why can't we see in our driveways, the results-- the fruits of our tax dollars, today? I do not have a clean copy of the New York Herald Tribune picture, just the fuzzy copy from the Anti Gravity Handbook. The names of the key researchers were; Dr Charles T. Dozier, senior research engineer and guided missile expert of the Convair division of General Dynamics Corporation, and Martin Caplan, Convair senior electronics engineer. Are those gentlemen alive today? Does anyone know if anyone else was doing research with them? Btw, Robert, due to the poor resolution of my copy, it does not appear to be a homopolar configuration; it looks almost like a Chris Eccles' description. Those studs at the rim... I guess they could be brushes, but I see no thick electrical leads. What were they? My copy is fuzzy, and it's hard to make out the details accurately. It angers me to think that our hard earned income may have been channeled into research that could benefit our lives today, yet forever seems to remain a secret, for the benefit of ...? I thought the cold war was over. That early technology belongs to us; we paid for it. (Well... Ok, the Americans paid for *most* of it..) Best Regards, Colin Quinney. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 07:29:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA24262; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:28:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 07:28:00 -0800 Message-ID: <36348727.8D3AA8B1 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:28:55 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Antigravity Motor Picture References: <19981018172205.15576.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> <3.0.5.32.19981026090222.007c92c0@inforamp.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kejHT1.0.ww5._J9Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23708 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Quinney wrote: > It angers me to think that our hard earned income may have been channeled > into research that could benefit our lives today, yet forever seems to > remain a secret, for the benefit of ...? Standard Oil of New Jersey, aka Rockefeller, et. al. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 08:46:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12343; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:41:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:41:21 -0800 Message-ID: <02ba01be00f6$f3f61c60$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: A/G and Wheels Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 08:37:17 -0700 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: <"6XXis3.0.W03.mOADs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23709 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton is blaming the Energy Interests for Suppressing the Homopolar A/G Motor. This is Wrong, Terry! It's the Speed Bump Interests,and the Wheel Manufacturing Interests (Five for every car), not to mention the Highway, Railroad, Airplane, and other such Interests. The Agricultural Interests(crop circles are destructive too).:-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 10:12:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA30340; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:10:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:10:32 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981026121118.00d1ad60 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:11:18 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Photoremediation in HRE-1 using D2O? Cc: , "George" In-Reply-To: <00ab01bdff47$1ecaa5c0$8db4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"QDtH5.0.wP7.NiBDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23710 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:08 AM 10/24/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >Gives one pause to wonder if it would "Self-Clean" if D2O had been used >instead of H2O,with the Photo-neutrons/CF from the Deuterium taken into >account? Actually it works the other way around. d + n --> t has a fairly large cross-section (a couple of barns) so you create more radiation than you could get rid of. Since p + n --> d has an even greater cross-section, one of the things that conventional fission plants have to worry about is replacing the cooling water frequently enough to keep the deuterium fraction down. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 10:27:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA04159; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:25:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:25:22 -0800 Message-ID: <3634AFF2.9FAB734C bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:22:58 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A/G and Wheels References: <02ba01be00f6$f3f61c60$8db4bfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PUBy82.0.q01.HwBDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23711 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J Sparber wrote: > Terry Blanton is blaming the Energy Interests for Suppressing the Homopolar > A/G Motor. > > This is Wrong, Terry! > > It's the Speed Bump Interests,and the Wheel Manufacturing Interests (Five > for every car), not to mention the Highway, Railroad, Airplane, > and other such Interests. The Agricultural Interests(crop circles are > destructive too).:-) > > Regards, Frederick Well, I certainly can't argue against the big wheels being the source of the conspiracy. Although, I'd think that General Motors would have been just as happy selling Jetsonmobiles as Roadmasters. The concept was best described in a decology by L. Ron Hubbard, published posthumously, whereby an alien force was concerned that their future conquest of Earth would be fruitless if we continued to pollute the planet. They sent their CIA equivalent to clandestinely introduce free energy devices into our society only to be stymied by the minions of Rockefeller. Of course the names were changed. . . Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 10:32:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA05919; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:28:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:28:07 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981026122955.00d1ceb0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:29:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Clean Spent Fuel Rods in The Reactor? Cc: , "George" In-Reply-To: <00c601bdff4f$72997200$8db4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cmxNz1.0.JS1.syBDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23712 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:08 AM 10/24/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >If the spent fuel rods were placed in a reactor,wouldn't the "spare" >neutrons clean them up after a while? In the CANDU, Robert E.? It's all politics, lots of politics (as in blood sucking insects). "Spent fuel rods a wonderful source of isotopes for creating nuclear weapons, so the major concern about "high-level radioactive waste" is not that it is radioactive, but that any reasonable type of remediation begins by separating out the contents by type of element. The best, safest type of fission plant is a molten salt reactor. They run on thorium, are very efficient in neutron economy, and in about ten years of operation, produce enough "extra" fissionable inventory to start another reactor in operation. (Or ten reactors --> one new reactor a year.) I believe that currently there are a total of zero publicly operating around the world. Why? Because it is so easy to separate the transuranics out of the molten salt along with the "poisons" that the non-proliferation crowd has a coronary whenever someone suggests building commercial MSRs. But if the politicians didn't want to make policial hay out of spent fuel rods, what would be done would be very simple. All the high level radioactives from spent fuel rods would be put into non-critical radioisotope generators, and the energy used to produce energy. In practice what really happens is that isotopes from which are "waste" in nuclear weapons production are used this way, killing the commercial potential. (For example, the Voyager spacecraft were powered by radioisotope generators using I think Pu-240.) So the real answer is that spent fuel rods are a very useful resource, which the non-proliferation people insist on throwing away. (The only commercial fuel reprocessing facility in this country, in New York State was forced out of business by the AEC.) 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 Oct 26 10:34:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA09191; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:32:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:32:04 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981026123321.00d1a950 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:33:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Clean Spent Fuel Rods in The Reactor? Cc: , "George" In-Reply-To: <00c601bdff4f$72997200$8db4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"MuOqn.0.RF2.Z0CDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23714 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:08 AM 10/24/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >If the spent fuel rods were placed in a reactor,wouldn't the "spare" >neutrons clean them up after a while? In the CANDU, Robert E.? One last point, in any reactor fueling for most commercial reactors, the new and used rods assemblies are mixed, with the outer boundary all older rods and the newest rods concentrated in the center. So, with a good burn-up pattern, the removed rods are pretty completely used. In fact, in some reactors, radiation damage to the fuel pins is the primary reason the rod assemblys are retired. 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 Oct 26 10:34:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA07317; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:29:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:29:47 -0800 Message-ID: <02ed01be0106$12c0a840$8db4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Photoremediation in HRE-1 using D2O? Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:28:33 -0700 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: <"5m3PI2.0.Fo1.Q-BDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23713 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:George Date: Monday, October 26, 1998 10:13 AM Subject: Re: Photoremediation in HRE-1 using D2O? Robert I. Eachus wrote: >At 06:08 AM 10/24/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >>Gives one pause to wonder if it would "Self-Clean" if D2O had been used >>instead of H2O,with the Photo-neutrons/CF from the Deuterium taken into >>account? > > Actually it works the other way around. d + n --> t has a fairly large >cross-section (a couple of barns) so you create more radiation than you >could get rid of. Since p + n --> d has an even greater cross-section, one >of the things that conventional fission plants have to worry about is >replacing the cooling water frequently enough to keep the deuterium >fraction down. True,Robert. But I was referring to cleanup of the longer half-life fission fragments. Does CANDU breed useful quantities of Tritium in the D2O Moderated Reactor? 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 Mon Oct 26 10:42:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA12907; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:39:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:39:57 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:37:21 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: More on Eccles: Allen digs trash Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810261240_MC2-5E12-BFA1 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"AZOEs3.0.b93.y7CDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23715 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Rick Monteverde writes: Shame on John Allen for even bringing this up, let alone CROSSPOSTING it!!! And to think we used to complain about people crossposting from SPF?! Folks, we have a new record low here. Hear, hear! This is disgraceful. DAMN but I'm pissed to see this kind of thing! This is the first time I've ever really felt like unsubscribing to Vortex. Don't do that Rick! We need you!don't let Allen drive you away. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 10:48:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13291; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:40:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:40:18 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:37:51 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810261241_MC2-5E12-BFA4 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"h8MMj.0.yE3.H8CDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23716 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex John Collins writes: Clearly you assume that, like the heat of the sun in your example above, people were looking for perpetual motion that would last for ever - infinite energy? I maintain that they only wanted it to last an apppreciable length of time - until the parts of whatever device they used wore out. No, clearly I did not assume any such thing. People understood that machines wear out. I meant that the sun appeared to be a limitless source of energy. It appeared to contradict the conservation of energy. You don't think that Bessler's machine is an issue today? No, I did not say that. I said that if you can build a machine it will not be an issue tomorrow. I hope indeed to rebuild Bessler's machine within a very short time, but I believe I could convince the world of the reality of his machine, without having to build a working model, if I explained the reasons why his machine worked, within currently held scientific beliefs You are wrong. You could not convince the world of the reality without a working model. Not in 10,000 years. You might explain the reasons, but no one will pay attention to you, and no one will believe you. Without a model you have no hope of success. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 11:56:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18661; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:53:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:53:42 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981026184746.2e17bf0a aapi.co.uk> X-Sender: jcollins aapi.co.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Collins Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 18:57:22 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"Rc5sT.0.OZ4.5DDDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23717 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:37 26/10/98 -0500, you wrote: >To: Vortex > I hope indeed to rebuild Bessler's machine within a very short time, but > I believe I could convince the world of the reality of his machine, > without having to build a working model, if I explained the reasons why > his machine worked, within currently held scientific beliefs > >You are wrong. You could not convince the world of the reality without a >working model. Not in 10,000 years. You might explain the reasons, but no one >will pay attention to you, and no one will believe you. Without a model you >have no hope of success. That is a depressing thought. You believe that no matter what I said no one would even listen unless I produced a working model? You say they won't believe me. I think that you wouldn't believe me. But surely if I presented a reasoned logical argument which set forth the general principle behind Bessler's wheels (and within current scientific theory generally), then it would not be a case of belief but rather understanding? I think that you are mistaken Jed and even if I fail with a working model, I have already decided to publish my theory on my web site, then we shall see if you are right. I hope you are not. John Author of 'Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?' - for more information and details on ordering, visit my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 12:50:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28551; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:47:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:47:57 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810261240_MC2-5E12-BFA1 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 09:46:16 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: More on Eccles: Allen digs trash Resent-Message-ID: <"JCbSV.0.pz6.y_DDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23718 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed - > don't let Allen drive you away I must have been too pissed off to remember I have good e-mail filters. I've set up a filter on John Allen, and will no longer see or respond to anything he posts. What he did is why I don't post more on the NGs, and I'm certain I'm not alone. I don't want some wack-o who has it in for me because I participate in controversial discussions to find it easy to stake me out, select various comments out of context, and blast them around to friends, family, job, business associates or whatever in an attempt to embarrass or discredit me. John Allen did a terrible thing that ought to be a criminal offense, even though I know that logically it can't be. It is in fact part of the "other side" of the principle of free speech. But that doesn't mean we have to sanction or condone it. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 12:52:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA30196; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:49:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:49:47 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:47:00 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810261450_MC2-5E1A-6668 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"_bcY_3.0.jN7.g1EDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23719 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I said that the only way to convince people is with the working model. John Collins responds: That is a depressing thought. It does not depress me. That is the way the world works, and how it should work. It is better that people believe experiments rather than models, because a model can always be wrong, whereas an experiment once replicated must be right. You believe that no matter what I said no one would even listen unless I produced a working model? You say they won't believe me. Absolutely! I guarantee it. I think that you wouldn't believe me. No, I will not understand you, and I will pay no attention. Your theories are over my head. The only part of your writing that I understand is your analogy comparing wind and gravity, which as I pointed out, is incorrect; or else a sailboat could not win a race by stealing another boat's wind. (Try stealing gravity.) But surely if I presented a reasoned logical argument which set forth the general principle behind Bessler's wheels (and within current scientific theory generally), then it would not be a case of belief but rather understanding? I think that you are mistaken Jed . . . Then you have not studied history. No scientific debate has ever been settled with reasoned logical arguments, but only by experiment. That's a good thing. . . . and even if I fail with a working model, I have already decided to publish my theory . . . If you fail with the working model then your theory must be wrong. The device is not inherently complex or difficult to build. It does not require close tolerances or exotic materials. If your theory was about superconductors or cold fusion devices, but your experiment failed to support the theory, I might believe that the experiment did not properly reflect the theory for unknown reasons, but with this simple mechanical device that seems unlikely. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 13:23:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA20375; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:19:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:19:03 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981026152106.00d289f0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:21:06 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: (off topic) Re: Mysterious Locations in CA w/"hum" Cc: , "George" In-Reply-To: <017601bdffa8$108ff3a0$8db4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"dpn_n.0.zz4.5TEDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23720 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:43 PM 10/24/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >Agreed, But when I was in the Military putting in 15-hour days man handling >Atomic Bombs and on an occasion outrunning an Atomic Artillery shell to >boot, for $90,00/month, with $50.00 >of it being sent home to help support my family,I got a very stern letter >from the IRS warning me that,"if you don't pay that $3.50 you owe us we're >going to confiscate your property and possibly send you to jail". :-) The IRS just doesn't like the military. When I was in Germany, I "owed" the IRS $0.99 for 1965. Per instructions, I wasn't required to pay any amounts less than $1.00, so I just sent the return in. Since I was getting out the next year, I put my home address on the return. A couple of months later, the IRS sent a dunning letter with a short fuse demanding the ninety-nine cents and one cent in interest. My parents just paid it, I would have forwarded it to Senator Scott's office, with a CC: to the IRS. 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 Oct 26 13:35:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA31613; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:33:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:33:12 -0800 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox2.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <3634DCCE.A60DD080 css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:34:22 -0600 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: (off topic) Taos Hum References: <3.0.5.32.19981026152106.00d289f0 spectre.mitre.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qV0Ds3.0.pj7.MgEDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23721 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall this topic had it's own discussion group list. Bill? -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 13:38:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA32351; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:34:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:34:15 -0800 Comments: ( Received on ftpbox.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <3634DD0D.4B8D2192 css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:35:25 -0600 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: TAOS HUM HOMEPAGE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qI-3R2.0.Lu7.DhEDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23723 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ah yes, here is the address: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/hum/hum.html -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 13:44:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA32284; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:34:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:34:06 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981026153601.0095feb0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:36:01 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Photoremediation in HRE-1 using D2O? Cc: , "George" In-Reply-To: <02ed01be0106$12c0a840$8db4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"yEwik3.0.4u7.ChEDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23722 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:28 AM 10/26/98 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >True,Robert. But I was referring to cleanup of the longer half-life fission >fragments. Does CANDU breed useful quantities of Tritium in the D2O >Moderated Reactor? How do you define useful? Read the Congressional debate about closing the Savanah River plants a few years ago if you want more details about the supply of and demand for tritium. But if you are not a superpower with a large collection of nuclear weapons to maintain, you probably buy your tritium, and for that matter deuterium, from the Canadians. 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 Oct 26 13:49:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA07587; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:45:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:45:28 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981026154727.00953a50 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:47:27 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Article by Tom Ligon on Farnsworth style fusors in Analog In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981026121118.00d1ad60 spectre.mitre.org> References: <00ab01bdff47$1ecaa5c0$8db4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NjdYv3.0.br1.qrEDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23724 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ...in the December 1988 issue. Good reading and seems to get all the details right. If anyone want to experiment based on this, let me know I have some old ideas from back when that got dumped in the bit bucket when the tokamak mafia took over the program. (Note--some of the "tokamak mafia" have scientific degrees, but most if not all are paper pushers. The antithesis of the "if I know what is going to happen it isn't reseach" school. There are actually some tokamak researchers who are friends--and actually do research.) 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 Oct 26 13:56:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA11928; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:50:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:50:54 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981026204502.2edff0f6 aapi.co.uk> X-Sender: jcollins aapi.co.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Collins Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:54:40 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"S3aqs.0.6w2.zwEDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23725 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 14:47 26/10/98 -0500, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >I said that the only way to convince people is with the working model. John >Collins responds: > > That is a depressing thought. > >It does not depress me. No Jed, you know as well as I do that I was referring to your 10,000 year quip, and not that a working model was required > > You believe that no matter what I said no one would even listen unless I > produced a working model? You say they won't believe me. > >Absolutely! I guarantee it. You can't guarantee it so don't take on commitments you can't back - yea ok semantics. > > > I think that you wouldn't believe me. > >No, I will not understand you, and I will pay no attention. Your theories are >over my head. The only part of your writing that I understand is your analogy >comparing wind and gravity, which as I pointed out, is incorrect; or else a >sailboat could not win a race by stealing another boat's wind. (Try stealing >gravity.) True you don't understand or you did not bother to read it properly. I was comparing the action of wind on a double Savonius windmill to the action of gravity on Bessler's wheel when it was able to turn in either direction to demonstrate that the internal mechanism was doubled (as in the Savonius windmill). I intended the analogy to enable the reader to understand the workings of the wheel, not the action of gravity on it. You show an impressive determination not to understand Jed "I will not understand and will pay no attention", not exactly the true hallmark of an open-minded scientist. > > > But surely if I presented a reasoned logical argument which set forth > the general principle behind Bessler's wheels (and within current > scientific theory generally), then it would not be a case of belief but > rather understanding? I think that you are mistaken Jed . . . > >Then you have not studied history. No scientific debate has ever been settled >with reasoned logical arguments, but only by experiment. That's a good >thing. Yes well you know that I have studied history, but I was answering your claim that *only* a working model would suffice. > > > . . . and even if I fail with a working model, I have already decided to > publish my theory . . . > >If you fail with the working model then your theory must be wrong. The device >is not inherently complex or difficult to build. It does not require close >tolerances or exotic materials. Not true. There may be some minor alteration to make, but time will tell. I've enjoyed this little debate but there is little else to say. John > Author of 'Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?' - for more information and details on ordering, visit my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 14:17:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA23210; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:13:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:13:12 -0800 Message-Id: <199810262114.PAA29613 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:13:01 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Resent-Message-ID: <"9kpZi1.0.Zg5.tFFDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23726 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex > >I said that the only way to convince people is with the working model. John >Collins responds: > > That is a depressing thought. > >It does not depress me. That is the way the world works, and how it should >work. It is better that people believe experiments rather than models, because >a model can always be wrong, whereas an experiment once replicated must be >right. > > > You believe that no matter what I said no one would even listen unless I > produced a working model? You say they won't believe me. > >Absolutely! I guarantee it. > > > I think that you wouldn't believe me. > >No, I will not understand you, and I will pay no attention. Your theories are >over my head. The only part of your writing that I understand is your analogy >comparing wind and gravity, which as I pointed out, is incorrect; or else a >sailboat could not win a race by stealing another boat's wind. (Try stealing >gravity.) > > > But surely if I presented a reasoned logical argument which set forth > the general principle behind Bessler's wheels (and within current > scientific theory generally), then it would not be a case of belief but > rather understanding? I think that you are mistaken Jed . . . > >Then you have not studied history. No scientific debate has ever been settled >with reasoned logical arguments, but only by experiment. ***{The above statement is very misleading. Scientific debates are settled with reasoned logical arguments *about experiments.* There is no way to proceed in science without argument, because the arguments are necessary to decide whether an experiment is sound and, thus, what it means. The processes of argumentation and experimentation are inextricably intertwined. It would be just as true to say that no scientific debate has ever been settled by experiment, but only by reasoned logical arguments, as it is to say what you said. Both statements contain a potent grain of truth but, in the final analysis, are misleading. --Mitchell Jones}*** That's a good >thing. > > > . . . and even if I fail with a working model, I have already decided to > publish my theory . . . > >If you fail with the working model then your theory must be wrong. The device >is not inherently complex or difficult to build. It does not require close >tolerances or exotic materials. If your theory was about superconductors or >cold fusion devices, but your experiment failed to support the theory, I might >believe that the experiment did not properly reflect the theory for unknown >reasons, but with this simple mechanical device that seems unlikely. ***{Note that you are arguing by, well, argument, rather than by "experiment." That's because arguing is the only way we have to settle disputes! Nobody ever settled a disagreement solely by means of an experiment. When experiments are used in the process of settling a disagreement, they are used *in argument.* Without the arguments, there is no way to decide what the experiments mean. Even so called "definitive" experiments are definitive only because they provide unassailable arguments to the proponents of one partular interpretation at the expense of alternative interpretations. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 14:40:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA01288; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:34:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 14:34:11 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:30:32 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: More on Eccles: Allen digs trash Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810261634_MC2-5E1C-FDBA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"akp3R1.0.sJ.VZFDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23727 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Rick Monteverde goes a little too far, understandably: John Allen did a terrible thing that ought to be a criminal offense . . . No! Free speech is too important. We can't let people like Allen mess it up. The law must protect deplorable speech, except slander, fraud and the like. . . .even though I know that logically it can't be. It is in fact part of the "other side" of the principle of free speech. But that doesn't mean we have to sanction or condone it. We do not have to publish it or allow it here either. But there is no reason to get upset or censor anyone, now that we have e-mail filters. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 15:44:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA02937; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:40:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:40:13 -0800 Message-ID: <3634ECE3.40D8AD1F ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:43:00 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: Akira Kawasaki Subject: Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. And two experimental suggestions. References: <199810242043.QAA09908 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ExL1g3.0.Oj.RXGDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23728 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 26, 1998, Monday Vortex, I would like to make a suggestion which I have not seen in the ICCFs that I have attended or to any publications, conversations, or correspondences that I have had over the years with respect to plalladium based cold fusion. I know my information base is limited so there might have been such a suggestion made already. I kind of doubt it. I brought up the suggestion in a form of a question to Edmund Storms in a short period of conversation during a break at Mallove's Manchester NH Symposium of October 11th, 1998. He found it most interesting but out of reach of the present state of cold fusion funding. He said, and I agree, that with proper funding, many areas of the palladium and cold fusion questions can be delved into properly. Humbly, the suggestion may provide the answer to the troubles we have been having with Pd-D2 fusion replication. I will not bore you with the thought process details here. It's not involved.. I think fission scientists will pick up on it right away. The suggestion, in a form of a question is this: What isotope(s) of palladium are actually responsible for the reactions (fusion and others) to occur? Just as you cannot make a fission bomb from pure uranium (mixed isotopes) , I believe you cannot expect consistant, replicable fusion to occur with pure (mixed isotopes) palladium. Just as in the atomic bomb project, you will have to separate out the isotopes of palladium to actually see what each does to loaded deuterium. You are not dealing with a radioactive substance for the isotope separation so it would not be expensive as the Manhatten Project. Just get the six stable palladium isotopes separated in sufficient quantities to do the experiments, whether by gas diffusion, electrolysis, or others. Saying this, I am still rooting for Russ George to be successful with the Case replication experiments underway at SRI and PNL. To what extent his results will show consistant results in all his cells, he is not saying. It is still a speculative unexplained process for the replication. And what of the other 23 palladium unstable isotope states? Some lasts from secons, minutes, hours, to years. Some of them may be formed and are crucial to sustained reaction. Or they may form a bridge to reactions found and links to neighboring elements (Rhodium and Silver). It should all come out as studies proceed. So let's get the funding! Am I crazy or off base? Get one of those surplus centrifuges that terrorists are constanly buying. :-) The second suggestion came out of Fred Sparber's posting of the Oak Ridge website inviting applications for using their neutron sources for experiments. The thought occurred that a loaded and unloaded palladium samples (of hydrogen, of deuterium) can be introduced to low energy neutrons and effects studied qualitatively and quantatatively to determine what was going on. Now if this can be done with isotopically pure palladium samples, the pictures should be clearer. It would be a nice combining of hot and cold nuclear technologies. By the way Uranium has 22 isotope states, 3 stable but it took an non-existant uranium isotope (half life long enough to be useable) to make the bomb. Data courtesy of CRC Table of Isotopes, 73rd & 76th editions. The 76th edition cleaned up most of the many errors in the previousTable. I'll leave this post to Vortex only. I'll leave distribution to others if desirable. Later, I'll foward it later to some friends not on the vortex. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 15:44:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04157; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:41:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:41:49 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:39:48 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: McKubre: 0.5% accuracy, 0.1% precision Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810261742_MC2-5E1A-4CF0 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"S6fyE3.0.o01.xYGDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23730 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Dieter Britz and I disagreed about in the level of precision claimed by McKubre for his flow calorimeter. Britz said 0.5%, I said 0.1%. It turns out we were both right, but he was more right than me, because I confused accuracy and precision. The paper claims, "high accuracy (the greater of 50 mW or 0.5%) and precision (10 mW or 0.1 percent)." That is from "Development of Advanced Concepts for Nuclear Processes in Deuterated Metals," EPRI TR-104195, Page 1-3. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 15:44:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA03574; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:41:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:41:25 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:40:00 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810261742_MC2-5E1A-4CF2 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"U0y0b3.0.ft.aYGDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23729 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I wrote that no scientific debate has ever been settled with reasoned logical arguments, but only by experiment. Michel Jones responded: The above statement is very misleading. Scientific debates are settled with reasoned logical arguments *about experiments.* Yes, but that goes without saying. I mean, I do not have to say it every time, and it isn't misleading because the audience here knows it. My point is that experiments remain paramount. They must come first. Until John Collins gives us an experiment, we will have nothing to argue about. The experiments performed by Bessler do not count because they were not replicated. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 16:40:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA27886; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:34:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:34:38 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981026171425.0072dd24 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:14:25 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Dr. Brown's nuclear battery Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"FHDR-2.0.Dp6.OKHDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23731 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At Gene's urging, I have contact Dr. Brown with a lot of questions about his nuclear battery. Here is his reply (my questions to him are quoted in the usual way): From: "Paul Brown" To: "Scott Little" Subject: Re: nuclear battery Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 10:59:25 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Hi Scott! >Adding up the .546 Mev beta from Sr-90 and the 2.282 Mev beta from Y-90 >which should be in equilibrium with the Sr-90, I can only get 18 milliwatts >out of 1.1 Curies. 75 watts is over 4000 times more than that!!!! Exactly! That is if you consider only the kinetic energy involved. >Do you really have a device that produces a steady 75 watts of electrical >power from 1.1 Ci of Sr-90...with no other input? Not at this time. This is very old information. Yes we did. It was all published in 1987-1993. The company fell victim to a corporate raider who cut-up the company and sold off all its assetts. I went to court and just got the rights back March 1997. Today, we are pursueing development of this technology as well as the tritium battery production. If you are interested in a list of publications, I can provide it. >Can you explain how this >is possible? It was all published at one time or another, again I can provide the references if you like. >Does the device somehow cause the Sr-90 to decay faster than >normal? This is not my explanation, and we never found any data to support such an assumption, however, many of the people involved with this project suspected this as a possible explanation. >Are there other energies released by the decay of Sr-90 besides >the betas? The beta decay from the Y-90 is very high and results in bremsstrahlung in many materials. We also used secondary emitters to convert high-energy beta decay into an avalanche of electons. But the beta decay from the Sr-90 and Y-90 is the only form emitted from the radioisotope. >How can you convert high-speed electrons into "normal" >electrical power with any efficiency? The device itself is a resonant cavity. The circuit is rf driven by the electrons driven by beta decay. >This battery looks MUCH more important that your rad remediation stuff to >me. I agree fully! >BTW, if you want me to get your patent and read it before bombarding you >with such questions, just say so. It's usually hard to get clear >explanations out of patents, which is why I'm coming to you first. The patents are not the best place for information. I can provide a list of published information, American Nuclear Society, NASA, IECEC, etc. My books are no longer available and under my present contract, I am not allowed to publish at this time. However, we are working on these, and will soon be allowed to release new information. Take Care, Paul Brown I have requested the publication list from him and will report back here after studying some of the papers. 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 Oct 26 16:50:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA01293; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:47:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:47:11 -0800 Message-ID: <36350A07.CC3B8624 GroupZ.net> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 18:47:19 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "freenrg-l eskimo.com" , KeelyNet , "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Y2K/Goverment/Free energy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-oP8-3.0.zJ.EWHDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23732 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Assuming the government and corporations, come to the conclusion, sometime in 1999, that "TheEndOfTheWorldAs WeKnowIt (TEOTWASKI), is a good possibility. Assuming that the government has research on free energy, and some sort of free energy theory/device. If the above assumptions are correct, can we expect the release of some sort of free energy device in 1999. If released in what form and where might one look for it (am also assuming it would not be released directly). Maybe not free energy but highly efficient, inexpensive generator? Any thoughts or comments appreciated....steven opelc From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 17:03:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA05224; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:52:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:52:46 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981026173903.0072a9b4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:39:03 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19981026184746.2e17bf0a aapi.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"dzHg3.0.UH1.SbHDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23733 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 18:57 10/26/98 +0000, John Collins wrote in response to Jed: >That is a depressing thought. You believe that no matter what I said no one >would even listen unless I produced a working model? Jed is right on the money on this one, John. Centuries ago, in Bessler's day, when higher mathematics and the laws of physics were relatively new, it was easy to sell folks on the possibility of mechanical perpetual motion machines. Nowadays, however, any college engineering/physics student can prove with indisputable mathematics and the laws of physics that any rotary motion of masses about a pivot point in a gravitational field, regardless of the complexity of linkages, slots, raceways, levers, etc. used to manipulate the masses as they rotate, will NECESSARILY be a "conservative" process. The term conservative means essentially that energy cannot be extracted continuously from such a device. Since all real mechanical devices have at least some frictional loss, that means such a device cannot even rotate itself on a continuous basis. >...But surely if I >presented a reasoned logical argument which set forth the general principle >behind Bessler's wheels... Such an argument cannot be consistent with the laws of physics. Therefore nobody would accept the argument. However, a working device that stood up to detailed inspection would get plenty of attention fast. It WOULD NOT be sufficient to produce an apparently working device and allow only very limited inspection of it, as Bessler reportedly did. 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 Oct 26 17:13:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA14568; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:09:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:09:48 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dr. Brown's nuclear battery Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:11:21 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36370f4e.150188832 24.192.1.20> References: <3.0.1.32.19981026171425.0072dd24 mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981026171425.0072dd24 mail.eden.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: <"-u_uf3.0.PZ3.RrHDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23734 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:14:25 -0600, Scott Little wrote: [snip] >I have requested the publication list from him and will report back here >after studying some of the papers. [snip] Scott, Could you post the publication list here, so that we can do our own reading in parallel with yours? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 17:15:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA15113; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:11:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:11:07 -0800 Message-ID: <008301be013e$2a3a0c40$96b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Spallation Neutron Source (http://www.ornl.gov/sns/) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:09:24 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE0103.621007E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"xVDTp3.0.2i3.gsHDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23735 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE0103.621007E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is what canceling the funding can do for the Superconducting Superconductor can do for funding SCIENCE YOU CAN USE. FJS http://www.ornl.gov/sns/ ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE0103.621007E0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Spallation Neutron Source.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Spallation Neutron Source.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.ornl.gov/sns/ Modified=C0F95D8A3D01BE019D ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE0103.621007E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 17:25:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA18710; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:14:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:14:54 -0800 Message-ID: <009001be013e$aa75ce80$96b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Fw: Spallation Neutron Source (http://www.ornl.gov/sns/) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:13:41 -0700 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_008D_01BE0103.FAB8D760" Resent-Message-ID: <"avE4G.0.Fa4.DwHDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23736 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_008D_01BE0103.FAB8D760 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----Original Message----- From: Frederick J Sparber To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: Bobcandeu aol.com Date: Monday, October 26, 1998 5:09 PM Subject: Spallation Neutron Source (http://www.ornl.gov/sns/) >This is what canceling the funding can do for >the Superconducting Supercollider can do for funding SCIENCE YOU CAN USE. No wonder they canceled it. :-) >FJS > >http://www.ornl.gov/sns/ > ------=_NextPart_000_008D_01BE0103.FAB8D760 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Spallation Neutron Source.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Spallation Neutron Source.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.ornl.gov/sns/ Modified=C0F95D8A3D01BE019D ------=_NextPart_000_008D_01BE0103.FAB8D760-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 20:25:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA05144; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:17:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:17:33 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Oscillator Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:51:03 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36353461.159682218 24.192.1.20> 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: <"hbkc2.0.3G1.DbKDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23737 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Does anyone know of an electronic device, capable of forming part of an oscillator circuit, in which the mass of the charged particles involved plays a critical role in the frequency of oscillation? (Something involving a magnetic field perhaps?) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Oct 26 21:55:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA02249; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:54:20 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:54:20 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <36356024.3184 earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:54:44 -0700 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: Wynar: procognition, remote viewing skepticism 10.25.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lwe3g3.0.yY.50MDs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23738 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: [q-mind] Re: QM 21/22-Oct-98 + Precognition/Remote Viewing Skepticism--Roahn Wynar Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 02:02:47 -0500 From: Nicole Tedesco From: Roahn H. Wynar Subject: Re: QM 21/22-Oct-98 + Precognition/Remote Viewing Skepticism The following is a reply to this item of the 21 to 22 QM list which was labeled 3. [q-mind] Obvious Challenges That Physicists Have Avoided--Campion Read [Moderators note: I have inadvertantly misrepresented the Subject of Campion's message. The Subject should have read: "The field of Consciousness vs. 'Objective Reality'" I'm sorry for any confusion this may have caused. -N Tedesco] In Mr. Read's post he cites a portion of a letter written to him by Dr. Walker and Mr. Read comments on the text: [Walker] The physicist takes his definition of energy, along with the experimental successes that he has had using the term in his way, to be a part of the reality existing quite apart from anything his brain does, or that of anyone. To the physicist, this energy exists exactly as he says whether he thinks about it or he doesn't. To the physicist, energy is something that is objectively real. My comments to Walker's original statement are as follows: [Roahn Wynar] Despite the fact that Mr. Read agrees with Dr. Walker's sentiments, I strongly disagree. Any honest physicist who was forced to describe the notion of "Energy" would have to say something like: "Energy is a mathematical construct that helps us solve certain classes of problems reliably." Energy has no independent existence in the same way "Integration" or "long division" have no independent existence. Even when we speak of "energy flow" we are not talking about any objectively real thing flowing. We owe it to nineteenth century science fiction and Qigong Quacks for convincing people that energy is an ooze that flows (or flys?) around and occationally has a greenish glow. Now the question regarding the reality of these thought constructions is still very interesting, but it is certainly a different class of reality and the statement "To the physicist, energy is something that is objectively real," needs serious qualifacation. I would also like to comment on Topic 5 of the 21 to 22 October QM list titled , "5. [q-mind] Precognition as an Unconscious "Mental Force"--Jack Sarfatti" In this post Jack Sarfatti states that "Ideas do create themselves" and he casually mentions that remote viewing is a "special case" of this. I urge the list members to be careful with this. Is it too pedestrian to suggest on this list that Remote Viewing is a farce? I have had the pleasant opportunity to meet with two Remote viewers up close and personal from the old Government program, one of whom was a founding member, and despite the fact they were extremely nice and intelligent people, on the subject of RV they could not make a simple rational thought. Dr. Sarffatti wants to construct important new ideas and I am in full support of this noble goal, but explanations of non-phenomenon will never lead to progress. Same paragraph regarding precognition. I do understand that the precognition Jack Sarfatti is refering to is more subtle than the "What will the stock market do tomorrow" type, but herin lies an inconsistency. You see, the most "knowledgeable" people about remote viewing will tell us that precognitive remote viewing is possible and is profitable (a typical example of a claimed successful program was the precognive remote viewing of silver futures). This is not the "Aha!" type Dr. Sarfatti seems to be talking about. I respectfully request that Dr. Sarafatti clear this up: 1) is precognition in the banal sense (Stock market, horse races etc..) possible? 2) if so, does he beleive it has ever happened 3) if not, is the RV community just nuts? For the record I have seen no reason to beleive that precognition in any meaningful form has ever been demonstrated or even exists. I also recommend we develop explinations of consciousness that do not depend on precognition and RV axiomatically or use these "phenomenon" as evidence in support of the theory. However, if a good explination of consciousness does emerge that predicts (no pun inteneded) these phenomenon it should give us a hint regarding the cultivation of the phenomenon. That would be a truly wonderful advance. It would also be a way to test the new theory.... It is absolutely critical that those who view this list do not perceive the work being done here as a a wacky attempt to validate psychic (remote viewing and precognition) or quack (homeopathy) phenomenon. ################################################################### Roahn H. Wynar Atomic and Molecular Experimental Physics Columnist, The Daily Texan, Student Newspaper of the University of Texas at Austin Roahn's Clearing house of Central Texas Pseudoscience and Quackery: http://www.ph.utexas.edu/~rwynar "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits." - Einstein ################################################################## From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 00:01:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA26843; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:58:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:58:45 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981027065101.2ba7e6de aapi.co.uk> X-Sender: jcollins aapi.co.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Collins Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:00:39 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"1t9e_.0.sY6.pqNDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23739 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 17:39 26/10/98 -0600, Scott wrote: >At 18:57 10/26/98 +0000, John Collins wrote in response to Jed: > >>That is a depressing thought. You believe that no matter what I said no one >>would even listen unless I produced a working model? Since all real mechanical devices have at least some frictional loss, that means such a device cannot even rotate itself on a continuous basis. Bessler's machine *did* work so friction was an acceptable part of the mechanism and not sufficient to bring it to a stop > >>...But surely if I >>presented a reasoned logical argument which set forth the general principle >>behind Bessler's wheels... > >Such an argument cannot be consistent with the laws of physics. Therefore >nobody would accept the argument. However, a working device that stood up >to detailed inspection would get plenty of attention fast. It WOULD NOT be >sufficient to produce an apparently working device and allow only very >limited inspection of it, as Bessler reportedly did. But my explanation *is consistent* with the laws of physics, but you and Jed are suggesting that because people will assume that it cannot be so, they won't read it. They have made an assumption which may prove to be false. I would say that Bessler's machine had more than a limited inspection, but I understand your point which is, I think, that without seeing the interior no one could say for sure that his claims were genuine. Personally I still think that a working model will be produced anyway, and when the mechnanism is seen and understood, there will be no need for a protracted examination such as you imply would be necessary. John Author of 'Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?' - for more information and details on ordering, visit my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 00:28:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA32500; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:25:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:25:39 -0800 Message-ID: <363576BD.3430 earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:31:09 -0700 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: Storms: Chubb: CF debate 10.26.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9Gik_2.0.ix7.2EODs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23740 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: CF debate 10.23.98 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:29:07 -0500 (EST) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net I am not so disturbed by the Takahashi claim from detection of neutrons at 2.45 MeV. He may well be right about that. It's the higher-energy part of the spectrum that I consider most suspect. Combine that with the silly speculation about multi-deuteron reaction processes, and I think we have good grounds to suspect that this is not careful work by an "expert", as you would have us believe. By the way, you are aware that the detector must be calibrated in order to arrive at a value for the neutron energies , are you not? Since you have read the paper in question, why don't you tell us how the detector was calibrated? I could find no mention of that important detail. So the titanium grains are too small to stop the betas emitted by the tritium. Do you think that makes things better? My statement still stands that the betas do not actually reach the detector. If they are not stopped in the titanium we really don't know very much about the radiation being detected, do we? It's bad experimental technique! > > Why do we have this ongoing shell game? Either the Miles-Bush > calorimetry is up to stuff or it is not. When I suggest that perhaps > the excess heat claim arising from these data is on shakey ground you > want to direct our attention elsewhere. > > --It is no shell game. The world is not black and white. Some data are > compelling and some are supportive. Shades of gray exist in between. > The Miles-Bush data are good and they demonstrate what they intend to > demonstrate. However, to accept the initial claims for a nuclear > reaction, which I accept, more data are required and especially data > having a greater magnitude. Fortunately, such data are available so I > do not need to use the Miles-Bush data to do anything more than show a > general, not exact, relationship between heat production and helium > generation. This relationship is consistent with an energy production > near but not necessarily equal to a fusion-type reaction. Other > possibilities can be considered but this is a good step toward believing > a fusion-type reaction is the source of heat.-- > So can we now acknowledge that the Mills-Bush measurements are not the greatest evidence for the production of excess heat? They need to be "supported" by some other research, but how are we to analyze and evaluated all this "gray" evidence? Let me suggest that the proper approach is to forget all the weak claims and examine only the strongest evidence, but you won't help us do that. You won't clean the CF house. If the Mills-Bush results are important because they show a correlation between excess heat and helium, where are we if the excess heat data is a bit shakey? By the way, could you confirm something for me about the Mills-Bush technique. Am I correct in saying that there was no catalytic recombining of deuterium and oxygen? That is to say the electrolysis was done in an "open" configuration, not a sealed cell. I wonder how you can rule out atmospheric contamination for an "open" system. > > We seem to be hung-up on this issue. I wish, indeed plead with Dick to > > read the literature which can be accessed through the bibliography in my > > reviews. If I were to attempt to plot a histogram as Dick suggests, I > > would produce a bimodal plot. There would be a sharply peaked curve > > centering near zero with a small tail on the positive side. Then comes > > a gap followed by another curve. This second curve has a broad peak near > > 500 mW and extends with rapidly decreasing frequency up to about 75 > > watts excess. Because a variety of sample sizes containing a variety of > > active sites were used to obtain these data, the shape of this second > > curve has no fundamental meaning. If we were seeing only the first curve > > near zero, as Dick would suggest is the case, I would agree, data > > selection or random variations might be the explanation. However, the > > second peak provides an indication that something else is going on. In > > addition, which region a particular sample falls depends on a clear > > relationship to its ability to acquire deuterium. Thus, two independent > > properties (excess energy production and ability to acquire deuterium) > > both self-select the samples into the same two sets. Can you explain how > > this can happen by a random process? Perhaps I should not ask such a > > question because I think you have the talent to explain anything to fit > > your beliefs. > > I find it strange that my reading habits are so often called into question. I don't think I can allow Ed Storms (or anyone else, for that matter) to define what constitutes "the literature" for CANR or cold fusion. Clearly Ed Storms could benefit from a broader knowledge of CANR so what is he doing to get himself up to speed on the very subject he claims to be so well informed about. I see no point in reading absolutely every piece of trash that gets published under the cold fusion heading. Over the years the ICCF proceedings have certainly included some pretty rotten stuff, so why pretend that all of it is so great that I really should be reading it. I have been asking for guidance as to where the solid evidence lies, and Ed Storms can't really say what is solid and what is merely "supportive." So in our discussion concerning the statistical aspects of CANR data we have gotten to the point where we agree, it seems, that it's desirable to have results that, when plotted, yield a bimodal distribution. Can we go further to suggest that data which does not show such a distribution should not be "cleaned up" for presentation by the arbitrary discard of the major portion of the distribution -- the part the shows little excess heat? If you agree with that notion how can we be justified in any further consideration of "positive" results that are generated that way? Let me suggest that the Miles-Bush data is moving closer to the discard pile. Maybe even the McKubre results belong there, too. Now with respect to your data, I am intrigued by a statement that was something to the effect that the shape of the distribution for the "positive results" has no significance because of the variabiltiy of the results. Are you saying that you have not replicated any of your measurements? I'd be glad to discuss, in detail, (d,alpha) reactions, if you would care to state your hypothesis for such a reaction to account for the observed excess heat at the watt level. > > --On the contrary, I expect, and indeed find, the effect to have a > positive temperature coefficient which is caused, I believe, by > increased stability of the nuclear-active regions as temperature is > increased. “All noise anyway” is your conclusion, not mine. The > overall power input is not random with time. The output power is random > within a narrow range but with a net excess power. The effect is seen > at constant applied power as well as when the power level is changed. > > Dick Blue is like a man who will not start on a trip unless he has a map > and, once the map is chosen, he will follow it come Hell or high-water. > I, on the other hand, am trying to draw the map. To do so, I need to go > down blind alleys, speculate on what might be over the next hill, and > take some shortcuts. This describes a basic difference in viewing > life-experiences, and it is the reason why we will never agree on where > to go or how to get there.-- > I have no objection to speculations and the exploring of blind alleys, but I also consider it folly not to make good use of information that has been derived from previous explorations. There is not enough time and resources available to conduct absolutely every possible experiment in something analogous to the 1000 monkeys in a room banging random keys on typewriters in hopes that great literature will come forth. If we are dealing (as I think we should be) with the testing of specific hypotheses with regard to possible CANR processes, the experiments should be designed to yield definitive results. For example, in the context of cold fusion I would suggest that neutron detection should play a key role, because of the superior sensitivity and selectivity it provides. There aren't many processes that could result in a neutron signal, but "excess heat" is just heat and that's to be expected regardless of what reaction process occurs. We've been there and done that. The results are in, but you won't acknowledge the established facts. Now you are indicating interest in some (d,alpha) process. That's OK with me. It's quite likely we already have information in hand that has bearing on that question. Care to guess what the evidence already shows? Let me clear up the question relating to input power. If the cell is driven at constant current the cell voltage is, in general, highly variable. In fact that's one of the measured parameters that gets logged, right? Of course, the voltage is confined to limits, perhaps zero and the power supply maximum. Based on the data I have examined, I would say it is still appropriate to characterize the cell voltage, and thus the power input", as being "noisey." I presume that is due to bubbles, cell polarization, and buildup of insulating layers on the cathode and stuff like that. Now you say your data show a positive temperature coefficient. Does the cell voltage show a temperature coefficient, and can you explain what you see in that regard? Pons and Fleischmann, of course, found you can boil water that way, at constant current. Because the resistance of the cell went up as a function of temperature so did the power input with just the result one would expect Yes, I would read your papers on this topic. My address is a matter of public record so I am not shy about posting it here. Richard Blue 631 Forest St. East Lansing, MI 48823 I look forward to seeing just what you have by way of evidence for a CANR process. I just hope it's better than the CETI experiment, for example. Speaking of reading the CF literature, do you want to know what I consider the all time worst example of a CF experimental claim? De Ninio is the priciple author, as I recall. Why don't you look that up to see if you can, perhaps, spot what is obviously wrong with the data. I'll give you a hint. It has to do with the way random events correlate to a computer time base. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Chubb: Blue: band state theory 10.22.98 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:48:05 -0500 (EST) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > This is a gross over-simplification and mistatement. The nuclear > portion of the wave function is addressed. But we have not emphasized > it. This is covered in our Fusion Technology 1990 or 1993 papers. > However, we have not discussed the nature of the coherence associated > with the nuclear reaction (as outlined below) except in passing in the > ICCF6 Proceedings paper. > > >For his problem the deuterons are just lumps that interact via > >the electrostatic potential. > > Again, it is simply untrue that we have treated the deuterons as lumps. > I think it would be useful to focus on the important point, the process > of transferring energy to the lattice and the associated nuclear > coherence. > > >So he as made them into something equivalent to heavy > >electrons with some of them moving through the lattice > >very much like conduction electrons. > > I suppose from the perspective of one used to thinking in terms of "free > particles", you might envision them as "heavy electrons" because > deuterons are 4000 times heavier than electrons. And they do behave > like conduction electrons. But, in point of fact, this perspective > misses an important point. In the very limiting situation where the > picture applies, only a very small fraction of a deuteron occupies each > unit cell, while normally, one thinks of a situation in which integer > numbers of electrons are present in each cell. From this perspective, > the deuteron is actually an extremely "light" electron because it is > more like a "wave" than a particle and the concept of light or heavy has > little relevance. > > >Now when he speaks > >of "coherence" in the wave function, all he is thinking > >about is that part of the wave function that involves the > >center-of-mass motion of the deuterons. > > Not true; I pointed out that at T=0, coherence is the rule, not the > exception. And I alluded to the fact that Schwinger pointed out that in > general separating the nuclear degrees of freedom from the electrostatic > degrees of freedom using a "simple" factoring of the wave function into > these two forms of interaction is not allowed. In particular, in these > comments, I was alluding explicitly to the fact that in a true T=0 > situation, it is not possible, in general, to apply Born-Oppenheimer > separability. This is because at T=0, it simply is not necessarily the > case the coherent nuclear interactions and coherent electrostatic > interactions will proceed on very different timescales. > > I think this is the fundamental point of disagreement between us. It > has nothing to do with whether or not I am considering the nuclear > problem. We are in fact doing this. The bone of contention that has > been the sore point over the years is that initially we did not provide > a mechanism for explaining how it is possible to maintain very different > timescales for nuclear and electrostatic interaction (which is required > in order for Born Oppenheimer separability to be meaningful) and to have > energy released to the environment. > > The key point that is new that I do not think you appreciate is that we > are suggesting a way of accomplishing this. This is provided by a > coherent interaction that keeps both the nuclear and electrostatic > portions of the wave function in their ground states. General > interactions do not allow this to happen. But there is a very specific, > size dependent one that does. It works in the following way: 1. > Because the centers of mass of potential nuclear by-products and > reactants are found at all periodically equivalent locations, overlap > between potential nuclei occurs at all periodically equivalent > locations; 2. This overlap can be evaluated using a standard strong > force model, subject to the constraint that the zero of kinetic energy > of the deuteron+deuteron system be shifted upwards by 23.8 MeV relative > to the zero of kinetic energy of the ground state 4He system; > 3. But to be consistent with the requirement that periodic order be > maintained, the associated reaction must be viewed as occurring at all > periodically equivalent locations at once (which is equivalent to > requiring that each nuclear wave function is also in a band state). > > The missing ingredient in this description is that the nuclear as well > as the electrostatic portions of the wave function occupy band states. > In normal situations, because of the short range nature of the strong > force, it might appear that to require the nuclear portion to be in a > band state is absurd. In fact, when it is required that the interaction > not raise the energy of the system or result in disruptions in periodic > order and that latent heat not be introduced, 1. Born Oppenheimer > separability is required, and 2. the nuclear portions of the wave > function must occupy band states. How this comes about is a separate > issue, involving, amoung other things, order-preserving ("Umklapp-like") > elastic recoil processes in which potentially large amounts of momentum > are transferred to the nuclear portions of the interaction, for > example. The final point is once the nuclear reactions are distributed, > how does energy become distributed to the lattice. There is a unique > way to accomplish this: through a shift of the zero of energy through a > "recoil process" in which residual (positive and negative) charge builds > up at the boundaries of the ordered, crystalline solid, as I have > discussed previously. I read this over and over and all I see is a large number of assumptions that, I believe, have little to do with the real physics of a real system. I suppose you can define a T=0 ground state with respect to all degrees of freedom and possibly come up with the kinds of ordering you describe, but so what? Isn't it also possible that you are simply constructing some idealized system in which you overlook some rather significant complicating aspects of the problem that we can be rather sure influence what will happen in the real world? > > I hope that the comments I have included above provide some useful input > concerning what I believe to be relevant about the question of > coherence. > > >When I use the word "coherence" as it applies to nuclear > >wave functions, that implies a heck of a lot of things that > >I can't get Scott to focus on. I want to see the NUCLEAR > >PART of the WAVE FUNCTION. > > I hope this message provides comments that illustrate to you that I have > focused on this question. > > >You know, the part you separated > >off from the problem back at step one. > > Again, see my earlier comments. > > >I agree that the nuclei are generally in their ground state > >and, thus, at T=0, and I would expect them to stay there > >no matter how you stir the soup, because it takes a zillion > >times more energy to excite them than is available from > >thermal or chemical processes. That is why you can separate > >off the nuclear degrees of freedom. End of cold fusion > >discussion, one would think. > > > >Now you want to describe a nuclear reaction process within > >the context of some theory -- say deuteron ion band states > >in a Pd lattice. That's fine with me, but let's not cheat. > >Let's bring the nuclear wave functions back into the picture > >right from the beginning, so we can tell what's true and not > >true about this system. > > There are magnetic anisotropies associated with orientation that may > very well be important in triggering potential reactions. > Here I must ask whether you have included said magnetic anisotropies in the problem or are you just blowing smoke? I note the word "may". If you will admit that the deuterons enter the lattice in a state of disorder, perhaps we can discuss how realistic it is to suggest that they arrive in an ordered state when cooled to T=0 and will do so in a finite period of time. Of course in the experiments at hand they are never cooled at all, so I suggest they remain disordered. > >Of course, for most phenomena associated with the said PdD > >lattice the orientation of the deuterons makes absolutely > >no difference. There is no interaction with anything that > >cares which way is up inside a deuteron so that part of the > >wave function is separated and forgotten. > > > >Now, however, we come to a phenomenon that will care about > >the orientation of the deuterons -- especially if coherence > >is to play such a significant role as Scott Chubb claims. > >What he atempts to do, however, is to use something that > >could possible result from a coherence without admitting > >that the system is not conducive to the establishment of > >such a condition. The deuterons are disoriented. There > >is no coherence in the NUCLEAR PART OF THE WAVE FUNCTION. > > See above; and note the comments about maintaining the ground state. > Also, note that I also was throwing up a "red flag" deliberately to > point out that the "naive" picture of deuterons as particles with > arbitrary orientations is exactly that, "naive." > Yes, I am pretty naive, but I am not stupid. I think I should be able to get you to actually clarify some points. You are ascribing some rather far-reaching effects to these ion band states and doing darned little to justify any of it. So let me see if I can recover some of what you have said in the past. With respect to the deuteron band states, this is a low density state, is it not. I recall something like 10^-5 deuterons per unit cell. If it takes two deuterons to make a 4He, how do we determine the density of deuteron pairs in your calculations? My estimate would be something like 10^-10 deuteron pairs per unit cell. Have I done something "naive" at that point? Now the entire justification for having ion band states at all is, as I recall that all the sites for bound deuterons are occupied, right? > Next let me see if I understand the coordinates of the problem just a bit better. If we treat the deuteron as a composite of a proton and a neutron, there is one position vector for each for a total of TWO. It is, however, useful to regroup and define a deuteron center-of-mass position vector, leaving one other that I have been calling "internal" to the deuteron. Do you agree with me up to that point? Now you have written, for the deuteron in an ion band state, a Bloch wave function that has in it a position coordinate, does it not? And am I correct in saying that the position coordinate you have been using is the deuteron center of mass? Now if I ask for a Hamiltonian, what will you offer? Which coordinates appear in that Hamiltonian and what is their functional form? So far most of the discussion has centered on the coulomb interaction, but there is another term to be considered as well, is there not -- something I would call the nuclear interaction potential? Now in my naive way of doing things, I would look at the interaction between two deuterons and suggest that at large separations (such as is appropriate for a low density system) the nuclear part of the potential is really out of the picture because of its radial dependence and all that need be included is the good old coulomb interation. Is that what you have done? Of course the problem with that is it doesn't make any helium nuclei, i.e. there are no nuclear interactions and no nuclear reactions. That's why I say your theory is a theory for no nuclear reactions. I simply am at a loss as to how your low-density state leads to anything different, and I don't see you clarifying anything here, either. You seem awfully fond of redefining energy zeros which I suppose is legit, as long as you have only one system under consideration. But it there really are two systems involved, don't we have to be more careful to keep the proper relationships between these systems. After all, as I said, you really can't put the helium ground state and the deuteron ground state at the same level. Now I think you had some justification, perhaps, for saying that the deuterons form an ion band state, but let's look at the helium just a bit closer. What evidence is there, experiment or theory, that puts any helium in an ion band state at any time? You can say that the reaction is occuring at all periodically equivalent locations, but what are those periodically equivalent locations? By my count we are going to have exactly ONE 4He nucleus in the entire lattice. What keeps it from binding somewhere? And you still have not told me how you get a transition from two deuterons (at a pair density of 10^-10 per unit cell) to that one lonely 4He nucleus. I also don't understand what keeps the 4He in its ground state. All you have mentioned is the T=0 condition, but what does that have to do with anything, unless you assume some unspecified and unrealistic close coupling between nuclear degrees of freedom and the lattice. Is the weak magnetic isotropy you mention supposed to account for this as well? Last I looked, 4He does not have much by way of magnetic moment to latch on to. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 00:34:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA01782; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:33:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:33:53 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981027013540.0095c130 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 01:35:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19981027065101.2ba7e6de aapi.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"3VEmj1.0.lR.mLODs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23741 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:00 AM 10/27/98 +0000, John Collins wrote: >But my explanation *is consistent* with the laws of physics.... If you will show me your explanation, I will attempt to point out the errors that it surely contains. I'm not trying to be rude or presumptous, John. It is simply that we are well past mechanical perpetual motion machines now. The frontiers of the free energy quest have moved on to more complex systems. In fact the field seems to sustain itself by staying one or two steps ahead of full comprehension. 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 Oct 27 00:49:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA04167; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:47:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 00:47:55 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:55:31 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Oscillator Resent-Message-ID: <"Oi7BW.0.y01.wYODs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23742 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:51 PM 10/26/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Does anyone know of an electronic device, capable of forming part of >an oscillator circuit, in which the mass of the charged particles >involved plays a critical role in the frequency of oscillation? >(Something involving a magnetic field perhaps?) How about a magnetron? Perhaps an oscillator using the Hall effect? A semiconductor oscillator using the cyclotron frequency of the charge carrier? Such an oscillator would depend on m*, the equivalent mass of the charge (hole) plus associated phonons. Open ended (not closed) secondary circuits with capacitive spheres at the end, if operated at very high frequencies. Klystron tube? Acutally, most any tube with a grid operated at sufficiently high frequency. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 01:04:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA07045; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 01:01:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 01:01:55 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:09:28 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Oscillator Resent-Message-ID: <"UtcXk.0.zj1.3mODs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23743 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:51 PM 10/26/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Does anyone know of an electronic device, capable of forming part of >an oscillator circuit, in which the mass of the charged particles >involved plays a critical role in the frequency of oscillation? >(Something involving a magnetic field perhaps?) How about NMR? Oscillation frequency depends on moment of inirtia, stongly related to mass. Charge plays no direct role, however, the force is related to magnetic moment. The neutron carries no charge, unless you view it as a composite particle, e.g. a proton and muon plus others, with differing radii. Magnetic moment as rotating charge is not an accepted QM idea I think. How about the resonating frequncies of various types of antennae? How about wigglers? Cyclotrons and synchrorons? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 02:01:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA17870; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:00:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:00:48 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981027013540.0095c130 mail.eden.com> References: <1.5.4.16.19981027065101.2ba7e6de aapi.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:59:24 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Resent-Message-ID: <"NfZFo3.0.xM4.FdPDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23744 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott - > In fact the field seems to sustain itself by > staying one or two steps ahead of full > comprehension. Which puts it a good three and a half steps ahead of me! Got a good laff off your line above. I also just got the "Wired" mag with the Platt article today, and I noticed your e-mail address in a sidebar, or whatever they call it. Are you getting any inquiries from that yet? Seemed like a pretty good article. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 02:33:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA22911; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:32:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:32:16 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981027092645.3b9750b0 aapi.co.uk> X-Sender: jcollins aapi.co.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Collins Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:36:23 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"t8_Qw2.0.vb5.m4QDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23746 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:35 27/10/98 -0600, you wrote: >I'm not trying to be rude or presumptous, John. It is simply that we are >well past mechanical perpetual motion machines now. The frontiers of the >free energy quest have moved on to more complex systems. In fact the field >seems to sustain itself by staying one or two steps ahead of full >comprehension. I know Scott, and I accept that. But I still have a problem explaining Bessler's wheel. I have so much information regarding his machine that I will not rest until I have explained it. As a mechanical engineer I know it to be impossible according to the current physics paradigm, but I also know it to be impossible to be a fake, according to the evidence I've accumulated. That leaves me trying to explain it within current physical laws - without fraud. I believe that I can and Ihope to - soon. Nuff said. John > > >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 > > Author of 'Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?' - for more information and details on ordering, visit my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 02:34:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA22452; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:30:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:30:13 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981027092805.00dd4d74 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 04:28:05 -0500 To: jkokor alum.mit.edu, Jeane Manning , 72240.1256 compuserve.com, Bensinger@bdhepa.hep.brandeis.edu, Jim Hile , jim@msri.org, discjt@servtech.com, John Ranta , jsearl@tako.demon.co.uk, joseph okor , joshprokop@worldnet.att.net, KeelyNet DallasTexas.net, kevin.blaker@autodesk.com, kpallist matrox.com, lstelmac@lynx.neu.edu, "drew blue" , Leonard Dvorson , mary@gnu.ai.mit.edu, atc wit.edu, cadman@mediaone.net, Nick Edgington , occ-env-med-l listserv.duhc.duke.edu, ohl@world.std.com, 71650.60 compuserve.com, pgm@world.std.com, peg@wintergreen.com, prs autodesk.com, rsmith@itiip.com, rfink@mitvma.mit.edu, RICHARDH uucp-1.csn.net, richard.quick@slug.org, raddison world.std.com, ezzell@molec-geodesics.com, sphinx angus.mystery.com, standeyo@iinet.net.au, psion@gateway.ecn.com, 71022.3001 compuserve.com, 73577.123@compuserve.com, tesla@pupman.com, thiahadge aol.com, tcapizzi@world.std.com, tom.duff@poweroasis.com, TAFAUL aol.com, USA-TESLA@usa.net, vortex-L@eskimo.com, "Lilly" From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Planetary Gyroscopic Balance (was Re: Most needed inventions) Resent-Message-ID: <"T_D0s.0.kU5.q2QDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23745 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Hi; > >There have been many books written about the planetary alignment happening on 5/5/2000. They ALL say that the last time this happened 6000 years ago, the South Pole Icecap slipped and repositioned itself at what was the equator due to the gyroscopic forces of the Earth's spin. Some calculate that the ice mass attained velocities of 1600 MPH. This seems a reasonable number because the equator speed, due to the Earth's rotation, is about 1000 MPH relative to our frame of reference. The axis of the Earth itself changed during the icecap shift. The atmosphere couldn't keep up with the Earth so the vacuum of space reached the surface in some places. This may explain why there were found INSTANTLY frozen animals in perfectly preserved condition at the Arctic regions. > >This condition really concerns me. If the technology were available, I would say that reshaping, and reducing in mass to a large extent, the South Pole Icecap is a wise thing to do. Why aren't the governments of the world doing this? Maybe because they don't know, too busy fighting one another (for pivot points?) or are too busy digging enormous underground refuge accomodations for if and when the icecap slips. > >For those who will be left out to fend for themselves, I would say that we should be allowed to acquire the technology to try the South Pole Icecap facelift idea. Maybe we'd get fewer earthquakes if the Earth were in good gyroscopic balance? > >It's time to stop worrying about repercussions from those trying to stop Free Energy and Antigravity technology. They have their hideouts to protect themselves during such a catastrophy all ready and probably comfy. We paid for these accomodations but we won't be invited to these shelters. > > >Dennis C. Lee > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 03:39:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA32158; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 03:38:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 03:38:32 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981027104736.00e06abc popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 05:47:36 -0500 To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk, vortex-l@eskimo.com, quantum@iol.ie From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: More on Eccles Cell Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id DAA32124 Resent-Message-ID: <"pE4j82.0.Os7.t2RDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23747 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi; In plain English, are you trying to say: At 06:57 PM 10/25/98 +0000, John Allan wrote: >A natural follow on from Suzi Wong's mail. > >I tried to trace Chris Eccles but got a reply from a woman who said she >did not know him. > >I did how ever find postings of his on alt.foreplay and br.masoch under >the title " Caning and Pain ". People who are accepted to this technology need a very high level of tolerance? One way may be this weird S&M thing? Couldn't another way be the study of Martial Arts? One's physical and emotional endurance is built with martial arts practice, without generating Black Negative Energy in one's life force energy field. I don't free spar or imagine an opponent when practicing. Positive energy units plus negative energy units equals zero. >• Mr Whitney, if you have any up to date news on Eccles I would be >interested to receive it, as would I substantiation of your claims and >evidence of your contracting with Stan Meyer. The fact that Stan Meyer ran screaming 'they finally poisoned me' just before he died, indicates that if the brain condition was caused by someone, it may have been Mr. Whitney? Could you give more background on this person? Also, do you have the background on the creeps who just decided to try to pull some very unethical fast ones on Professor Searl? Regards; Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 04:23:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA10777; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 04:19:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 04:19:00 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981027112805.00e1b034 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 06:28:05 -0500 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Splitting Water Cc: KeelyNet DallasTexas.net, vortex-L@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"UVPAE2.0.3e2.peRDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23748 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; To get full performance from electrolysis, the electrodes must be designed such that its' mass contributes to the process. Keely's work has a concept of mass chord. CAN ANYONE PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THE MASS CHORD OF AN OBJECT IS DETERMINED? Dennis C. Lee At 11:26 PM 10/26/98 -0500, you wrote: >Have you seen U.S. Patent 5,089,107 available on the IBM patent site. > > BI-POLAR AUTO ELECTROLYTIC HYDROGEN GENERATOR > Inventor: Francisco Pacheco, Hewitt, NJ 07421 Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 04:34:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA15396; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 04:33:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 04:33:48 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981027114241.00e10a18 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 06:42:41 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Oscillator Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net Resent-Message-ID: <"YJgRt.0.Lm3.hsRDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23749 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; Adjust the mass chord of the electrodes to the desired resonance frequency? COULD SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW TO DETERMINE THE MASS CHORD OF AN OBJECT? Dennis C. Lee At 02:51 AM 10/27/98 GMT, you wrote: >Does anyone know of an electronic device, capable of forming part of >an oscillator circuit, in which the mass of the charged particles >involved plays a critical role in the frequency of oscillation? >(Something involving a magnetic field perhaps?) > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 05:23:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA00422; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 05:22:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 05:22:25 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981027123123.00e2d968 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:31:23 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Bessler versus Newcomen Resent-Message-ID: <"8CZLi1.0.U6.HaSDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23750 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; Without discussion of various theories, there is less chance of seeing which ones simultaneously cover the most points observed from previous experimental data. Further experiments should be designed to see if the best theory is without contradiction. Dennis At 05:40 PM 10/26/98 -0500, you wrote: >To: Vortex > > >I wrote that no scientific debate has ever been settled with reasoned logical >arguments, but only by experiment. Michel Jones responded: > > The above statement is very misleading. Scientific debates are settled > with reasoned logical arguments *about experiments.* > >Yes, but that goes without saying. I mean, I do not have to say it every time, >and it isn't misleading because the audience here knows it. My point is that >experiments remain paramount. They must come first. Until John Collins gives >us an experiment, we will have nothing to argue about. The experiments >performed by Bessler do not count because they were not replicated. > >- Jed > > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 07:34:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA14645; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:33:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:33:15 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 05:40:49 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Oscillator Resent-Message-ID: <"ato5D3.0.ga3.wUUDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23751 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:51 PM 10/26/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Does anyone know of an electronic device, capable of forming part of >an oscillator circuit, in which the mass of the charged particles >involved plays a critical role in the frequency of oscillation? >(Something involving a magnetic field perhaps?) The Fusor resonant frequency should be based on e/m. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 08:42:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA06617; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:40:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:40:16 -0800 Message-ID: <19981027135444.24407.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.73.204.24] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Prof. John Searl MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 05:54:43 PST Resent-Message-ID: <"uZ0Oz.0.Ed1.lTVDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23752 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Dennis, What is suppose to have been done to John Searl then? >Also, do you have the background on the creeps who just decided to try to >pull some very unethical fast ones on Professor Searl? I was wondering how his project was progressing? Last time I heard they were trying to get funding to cast that very brittle ring. Rob King ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 08:43:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA06837; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:40:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:40:57 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981027094154.0071b61c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:41:54 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. And two experimental suggestions. In-Reply-To: <3634ECE3.40D8AD1F ix.netcom.com> References: <199810242043.QAA09908 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"i6-0E1.0.lg1.OUVDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23753 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 13:43 10/26/98 -0800, Akira Kawasaki wrote: >I would like to make a suggestion which I have not seen in the ICCFs... >What isotope(s) of palladium are actually responsible for the reactions >(fusion and others) to occur? You should talk to Ben Bush. This issue is one of his pet theories. He has written a preliminary paper that ties together some isotopic analysis on Pd cathodes that showed excess heat and he makes a stab at identifying which Pd isotopes are "active". I note that his ICCF-7 paper says nothing about this. 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 Oct 27 09:04:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12208; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:01:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:01:27 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981027161023.00e3d7b0 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:10:23 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. And two experimental suggestions. Resent-Message-ID: <"ysqIV3.0.b-2.cnVDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23754 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; In my technical research travels, I have feel the following may have relevence: David Hudson commented that monatomic palladium was the source of the extra heat creation in CF. Monatomics have very high temperature superconducting properties. The hydrogen loading breaks monatomic palladium loose from the electrode. The magnetic field charges the superconductor to the point of saturation. As the superconducting field breaks down, energy is released. I'm a little wary of the magnetic field charging aspect but it would be interesting to see if residue formed on the palladium is monatomic. Since monatomics are supposed to have Cooper paired electrons (photons) normal analysis methods are ineffective. I have an idea for a relatively inexpensive experiment to test the above hypothesis should there be interest. Dennis >Vortex, > >I would like to make a suggestion which I have not seen in the ICCFs that I >have attended or to any publications, conversations, or correspondences that >I have had over the years with respect to plalladium based cold fusion. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 09:10:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA14197; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:06:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:06:46 -0800 Message-ID: <004001be01c3$b5d5f0e0$904fd3d0 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Re: Oscillator Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 06:50:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"6CzHL.0.jT3.bsVDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23755 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin said: >Does anyone know of an electronic device, capable of forming part of >an oscillator circuit, in which the mass of the charged particles >involved plays a critical role in the frequency of oscillation? >(Something involving a magnetic field perhaps?) I believe a Klystron oscillator fits this description. The tube and circuit involve the rate of drift of electron clouds between cavities. Klystrons are UHF amplifiers used in communication satellite transponders and some radar systems, I believe. Varian was one source. It may not be what you are looking for. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 11:06:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA31954; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 10:57:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 10:57:33 -0800 Message-ID: <007901be01d3$1fd17320$688f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Ion Sources and Ion Beams (http://www.casetechnology.com/source.html) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 10:55:50 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0076_01BE0198.73697360" 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: <"JuLvM.0.5p7.SUXDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23756 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_0076_01BE0198.73697360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Great Web Site for beam technology. I was drowned in this stuff 35 years ago while working on Ion Implantation in Semiconductors. Sure would've helped to have had this info then. :-) Regards, Frederick http://www.casetechnology.com/source.html ------=_NextPart_000_0076_01BE0198.73697360 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Ion Sources and Ion Beams.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Ion Sources and Ion Beams.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.casetechnology.com/source.html Modified=20DDCE68D201BE01C5 ------=_NextPart_000_0076_01BE0198.73697360-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 11:17:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA02887; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:03:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:03:56 -0800 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:00:49 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Stop children, what's that sound? Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810271304_MC2-5E20-F8CA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Qehic1.0.1j.SaXDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23757 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex A large dose of off-topic paranoia seems to be creeping into the life of this forum recently. I think it is a bunch of malarkey, and I'm sick of it. Regarding the Y2K problem, steven opelc wrote: Assuming the government and corporations, come to the conclusion, sometime in 1999, that "TheEndOfTheWorldAs WeKnowIt (TEOTWASKI), is a good possibility. Assuming that the government has research on free energy, and some sort of free energy theory/device. The Y2K problem is an expensive nuisance to old-line large corporations with obsolete mainframe computers. It may cause disruptions and lawsuits, but it will *not* cause any major problems to society. People are not idiots. They will know to set the clock back a year if the equipment fails to work on January 1, 2000. People often set back dates now. They buy software with a license that expires after some period of time, and to keep it going they reset the computer every year. I have been programming industrial applications with mainframes, minis and microcomputers for 25 years. I have seen screwed up programs and equipment clocks set incorrectly in locations all over the United States. They are as common as VCR clocks that flash "12:00" forever. If program bugs like the Y2K problem could bring down civilization, they would have done so long ago. The upgrade to Windows 95 was probably more traumatic than the Y2K problem will be. Faulty or missing backup media are more of a threat than Y2K. Computer crashes and malfunctions are an ordinary occurrence in factories and offices, and they used to be more common, yet people have muddled through. This Y2K panic seems to be predicated on the notion that people are helpless infants. The alarmists seem to think that the men and women who work with machinery have no idea how to cope with emergencies or equipment failures. The folks who keep the escalators running and the phone calls switching through the network know what they are doing. People who repair snarled electric power lines after a hurricane deal with life-and-death situations and critical equipment failures. They will not be buffaloed by a simple clock problem. Yesterday, stock trading on Wall Street halted for one hour because of a computer failure. This sort of thing happens occasionally, despite the best efforts of the backroom technicians. Please note that the world did not end yesterday even though Wall Street was down for an hour. Wall Street could be down for weeks and we would survive. As it happens, on a recent weekend the Wall Street computers and the major bank transaction processing computers were extensively tested for the Y2K problem by setting the clocks ahead and running dummy transactions. The network passed these tests without major problems. It never seems to occur to the Y2K alarmists that we can set the clocks ahead now and test equipment. Of course we can! And we do. As I said, we are not idiots. I admit, as a sometimes-backroom technician myself, that I do not plan to take an airplane trip on January 1, 2000. Ticketing and baggage handling machines may be screwed up for a few hours, maybe even a few days. But airplanes will not fall from the skies! Okay, they may smash together without air traffic control, but they might do that at any moment today because the air traffic control system depends on antique computers which often go on the fritz. You want to worry about something? Worry about that. It is more dangerous than Y2K. And, no, the government does not research free energy, and it is not hiding a free energy theory or device. The government is not capable of hiding anything for long, except blunders made by bureaucrats. In more tiresome alarmist nonsense, Dennis C. Lee writes: The fact that Stan Meyer ran screaming 'they finally poisoned me' just before he died, indicates that if the brain condition was caused by someone, it may have been Mr. Whitney? No, it does not indicate any such thing. This is nonsense, as you well know, Mr. Lee. I told you that Meyer died of a cerebral hemorrhage, according to the coroner's autopsy report. Meyer suffered a brief delusion that he had been poisoned, moments before he died. You should not spread absurd rumors about alleged homicides. You should not spread lurid tales about a personal tragedy over the Internet. Do not feed the public's paranoid delusions. Inventors are not suppressed by the government or by Men in Black. I am at the forefront of anomalous energy research, and I assure you the government does not give a damn about it, and neither do the oil companies. The patent office does not like cold fusion, but it is easy to get around its restrictions, as CETI demonstrated. Academic rivals caused Pons and Fleischmann great distress, but this was the normal outcome of an academic turf war. Also, do you have the background on the creeps who just decided to try to pull some very unethical fast ones on Professor Searl? I doubt these creeps exist. In any case, no one could hurt Professor Searl as much as he has hurt himself. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 11:28:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA13003; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:26:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:26:16 -0800 From: Chuck Davis To: PsyPhyList Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 10:27:17 -0800 Message-ID: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Telephone scam: 90# (fwd) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"UwBl71.0.-A3.NvXDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23758 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: *** Forwarded message, originally written by Wright, James 9590 on 27-Oct-98 *** From: "Wright, James 9590" I got htis today in my interoffice mail .... has anyone else ever heard of this? Thanks! james -----Original Message----- From:Reichert, Sylvia L. 9608 >>I received a telephone call today from an individual >>identifying himself an AT&T Service Technician who was >>conducting a test on our telephone lines. He stated >>that to complete the test I should touch nine (9), >>zero (0), the pound sign (#) and then hang up. >>Luckily, I was suspicious and refused. >> >>Upon contacting the telephone company, I was informed that >>by pushing 90#, you give the requesting individual full >>access to your telephone line, which allows them to place >>long distance telephone calls billed to your phone number. >>I was further informed that this scam has been >originating >>from many of the local jails/prisons. I have also verified >>this information with UCB Telecom Pacific Bell, MCI, Bell >>Atlantic, GTE and NYNEX. Please beware. DO NOT press 90#, >>for ANYONE. >>The GTE Security Department requested that I share this >>information with EVERYONE I KNOW. >> >>PLEASE pass this on to everyone YOU know. If you have >>mailing lists and/or newsletters from organizations you are >>connected with, I encourage you to pass on this information >>to them, too. -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 11:43:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18408; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:38:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:38:36 -0800 Message-ID: <3636BC3A.1D11178E gold.globalcafe.co.uk> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 06:40:19 +0000 From: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk (John Allan) Reply-To: energy gold.globalcafe.co.uk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More trash on Allen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wuu3q3.0.YV4.y4YDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23759 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Actually, it is All_a_n, not All_e_n. Just in case anyone want to get that mail filter correct. Jed wrote: > No! Free speech is too important. > We can't let people like Allen mess it up. > The law must protect deplorable speech, except slander, fraud and the like. Well said Jed! Glad so see us in one accord at last. Let us add making up false accusations, breaking deals, conspiracy and sabotage. A good horse whipping is not good enough for the likes of them! John Allan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 11:44:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18847; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:39:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:39:34 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981027184655.00e331c4 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:46:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Prof. John Searl Cc: 72240.1256 compuserve.com, jsearl@tako.demon.co.uk Resent-Message-ID: <"bQxUd3.0.Nc4.r5YDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23760 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi; At 05:54 AM 10/27/98 PST, you wrote: >What is suppose to have been done to John Searl then? Investors tried to put their names on the patent during a meeting with the lawyer. First the lawyer said OK. When Professor Searl objected, the lawyer said you're right. >I was wondering how his project was progressing? >Last time I heard they were trying to get funding to cast that very >brittle ring. John Allen says that the people helping tried to keep Professor Searl out of the lab because he was getting into their way. If I were there, I'd be asking for his APPROVAL at each step! I can't believe they did that! He's way past PH.D level on every subject that I like to talk to him about with no exception. If I could get Jed to calm down when listening to advanced physics ideas, be respectful, and try to get Professor Searl to understand the history of successful innovation as he CALMLY explains so well, I think we could get this to fly. (pun intended) I could buffer the meetings. If Jed had any questions about advanced physics concerning Searl technology, I would provide the reference material from other sources that would confirm what Professor Searl says. I could also help further explain to Professor Searl the reasoning behind Jed's historically proven business method when required, to keep things on track. I think I get along with both of these people fairly well. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 13:35:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA08507; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:31:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:31:24 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:38:54 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"qqK_V3.0.Y42.hkZDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23761 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 1:00 PM 10/27/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: >To: Vortex > >A large dose of off-topic paranoia seems to be creeping into the life of this >forum recently. I think it is a bunch of malarkey, and I'm sick of it. It would be nice to return to serious discussion of experimental results. When there are lulls like this, though, something always seems to fill the vacuum. Too bad it has to be paranoic pop science, and discussion regarding people instead of ideas. BTW, what ever happened to the nifty work Vince was doing in Los Vegas? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 13:40:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA11869; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:34:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:34:38 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:45:21 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Y2K fun... and cybernetic behavior... Resent-Message-ID: <"Wi2S42.0.Hv2.jnZDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23762 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex > >A large dose of off-topic paranoia seems to be creeping into the life of this >forum recently. I think it is a bunch of malarkey, and I'm sick of it. >Regarding the Y2K problem, steven opelc wrote: > > Assuming the government and corporations, come to the conclusion, > sometime in 1999, that "TheEndOfTheWorldAs WeKnowIt (TEOTWASKI), is a > good possibility. > > Assuming that the government has research on free energy, and some sort > of free energy theory/device. > >The Y2K problem is an expensive nuisance to old-line large corporations with >obsolete mainframe computers. It may cause disruptions and lawsuits, but it >will *not* cause any major problems to society. People are not idiots. They >will know to set the clock back a year if the equipment fails to work on >January 1, 2000. People often set back dates now. They buy software with a >license that expires after some period of time, and to keep it going they >reset the computer every year. I have been programming industrial applications >with mainframes, minis and microcomputers for 25 years. I have seen screwed up >programs and equipment clocks set incorrectly in locations all over the United >States. They are as common as VCR clocks that flash "12:00" forever. If >program bugs like the Y2K problem could bring down civilization, they would >have done so long ago. The upgrade to Windows 95 was probably more traumatic >than the Y2K problem will be. Faulty or missing backup media are more of a >threat than Y2K. Computer crashes and malfunctions are an ordinary occurrence >in factories and offices, and they used to be more common, yet people have >muddled through. > >This Y2K panic seems to be predicated on the notion that people are helpless >infants. The alarmists seem to think that the men and women who work with >machinery have no idea how to cope with emergencies or equipment failures. The >folks who keep the escalators running and the phone calls switching through >the network know what they are doing. People who repair snarled electric power >lines after a hurricane deal with life-and-death situations and critical >equipment failures. They will not be buffaloed by a simple clock problem. >Yesterday, stock trading on Wall Street halted for one hour because of a >computer failure. This sort of thing happens occasionally, despite the best >efforts of the backroom technicians. Please note that the world did not end >yesterday even though Wall Street was down for an hour. Wall Street could be >down for weeks and we would survive. As it happens, on a recent weekend the >Wall Street computers and the major bank transaction processing computers were >extensively tested for the Y2K problem by setting the clocks ahead and running >dummy transactions. The network passed these tests without major problems. It >never seems to occur to the Y2K alarmists that we can set the clocks ahead now >and test equipment. Of course we can! And we do. As I said, we are not idiots. > snip-- > > >- Jed It may well be (in retrospect, come January 1, 2000) that people's actions UP TO December 31, 1999 may prove a bit more significant than what happens on the next "revolution of the earth." To whatever extent the "masses" believe that there WILL be a serious problem come January 1, 2000, then their actions UP TO December 31, 1999 may contribute to some aspect of a self-fulfilling prophecy. I would anticipate that the national newsmedia will begin to extensively play up the Y2K "problem" beginning sometime around mid-1999 -- "panic" and impending "crises" help sell news... At least one Hollywood movie about the "problem" is scheduled for release late next year. If the "masses" discount this, fine. If they start widespread withdrawing of significant cash from banks, from mutual fund accounts, etc., then this could have some significant economic implications -- at least in the short term. Then again, if the "masses" have a plethora of loose "cash" hanging around come December 1999, they might splurge more on Christmas gifts, thereby "stimulating the economy" more than what would have otherwise occurred.... :-) Evan Soule' From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 13:53:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA18414; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:48:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:48:58 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991231144227.0072541c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 14:42:27 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? In-Reply-To: <199810271304_MC2-5E20-F8CA compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5Ye1B2.0.XV4.7_ZDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23763 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 13:00 10/27/98 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >The Y2K problem is an expensive nuisance to old-line large corporations with >obsolete mainframe computers. It may cause disruptions and lawsuits, but it >will *not* cause any major problems to society. I agree...the worst of it will probably be record-setting queues at the grocery store on Friday, December 31, 1999. Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 14:09:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26419; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:06:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:06:50 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Oscillator Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:08:17 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <363735ff.53786718 24.192.1.20> References: <1.5.4.32.19981027114241.00e10a18 popd.ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981027114241.00e10a18 popd.ix.netcom.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: <"3q8MZ.0.dS6.uFaDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23765 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 06:42:41 -0500, Dennis C. Lee wrote: >Hi; > >Adjust the mass chord of the electrodes to the desired resonance frequency? > >COULD SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW TO DETERMINE THE MASS CHORD OF AN OBJECT? > >Dennis C. Lee Hi Dennis, Could you please explain where you got the term "mass chord", and what it means? > > > >At 02:51 AM 10/27/98 GMT, you wrote: >>Does anyone know of an electronic device, capable of forming part of >>an oscillator circuit, in which the mass of the charged particles >>involved plays a critical role in the frequency of oscillation? >>(Something involving a magnetic field perhaps?) >> >> >>Regards, >> >>Robin van Spaandonk >> >> >> > > >Tall Ships >http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 14:10:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26828; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:07:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:07:58 -0800 Message-Id: <199810272108.PAA25934 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:07:51 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"xhlaL.0.2Z6.wGaDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23767 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex > >A large dose of off-topic paranoia seems to be creeping into the life of this >forum recently. I think it is a bunch of malarkey, and I'm sick of it. >Regarding the Y2K problem, steven opelc wrote: > > Assuming the government and corporations, come to the conclusion, > sometime in 1999, that "TheEndOfTheWorldAs WeKnowIt (TEOTWASKI), is a > good possibility. > > Assuming that the government has research on free energy, and some sort > of free energy theory/device. > >The Y2K problem is an expensive nuisance to old-line large corporations with >obsolete mainframe computers. It may cause disruptions and lawsuits, but it >will *not* cause any major problems to society. People are not idiots. They >will know to set the clock back a year if the equipment fails to work on >January 1, 2000. ***{Jed, don't you think you are getting a bit extreme here? There are approaches to dealing with this problem which involve setting clocks back, but they also require setting the data back--and setting the data back requires a systems analysis and programming effort that is far too large to be accomplished overnight by a company that waits until midnight on Dec. 31, 1999 before addressing the problem. If, for example, an electrical utility lies to its computer, telling it that the date is Jan. 1, 1999 rather than Jan. 1, 2000, and its data base contains records of usage which still are tagged with correct dates, then when the utility next does electrical billing, its system will use Dec. 1998 usage data to compute billing, and will bill the utility's customers based on their Dec. 1998 usage rather than on their Dec. 1999 usage. In other words, the result will be worse than if the system didn't work at all. (It would be better to not bill people than to send out bills that will *all* be incorrect!) Nor is this example an exception to the general rule: it is the norm. Bottom line: your Panglossian pronouncements about the world we live in are wildly off the mark, and any IT managers who use such excuses to justify ignoring the Y2K problem are courting disaster. --Mitchell Jones}*** People often set back dates now. They buy software with a >license that expires after some period of time, and to keep it going they >reset the computer every year. ***{You are talking about people who use home computers for entertainment, not about business applications, where large data bases have to be processed on a monthly or weekly basis, and where the records to be processed are identified by the dates that they contain. Any business that delays confronting Y2K, based on the notion that this is a trivial problem, is probably going to fail. And if bright and knowledgeable people such as yourself are treating it as trivial, then the portents are ominous indeed, because corporate managers do not want to believe that they need to divert huge portions of their budgets to deal with Y2K, and most of them lack the computer expertise which they need to reach a reasoned decision. Thus many of them will undoubtedly take the bad advice of Pollyannas such as yourself, who are saying what they want to hear, rather than heed the unpleasant advice of people who have considered the problem more carefully. In that case, when Jan. 1, 2000 rolls around, the worst-case scenario--total economic collapse--may unfold. --Mitchell Jones}*** that I have been programming industrial applications >with mainframes, minis and microcomputers for 25 years. ***{As you may recall, I also worked as a professional programmer for many years. (My first job was as a COBOL programmer on an IBM system 360 model 50 computer in 1969, and I programmed in 7 different computer languages before turning to other pursuits.) The difference between us on this topic does not appear to be one of background, but of failure on your part to carefully consider the difficulties that are associated with setting clocks back. I wrote a paper on that subject in 1995, and reached the conclusion that the approach would work only if an entire complex of associated software and data related changes were implemented at the same time. (The best clock setback, by the way, would be 28 years, not 1 year, because every 28 years, the days of the week fall on the same dates throughout the year.) And a vast array of other changes, requiring a significant systems analysis and programming effort, is necessary to make the approach work. To repeat: any company that delays confronting Y2K until midnight, Dec. 31, 1999, is *not* going to be able to avoid disaster by merely resetting the clocks in its computers. --Mitchell Jones}*** I have seen screwed up >programs and equipment clocks set incorrectly in locations all over the United >States. They are as common as VCR clocks that flash "12:00" forever. If >program bugs like the Y2K problem could bring down civilization, they would >have done so long ago. The upgrade to Windows 95 was probably more traumatic >than the Y2K problem will be. Faulty or missing backup media are more of a >threat than Y2K. Computer crashes and malfunctions are an ordinary occurrence >in factories and offices, and they used to be more common, yet people have >muddled through. > >This Y2K panic seems to be predicated on the notion that people are helpless >infants. The alarmists seem to think that the men and women who work with >machinery have no idea how to cope with emergencies or equipment failures. The >folks who keep the escalators running and the phone calls switching through >the network know what they are doing. People who repair snarled electric power >lines after a hurricane deal with life-and-death situations and critical >equipment failures. They will not be buffaloed by a simple clock problem. ***{It isn't a simple clock problem, Jed. As I explained above, it is a complex problem involving the way dated material is processed, and it *cannot* be solved by merely resetting computer clocks. --Mitchell Jones}*** >Yesterday, stock trading on Wall Street halted for one hour because of a >computer failure. This sort of thing happens occasionally, despite the best >efforts of the backroom technicians. Please note that the world did not end >yesterday even though Wall Street was down for an hour. Wall Street could be >down for weeks and we would survive. ***{Indeed, but the reason civilization limps along despite such snafus is that they are not coordinated, even in cases where large emergency programming efforts are required to correct them. Such projects occur on a fairly frequent basis in virtually every mainframe shop. The affected organizations simply expand their staffs to deal with such projects by bringing in contract programmers. This works precisely because such emergency projects are not required everywhere at the same time. Thus as new projects open up, other projects are finishing up somewhere else, and the contract personnel can simply transfer to the new project. But if emergency projects were ever to be started up in all shops at the same time, or even if 20 percent of them were simultaneous, the economic consequences would be dire indeed. The limited pool of contract programmers would no longer be able to handle the situation by moving about among projects: it would be physically impossible, under those circumstances, to get all the projects done, and even those organizations who had contractors on staff would be able to keep them only by bidding wages out of sight, and busting their budgets. The result would be an economic disaster for all concerned. Since Y2K is an emergency project where all mainframe shops have the same deadline--midnight, Dec. 31, 1999--it is by its very nature a prescription for disaster. --Mitchell Jones}*** As it happens, on a recent weekend the >Wall Street computers and the major bank transaction processing computers were >extensively tested for the Y2K problem by setting the clocks ahead and running >dummy transactions. The network passed these tests without major problems. It >never seems to occur to the Y2K alarmists that we can set the clocks ahead now >and test equipment. Of course we can! And we do. As I said, we are not idiots. ***{A safe statement: every reader thinks "We includes me, and I am not an idiot, therefore the statement is correct." Unfortunately, the issue is not whether everybody agrees with your statement, above, but whether there will be enough noncompliant shops to bring the system down, and it appears that there is a good chance that the answer is yes. Those who are assuming the worst and preparing accordingly are, of course, subjecting themselves to inconvenience and expense which, if the best case scenario prevails, will have been unnecessary. But that fact does not refute their behavior. Such precautions are a form of insurance, and like automotive insurance, you hope that you will not need it, while recognizing that the fools are the ones who do not have it. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > I admit, as a sometimes-backroom technician myself, that I do not plan >to take an airplane trip on January 1, 2000. Ticketing and baggage handling >machines may be screwed up for a few hours, maybe even a few days. But >airplanes will not fall from the skies! Okay, they may smash together without >air traffic control, but they might do that at any moment today because the >air traffic control system depends on antique computers which often go on the >fritz. You want to worry about something? Worry about that. It is more >dangerous than Y2K. ***{Programmers who are actually trying to deal with the problem are far more pessimistic than you, Jed. That does not augur well for your predictions. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >And, no, the government does not research free energy, and it is not hiding a >free energy theory or device. The government is not capable of hiding anything >for long, except blunders made by bureaucrats. > >In more tiresome alarmist nonsense, Dennis C. Lee writes: > > The fact that Stan Meyer ran screaming 'they finally poisoned me' just > before he died, indicates that if the brain condition was caused by > someone, it may have been Mr. Whitney? > >No, it does not indicate any such thing. This is nonsense, as you well know, >Mr. Lee. I told you that Meyer died of a cerebral hemorrhage, according to the >coroner's autopsy report. Meyer suffered a brief delusion that he had been >poisoned, moments before he died. You should not spread absurd rumors about >alleged homicides. You should not spread lurid tales about a personal tragedy >over the Internet. Do not feed the public's paranoid delusions. Inventors are >not suppressed by the government or by Men in Black. I am at the forefront >of anomalous energy research, and I assure you the government does not give a >damn about it, and neither do the oil companies. The patent office does not >like cold fusion, but it is easy to get around its restrictions, as CETI >demonstrated. Academic rivals caused Pons and Fleischmann great distress, but >this was the normal outcome of an academic turf war. > > > Also, do you have the background on the creeps who just decided to try > to pull some very unethical fast ones on Professor Searl? > >I doubt these creeps exist. In any case, no one could hurt Professor Searl as >much as he has hurt himself. > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 14:11:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26270; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:06:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:06:35 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981027211519.00e4e600 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:15:19 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"KuwBl1.0.2Q6.eFaDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23764 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 01:00 PM 10/27/98 -0500, you wrote: >In more tiresome alarmist nonsense, Dennis C. Lee writes: > > The fact that Stan Meyer ran screaming 'they finally poisoned me' just > before he died, indicates that if the brain condition was caused by > someone, it may have been Mr. Whitney? > >No, it does not indicate any such thing. This is nonsense, as you well know, >Mr. Lee. I told you that Meyer died of a cerebral hemorrhage, according to the >coroner's autopsy report. Meyer suffered a brief delusion that he had been >poisoned, moments before he died. You should not spread absurd rumors about >alleged homicides. You should not spread lurid tales about a personal tragedy >over the Internet. Do not feed the public's paranoid delusions. Inventors are >not suppressed by the government or by Men in Black. I am at the forefront >of anomalous energy research, and I assure you the government does not give a >damn about it, and neither do the oil companies. The patent office does not >like cold fusion, but it is easy to get around its restrictions, as CETI >demonstrated. Academic rivals caused Pons and Fleischmann great distress, but >this was the normal outcome of an academic turf war. Could such a cerebral hemorrage be caused by someone? All I know is that reading about many cases of free energy and anti gravity researchers getting seriously harrassed makes one wonder. Anyone else good enough to do research will have read similar accounts. On the other hand, possible upcoming world scale catastrophic events will almost certainly necessitate these technologies to come to market if we are to survive. I think the logical conclusion is to bite the bullet, do the work, and know how to defend one's self. Anyone who's with me won't have to worry about self defense while I'm around; unless they use a sniper rifle. ;) If Mr. Whitney is involved with TWO inventors who died or disappeared, would you agree that caution is in order if he wanted to fund a project one is involved in? I feel that this is an informed attitude about the matter. > Also, do you have the background on the creeps who just decided to try > to pull some very unethical fast ones on Professor Searl? > >I doubt these creeps exist. In any case, no one could hurt Professor Searl as >much as he has hurt himself. I agree, for some reason, he has trouble trusting people. I would say that past experience is the reason. All I know is that I can ask him about any research I find and he will know what I'm talking about and further clarify the subject on an impressive level. I'd jump in front of a bullet for Professor Searl. For you Jed, unless you figure out how to tone down and be more calm, I would only try to knock the gun out of his hand. Just kidding folks. :) Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 13:19:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04208; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:12:28 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:12:28 -0800 (PST) From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Oscillator Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:09:20 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36383656.53873725 24.192.1.20> 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: <"oiXhb2.0.g11.wSZDs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23766 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 05:40:49 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 5:51 PM 10/26/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >>Does anyone know of an electronic device, capable of forming part of >>an oscillator circuit, in which the mass of the charged particles >>involved plays a critical role in the frequency of oscillation? >>(Something involving a magnetic field perhaps?) > >The Fusor resonant frequency should be based on e/m. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > Thanks Horace and Mike, for the suggestions. I will look into them. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 14:26:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03596; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:24:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:24:08 -0800 Message-ID: <36363A98.58D5 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:26:48 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Where's VINCE IN LAS VEGAS?? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"rk_kB2.0.-t.7WaDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23768 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > (snip) > BTW, what ever happened to the nifty work Vince was doing in Los Vegas? I'll second that, Horace! Hey Vince, WHERE ARE YOU?? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 14:54:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA15643; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:51:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:51:40 -0800 Message-ID: <00e201be01f3$d7597f40$688f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Stop Children, wha's that noise Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:50:35 -0700 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: <"nH6L82.0.Iq3.wvaDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23769 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I think it was Mitchell Jones that said that "the same days of the month fall every 28 years". I checked out the perpetual calendar in the World Almanac and Book of Facts. Friday the 13th of November (the birthday of some folks I know): 1891, 1903, 1914, 1925, 1931, 1942, 1953, 1959, 1970, 1981, 1987, 1998, 2009, 2015, 2026, 2037, 2043, 2054, what's the formula? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 14:59:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA17673; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:56:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:56:14 -0800 Message-ID: <00e501be01f4$7bd29980$688f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Where's VINCE IN LAS VEGAS?? Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:55:10 -0700 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: <"YX3MF1.0.0K4.E-aDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23770 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, October 27, 1998 2:27 PM Subject: Where's VINCE IN LAS VEGAS?? Frank Stenger wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> >(snip) > >> BTW, what ever happened to the nifty work Vince was doing in Los Vegas? > >I'll second that, Horace! Hey Vince, WHERE ARE YOU?? He's probably over at the airport scooping up all of those quarters that I left there on a stop-over in mid September. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 14:59:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA17769; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:56:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:56:34 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981027211519.00e4e600 popd.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:50:43 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"tmJjn1.0.TL4.W-aDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23771 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dennis writes: > All I know is that reading about many cases > of free energy and anti gravity researchers > getting seriously harrassed makes one > wonder. You said it! READING about "free energy and anti gravity researchers getting seriously harrassed"... That's the point. Perpetuating and adding a sense or air of credibility to that crap by reposting and churning it over and over is the problem. And worse towards that end is embellishing it along the way, as in turning the delusions of a paranoid con man dying of natural causes into a possible murder clue. Geez. I think this whole paranoia thing is a ploy con men use to make people think that they must really have something terribly important, since the Big Bad Wolves are out to get them for it. Better send your money now before they "get to him" and take it black! I'm not saying they're always intentionally putting it on though. It fits perfectly with the genuine delusions they often seem to have have in that regard, a perfect marriage of mental illness and practical need. Look at Jed. He's the Big Loudmouth on this stuff, the lightning rod who's out there making the credible noises people are going to listen to, and nobody bothers him for it. I've done some antigravity and free energy experiments, and nobody bothers me. Scott, Vince, Mallove, Heffner, everybody else here who has actually done some experiments. Had the MIB on your doorstep lately? I didn't think so. These people are actually doing something and publishing results, and there's plenty of them. No MIB. Then there's a small handfull of tweaks out there who NEVER produce ANY sound experimental evidence, and strangely THEY are the ones with the MIB rash. As you say, makes one wonder... - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 15:17:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA26845; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:14:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:14:54 -0800 Message-ID: <3636467E.5061 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:17:34 -0500 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: Ion Sources and Ion Beams (http://www.casetechnology.com/source.html) References: <007901be01d3$1fd17320$688f85ce default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sgc2P1.0.DZ6.jFbDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23772 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J Sparber wrote: > > Great Web Site for beam technology. I was drowned in this stuff 35 years ago > while working on Ion Implantation in Semiconductors. > Sure would've helped to have had this info then. :-) Regards, > Frederick Hey, you're right, Frederick! This site makes me want to go out to my garage and pump a vacuum on some hot filaments - if I only had a vacuum pump - sigh....... Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 15:30:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA31903; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:27:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:27:00 -0800 Message-ID: <363648E4.A8C93488 GroupZ.net> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:27:49 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? References: <199810271304_MC2-5E20-F8CA compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ReJwO.0.Oo7.3RbDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23773 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed...thank you for your thoughts...I am retired military with years of experience in computer maintenance....I also do not think it will be the "end of the world"...I think that we will muddle through...however my present thinking is that it is going to be awful rough for awhile.... a log rougher then you seem to think...hope that I am wrong.... At one time I used to use the same argument that you are making, concerning free energy and other fringe topics, and the government....felt that the government could not cover up anything, where were the whistle blowers ??.... while browsing the web one day I happened to come across a name I knew, a SMaj that I had ran across while stationed in Paris, France in the early 60's....this was a man that was hard nosed and realistic, not a BSer type, not the type to have fantasies or to make up stories to blow up his ego... he was claiming to have had access to a document that proved the government had recovered alien wreckage....because of my respect for the man I started looking more seriously at some of the fringe stuff....and was surprised that there were whistle blowers all over the place....people of credibility that were claiming the same things...that the government has had contact with aliens and that the government was trying to back engineer alien technology...at the present time, based on what I have heard from these people I am 90 percent sure that the government is in fact covering up.....remember if you want to cover something up that is going to come out, one of the best ways is to laugh at it, when it does come out...to appear not to take it seriously....I think that is what is happening....anyway this is where I am coming from...thank you again for your thoughts....Steven Opelc (MSG ret. US Army) ....... Jed Rothwell wrote: > > To: Vortex > > A large dose of off-topic paranoia seems to be creeping into the life of this > forum recently. I think it is a bunch of malarkey, and I'm sick of it. > Regarding the Y2K problem, steven opelc wrote: > > Assuming the government and corporations, come to the conclusion, > sometime in 1999, that "TheEndOfTheWorldAs WeKnowIt (TEOTWASKI), is a > good possibility. > > Assuming that the government has research on free energy, and some sort > of free energy theory/device. > > The Y2K problem is an expensive nuisance to old-line large corporations with > obsolete mainframe computers. It may cause disruptions and lawsuits, but it > will *not* cause any major problems to society. People are not idiots. They > will know to set the clock back a year if the equipment fails to work on > January 1, 2000. People often set back dates now. They buy software with a > license that expires after some period of time, and to keep it going they > reset the computer every year. I have been programming industrial applications > with mainframes, minis and microcomputers for 25 years. I have seen screwed up > programs and equipment clocks set incorrectly in locations all over the United > States. They are as common as VCR clocks that flash "12:00" forever. If > program bugs like the Y2K problem could bring down civilization, they would > have done so long ago. The upgrade to Windows 95 was probably more traumatic > than the Y2K problem will be. Faulty or missing backup media are more of a > threat than Y2K. Computer crashes and malfunctions are an ordinary occurrence > in factories and offices, and they used to be more common, yet people have > muddled through. > > This Y2K panic seems to be predicated on the notion that people are helpless > infants. The alarmists seem to think that the men and women who work with > machinery have no idea how to cope with emergencies or equipment failures. The > folks who keep the escalators running and the phone calls switching through > the network know what they are doing. People who repair snarled electric power > lines after a hurricane deal with life-and-death situations and critical > equipment failures. They will not be buffaloed by a simple clock problem. > Yesterday, stock trading on Wall Street halted for one hour because of a > computer failure. This sort of thing happens occasionally, despite the best > efforts of the backroom technicians. Please note that the world did not end > yesterday even though Wall Street was down for an hour. Wall Street could be > down for weeks and we would survive. As it happens, on a recent weekend the > Wall Street computers and the major bank transaction processing computers were > extensively tested for the Y2K problem by setting the clocks ahead and running > dummy transactions. The network passed these tests without major problems. It > never seems to occur to the Y2K alarmists that we can set the clocks ahead now > and test equipment. Of course we can! And we do. As I said, we are not idiots. > > I admit, as a sometimes-backroom technician myself, that I do not plan > to take an airplane trip on January 1, 2000. Ticketing and baggage handling > machines may be screwed up for a few hours, maybe even a few days. But > airplanes will not fall from the skies! Okay, they may smash together without > air traffic control, but they might do that at any moment today because the > air traffic control system depends on antique computers which often go on the > fritz. You want to worry about something? Worry about that. It is more > dangerous than Y2K. > > And, no, the government does not research free energy, and it is not hiding a > free energy theory or device. The government is not capable of hiding anything > for long, except blunders made by bureaucrats. > > In more tiresome alarmist nonsense, Dennis C. Lee writes: > > The fact that Stan Meyer ran screaming 'they finally poisoned me' just > before he died, indicates that if the brain condition was caused by > someone, it may have been Mr. Whitney? > > No, it does not indicate any such thing. This is nonsense, as you well know, > Mr. Lee. I told you that Meyer died of a cerebral hemorrhage, according to the > coroner's autopsy report. Meyer suffered a brief delusion that he had been > poisoned, moments before he died. You should not spread absurd rumors about > alleged homicides. You should not spread lurid tales about a personal tragedy > over the Internet. Do not feed the public's paranoid delusions. Inventors are > not suppressed by the government or by Men in Black. I am at the forefront > of anomalous energy research, and I assure you the government does not give a > damn about it, and neither do the oil companies. The patent office does not > like cold fusion, but it is easy to get around its restrictions, as CETI > demonstrated. Academic rivals caused Pons and Fleischmann great distress, but > this was the normal outcome of an academic turf war. > > Also, do you have the background on the creeps who just decided to try > to pull some very unethical fast ones on Professor Searl? > > I doubt these creeps exist. In any case, no one could hurt Professor Searl as > much as he has hurt himself. > > - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 15:45:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA06448; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:40:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:40:43 -0800 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:39:37 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810271741_MC2-5E43-8B56 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"iF5Kd3.0.ba1.wdbDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23774 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Dennis C. Lee asks: Could such a cerebral hemorrhage be caused by someone? Yes. My father caused a cerebral hemorrhage by smoking cigarettes for 50 years. You can cause one by eating country style Japanese cooking with those delicious salty pickles. First you get hypertension, then a stroke. Country folks in Japan have the highest rates of cerebral hemorrhages in the world, partly because they are so healthy in other ways they escape other diseases. All I know is that reading about many cases of free energy and anti gravity researchers getting seriously harassed makes one wonder. It should make one wonder about one's choice of reading matter. Investigate these "cases" and you will find they are all baseless rumors. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 15:55:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11781; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:50:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:50:44 -0800 Message-ID: <001301be01fc$13c7cc40$8ab4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Ion Sources and Ion Beams (http://www.casetechnology.com/source.html) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:49:31 -0700 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: <"EMpvv.0.gt2.HnbDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23775 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, October 27, 1998 3:17 PM Subject: Re: Ion Sources and Ion Beams (http://www.casetechnology.com/source.html) Frank wrote: > >Hey, you're right, Frederick! This site makes me want to go out to >my garage and pump a vacuum on some hot filaments - if I only had a >vacuum pump - sigh....... We used to pull a vacuum for sucking the pus out of boils by dipping a empty pop bottle with a bit of water in it in boiling hot water then cooling the neck of it under the pitcher-pump at the sink, then putting it over the boil. It worked! Hope this helps. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 18:09:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA10099; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:07:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:07:43 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981028011521.00e38a0c popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:15:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Oscillator Resent-Message-ID: <"ne1Aq3.0.gT2.kndDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23776 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; John Keely discovered mass chord from Chladni plate experimentation. He states that the sun emits undifferentiated light. This is light with magnetic, electric and gravitaty components. When this light interacts with a mass, the result gives the mass the properties we observe depending on how each light component was absorbed. If we put three vibrations (the mass chord) equal to the absorbed electric, magnetic, and gravity frequency proportions, in relative octaves, the undifferentiated light will be neutralized and the mass will become weightless. Depending upon the application, the mass chord can be varied to produce advantagious results. http://www.svpvril.com/ Dennis At 09:08 PM 10/27/98 GMT, you wrote: >Could you please explain where you got the term "mass chord", and what >it means? Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 18:09:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA10567; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:08:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:08:32 -0800 Message-Id: <199810280109.TAA00526 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:08:34 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Stop Children, wha's that noise Resent-Message-ID: <"6cf_q1.0._a2.WodDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23777 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >I think it was Mitchell Jones that said that "the same days of the month >fall every 28 years". > >I checked out the perpetual calendar in the >World Almanac and Book of Facts. Friday the 13th of November (the birthday >of some folks I know): > >1891, 1903, 1914, 1925, 1931, 1942, 1953, 1959, > >1970, 1981, 1987, 1998, 2009, 2015, 2026, 2037, > >2043, 2054, what's the formula? :-) > >Regards, Frederick ***{What I said was that the days of the week fall on the same calendar dates every 28 years. My reasoning was that since each leap year cycle (4 years) shifts the weekday by 5 days, it follows that 7 four-year cycles would shift the weekday by 35 days, and, since 35 is a multiple of 7, we would be back to the weekday where we started. (A four year leap cycle consists of 1461 days, which is 208 weeks 5 days. If one leap cycle begins on a Monday, for example, then the next one will begin on a Saturday.) This adjustment works only within a century, because leap days are not added in years ending in 00 unless the year is divisible by 400. Thus 1900, while divisible by 4, is not a leap year because it is not divisible by 400. For Y2K conversion purposes, the advantage of falling back to a year in which every calendar date falls on the same day of the week is that you avoid problems with subroutines that calculate day of week. Thus you calculate weekends correctly, and your paycheck computations come out right, etc. As for the series of dates which you posted, note the subset "1914, 1942, 1970, 1998." Each member of the subset is 28 years ahead of the preceding member. In those years, not merely does Nov. 13 fall on a Friday, but every date in the entire year falls on the same weekday as the corresponding date in any of the other years. If you tried to subtract 28 from 1914, however, the relationship would break down, because 1900 is not divisible by 400 and, thus, was not a leap year. In summary: if you subtract 28 from any year, you will come up with a year in which every date falls on the same weekday, provided you do not cross a century date that isn't divisible by 400. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 18:21:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA17240; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:19:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:19:21 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981028005058.00e52504 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:50:58 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Cc: jsearl tako.demon.co.uk Resent-Message-ID: <"Aw0q31.0.7D4.eydDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23778 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 11:50 AM 10/27/98 -1000, you wrote: >You said it! READING about "free energy and anti gravity researchers >getting seriously harrassed"... That's the point. Perpetuating and adding a >sense or air of credibility to that crap by reposting and churning it over >and over is the problem. And worse towards that end is embellishing it >along the way, as in turning the delusions of a paranoid con man dying of >natural causes into a possible murder clue. Geez. It is still a question that cannot be determined either way in absolute terms. Maybe things have lightened up lately. Maybe there never was a harrassment problem. Whatever one's personal reason we should continue this work. If a threat does exist, all the more reason to make full disclosure as soon as possible. If Meyer put the proper electrode thicknesses in the patent, the device would be easily duplicated successfully. There would not be a way to stop the design. Others couldn't make changes to the design and make competing products because so few know about mass chord let alone determine its' value. I bet NONE of the resonant OU electrolysis patents fully state the electrode dimensions AND fully disclose powersupply signiture. This is a challenge folks! OK. Some say there's nothing to worry about. I say there's a good chance of getting killed working on the level of Searl technology especially. I think there's a good chance of getting killed in the near future anyways, from global catastrophy. For this reason, I'm willing to jump into the fire now. Our backs are against the wall, it's now or never, this is serious business. Jed, we can find out about this issue in absolute terms. We visit (using the new Boing jets with teflon coated kapton wiring) London and either buy present investors out, buy into stock options if he fixed present relations, or find out the technology is a farce. As far as verifying the demonstration, we can get the magnets x-rayed to look for hidden wires or batteries, then put them together on the spot to check self rotation functions. Professor Searl is getting on in years so it's unreasonable to ask him to come to the US. I don't think he would let the prototype out of his sight for inspection never mind mail it. There should be facilities and equipment that you'd want to see anyways. We have a mutual aquaintance at PowerOasis who can provide references for me. I've made patent drawings for them in the past. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 19:11:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA06433; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:09:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:09:55 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. And two experimental suggestions. Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 02:11:30 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <363f7d07.71976999 24.192.1.20> References: <1.5.4.32.19981027161023.00e3d7b0 popd.ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981027161023.00e3d7b0 popd.ix.netcom.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: <"-ZC1s2.0.Na1.1ieDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23779 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:10:23 -0500, Dennis C. Lee wrote: [snip] >David Hudson commented that monatomic palladium was the source of the extra >heat creation in CF. Monatomics have very high temperature superconducting >properties. The hydrogen loading breaks monatomic palladium loose from the >electrode. The magnetic field charges the superconductor to the point of >saturation. As the superconducting field breaks down, energy is released. >I'm a little wary of the magnetic field charging aspect but it would be >interesting to see if residue formed on the palladium is monatomic. Since >monatomics are supposed to have Cooper paired electrons (photons) normal >analysis methods are ineffective. [snip] How does he explain the helium? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 19:15:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA08047; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:14:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:14:04 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981028022311.00e76c9c popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:23:11 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"Tm5kT2.0.dz1.yleDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23780 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 05:27 PM 10/27/98 -0500, you wrote: >something up that is going to come out, one of the best ways is to >laugh at it, >when it does come out...to appear not to take it seriously So when they're "laughing", what might they do to one to cover up? Is anyone sure they are in the "not take it seriously" mode now? Do the ruling extremely wealthy have similar "laughing" and "not take it seriously" modes also? Thank you for your insight. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 19:44:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA21734; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:41:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:41:35 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981028025002.00e75008 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:50:02 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. And two experimental suggestions. Resent-Message-ID: <"A-PdV.0.WJ5.k9fDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23781 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 02:11 AM 10/28/98 GMT, you wrote: >How does he explain the helium? The last sentence below. Dennis >we got a copy of Pons & >Fleischman's paper before they publicly announced. It was sent to >GE for their review. It was their electric chemical catalyst >division who works with Palladium. They handed it to me and said, >"Dave, look here. What's coming out here?" Pons and Fleischman >were putting a Palladium electrode in this Lithium Deuterate >solution. Lithium is the third element on the Periodic Table. >Lithium will dissolve into the Palladium just like Hydrogen. It's >tiny and it goes in between the metal-metal bonds, just like >Hydrogen, and it weakens the s-p bonding and little by little, >the Palladium begins to disaggregate from the other palladium >atoms and go to the high-spin state. What they have reported is >that after several days, there is this tremendous release of >energy and it's more energy than the amperage that went into the >sample. What they haven't figured out is that a superconductor >feeds on the magnetic field, not on the amperage. And so >literally, when they pull the voltage potential in it, there's >no amperage flowing. The amperage only puts the Lithium into the >Palladium. That's the only purpose of the amperage is to >electroplate the Lithium onto the Palladium and cause the metal- >metal bonding of the Palladium to break and form what Pons and >Fleischman call, and this is their scientific technical term, >"the white crud on the surface of the Palladium." And that white >crud is the superconductor. And it literally builds up energy. >Builds up energy. Kind of like you think of a capacitor building >up energy. It's flowing more and more light and it's feeding on >the magnetic potential. More and more light, more and more light, >until it reaches what's called HC2, the greatest amount of >magnetic field that superconductor can sustain. and at that >point, it collapses. > In another paper it says "We will find >that a superconducting material like Palladium is going into a >state that is much like superconductivity when it causes the cold >fusion reaction." And they're figuring this out. They're seeing >what 1 am describing, but they don't understand this, yet. >Palladium specifically can become superdeformed. Palladium will >come apart by just looking at it wrong. So certainly 'when this >flux collapse occurs, you'll get all sorts of elements that >shouldn't have been there before. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 19:49:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA23725; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:45:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:45:48 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810280109.TAA00526 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:39:45 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Stop Children, wha's that noise Resent-Message-ID: <"xjkVC1.0.Vo5.hDfDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23782 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell "Rainman" Jones says: > As for the series of dates which you posted, > note the subset "1914, 1942, 1970, > 1998." Each member of the subset is 28 > years ahead of the preceding member. In > those years, not merely does Nov. 13 fall on > a Friday, but every date in the entire year > falls on the same weekday as the > corresponding date in any of the other years. > If you tried to subtract 28 from 1914, > however, the relationship would break > down, because 1900 is not divisible by 400 > and, thus, was not a leap year. In summary: > if you subtract 28 from any year, you will > come up with a year in which every date > falls on the same weekday, provided you do > not cross a century date that isn't divisible > by 400. Remind me to NEVER argue calendars with you! ;) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 20:29:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA14448; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:26:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:26:31 -0800 Message-ID: <36368EDD.489A6FC0 GroupZ.net> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:26:21 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? References: <1.5.4.32.19981028022311.00e76c9c popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Dp-cr1.0.fX3.spfDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23783 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: My feeling on this is that they have to be real careful on what they might do...for instance in the case of retired military, and losing their retirement because of what they might say....they pretty much leave them alone...if they took away their retirement that would be proof that their is something to hide.... Their are so many kooks that have jumped on the bandwagon over the years that it is almost impossible, unless you personally know someone who you trust a bit...to dig out the truth... As far as technologies are concerned I think that "inventors desease"...along with the fact that the easiest person to fool is yourself inventors convincing themselves that they have something when they don't), takes care of most of the problem....I seriously doubt that they use strong arm methods as some claim, as it would be counter productive if they were caught.... Since most new inventors try to patent their discoveries, when they go through the patent office a stamp of "top secret" can be put on it, and the inventor either retired, with a life long pension, or pressured with threats, to co-operate... I am not a conspiracy nut, but I am sure someone in the government is going to be reading this and smiling to himself (herself?) ... Anyway, these are just some of my thoughts, I don't have any proof...just some conversations with some people I have no reason to doubt.....in fact this is the first time I have ever talked about how I feel about this.... I can only speak from the government side, as far as what the "ruling", "extremely wealthy"....have no feeling one way or the other... Thanks for asking .....steve "Dennis C. Lee" wrote: > > Hi; > > At 05:27 PM 10/27/98 -0500, you wrote: > > >something up that is going to come out, one of the best ways is to > >laugh at it, > >when it does come out...to appear not to take it seriously > > So when they're "laughing", what might they do to one to cover up? Is anyone > sure they are in the "not take it seriously" mode now? Do the ruling > extremely wealthy have similar "laughing" and "not take it seriously" modes > also? Thank you for your insight. > > Dennis > > Tall Ships > http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 20:32:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA15765; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:30:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:30:24 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. And two experimental suggestions. Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 03:32:01 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3640901a.76861105 24.192.1.20> References: <1.5.4.32.19981028025002.00e75008 popd.ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981028025002.00e75008 popd.ix.netcom.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: <"5K0rQ2.0.8s3.VtfDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23784 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:50:02 -0500, Dennis C. Lee wrote: >Hi; > >At 02:11 AM 10/28/98 GMT, you wrote: > >>How does he explain the helium? > > >The last sentence below. > >Dennis Thanks. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 21:36:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA06687; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:34:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:34:15 -0800 Message-ID: <3636A022.2B6 earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:40:02 -0700 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 CC: PsyPhyList Subject: Murray: urban myth? Telephone scam: 90# 10.27.98 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FYNLx1.0.Oe1.MpgDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23785 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oct. 27, 1998 My first impression is that this sounds like an urban myth, designed to be spread widely. Can someone check this out with a phone company? Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 21:38:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA07824; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:36:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:36:28 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981028044524.00e2e840 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:45:24 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"l_z2Z.0.1w1.RrgDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23786 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Steve; At 10:26 PM 10/27/98 -0500, you wrote: >I seriously doubt that they use strong arm methods >as some claim, as it would be counter productive if they were >caught.... What kind of people would be called to perform this type of duty? If they really thought it was life or death type of National security, wouldn't they use any means necessary? >Since most new inventors try to patent their discoveries, when >they go through the patent office a stamp of "top secret" can >be put on it, and the inventor either retired, with a life long >pension, or pressured with threats, to co-operate... Were they aware of the upcoming possibility of catastrophy? How do they know if 5/5/2000 won't happen. Einstein thought the theory made sense and was possible. Did they build the underground cities for themselves? If it did happen, too bad? Whatever the case, they won't help, they'll just hide if necessary? >I am not a conspiracy nut, but I am sure someone in the government >is going to be reading this and smiling to himself (herself?) ... Do you know of anyone in the government who would be able to process a request to release top secret technology in order to save the world? Or are they still in the laughing mode? Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 22:00:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA16601; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:57:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:57:52 -0800 Message-ID: <3636A44B.CB963B49 GroupZ.net> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:57:47 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? References: <1.5.4.32.19981028044524.00e2e840 popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GSjT62.0.I34.V9hDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23787 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I think that if things really got scary (read desperate) that there are enough in on it, who truly believe what they are doing is right (and it may be, you might agree if you had all the information they have)...these people would not let things go down the tubes, without getting info out that might save bunches of people....I am not necessarily talking about those in charge, but those under them....it may happen to late...but believe that is what might happen... seems we may be going into even more interesting times ....we shall see ....steve "Dennis C. Lee" wrote: > > Hi Steve; > > At 10:26 PM 10/27/98 -0500, you wrote: > >I seriously doubt that they use strong arm methods > >as some claim, as it would be counter productive if they were > >caught.... > > What kind of people would be called to perform this type of duty? If they > really thought it was life or death type of National security, wouldn't they > use any means necessary? > > >Since most new inventors try to patent their discoveries, when > >they go through the patent office a stamp of "top secret" can > >be put on it, and the inventor either retired, with a life long > >pension, or pressured with threats, to co-operate... > > Were they aware of the upcoming possibility of catastrophy? How do they know > if 5/5/2000 won't happen. Einstein thought the theory made sense and was > possible. Did they build the underground cities for themselves? If it did > happen, too bad? Whatever the case, they won't help, they'll just hide if > necessary? > > >I am not a conspiracy nut, but I am sure someone in the government > >is going to be reading this and smiling to himself (herself?) ... > > Do you know of anyone in the government who would be able to process a > request to release top secret technology in order to save the world? Or are > they still in the laughing mode? > > Dennis > > Tall Ships > http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 22:01:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA16950; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:58:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:58:11 -0800 Message-ID: <3636A5B0.391A earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:03:44 -0700 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: Y2K: Sallot, Saunders: Canadian Army fears civil chaos 10.27.98 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------456D5A6AD89" Resent-Message-ID: <"nDc1q2.0.Y84.n9hDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23788 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. --------------456D5A6AD89 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.theglobeandmail.com/docs/news/19981027/GlobeFront/UTWOON.html --------------456D5A6AD89 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="UTWOON.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="UTWOON.html" Content-Base: "http://www.theglobeandmail.com/docs/ne ws/19981027/GlobeFront/UTWOON.html" Army fears civil chaos from millennium bug

home
www.theglobeandmail.com
Link to us.
Other Globe sites
GLOBEfund.com
GLOBEcareers.com
GLOBEtechnology.com
bullet News
· Column One
· Front page news
· Compass
· Social studies
· Facts and
  Argume nts essay
· From the archives
bullet Report on Business
· ROB front
· ROB index
· Enterprise competition
· Columns
· Technology
· ROB Magazine
· Top 1000
· Annual Reports
· Mutual Funds
· Managing
bullet Sports
· Columns
· Sports stories
· Sports briefs
· Truth and Rumours
· Sports writers
bullet Arts & Leisure
· News
· Columns
bullet Health
bullet Focus & Books
· Focus news
· Focus columns
· Book news
· Book reviews
· Bestsellers
bullet Commentary
· Editorials
· Columns
bulletWebExtra< /a>
bulletClassifie ds
· Births and deaths
· Lives Lived
· Real estate sales
· Real estate rentals
· Automotive
· National personals
· Online personals
bulletGlobe History
bullet Customer Service
· Subscribe secure
· Reports, specials
  and fe atures
bulletWhat's new
bulletSite map
bulletSite sea rch
bulletContact us< /b>
bulletLink to The Gl obe and Mail
bulletOnline advertising
Read UP

Report on Business Magazine

download

GLOBEfund.com

GLOBEcareers.com

GLOBEtechnology.com

National Issues Forum

The Globe and Mail

Army fears civil chaos from millennium bug

Huge deployment would deal with fallout from computer failures

Tuesday, October 27, 1998
JEFF SALLOT and JOHN SAUNDERS

Ottawa and Toronto -- JEFF SALLOT
in Ottawa
JOHN SAUNDERS
in Toronto

The Canadian Armed Forces have been ordered to spend the next 14 months preparing for what could be their biggest peacetime deployment -- tens of thousands of troops spread across the country and frigates standing by in major ports -- in case computer problems in 2000 bring civil chaos.

The army is studying everything from the number of flashlights and batteries it will need if power is out for weeks to whether military air-traffic-control field equipment should be set up at civilian airports.

Logistics officers are plotting where to position vehicles, fuel, tents, cots, ration packs and other supplies. Signals officers are trying to figure out how to keep high government officials in communication if commercial systems fail.

Rules for the use of force are being drafted should soldiers have to make arrests or back up police dealing with riots and looting.

As police, fire and other civilian emergency services make their own plans, military commanders have been told that meeting the threat of the Year 2000 bug is their highest priority and will be the focus of all training from January on. Equipment purch ases that do not contribute to the effort are to be postponed.

No one knows whether a common programming flaw -- a seemingly small matter of dealing with dates beyond 1999 -- will cause cascading failure in the world's computer systems,knocking out in the dead of a Canadian winter machines that run everything from traffic lights to nuclear reactors.
It could turn out to be one of history's great anticlimaxes, but the armed forces are taking no chances.

The effort is called Operation Abacus, after an ancient Chinese bead-and-string calculator that needs no power and is not susceptible to glitches. A 24-page "warning order" was sent to military commanders, regional headquarters and reserve unit s across the country nearly two months ago.

"There is a potential for disruption of major infrastructure systems . . . that may require Canadian Forces support to civil authorities," the order begins. The commanders have been given until mid-November to come up with first drafts of plans that will be refined right up to Jan. 1, 2000.

The success of the operation depends on "public confidence in the government's ability to manage and provide leadership in dealing with the year 2000 problem," the order says.

Navy captains have been told their ships may have to be docked to serve as garrisons, power plants, field hospitals and soup kitchens.

On land, the official worst-case scenario would have 32,000 soldiers, including volunteer reservists, living and working in the field.

So far, the army says it has sought no cabinet order pressing weekend warriors into service. Rumours in reserve circles suggest the field force could reach more than 60,000, including many non-volunteers, if such an order were issued.

Such talk was not diminished by an article this month on the Year 2000 effort in the Maple Leaf, an official army magazine. Lieutenant-General Ray Crabbe, a just-retired deputy chief of defence staff, said soldiers need not worry about missing their 19 99 Christmas holidays.

"As far as Christmas goes, I don't think you could deploy 60,000 troops away from their homes at Christmas, especially from a morale point of view," he was quoted as saying. "I'm not sure you can say the same thing for New Year's Eve."
Almost everyone knows about the problem by now.

Traditionally, most computers recorded years in two digits: "98" for 1998, "99" for 1999 and so on. When "00" arrives, some computers may think it is 1900 or some other base year.

Some may be uncertain of the year or even the day of the week. (Dec. 31, 1999, is a Friday; Jan. 1, 1900, was a Monday. That does not compute.) They may act strangely or shut down, paralyzing complex systems.

Or maybe not. The Year 2000 problem (Y2K for short) has been called both a death sentence for industrial civilization and a fraud perpetrated by computer types.

Whatever it is, billions of dollars and millions of hours of work will have been lavished on it before the end of next year. Greying, out-of-fashion mainframe programmers have found themselves commanding wages as high as $1,000 a day, at least temporar ily, in the rush to fix countless lines of code.
If the troops are out in the cold, they will have plenty of company. Police forces have begun warning their staffs not to plan vacations around the turn of the year.

The RCMP's 16,000 officers have been told to book no time off from Dec. 27, 1999, to March 15, 2000, at least until the scope of the Y2K problem becomes clearer.

Toronto's 5,000 police officers have been given no-go dates of Dec. 27, 1999, to Jan. 9, 2000, and Vancouver's 1,150 officers have been given Dec. 29, 1999, to Jan. 14, 2000. Calgary police are considering the same dates as the RCMP, although no order has gone out.

Montreal's fire department says there will be a Y2K vacation ban but has announced no dates. The Toronto department has no special ban but says December and January have customarily been no-leave months because of extra fires associated with candles, f ireplaces and space heaters, among other things.

News | Sports | The Arts | Commentary | Focus & Books | Report on Business

Back to the top of the page

We welcome your comments.
Copyright © 1998, The Globe and Mail Company
All rights reserved.
--------------456D5A6AD89-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 22:06:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA18707; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:03:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:03:36 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 05:05:19 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3636a5df.679551 24.192.1.20> References: <1.5.4.32.19981028044524.00e2e840 popd.ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981028044524.00e2e840 popd.ix.netcom.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: <"wCHaA3.0.Ca4.uEhDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23789 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:45:24 -0500, Dennis C. Lee wrote: [snip] >Do you know of anyone in the government who would be able to process a >request to release top secret technology in order to save the world? Or are >they still in the laughing mode? [snip] If they were capable of doing anything, they would have done it by now. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 22:30:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA26566; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:26:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:26:23 -0800 Message-ID: <3636AAEE.5BF7C641 GroupZ.net> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:26:06 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? References: <1.5.4.32.19981028044524.00e2e840 popd.ix.netcom.com> <3636a5df.679551@24.192.1.20> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1qH3q2.0.jU6.DahDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23790 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Why?? Up until now the government is still pretty much in denial that this could be a real problem....and those who think it could be, do not want to panic people, afraid they might create a self fulfilling prophesy ....steve Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:45:24 -0500, Dennis C. Lee wrote: > [snip] > >Do you know of anyone in the government who would be able to process a > >request to release top secret technology in order to save the world? Or are > >they still in the laughing mode? > [snip] > If they were capable of doing anything, they would have done it by > now. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 23:25:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA22513; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:24:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:24:23 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981028063319.00e6c5a8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 01:33:19 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. And two experimental suggestions. Resent-Message-ID: <"pbAP52.0.hV5.cQiDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23791 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; This is only part of it. I'll scan the rest and send it out in the morning. Gotta crash. Dennis At 03:32 AM 10/28/98 GMT, you wrote: >Thanks. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Oct 27 23:34:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA24574; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:33:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:33:27 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 06:35:06 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3638ba92.5983483 24.192.1.20> References: <1.5.4.32.19981028044524.00e2e840 popd.ix.netcom.com> <3636a5df.679551@24.192.1.20> <3636AAEE.5BF7C641@GroupZ.net> In-Reply-To: <3636AAEE.5BF7C641 GroupZ.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: <"wkKjw.0.p_5.7ZiDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23792 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:26:06 -0500, sno wrote: >Why?? Up until now the government is still pretty much in denial >that this could be a real problem....and those who think it could >be, do not want to panic people, afraid they might create a self >fulfilling prophesy ....steve If they are preparing "bomb shelters", then they have already acknowledged that it could be a problem. They don't have to tell anyone about it, in order to do something to avert it, if they had the technology that you suppose. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 00:10:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA01555; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:07:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:07:56 -0800 Message-ID: <008901be0241$8c41b9c0$8ab4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" , Subject: Re: Self-Cleaning Nuclear Fission in D2O Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:06:49 -0700 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: <"KrGaZ1.0.DO.R3jDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23793 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Going over the figures for a Homogeneous Fission Reactor using about 30 grams of Uranyl Sulfate/kilogram of D2O in solution,the 6-8 Mev photons from the neutron absorption of the fissionable material should provide the 2.23 Mev necessary to remove some of the neutrons from the deuterium plus the 2-3 neutrons from the fission, the two 80 Mev fission fragments should also knock some neutrons from the deuterium, thus providing enough neutrons for appreciable cleanup of the radioactive fission fragments which should also generate 3-5 Mev photons when they absorb a neutron thus generating more photoneutrons, etc. If it don't blow up. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 00:22:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA06749; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:21:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:21:39 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <3636B8D0.3E6A ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:25:20 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: peter itim.org.soroscj.ro, Russ George , Akira Kawasaki , little@eden.com Subject: Re: Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. And two experimental suggestions. References: <199810242043.QAA09908 mercury.mv.net> <3.0.1.32.19981027094154.0071b61c@mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"u2IVe3.0.Ef1.IGjDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23794 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 27, 1998 Thanking Scott, he wrote: > You should talk to Ben Bush. This issue is one of his pet theories. Ben F. Bush? Of Universaity of Texas, Chemistry Dept.? Must of happened most recently. I will look him up. However, in what I posted, I am suggesting experiments to be undertaken to (possibly) resolve/answer replication difficulties, not mull over theories. Also to see what effects are caused by introduction of slow neutrons to a loaded palladium sample rather than waiting for a reaction to occur by the method of high loading of deuterium and wishing. >He has written a preliminary paper that ties together some isotopic >analysis on Pd cathodes that showed excess heat and he makes a stab at >identifying which Pd isotopes are "active". 'Stabbing' sounds too much like a guessing game yet. I'd like to see something more specific directed toward isotopic studies. Separate isotope studies if possible. Unfortunately, my garage resources hinders my own attempts at this so I can only persuade by a suggestion to this end to inclined people endowed with institutional laboratories. > I note that his ICCF-7 paper says nothing about this. I also have found nothing in ICCF-4, 5 & 6 abstracts that points to a 'pet' theory specific to fingering pd isotopes or results. With his permission, I'd like to see that preliminary paper if possible, if you have it in hand. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 01:06:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA16181; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 01:05:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 01:05:43 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:13:21 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"ZL67f1.0.ly3.dvjDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23795 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:50 AM 10/27/98, Rick Monteverde wrote: [snip] > Scott, Vince, Mallove, Heffner, >everybody else here who has actually done some experiments. Had the MIB on >your doorstep lately? I didn't think so. Negative here. It's a loonnnng way to my doorstep to check up on someone who has been getting such unfavorable results. 8^) I will also say that if any of my experiments of late had been a bit more successful there would have been an incredibly good reason for the MIB to come a knocking. I suppose if it ever comes time for test flights I'll have a bit more trouble. ;^))) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 01:08:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA16660; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 01:07:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 01:07:07 -0800 Message-Id: <199810280808.TAA03052 tig.com.au> From: "NeXuS" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Stop Children, wha's that noise Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:04:36 +1100 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: <"dtfyV2.0.044.wwjDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23796 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: does it start with 1892? well anyway the diff between all of them is apart from 1891 is 11,11,6....6,11,11 anyone notice =) ---------- > > 1891, 1903, 1914, 1925, 1931, 1942, 1953, 1959, > > 1970, 1981, 1987, 1998, 2009, 2015, 2026, 2037, > > 2043, 2054, what's the formula? :-) > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 01:26:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA22700; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 01:26:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 01:26:04 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:33:44 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. And two experimental suggestions. Resent-Message-ID: <"GCDzT.0.cY5.hCkDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23797 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:50 PM 10/27/98, Dennis C. Lee wrote: [snip] >>Palladium will >>come apart by just looking at it wrong. So certainly 'when this >>flux collapse occurs, you'll get all sorts of elements that >>shouldn't have been there before. There is the small matter of the unreleased binding energy - which should be cleary visible when released in the form of gammas or energetic particles. Where does this energy go? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 05:39:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA20648; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 05:37:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 05:37:48 -0800 Message-ID: <00a501be0277$c5b09380$8ab4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" , Subject: Re: Benchtop Thorium-D2O Breeder? Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 06:34:51 -0700 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: <"5sDEY1.0.S25.iunDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23798 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex 1, ThO2 + Hot H2SO4 ---> Thorium Sulfate (soluble in D2O). 2, Th232 + n ---> U233 + 7.14 Mev Gamma 3, 7.14 Mev Gamma + D ---> H + neutrons 4, U233 + n ---> 2 fragments + 80 Mev ea. + 2.5 neutrons 5, 2 80 Mev Fission Fragments Colliding with D ---> H + neutrons 6, Fission Fragments + neutrons ---> new isotopes + 9.9 Mev gammas 7, 9.9 Mev gammas + D ---> H + neutrons. 8, neutrons + new isotopes ---> newer isotopes + 9.9 Mev gammas 9, gammas + D ---> H + neutrons and so on, if the mix and collision cross sections are correct. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 06:09:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA00995; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 06:07:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 06:07:28 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981028140722.008ffee8 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: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:07:22 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"i57EQ1.0.LF.VKoDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23799 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 11:50 AM 10/27/98, Rick Monteverde wrote: >[snip] >> Scott, Vince, Mallove, Heffner, >>everybody else here who has actually done some experiments. Had the MIB on >>your doorstep lately? I didn't think so. > I'm not sure. I live out in the country about 20 miles from the UPS center. In a relatively short time after I received my liter of heavy water a man dressed in a business suit accompanied the UPS driver on a delivery of other items to me. I sometimes wondered about that. Was he FBI? Why would a second passenger who has nowhere to sit except on a package or the floor ride around the whole country all day long if he were an UPS employee checking on the route? I surmised he parked his car nearby and when UPS came (by prior arrangement) to deliver the packages he hoppped on and came into our property (We live about 1000 ft off a little travelled gravel road.) and checked me out. No checking since then. Am I paranoid? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 07:14:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA25397; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:12:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:12:41 -0800 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 10:09:07 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810281011_MC2-5E3E-2AAA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"1YA8N.0.jC6.eHpDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23800 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Michel Jones made some interesting comments about the year 2000 problem and utility billing. There are approaches to dealing with this problem which involve setting clocks back, but they also require setting the data back--and setting the data back requires a systems analysis and programming effort that is far too large to be accomplished overnight by a company that waits until midnight on Dec. 31, 1999 before addressing the problem. Any company that waits until December 31, 1999 will be out of business within a few months. I was not suggesting that no steps should be taken or will be taken before then, but that a few undetected problems left over are not likely to cause serious problems. If, for example, an electrical utility lies to its computer, telling it that the date is Jan. 1, 1999 rather than Jan. 1, 2000, and its data base contains records of usage which still are tagged with correct dates, then when the utility next does electrical billing, its system will use Dec. 1998 usage data to compute billing . . . This is indeed the kind of application where I would expect problems. I have no experience with electrical utility billing, but I have worked on water, sewage and telephone utility accounting and billing. Here are some observations about these systems. We are talking about billing computers, not the control programs for power generators. This is a crucial distinction. The year 2000 problem is hardly likely to interrupt power generation, because the people who program equipment, such as pumps and transformers, know that a failure would be catastrophic. They know that clocks are frequently set incorrectly and clocks go haywire. No sane engineer would tell the program to stop operations and shut down a critical cooling pump just because a clock error has been detected. The Three Mile Island nuclear plant was a textbook example of a poorly designed computer control system. The engineers were to blame for putting the pump error light where operators could not see it, but I do not think any engineer would cause a catastrophe like that by shutting down the pump for a trivial reason. I frequently read about the following scenario: on the morning of January 1, an escalator will not work because the control program thinks maintenance has not been performed for 100 years. I cannot imagine an engineer programming it this way. What if the clock goes haywire in the middle of a business day and stops the elevators? We are talking about obsolete equipment with notoriously unreliable clocks. Some did not have battery backup, and they would go wrong with every power fluctuation. I do not think elevators will stop on January 1. At most, an alarm light or buzzer will be set, or an error message will be displayed on an LCD control panel. Consider utility billing. Water and power meters, where the data originates, do not generally record the date and time. They record only usage. Date and time are added when the meters are polled. These dates and times may be incorrect. Or the accounting program that deals with them may treat them incorrectly. Either problem can be corrected by patching the data and re-running the billing program. The information is always in there somewhere, and it can always be rescued. I have done it hundreds of times! In the worst-case scenario, the meters would have to be polled again with the correct date added this time. The previous month's bills would be voided and all customers re-billed. The utility companies can afford to wait a month or two for their money while the accounting department straightens out the mess. I am not saying this would be easy or cheap, but it is the sort of problem people are used to dealing with. . . . and will bill the utility's customers based on their Dec. 1998 usage rather than on their Dec. 1999 usage. In other words, the result will be worse than if the system didn't work at all. (It would be better to not bill people than to send out bills that will *all* be incorrect!) You may be sure the bills would never go out. We're talking about obsolete billing computers designed twenty or thirty years ago, before people were aware of the year 2000 problem. These computers suffer constant problems, and the operators who tend to them are used to seeing the bills come out incorrectly. Bottom line: your Panglossian pronouncements about the world we live in are wildly off the mark, and any IT managers who use such excuses to justify ignoring the Y2K problem are courting disaster. This is the first time in my life I've been accused of being an optimist regarding computer bugs. You are grossly distorting what I said. I never suggested that Y2K problems should be ignored! When the night shift experienced problems with those billing computers twenty years ago, I was the guy they rousted out of bed at 3 a.m. I am hardly likely to be sanguine about computer screw-ups that cost the customer a thousand dollars per hour. I wrote, "people often set back dates now. They buy software with a license that expires after some period of time, and to keep it going they reset the computer every year." Jones responded: You are talking about people who use home computers for entertainment, not about business applications, where large data bases have to be processed on a monthly or weekly basis . . . No, I'm talking about customers running business applications. I have no experience with the home computer market. Any business that delays confronting Y2K, based on the notion that this is a trivial problem, is probably going to fail. I would say it will definitely fail. And if bright and knowledgeable people such as yourself are treating it as trivial . . . I never did. I find you often exaggerate what people say here, and you put in their mouths as you have done here. This is annoying and rude. I think you should apologize. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 07:29:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA29733; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:26:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:26:19 -0800 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: <36373788.9DAC6929 css.mot.com> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:26:00 -0600 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Oscillator References: <1.5.4.32.19981028011521.00e38a0c popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3_XRR.0.UG7.QUpDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23801 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dennis C. Lee wrote: > http://www.svpvril.com/ Great link Dennis! I can see my paycheck disappearing even faster now.... grrrrr. 8^) Thanks for posting it. If you have any others like it, please let me know. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 07:32:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA31991; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:30:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:30:20 -0800 Message-ID: <363738C5.1594 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 10:31:17 -0500 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: Stop children, what's that sound? References: <1.5.4.32.19981028140722.008ffee8 freeway.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lfycR.0.jp7.CYpDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23802 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edwin Strojny wrote: > (We live about 1000 ft off a little travelled gravel > road.) and checked me out. No checking since then. Am I paranoid? No, Ed, just a country bumpkin - like me! This "suit" was probably from the US Dept. of Agriculture - just wanted to see if you were heavy watering your cows to increase market weight? :-) (I've been reading too many of Fred Sparber's posts!) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 08:38:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA26003; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:35:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:35:09 -0800 Message-ID: <36374768.53EA71CB GroupZ.net> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:33:44 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing References: <199810281011_MC2-5E3E-2AAA compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"p-fPG.0.5M6.yUqDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23803 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed...its not just billing...take a look here this guy is not selling anything.... http://agitator.dynip.com/agitator/Generator/y2ktrainwreck.htm steve Jed Rothwell wrote: > > To: Vortex > > Michel Jones made some interesting comments about the year 2000 problem and > utility billing. > > There are approaches to dealing with this problem which involve setting > clocks back, but they also require setting the data back--and setting > the data back requires a systems analysis and programming effort that is > far too large to be accomplished overnight by a company that waits until > midnight on Dec. 31, 1999 before addressing the problem. > > Any company that waits until December 31, 1999 will be out of business within > a few months. I was not suggesting that no steps should be taken or will be > taken before then, but that a few undetected problems left over are not likely > to cause serious problems. > > If, for example, an electrical utility lies to its computer, telling it > that the date is Jan. 1, 1999 rather than Jan. 1, 2000, and its data > base contains records of usage which still are tagged with correct > dates, then when the utility next does electrical billing, its system > will use Dec. 1998 usage data to compute billing . . . > > This is indeed the kind of application where I would expect problems. I have > no experience with electrical utility billing, but I have worked on water, > sewage and telephone utility accounting and billing. Here are some > observations about these systems. > > We are talking about billing computers, not the control programs for power > generators. This is a crucial distinction. The year 2000 problem is hardly > likely to interrupt power generation, because the people who program > equipment, such as pumps and transformers, know that a failure would be > catastrophic. They know that clocks are frequently set incorrectly and clocks > go haywire. No sane engineer would tell the program to stop operations and > shut down a critical cooling pump just because a clock error has been > detected. The Three Mile Island nuclear plant was a textbook example of a > poorly designed computer control system. The engineers were to blame for > putting the pump error light where operators could not see it, but I do not > think any engineer would cause a catastrophe like that by shutting down the > pump for a trivial reason. I frequently read about the following scenario: on > the morning of January 1, an escalator will not work because the control > program thinks maintenance has not been performed for 100 years. I cannot > imagine an engineer programming it this way. What if the clock goes haywire in > the middle of a business day and stops the elevators? We are talking about > obsolete equipment with notoriously unreliable clocks. Some did not have > battery backup, and they would go wrong with every power fluctuation. I do not > think elevators will stop on January 1. At most, an alarm light or buzzer will > be set, or an error message will be displayed on an LCD control panel. > > Consider utility billing. Water and power meters, where the data originates, > do not generally record the date and time. They record only usage. Date and > time are added when the meters are polled. These dates and times may be > incorrect. Or the accounting program that deals with them may treat them > incorrectly. Either problem can be corrected by patching the data and > re-running the billing program. The information is always in there somewhere, > and it can always be rescued. I have done it hundreds of times! In the > worst-case scenario, the meters would have to be polled again with the correct > date added this time. The previous month's bills would be voided and all > customers re-billed. The utility companies can afford to wait a month or two > for their money while the accounting department straightens out the mess. I am > not saying this would be easy or cheap, but it is the sort of problem people > are used to dealing with. > > . . . and will bill the utility's customers based on their Dec. 1998 > usage rather than on their Dec. 1999 usage. In other words, the result > will be worse than if the system didn't work at all. (It would be better > to not bill people than to send out bills that will *all* be incorrect!) > > You may be sure the bills would never go out. We're talking about obsolete > billing computers designed twenty or thirty years ago, before people were > aware of the year 2000 problem. These computers suffer constant problems, and > the operators who tend to them are used to seeing the bills come out > incorrectly. > > Bottom line: your Panglossian pronouncements about the world we live in > are wildly off the mark, and any IT managers who use such excuses to > justify ignoring the Y2K problem are courting disaster. > > This is the first time in my life I've been accused of being an optimist > regarding computer bugs. You are grossly distorting what I said. I never > suggested that Y2K problems should be ignored! When the night shift > experienced problems with those billing computers twenty years ago, I was the > guy they rousted out of bed at 3 a.m. I am hardly likely to be sanguine about > computer screw-ups that cost the customer a thousand dollars per hour. > > I wrote, "people often set back dates now. They buy software with a license > that expires after some period of time, and to keep it going they reset the > computer every year." Jones responded: > > You are talking about people who use home computers for entertainment, > not about business applications, where large data bases have to be > processed on a monthly or weekly basis . . . > > No, I'm talking about customers running business applications. I have no > experience with the home computer market. > > Any business that delays confronting Y2K, based on the notion that this > is a trivial problem, is probably going to fail. > > I would say it will definitely fail. > > And if bright and knowledgeable people such as yourself are treating it > as trivial . . . > > I never did. I find you often exaggerate what people say here, and you put in > their mouths as you have done here. This is annoying and rude. I think you > should apologize. > > - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 08:39:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA26523; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:36:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:36:04 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:41:56 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"Pz_Db1.0.GU6.pVqDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23804 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:07 AM 10/28/98, Edwin Strojny wrote: >>At 11:50 AM 10/27/98, Rick Monteverde wrote: >>[snip] >>> Scott, Vince, Mallove, Heffner, >>>everybody else here who has actually done some experiments. Had the MIB on >>>your doorstep lately? I didn't think so. >> > >I'm not sure. I live out in the country about 20 miles from the UPS center. >In a relatively short time after I received my liter of heavy water a man >dressed in a business suit accompanied the UPS driver on a delivery of other >items to me. I sometimes wondered about that. Was he FBI? Why would a >second passenger who has nowhere to sit except on a package or the floor >ride around the whole country all day long if he were an UPS employee >checking on the route? I surmised he parked his car nearby and when UPS >came (by prior arrangement) to deliver the packages he hoppped on and came >into our property (We live about 1000 ft off a little travelled gravel >road.) and checked me out. No checking since then. Am I paranoid? > >Ed Strojny Interesting. A similar thing happened to me. I think there is a good explanation though, at least one was given to me. A UPS delivery of a new Pentium II processor chip came a couple days late and was accompanied by a supervisor. The driver was a new employee and the supervisor was along as a trainer. I found this out because the CPU was purchased for my son at Carnegie Mellon Univ., but the shipper, for security reasons, would not bill to an Alaskan address and ship to a Pittsbugh address. When the package arrived I had to reship and in conversation while filling out the forms it was revealed, mostly due to the amount of questions to the supervisor, that the driver was new in his job and that the supervisor was in the truck. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 08:53:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA01098; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:52:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:52:18 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:58:09 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Benchtop Thorium-D2O Breeder? Resent-Message-ID: <"fEt-11.0.xG.1lqDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23805 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:34 AM 10/28/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >1, ThO2 + Hot H2SO4 ---> Thorium Sulfate (soluble in D2O). > >2, Th232 + n ---> U233 + 7.14 Mev Gamma > >3, 7.14 Mev Gamma + D ---> H + neutrons > >4, U233 + n ---> 2 fragments + 80 Mev ea. + 2.5 neutrons > >5, 2 80 Mev Fission Fragments Colliding with D ---> H + neutrons > >6, Fission Fragments + neutrons ---> new isotopes + 9.9 Mev gammas > >7, 9.9 Mev gammas + D ---> H + neutrons. > >8, neutrons + new isotopes ---> newer isotopes + 9.9 Mev gammas > >9, gammas + D ---> H + neutrons > >and so on, if the mix and collision cross sections are correct. > >Regards, Frederick Isn't the problem with this idea the fact that the gamma interaction is much more likely to be with electrons? There is only 1 nucleus to an atom but there are A electrons. D2O contains 3 nucleii but 18 electrons. The gamma energy is almost entirely transferred to electrons, true? The same can then be said for the electron kinetic energy. It is rapidly diluted to below the critical 1.5 MeV level by electron-electron interaction and x-ray emission. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 09:26:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17413; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:24:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:24:43 -0800 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:21:31 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: The mysterious PHONOGRAPH! Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810281223_MC2-5E56-6448 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"o2pmU3.0.yF4.QDrDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23806 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex . . . I mean to say. It's that !$# voice input! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 09:26:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17461; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:24:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:24:52 -0800 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:20:06 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: The mysterious photograph! Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810281223_MC2-5E56-6446 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"i2Ra73.0.kG4.ZDrDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23807 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex This is somewhat off topic, but it is cute. Here are two paragraphs from the book "Thomas A. Edison, a streak of luck," Robert Conot, (Da Capo Press) p. 107. This shows how effective a proper demonstration of an o-u device would be. It would convince the establishment and public, even if the public did not understand. . . . Edison and Batchelor went to New York to test the latest telephones, and to deposit one of the two existing phonographs on the desk of the editor of the Scientific American. (The other went to the patent office. ) Edison, the editor reported to his readers, "turned a crank, and the machine inquired as to our health, asked how we liked the phonograph, informed us that *it* was very well, and bid us a cordial good night." The dozen persons in the office flocked to the desk. Their amazement could not have been greater had Edison unveiled Aladdin's lamp. Word spread through the building, and people packed themselves into the office until the editor feared the floor would collapse. Over and over they demanded that Edison play the phonograph for them. The principle involved was beyond the comprehension of almost everyone, as indicated by Puck, the American humor magazine. "You do not know what the Phonograph is? Well, Puck will tell you. A quadrupled, double-driving, osculatory cog-wheel, gyrating in a fluted pedestal by the positive and negative current from a cautery voltaic battery strikes the atmospheric tympanic diaphragm. The rheotone depending on the vibratory armature of the secondary coil produces dynamic Faradization. Ahem!" - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 10:15:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA01904; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 10:12:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 10:12:07 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981028181149.00906470 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: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:11:49 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"IfpHg.0.PT.rvrDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23808 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:41 AM 10/28/98 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 9:07 AM 10/28/98, Edwin Strojny wrote: >>>At 11:50 AM 10/27/98, Rick Monteverde wrote: >>>[snip] >>>> Scott, Vince, Mallove, Heffner, >>>>everybody else here who has actually done some experiments. Had the MIB on >>>>your doorstep lately? I didn't think so. >>> >> >>road.) and checked me out. No checking since then. Am I paranoid? >> >>Ed Strojny > >Interesting. A similar thing happened to me. I think there is a good >explanation though, at least one was given to me. A UPS delivery of a new >Pentium II processor chip came a couple days late and was accompanied by a >supervisor. The driver was a new employee and the supervisor was along as >a trainer. >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > In my case, the driver has had this route for several years. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 11:27:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA02297; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:25:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:25:19 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981028142549.00d18ca0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:25:49 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? In-Reply-To: <199810271304_MC2-5E20-F8CA compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"3l5423.0.pZ.V-sDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23809 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:00 PM 10/27/98 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: > I admit, as a sometimes-backroom technician myself, that I do not plan >to take an airplane trip on January 1, 2000. Ticketing and baggage handling >machines may be screwed up for a few hours, maybe even a few days. But >airplanes will not fall from the skies! Okay, they may smash together without >air traffic control, but they might do that at any moment today because the >air traffic control system depends on antique computers which often go on the >fritz. You want to worry about something? Worry about that. It is more >dangerous than Y2K. Include August 22, 1999 in your non-travel plans. That is when the clocks in the GPS satellites rolls over. This should not directly affect commercial flights, but we suspect that there are a number of General Aviation planes that will be affected, especially small private aircraft. 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 Oct 28 11:45:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA10206; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:43:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:43:01 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <3637662F.C7A ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 10:45:03 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: A cheaper 3rd suggestion with an experiment protocol. Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable. References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FuuSg3.0.LV2.5FtDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23810 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 28, 1998 Vortex, My suggestions did not grow out of zero. It grows out of interactions such we are having now to nuture hints picked up here and there. It's a continuing basis of education I think. Thank you. I find the Vortex useful. It is certainly 'democratic' in the quality of the posts with the least denominator (notice I left out 'common') having equal voice in things to irritation though, many times. oh well. I thought furthur on the subject, reflecting on Scott's reference about Bush. I see he ran "after the effect" analysis. Similar to Tom Passell's effort, long not recognized enough (I realize now). I would give reference to Jed to look up Tom Passell's work when he asked what became of the used electrodes of past experiments. Bush's analysis are fine in giving him some indications of isotope specific effects on a pd-d experiment. What I find missing then is a protocol, which should have been done in hindsight, of all the experiments: To have examined the palladium samples for isotopic distribution PRIOR to running a pd-d experiment. Also afterwards. Then my suggestions on isotope specificity would not have been needed. Or the puzzle continue on erratic replications. The second suggestion was to introduce slow neutrons from external sources rather than wait for neutrons to happen within a high loaded Pd lattice. I believe, in this case, you do not have to load it high to observe or expect effects. And you can use your regular supply of "isotopically alloyed" pure palladium samples, as long as the prior and after protocol of isotopic analysis has been made. This is in essence, a third, cheaper suggestion to finding out about nuclear isotopic effects in loaded palladium when it works. -AK- Off Topic: What Planck did not mention was that as new replaces old, he did not pass jugement on whether the old was outmoded or that the new was more valid. So we may be cursed to repeat the past in ignorance if the new is inflexibly rigid as the old. I was amused when the comment was made that "I am not so open minded that my brain falls out". On thinking, it occurred to me that this statement was rather egotisticle (or should the spelling have been egotesticle?) :) What if you did open your mind and and nothing fell out? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 11:54:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA16027; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:50:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:50:29 -0800 Message-Id: <199810281949.OAA18475 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: "Vortex" Subject: Important Safety Tip Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:51:37 -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: <"EqsJI3.0.Kw3.4MtDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23811 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vortexians, We learned something from Les Case that could be a lifesaver. It is rather amazing that teflon is used as much as it is on cookware because the stuff forms a compound that he mentioned, with at least 7 syllables, that I cannot recall, that is deadly and causes a condition exactly like pneumonia that kills. The PTFE has to get to around 550C (red hot) to produce this gas. He said its in the literature. He also said that at a lower temperature, it produces a chemical that produces flu-like symptoms. At Dupont, where his departed wife worked, they would fire anyone with smoking products on their person because a small amount of PTFE on a cigarette could be fatal. She wouldn't allow any teflon cookware in the house. It seems to me that a warning label should be on teflon tape and cookware. A plumber could overheat PTFE where a sweated joint is joined to a threaded joint. And what coroner would think anything of a man who died of pneumonia? Ed Wall NERL From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 11:57:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17954; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:53:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:53:21 -0800 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:49:26 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810281452_MC2-5E5E-A207 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"pwR1j2.0.IO4.mOtDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23812 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Note to Steve: please refrain from copying entire messages when responding. See rule 4: 4. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE: when you reply to a message DON'T include the ENTIRE message in your reply. Always edit it a bit and delete something . . . Steve says the problem at utilities "is not just billing." Yes, but that's the part I know about, and as the part Michel Jones mentioned. Steve suggests we look at: http://agitator.dynip.com/agitator/Generator/y2ktrainwreck.htm Here are two harrowing paragraphs from the document: My buddy and I soon found out that all of those racks and racks of industrial computers are running single board pc's based on Intel 286's! They're controlled by laptops that are circa 1990 and long since extinct. Every single thing that happened in that plant was date and time stamped. Now, IF the clocks in that system can be cranked back, and IF those boards have their bios chips in sockets, and IF they even know how to write an upgrade since, this is a 286 we're talking about here (and they probably just bought the board from somebody else anyway), and IF a bios upgrade exists, and IF those boards aren't proprietary and are interchangeable with commercial, off-the-shelf replacements, and IF and IF and IF. It was obvious that this guy hadn't heard that they were going to be replacing/upgrading every computer card in the house and he certainly was in a position to hear about it since he's the guy doing the monitor and control of the joint. This probably would require turning off the entire plant (10% of the power in an entire region of the country) to do it - you would think he would have heard about something like that... It sounds pretty bad, but maybe it isn't quite as awful as he makes out. Yes, everything is date and time stamped. Suppose the date and time stamps were all 10 years wrong, having been set back to 1990. They will have to patch the main program that monitors the output from these 286s, and have it add 10 years. Yes, of course the clocks in that system can be "cranked back." (I assume this means set back.) The clocks must have been changed since 1990, because clocks of that vintage depended upon batteries which wear out periodically. If they must all be set back to 1990 and this would require that the plant be shut down, it should be done in stages over the next year during routine shutdown for maintenance. The author of says "this probably would require turning off the entire plant." Yes, but the plant will be turned off many times, in stages or possibly all at once. I believe most electric plants operate 60 to 70 percent of the time. My point is that many people learn to make do with obsolete, problematic equipment. This is a tough problem, but people who work at power plants are used to dealing with tough problems. Suppose the 286 computers fail to roll over to the year 2000. They will slip back to 1986, I believe. So what? All date stamp records will come out with 1986 dates. It would cause havoc in the record keeping, and an administrative nightmare, but it's hard to imagine how this would adversely affect the equipment itself. The plant worked in 1986 and I do not see why it will not continue working even though the equipment thinks time has slipped backward 14 years. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 12:45:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07684; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:40:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:40:44 -0800 Message-ID: <36378101.DB41C1B8 GroupZ.net> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:39:29 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing References: <199810281452_MC2-5E5E-A207 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_9rPm1.0.-t1.B5uDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23813 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed, thanks for reminding me about deleting....I just hope you are right about y2k...steve Jed Rothwell wrote: > > To: Vortex > > Note to Steve: please refrain from copying entire messages when responding. > See rule 4: > > Steve says the problem at utilities "is not just billing." Yes, but that's the > part I know about, and as the part Michel Jones mentioned. Steve suggests we > look at: > > http://agitator.dynip.com/agitator/Generator/y2ktrainwreck.htm > > Here are two harrowing paragraphs from the document: > > My buddy and I soon found out that all of those racks and racks of > industrial computers are running single board pc's based on Intel 286's! > They're controlled by laptops that are circa 1990 and long since > extinct. > > It sounds pretty bad, but maybe it isn't quite as awful as he makes out. Yes, > everything is date and time stamped. Suppose the date and time stamps were all > 10 years wrong, having been set back to 1990. They will have to patch the main > program that monitors the output from these 286s, and have it add 10 years. > Yes, of course the clocks in that system can be "cranked back." (I assume this > means set back.) The clocks must have been changed since 1990, because clocks > of that vintage depended upon batteries which wear out periodically. If they > must all be set back to 1990 and this would require that the plant be shut > down, it should be done in stages over the next year during routine shutdown > for maintenance. The author of says "this probably would require turning off > the entire plant." Yes, but the plant will be turned off many times, in > stages or possibly all at once. I believe most electric plants operate 60 > to 70 percent of the time. > > My point is that many people learn to make do with obsolete, problematic > equipment. This is a tough problem, but people who work at power plants are > used to dealing with tough problems. Suppose the 286 computers fail to roll > over to the year 2000. They will slip back to 1986, I believe. So what? All > date stamp records will come out with 1986 dates. It would cause havoc in the > record keeping, and an administrative nightmare, but it's hard to imagine how > this would adversely affect the equipment itself. The plant worked in 1986 and > I do not see why it will not continue working even though the equipment thinks > time has slipped backward 14 years. > > - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 13:21:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23088; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:17:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:17:30 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981028140722.008ffee8 freeway.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:14:19 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"wDExK2.0.Ve5.eduDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23814 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ed - > Am I paranoid? Probably. But they may have been checking you out all the same. A while back I bought a 6" length of 2" pipe with the end caps at the local hardware store for Hodowanec and capacitor experiment shielding. I never noticed any odd activity at the time or after, but I think they probably should pass along sales like that for someone to check out. As a matter of fact I think they are doing that around here now, as we have a continuous rash of pipe bombings here for some reason. Read in the paper they were doing that. People are nuts, and it's a dangerous world. It's hard to keep the peace without ruining privacy and civil rights. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 13:29:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA29447; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:27:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:27:59 -0800 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox2.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <36378C39.99C9FEDD css.mot.com> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:27:21 -0600 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Important Safety Tip References: <199810281949.OAA18475 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2WLUE2.0.wB7.UnuDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23815 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ed Wall wrote: > We learned something from Les Case that could be a lifesaver. It is rather > amazing that teflon is used as much as it is on cookware because the stuff > forms a compound that he mentioned, with at least 7 syllables, that I > cannot recall, that is deadly and causes a condition exactly like pneumonia > that kills. The PTFE has to get to around 550C (red hot) to produce this > gas. He said its in the literature. He also said that at a lower > temperature, it produces a chemical that produces flu-like symptoms. Hmmm. PTFE isn't as toxic as you are making it out to be. Yes, hazardous fluoro compounds are produced at decomposition temperatures above 400 deg C, but influenza-like symptoms show up only after 2-6 hours of unventilated exposure. Small animals like birds may be more susceptible, but only because of relative size (the very reason coal miners used them to check for dangerous gas build ups). The seven syllable compounds you refer to above are tetrafluoroethylene and hexafluoropropylene, with traces of a few others. Under normal conditions fluoropolymers are physiologically inert and have no toxicological effects. Cookware isn't exactly a risk as the operating range is below decomposition range, and exposure time is less than 2 hours. Don't have an electronic version handy of ours, but here is a MSDS I found online for virgin PTFE: And if you really have some extra time, The Unofficial Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Homepage: http://www.net-master.net/~ptfedave/ Ok, I know many probably forwarded the last post to at least one friend or family member without checking into it first. Be sure to pass this one along too so poor Ed doesn't gain notoriety for starting another annoying email chain letter scare! -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 13:58:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09973; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:54:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:54:40 -0800 X-AirNote: 1 Message-ID: <01BE028B.32F6D720.zpe pdq.net> From: ZPE To: "'freenrg-l eskimo.com'" , "'KeelyNet DallasTexas.net'" , "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: VORTEX COUNTDOWN COMPLETE !!! Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:53:42 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Encoding: 7 TEXT Resent-Message-ID: <"JoOmH1.0.PR2.TAvDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23816 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greetings all! The day has finally arrived! See http://freeweb.pdq.net/zpe for the good news! Best Wishes, ZPE From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 14:03:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20659; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:01:31 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:01:31 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981028165836.00c573e0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:58:36 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing In-Reply-To: <199810281011_MC2-5E3E-2AAA compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ZN56F1.0.V25.pGvDs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23817 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:09 AM 10/28/98 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: > The Three Mile Island nuclear plant was a textbook example of a >poorly designed computer control system. The engineers were to blame for >putting the pump error light where operators could not see it, but I do not >think any engineer would cause a catastrophe like that by shutting down the >pump for a trivial reason. Say what? The reason the key warning light was missed was not poor panel layout, but that some clueless bureaucrat had required that a tag be added to a switch so that it wouldn't be inadvertantly switched. (The tag was "temporary" while other repairs were being made. The bureaucrat problem referred to was one I have run into. The rules say tag it, you are not in compliance unless there is a big cardboard tag there. A plastic cover over the switch--even if properly labelled--is not acceptable.) > I frequently read about the following scenario: on >the morning of January 1, an escalator will not work because the control >program thinks maintenance has not been performed for 100 years. I cannot >imagine an engineer programming it this way. What if the clock goes haywire in >the middle of a business day and stops the elevators? We are talking about >obsolete equipment with notoriously unreliable clocks. Some did not have >battery backup, and they would go wrong with every power fluctuation. I do not >think elevators will stop on January 1. At most, an alarm light or buzzer will >be set, or an error message will be displayed on an LCD control panel. Actually a much, much more likely scenario is that the elevator will run on a weekday schedule even though it is Sunday, and vice-versa. >The utility companies can afford to wait a month or two >for their money while the accounting department straightens out the mess. I am >not saying this would be easy or cheap, but it is the sort of problem people >are used to dealing with. This is again missing the point. Believe it or not, there are power plants, water systems, irrigation plants and sewage treatment plants that care about the tides. Get the date wrong, and you are not talking about billing problems, you are trying to figure out how many months it will take to fix the damage. A few thousand acre-feet of salt water in the wrong place is not a minor problem. I don't expect the Dutch to have problems, but there are countries in the Middle East, Africa and Asia where this may be a severe issue. 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 Oct 28 14:27:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA24016; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:22:50 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:22:50 -0800 (PST) Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox2.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <36379705.2538E013 css.mot.com> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:13:25 -0600 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: VORTEX COUNTDOWN COMPLETE !!! References: <01BE028B.32F6D720.zpe pdq.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"g6MaM3.0.6t5.uavDs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23818 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ZPE wrote: > The day has finally arrived! See http://freeweb.pdq.net/zpe for the good news! Ok, I give up. What is the good news? There is nothing new or substantial posted, just more fluff. If you can't reveal any details, why do you keep yanking our chain with press release level information like this? Looking forward to REAL data. Please let us know when it is available. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 14:24:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26154; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:22:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:22:40 -0800 Message-Id: <199810282222.RAA21485 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: Important Safety Tip Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:24:14 -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: <"t_a_A1.0.GO6.lavDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23819 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John, If you ever get into a conversation with Les Case about this, let me know how it turns out. The pages certainly back you up and I would have to wonder how it could be approved as an oil additive, considering how much of this PTFE combustion product we would be breathing. I enjoyed the accidental discovery story. > > Ok, I know many probably forwarded the last post to at least one friend or > family member without checking into it first. Be sure to pass this one along > too so poor Ed doesn't gain notoriety for starting another annoying email chain > letter scare! > I'm afraid that Dr. Case will have to take credit for that one! Ed Wall NERL From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 15:05:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA12558; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:04:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:04:04 -0800 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:53:57 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810281803_MC2-5E4E-783A compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"AhZSx.0.443.YBwDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23820 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Regarding Three Mile Island, Robert I. Eachus writes: The reason the key warning light was missed was not poor panel layout, but that some clueless bureaucrat had required that a tag be added to a switch . . . The tag was another problem. An important warning light was located behind an equipment panel. In the final report many human engineering problems were cited in the design of the control room. Actually a much, much more likely scenario is that the elevator will run on a weekday schedule even though it is Sunday, and vice-versa. I agree. So they will set the wrong year, wrong day, but the correct day of the week. This is kind of work-it-out patch people often adapt, with no ill effect. This is again missing the point. Believe it or not, there are power plants, watms, irrigation plants and sewage treatment plants that care about the tides. Get the date wrong, and you are not talking about billing problems, you are trying to figure out how many months it will take to fix the damage. Again, I am not suggesting that the engineers should rush into the next century with no planning or testing. I acknowledge that would be a disaster. However, if they find they cannot upgrade a 286 bios, and the computer dates will be wrong, they can plan for this by entering tide information manually. It is not difficult to keep track of tides. My point is, people can finds way to work around the problems without necessarily replacing equipment or reprogramming. I would rather have 100 obsolete computers to deal with than a manually operated factory. People working on embedded systems are doing triage: they fix critical systems, put aside others until after 2000, and scrap the hopeless ones. Managers complain that Y2K upgrades are an expense without a return on investment, but a properly managed upgrade program will enhance the overall value of the factory. 20 and 30 year old equipment probably wants to be scrapped anyway. Operating old computers is like burning money. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 15:16:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA14638; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:07:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:07:04 -0800 Message-ID: <3637BEE9.59F90F4D sunherald.infi.net> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:03:37 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: VORTEX COUNTDOWN COMPLETE !!! References: <01BE028B.32F6D720.zpe pdq.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ZrHeZ2.0.Ua3.MEwDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23821 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ZPE wrote: > > Greetings all! > > The day has finally arrived! See http://freeweb.pdq.net/zpe for the good news! What good news? I saw no disclosure of information as promised. No plans, schematics, nothing. If you want to convince us, then tell us. A bit of advice if you will: whenever I work on something, I don't post any claims until I give hard data on how to replicate it. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 16:00:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA02785; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:57:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:57:36 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <36379705.2538E013 css.mot.com> References: <01BE028B.32F6D720.zpe pdq.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:54:49 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: VORTEX SNOWJOB COMPLETE !!! Resent-Message-ID: <"f546J2.0.Jh.kzwDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23822 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John - > Ok, I give up. What is the good news? There > is nothing new or substantial posted, just > more fluff. If you can't reveal any details, > why do you keep yanking our chain with > press release level information like this? > > Looking forward to REAL data. Please let us > know when it is available. Now now, go back and re-read the page. It says they might be releasing details in two years if things don't work out. Really, I've had it with this "fluff" too. That's all it has been from the start. A fourteen year old could have cooked up the entire episode from start to present. I think it's silly, and continue to believe that in the complete absence of any evidence to the contrary, that's probably all that is going on here. It's like Greg Watson minus the SMOT. (nuttin' - nuttin' = nuttin'). - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 16:30:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA15116; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:26:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:26:58 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981028182535.00726f6c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 18:25:35 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: reply from Mizuno Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"s5Dsx2.0.3i3.GPxDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23823 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Return-Path: >Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:04:34 +0900 (JST) >X-Sender: mizuno athena.qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp >To: Scott Little >From: Mizuno Tadahiko >Subject: Re: Low Temperature > >Dear Dr. Scott Little > >I have read your article. I am very sorry so late to answer to you. I can >understand several difference between you experimental condition and ours. >However, I can say, I am not sure the differences is the essential matter >for the condition that would be given the excess heat. Still I am continuing >to look out the conditions to realize the high probability to replicate the >large heat. Please consider and watch you experimental conditions. I show >you as follows: >1. You used an anode a 0.5-mm diameter Pt lead crimped to a 1 cm2 of Pt >mesh. I think there may be exist large cell resistively. It can be >considered the resistance retards the heat evolution. We used a Pt mesh >anode, which made a 0.1-mm diameter of Pt wire, and the rectangular shape of >5 cm and 10 cm. The area ratio of cathode and anode is 100 of difference. >2. You have employed 0.5 M of potassium carbonate solution. We usually had >used 0.1 and 0.2 M. because the tungsten electrode is easily erode in high >concentration of electrolyte. However, in our case the speed of erosion is >much lower than yours. >3. I have still no idea the purity of electrode. We used very high grade of >W such as 99.99 %. The diminution is 5 mm, 5 mm and 0.3 mm of thickness of >rectangular shape. I welded the W wire of 0.3-mm diameter of lead. Where all >of the lead wire was completely covered with shrinkable Teflon tube. >4. I sow your photo of cell, unfortunately it is difficult to understand >your cell design. Could you show me the Cu pipe passed through the inner or >outer of the cell. I can say, we were bothered the electrical isolation >during the incadescent experiment using high voltage electrolysis. >Sometimes, the electric current have passed another devices in the cell such >as heater, thermometer and cooling pipe in the cell. > >Here, I have written several points of differences from our conditions. I >you have other questions, please contact with me, >Sincerely, >Tadahiko > >Tadahiko Mizuno >Division of Quantum Energy Engineering, >Research group of Nuclear System Engineering, >Laboratory of Nuclear Material System, >Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, >Kita-ku, North 13, West-8, Sapporo 060-8628 JAPAN >Tel:81-11-706-6689, Fax:81-11-706-7835 >E-mail:mizuno qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp I will respond to Mizuno's questions about by cell design, etc. I will also inform him that it's Mr. Scott Little. 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 Oct 28 17:23:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA01177; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:13:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:13:53 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981028201235.01bf07e0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 20:12:35 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing Cc: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com In-Reply-To: <199810281803_MC2-5E4E-783A compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"FR6mk1.0.8I.05yDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23824 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:53 PM 10/28/98 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >People working on embedded systems are doing triage: they fix critical >systems, put aside others until after 2000, and scrap the hopeless ones. >Managers complain that Y2K upgrades are an expense without a return on >investment, but a properly managed upgrade program will enhance the overall >value of the factory. 20 and 30 year old equipment probably wants to be >scrapped anyway. Operating old computers is like burning money. In this country there will be some glitches, and maybe even an accident or two, but you are right, by and large it will be a non-event. The real problem is in unmaintained systems in third world countries. The people operating the systems are unaware that there is a potential problem. Look a the recent pipeline accident/sabatoge/theft call it what you will incidents. Are the operators of such systems worried about something that may happen over a year from now? 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 Oct 28 17:27:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA04734; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:23:21 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:23:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 18:20:51 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: VORTEX SNOWJOB COMPLETE !!! In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199810290119.SAA31443 smtp2.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <36379705.2538E013 css.mot.com> <01BE028B.32F6D720.zpe@pdq.net> Resent-Message-ID: <"5Sy6g1.0.q91.7EyDs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23825 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 01:54 PM 10/28/98 -1000, you wrote: It's like Greg Watson minus the SMOT. (nuttin' - nuttin' >= nuttin'). > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI > Why "minus" the SMOT? Didn't that stand for "Simple Magnetic Overunity Toy"? Talk about nuttin'! Or do you have yours? :-) --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 17:39:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09678; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:34:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:34:52 -0800 Message-ID: <0c8901be02db$d405dd00$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: , Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 20:31:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"qv6aQ.0.-M2.mOyDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23827 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >everybody else here who has actually done some experiments. Had the MIB on >>>your doorstep lately? I didn't think so. >> > >I'm not sure. I live out in the country about 20 miles from the UPS center. >In a relatively short time after I received my liter of heavy water a man Why would you need a liter of heavy water? >dressed in a business suit accompanied the UPS driver on a delivery of other >items to me. I sometimes wondered about that. Was he FBI? Why would a >second passenger who has nowhere to sit except on a package or the floor >ride around the whole country all day long if he were an UPS employee >checking on the route? I surmised he parked his car nearby and when UPS >came (by prior arrangement) to deliver the packages he hoppped on and came >into our property (We live about 1000 ft off a little travelled gravel >road.) and checked me out. No checking since then. Am I paranoid? Perhaps, but cameras are going for cheap nowadays. Set up some surveillance if it will help your sleep. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 17:39:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09653; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:34:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:34:42 -0800 Message-ID: <0c8701be02db$d1ff1080$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: "sno" , , "KeelyNet" , Subject: Re: Y2K/Goverment/Free energy Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:30:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZKZKU3.0.dM2.jOyDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23826 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Assuming the government and corporations, come to the >conclusion, sometime in 1999, that "TheEndOfTheWorldAs >WeKnowIt (TEOTWASKI), is a good possibility. You make a funny. >If the above assumptions are correct, can we expect >the release of some sort of free energy device in 1999. No. >If released in what form and where might one look for it >(am also assuming it would not be released directly). None. >Maybe not free energy but highly efficient, inexpensive >generator? Never. >Any thoughts or comments appreciated....steven opelc >From: Moody, Carla A >Sent: Thursday, October 22, 1998 3:13 PM >To: FAC Staff >Subject: FW: Year 2000 >Importance: High >Sensitivity: Confidential > > OK, I know we are all busy, but at least this might make the load >lighter for a minute or two... > >PLEASE POST IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCATION > > > To: All Appropriate Personnel > Subject: Y2K Problem Solved > >Corporate has defined a lower cost alternative for Desktop conversions > that also addresses the Y2K (Year 2000) issue: > >The goal is to remove all computers from the desktop by Jan, 1999. >Instead, everyone will be provided with an Etch-A-Sketch. > >There are many sound reasons for doing this: > 1. No Y2K problems > 2. No technical glitches, keeping work from being done. > 3. No more wasted time reading and writing emails. > 4. Substantial hardware cost savings. > >Frequently Asked Questions from the Etch-A-Sketch Help Desk: > Q: My Etch-A-Sketch has all of these funny little lines all over > the screen. What do I do? > A: Pick it up and shake it. > > Q: How do I turn my Etch-A-Sketch off? > A: Pick it up and shake it. > > Q: What's the shortcut for Undo? > A: Pick it up and shake it. > > Q: How do I create a New Document window? > A: Pick it up and shake it. > > Q: How do I set the background and foreground to the same color? > A: Pick it up and shake it. > > Q: What is the proper procedure for rebooting my Etch-A-Sketch? > A: Pick it up and shake it. > > Q: How do I delete a document on my Etch-A-Sketch? > A: Pick it up and shake it. > > Q: How do I save my Etch-A-Sketch document? > A: Don't shake it > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 18:53:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA05673; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 18:51:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 18:51:57 -0800 Message-ID: <3637D94B.667 lcia.com> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:56:11 -0500 From: B25B LCIA.COM (RON BRENNEN) Reply-To: b25b LCIA.COM X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? References: <1.5.4.32.19981028140722.008ffee8 freeway.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8_AH51.0.RO1.DXzDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23828 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edwin Strojny wrote: > > >At 11:50 AM 10/27/98, Rick Monteverde wrote: > >[snip] > >> Scott, Vince, Mallove, Heffner, > >>everybody else here who has actually done some experiments. Had the MIB on > >>your doorstep lately? I didn't think so. > > > > I'm not sure. I live out in the country about 20 miles from the UPS center. > In a relatively short time after I received my liter of heavy water a man > dressed in a business suit accompanied the UPS driver on a delivery of other > items to me. I sometimes wondered about that. Was he FBI? Why would a > second passenger who has nowhere to sit except on a package or the floor > ride around the whole country all day long if he were an UPS employee > checking on the route? I surmised he parked his car nearby and when UPS > came (by prior arrangement) to deliver the packages he hoppped on and came > into our property (We live about 1000 ft off a little travelled gravel > road.) and checked me out. No checking since then. Am I paranoid? > > Ed Strojny Why don't you ask the UPS driver who he was? Just curious. Ron Brennen From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 19:01:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA09473; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 18:59:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 18:59:41 -0800 From: Chuck Davis To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:00:05 -0800 Message-ID: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: VIAGRA OVERDOSE (fwd) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"0-U5j1.0.xJ2.SezDs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23829 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: CLICK ON THIS AND WAIT http://www.wsu.edu:8000/~lobo/dirty/viagra_overdose.gif -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 19:36:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22167; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:31:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:31:23 -0800 Message-ID: <0f6101be02ec$3a439e80$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: "ZPE" , , , Subject: Re: VORTEX COUNTDOWN COMPLETE !!! Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:28:31 -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: <"ikb7Q.0._P5.96-Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23830 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here you go ZPE, I have outdone nostrodamus, I made 1 prediction and it came true - 100% success rate- HAHA!, this from a message I sent you on 9/7/98 ZPE>>Also, if a potential investor decides to "wait" for the Oct 28th >>disclosure, he runs the risk that we WILL establish solid funding contacts >>which would mean public disclosure will never happen. Bill>Exactly what I predict you will say, wether you get it or not, hope you can >prove me wrong. No release, and the multitudes in Russia are still starving and many are predicted to freeze to death this winter, 2 years is too long. How can you sleep at night knowing your personal gain(money) will cause thousands if not hundreds of thousands to die? The blood on your hands is not so easily washed off. >Greetings all! > >The day has finally arrived! See http://freeweb.pdq.net/zpe for the good news! > >Best Wishes, >ZPE From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 19:38:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22812; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:32:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:32:39 -0800 Message-ID: <3637FD36.C262ADB2 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:29:26 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L Subject: SETI signals detected from EQ Pegasi? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GAdIW3.0.Ka5.N7-Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23831 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: All: Much weirdness happening with an amatuer SETI researcher. Go to this link: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193/ Any thoughts? Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 19:43:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA27538; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:38:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:38:36 -0800 Message-ID: <000c01be02ed$36675940$4e8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" , Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 20:35:17 -0700 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: <"6xQmk3.0.2k6.xC-Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23832 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edwin Strojny wrote: > In a relatively short time after I received my liter of heavy water a man > dressed in a business suit accompanied the UPS driver on a delivery... Hey Ed, with a few grams of Natural Uranium, or Thorium in heavy water you're set to start "breeding" a nuke device. Never mind O/U CF or Perpetual Motion Machine mania, at the equivalent of about 15 tons of TNT or 1.5 Tons of Coal/gram, when you consider what Terrorist Factions are up to you might very well be seeing "MIBs" looking over your shoulder in your garage. If Frank Stenger thinks he's going to beat out the fuel oil truck.... :-) The price of a knowledgeable-open society. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 21:15:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA25559; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:11:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:11:47 -0800 Message-Id: <199810290510.XAA28784 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 00:09:58 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing Resent-Message-ID: <"I1Ch2.0.HF6.Ia_Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23833 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >To: Vortex > >Michel Jones made some interesting comments about the year 2000 problem and >utility billing. > > There are approaches to dealing with this problem which involve setting > clocks back, but they also require setting the data back--and setting > the data back requires a systems analysis and programming effort that is > far too large to be accomplished overnight by a company that waits until > midnight on Dec. 31, 1999 before addressing the problem. > >Any company that waits until December 31, 1999 will be out of business within >a few months. I was not suggesting that no steps should be taken or will be >taken before then, but that a few undetected problems left over are not likely >to cause serious problems. ***{Your exact words, which you deleted, were: >The Y2K problem is an expensive nuisance to old-line large corporations with >obsolete mainframe computers. It may cause disruptions and lawsuits, but it >will *not* cause any major problems to society. People are not idiots. They >will know to set the clock back a year if the equipment fails to work on >January 1, 2000. Your statement, above, was not qualified. Nowhere did you state that you were talking only about the unlikely case where virtually everything has been successfully fixed and "a few undetected problems" are "left over." The implication of your statement, sans qualifiers, was that you believed a mere clock setback would cure equipment failures that were due to non-compliance with Y2K standards. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > If, for example, an electrical utility lies to its computer, telling it > that the date is Jan. 1, 1999 rather than Jan. 1, 2000, and its data > base contains records of usage which still are tagged with correct > dates, then when the utility next does electrical billing, its system > will use Dec. 1998 usage data to compute billing . . . > >This is indeed the kind of application where I would expect problems. I have >no experience with electrical utility billing, but I have worked on water, >sewage and telephone utility accounting and billing. Here are some >observations about these systems. > >We are talking about billing computers, not the control programs for power >generators. This is a crucial distinction. The year 2000 problem is hardly >likely to interrupt power generation, because the people who program >equipment, such as pumps and transformers, know that a failure would be >catastrophic. They know that clocks are frequently set incorrectly and clocks >go haywire. No sane engineer would tell the program to stop operations and >shut down a critical cooling pump just because a clock error has been >detected. ***{The Y2K problem is a 2-digit-year rollover problem. Any embedded chip or computer system that uses 2-digits to encode the year was designed under the assumption that the system in question would be modified or replaced before the rollover into the year 2000 occurred. What that means is that the question of how these systems would behave when the rollover occurred was not considered when they were designed. Given that fact, it is absurd to engage in generalized theorizing about how they will behave under those circumstances. These are not questions that can be answered by recourse to generalized arguments about the sanity of the people who made the original decisions, because we cannot know how any particular system--including power generation--will behave without investing time and money analyzing and testing it. The use of generalized arguments to paint a rosy picture is dangerously misleading, and encourages managers to skimp on Y2K expenses and hope for the best. It trivializes a problem that is very real and very serious. --Mitchell Jones}*** The Three Mile Island nuclear plant was a textbook example of a >poorly designed computer control system. The engineers were to blame for >putting the pump error light where operators could not see it, but I do not >think any engineer would cause a catastrophe like that by shutting down the >pump for a trivial reason. I frequently read about the following scenario: on >the morning of January 1, an escalator will not work because the control >program thinks maintenance has not been performed for 100 years. I cannot >imagine an engineer programming it this way. What if the clock goes haywire in >the middle of a business day and stops the elevators? We are talking about >obsolete equipment with notoriously unreliable clocks. Some did not have >battery backup, and they would go wrong with every power fluctuation. I do not >think elevators will stop on January 1. At most, an alarm light or buzzer will >be set, or an error message will be displayed on an LCD control panel. ***{More trivializing. The fact is that neither you nor anybody else can know a priori what a date-sensitive system that was designed to operate *within* the 20th century will do when the rollover into the 21st century occurs. Generalized reasoning cannot answer such questions. Each system must be examined and tested, to ascertain how it will behave when operated outside of its design specifications. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Consider utility billing. Water and power meters, where the data originates, >do not generally record the date and time. They record only usage. Date and >time are added when the meters are polled. These dates and times may be >incorrect. Or the accounting program that deals with them may treat them >incorrectly. Either problem can be corrected by patching the data and >re-running the billing program. The information is always in there somewhere, >and it can always be rescued. I have done it hundreds of times! In the >worst-case scenario, the meters would have to be polled again with the correct >date added this time. The previous month's bills would be voided and all >customers re-billed. The utility companies can afford to wait a month or two >for their money while the accounting department straightens out the mess. I am >not saying this would be easy or cheap, but it is the sort of problem people >are used to dealing with. ***{Here you are once again applying the unstated proviso that basically everything will be successfully fixed, with only "a few undetected problems" that are "left over." However, (a) as I noted above, that is an assumption that was not present in your original post, and (b) it is an assumption which is unlikely to apply to the actual case. The reason: too many organizations are headed up by managers who have been swayed by people like you, who have employed unsound generalized arguments to trivialize the problem. Managers do not want to divert major chunks of their budgets to activities that would add to costs but not income, thereby impacting profits and hurting stock prices. Hence they are vulnerable to optimistic preachments, and have been dragging their feet where Y2K spending is concerned. That fact, more than any other, renders credible those who warn of impending calamity. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > . . . and will bill the utility's customers based on their Dec. 1998 > usage rather than on their Dec. 1999 usage. In other words, the result > will be worse than if the system didn't work at all. (It would be better > to not bill people than to send out bills that will *all* be incorrect!) > >You may be sure the bills would never go out. We're talking about obsolete >billing computers designed twenty or thirty years ago, before people were >aware of the year 2000 problem. These computers suffer constant problems, and >the operators who tend to them are used to seeing the bills come out >incorrectly. ***{More trivializing. Five years ago, almost nobody was thinking about this problem, and most mainframe programmers were still habitually coding virtually everything to use the 2-digit year codes that had been the de facto standard since the 1950's. Thus this situation is *not* limited to obsolete systems designed twenty or thirty years ago. It is a real problem of mammoth proportions that requires managers to think objectively and make hard choices, if they are to avert disaster. Many, of course, are doing what needs to be done and taking the required hits on the bottom line. Too many others, however, are worried more about analysts downgrading their stock today than about whether disaster will strike in the year 2000, and they are feeding off of the statements of seemingly knowledgeable optimists who say things such as: "Don't worry. If your systems crater on Jan. 1, 2000, just set your clocks back a year and everything will be OK." --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > Bottom line: your Panglossian pronouncements about the world we live in > are wildly off the mark, and any IT managers who use such excuses to > justify ignoring the Y2K problem are courting disaster. > >This is the first time in my life I've been accused of being an optimist >regarding computer bugs. You are grossly distorting what I said. ***{I wish. Unfortunately, your words are sitting there on the computer screen, belying such claims. Virtually everything you have said, both yesterday and today, has the effect of trivializing the problem. --Mitchell Jones}*** I never >suggested that Y2K problems should be ignored! ***{True, but by trivializing Y2K problems, you encourage others to ignore them. --Mitchell Jones}*** When the night shift >experienced problems with those billing computers twenty years ago, I was the >guy they rousted out of bed at 3 a.m. I am hardly likely to be sanguine about >computer screw-ups that cost the customer a thousand dollars per hour. > >I wrote, "people often set back dates now. They buy software with a license >that expires after some period of time, and to keep it going they reset the >computer every year." Jones responded: > > You are talking about people who use home computers for entertainment, > not about business applications, where large data bases have to be > processed on a monthly or weekly basis . . . > >No, I'm talking about customers running business applications. ***{In that case, I disagree. Most businessmen would dress down an employee who engaged in the type of fraud that you describe, above, and would fire him if the behavior recurred. The reason: they would not want to be exposed to the possibility of expensive litigation and damage to their reputations to save a few bucks on a software license. (Software vendors have a hotline that you can call to report software piracy and a fund out of which they pay very large rewards to informants.) I doubt that there are many businesses of significant size that behave as you describe. In my view, software license fraud is primarily the province of individuals who use home computers for entertainment. --Mitchell Jones}*** I have no >experience with the home computer market. > > > Any business that delays confronting Y2K, based on the notion that this > is a trivial problem, is probably going to fail. > >I would say it will definitely fail. > > > And if bright and knowledgeable people such as yourself are treating it > as trivial . . . > >I never did. I find you often exaggerate what people say here, and you put in >their mouths as you have done here. This is annoying and rude. I think you >should apologize. ***{Rubbish. I didn't say you *said* it was trivial. I said you are *treating* it as trivial. Thus I didn't put words in your mouth. Moreover, not merely did you treat the matter as trivial yesterday, but you continue to trivialize it today, in between denials that you are doing so. (See above.) --Mitchell Jones}*** >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 21:31:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA32734; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:29:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:29:10 -0800 Message-ID: <3637FDE3.741F earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:32:19 -0700 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: Chubb: Blue: band state theory 10.28.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XmqK-1.0.H_7.bq_Ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23834 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Storms: Chubb: CF debate 10.26.98 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:41:51 -0500 From: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil To: rmforall earthlink.net >Subject: Re: Chubb: Blue: band state theory 10.22.98 > Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:48:05 -0500 (EST) > From: "Richard A Blue" > To: rmforall earthlink.net > >I read this over and over and all I see is a large number of assumptions >that, I believe, have little to do with the real physics of a real >system. It would be useful if you could be more specific. You make it sound like a "large number of assumptions" are being made, when in fact only four basic ideas are used: 1. At T=0, entropy achieves its absolute minimum. 2. It is required that no latent heat be present. 3. T=0 conditions are maintained in the bulk. 4. Periodic order be present and maintained in the bulk. The rest of the discussion involves application of known physical results that follow from these assumptions. >I suppose you can define a T=0 ground state with respect to all >degrees of freedom and possibly come up with the kinds of ordering you >describe, but so what? The discussion was in response to your question about how (and by inference, why) nuclear coherence can be involved. The key point is that at T=0, nuclear coherence can be involved but only (provided assumptions 2 and 3 hold) in a very specific way: one that maintains Born-Oppenheimer separability. >Isn't it also possible that you are simply >constructing some idealized system in which you overlook some rather >significant complicating aspects of the problem that we can be rather >sure influence what will happen in the real world? Of the four assumptions, assumption 1 is the zeroeth law of thermodynamics; while 3 and 4, which are required to maintain a T=0 state, also hold rigorously when a finite gap exists between the ground and first excited states and thermal energy is not introduced that excites the system into its first excited state. Assumption 2 is the only postulate that need not hold. But it certainly is a reasonable assumption for many situations. >> >Now you want to describe a nuclear reaction process within >> >the context of some theory -- say deuteron ion band states >> >in a Pd lattice. That's fine with me, but let's not cheat. >> >Let's bring the nuclear wave functions back into the picture >> >right from the beginning, so we can tell what's true and not >> >true about this system. >> >> There are magnetic anisotropies associated with orientation that may >> very well be important in triggering potential reactions. >> > >Here I must ask whether you have included said magnetic anisotropies in >the problem or are you just blowing smoke? I note the word "may". The reaction requires a coupling between two intial spin 1 state deuterons and a spin 0 4He final state. In the absence of magnetic impurities in the Pd host, in the idealization of an ordered, infinite crystal, at T=0, each spin magnetic quantum number state -1,0, and 1 has associated with it a nuclear band state; and each of these bands is equally occupied. For this reason, there actually is complete order at T=0, and overlap with the 4He final state occurs. The important point about anisotropy comes in, however, because only in a finite crystal at finite temperature does energy release to the environment become an important issue. In this context, there is a subtlety that may or may not seem relevant to you: the process of getting the 4He out of the lattice. In particular, for energy to be released, at T=0, coherent charge redistribution to the boundaries must occur. This leads to a build up of charge that potentially can result in crack formation and a breakdown of periodic order. At finite temperature, a similar charge redistribution can occur, but coupled to this process are important lattice vibrational processes that may disrupt bulk periodic order. In both scenarios, it is important (for the process to be self-sustaining) that the 4He be eliminated from the bulk (and potentially from the surface region). The significance associated with magnetic potential anisotropies enters in two ways: 1. Either through the application of external fields, or 2. Through coupling to the electron spin density ("contact field") at the crystal boundaries. In particular, in an optimal situation it is desired that 4He be dispelled. To achieve this, it is desired that the z-component of the magnetic field in directions perpendicular to the surface vanish. Scenarios that accomplish this (either through the contact field or through externally applied fields) potentially provide useful triggering mechanisms for achieving the reaction. >If you will admit that the deuterons enter the lattice in a state of >disorder, perhaps we can discuss how realistic it is to suggest that >they arrive in an ordered state when cooled to T=0 and will do so >in a finite period of time. The disorder occurs in the surface region. In the bulk region, the bonding and energetics of the situation require that this not be the case. >Of course in the experiments at hand >they are never cooled at all, so I suggest they remain disordered. > This is a question of preparation. The really important parameters are degree of crystalline order (i.e., the size of the crystals that are involved) and the deuteron concentration, not so much the temperature. If the crystal is sufficiently large, the nuclear bands will be equally occupied provided deuteron-deuteron spin-spin interaction is sufficiently small (and it will be for the concentrations that are relevant). >Yes, I am pretty naive, but I am not stupid. I think I should be >able to get you to actually clarify some points. You are ascribing >some rather far-reaching effects to these ion band states and doing >darned little to justify any of it. So let me see if I can recover >some of what you have said in the past. > >With respect to the deuteron band states, this is a low density state, >is it not. I recall something like 10^-5 deuterons per unit cell. If >it takes two deuterons to make a 4He, how do we determine the density of >deuteron pairs in your calculations? My estimate would be something >like 10^-10 deuteron pairs per unit cell. Have I done something "naive" >at that point? You are not naïve. You are correct. > >Now the entire justification for having ion band states at all is, as I >recall that all the sites for bound deuterons are occupied, right? Not quite; in essence this is correct. Besides requiring that all of the interstitial site become occupied, the electrons of the D must become Pd-like, and for low (for example, 10^-5) concentrations, this approximation is valid. >Next let me see if I understand the coordinates of the problem just a >bit better. If we treat the deuteron as a composite of a proton and a >neutron, there is one position vector for each for a total of TWO. Technically, there really are 2x Ncell coordinates for each deuteron. Each proton may occupy Ncell locations. Each deuteron may occupy Ncell locations. (Ncell is the number of unit cells in the solid.) >It is, however, useful to regroup and define a deuteron center-of-mass >position vector, leaving one other that I have been calling "internal" >to the deuteron. Do you agree with me up to that point? "I agree" in the following sense: each deuteron center-of-mass position is defined modulo a Bravais lattice vector. However, we go a step further that you have not considered: each deuteron "internal" (we use the term "separation") coordinate is also defined modulo a Bravais lattice vector. >Now you have written, for the deuteron in an ion band state, a Bloch >wave function that has in it a position coordinate, does it not? And am >I correct in saying that the position coordinate you have been using is >the deuteron center of mass? Where I say "modulo a Bravais lattice vector" above, I am also saying "Bloch Function." In other words, both the nuclear wave function (which is associated with the "internal coordinate") and the electrostatic wave function (which is associated with the center of mass coordinate) are "Bloch Functions," not just the (electrostatic) wave function associated with the deuteron center of mass. > >Now if I ask for a Hamiltonian, what will you offer? Which coordinates >appear in that Hamiltonian and what is their functional form? So far >most of the discussion has centered on the coulomb interaction, but >there is another term to be considered as well, is there not -- >something I would call the nuclear interaction potential? > The interaction Hamiltonian includes the Strong Interaction Vs. It is defined by the time evolution of the overlap of the initial state deuteron nuclear wave functions with the helium final state wave function. Because all of the states are in band states, this time evolution occurs with equal weight throughout the lattice, and for this reason Vs (which depends on 3 x Ncell internal coordinates) is a periodic function in all of its coordinates. >Now in my naive way of doing things, I would look at the interaction >between two deuterons and suggest that at large separations (such as is >appropriate for a low density system) the nuclear part of the potential >is really out of the picture because of its radial dependence and all >that need be included is the good old coulomb interation. >Is that what you have done? No; at the heart of both the relevant Coulomb problem and the nuclear problem is the need to consider the close separation situation. In this context, it is probably worthwhile mentioning that in our early papers we did not deal with this in a manner that was rigorous. In particular, to address the nuclear problem, it is necessary to deal explicitly with the limit in which the separation variable goes to zero. We have done this in detail in the ICCF7 and ICCF6 papers. The "good old Coulomb" problem at large separation bears no resemblance to the relevant problem. >Of course the problem with that is it doesn't make any >helium nuclei, i.e. there are no nuclear interactions and no nuclear >reactions. That's why I say your theory is a theory for no nuclear >reactions. Wrong! This is your interpretation-- >I simply am at a loss as to how your low-density state leads >to anything different, and I don't see you clarifying anything here, >either. The Coulomb discussion is germane. To "overcome" the "barrier", it is necessary that close enough proximity occur. Possibly, you might find relevant the following point: overlap occurs at all periodically equivalent lattice locations--i.e., at r1-r2=0, r1-r2-Rn=0, r1=cm of deuteron 1, r2=cm of deuteron 2, Rn=Bravais lattice vector, for all Rn. >You seem awfully fond of redefining energy zeros which I suppose is >legit, as long as you have only one system under consideration. But it >there really are two systems involved, don't we have to be more careful >to keep the proper relationships between these systems. The statements made in this regard are precise. The key point in the T=0 situation is that the ground states of the initial and final states be represented by the same complete sets of eigenstates. This requires that the zero of kinetic energy (and the associated classical turning points of initial and final states) be consistently defined. The procedure for doing this is not a question of being "fond" of anything. >After all, as I >said, you really can't put the helium ground state and the deuteron >ground state at the same level. > >Now I think you had some justification, perhaps, for saying that the >deuterons form an ion band state, but let's look at the helium just >a bit closer. What evidence is there, experiment or theory, that puts >any helium in an ion band state at any time? The point is that if the He is not in a band state, by necessity it causes cracks and large amounts of disorder. That this is the case is known from alpha particle trapping studies and the lack of even negligible He diffusion in any of these 3d and 4d transition metals. There is no "direct" evidence (except perhaps Cold Fusion) that 4He will occupy ion band states. On the other hand, given the concentrations involved, it follows that for some values of the 4He and D chemical potentials, 4He ion band states will become occupied. >You can say that the reaction is occuring at all periodically equivalent >locations, but what are those periodically equivalent locations? By >my count we are going to have exactly ONE 4He nucleus in the entire >lattice. Correct! There is one 4He nucleus. But it is distributed over Ncell locations. >What keeps it from binding somewhere? To do so involves a huge energy cost. >And you still have not >told me how you get a transition from two deuterons (at a pair density >of 10^-10 per unit cell) to that one lonely 4He nucleus. It occurs through the normal strong force reaction. But the nuclear state and the electrostatic wave function are both band states. As a result, there is only a concentration of 10^-5 4He nuclei in the final state. > I also >don't understand what keeps the 4He in its ground state. All you have >mentioned is the T=0 condition, but what does that have to do with >anything, unless you assume some unspecified and unrealistic close >coupling between nuclear degrees of freedom and the lattice. As I said, the coupling occurs through a shift of the zero of energy of the entire lattice relative to its surroundings. This keeps the 4He in its ground state. Although in an individual reaction, 23.8 MeV is released, which seems like a large number, on the scale of a macroscopic lattice, this is a tiny amount. The lattice heating, ultimately, occurs through a redistribution of positive and negative charge to (and within) the dipole region near the surface of the metal. >Is the >weak magnetic isotropy you mention supposed to account for this as well? No, as I said, the dominant processes involve elastic, coherent, Umklapp-like transfers of momentum to the environment. >Last I looked, 4He does not have much by way of magnetic moment to latch >on to. See my comments above referring to some specific information about the nuclear reaction-- >Dick Blue I detect some flippancy in your comments. I trust that you will read my responses carefully, and I hope that you will be specific in your comments about them. I note that this last response by you seems to have ignored a number of my comments from my previous communication. Possibly, is this because a number of the points raised there were unclear to you? Believe it or not, we have made considerable progress in addressing the nuclear problem. I hope you will try to digest what we have done with an open-mind. Scott Chubb From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 23:00:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA17431; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:53:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:53:44 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981029070126.00e1e1ac popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:01:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"9NdMW2.0.HG4.u31Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23835 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Steve; I think that cutting chuncks of ice out of the Soth Pole Icecap and transporting them to places that need big icecubes is the best solution. I want to know what is being done about this. As a concerned inhabitant of the world, I feel that I have the right to try the best solutions possible. I don't want to wait until things get desperate. Well if not me, get your guys to design a craft that can cut ice and transport it. We have the right to technology to make crafts that can be used to get off the planet in case you guys goof. I don't want to depend on someone else's opinion of what's good for us and what risk we have to live with. Dennis At 11:57 PM 10/27/98 -0500, you wrote: >I think that if things really got scary (read desperate) that there >are enough >in on it, who truly believe what they are doing is right (and it may >be, you >might agree if you had all the information they have)...these people >would not >let things go down the tubes, without getting info out that might save >bunches >of people....I am not necessarily talking about those in charge, but >those >under them....it may happen to late...but believe that is what might >happen... >seems we may be going into even more interesting times ....we shall >see >....steve Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 23:03:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA20699; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:02:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:02:38 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3637FD36.C262ADB2 sunherald.infi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 20:59:25 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: SETI signals detected from EQ Pegasi? Resent-Message-ID: <"a6lZh2.0.L35.DC1Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23837 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle - RE: potential alien signals from EQ Pegasi: > Any thoughts? Jealous they beat you to it? ;) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Oct 28 23:05:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA19700; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:01:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:01:06 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810290119.SAA31443 smtp2.asu.edu> References: <36379705.2538E013 css.mot.com> <01BE028B.32F6D720.zpe@pdq.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 20:57:16 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: VORTEX SNOWJOB COMPLETE !!! Resent-Message-ID: <"6Engs.0.Zp4.nA1Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23836 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lynn - > Why "minus" the SMOT? Didn't that stand > for "Simple Magnetic Overunity Toy"? Talk > about nuttin'! I meant that ZPE doesn't even make the pretense of describing a device in enough detail for anyone to replicate it. At least Watson did that, and we had some fun with it. This guy won't even give gizmo. It does sound from a description of events given on their web page that they almost managed to e-mail somebody to death. That's got to be worth something. Apparently they are able to extract enough energy from ASCII alone to keep it going, and that alone might be evidence of OU. Seriously, if they have something and somebody has agreed to build it for them and test it, then - gee, that's nice. But why even bother us about it if there's not to be any details at all forthcoming? Like, what are we supposed to DO with that information? It's indistinguishable from pure fantasy at this point. Besides being useless, it's irritating. I feel like we're being used in some way, or set up for something. Geez, even the Whirlpower dreamer described his idea/gizmo and how he thought it might work. > Or do you have yours? :-) My SMOTs, including The Worlds Largest Smot, have been dismantled, and their magnets recycled into incredible new antigravity levitators and potential alien communication devices. (IOW, they hold notes on my filing cabinets.) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 00:11:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA07116; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 00:10:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 00:10:11 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981029070503.00e14084 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:05:03 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"CtA2K3.0.1l1.XB2Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23838 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; Maybe they did think of, or don't want to expose the technology and cannot try, a vehicle that can cut large chunks of ice from the South Pole Icecap and transport it to places that need it. Dennis At 05:05 AM 10/28/98 GMT, you wrote: >On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:45:24 -0500, Dennis C. Lee wrote: >[snip] >>Do you know of anyone in the government who would be able to process a >>request to release top secret technology in order to save the world? Or are >>they still in the laughing mode? >[snip] >If they were capable of doing anything, they would have done it by >now. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 02:14:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA01304; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:13:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:13:21 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981029102036.00e6c30c popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 05:20:36 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: The mysterious photograph! Resent-Message-ID: <"nCc6f3.0.IK.1_3Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23839 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; If one want's to be in the game, one must learn the language. It takes a whole lot of time and energy in study. There's no way around it. I started to analyze the description and realized that this is a humorist's joke, right? I think that succinct and complete descriptions can be an example of objective art. Where the greater one's understanding, the more one can see. Dennis At 12:20 PM 10/28/98 -0500, you wrote: > A quadrupled, > double-driving, osculatory cog-wheel, gyrating in a fluted pedestal by > the positive and negative current from a cautery voltaic battery strikes > the atmospheric tympanic diaphragm. The rheotone depending on the > vibratory armature of the secondary coil produces dynamic Faradization. > Ahem!" > >- Jed > > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 02:56:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA04988; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:53:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:53:12 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981029110017.00e75dd8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 06:00:17 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Important Safety Tip Resent-Message-ID: <"_86Wh2.0.sD1.Oa4Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23840 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 03:27 PM 10/28/98 -0600, you wrote: >Ok, I know many probably forwarded the last post to at least one friend or >family member without checking into it first. Be sure to pass this one along >too so poor Ed doesn't gain notoriety for starting another annoying email chain >letter scare! Even if it all checks out, it's probably useless and annoying to most if one is prevented from being able to do anything about it. It's too late to do anything about 5/5/2000. I guess we just keep our fingers crossed on this one. They say that if it happens, it will be 'mercifully' quick. Makes one confident to go out there and start that family now doesn't it. On the other hand if one could hook up with the supposed aliens; they would have the equipment to fix this problem! Whitney Streiber, where are you? ;) Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 05:51:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA06300; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 05:48:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 05:48:34 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981029135422.00e5e5e0 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:54:22 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: The CF answer? (was Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion with an experiment protocol. Palladium: 29 isotope states, 6 stable.) Cc: Alan.CHEAH adecco.com, alex@frolov.spb.ru, ahannan@MIT.EDU, deadnuts deadnuts.com, "apple pie" , lupem world.std.com, bso@acm.org, DaleSVP@ipa.net, dtassen@c-zone.net, clsmith darwin.bu.edu, ccantor@sequenom.com, 76753.3551@compuserve.com, eben ergeng.com, ehill@world.std.com, Eric Howlett , ejp@world.std.com, wordpros inforamp.net, moy@ziplink.net, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, gjcheah guybutler.com, wellenstein@binah.cc.brandeis.edu, hic world.std.com, jkokor@alum.mit.edu Resent-Message-ID: <"YLyeD2.0.HY1.m87Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23841 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; I was trying to suggest a possible mechanism as to how strange elements and particles can originate. David Hudson spent 5 million dollars investigating monatomics. It requires 3-4 months of study to get a handle on it. It is worthwhile effort. At 10:45 AM 10/28/98 -0800, you wrote: >October 28, 1998 > >Vortex, > >My suggestions did not grow out of zero. It grows out of interactions >such we are having now to nuture hints picked up here and there. It's a >continuing basis of education I think. Thank you. >I find the Vortex useful. It is certainly 'democratic' in the quality of >the posts with the least denominator (notice I left out 'common') having >equal voice in things to irritation though, many times. oh well. Sorry if you refer to me. I've resigned myself that nothing positive can be done about the icecap except crossing one's fingers. I give up. Are you happy? >I thought furthur on the subject, reflecting on Scott's reference about >Bush. I see he ran "after the effect" analysis. Similar to Tom Passell's >effort, long not recognized enough (I realize now). I would give >reference >to Jed to look up Tom Passell's work when he asked what became of the >used >electrodes of past experiments. It would be interesting to look for monatomics. I have a few friends at MIT labs that would let me test for monatomics. I don't know if David Hudson would give me the exact spectroscopy profile but I know the range the IR doublet should be within. >Bush's analysis are fine in giving him some indications of isotope >specific >effects on a pd-d experiment. What I find missing then is a protocol, >which >should have been done in hindsight, of all the experiments: To have >examined >the palladium samples for isotopic distribution PRIOR to running a pd-d >experiment. Also afterwards. Then my suggestions on isotope specificity >would >not have been needed. Or the puzzle continue on erratic replications. > >The second suggestion was to introduce slow neutrons from external >sources >rather than wait for neutrons to happen within a high loaded Pd lattice. >I believe, in this case, you do not have to load it high to observe or >expect >effects. And you can use your regular supply of "isotopically alloyed" >pure >palladium samples, as long as the prior and after protocol of isotopic >analysis >has been made. This is in essence, a third, cheaper suggestion to >finding out >about nuclear isotopic effects in loaded palladium when it works. Has monatomic theory been looked at? It makes sense that palladium atoms may break free as it is being hydrogen loaded. What about the nature of the hydrogen bond? Is it monatomic when it is loaded. Does it go from diatomic to monatomic in the loading process? Is this accounted for in the energy requirements to break the bond? Does loading into palladium use less energy to break the hydrogen bond somehow? I think I have the answer. The weird nuclear stuff is from the monatomic palladium magnetic field collapse transmuting the atom. The energy is from monatomic hydrogen recombining as it escapes the lattice. I'm not sure about superconductor magnetic oversaturation collapse. Would this produce OU energy? >Off Topic: > > What Planck did not mention was that as new replaces old, he did not > pass jugement on whether the old was outmoded or that the new was more > valid. So we may be cursed to repeat the past in ignorance if the new >is > inflexibly rigid as the old. > > I was amused when the comment was made that "I am not so open minded > that my brain falls out". On thinking, it occurred to me that this > statement was rather egotisticle (or should the spelling have > been egotesticle?) :) > > What if you did open your mind and and nothing fell out? I'm looking at a wall of books to my right. We must have different books. I put at least 20 or 30 hours a week on studies (it's fun to me, weird huh?) you guys would laugh at. Time will tell. (I'll probably be killed for it) I have dibs on putting together the superconducting monatomic palladium oversaturated magnetic field collapse triggered transmutation producing weird particles source AND the monatomic hydrogen recombination to diatomic hydrogen producing excess energy source theorems as the basic nature of the cold fusion process for 10/29/98! Nya-nya plplplplplplplplpl ;) The Bible says that if people hate you for doing right in this world, your on the correct track! So I don't care what anyone thinks! Dennis C. Lee Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 06:08:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA11098; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 06:07:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 06:07:53 -0800 Message-ID: <3638760D.57F06E17 fc.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:05:01 -0600 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: Vortex Subject: Re: Important Safety Tip X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <199810281949.OAA18475 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"iimGs.0.Gj2.uQ7Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23842 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Wall wrote: > Vortexians, > > We learned something from Les Case that could be a lifesaver. It > is rather > amazing that teflon is used as much as it is on cookware because > the stuff > forms a compound that he mentioned, with at least 7 syllables, > that I > cannot recall, that is deadly and causes a condition exactly like > pneumonia > that kills. The PTFE has to get to around 550C (red hot) to > produce this > gas. He said its in the literature. He also said that at a lower > > temperature, it produces a chemical that produces flu-like > symptoms. > > At Dupont, where his departed wife worked, they would fire anyone > with > smoking products on their person because a small amount of PTFE on > a > cigarette could be fatal. She wouldn't allow any teflon cookware > in the > house. > > It seems to me that a warning label should be on teflon tape and > cookware. > A plumber could overheat PTFE where a sweated joint is joined to a > threaded > joint. And what coroner would think anything of a man who died of > > pneumonia? > > Ed Wall > NERL -- As I recall, "TEFLON" is polytetrafluoroethylene, which polymerizes as a carbon helix completely surrounding a fluorine core. This arrangement makes the molecule extremely stable, but if heated sufficiently it will decompose into carbon and fluorine. Fluorine, being as active as it is, will try to grab ahold of anything it can and if the moisture in your lungs winds up being the target you wind up with hydrofluoric acid in your lungs. Not a good thing. Other than this, I believe, ptfe is largely benign. I remember seeing a data sheet which was supplied back in the '50's by DuPont which outlined the "dangers" of working with ptfe and, being a smoker back then, what stuck with me was the warning about not machining ptfe with an open pack of cigarettes in your pocket because of the possibility of ptfe dust being deposited on the tobacco and being subsequently decomposed and inhaled. Ouch! -- John Fields From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 06:30:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA16052; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 06:28:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 06:28:41 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981029092700.007e72b0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:27:00 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Important Safety Tip In-Reply-To: <3638760D.57F06E17 fc.net> References: <199810281949.OAA18475 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4gkEW2.0.kw3.Pk7Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23843 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:05 AM 10/29/98 -0600, John Fields wrote: >Ed Wall wrote: >> We learned something from Les Case that could be a lifesaver. It >> is rather >> amazing that teflon is used as much as it is on cookware because >> the stuff >> forms a compound that he mentioned, with at least 7 syllables, >> that I >> cannot recall, that is deadly and causes a condition exactly like >> pneumonia >> that kills. The PTFE has to get to around 550C (red hot) to >> produce this >> gas. He said its in the literature. He also said that at a lower ..... >As I recall, "TEFLON" is polytetrafluoroethylene, which polymerizes >as a carbon helix completely surrounding a fluorine core. > >This arrangement makes the molecule extremely stable, but if heated >sufficiently it will decompose into carbon and fluorine. > >Fluorine, being as active as it is, will try to grab ahold of >anything it can and if the moisture in your lungs winds up being the >target you wind up with hydrofluoric acid in your lungs. Not a >good thing. > >Other than this, I believe, ptfe is largely benign. > >I remember seeing a data sheet which was supplied back in the '50's >by DuPont which outlined the "dangers" of working with ptfe and, >being a smoker back then, what stuck with me was the warning about >not machining ptfe with an open pack of cigarettes in your pocket >because of the possibility of ptfe dust being deposited on the >tobacco and being subsequently decomposed and inhaled. Ouch! For more than a decade teflon fumes (overheating the pans without food within included) have been known to cause fever of unknown origin (FUO). Such etiology is considered in the differential diagnosis of FUOs. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 07:04:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30938; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:01:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:01:17 -0800 Message-ID: <36388322.EC1CE347 bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:00:50 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [Fwd: UFO UpDate: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------4A0758B6F5F35F8A61897251" Resent-Message-ID: <"wz1qU3.0.GZ7.yC8Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23844 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. --------------4A0758B6F5F35F8A61897251 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gnorts, Vorts! Well, it's not an internet hoax. BBC really *did* interview the amateur astronomer; so, at least he exists. Probably a geosync satellite; but, not terrestrial since the signal disappears when the antenna is pointed off axis. Terry <><><><><><><><><><><><> --------------4A0758B6F5F35F8A61897251 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from mail1.bellsouth.net (mail1.bellsouth.net [205.152.0.6]) by mail.atl.bellsouth.net (8.8.8-spamdog/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA21104; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 03:05:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtp2.globalserve.net (smtp2.globalserve.net [209.90.128.7]) by mail1.bellsouth.net (8.8.8-spamdog/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA29184; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 03:05:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from buddy-guy (dialin903.toronto.globalserve.net [209.90.133.140]) by smtp2.globalserve.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA23185; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:48:29 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.1.19981029013916.00a9c250 mail.globalserve.net> X-Sender: updates mail.globalserve.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:41:21 -0500 To: "UFO UpDates Subscribers":; From: UFO UpDates - Toronto Subject: UFO UpDate: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 From: Stig_Agermose online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) To: updates globalserve.net Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:20:42 +0200 Subject: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi=20 [List only] Source: BBC Online, http://news.bbc.co.uk:80/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_203000/203133.stm Stig ******* Wednesday, October 28, 1998 Published at 15:16 GMT=20 =20 Sci/Tech =20 =20 Puzzle over alien 'discovery'=20 =20 (Photo:) Is there intelligent life in this star system?=20 =20 =20 by our Science Editor David Whitehouse=20 The scientific world is buzzing with the suggestion that signals=20 from aliens living in another star system may have been picked=20 up by a part-time astronomer.=20 Other astronomers are scrambling to confirm or deny them.=20 It could either be the most important discovery ever made, a=20 case of mistaken identity or an elaborate hoax.=20 The part-time astronomer who discovered the signals has not=20 revealed his identity. He is said to work for a major=20 telecommunications firm in England.=20 He has been using a small radio telescope belonging to his firm=20 to scan the sky for intelligent signals.=20 On October 22 and on the following night, the engineer reported=20 detecting signals from the EQ Pegasi star system which is 22=20 light years away.=20 The signals were not the type that occurs naturally. The data=20 has been distributed to several astronomers and observatories.=20 Follow-up observations are said to have begun at a major=20 European radio observatory.=20 However astronomers at the Jodrell Bank Observatory in England=20 could not confirm the signals. Astronomer Ian Morrison told BBC=20 News Online: "This is the first we've heard about it but we will=20 check it out."=20 The truth is out there=20 The same search for extra-terrestrial life is being carried out=20 by professional astronomers using the world's largest radio=20 telescopes such as the one in Arecibo, Puerto Rico.=20 They call it Seti, the Search for Extra-Terrestrial=20 Intelligence.=20 With the development of radio astronomy in the 1950s,=20 astronomers realised that they had telescopes that could send=20 and receive radio signals between the stars.=20 The first search for radio signals from space was in 1960. Two=20 nearby stars were observed but no signals were detected.=20 Since then about 40 searches have been made. Many unusual=20 signals have been detected but astronomers think that none of=20 them were from intelligent life.=20 Last month astronomers at the giant Arecibo radio telescope=20 conducting 'project Phoenix,' a detailed search for radio=20 signals from intelligent life in space, detected a signal from=20 EQ Peg but concluded that it was man-made interference.=20 The EQ Peg star system is unlike our own. It consists of two dim=20 red dwarf stars orbiting each other. From time to time=20 explosions, so-called stellar flares, occur on both stars.=20 Detecting signals from some form of intelligence living in a=20 nearby star system would be the most important scientific=20 discovery ever made.=20 At the moment it seems likely that the 'alien' radio signals are=20 just man-made interference.=20 Terrestrial signals can easily fool astronomers into thinking=20 that they have detected ET.=20 The searchers of project Phoenix recently tracked a signal for=20 14 hours before they realised it was a scientific satellite.=20 =A9 =20 =20 =20 =20 Relevant Stories=20 =20 28 Oct 98 Sci/Tech=20 *Is anybody out there? =20 28 Oct 98 Sci/Tech=20 *Anyone out there? =20 Internet Links =20 =09 *Seti Institute =20 *British UFO Research Association =20 *Ufology Society International The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet=20 sites.=20 =20 \_______________________________________________/ UFO UpDates - Toronto - updates globalserve.net A UFO & Related Phenomena E-Mail List operated=20 by Errol Bruce-Knapp - 416-691-0716 UFO UpDates Archives are available at http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates MUFON Ontario's Home Page: http://www.globalserve.net/~updates/mufon/ --------------4A0758B6F5F35F8A61897251-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 07:04:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA31737; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:02:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:02:41 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981029100315.01c12100 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:03:15 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <36378101.DB41C1B8 GroupZ.net> References: <199810281452_MC2-5E5E-A207 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"HBQS_3.0.il7.FE8Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23845 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > My point is that many people learn to make do with obsolete, problematic > equipment. This is a tough problem, but people who work at power plants are > used to dealing with tough problems. Suppose the 286 computers fail to roll > over to the year 2000. They will slip back to 1986, I believe. So what? All > date stamp records will come out with 1986 dates. It would cause havoc in the > record keeping, and an administrative nightmare, but it's hard to imagine how > this would adversely affect the equipment itself. The plant worked in 1986 > and I do not see why it will not continue working even though the equipment > thinks time has slipped backward 14 years. We discovered several years ago that there are ROM BIOSes out there with a very pernicious bug in them. They work fine as the clock rolls past midnight on Dec. 31, 1999. But if you subsequently try to reboot, the machine is dead. The only ways to get the computer running again are to either replace the BIOS or remove the clock battery from the motherboard, short out an on board capacitor, THEN restart. See MITRE's Y2K web pages for further details. So if you have one of the bad BIOS chips, you are SOL unless you already know about the problem and what to do about it. (As it turns out, the "easy" fix if up against the wall is to shut the computer down to avoid the date rollover. However, if you can plan for that, why not buy replacement BIOSes and slip them in now.) 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 Oct 29 07:30:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08689; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:23:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:23:12 -0800 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:19:11 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810291022_MC2-5E73-993 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"HZBfU.0.h72.WX8Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23846 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Mitchell Jones writes: Your statement, above, was not qualified. Nowhere did you state that you were talking only about the unlikely case where virtually everything has been successfully fixed . . . I should not have to qualify every damn thing I write here. This is not a Grand Jury and you are not Ken Starr. Readers here have common sense. It would be absurd for me to assert that everything will be successfully fixed. I've never seen a customer installation where everything worked successfully. Heck, I personally own five computers and I have never seen all five working correctly. I happen to have a 286 portable with a 1990 operating system and a December 1992 bios and . . . the date does roll over correctly, by the way. It is a nifty little 2.6 lb Gateway machine. So the person who wrote http://agitator.dynip.com/agitator/Generator/y2ktrainwreck.htm may be agonizing over nothing, but I hope the power company engineer *does* get off his butt to check. What that means is that the question of how these systems would behave when the rollover occurred was not considered when they were designed. Given that fact, it is absurd to engage in generalized theorizing about how they will behave under those circumstances. I'm not theorizing. I'm discussing actual equipment with which I am familiar. Dates frequently reset back to the starting time (usually 1986). I recall seeing one go negative. It is a constant problem I've been dealing with for years. . . . because we cannot know how any particular system--including power generation--will behave without investing time and money analyzing and testing it. Similar problems occur all the time because of flaky clocks. I know about particular systems: ones I have worked with. Of course we must invest time and money; that goes without saying. It trivializes a problem that is very real and very serious. Nobody is trivializing anything. More trivializing. The fact is that neither you nor anybody else can know a priori what a date-sensitive system that was designed to operate *within* the 20th century will do when the rollover into the 21st century occurs. Oh yes I can know! I know a priori because I test a priori, by setting clocks ahead. Generalized reasoning cannot answer such questions. But experience can. Each system must be examined and tested, to ascertain how it will behave when operated outside of its design specifications. Yes, of course. More trivializing. Five years ago, almost nobody was thinking about this problem, and most mainframe programmers were still habitually coding virtually everything to use the 2-digit year codes that had been the de facto standard since the 1950's. That is false. I worked on utility billing systems in the late 1970s at a major mainframe company, and we were well aware of these problems. I fixed my date problems by 1985, and I patched a bunch of circa 1984 AT&T microcomputers to roll over to 2000 correctly. I wrote that I know customers running business applications who reset their clocks to avoid license fees. Jones responds: In that case, I disagree. You can't disagree; this is an observation. Most businessmen would dress down an employee who engaged in the type of fraud that you describe, above, and would fire him if the behavior recurred. I wish! It was my software in some cases, and it was the managers who diddled with it. Employees don't care about expenses. And don't tell me I should look for a classier group of customers who never steal. You'll find thieves at the swankiest corporations. But I have to say 99.99% of customers are honest. The reason: they would not want to be exposed to the possibility of expensive litigation and damage to their reputations to save a few bucks on a software license. Alas, the customers know we will not sue for one package. But they don't get technical help, either. That brings 'em around. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 08:02:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20442; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:59:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:59:15 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <36388350.34F8 ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 07:01:36 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Paranoia? References: <1.5.4.32.19981029135422.00e5e5e0 popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2h1l71.0.I_4.I39Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23847 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: October 29, 1998 D.L. wrote in part: (with snips) > Sorry if you refer to me. Not particularly. I read your posts (not all though). >I've resigned myself that nothing positive can be done about the icecap >except crossing one's fingers. I give up. Thanks. Next time, pragmatism helps a little or have leverage to do anything you want. > It would be interesting to look for monatomics. I have a few friends >at MIT labs that would let me test for monatomics. Go for it. > Has monatomic theory been looked at? It makes sense that palladium >atoms may break free as it is being hydrogen loaded. What about the >nature of the hydrogen bond? Is it monatomic when it is loaded. Does it >go from diatomic to monatomic in the loading process? Is this accounted >for in the energy requirements to break the bond? Does loading into >palladium use less energy to break the hydrogen bond somehow? Your resources at MIT (including the laboratory and the library) propbably can answer these questions to your hearts content. > I think I have the answer. The weird nuclear stuff is from the >monatomic palladium magnetic field collapse transmuting the atom. The >energy is from monatomic hydrogen recombining as it escapes the >lattice. I'm not sure about superconductor magnetic oversaturation >collapse. Would this produce OU energy? You might be more successul at MIT if your questions are pursued as a straight pursuit of physics research without regard to over-unity goals. You might still get over unity though. Nature is not weird, only our thinking process is. > I'm looking at a wall of books to my right. Just one wall? > I have dibs on putting together the superconducting monatomic >palladium oversaturated magnetic field collapse triggered transmutation >producing weird particles source AND the monatomic hydrogen >recombination to diatomic hydrogen producing excess energy source >theorems as the basic nature of the cold fusion process for 10/29/98! >Nya-nya plplplplplplplplpl ;) Fine with me. Work at it and get a product out. And quit plpl-ing your saliva onto your bib. > The Bible says that if people hate you for doing right in this world, > your on the correct track! So I don't care what anyone thinks! That is your only resource to buttress your position? So where do you get this feeling that there is hate for you? Tell it all to your confessor (not me). Thanks for responding to the post. I take it that you are young and exuberant. Don't waste them. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 08:19:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA30288; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:17:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:17:30 -0800 Message-ID: <36389D96.4ACF ca-ois.com> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:53:42 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Fwd: UFO UpDate: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi] References: <36388322.EC1CE347 bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Rr2H-1.0.yO7.PK9Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23848 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > > Gnorts, Vorts! > > Well, it's not an internet hoax. BBC really *did* interview the > amateur astronomer; so, at least he exists. > > Probably a geosync satellite; A real Radio Telescope reguires a clocked driving mechanism (to enable it to compensate for the rotation of the earth) that would sweep the dish past a geosync satellite in less than a minute. Therefore geosync sats should be easily identified due to the very temporary but diurnally recurring nature of the signals recieved from them by such equipment. Jim O. but, not terrestrial since the signal > disappears when the antenna is pointed off axis. > > Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 09:16:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA23734; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:14:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:14:30 -0800 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:11:04 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810291213_MC2-5E7B-CB12 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"mrGsT2.0.co5.q9AEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23849 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Robert I. Eachus writes: We discovered several years ago that there are ROM BIOSes out there with a very pernicious bug in them. They work fine as the clock rolls past midnight on Dec. 31, 1999. But if you subsequently try to reboot, the machine is dead. The only ways to get the computer running again are to either replace the BIOS or remove the clock battery from the motherboard, short out an on board capacitor, THEN restart. Wow! That serious by golly. Someone deserves a medal for that one. (For finding it, not creating it.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 10:52:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25285; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:50:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:50:59 -0800 Message-ID: <3638B8B1.3A574573 GroupZ.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:49:21 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing References: <199810291213_MC2-5E7B-CB12 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"su3rv3.0._A6.JaBEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23850 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Anyone who is following this thread and wants to stay up to date on what is happening with yk2...this url has very good daily summaries of news stories...both positive and negative.... http://www.cruxnet.com/~sanger/y2k/ steve Jed Rothwell wrote: > > To: Vortex > > Robert I. Eachus writes: > > We discovered several years ago that there are ROM BIOSes out there with > a very pernicious bug in them. They work fine as the clock rolls past > midnight on Dec. 31, 1999. But if you subsequently try to reboot, the > machine is dead. The only ways to get the computer running again are to > either replace the BIOS or remove the clock battery from the > motherboard, short out an on board capacitor, THEN restart. > > Wow! That serious by golly. Someone deserves a medal for that one. (For > finding it, not creating it.) > > - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 11:49:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA12486; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:47:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:47:15 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:53:14 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [Fwd: UFO UpDate: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi] Resent-Message-ID: <"gZi3b2.0._23.1PCEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23851 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:53 AM 10/29/98, Jim Ostrowski wrote: >Terry Blanton wrote: >> >> Gnorts, Vorts! >> >> Well, it's not an internet hoax. BBC really *did* interview the >> amateur astronomer; so, at least he exists. >> >> Probably a geosync satellite; > >A real Radio Telescope reguires a clocked driving mechanism (to enable >it to compensate for the rotation of the earth) that would sweep the >dish past a geosync satellite in less than a minute. Therefore geosync >sats should be easily identified due to the very temporary but diurnally >recurring nature of the signals recieved from them by such equipment. > >Jim O. > > but, not terrestrial since the signal >> disappears when the antenna is pointed off axis. >> >> Terry It is odd that the reported signal *is* diurnal. BTW, the "amateur" is identified as Paul Dore. Partial resmume and ID at: Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 11:56:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA14591; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:54:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:54:27 -0800 Message-ID: <3638E353.2FBE8696 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:51:15 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: SETI signals detected from EQ Pegasi? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6tKM2.0.sZ3.oVCEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23852 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > Jealous they beat you to it? ;) Hehe, well not really. Whoever is at EQ Peg (if anyone) is probably not too advanced beyond us. They still use radio, limited to 300,000km/sec. I figure that a more advanced civilization would use something faster. Then again, maybe they are advanced, and wanted to contact us in a way they knew we would be able to recieve. If so, they obviously have alot of time on their hands. Or tentacles... But seriously, I don't know what to make of this. If its a real detection, this is one of the biggest things ever to have happened. If not, keep searching. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 12:04:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA17118; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:00:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:00:18 -0800 Message-ID: <3638E4A6.EE3D11AB sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:56:54 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Fwd: UFO UpDate: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi] References: <36388322.EC1CE347 bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_gXes1.0.8B4.HbCEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23855 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > > Gnorts, Vorts! > > Well, it's not an internet hoax. BBC really *did* interview the > amateur astronomer; so, at least he exists. > > Probably a geosync satellite; but, not terrestrial since the signal > disappears when the antenna is pointed off axis. They'll have to come up with a better explanation than that. If its a geosynchronous satellite, it would move with respect to the background stars as the earth turns. The signal stayed from the star, it didn't move. A satellite in a Molniya type orbit might do the trick though. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 12:06:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA16841; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:00:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:00:00 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:05:59 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: VORTEX SNOWJOB COMPLETE !!! Resent-Message-ID: <"oAMio3.0.z64._aCEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23854 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:57 PM 10/28/98, Rick Monteverde wrote: [snip] > But why even bother us about it >if there's not to be any details at all forthcoming? Like, what are we >supposed to DO with that information? [snip] Why, send money of course! 8^) >My SMOTs, including The Worlds Largest Smot, have been dismantled, and >their magnets recycled into incredible new antigravity levitators and >potential alien communication devices. (IOW, they hold notes on my filing >cabinets.) [snip] LOL. A small fraction of mine hold notes to the refrigerator. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 12:10:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA16285; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:59:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:59:05 -0800 Message-Id: <199810291958.NAA12262 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:57:22 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: [Fwd: UFO UpDate: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi] Resent-Message-ID: <"7GVJL.0.N-3.8aCEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23853 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Terry Blanton wrote: >> >> Gnorts, Vorts! >> >> Well, it's not an internet hoax. BBC really *did* interview the >> amateur astronomer; so, at least he exists. >> >> Probably a geosync satellite; > >A real Radio Telescope reguires a clocked driving mechanism (to enable >it to compensate for the rotation of the earth) that would sweep the >dish past a geosync satellite in less than a minute. Therefore geosync >sats should be easily identified due to the very temporary but diurnally >recurring nature of the signals recieved from them by such equipment. > >Jim O. > > but, not terrestrial since the signal >> disappears when the antenna is pointed off axis. >> >> Terry ***{An incisive comment, Jim. As you can see by reading the remarks from the engineer who picked up the supposedly extraterrestrial signal (between the lines of asterisks, below), the 30 meter antenna does, in fact, have a tracking mode, and the signal did persist long enough to discount the theory that the signal was coming from a geosynchronous satellite. It is an interesting situation. I recommend that everybody go to http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193/ and check this out. --Mitchell Jones}*** ******************************************* Hello, I am sending this along to inform you of a possible SETI Hit. First let me state, I am *NOT* a member of the SETI League for reason's I would rather not go into. I have however been conducting Amateur SETI for little over a year and a half. I am an engineer at a major telecomunications firm in England and I have for the last year conducted SETI from one of the large (10 Meter) dishes we have here that was taken offline some year sago. This is a "parasitic" experiment and no one around here knows I mounted a 2nd feedhorn on the dish due to the fact that I am the engineer. The station is as follows: One 10 Meter dish ----> into a custom built (by me) 1450 Mhz Feedhorn>-----> into a custom built (again by me) -----> "waterhole" filter (again designed and built by yours truely) -----> an Inmarsat LNA with about 25db gain ----->an ICOM R7100 whose output is sent to two Pentium II's (one running SETIFOX, the other FFTDSP42) Here is what happened: On 22 Oct 1998 at about 21:13UTC FFTDSP logged a "Hit". Whilst I was working outside the signal faded into view. I looked at the FFTDSP screen when I came inside to take a break to find the last bit of signal trailing into static. I quickly used the REPLAY.EXE program to replay the data to find what you see in the gif file HIT.GIF. The antenna was pointed at RA: 23 degrees 31 minutes 48 seconds(approx), Declination:19 Hours 55 minutes 58 seconds (approx). Several times during my shift I moved the antenna to that position but the signal did not reappear. Today 23 Oct 1998 at approximately the same time (21:17UTC in this case) the same signal was picked up at the same RA and declination. I had come in prepared to check again for the signal. Between last night and tonight I checked out all equipment to ensure it was in good health so you can imagine my excitement when SETIFOX alerted me at about the same time that it detected a carrier. I had FFTDSP logging the data again and you can see by looking at HIT02.GIF the signal did almost the exact same thing as the night before. I hurried to move the antenna off the source and when I did so the signal went away I moved it back on and lo and behold there it was. I ran two more on-source, off-source tests of this type before finally keeping it onsource by putting the antenna in tracking mode. I during this time I recorded several minutes of data in the form of a .WAV file to disc. Now that said, I am very reluctant to give my name due to the nature of my work and the fact that my supervisors know nothing of my SETI endeavor. I have a wife and kids and don't want to risk my job unless I know for sure this is the real thing. I was hoping your lot could check it out over the weekend since I will be unable to take data during my days off. I don't risk having the programs running when I am not there just in case someone from the company comes nosing around. Anyway if this sequence occurs again Monday or Tuesday I will alert Jodrell Bank, and the media (BBC, CNN,Skynews, and the like) due to the fact that I don't trust many people, SETI folks included. (No offense meant) 73's (I'd give my call but that would give me away.) So I'll just sign this, anonymous (for now) ******************************************* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 13:13:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10982; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:10:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:10:53 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <3638CC12.696F ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:12:02 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: aki ix.netcom.com Subject: test transmission References: <1.5.4.32.19981029135422.00e5e5e0 popd.ix.netcom.com> <36388350.34F8@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yjmtc.0.Oh2.QdDEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23856 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 29, 1998 Just a test to see of the subscription is still active. -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 13:25:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA16073; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:21:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:21:02 -0800 Message-Id: <199810292120.PAA14356 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:19:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi] Resent-Message-ID: <"6ko0X.0.2x3.zmDEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23857 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ***{The following is the text of a BBC story about the EQ Pegasi signal, with my comments inserted. --Mitchell Jones}*** *************************************** The scientific world is buzzing with the suggestion that signals from aliens living in another star system may have been picked up by a part-time astronomer. Other astronomers are scrambling to confirm or deny them. It could either be the most important discovery ever made, or more likely, a case of mistaken identity or an elaborate hoax. At first the part-time astronomer who discovered the signals would not reveal his identity. However he has since been named as Paul Dore of Siemens Plessey Systems in the UK. He has been using a small radio telescope belonging to his firm to scan the sky for intelligent signals. On October 22 and on the following night, he reported detecting signals from the EQ Pegasi star system which is 22 light years away. The signals were not the type that occurs naturally. The data has been distributed to several astronomers and observatories. However astronomers at the Jodrell Bank Observatory in England say it is all a case of mistaken identity. Astronomer Ian Morrison told BBC News Online: "I think he has detected signals from a satellite." ***{This is nonsense. Paul Dore supplied enough information in his original letter to refute such speculations: he recorded several minutes of ET type data while his antenna was in tracking mode. (As Jim Ostrovski noted, tracking a fixed star system would have caused the antenna to sweep past a geosynchronous satellite in less than a minute.) --Mitchell Jones}*** The truth is out there The same search for extra-terrestrial life is being carried out by professional astronomers using the world's largest radio telescopes such as the one in Arecibo, Puerto Rico. They call it Seti, the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence. With the development of radio astronomy in the 1950s, astronomers realised that they had telescopes that could send and receive radio signals between the stars. The first search for radio signals from space was in 1960. Two nearby stars were observed but no signals were detected. Since then about 40 searches have been made. Many unusual signals have been detected but astronomers think that none of them were from intelligent life. Last month astronomers at the giant Arecibo radio telescope conducting 'project Phoenix,' a detailed search for radio signals from intelligent life in space, detected a signal from EQ Peg but concluded that it was man-made interference. ***{This was refuted by Paul Dorr, who employed a commonsense test: he repeatedly shifted his dish off-target, and noted that the supposed ET signal went away, only to return when he shifted the dish back on-target. --Mitchell Jones}*** The EQ Peg star system is unlike our own. It consists of two dim red dwarf stars orbiting each other. From time to time explosions, so-called stellar flares, occur on both stars. Detecting signals from some form of intelligence living in a nearby star system would be the most important scientific discovery ever made. At the moment it seems likely that the 'alien' radio signals are just man-made interference. ***{Yup: man-made interference that seems to originate from EQ Pegasi. Man-made, but not hu-man-made! (No, I don't believe this yet, but I am very intrigued! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** Terrestrial signals can easily fool astronomers into thinking that they have detected ET. ***{Not so. The test is the one done by Paul Dorr: you shift your antenna repeatedly off-target, and see if the signal goes away. If it doesn't, you are dealing with hu-man-made interference. If it does, you are dealing with alien-man-made interference! --Mitchell Jones}*** The searchers of project Phoenix recently tracked a signal for 14 hours before they realised it was a scientific satellite. ***{Irrelevant. An earth-orbiting satellite would not remain at the same right ascension and declination for 14 hours. Right ascension and declination are celestial coordinates--i.e., numbers describing points on an immense imaginary sphere that is fixed with respect to the stars. Its equator is the projection of the equator of the earth, and its poles are the projections of the poles of the earth, but unlike the earth, it does not rotate. Hence if a satellite were to remain at the same celestial coordinates for 14 hours, it wouldn't be orbiting the earth and, thus, would not be a satellite. Thus it would have been obvioujs to the Project Phoenix people that they were tracking a moving object for 14 hours. There is no such possibility in the data supplied by Paul Dorr. As far as I can see--and I'm sure I'll be corrected if I am wrong--there are two possibilities: either Paul Dorr has found a signal that meets SETI's search parameters, or he is perpetrating a hoax. And, frankly, I find the latter possibility rather unlikely. --Mitchell Jones}*** Many astronomers involved in searching for life in space have expressed regret that the EQ Peg observations were released without going through the procedure agreed to tell the public about possible ET signals. ***{It is, indeed, regrettable: a cover-up cannot work if there are renegades who release information without going through the approved channels! --Mitchell Jones}*** Because of this they say they are suspicious that it is all a hoax. ***{Either that, or the persistent negative reports from SETI are the hoax. --Mitchell Jones}*** Even if it is it will have caused many scientists to think again about how they would release the news of a real discovery. ***{I don't know whether Paul Dorr has found a valid ET signal or not, but I do know that I distrust the mass media take on any controversy, and what I am seeing here reinforces that distrust. We need to get the government out of communications, and the way to do it is to grant ownership rights to "frequency-areas"--i.e., the right to be the strongest signal source at a given frequency in a given area. Such rights should be treated like any other property rights: they should be freely transferable at mutually agreed prices, and the content of the signals should be totally unregulated. If that were the case, then broadcasters would not be constantly worried about offending the regulatory authorities by sending out unapproved content, and they would be far less monolithic in their news screening procedures than they are now. Under those circumstances, a truth which the government wanted to suppress would have a far better chance to out than is the case today. --Mitchell Jones}*** *************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 13:53:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA26798; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:42:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:42:54 -0800 Message-ID: <3638E23F.5583 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:46:39 -0700 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: Storms: Blue: CF debate 10.28.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zuxTR3.0.WY6.T5EEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23858 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Blue: Storms: Chubb: CF debate 10.26.98 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:50:12 +0000 From: Edmund Storms To: rmforall earthlink.net To Rich Murray et al. Reply to Dick Blue (10/28/98) > > I am not so disturbed by the Takahashi claim from detection of neutrons > at 2.45 MeV. He may well be right about that. It's the higher-energy > part of the spectrum that I consider most suspect. Combine that with > the silly speculation about multi-deuteron reaction processes, and I > think we have good grounds to suspect that this is not careful work > by an "expert", as you would have us believe. By the way, you are aware > that the detector must be calibrated in order to arrive at a value for > the neutron energies , are you not? Since you have read the paper in > question, why don't you tell us how the detector was calibrated? I > could find no mention of that important detail. According to my reading of Fusion Technol 19 (1991) page 387, Takahashi used a NE213 detector. "The recoil-proton energy was calibrated by the Compton edge due to 60Co gamma rays." "The 2,45 MeV recoil proton energy increased its height in the third week, corresponding to the increments of excess neutron counts." He also used a He3 counter which showed a similar change in count rate as a function of time during the experiment. > > So the titanium grains are too small to stop the betas emitted by > the tritium. Do you think that makes things better? My statement > still stands that the betas do not actually reach the detector. If > they are not stopped in the titanium we really don't know very much > about the radiation being detected, do we? It's bad experimental > technique! The beta emission was measured by two different detectors. A GM counter detected the bremsstrahlung and a vibrating reed electrometer detected the beta current. Both methods gave similar results. I would say that we know enough about the radiation being detected to suggest an unusual behavior. As a result of this possibility, a government laboratory has been studying the effect. I don't yet know the results. > > > > --It is no shell game. The world is not black and white. Some data are > > compelling and some are supportive. Shades of gray exist in between. > > The Miles-Bush data are good and they demonstrate what they intend to > > demonstrate. However, to accept the initial claims for a nuclear > > reaction, which I accept, more data are required and especially data > > having a greater magnitude. Fortunately, such data are available so I > > do not need to use the Miles-Bush data to do anything more than show a > > general, not exact, relationship between heat production and helium > > generation. This relationship is consistent with an energy production > > near but not necessarily equal to a fusion-type reaction. Other > > possibilities can be considered but this is a good step toward believing > > a fusion-type reaction is the source of heat.-- > > > So can we now acknowledge that the Mills-Bush measurements are not the > greatest evidence for the production of excess heat? They need to > be "supported" by some other research, but how are we to analyze and > evaluated all this "gray" evidence? Let me suggest that the proper > approach is to forget all the weak claims and examine only the strongest > evidence, but you won't help us do that. You won't clean the CF house. A large collection of "strong" evidence exists which I have summarized in my latest review. The problem is that Dick and I have a different criteria for what is "strong". To make matters worse, I have no idea what Dick means by "clean the CF house". Of course some experiments are less useful than are others. However, some of these studies reveal aspects of the phenomenon which are valuable. What Dick wants is an experiment which is so well done and which shows such a large effect that he can find no errors. If we clean house using this criteria, there will be nothing left to discuss. > > If the Mills-Bush results are important because they show a correlation > between excess heat and helium, where are we if the excess heat data is > a bit shakey? By the way, could you confirm something for me about > the Mills-Bush technique. Am I correct in saying that there was no > catalytic recombining of deuterium and oxygen? That is to say the > electrolysis was done in an "open" configuration, not a sealed cell. > I wonder how you can rule out atmospheric contamination for an > "open" system. Although the system does not contain a recombiner, it is sealed from the atmosphere by a bubbler. When excess heat is detected, a sample of the evolving gas is passed through a steel flask, which is then sealed and sent for analysis.. As a result, any He is flushed from the system before a sample is taken and any He in the air is prevented from entering the system. > > > I find it strange that my reading habits are so often called into > question. I don't think I can allow Ed Storms (or anyone else, for that > matter) to define what constitutes "the literature" for CANR or cold > fusion. Clearly Ed Storms could benefit from a broader knowledge of > CANR so what is he doing to get himself up to speed on the very subject > he claims to be so well informed about. I see no point in reading > absolutely every piece of trash that gets published under the cold > fusion heading. Over the years the ICCF proceedings have certainly > included some pretty rotten stuff, so why pretend that all of > it is so great that I really should be reading it. I have been asking > for guidance as to where the solid evidence lies, and Ed Storms can't > really say what is solid and what is merely "supportive." I do not suggest Dick read all the "trash". I do suggest he read my latest review in Infinite Energy and we confine our debate to experimental results mentioned therein. > > So in our discussion concerning the statistical aspects of CANR data we > have gotten to the point where we agree, it seems, that it's desirable > to have results that, when plotted, yield a bimodal distribution. Can > we go further to suggest that data which does not show such a > distribution should not be "cleaned up" for presentation by the > arbitrary discard of the major portion of the distribution -- the part > the shows little excess heat? If you agree with that notion how can we > be justified in any further consideration of "positive" results that are > generated that way? Let me suggest that the Miles-Bush data is moving > closer to the discard pile. Maybe even the McKubre results belong > there, too. We seem to have regressed back to the idea that negative data can offset positive data to produce a net effect. This idea only applies to random events which CANR is not. However, I get the idea that Dick still believes we are all deceived by a random process. > > Now with respect to your data, I am intrigued by a statement that was > something to the effect that the shape of the distribution for the > "positive results" has no significance because of the variabiltiy of the > results. Are you saying that you have not replicated any of your > measurements? No, I am not saying that. I am saying that there is a wide variability in the way palladium behaves. In addition, the results depend on the applied current, the temperature, the shape of the sample, and the method of loading. All of these variables affect the results, so that an exact comparison can not be made between different studies. All we can use are general patterns of behavior. It is important that we all see the same patterns, regardless of these variables. > > I'd be glad to discuss, in detail, (d,alpha) reactions, if you would > care to state your hypothesis for such a reaction to account for the > observed excess heat at the watt level. I will hold off on this for a later discussion. > > If we are dealing (as I think we should be) with the testing of specific > hypotheses with regard to possible CANR processes, the experiments > should be designed to yield definitive results. For example, in the > context of cold fusion I would suggest that neutron detection should > play a key role, because of the superior sensitivity and selectivity it > provides. There aren't many processes that could result in a neutron > signal, but "excess heat" is just heat and that's to be expected > regardless of what reaction process occurs. We've been there and done > that. The results are in, but you won't acknowledge the established > facts. No, I will not acknowledge facts that do not apply to the conditions of the present experiments. In addition, having accepted the fact that CANR does occur, the established facts you would use do not seem to explain the observations. You only use them to show that the observations can not be true. On the other hand, if you accepted CANR, you would choose a different set of facts, and we could have a good debate about how this new collection applies. > > Now you are indicating interest in some (d,alpha) process. That's OK > with me. It's quite likely we already have information in hand that has > bearing on that question. Care to guess what the evidence already > shows? Yes, I can. > > Let me clear up the question relating to input power. If the cell is > driven at constant current the cell voltage is, in general, highly > variable. In fact that's one of the measured parameters that gets > logged, right? Of course, the voltage is confined to limits, perhaps > zero and the power supply maximum. Based on the data I have examined, I > would say it is still appropriate to characterize the cell voltage, and > thus the power input", as being "noisey." I presume that is due to > bubbles, cell polarization, and buildup of insulating layers on the > cathode and stuff like that. Yes, the voltage is noisy . The extent of the variation is severely limited by the low impedance of the power supply (about 0.01 ohm) compared to the higher impedance of the cell (about 10 ohm). Therefore, the voltage has a random variation of perhaps 100 mW. Over a period of time, as the cell conditions change, the average voltage slowly changes, as you surmise. This noise is averaged by many measurements and the drift has no effect because the voltage is measured at regular ntervals. > > Now you say your data show a positive temperature coefficient. Does the > cell voltage show a temperature coefficient, and can you explain what > you see in that regard? Pons and Fleischmann, of course, found you can > boil water that way, at constant current. Because the resistance of the > cell went up as a function of temperature so did the power input with > just the result one would expect The positive temperature coefficient is seen as an increase in excess power when the temperature of the cell is increased. Of course, a calibration as a function of temperature is required. When the temperature is raised, the voltage goes down at constant applied current. In other words, the resistance of the cell drops as temperature is increased. Of course, one can boil water by applying sufficient electrolytic power. The question is whether the power being applied equals the power being used during the boiling process. Pons and Fleischmann find that more power is being applied than is required to boil the measured amount of water. > Yes, I would read your papers on this topic. My address is a matter of > public record so I am not shy about posting it here. > > Richard Blue > 631 Forest St. > East Lansing, MI 48823 > > I look forward to seeing just what you have by way of evidence for a > CANR process. I just hope it's better than the CETI experiment, for > example. I have sent some papers and look forward to your comments. Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 14:37:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA13603; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:34:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:34:13 -0800 Message-ID: <00c201be038b$dd40c6e0$4e8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: test transmission Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:31:20 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"S7ES72.0.TK3.arEEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23860 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: aki ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Date: Thursday, October 29, 1998 2:12 PM Subject: test transmission >October 29, 1998 > >Just a test to see of the subscription is still active. Yep. :-) > >-ak- > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 14:37:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA12403; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:32:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:32:34 -0800 Message-ID: <00b501be038b$a017bbc0$4e8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Secret Ingredients in O/U ? Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:28:46 -0700 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: <"Q8FYe1.0.g13.1qEEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23859 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The usual concentration of Deuterium in tapwater is 1 Deuteron/6700 Protons which is about 6.69E22/6700~= 1.0E18 Deuterons/cm^3 of H2O. This could be increased by electrolysis of aqueous sulfuric acid or such. Secondly, loading the water with a dilute acid to get more free deuterons, even dissolving CO2 in the water to make the weak carbonic acid might be worth the effort. Along this line,in the sonoluminescent experiments there was a better "yield" with lower temperature water which infers that there was more CO2 dissolved in it, thus possibly more H+ + HCO3- or D+ + HCO3- and so on. Electron "collisions" with the D+ ion from mechanical agitation should facilitate CF and/or ZPE Extraction Heat, dE = hbar/dt. IOW, pH and Deuteron concentration in the water could have a significant effect on O/U performance. Maybe this is the "Secret Ingredient" that Scott was looking for with the Vortex or the Griggs Pump? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 15:00:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA25926; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:58:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:58:21 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981029175900.01c15b90 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:59:00 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing In-Reply-To: <199810291213_MC2-5E7B-CB12 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"GR4223.0.0L6.DCFEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23861 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:11 PM 10/29/98 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Wow! That serious by golly. Someone deserves a medal for that one. (For >finding it, not creating it.) Of course, the manager of the project was furious that a perfectly good $4500 PC had been trashed by the Y2K testing, and he was going to have to replace it out of his capital budget. (At that point all that was known was that the motherboard was non-functional, and possibly non-fixable.) It took two levels of higher management to convince him that the testers were doing their job right. (Just in case it isn't obvious. They needed to buy a second machine to continue the testing while the manufacturer tried to figure out what had gone wrong in the other one.) Incidently, if you run Sun's part of my time this week has been spent installing patches on Solaris 2.5.1 machines to make them Y2K compliant. And we have a lot of Sun OS 4.1.x machines that we may have to bite the bullet on and move to Solaris 2.5.1 or 2.6. 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 Oct 29 15:23:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04535; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:21:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:21:34 -0800 Message-ID: <3638F860.EEBF6069 bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:21:04 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: SETI Hoax Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lymTC1.0.j61.zXFEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23862 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: SETI Signal Is A HOAX >From CNINews1 aol.com 10-29-98 BOSTON (BUSINESS-WIRE) --On Monday, October 26, an anonymous enthusiast of the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) made a startling anonnouncement: we are not alone in the universe. But within minutes of analysing the alleged data, Professor Nathan Cohen of Boston University gave the verdict: "A hoax", said Cohen. Not even a good one." The alleged discoverer claimed that he was a ham radio operator piggybacking his SETI search off a British company's 30 foot satellite dish. "He talked the talk but didn't walk the walk", said Cohen. Calling himself 'anon', the hoaxster sent copies of the data all over the internet, which Cohen quickly reviewed--and was the first to reject. "It stuck out like a sore thumb", said Cohen. Unwilling to elaborate on all of the signal's failings as an alien 'hit', Cohen said "my colleagues and I share the belief that we shouldn't help the hoaxsters by telling them all that's wrong with the fake." The major problem is that the signals were carbon copies on two separate days of data, a probability that Cohen says would be astronomically small as reality. But the main problem was the signal lacked the channel bandwidth required of a SETI signal. "The signal loses a tremendous amount of punch over cosmic distances and you have to optimize the mode", said Cohen. Cohen showed in 1993 that distant SETI signals would be spread out in frequency like teeth on a comb, in what is now called 'polychromatic SETI'. "These 'sidebands' of the alleged signal do nothing for helping detect it and are characteristic of an Earth-based modulation method." While anon gave the position close to that of a known star, Cohen asserts the star's position information lacked a key detail which invalidates it as a real one. Cohen asserts that the 'signal' is a fabricated one or a snip of a terrestrial satellite's signal being passed off as otherwise. "A hacker gone wild. Too many 'Contact' reruns. Case closed", said Cohen. This information is provided by SETINOW which sponsors dissemination of important breakthroughs in SETI. Professor Cohen may be contacted through the following listing. CONTACT: Boston University Office of Public Relations, 617/353-2240 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 15:30:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA06475; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:26:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:26:22 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981029233301.00df07e8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:33:01 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Paranoia? Resent-Message-ID: <"0cVoK2.0.5b1.UcFEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23863 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 07:01 AM 10/29/98 -0800, you wrote: >October 29, 1998 > > >Thanks. Next time, pragmatism helps a little or have leverage to do >anything you want. I had to look pragmatism up. I thought the big icecube business is quite practical. I checked this idea first with Professor Searl. At first I was thinking of lifting the whole icecap up at once and ascend into space. I asked if the mass chord of the icecap could be determined. Professor Searl said yes. So I said if we vibrate the icecap at this mass chord it should become weightless. Professor Searl said yes. So I said then if we had an Inverse G Vehicle, we could give the icecap a vibration to make it easier to pick up, then lift it out into space with the IGV? Professor Searl said in a kind of funny loud voice "YOU COULD". After a while, I thought cubic mile icecubes might be a more practical start. A cubic mile of ice for $5,000.00? Do you think anyone would buy them? One might be able to make one or two deliveries a day. >> It would be interesting to look for monatomics. I have a few friends >at MIT labs that would let me test for monatomics. > >Go for it. Are there any of those used Palladium rods around? > >> Has monatomic theory been looked at? It makes sense that palladium >>atoms may break free as it is being hydrogen loaded. What about the >>nature of the hydrogen bond? Is it monatomic when it is loaded. Does it >>go from diatomic to monatomic in the loading process? Is this accounted >>for in the energy requirements to break the bond? Does loading into >>palladium use less energy to break the hydrogen bond somehow? > >Your resources at MIT (including the laboratory and the library) >propbably can answer these questions to your hearts content. I was looking through an old chemistry book and it occurred to me that a simple experiment may prove the theory in a clear manner. I'd need help for safety issues. Did I read about blue flash and explosion possibilities with CF experiments? >> I'm looking at a wall of books to my right. > >Just one wall? I would like to buy a whole lot more. What is your background? >Fine with me. Work at it and get a product out. And quit plpl-ing your >saliva onto your bib. The idea mentioned above might be useful. I shouldn't have been so cocky. I was just video capturing Sifu Yao Li's Nan Quan form outside in the cold for two and a half hours and now I have a cold. God is saying that I shouldn't be so cocky. >Thanks for responding to the post. I take it that you are young and >exuberant. Don't waste them. Actually, you treated me and others guys, who didn't get to go to Gene's burning tile demo, to a real nice dinner after the cold fusion conference at that Cambridge hotel 3 or 4 years ago. I'm the asian with the black ponytail (it's 40" long now), Fu Man Chu moustache, and goatee, who sat across from you. I don't think I carried my walking stick then which is a rare occurance. I know I'm scary enough as it is so I left it home. I showed you the book Tapping The Zero Point Energy by Moray B. King and its' ZPE suggestion of CF excess energy. Do you remember me? Thanks for the dinner BTW. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 15:54:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA17005; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:52:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:52:28 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981029235921.00e397c8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:59:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Secret Ingredients in O/U ? Resent-Message-ID: <"Ko2JG3.0.U94.x-FEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23864 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; I just saw another reference reinforcing the validity of my idea. Anyone have a CF lab? If I just say it here, the one year disclosure time limit to patent will start ticking. I got a good feeling about this one! Dennis At 03:28 PM 10/29/98 -0700, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >The usual concentration of Deuterium in tapwater is 1 Deuteron/6700 Protons >which is about 6.69E22/6700~= 1.0E18 Deuterons/cm^3 of H2O. > >This could be increased by electrolysis of aqueous sulfuric acid or such. > >Secondly, loading the water with a dilute acid >to get more free deuterons, even dissolving >CO2 in the water to make the weak carbonic acid might be worth the effort. > >Along this line,in the sonoluminescent experiments there was a better >"yield" with lower temperature water which infers that there was more CO2 >dissolved in it, thus possibly more H+ + HCO3- or D+ + HCO3- and so on. > >Electron "collisions" with the D+ ion from mechanical agitation should >facilitate CF and/or ZPE Extraction Heat, dE = hbar/dt. > >IOW, pH and Deuteron concentration in the water could have a significant >effect on O/U performance. > >Maybe this is the "Secret Ingredient" that Scott was looking for with the >Vortex or the Griggs Pump? > >Regards, Frederick > > > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 16:43:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA06490; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:40:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:40:09 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:40:03 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <363c0a63.157532113 24.192.1.20> References: <1.5.4.32.19981029070503.00e14084 popd.ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981029070503.00e14084 popd.ix.netcom.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: <"DwqcL1.0.Kb1.fhGEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23866 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:05:03 -0500, Dennis C. Lee wrote: >Hi; > >Maybe they did think of, or don't want to expose the technology and cannot >try, a vehicle that can cut large chunks of ice from the South Pole Icecap >and transport it to places that need it. > >Dennis Hi Dennis, They would save themselves a lot of trouble and effort by simply using icebergs that calve naturally. In fact this idea (towing icebergs to dry lands) has been around longer than I have. I don't think it has been considered practical. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 16:43:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA05649; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:39:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:39:22 -0800 Message-ID: <00f601be039d$57583560$4e8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Secret Ingredients in O/U? Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:36:25 -0700 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: <"zx5u3.0.AO1.vgGEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23865 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex FWIW. The ratio of H to D coming off at the cathode in electrolysis of water to enrich the D fraction is 8:1. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 17:56:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA13299; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:36:23 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:36:23 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981030013103.00e31b3c popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:31:03 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Stop children, what's that sound? Resent-Message-ID: <"UdlmK.0.ZF3.-UHEs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23867 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; It's got to be antigravity or it will be too slow, impractical and no fun. Dennis At 12:40 AM 10/30/98 GMT, you wrote: >On Thu, 29 Oct 1998 02:05:03 -0500, Dennis C. Lee wrote: >Hi Dennis, > >They would save themselves a lot of trouble and effort by simply using >icebergs that calve naturally. In fact this idea (towing icebergs to >dry lands) has been around longer than I have. I don't think it has >been considered practical. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 18:14:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA16170; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:10:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:10:24 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981030021737.00e4c4e8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:17:37 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Palladium Black Resent-Message-ID: <"8UuTL1.0.Ly3.D0IEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23868 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; Shoot, they already tried palladium black in '95. There goes my surprise. http://www.skypoint.com/~jlogajan/files/rothwell.txt Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 18:54:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA32754; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:51:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:51:43 -0800 Message-Id: <199810300251.UAA20610 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:50:06 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: SETI Hoax Resent-Message-ID: <"J8ZtG1.0.d_7.-cIEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23869 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >SETI Signal Is A HOAX >>From CNINews1 aol.com >10-29-98 > > BOSTON (BUSINESS-WIRE) --On Monday, October 26, an anonymous >enthusiast of the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) >made a startling anonnouncement: we are not alone in the universe. >But within minutes of analysing the alleged data, Professor Nathan >Cohen of Boston University gave the verdict: "A hoax", said Cohen. >Not even a good one." > >The alleged discoverer claimed that he was a ham radio operator >piggybacking his SETI search off a British company's 30 foot >satellite dish. "He talked the talk but didn't walk the walk", said >Cohen. Calling himself 'anon', the hoaxster sent copies of the data >all over the internet, which Cohen quickly reviewed--and was the >first to reject. > >"It stuck out like a sore thumb", said Cohen. Unwilling to elaborate >on all of the signal's failings as an alien 'hit', Cohen said "my >colleagues and I share the belief that we shouldn't help the >hoaxsters by telling them all that's wrong with the fake." ***{Of course not. If we have clear-cut standards, stated in advance, concerning what a bona fide "SETI hit" would look like, then there is no wiggle room. In that event, some renegade might actually *obtain* a SETI hit. And we can't have that, now can we! --Mitchell Jones}*** > >The major problem is that the signals were carbon copies on two >separate days of data, a probability that Cohen says would be >astronomically small as reality. ***{Yup. No man-made signal is ever the same on two different days. If you didn't watch "Leave it to Beaver" in the 1950's, you were shit out of luck. Nobody ever re-runs anything, for any reason. --Mitchell Jones}*** But the main problem was the signal >lacked the channel bandwidth required of a SETI signal. "The signal >loses a tremendous amount of punch over cosmic distances and you >have to optimize the mode", said Cohen. Cohen showed in 1993 that >distant SETI signals would be spread out in frequency like teeth on >a comb, in what is now called 'polychromatic SETI'. "These >'sidebands' of the alleged signal do nothing for helping detect it >and are characteristic of an Earth-based modulation method." ***{Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of the above? If so, please step to the plate and take a swing. --Mitchell Jones}*** While >anon gave the position close to that of a known star, Cohen asserts >the star's position information lacked a key detail which >invalidates it as a real one. ***{And that detail, apparently, must forever remain a secret. Why? To "avoid helping the hoaxters," of course! No one would ever for an instant suspect that the true purpose of these secret standards might be to give the government the power to snuff out claims of extraterrestrial life and, horror of horrors, extraterrestrial intelligence. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Cohen asserts that the 'signal' is a fabricated one or a snip of a >terrestrial satellite's signal being passed off as otherwise. "A >hacker gone wild. Too many 'Contact' reruns. Case closed", said >Cohen. > >This information is provided by SETINOW which sponsors dissemination >of important breakthroughs in SETI. Professor Cohen may be contacted >through the following listing. > >CONTACT: > >Boston University > >Office of Public Relations, 617/353-2240 ***{It is my understanding that SETI has published some rather explicit standards for determining whether a signal has characteristics reflecting an intelligent source, and that those standards have been incorporated into specific signal analysis programs which will run on a PC. It is also my understanding that Paul Dore claimed to have been using those programs to evaluate the various signals which he encountered. Yet now we seem to have a "Professor Cohen" who is bringing forward additional criteria, after the fact, and intends to use them to reject Paul Dore's alleged "SETI hit." This reminds me to one of the Mars missions, many years ago. The intent was to run an experiment to test for bacteria in the Martian soil, and prior to the mission a committee of scientists met and worked out detailed criteria which would be used to evaluate the experimental results. If those criteria were met, NASA would announce that there was life on Mars; if not, not. Those criteria were published and available to the public before the mission lifted off. Unfortunately, when the mission landed on Mars, did the experiment, and radioed the results back to Earth, it was discovered that the criteria had been met! NASA, if it were to abide by its prior stipulations, would have to announce publicly that the experimental results suggested the presence of life on Mars! Did they do it? Of course not: they decided their earlier criteria had been flawed, added some additional ones after the fact which the results did not meet, and announced that the experiments proved there was no life on Mars! --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 18:56:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA01137; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:54:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:54:17 -0800 Message-ID: <363945BB.2C243D22 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:51:07 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: SETI Hoax References: <3638F860.EEBF6069 bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vmbsU.0.fH.OfIEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23870 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I hate to get involved in the 'Conspiracy! conspiracy!' type thigs, but: > "It stuck out like a sore thumb", said Cohen. Unwilling to elaborate > on all of the signal's failings as an alien 'hit', Cohen said "my > colleagues and I share the belief that we shouldn't help the > hoaxsters by telling them all that's wrong with the fake." Very curious...why wouldn't they admit what these failings were? It would help others to identify a hoax. Very peculiar... > > The major problem is that the signals were carbon copies on two > separate days of data, a probability that Cohen says would be > astronomically small as reality. Improbable from a natural source, yes. From a source produced by an advanced civilization (if any)? I don't know. > But the main problem was the signal > lacked the channel bandwidth required of a SETI signal. "The signal > loses a tremendous amount of punch over cosmic distances and you > have to optimize the mode", said Cohen. Cohen showed in 1993 that > distant SETI signals would be spread out in frequency like teeth on > a comb, in what is now called 'polychromatic SETI'. "These > 'sidebands' of the alleged signal do nothing for helping detect it > and are characteristic of an Earth-based modulation method." I noticed sidebands on the other waterfall plots. Hmmm...I've seen many naturally occuring atrophysical phenomena that produce a narrow band signal...and a narrow band signal is also what Carl Sagan was so enthusiatic about wanting to find. As Sagan would say, "Curiouser and curiouser". > While > anon gave the position close to that of a known star, Cohen asserts > the star's position information lacked a key detail which > invalidates it as a real one. I'd like to know what this key detail was. Why wouldn't he say? Unfortunately this is what I expected. I don't know if the signal is real or not, but these arguments for a hoax are lousy. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 19:20:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA05392; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:17:48 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:17:48 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981030030619.00905704 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, 29 Oct 1998 22:06:19 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi] Resent-Message-ID: <"DeFog2.0.sD1.8zIEs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23871 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:19 PM 10/29/98 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{The following is the text of a BBC story about the EQ Pegasi signal, >with my comments inserted. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >*************************************** >The scientific world is buzzing with the suggestion that signals from >aliens living in another star system may have been picked up by a part-time >astronomer. > >Other astronomers are scrambling to confirm or deny them. > Is one of our space rocket probes in line between earth and EQ Pegasi? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 20:08:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA11645; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:03:06 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:03:06 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:02:32 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Secret Ingredients in O/U ? Resent-Message-ID: <"rYAIF1.0.kr2.afJEs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23872 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:28 PM 10/29/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote: [snip] > >Electron "collisions" with the D+ ion from mechanical agitation should >facilitate CF and/or ZPE Extraction Heat, dE = hbar/dt. > >IOW, pH and Deuteron concentration in the water could have a significant >effect on O/U performance. [snip] Actually, it may even get better than that. The D+ is not in that form. It is typically in D3O+ form. This fact affects proton conduction, for example, which requires H3O molecule rotation plus a proton exchange, which may be by tunneling. In the D3+ state, the "free" d+ shares the two orbitals, which hop about very fast at random, playing a kind of musical chairs, or odd man out. The presence of 3 + charges and 2 - charges should make for a bigger molecule, but the "spring constant" provided by the electrons should IMHO be less. The D3O+ molecule should be less ridged, and therefore the shielding effect force should less on average, but may be far more diverse, i.e. much bigger oscillations in proton distance may be present within the D3O+ radical. You may not even need electrodes? Just make a lot of D3O+ and rattle its cage. One way to rattle its cage might be to reduce pressure and place a high voltage cathode, say 30KV, above the surface of the electrolyte to attract the D3O+ radicals off the solution surface. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 21:06:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA23109; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:00:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:00:48 -0800 Message-Id: <199810300500.XAA22550 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:59:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: BBC On Possibly Intelligent Signals From EQ Pegasi] Resent-Message-ID: <"fTclC3.0._e5.0WKEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23873 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 04:19 PM 10/29/98 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>***{The following is the text of a BBC story about the EQ Pegasi signal, >>with my comments inserted. --Mitchell Jones}*** >> >>*************************************** >>The scientific world is buzzing with the suggestion that signals from >>aliens living in another star system may have been picked up by a part-time >>astronomer. >> >>Other astronomers are scrambling to confirm or deny them. >> >Is one of our space rocket probes in line between earth and EQ Pegasi? > >Ed Strojny ***{If so, it would be a tad strange for it to remain there for several days running. What kind of trajectory would that be? Do we have a mission to EQ Pegasi that nobody is telling us about? :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 21:20:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA29495; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:18:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:18:27 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:13:47 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: Verdian aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: H2 Glow Discharge with K Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 226 Resent-Message-ID: <"GISjI3.0.nC7.YmKEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23875 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 10/27/1998 12:36:15 Pacific Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes: > BTW, what ever happened to the nifty work Vince was doing in Los Vegas? > Regards, > Horace Heffner Vorts, I am still here. I have been _very_ busy at my day job with B.Blue and unable to continue the H2 glow discharge experiments. I _will_ be firing up again around the 15th of December, the day that I retire from 32 years chasing bits and bytes. (yea!) I also have had cataract surgery on both eyes which corrected my 20/200 vision to 20/30! So now I really have to make sure safety glasses are close at hand when getting ready to start a run. Some things planned: I need to construct or purchase a high frequency (20-100 kHz), high voltage (5-10 kV) power supply that can supply, oh maybe 500-1000 milliamps, alternating current. The high voltage DC supply I built is nice but I still think that an AC supply would provide better mixing of the H2/K mixture in the reactor tube. An efficient supply powered by a DC source would be nice and simplify power measurment to the tube. I have searched through my catalogs but have found nothing. Any ideas anyone? Horace, I read through the Motorola high freq electronic ballast info you sent me but those things have error circuts built into them and would go into the electronic version of cardiac arrest if I tried using them with all the vaiables that crop up when running the experiment (fill pressure/electrode gap ect). So what I'm looking for is a hefty supply that can pump a high voltage AC current into just about any impedence with high efficiency. Best Regards and lurking, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada BTW, the vacuum system is still holding perfect vacuum since I shut it down in August. V From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 21:23:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA29436; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:18:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:18:14 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <4b900225.36394b11 aol.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:13:53 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Where's VINCE IN LAS VEGAS?? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 226 Resent-Message-ID: <"8tBIM.0.oB7.MmKEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23874 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 10/27/1998 13:59:44 Pacific Standard Time, fjsparb sprintmail.com writes: > >I'll second that, Horace! Hey Vince, WHERE ARE YOU?? > > He's probably over at the airport scooping up all of those quarters that I > left there on a stop-over in mid September. :-) > > Regards, Frederick Heh...Naa, I don't play with those electronic suckahs. Hey, you shoulda called me, I'm in the book. Would have been glad to meet, hava cuppa cawfee, mebby saved you some of those quarters. Vince Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 21:35:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA00353; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:32:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:32:41 -0800 X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:44:11 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: SETI Hoax Resent-Message-ID: <"LvtsJ2.0.R5.uzKEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23876 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 9:50 PM 10/29/98, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] > >But the main problem was the signal >>lacked the channel bandwidth required of a SETI signal. "The signal >>loses a tremendous amount of punch over cosmic distances and you >>have to optimize the mode", said Cohen. Cohen showed in 1993 that >>distant SETI signals would be spread out in frequency like teeth on >>a comb, in what is now called 'polychromatic SETI'. "These >>'sidebands' of the alleged signal do nothing for helping detect it >>and are characteristic of an Earth-based modulation method." > >***{Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of the above? If so, >please step to the plate and take a swing. --Mitchell Jones}*** Cohen is saying travelling through light years of hydrogen and cosmic dust will disperse the signal frequency over a large band with absorbtion lines. Dore has a signal at 1453.07512Mhz plus or minus about +400 hz, not a wideband signal. I see no reason to assume, as both Cohen and Dore have, that the signal must originate at either a nearby (e.g. geosynchronous) distance or at light year distances in the vicinity of some star or another. It could originate somewhere in between, possibly even within our solar system. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 21:44:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA03790; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:42:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:42:17 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981030054940.00e38b30 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:49:40 -0500 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net, vortex-L@eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: CIA? This is for you! Resent-Message-ID: <"2PEnF2.0.8x.u6LEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23877 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi; Some one just told me that CIA crawl all over these lists. Hey CIA people, this is for you. Do you have your spots all picked out in the underground cities? If not, your gonna be stuck up here on top just like the rest of us, if and when the poles tip! Even if you do have reservations, what are you going to do when you come topside and see everything dead and destroyed? It ain't going to be much fun then either. Will all of your family and friends get admission to the underground city? You can deny the possibility but that won't stop the truth of the matter. You will die just like the rest of us, or you will wish you were dead. Your fun and games will end up killing us all. Get your butts in gear and get us ANTIGRAVITY ICECUBE CUTTER/TRANSPORTS so we can start trimming the South Pole Icecap or you will die like dogs just as the rest of us will. Time is running out... If I die because of your stupidity, I will be so upset, I will find some way of coming back... :( Dennis C. Lee > > I'm really sick of this nonsense and > > appalled at the ignorance of elementary > > physics that allows it to propagate. > > NOTHING will twist the rotational axis of > > the earth perceptibly except collision > > with another heavenly object having > > enormous mass. > >Well, I'm afraid when you read this you're going to get even sicker. > >My elementary geophysics tells me that the the earth is very, very, nearly >a perfect sphere. The much talked about equatorial bulges or "oblate >spheroid" shape is extremely small compared with the size of the earth. > >Then, my elementary physics tells me that a perfect spinning sphere has >*NO* gyroscopic stability. Nada, none at all. If the earth were a perfect >sphere, after a few years a gang of fleas all farting in the same direction >could tilt the earth off its axis. Of course it's not quite a perfect >sphere. So how does that tiny equatorial bulge stack up against the ice >packs anyway? Is much of that equatorial bulge made up of seawater? I'd >really be interested in a good explanation of the physics of the stability >of a spinning *elastic* sphere (perhaps fluid filled, like a near-spherical >water balloon for instance). I'd think its centrifugal bulge would >contribute to stability as expected, but is it truly the same as a rigid >solid having a fixed equatorial bulge? How would such a fluid system react, >for instance, to a field which applied force to all the elements (molecules >or whatever) of the system all at once? The earth, even the solid rock, >might as well be considered a near-fluid when taken altogether as a planet. > >There may be other forces between the earth and sun, or even the other >planets, that loom large but unknown against the simple electrogravitic >(plain old gravity in straight radiated 'as in electrostatic' lines). >Obviously electrostatic forces aren't small, and even gravity itself might >have some glitches to it involving large spinning masses. I know the >magnetogravitic effect from such systems is thought to be vanishingly >small, but that might not be the whole story. Remember "Jove rules the >heavens", and there's physical evidence to back the claim (angular momentum >of the solar system). Would that be a clue? > >The ancients seemed terribly intersted in tracking the heavens, and >evidence indicates they experienced enormous relief and celebration when >observations showed that things were continuing to move in their expected >paths. Why this paranoia about celectial objects reappearing in their >proper places? Don't they always? Why would anyone think it could be >otherwise? Maybe they knew something we don't? Maybe they or their >ancestors had certain bad experiences in this regard? > >I'm not buying into any of this 5/5/2000 or polar shift stuff without any >good evidence either. But I'm not so sure I can dismiss all of it out of >hand without some good answers to some of these other questions. > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 22:56:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA21777; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 22:53:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 22:53:29 -0800 Message-ID: <03b501be03d1$a34af780$ba98a8cf hh2152186.www.surfsouth.com> From: "Bill Wallace" To: , , Subject: Re: CIA? This is for you! Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:50:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"bOrjv.0.wJ5.d9MEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23878 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Some one just told me that CIA crawl all over these lists. Damn you discovered our methods of research! Funny the MKULTRA program did not predict this, you know too much Dennis! Hey CIA people, >this is for you. Do you have your spots all picked out in the underground >cities? Yep, and you aren't invited! > If not, your gonna be stuck up here on top just like the rest of us, >if and when the poles tip! If?, we are COUNTING on it, easier way to get rid of the "problems" Even if you do have reservations, what are you >going to do when you come topside and see everything dead and destroyed? Laugh our asses off??! It >ain't going to be much fun then either. Will all of your family and friends >get admission to the underground city? Only if my friends are female, with red hair and pointy breasts! You can deny the possibility but that >won't stop the truth of the matter. You will die just like the rest of us, No, we have lots of food reserves, syspakco has really been cranking out the MRE's for us! And then our alien friends, the greys and the blues have everything else we need, have even slaughtered a lot of cows and stored the meat for us! (and that is not even counting all the mammoths they have frozen for us that will be thawed after your gone!) And you thought the cow deaths were meaningless = HAHA ! >or you will wish you were dead. Your fun and games will end up killing us YEAH! That is the point! Hello? Why do you think all the mystery, damn you discovered our plot! Our tricks were not good enough, no matter, we have all the food and water and cities and friends in high places, just need to abduct a few more farm girls for the breeding and we are set to go! >all. Get your butts in gear and get us ANTIGRAVITY ICECUBE CUTTER/TRANSPORTS NOT ON YOUR LIFE! HAH! >so we can start trimming the South Pole Icecap or you will die like dogs >just as the rest of us will. Time is running out... And we can't wait for the final countdown! TICK TICK BABY! >If I die because of your stupidity, I will be so upset, I will find some way >of coming back... :( OUR STUPIDITY! AU CONTRERE MON FRERE! We are the ones with the food and the underground cities, you are the one that is going to perish!~ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 23:49:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA03456; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:47:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:47:17 -0800 Message-Id: <199810300746.BAA24295 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:45:34 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Y2K and utility billing Resent-Message-ID: <"RYac91.0.wr.4yMEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23879 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >To: Vortex > >Mitchell Jones writes: > > Your statement, above, was not qualified. Nowhere did you state that you > were talking only about the unlikely case where virtually everything has > been successfully fixed . . . > >I should not have to qualify every damn thing I write here. ***{That's right, by cracky! We are all mind readers here, so if you toss out global, unqualified assertions that seem to make no sense at all, we will be able to easily insert the qualifiers which you omitted. Indeed, why not simply send out blank posts, since we will all know exactly what you mean. :-) --Mtichell Jones}*** This is not a >Grand Jury and you are not Ken Starr. Readers here have common sense. ***{Damn straight, and mind reading capability too. Some of us--myself included--are even scanners. (You can stop taking those aspirins, Jed. They will do you no good! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** It would >be absurd for me to assert that everything will be successfully fixed. I've >never seen a customer installation where everything worked successfully. Heck, >I personally own five computers and I have never seen all five working >correctly. I happen to have a 286 portable with a 1990 operating system and a >December 1992 bios and . . . the date does roll over correctly, by the way. It >is a nifty little 2.6 lb Gateway machine. So the person who wrote >http://agitator.dynip.com/agitator/Generator/y2ktrainwreck.htm may be >agonizing over nothing, but I hope the power company engineer *does* get off >his butt to check. > > > What that means is that the question of how these systems would behave > when the rollover occurred was not considered when they were designed. > Given that fact, it is absurd to engage in generalized theorizing about > how they will behave under those circumstances. > >I'm not theorizing. I'm discussing actual equipment with which I am familiar. >Dates frequently reset back to the starting time (usually 1986). I recall >seeing one go negative. It is a constant problem I've been dealing with for >years. ***{If I may be serious for a moment: you are missing the point. What you learn by investigating the Y2K related vulnerabilities of *your* systems cannot be used as a basis for judging how other systems will behave. You cannot use the type of generalized reasoning that you have been employing, if you expect to reach true conclusions. Each system which employs 2 digit dates--and when we count those that use embedded chips there are hundreds of millions of them--must be examined separately and assessed on its own merits. Sometimes that is merely a matter of popping open a cabinet, jotting down a chip number, and contacting a manufacturer. At other times, it may require the examination and correction of hundreds of millions of lines of user-written code. Until such efforts have been undertaken, the extent of vulnerability cannot be assessed. It is only after large numbers of sites have completed such projects that statistics can be compiled and reasoned judgments can be reached about the threat to the nation as a whole. Such studies have been done, and are being continuously updated, by various companies such as the Gartner Group, *and I have yet to see any of them with the happy-go-lucky, devil-may-care attitude exhibited by you.* I, personally, do not claim to know whether Jan. 1, 2000 will arrive with a bang or with a whimper, but I think we should all assume that serious societal disruption will occur, and plan accordingly. Sure, that course of action will involve expense and inconvenience, but we should follow it anyway. It is a form of insurance, nothing more, and nothing less. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > . . . because we cannot know how any particular system--including power > generation--will behave without investing time and money analyzing and > testing it. > >Similar problems occur all the time because of flaky clocks. I know about >particular systems: ones I have worked with. Of course we must invest time and >money; that goes without saying. > > > It trivializes a problem that is very real and very serious. > >Nobody is trivializing anything. ***{Are too! :-) --MJ}*** > > > More trivializing. The fact is that neither you nor anybody else can > know a priori what a date-sensitive system that was designed to operate > *within* the 20th century will do when the rollover into the 21st > century occurs. > >Oh yes I can know! I know a priori because I test a priori, by setting clocks >ahead. ***{Yes, but you can't extrapolate your results to other sites where the systems are different, or to the country as a whole. Your narrow experiences cannot be used as a basis for concluding that all is well and that Y2K isn't going to result in an economic collapse, or something worse. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > Generalized reasoning cannot answer such questions. > >But experience can. ***{Only for the site where the experience took place. You cannot validly generalize from your situation to the situations of others. --MJ}*** > > > Each system must be examined and tested, to ascertain how it will behave > when operated outside of its design specifications. > >Yes, of course. > > > More trivializing. Five years ago, almost nobody was thinking about this > problem, and most mainframe programmers were still habitually coding > virtually everything to use the 2-digit year codes that had been the de > facto standard since the 1950's. > >That is false. I worked on utility billing systems in the late 1970s at a >major mainframe company, and we were well aware of these problems. I fixed my >date problems by 1985, and I patched a bunch of circa 1984 AT&T microcomputers >to roll over to 2000 correctly. ***{Amazing. I've never heard of a shop that invested the money necessary to become Y2K compliant by 1985, despite having read tons of stuff on this topic, which I have literally been following for years. If this is true, then I can certainly see why you are inclined to trivialize this matter, but you need to recognize that your experience is exceedingly rare if not unique. The truth is precisely as I stated, above: "Five years ago, almost nobody was thinking about this problem, and most mainframe programmers were still habitually coding virtually everything to use the 2-digit year codes that had been the de facto standard since the 1950's." It appears that you have had a wildly aberrant experience with this problem, and it has caused you to take it too lightly. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >I wrote that I know customers running business applications who reset their >clocks to avoid license fees. Jones responds: > > In that case, I disagree. > >You can't disagree; this is an observation. ***{That makes my reply sound pretty silly, Jed, but only because you misstated the remark to which I was responding. Let's insert your actual words, and see how my reply sounds then: > >I wrote: "people often set back dates now. They buy software with a license >that expires after some period of time, and to keep it going they reset the >computer every year." Jones responds: > > In that case, I disagree. > >You can't disagree; this is an observation. Now your rejoinder falls flat: since your statement contained a reference to frequency ("often"), I can obviously disagree that, for business applications, the frequency is large enough to justify the use of that word. (And that's exactly what I did.) What this illustrates is a point I have tried to make with you before, via e-mail: you delete too much of the posts to which you are responding. As a result, you sometimes lose track of the context, and needlessly stray into hot water. When you are arguing, it is better to leave too much of the context than to leave too little. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > Most businessmen would dress down an employee who engaged in the type of > fraud that you describe, above, and would fire him if the behavior > recurred. > >I wish! It was my software in some cases, and it was the managers who diddled >with it. Employees don't care about expenses. And don't tell me I should look >for a classier group of customers who never steal. You'll find thieves at the >swankiest corporations. But I have to say 99.99% of customers are honest. > > > The reason: they would not want to be exposed to the possibility of > expensive litigation and damage to their reputations to save a few bucks > on a software license. > >Alas, the customers know we will not sue for one package. But they don't get >technical help, either. That brings 'em around. > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 23:56:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA05561; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:53:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:53:07 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981030075939.00e13494 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:59:39 -0500 To: "Bill Wallace" , , , From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: CIA? This is for you! Resent-Message-ID: <"9LcTR1.0.gM1.Y1NEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23880 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi; You bum, you are ruining the effect. OK, Bill, what do you think of the icecap mass at the South Pole? I think the issue should be addressed. What do you think should be done? Dennis At 01:50 AM 10/30/98 -0500, Bill Wallace wrote: >>Some one just told me that CIA crawl all over these lists. > >Damn you discovered our methods of research! Funny the MKULTRA program did >not predict this, you know too much Dennis! Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Oct 29 23:56:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA05985; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:53:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:53:29 -0800 Message-ID: <3639791B.680C ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:30:19 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: CIA? This is for you! References: <1.5.4.32.19981030054940.00e38b30 popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6duCm2.0.RT1.u1NEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23881 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dennis C. Lee wrote: > > Hi; > > Some one just told me that CIA crawl all over these lists. Hey CIA people, > this is for you. Do you have your spots all picked out in the underground > cities? If not, your gonna be stuck up here on top just like the rest of us, > if and when the poles tip! Even if you do have reservations, what are you > going to do when you come topside and see everything dead and destroyed? It > ain't going to be much fun then either. Will all of your family and friends > get admission to the underground city? You can deny the possibility but that > won't stop the truth of the matter. You will die just like the rest of us, > or you will wish you were dead. Your fun and games will end up killing us > all. The CIA , if they are lurking here , would probably be looking for posts about making small scale atomic explosions, and don't have a clue as to what the hell you are talking about with this 5/5/2000 scenario. And even if they did what would you expect any of them to do about it? Snivel to their supervisors? Quit their jobs? BTW I got Noone's book too. It's a hype to get you interested in joining the Masonic Order. Your attention is being diverted from the issues they attempt to hide by not mentioning them at all. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 00:52:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA18373; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:51:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:51:28 -0800 Message-Id: <199810300851.TAA16232 tig.com.au> From: "NeXuS" To: Subject: Re: Important Safety Tip Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:47:10 +1100 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: <"c3cOU2.0.wU4.GuNEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23882 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Is this the same gases that are formed from styrofoam. Just wondering cause isnt that why they banned them from mcdonalds a while back ? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 01:37:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA25627; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:36:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:36:21 -0800 Message-Id: <199810300935.DAA25385 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 04:34:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: SETI Hoax Resent-Message-ID: <"d5gE53.0.LG6.KYOEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23883 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 9:50 PM 10/29/98, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >> >>But the main problem was the signal >>>lacked the channel bandwidth required of a SETI signal. "The signal >>>loses a tremendous amount of punch over cosmic distances and you >>>have to optimize the mode", said Cohen. Cohen showed in 1993 that >>>distant SETI signals would be spread out in frequency like teeth on >>>a comb, in what is now called 'polychromatic SETI'. "These >>>'sidebands' of the alleged signal do nothing for helping detect it >>>and are characteristic of an Earth-based modulation method." >> >>***{Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of the above? If so, >>please step to the plate and take a swing. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Cohen is saying travelling through light years of hydrogen and cosmic dust >will disperse the signal frequency over a large band with absorbtion lines. ***{That's what I thought at first, also, but upon reflection the part about the bandwidth expansion made no sense to me. When a photon grazes a dust particle, it will give up some of its energy and drop down in frequency (Compton effect), but it will also be deflected off course. We will not receive it, at a distance of 22 light years, or, if we do, we will not be able to recognize it as part of the original signal. Thus I remain befuddled as to exactly what Cohen is trying to say. --Mitchell Jones}*** >Dore has a signal at 1453.07512Mhz plus or minus about +400 hz, not a >wideband signal. I see no reason to assume, as both Cohen and Dore have, >that the signal must originate at either a nearby (e.g. geosynchronous) >distance or at light year distances in the vicinity of some star or >another. It could originate somewhere in between, possibly even within our >solar system. ***{You make an excellent point, Horace. Modern astronomers believe that the solar system is surrounded by the Oort cloud, an immense spherical distribution of comets--more than 100 billion of them--with each such comet plying its own, independent, roughly circular orbit around the sun. The comets in the Oort cloud are concentrated in a region from 1/2 to 1 light year from the sun and, because of their vast distances from us, each would remain in roughly the same region of the sky for a lengthy period of time. Looking back at Paul Dore's original letter, I see that the coordinates he used were RA: 23 hours 31 minutes 48 seconds(approx), Declination:19 degrees 55 minutes 58 seconds (approx). (He had reversed hours with degrees, but that was an obvious typo.) From another source, I find that Eq Pegasi is at 23h31m52.2s 19deg56m15s 21.97, which is close to Dore's coordinates, but not exactly the same. What if he is reading a signal that isn't coming from Eq Pegasi at all, but rather from an object orbiting somewhere in the Oort cloud? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 02:19:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA03394; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:18:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:18:03 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:24:04 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Secret Ingredients in O/U ? Resent-Message-ID: <"tSp6K2.0.rq.Q9PEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23884 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:02 PM 10/29/98, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >In the D3+ state, the "free" d+ shares the two orbitals, which hop about >very fast at random, playing a kind of musical chairs, or odd man out. The >presence of 3 + charges and 2 - charges should make for a bigger molecule, >but the "spring constant" provided by the electrons should IMHO be less. >The D3O+ molecule should be less ridged, and therefore the shielding effect >force should less on average, but may be far more diverse, i.e. much bigger >oscillations in proton distance may be present within the D3O+ radical. > >You may not even need electrodes? Just make a lot of D3O+ and rattle its >cage. One way to rattle its cage might be to reduce pressure and place a >high voltage cathode, say 30KV, above the surface of the electrolyte to >attract the D3O+ radicals off the solution surface. This was a bad idea due to the high energy cost and the probable ionization and destruction of the D3O+ radicals with low payback ratios. A better idea might be to oscillate the D3O+ radicals in solution with high frequency insulated electrode plates. Due to increased capacitance with increased area, plate size would be limited, so lots of small cells in series might be called for? At least this approach would minimize the evolved gas. Another thought, the tips of micro tendrils which form on (esp. Pd) cathodes may act as a tunneling site for the exchange of a D+ from the D3O+ to the cathode. The D3O+ must rotate into the proper orientation for the tunneling to occur. Then a random period of time follows prior to the tunneling. If the randomness of such time can be controlled, it might be possible to force simultaneous tunneling of multiple D+ from multiple D3O+ radicals to the atomic sized tendril tip. Such a coordination might be achieved by a pulse with fast enough rise time. The tuneling of two D+ nucleii to the same electron rich site momentarily creates a Bose condensate, a long delay in proximity, and the prospect of fusion. So the secret ingredients would be (1) lots of atomic sized Pd tendrils, (2) negative DC bias to achieve D3O+ radical migration to the interface at the tendril tip, and (3) ultra-fast rise time of the potential at the tendril tips into the overpotential range. This scenario does not account for the lack of normal fusion signature though. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 02:53:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA01556; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:51:21 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:51:21 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:49:17 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: SETI Hoax Resent-Message-ID: <"Ixxld1.0.DO.bePEs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23885 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:34 AM 10/30/98, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >>Cohen is saying travelling through light years of hydrogen and cosmic dust >>will disperse the signal frequency over a large band with absorbtion lines. > >***{That's what I thought at first, also, but upon reflection the part >about the bandwidth expansion made no sense to me. When a photon grazes a >dust particle, it will give up some of its energy and drop down in >frequency (Compton effect), but it will also be deflected off course. With lots of dust between here and there some of the scattered radiation is again reflected back at us through secondary and teritary interactions. [snip] >Looking back at Paul Dore's original letter, I see that the coordinates he >used were RA: 23 hours 31 minutes 48 seconds(approx), Declination:19 >degrees 55 minutes 58 seconds (approx). (He had reversed hours with >degrees, but that was an obvious typo.) From another source, I find that >Eq Pegasi is at 23h31m52.2s 19deg56m15s 21.97, which is close to Dore's >coordinates, but not exactly the same. What if he is reading a signal that >isn't coming from Eq Pegasi at all, but rather from an object orbiting >somewhere in the Oort cloud? --Mitchell Jones}*** Such an object, due to the possible extreme orbital eccentricity of Ort cloud objects, might be coming right at us. Then again, it doesn't even have to be an Ort Cloud object, it might be a vehicle aimed almost directly at us. 8^) Another possibility is a pulsar? However, 1453.07512 MHz is one humming fast pulsar! Gee, I wonder if gravity waves could make matter in the vicinity of a fast spinning black hole radiate synchronously? In any event, it is self evident that corroboration is needed, and it seems to me especially useful to also get some time lapse optical spectrum photos of the vicnity. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 04:57:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA30274; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 04:54:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 04:54:12 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <3639A965.72EC ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 03:56:21 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Ice chunks & ---- (off topic) References: <1.5.4.32.19981029233301.00df07e8 popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sRys7.0.yO7.qRREs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23886 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 30, 1998 Dennis, > I had to look pragmatism up. At least you are frank about it. >I thought the big icecube business is quite practical. As already mentioned by Sparber, it's an old idea. As a kid devouring "Popular Science'and Popular Mechanics (took after dad), they had a cover showing a steamer lugging a chunk of arctic iceberg down to warmer latitudes to solve the fresh water needs. Hasn't happened yet. > Do you think anyone would buy them? One might be able to make one or >two deliveries a day. In the fresh water craze, some people in Japan, I read, got sucked into buying airlifted arctic ice (packaged nicely). By the way, perhaps you may want to levitate equal amounts of ice fron both poles to keep everything in balance. > Are there any of those used Palladium rods around? Yes, ask MIT what they did with theirs. > I would like to buy a whole lot more. What is your background? I hope you do. Make sure you don't buy the same ones. My background is more than one wall so far. > God is saying that I shouldn't be so cocky. God is saying to one of it's creation, "go take advantage of that fool in the cold". > Actually, you treated me and others guys, who didn't get to go to You are welcome. It was an impluse to extend the commonality of the symposium experience to a dinner. Most people at the Second Mallove Symposium were not invited to the confidential burning tile disclosure/demonstration. Somehow I do not feel I missed out on anything now. > I'm the asian with the black ponytail (it's 40" long now), Fu Man Chu >moustache, and goatee, who sat across from you. So you remember how you appeared. Only thing I know about myself was that I was not running around naked. Is the tail prehensile yet? :) >I don't think I carried my walking stick then which is a rare > occurance. I know I'm scary enough as it is so I left it home. Good idea. You never want to scare yourself. >I showed you the book Tapping The Zero Point Energy by Moray B. King >and its' ZPE suggestion of CF excess energy. I have Zero recollection on that. >Do you remember me? Thanks for the dinner BTW. Yes I remember. I also recollect an impression of you that reminded me of a taut spring. Probably because of your physical training. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 05:10:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA00134; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 05:09:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 05:09:14 -0800 Message-ID: <017301be0406$17f994e0$4e8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Secret Ingredients in O/U? Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 06:05:02 -0700 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: <"dzdsT.0.02.vfREs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23887 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex While Horace is working out Theoretical Physical Chemistry: :-) With a 1.23 Volt potential required to electrolysis of water (doubled to 2.5 volts to overcome electrode polarization effects and wiring losses) it takes about 25 kilowatt-hours/pound of hydrogen liberated in the process. With 8 pounds of hydrogen atoms/2 pounds of deuterium atoms given off during the electrolysis concentration of Heavy Water, about 250 kilowatt-hours will be required, or 2.5 volts at 100,000 amperes will do the job in one hour. Or 100 amperes at 2.5 volts will do about 18 pounds (2.16 gal.) of water in about 1,000 Hours. At $0.10/kilowatt-hour it will cost about $25.00 to electrolyze that 2.16 gallons of water. I think Chalk River can provide Heavy Water at less cost,unless you have an old lead-acid storage battery in good condition laying around ,and a battery charger,very cheap electricity, plus lots of insurance coverage. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 06:41:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA24527; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 06:40:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 06:40:13 -0800 Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox2.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <3639CFB7.5988496E css.mot.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:39:51 -0600 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola PCS - Rapid Tooling Applications X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Important Safety Tip References: <199810300851.TAA16232 tig.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Shjya1.0.5_5.C_SEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23888 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: NeXuS wrote: > Is this the same gases that are formed from styrofoam. Just wondering cause > isnt that why they banned them from mcdonalds a while back ? No, the clown caved into to public misinformation regarding the recyclability of styrofoam and the CFCs originally used in it's manufacture. The decision was only a PR move to cut their losses educating the public to the facts. The polymer coated paper products they use now are 10x worse than the alleged claims of the 'green' groups regarding foamed styrene. Styrene, foamed or not, IS and has always been recyclable. The polymer coated paper products used now are NOT and never will be. Landfill or burn, those are the only choices as the barrier layer that the FDA requires to make them suitable for use with food products also prevents them from both biodegrading AND from being recycled. What you didn't hear about in the popular press is the decision to switch put several companies who DID process waste styrene out of business, and several more that were opening. If the 'green' groups had any sense at all, they would lobby to have the foamed containers brought back. They are much more environmentally friendly than the current packaging. As for the CFCs, they were originally used to foam the plastic but have not been used for over 10 years now. They had already been phased out of manufacturing before the clown even made the switch. Education is a dangerous thing. Perhaps we should outlaw it so people would want it more.... 8^) -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John E. Steck Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola, Libertyville, IL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 06:53:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA28178; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 06:52:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 06:52:21 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <26617406.3639d1ee aol.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 09:49:18 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SETI Hoax Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 226 Resent-Message-ID: <"J2JtD.0.Cu6.aATEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23889 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 10/29/1998 21:34:48 Pacific Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes: > Cohen is saying travelling through light years of hydrogen and cosmic dust > will disperse the signal frequency over a large band with absorbtion lines. > Dore has a signal at 1453.07512Mhz plus or minus about +400 hz, not a > wideband signal. I see no reason to assume, as both Cohen and Dore have, > that the signal must originate at either a nearby (e.g. geosynchronous) > distance or at light year distances in the vicinity of some star or > another. It could originate somewhere in between, possibly even within our > solar system. > Regards, > Horace Heffner > Perhaps an incoming ship announcing itself. Any doppler on that frequency? Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 07:20:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA05098; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:18:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:18:25 -0800 Message-ID: <3639D81C.E45D1A9E bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:15:40 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [Fwd: UFO UpDate: Re: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETILeague'] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------E9ED87B7C76B01794825FB4D" Resent-Message-ID: <"Owlzy1.0.aF1.1ZTEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23890 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. --------------E9ED87B7C76B01794825FB4D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dr. Shuch sure has his panties in a wad. I wonder if the 63 stations' beamwidths are too narrow? Terry <><><><><><><><><><><> --------------E9ED87B7C76B01794825FB4D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from mail4.bellsouth.net (mail4.bellsouth.net [205.152.0.4]) by mail.atl.bellsouth.net (8.8.8-spamdog/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA10027; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 03:31:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtp1.globalserve.net (smtp1.globalserve.net [209.90.144.2]) by mail4.bellsouth.net (8.8.8-spamdog/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA09290; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 03:31:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from buddy-guy (dialin893.toronto.globalserve.net [209.90.133.130]) by smtp1.globalserve.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id CAA23439; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:20:12 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from updates globalserve.net) Message-Id: <4.1.19981030020108.05d7aa70 mail.globalserve.net> X-Sender: updates mail.globalserve.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 02:08:23 -0500 To: "UFO UpDates Subscribers":; From: UFO UpDates - Toronto Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETI League' Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 From: Stig Agermose To: updates globalserve.net Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 05:35:40 +0200 Subject: Statement By Dr. Paul Shuch Of 'The SETI League' : Forwarded from the SETI Email Discussion List. Information on the list can be found at http://www.setileague.org/admin/setilist.htm Stig ******* At 06:47 PM 10/28/98 -0800, Brian Wong wrote: >Dr. Shuch, I feel a public statement is in order or we will all look bad. Thanks, Brian. My public statement, already sent to the press through another forum (though all of you are free to disseminate it to your local media), follows: --------------------- You may by now have seen claims in the press about a signal from EQ Peg, allegedly received by an amateur in England. The nonprofit, membership-supported SETI League has been analyzing this claim since Friday night. None of our 63 active stations around the world has been able to confirm it. The signals were reported anonymously in a message hacked into a *closed* signal verification email list. Still, David Whitehouse at BBC decided to run with the story, without contacting Seth Shostak or me. (I wonder why?). The perpetrator asserts that he/she is NOT a SETI League member, which is scant consolation to us. The "signal" has been thoroughly discredited by a host of radio astronomers, amateur and professional, who have analyzed the GIFs posted to the Internet. The person who reported the alleged signals has violated every principle of responsible science. He has NOT followed the carefully crafted SETI League signal detection protocols to which all of our participating stations are signatory. See http://www.setileague.org/general/detect.htm He has NOT adhered to international policies regarding signal verification. See http://www.setileague.org/general/protocol.htm He has NOT identified himself, and NOT answered emails from our volunteer Regional Coordinator in England, making any meaningful follow-up impossible. And he has NOT waited for backup analysis before announcing his "find" to the press. If this is not a blatant hoax, it is the worst kind of irresponsible science (the kind which gives The SETI League, and all credible scientific endeavours, a bad name). Anonymity and scientific integrety are mutually exclusive. A responsible scientist, amateur or professional, owns his mistakes as well as his accomplishments. Unfortunately the media sometimes fail to make that distinction. ----------------------------------------------------------------- H. Paul Shuch, Ph.D. Executive Director, The SETI League, Inc. 433 Liberty Street, PO Box 555, Little Ferry NJ 07643 USA voice (201) 641-1770; fax (201) 641-1771; URL http://www.setileague.org/ email work: n6tx setileague.org; home: drseti@usa.net "We Know We're Not Alone!" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:03:59 -0500 From: "Dr. H. Paul Shuch" To: Brian Wong Subject: Re: SETI EQ Pegasi Again and spreading. \_______________________________________________/ UFO UpDates - Toronto - updates globalserve.net A UFO & Related Phenomena E-Mail List operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp - 416-691-0716 UFO UpDates Archives are available at http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates MUFON Ontario's Home Page: http://www.globalserve.net/~updates/mufon/ --------------E9ED87B7C76B01794825FB4D-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 07:32:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA11659; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:30:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:30:50 -0800 Message-ID: <3639DBE4.36B4 interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:31:48 -0500 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: SETI Hoax References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RmMuJ2.0.5s2.fkTEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23891 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > > In any event, it is self evident that corroboration is needed, and it seems > to me especially useful to also get some time lapse optical spectrum photos > of the vicnity. Sounds good, Horace. And when NASA confirms the validity of such signals, they will proceed to hush it up. If they let it out, the publicity would lead to a quadrupling of their budget and those lazy old NASA (3.5+ grade point) engineers certainly wouldn't want to go to all the work that a huge growth spert in the agency would entail! :-( Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 09:51:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA24117; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 09:49:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 09:49:32 -0800 Message-ID: <363A04B3.1C91 ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:25:55 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Wide band SETI References: <199810300935.DAA25385 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DZDUh3.0.Uu5.hmVEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23892 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >At 9:50 PM 10/29/98, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >[snip] > >> > >>But the main problem was the signal > >>>lacked the channel bandwidth required of a SETI signal. "The signal > >>>loses a tremendous amount of punch over cosmic distances and you > >>>have to optimize the mode", said Cohen. Cohen showed in 1993 that > >>>distant SETI signals would be spread out in frequency like teeth on > >>>a comb, in what is now called 'polychromatic SETI'. Gee , I must have missed the experiment performed by Cohen , and presumably some extraterrestrials which showed this. I agree that the compton effect will scatter "photons" but photons are not a useful concept for radio engineers, at least not the earthbound ones. If we take the single frequency case , not the wide band emissions used by geosysc satellites, the emission at a given freq either gets absorbed on it's way to the target or it doesn't , in any case absorption lines are specific to given elements in the way and are very narrow. If your transmision is coherent, monochramatic, and the frequency does not correspond with an absorption line it gets through unchanged. Of course SETI is not geared up to monitor for such narrow band emissions as it appears our mystery RF astronomer was. That is presumably the kicker in all this. What's he doing using narrow band in violation of Schuch's ("Dr. Seti's") dictums? I have had personal experience with Schuch via email. Typical arrogant government brown noser, IMO. Won't talk to me unlessI publish a peer reviewed paper about SETI. But don't let my experience/opinion influence y'all. None of this is any of my business anyway, because I'm not part of the gov't. Scuse me Fred . Jim O. "These > >>>'sidebands' of the alleged signal do nothing for helping detect it > >>>and are characteristic of an Earth-based modulation method." > >> > >>***{Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of the above? If so, > >>please step to the plate and take a swing. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > >Cohen is saying travelling through light years of hydrogen and cosmic dust > >will disperse the signal frequency over a large band with absorbtion lines. > > ***{That's what I thought at first, also, but upon reflection the part > about the bandwidth expansion made no sense to me. When a photon grazes a > dust particle, it will give up some of its energy and drop down in > frequency (Compton effect), but it will also be deflected off course. We > will not receive it, at a distance of 22 light years, or, if we do, we will > not be able to recognize it as part of the original signal. Thus I remain > befuddled as to exactly what Cohen is trying to say. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >Dore has a signal at 1453.07512Mhz plus or minus about +400 hz, not a > >wideband signal. I see no reason to assume, as both Cohen and Dore have, > >that the signal must originate at either a nearby (e.g. geosynchronous) > >distance or at light year distances in the vicinity of some star or > >another. It could originate somewhere in between, possibly even within our > >solar system. > > ***{You make an excellent point, Horace. Modern astronomers believe that > the solar system is surrounded by the Oort cloud, an immense spherical > distribution of comets--more than 100 billion of them--with each such comet > plying its own, independent, roughly circular orbit around the sun. The > comets in the Oort cloud are concentrated in a region from 1/2 to 1 light > year from the sun and, because of their vast distances from us, each would > remain in roughly the same region of the sky for a lengthy period of time. > Looking back at Paul Dore's original letter, I see that the coordinates he > used were RA: 23 hours 31 minutes 48 seconds(approx), Declination:19 > degrees 55 minutes 58 seconds (approx). (He had reversed hours with > degrees, but that was an obvious typo.) From another source, I find that > Eq Pegasi is at 23h31m52.2s 19deg56m15s 21.97, which is close to Dore's > coordinates, but not exactly the same. What if he is reading a signal that > isn't coming from Eq Pegasi at all, but rather from an object orbiting > somewhere in the Oort cloud? --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > > >Regards, > > > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 10:52:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA10355; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:48:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:48:09 -0800 Message-ID: <363A128B.3414 ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:24:59 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wide band SETI References: <199810300935.DAA25385 mail11.jump.net> <363A04B3.1C91@ca-ois.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xB8s4.0.jX2.fdWEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23893 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > But don't let my experience/opinion influence y'all. None of this is any > of my business > anyway, because I'm not part of the gov't. Oh, but just for the sake of the outside chance anyone IS interested in what else I might have to say about this subject, click here: http://www.ca-ois.com/jimostr CIA lurkers invited too. CIA lurkers may request my resume by emailing me at the address in the header... ;^) Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 11:26:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26272; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:24:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:24:49 -0800 Message-Id: <199810301924.NAA07549 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:23:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Alleged SETI Hit Resent-Message-ID: <"vmQdR2.0.MQ6.1AXEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23894 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 4:34 AM 10/30/98, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>>Cohen is saying travelling through light years of hydrogen and cosmic dust >>>will disperse the signal frequency over a large band with absorbtion lines. >> >>***{That's what I thought at first, also, but upon reflection the part >>about the bandwidth expansion made no sense to me. When a photon grazes a >>dust particle, it will give up some of its energy and drop down in >>frequency (Compton effect), but it will also be deflected off course. > >With lots of dust between here and there some of the scattered radiation is >again reflected back at us through secondary and teritary interactions. ***{Yes, but as I noted, in that case there would be no way to recognize that it was part of the original signal. The density of cosmic dust in the vicinity of the sun--within 21 lightyears, say--is incredibly low, and thus the mean free path of a photon through it is very great. (If this were not the case, we would see very little from beyond 20 or 30 light years.) This means that after the first deflection, the photon would likely travel a vast distance before the 2nd deflection occurred, and would thus be far from the line-of-sight connecting Eq Pegasi to Earth when it was deflected again. Result: even if the second deflection pointed it straight at the center of Paul Dore's dish, it would be coming in at a different angle from the original signal, would rebound toward a different focal point, and would not be picked up by the receiver. As I said, it would not be recognized to be a part of the original signal. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >[snip] >>Looking back at Paul Dore's original letter, I see that the coordinates he >>used were RA: 23 hours 31 minutes 48 seconds(approx), Declination:19 >>degrees 55 minutes 58 seconds (approx). (He had reversed hours with >>degrees, but that was an obvious typo.) From another source, I find that >>Eq Pegasi is at 23h31m52.2s 19deg56m15s 21.97, which is close to Dore's >>coordinates, but not exactly the same. What if he is reading a signal that >>isn't coming from Eq Pegasi at all, but rather from an object orbiting >>somewhere in the Oort cloud? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Such an object, due to the possible extreme orbital eccentricity of Ort >cloud objects, might be coming right at us. Then again, it doesn't even >have to be an Ort Cloud object, it might be a vehicle aimed almost directly >at us. 8^) > >Another possibility is a pulsar? However, 1453.07512 MHz is one humming >fast pulsar! ***{Plus, a pulsar signal would not pass through the filters of a SETI signal analysis program. (Too regular.) --MJ}*** Gee, I wonder if gravity waves could make matter in the >vicinity of a fast spinning black hole radiate synchronously? ***{Same as the above: "black hole" radiation would not pass the SETI filters. --MJ}*** > >In any event, it is self evident that corroboration is needed, and it seems >to me especially useful to also get some time lapse optical spectrum photos >of the vicnity. ***{I agree that corroboration is needed. However, since the world's governments have a virtual monopoly on radiotelescope facilities, and since there seems to be a fairly strong possibility that they are engaged in a cover-up of ET related information, a non-confirmation cannot be trusted. The best we can hope for, I think, is that there is some other amateur out there who, like Paul Dore, is in a position to use corporate equipment to verify these claims. Returning to the original point, it occurs to me that, since the celestial equator is defined as the intersection of the plane of Earth's equator with the celestial sphere, and since the equatorial plane of the Earth is tilted at an angle of 23.5 degrees from the plane of its orbit, there is a possibility that the signal is from an object in the Kuiper belt--the region where planetesimals orbit in the plane of the solar system, beginning just beyond Pluto. The reason: some lines of sight that have a declination of 19 degrees will, near the equinoxes, point through the Kuiper belt. Since the autumnal equinox (Sept. 22) was just a month before Paul Dore's SETI hit (Oct. 22), and since the celestial meridian through the vernal equinox is defined as having a right ascension of zero, which is the same as 24h0m0s, and since Paul Dore's alleged SETI hit occurred RA = 23h31m48s, the agreement is pretty close. His signal appears to be coming from near the plane of the ecliptic. Where are Mars and Jupiter right now? We have Mars and Jupiter probes sending data to us at present, as I recall, though I doubt that they would be transmitting on 1453.07512 MHz! :-) In any case, I don't believe in coincidences: the fact that this signal is passing near the plane of the ecliptic suggests an origin in the outer solar system or the Kuiper belt, assuming it is not a hoax. (And, thus far, there is no evidence that it is a hoax.) --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 11:58:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA06034; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:56:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:56:29 -0800 Message-Id: <199810301955.NAA08470 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:54:43 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: SETI Hoax Resent-Message-ID: <"q4XOM1.0.CU1.jdXEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23895 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> > >> >> In any event, it is self evident that corroboration is needed, and it seems >> to me especially useful to also get some time lapse optical spectrum photos >> of the vicnity. > >Sounds good, Horace. And when NASA confirms the validity of such >signals, they will proceed to hush it up. If they let it out, the >publicity would lead to a quadrupling of their budget and those lazy >old NASA (3.5+ grade point) engineers certainly wouldn't want to go to >all the work that a huge growth spert in the agency would entail! :-( > >Frank Stenger ***{Frank, when NASA changed their criteria after the fact and announced that their Martian soil samples contained no life, I wondered the same thing. Why on earth, I asked myself, would they pass up an opportunity to vastly increase their budget? From that perspective, the fact that their experiments had positive results would seem to have been a godsend. After thinking about it, I decided that there was only one possible explanation: the rumors that matters pertaining to alien life forms have a classification beyond top secret must be true. If NASA were free to announce that they had found life on Mars without violating "national security," there is no power in the universe that could have dissuaded them from doing so, given that their pre-agreed criteria had been met. Those who argued after the fact that the original criteria were too lax would have been ignored, because NASA administrators would have been unable to resist the opportunity to increase their budget. The fact that that did not happen is smoking gun proof that a "national security" lid has been clamped down over this topic. The question is: would they clamp down the lid, if there were no aliens? You decide. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 12:05:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA08341; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:00:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:00:33 -0800 Message-ID: <01a401be043f$7b493a80$4e8f85ce default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:56:30 -0700 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: <"bKIfb3.0.B22.WhXEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23896 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Mitchell Jones To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, October 30, 1998 12:25 PM Subject: Alleged SETI Hit Mitchell Jones wrote: > >Another possibility is a pulsar? However, 1453.07512 MHz is one humming >fast pulsar! 1453.07512 MHz is NEUTRAL HYDROGEN RADIATION of 20.61358 cm one of the lines of the "21 cm" 1420.413 Hydrogen-Hydroxyl absorption/emission lines. >though I doubt that they would be transmitting on 1453.07512 MHz! Not much sense to doing that. I think someone has been HAD. :-) Regards, Frederick >there is no evidence that it is a hoax.) > >--Mitchell Jones}*** > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 12:56:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA26271; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:53:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:53:18 -0800 Message-ID: <002e01be0447$568ad200$a31a010a ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit [OFF TOPIC] Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:53:07 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 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-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA26213 Resent-Message-ID: <"GKTx83.0.PQ6.zSYEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23897 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Frederick J Sparber To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: George Date: Friday, October 30, 1998 2:27 PM Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit >1453.07512 MHz is NEUTRAL HYDROGEN RADIATION of >20.61358 cm one of the lines of the "21 cm" >1420.413 Hydrogen-Hydroxyl absorption/emission lines. > >>though I doubt that they would be transmitting on 1453.07512 MHz! > >Not much sense to doing that. I think someone has been HAD. :-) Wait a minute! Isn't this the 'water-hole' everyone has been talking about? Isn't this why he was listening on this frequency? Why isn't this a good frequency? Thanks, Craig Haynie (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 13:17:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA02046; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:15:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:15:47 -0800 Message-ID: <001001be044a$0cc3c480$c2b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Project Phoenix (http://www.seti.org/phoenix/) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:05:41 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE040E.61093840" 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: <"nJeu.0.uV.3oYEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23899 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_01BE040E.61093840 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ye Olde "Water-Hole" 1,000 - 3,000 MHZ http://www.seti.org/phoenix/ ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE040E.61093840 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Project Phoenix.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Project Phoenix.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.seti.org/phoenix/ Modified=60681CCD4804BE01BC ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE040E.61093840-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 13:19:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA02027; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:15:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:15:46 -0800 Message-ID: <001101be044a$0df98560$c2b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit [OFF TOPIC] Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:12:41 -0700 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: <"8aUFu3.0.XV.2oYEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23898 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Craig Haynie To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: George Date: Friday, October 30, 1998 1:54 PM Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit [OFF TOPIC] Craig Haynie wrote: > >-----Original Message----- >From: Frederick J Sparber >To: vortex-l eskimo.com >Cc: George >Date: Friday, October 30, 1998 2:27 PM >Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit > > >>1453.07512 MHz is NEUTRAL HYDROGEN RADIATION of >>20.61358 cm one of the lines of the "21 cm" >>1420.413 Hydrogen-Hydroxyl absorption/emission lines. >> >>>though I doubt that they would be transmitting on 1453.07512 MHz! >> >>Not much sense to doing that. I think someone has been HAD. :-) > > >Wait a minute! > >Isn't this the 'water-hole' everyone has been talking about? Isn't this why he was listening on this frequency? >Why isn't this a good frequency? The "Water-Hole" (1,000-3,000 MHz) and particularly the "21 Cm" signal can be doppler shifted Up/Down to give you the signal that Dore is all excited about. Kinda like picking up flashlight signals on the Las Vegas Strip. Right Vince? :-) Regards, Frederick > >Thanks, > >Craig Haynie (Houston) > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 13:30:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA07519; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:27:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:27:22 -0800 Message-ID: <363A4A99.85321E38 sunherald.infi.net> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 15:24:09 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wide band SETI References: <199810300935.DAA25385 mail11.jump.net> <363A04B3.1C91@ca-ois.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"a_noO3.0.Fr1.uyYEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23900 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > Gee , I must have missed the experiment performed by Cohen , and > presumably some extraterrestrials which showed this. I agree that the > compton effect will scatter "photons" but photons are not a useful > concept for radio engineers, at least not the earthbound ones. Yes, I'd like to know why Cohen believes the signal can't be narrow band... > Of course SETI is not geared up to monitor for such narrow band > emissions as it appears > our mystery RF astronomer was. That is presumably the kicker in all > this. What's he doing using narrow band in violation of Schuch's ("Dr. > Seti's") dictums? Naturally, since SETI isn't set up to recieve these signals, they muct be hoaxed. Curious. > > I have had personal experience with Schuch via email. Typical arrogant > government brown noser, IMO. Won't talk to me unlessI publish a peer > reviewed paper about SETI. Ah, so you've talked to him? I haven't, but just looking at things he writes gives me the impression that he isn't very...nice. BTW: I don't know if any of you are aware of this, but on Oct. 27 (the day when the EQ Peg signal story started to heat up) SETI's BETA home page underwent an alteration...instead of showing where they are scanning every 10 minutes, they now only update it every 24 hours. You've got to admit that's pretty odd. And the story that the signal came from a geosync satellite is just ridiculous. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 14:07:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA22627; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:06:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:06:23 -0800 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:02:36 -0500 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Phonograph demo blues Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199810301705_MC2-5E9B-9841 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"0q745.0.TX5.VXZEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23901 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Inventing takes time. In 1820 Oersted discovered that electric currents will deflect a magnet. Faraday worked on and off for 10 years noodling away trying to prove the opposite: that magnetic effects can produce electric currents. In 1831 he finally succeeded by inventing an inductive transformer: two coils of wire wound around opposite sides of a ring. He also demonstrated that an electric current can be induced by moving a magnet or by turning an electromagnet on and off, thus making the first generator. Edison announced the phonograph in 1877 and caused a worldwide brouhaha. What is interesting to note is that the phonograph fell flat commercially and everyone, including Edison himself, dismissed it. He put it aside. He was constantly hopping from one invention to another, leaving things unfinished and leaving investors holding the bag. In 1888 he decided the phonograph might be worth something after all, because A. G. Bell was making progress and profits with it. People were beginning to think that Bell had invented the phonograph, which upset Edison to no end. (He loved the limelight and hated sharing it.) So Edison set to work improving the machine. Before he made much progress, he began building two large factories to manufacture phonographs. He asked investors for a half-million dollars, "for a product he had maintained not too long ago was of no commercial value!" (Conot) At one point he held a demonstration of his latest technology. He invited New York bankers to the laboratory. It was a typical trade show flop, the kind that gives developers nightmares: "Edison read into the speaker, swivelled it aside, and put the reproducer in place. He switched the motor on. But the fixed-arm cylinder produced merely a derisive hiss. No matter what Edison did, the assembled group heard nothing but knocking, scraping, and humming. (As an explanation for the failure Edison resurrected the story he had told Harrington 17 years before about a workman changing a part on the machine without his knowledge.)" In other words, Edison could not reproduce his own machine. His first famous demonstrations at the Scientific American, the White House and Congress were triumphs, and textbook examples of how to introduce radical new technology to the public. Twelve years later, this demonstration was a fiasco. This goes to show that some of history's greatest inventors were kooks who periodically suffered from the Inventors Disease and had to be rescued from themselves. Edison was something of a crackpot and he attracted crackpots. By 1888, "Edison's laboratory staff had mushroomed to 120 employees -- a veritable cuckoo's nest of learned man, cranks, enthusiasts, ambitious youth, plain muckers, and quite insane people." His biggest problem was that he could not tolerate people with more skill and knowledge than he himself had. "He disliked employing people with the intelligence and initiative to pursuit experiments independently." He dismissed chemists, but hired hordes of boys because they were cheap. One of his supervisors complained, "our present staff of juveniles are excessively stupid. All of them combined have not as much common sense as would be required to keep a ton of pig iron from floating out to sea in a calm." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 16:06:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA06159; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 16:05:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 16:05:10 -0800 Message-Id: <199810310004.SAA14973 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:03:27 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit Resent-Message-ID: <"6IYzD3.0.5W1.sGbEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23902 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >-----Original Message----- >From: Mitchell Jones >To: vortex-l eskimo.com >Date: Friday, October 30, 1998 12:25 PM >Subject: Alleged SETI Hit > > >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >>Another possibility is a pulsar? However, 1453.07512 MHz is one humming >>fast pulsar! > >1453.07512 MHz is NEUTRAL HYDROGEN RADIATION of >20.61358 cm one of the lines of the "21 cm" >1420.413 Hydrogen-Hydroxyl absorption/emission lines. > >>though I doubt that they would be transmitting on 1453.07512 MHz! > >Not much sense to doing that. I think someone has been HAD. :-) ***{To have considered the possibility that the story was true is not quite the same as being had. The whole point of discussing extraordinary claims is to try to evaluate whether they are true. (That's what vortex is about, is it not?) Admittedly, I am inclined to assume that people are telling the truth if I can see no reason for them to lie, as in the present case. The fact that this frequency just happens to be the well-known 21 centimeter hydrogen wavelength, however, does strain credulity a bit. At first glance it seems rather coincidental that anyone would attempt to transmit information through space by modulating a narrow band carrier at that frequency. But then, it's an *absorption* frequency, not an emission frequency. Since hydrogen is the most common element in the universe, and the one most commonly present in deep space, that means 1453.07512 MHz is, of all the frequencies in the cosmos, the very one where naturally occurring interference is at a minimum. Thus given the technology to drill a powerful narrow-band transmission down the center of that pipe, one could expect it to come in 5X5 virtually anywhere. Thus your insight, while interesting, is by no means definitive. If anything, you have rendered the hypothesis that this is an alien transmission *more* plausible, rather than less. In any case, however this turns out, your suggestion that anyone has been "had" is a large stretch: neither I nor anyone else posting here, to my knowledge, has claimed to know for a fact whether this report is true or not. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Regards, Frederick > >>there is no evidence that it is a hoax.) >> >>--Mitchell Jones}*** >> From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 17:37:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA31769; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:36:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:36:07 -0800 Message-ID: <000601be046e$e8480420$30729bce atlsjkcz> From: "bull" To: Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:36:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"Ue_9D.0.Jm7.7ccEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23903 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: 1.4 Ghz pulse of eletricity is the only choose other than alien's or ufo's. What about a star explosion from the backside of the moon. just an idea. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 17:55:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA08624; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:53:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:53:27 -0800 Message-ID: <000c01be0471$53afd380$30729bce atlsjkcz> From: "bull" To: Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:53:56 -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 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"R9cSL.0.c62.MscEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23904 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --1.4 Ghz pulse of eletricity is the only choose other than alien's or ufo's. What about a star explosion from the backside of the moon. just an idea. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 17:55:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09068; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:54:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:54:16 -0800 Message-ID: <363937A4.7F669B0D sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:51:00 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L Subject: Radio guys: SETI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fXseP3.0.cD2.7tcEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23905 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vo: Is there anyone here who knows anything about radio telescopic observations, and could determine whether the images from 'Paul Dore' origninated from a distant location or from a satellite? There must be some way to determine this from the signal curve on the GIF files. Any thoughts? Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 18:27:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA19672; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 18:26:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 18:26:55 -0800 Message-Id: <199810310226.UAA16705 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 21:25:12 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Radio guys: SETI Resent-Message-ID: <"b4TdJ2.0.Gp4.kLdEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23906 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Vo: > >Is there anyone here who knows anything about radio telescopic >observations, and could determine whether the images from 'Paul Dore' >origninated from a distant location or from a satellite? There must be >some way to determine this from the signal curve on the GIF files. Any >thoughts? ***{If by "satellite" you mean something in orbit around the earth, that's already been discussed. Such a source would move off Paul Dore's coordinates in less than a minute. Since he tracked it for much longer than that, the earth orbiting satellite theory is toast. Without actually doing the calculations, my best guess is that to produce slow enough drift in coordinates to account for the reported results, such an orbit would have to be located in the outer solar system, the Kuiper belt, or perhaps the Oort cloud. And if that is, in fact, where the source is, then attempts to replicate this finding are going to fail, because everybody seems fixated on the assumption that the source is Eq Pegasi, rather than something in our own vicinity. Nobody appears to be expecting the source to slowly drift away from the original coordinates. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 18:58:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA28589; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 18:57:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 18:57:22 -0800 Message-ID: <363A7D7C.7DCD earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 20:01:16 -0700 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, jhuntres@tenagra.com, avoid-L@hawaii.edu, sarfatti well.com Subject: Murray: Houston, we have a problem... 10.30.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"gNV4-.0.d-6.HodEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23907 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oct. 30, 1998 Houston, we have a problem... Dear children, since it's Halloween, the time is ripe for a scary story, one even vaster and more implacable than the already jaded, although yet to arrive in 14 months, Y2K crisis. MESS: Major Extinctions Solar System, as vividly portrayed in the meteor disaster movie "Armegeddon". These are available about every 100 million years, a recent example being the strike of a mere 6-mile iron asteroid on the Yucatan peninsula 65 million years ago, eliminating almost all dinosaurs. Otherwise, I would be sitting here, resting comfortably on my coiled tail, scratching my scales thoughtfully, tapping the keyboard with my dexterous claws, trying to imagine the horrors of a world dominated by those obscene insignificances, mammels. But not only random great rocks can sweep clean the diceboard of evolutionary play. Supernova within a few thousand light years will also occasionally irridiate any solar system with lethal doses of neutrinos, of all things, truth be told. And likewise gamma ray bursters will at moments deliver lethal blazes of light. Many of us remember that poignant story by Arthur C. Clarke, "The Star", in which a devout Jesuit scientist loses his faith after visiting the remains of a civilization, wiped out ages before when their sun went nova. Suppose, conservatively, these MESS events happen every 10**8 years. Given 10**11 stars per galaxy, then a MESS strikes 10**3 per year, and for an Observable Universe with 10**10 LY radius, or 10**30 LY3 volume, its 10**11 galaxies will have 10**22 stars, supporting a MESS rate of 10**14 MESS per year, or 10**7 per sec. That's quite a lot of burned popcorn, kiddies. If one star per galaxy has now reached that pinnacle of evolution, ahem, us, or urban civilization, then the 10**11 galaxies in the Observable Universe, visible at the speed of light for 10**10 years, would give a MESS rate for urban civilizations of 10**3 per year, 3 per day. But, children, there's much more. As M.I.T.'s Alan Guth wrote in 1989 in "The Inflationary Universe," Chapter 3 in Paul Davies, "The New Physics": "...it is likely we are living in a homogeneous region with a size of 10**35 light years or more." "Homogeneous region" means our Universe Bubble, the result of a single instant of cosmic inflation, is just as full of galaxies as the mere 10**10 light years we can see now at the speed of light. That's a volume of 10**105 cubic light years in our Universe Bubble, or 10**75 more galaxies and stars than we can see in the Observable Universe. That implies an urban MESS rate, if one star per galaxy has urban life, of 10**78 per year, or 10**71 per sec. Wooooo! Well! That's just intolerable. Right? So let's cut this dreadful estimate down to size. If only one star in the whole Observable Universe each year has urban life, then our Universe Bubble has an urban MESS rate of 10**67 per year, or 10**60 per sec. Uhhh, somehow that just doesn't cut the mustard... Try again. Only one urban civilization in the Observable Universe for the entire 10 billion years of cosmic evolution, 10**17 sec. Then our Universe Bubble has an urban MESS rate of 10**50 per year, or 10**43 per sec. I don't feel so hot... think I'll go back to worrying about Y2K. long gone, always a goner, Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 19:05:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA31285; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:04:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:04:21 -0800 Message-ID: <000e01be047b$3af6e4a0$9b729bce atlsjkcz> From: "bull" To: Subject: Re: Radio guys: SETI Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 21:04:49 -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 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"QSkVM.0.he7.qudEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23908 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: would like you to send the file to me so i could determine if it is sat or land From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 19:10:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA32537; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:06:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:06:57 -0800 Message-ID: <363948AE.E2C804BE sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:03:42 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Radio guys: SETI References: <199810310226.UAA16705 mail11.jump.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8T2p72.0.Jy7.HxdEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23909 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > ***{If by "satellite" you mean something in orbit around the earth, that's > already been discussed. Such a source would move off Paul Dore's > coordinates in less than a minute. Since he tracked it for much longer than > that, the earth orbiting satellite theory is toast. But why was the signal line 'bent' down the waterfall plot? I am not very knowledgeable about these SETI systems. > And if that is, in fact, where the source is, then attempts to > replicate this finding are going to fail, because everybody seems fixated > on the assumption that the source is Eq Pegasi, rather than something in > our own vicinity. Nobody appears to be expecting the source to slowly drift > away from the original coordinates. --Mitchell Jones}*** But if there is indeed something in the outer solar system...who built it? Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 19:25:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA04125; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:23:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:23:22 -0800 Message-ID: <36394C87.F158FC8A sunherald.infi.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:20:07 -0800 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Radio guys: SETI References: <000e01be047b$3af6e4a0$9b729bce atlsjkcz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"LKZeO1.0.N01.gAeEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23910 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: bull wrote: > > would like you to send > the file to me so i could determine if it is sat or land The files are at: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 20:23:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA24198; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 20:21:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 20:21:41 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981031042839.00e509a4 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:28:39 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Phonograph demo blues Resent-Message-ID: <"SswUv3.0.0w5.K1fEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23911 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi; At 05:02 PM 10/30/98 -0500, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >Inventing takes time. If we could count on the government to help it would be different for somethings. >In 1820 Oersted discovered that electric currents will deflect a magnet. >Faraday worked on and off for 10 years noodling away trying to prove the >opposite: that magnetic effects can produce electric currents. In 1831 he >finally succeeded by inventing an inductive transformer: two coils of wire >wound around opposite sides of a ring. He also demonstrated that an electric >current can be induced by moving a magnet or by turning an electromagnet on >and off, thus making the first generator. The artistic innovative state is like a female quality, the more you try to force it the less it will evolve. Could anyone or anything have accelerated this process in Faraday's case? Is there an indication in history where good inventors didn't noodle around or hop from one invention to another? >Edison announced the phonograph in 1877 and caused a worldwide brouhaha. What >is interesting to note is that the phonograph fell flat commercially and >everyone, including Edison himself, dismissed it. Were there manufacturing, technical, political, or marketing issues? >He put it aside. He was >constantly hopping from one invention to another, leaving things unfinished >and leaving investors holding the bag. That's why I say that inventors should be financially independent so they can fund their own projects and have fun with their innovation efforts. Edison probably had his own resources but considering the 'joke' 'played' on Tesla when he designed a working three phase ac system, Edison isn't an example of the best possible character for an inventor. >In 1888 he decided the phonograph might >be worth something after all, because A. G. Bell was making progress and >profits with it. People were beginning to think that Bell had invented the >phonograph, which upset Edison to no end. (He loved the limelight and hated >sharing it.) Again, getting the job done QED and for the greater good should be the goal. Society should jump to reward such efforts so that the inventor doesn't develop counter productive habits like having to look out for number one. >So Edison set to work improving the machine. Before he made much >progress, he began building two large factories to manufacture phonographs. He >asked investors for a half-million dollars, "for a product he had maintained >not too long ago was of no commercial value!" (Conot) There was something wrong with the first attempt to market. Instead of improving the system like he should of if he really believed in it, he considered maintaining the 'image' was more important? Or did he really try and just faced a roadblock that he didn't know how to deal with? One could then start throwing money at it or work on something else that has better timing to produce a positive result from ones efforts? In time, roadblocks become less obstructive. >At one point he held a >demonstration of his latest technology. He invited New York bankers to the >laboratory. It was a typical trade show flop, the kind that gives developers >nightmares: "Edison read into the speaker, swivelled it aside, and put the >reproducer in place. He switched the motor on. But the fixed-arm cylinder >produced merely a derisive hiss. No matter what Edison did, the assembled >group heard nothing but knocking, scraping, and humming. (As an explanation >for the failure Edison resurrected the story he had told Harrington 17 years >before about a workman changing a part on the machine without his knowledge.)" > >In other words, Edison could not reproduce his own machine. His first famous >demonstrations at the Scientific American, the White House and Congress were >triumphs, and textbook examples of how to introduce radical new technology to >the public. Twelve years later, this demonstration was a fiasco. Either that, or the workman was a bum who did it on purpose. Perhaps those who appreciate the performing arts were concerned? One could say the phonograph would help more people to become interested in performing art. This requires a culture with the understanding that the greater good fundamental goes without saying. >This goes to show that some of history's greatest inventors were kooks who >periodically suffered from the Inventors Disease and had to be rescued from >themselves. Edison was something of a crackpot and he attracted crackpots. By >1888, "Edison's laboratory staff had mushroomed to 120 employees -- a >veritable cuckoo's nest of learned man, cranks, enthusiasts, ambitious youth, >plain muckers, and quite insane people." His biggest problem was that he could >not tolerate people with more skill and knowledge than he himself had. "He >disliked employing people with the intelligence and initiative to pursuit >experiments independently." As you have said before, the world doesn't care about you, it's only interested in what you create. And, you should expect unethical treatment and attitude toward one's work. The only way to stay ahead is to ride that creativity wave. I can understand and accept such a reality. But one may then ask if inventor's disease from nature or nuture? How do you establish proper confidentiality levels facing such paradox? Is my philosophy flawed and unworkable? Being untrustworthy himself (was he always like this?), Edison couldn't count on continued ethical business relationships of an independent and equal nature with others of similar skills. Was society geared toward maintaining cooperative and colaborative working business relationships in those times? >He dismissed chemists, but hired hordes of boys >because they were cheap. One of his supervisors complained, "our present staff >of juveniles are excessively stupid. All of them combined have not as much >common sense as would be required to keep a ton of pig iron from floating out >to sea in a calm." As far as an icecap goes, one is the size of the North American continent and three miles thick. The deadline is really 5/5/2000 and time extensions after that should be considered extreme luck. The sea level is also rising too much from global warming. Perhaps the ice should also be parked in orbit around the Earth? Antigravity is the only answer that can really fix the problem in time. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 20:24:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA25133; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 20:23:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 20:23:01 -0800 Message-Id: <199810310422.PAA18145 tig.com.au> From: "NeXuS" To: Subject: Re: Important Safety Tip Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 15:18:46 +1100 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: <"TAJkE2.0.Z86.b2fEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23912 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Talking bout in australia, it wasnt a recycling thing people were putting out cigarettes in the things and were getting poisoned from the fumes thats all. ---------- > From: John Steck > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Important Safety Tip > Date: Saturday, October 31, 1998 1:39 AM > > NeXuS wrote: > > Is this the same gases that are formed from styrofoam. Just wondering cause > > isnt that why they banned them from mcdonalds a while back ? > > No, the clown caved into to public misinformation regarding the recyclability of > styrofoam and the CFCs originally used in it's manufacture. The decision was > only a PR move to cut their losses educating the public to the facts. The > polymer coated paper products they use now are 10x worse than the alleged claims > of the 'green' groups regarding foamed styrene. Styrene, foamed or not, IS and > has always been recyclable. The polymer coated paper products used now are NOT > and never will be. Landfill or burn, those are the only choices as the barrier > layer that the FDA requires to make them suitable for use with food products > also prevents them from both biodegrading AND from being recycled. What you > didn't hear about in the popular press is the decision to switch put several > companies who DID process waste styrene out of business, and several more that > were opening. If the 'green' groups had any sense at all, they would lobby to > have the foamed containers brought back. They are much more environmentally > friendly than the current packaging. As for the CFCs, they were originally used > to foam the plastic but have not been used for over 10 years now. They had > already been phased out of manufacturing before the clown even made the switch. > > Education is a dangerous thing. Perhaps we should outlaw it so people would > want it more.... 8^) > > > -- > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > John E. Steck > Senior Mechanical Engineer > Rapid Tooling Applications > Motorola, Libertyville, IL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > "The highest reward for a man's toil is not what he gets > for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 20:39:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA30262; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 20:36:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 20:36:25 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981031044352.00e50758 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:43:52 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: CIA? This is for you! Resent-Message-ID: <"6Un2A.0.mO7.9FfEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23913 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 12:30 AM 10/30/98 -0800, you wrote: > >The CIA , if they are lurking here , would probably be looking for posts >about >making small scale atomic explosions, and don't have a clue as to what >the hell you >are talking about with this 5/5/2000 scenario. There are levels that are probably aware. People in the field may not. I want to at least get them aware of this issue. >And even if they did what >would you expect any of them to do about it? Snivel to their >supervisors? Quit their jobs? Who knows? Maybe one or two would have the courage to say that my suggestion of using antigravity technology to keep the icecap stable is worth looking into and implementing? Who else would be able to process such a request? Do you have a better suggestion? >BTW I got Noone's book too. It's a hype to get you interested in joining >the Masonic Order. Your attention is being diverted from the issues they >attempt to hide by not mentioning them at all. I don't see how the Masons will fix this problem. In fact, I believe they are involved in the underground cities if they do exist. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 21:37:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA08817; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 21:36:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 21:36:11 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981031054235.00e1b718 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 00:42:35 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Ice chunks & ---- (off topic) Resent-Message-ID: <"wbzzJ.0.d92.B7gEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23914 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 03:56 AM 10/30/98 -0800, you wrote: >>I thought the big icecube business is quite practical. > >As already mentioned by Sparber, it's an old idea. As a kid devouring >"Popular Science'and Popular Mechanics (took after dad), they had a >cover showing a steamer lugging a chunk of arctic iceberg down to warmer >latitudes to solve the fresh water needs. Hasn't happened yet. If antigravity technology exists, it would make it practical and cost effective. The South Pole icecap is 3 miles thick and the size of the North American continent. Conventional technology can't do it fast enough. >> Do you think anyone would buy them? One might be able to make one or >two deliveries a day. > >In the fresh water craze, some people in Japan, I read, got sucked into >buying airlifted arctic ice (packaged nicely). Global survival is the main reason. Fresh water marketing is secondary. Two good reasons to follow through if conditions made this possible. Was it a con job that happened in Japan? How much were they proposing to charge for the water? >By the way, perhaps you may want to levitate equal amounts of ice fron >both poles to keep everything in balance. The North Pole icecap is melting twice as fast as normal because most of the cars and powerplants are in the Northern Hemisphere. >So you remember how you appeared. Only thing I know about myself was >that I was not running around naked. Is the tail prehensile yet? :) I had to look up prehensile. It's my natural state. The ladies like it also. Too bad they didn't think that in my younger days. >Good idea. You never want to scare yourself. I get carried away with self reflection sometimes. I think the icecap is an important issue and I'm disappointed that there aren't any answers workable now without the government's help. And, the government won't help because there is no honor. > >Yes I remember. I also recollect an impression of you that reminded me >of a taut spring. Probably because of your physical training. Taut spring? Interesting perception. Is it OK to be like that? Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 22:39:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA25387; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 22:39:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 22:39:10 -0800 Message-ID: <363AB01C.BFC2DF42 gte.net> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:37:24 -0700 From: Bob Horst X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palladium isotopes References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fdlgR3.0.aC6.D2hEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23915 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: aki ix.netcom.com wrote: > What I find missing then is a protocol, which > should have been done in hindsight, of all the experiments: To have > examined the palladium samples for isotopic distribution PRIOR to running > a pd-d > experiment. Also afterwards. Then my suggestions on isotope specificity > would not have been needed. Or the puzzle continue on erratic > replications. > And you can use your regular supply of "isotopically alloyed" > pure palladium samples, as long as the prior and after protocol of > isotopic > analysis has been made. This is in essence, a third, cheaper suggestion > to > finding out about nuclear isotopic effects in loaded palladium when it > works. Over a year ago, I visited George Miley's lab at Illinois and suggested that he try isotopically-pure CETI-type beads in his experiments. This would have allowed him to find out if the apparent transmutations and excess heat were a function of which PD or Ni isotope he started with. His lab is the perfect place to do this work, because he uses thin film coating of the beads, and would need less of the expensive isotopes than other experiments. He is also fortunate in having access to the Materials Research Lab at Illinois, and they would have been capable of obtaining the materials and making the beads. I think that Miley thought this was a good suggestion, but as with any good scientist, he has many more good ideas than he can pursue given the available people and funding. As far as I know, he never attempted any of these experiments. -- Bob Horst From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Oct 30 23:29:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA01782; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:27:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:27:52 -0800 Message-Id: <199810310727.BAA19522 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 02:26:10 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Yet Another SETI Hit Resent-Message-ID: <"EAH7z2.0.mR.tlhEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23916 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is getting stranger by the hour. Here is an independent confirmation of Paul Dore's SETI hit, from another amateur, with a smaller dish even than the one Dore had. --Mitchell Jones ***************************************** From: gu0nhd hotmail.com Greetings, I am an amateur radio operator on the Isle of Guernsey offshore from Normandy. When I saw the story of the possible SETI discovery on the BBC I immediately went to work to see if I could pick the signals up. I normally work stations in the 23cm band which is near the frequency that the signals were allegedly transmitted (1296Mhz as opposed to 1450 Mhz). I have a 1.5 meter dish I use for point to point communication as well as moonbounce (whereby we bounce signals off of the moon) I also have an ICOM 8500 receiver so I was readily equipped to follow this up. I set my dish to the coordinates I found on your website after I converted them to azimuth and elevation and I set my radio and a program called Setifox (which I downloaded off of the Internet) to search between 1445 and 1455Mhz. At approximately 12:30 GMT (about the time when EQ Pegasi rose in my sky) the program began logging what looked like a faint carrier signal. It slowly fadeded into view and when the signal became strong enough the computer alerted me. I began to set the antenna to track the source over the next few hours. I started into this completely skeptical and sure this was another UFO scare now I am just as puzzeled as the scientists. If this is a signal from another star it is incredibly strong. This would have to be beamed directly at us as far as I can tell. I hope this information is of some value. Best Regards, K F Benton - GU0NHD, Castel, Guernsey, UK ***************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 00:37:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA14322; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 00:35:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 00:35:40 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981031084252.00e3c280 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 03:42:52 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palladium isotopes Resent-Message-ID: <"T3TN9.0.iV3.RliEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23917 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At a cold fusion conferance 3 or 4 years ago, I saw a highly respect MIT scientist explain in detailed subatomic theory, why fusion couldn't be the mechanism behind the heat or unexplainable particles produced. I didn't understand most of what he said, but given the circumstances, I think that he did his homework and was confident about his conclusion. After the interim years have proved fruitless as to any additional evidence supporting fusion mechanisms in any way, I presented David Hudson's theory of monatomic superconductivity. Basically, the hydrogen loading process breaks monatomic palladium free from the lattice. The magnetic field builds until the monatomic palladium superconductor reaches critical magnetic field and breaks down. During superconductivity break down, the palladium atom sometimes transmutates to the unexplainable particles observed present. To me, this is alot more believable than saying that the MIT scientist mentioned above didn't know what he was talking about. Dennis At 11:37 PM 10/30/98 -0700, you wrote: >Over a year ago, I visited George Miley's lab at Illinois and suggested >that he try isotopically-pure CETI-type beads in his experiments. This >would have allowed him to find out if the apparent transmutations and >excess heat were a function of which PD or Ni isotope he started with. His >lab is the perfect place to do this work, because he uses thin film coating >of the beads, and would need less of the expensive isotopes than other >experiments. He is also fortunate in having access to the Materials >Research Lab at Illinois, and they would have been capable of obtaining the >materials and making the beads. > >I think that Miley thought this was a good suggestion, but as with any good >scientist, he has many more good ideas than he can pursue given the >available people and funding. As far as I know, he never attempted any of >these experiments. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 00:41:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA15627; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 00:41:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 00:41:05 -0800 Message-Id: <199810310840.CAA19854 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 03:39:25 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Comments from Paul Dore re SETI hit Resent-Message-ID: <"6_FTm.0.1q3.WqiEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23918 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: News conference slated for Wenesday November 4th, despite allegations of a hoax. Paul Dore and two radio astronomers from the Effelsberg Radio Observatory in Effelsberg, Germany are to announce the discovery of repeating, artificial signals from space at a press conference to take place in London Wenesday Novemeber 4th. When the engineer was asked what he thought of of the allegations that this was all a hoax he responded, "This is absolutely not a hoax. I will admit there were problems with the first two images I posted being infact the same one with the wrong date stamp on one. I was so exicted I rushed onto the Internet to a CLOSED list to get confirmation. Unfortunately I wasn't careful to check the two images. I admit that was sloppy however the people alleging that I made this all up have yet to refute any of the subsequent screen dumps I posted." (Series 1026-1, 1026-2, 1027-1 on this site) "Furthermore they have not seen the data from the observatory in Europe. I feel they are basically calling this a hoax because they feel left out. This was not the type of signal the SETI establishment was expecting ie: a beacon signal announcing "hello" nor is it an interstellar version of I love lucy." When asked what he thought the signals were he responded, "That would be speculation and I would rather not speculate however my expertise is in radar. I've worked on radar systems for the RAF and I feel that this is most likely a radar or navigational signal, perhaps intended for an interstellar probe that just happens to be in our general direction. Again, due to the nature of my work I am somewhat biased." When told that the SETI project at Harvard known as BETA disabled their real-time data website his response was: "That does not suprise me one bit. We have had a hard time observing since this was publicized. It seems that at times the signal is being wiped out by a close by noise source though I won't go so far as to say its intentional jamming. Additionally I have had a car with government tags shadowing me for the last few days since my identity was revealed on the internet. I am not the paranoid type, as I said before, I don't trust many people, and that includes the government. It's just my nature." When asked about the Buisness Wire story he responded: "I haven't seen that but I assuming it asserts this is a hoax I have no further comment other than I am satisfied that it is not. Next Wenesday will make that point perfectly and completely clear beyond a shadow of a doubt." ***{The question is: do the powers that be have enough juice to cover this up, now that it has gone this far? As noted earlier, governments have a virtual monopoly on radio telescope dishes, but from the account of the fellow on Guernsey, a 1.5 meter dish is good enough to read this signal. That means there are probably thousands of private individuals around the world who will be able to confirm Paul Dore's claim. How can that state of affairs be dealt with? Is there a cover story that can be cooked up which will work in such a situation? The best idea that I can think of would be for the U.S. military to announce that the signal is coming from a secret deep space probe launched several years ago from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The dupes in the controlled press would pick that up and transmit it to the mindless masses as holy writ, and it would be dutifully believed. Result: the ET genie would be back in his bottle, where our rulers want to keep him. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 01:16:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA18664; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 01:15:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 01:15:00 -0800 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810310840.CAA19854 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:12:06 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Comments from Paul Dore re SETI hit Resent-Message-ID: <"6wbfP.0.YZ4.KKjEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23919 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell - > The best idea that I can think of would be for > the U.S. military to announce that the signal > is coming from a secret deep space probe > launched several years ago from Vandenberg > Air Force Base in California. The dupes in > the controlled press would pick that up and > transmit it to the mindless masses as holy > writ, and it would be dutifully believed. > Result: the ET genie would be back in his > bottle, where our rulers want to keep him. Sounds like a good good idea to me. Unless of course the signal is blueshifted because it's emanating from something that's coming towards us and not going the other way. Even Dore seems to think the signal's terribly strong to be from interstellar distance. By the way, I think that second guy's dish is supposedly 4.5 meters, and not 1.5 meters. Haven't checked the web site version to confirm that yet. Saw Dore's traces on the Geocities site though. I'd love for this to be the Big One as much as anybody, but I'm willing to sit tight and wait for it to play out. My guess is it really is just a satellite, probe, or just a plain old hoax. I suppose we'll know by Tuesday or Wednesday. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 01:53:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA24795; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 01:52:04 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 01:52:04 -0800 (PST) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:35:44 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Comments from Paul Dore re SETI hit Resent-Message-ID: <"P84211.0.L36.2tjEs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23920 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell - I wrote: > By the way, I think that second guy's dish is > supposedly 4.5 meters, and not 1.5 meters. > Haven't checked the web site version to > confirm that yet. Saw Dore's traces on the > Geocities site though. Ok, now I checked it. Here's the message from the second source. It is 4.5 meters: > From: gu0nhd hotmail.com > > > > Greetings, > > I am an amateur radio operator on the Isle of > Guernsey offshore from Normandy. When I > saw the story of the possible SETI discovery > on the BBC I immediately went to work to > see if I could pick the signals up. I normally > work stations in the 23cm band which is > near the frequency that the signals were > allegedly transmitted (1296Mhz as opposed > to 1450 Mhz). I have a 4.5 meter dish I use > for point to point communication as well as > moonbounce (whereby we bounce signals off > of the moon) I also have an ICOM 8500 > receiver so I was readily equipped to follow > this up. I set my dish to the coordinates I > found on your website after I converted them > to azimuth and elevation and I set my radio > and a program called Setifox (which I > downloaded off of the Internet) to search > between 1445 and 1455Mhz. At > approximately 12:30 GMT (about the time > when EQ Pegasi rose in my sky) the > program began logging what looked like a > faint carrier signal. It slowly faded into > view and when the signal became strong > enough the computer alerted me. I began to > set the antenna to track the source over the > next few hours. I started into this > completely skeptical and sure this was > another UFO scare now I am just as puzzeled > as the scientists. If this is a signal from > another star it is incredibly strong. This > would have to be beamed directly at us as far > as I can tell. I hope this information is of > some value. > > Best Regards, > > K F Benton - GU0NHD, Castel, Guernsey, UK - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 02:13:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA25276; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 02:10:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 02:10:51 -0800 Message-ID: <19981031101227.16197.rocketmail send102.yahoomail.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 02:12:27 -0800 (PST) From: ron kita Subject: Dore/War of the Worlds Broadcast To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"XCWDK3.0.sA6.h8kEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23921 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Tonight is the anniversity of the famous War of the Worlds broadcast....Instead of listening to it.. I decided to disseminate the SETI info to some of my non-scientific freinds. Strange juxatposition....I hope this signal is a "keeper"...and so does everyone else. Many Cheers, Ron Kita _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 03:53:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA03436; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 03:52:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 03:52:02 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981031195419.00a97d40 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 19:54:19 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Re: Yet Another SETI Hit In-Reply-To: <199810310727.BAA19522 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"vye__2.0.Xr.YdlEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23922 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:26 31/10/98 -0600, Mitchell Jones quoted: >...were allegedly transmitted (1296Mhz as opposed to 1450 Mhz). >I have a 1.5 meter dish I use for point to point communication ... At 23:35 30/10/98 -1000, Rick quoted: >...were allegedly transmitted (1296Mhz as opposed to 1450 Mhz). >I have a 4.5 meter dish I use for point to point communication ... This is obviously the same email message and someone has changed the 1.5 to 4.5 (or vice-versa). So who can't we trust? Who is the author of the http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193/ website? I wonder if it was another "accident" like posting the same image with an altered date stamp on the second copy. Doesn't bode well to me but I'm hoping that something will be for real! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 03:56:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA03464; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 03:52:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 03:52:05 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981031195423.00a99e90 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 19:54:23 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit In-Reply-To: <199810301924.NAA07549 mail11.jump.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"0lP7T2.0.2s.adlEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23923 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 14:23 30/10/98 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >... However, since the world's governments have a virtual >monopoly on radiotelescope facilities, ... This is simply not true. Project Phoenix is privately funded and uses various world class radiotelescopes as and how they wish once they have booked time on it. The same goes for any other research groups and scientists that want to use them. There are no government officials breathing down your neck and saying "no you can't point in that direction or monitor at that frequency just now"! Even *I* got to choose a star or two to point the big radio- telescope dish at Parkes in Australia. (Our Australian SETI group got to use the Phoenix equipment to do a few searches of our own just before they packed up and left for elsewhere - Aricebo now). I am pretty certain there is no coverup going on there having worked with them for a few days. If we had cracked onto one while we were there, there was absolutely nothing to stop the news getting out. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 05:05:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA14004; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:04:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:04:58 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <363AFD63.2CC2 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:06:59 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Ice chunks & ---- (off topic) References: <1.5.4.32.19981031054235.00e1b718 popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"07EUS2.0.gQ3.whmEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23924 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 31, 1998 Dennis wrote: > Global survival is the main reason. Wrong. Thomas Robert Malthus had the right thrust starting in 1798. Quit reproducing ourselves like a feeding bacteria (or virus) with no conciousness or reflections on ramifications of overbreeding. Nature is giving models and hints. Smaller population, better enviroment. More so with expanded use of science and technology. I would suggest one child per couple per generation for starters. And keep the rest of the couple's gene pool in a cryo-bank for use if needed later for child lost (or couple replication?). China and India is/was trying something like that but nothing was setup for saving gene pools. The globe can take care of itself (with some help) then. Its a wide area for urgent expanded consideration as it applies to populations and the also the way we do business globally in the 'free enterprise' system. I am tired of looking at particle boards and plastic veneers for hardwoods. Real stuffs has 'cavier' prices. Is this how we want to survive --- in a virtual world without glasses? Let me step down. > Was it a con job that happened in Japan? How much were they proposing to charge for > the water? I'd say it was a virtual con-job. Ignorant gullibility breeds cons. Don't know exactly about the cost, but it is not cheap airlifting stuff. Your regular bottled water is also a virtual con job. Big business in those thin plastic bottles. More margin than soda water. Nothing to add. >From time to time, you hear aspersions of doubt about the public water systems. Never heard of these things before bottled water became a hugely profitable industry. > The North Pole icecap is melting twice as fast as normal because most of the > cars and powerplants are in the Northern Hemisphere. Makes sense. Just replicate the same thing in the Southern Hemispere and there's the balance. :) > I get carried away with self reflection sometimes. Do get carried away. :) >I think the icecap is an important issue ---- "It's the population", ------. > Taut spring? Interesting perception. Is it OK to be like that? It ok as long as you do not go "Sprooinng!". -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 06:43:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA06753; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:42:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:42:21 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <363B143E.263D ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:44:30 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palldium isotopes -- References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> <363AB01C.BFC2DF42@gte.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"iuGo92.0.Rf1.C7oEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23925 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 31, 1998 Bob Horst wrote: > Over a year ago, I visited George Miley's lab at Illinois and suggested > that he try isotopically-pure CETI-type beads in his experiments. This > would have allowed him to find out if the apparent transmutations and > excess heat were a function of which PD or Ni isotope he started with. On furthur thought, perhaps, instead of yes. Cost considerations (at a quote of $7K for 3 grams of a Pd isotope) may inhibit doing this along with not knowing what the results would be in an exact CETI cell replication which did not call for it. Also, in electrolysis, All of the materials used have multiple isotope states (long and short lives) which may, I realize, have various nuclear effects (with the materials used) in electrolysis aside from conventional chemical or simple electrolysis reactions which we know about. I think isotopically detailed studies are needed, if not mandatory for any 'chemical' reactions with nuclear effects in mind or expected. > His lab is the perfect place to do this work, because he uses thin film coating > of the beads, and would need less of the expensive isotopes than other > experiments. He is also fortunate in having access to the Materials > Research Lab at Illinois, and they would have been capable of obtaining the > materials and making the beads. He should do it again with a known makeup (isotopically) by the first suggestion or the third. I am more in favor of doing a gas diffusion pd-d method to make a better determination of what is going on. But I am for whatever that gives answers. > I think that Miley thought this was a good suggestion, --- You think, but did he say so or answer/react/discuss the suggestion? Also was your suggestion presented in the same manner as you describe the event? Dr. Edmund Storms, in our short conversation (Oct. 11th) which included questions of his thin film loading results, reponded postively but also recognized his resource limits, being retired. > but as with any good scientist, he has many more good ideas --- I have never seen his wish list. > -- than he can pursue given the available people and funding. As far as I know, he > never attempted any of these experiments. Oh well. I cannot read minds. I think you made a good suggestion. Should've posted it. Everybody could have gained from it, even if Miley did not pursue it. The November Wired mentioned that CETI did not produce another batch of beads that performed the same as the beads used in the 1KW demonstration at the PowerGen 95. An isotope study of the unused first batch, which they have some left, and the later batches should be an interesting study along with isotpe studies of both samples of used beads. Should give answers. I would welcome precious metals and chemical suppliers furnishing accurate isotope values to metals and other supplies sold for CF studies. -AK From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 07:02:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA11310; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 07:01:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 07:01:32 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <363B18D0.145 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 06:04:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Dennis views References: <1.5.4.32.19981031084252.00e3c280 popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"bWTDF1.0.Ym2.BPoEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23926 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 31, 1998 Dennis wrote in part: > After the interim years have proved fruitless as to any additional evidence > supporting fusion mechanisms in any way, ---- All I can say is: you go your way, I go mine. >I presented David Hudson's theory of monatomic superconductivity ----- You got the theory, just design the physical experiment that gives results to indicate support for it --- preferably at MIT. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 07:13:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA14772; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 07:13:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 07:13:05 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981031101118.009aac30 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:11:18 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palladium isotopes In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19981031084252.00e3c280 popd.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"zn6vF3.0.kc3.1aoEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23927 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:42 AM 10/31/98 -0500, Dennis C. Lee wrote: >At a cold fusion conferance 3 or 4 years ago, I saw a highly respect MIT >scientist explain in detailed subatomic theory, why fusion couldn't be the >mechanism behind the heat or unexplainable particles produced. I didn't >understand most of what he said, but given the circumstances, I think that >he did his homework and was confident about his conclusion. After the >interim years have proved fruitless as to any additional evidence supporting >fusion mechanisms in any way, Not true. There is significant evidence of fusion processes in cf, including low level xray emission, helium-4 production, and other data, that suggests that people who believe Dennis' last statement ought get off the internet and into a library. More info at http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 08:32:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA01782; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 08:32:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 08:32:00 -0800 Message-Id: <363B303F.8E148709 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 17:43:59 +0200 From: Hamdi Ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: "Popups free" free homepages Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6nXUK2.0.jR._jpEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23928 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, I think it will be useful to post this information. I made a "free" homepage at pages.hotbot.com. Hotbot normally popup its own window only at index.html and not in every pages as do Geocities. Also the annoying sliding company logo was not applied on hotbot pages. This enough conformable for many visitors . But I found a trick to suppress the "popup" also. See source of my index page at http://pages.hotbot.com/und/tumbolia/ Although I did a bit harder to read the page source, but not so discouraging who need this feature. The easy alternate way is to ask me, of course. (Hotbot offers 5 MB file space). Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 09:03:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA10646; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 08:53:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 08:53:44 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: K3PGP qsl.net Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 08:51:09 -0800 Subject: Re: Comments from Paul Dore re SETI hit Message-ID: <19981031.085127.3614.1.tv juno.com> References: X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0,2-3,5-19,21-74 From: tv juno.com (Tim Vaughan) Resent-Message-ID: <"y2lr4.0.Gc2.N2qEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23929 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This infomration is technically correct, the ICOM 8500 would be an ideal radio for this frequency range. I belive I have seen the program he he is mentioning, advertised in amatuer radio magazines. It is also useful for moonbounce where signals are very weak or under the noise. For an interesting web page on amatuer weak signal work check out: http://www.qsl.net/k3pgp/ He tells about his 10.3 meter moonbounce/seti dish at: http://www.qsl.net/k3pgp/Construction/Dish/dish.htm 73's Tim ( tv juno.com ) Ok, now I checked it. Here's the message from the second source. It is 4.5 meters: > From: gu0nhd hotmail.com > > > > Greetings, > > I am an amateur radio operator on the Isle of > Guernsey offshore from Normandy. When I > saw the story of the possible SETI discovery > on the BBC I immediately went to work to > see if I could pick the signals up. I normally > work stations in the 23cm band which is > near the frequency that the signals were > allegedly transmitted (1296Mhz as opposed > to 1450 Mhz). I have a 4.5 meter dish I use > for point to point communication as well as > moonbounce (whereby we bounce signals off > of the moon) I also have an ICOM 8500 > receiver so I was readily equipped to follow > this up. I set my dish to the coordinates I > found on your website after I converted them > to azimuth and elevation and I set my radio > and a program called Setifox (which I > downloaded off of the Internet) to search > between 1445 and 1455Mhz. At > approximately 12:30 GMT (about the time > when EQ Pegasi rose in my sky) the > program began logging what looked like a > faint carrier signal. It slowly faded into > view and when the signal became strong > enough the computer alerted me. I began to > set the antenna to track the source over the > next few hours. I started into this > completely skeptical and sure this was > another UFO scare now I am just as puzzeled > as the scientists. If this is a signal from > another star it is incredibly strong. This > would have to be beamed directly at us as far > as I can tell. I hope this information is of > some value. > > Best Regards, > > K F Benton - GU0NHD, Castel, Guernsey, UK - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 09:29:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA18984; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 09:21:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 09:21:33 -0800 Message-ID: <363B4808.3566 earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:25:28 -0700 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: Storms: CF debate 10.31.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pbLuP1.0.Xe4.SSqEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23930 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Storms: Blue: CF debate 10.28.98 Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 11:29:50 -0500 (EST) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Dick Blue reply to Ed Storms > According to my reading of Fusion Technol 19 (1991) page 387, Takahashi > used a NE213 detector. "The recoil-proton energy was calibrated by the > Compton edge due to 60Co gamma rays." "The 2,45 MeV recoil proton > energy increased its height in the third week, corresponding to the > increments of excess neutron counts." He also used a He3 counter which > showed a similar change in count rate as a function of time during the > experiment. Next question, of course, is where in the energy spectrum does the Compton edge due to 60Co gamma rays lie with respect to the stated neutron energies? The answer may surprise you, but it's not really significant to my main point -- namely that neutron energies that cannot be accounted for may not, if fact, be real. Nothing Takahashi does establishes that the detector response is 100% due to neutrons. In fact he could not use a gamma source for calibration if the detector did not response to gammas, right? My ball-park number, which I stick by, is that electronic rejection using the method Takahashi employed is only 99% efficient. So what I suggest is that some of the response is due to neutrons, and that would likely be confirmed by the He3 detector. However, the signal that Takahashi suggests is higher energy neutrons may well be something else -- i.e. gamma rays or muons, etc. What is needed are some very long runs for background determination with the cold fusion turned off. Are those spectra total blanks? I think not. > > > > > So the titanium grains are too small to stop the betas emitted by > > the tritium. Do you think that makes things better? My statement > > still stands that the betas do not actually reach the detector. If > > they are not stopped in the titanium we really don't know very much > > about the radiation being detected, do we? It's bad experimental > > technique! > > The beta emission was measured by two different detectors. A GM counter > detected the bremsstrahlung and a vibrating reed electrometer detected > the beta current. Both methods gave similar results. I would say that we > know enough about the radiation being detected to suggest an unusual > behavior. As a result of this possibility, a government laboratory has > been studying the effect. I don't yet know the results. > Yes, there were two methods employed for part of the measurements, but if you read the paper carefully you will learn that the crucial claims for variations in activity all derive from just the geiger counter measurement! > > > The Miles-Bush data are good and they demonstrate what they intend to > > > demonstrate. However, to accept the initial claims for a nuclear > > > reaction, which I accept, more data are required and especially data > > > having a greater magnitude. Fortunately, such data are available so I > > > do not need to use the Miles-Bush data to do anything more than show a > > > general, not exact, relationship between heat production and helium > > > generation. This relationship is consistent with an energy production > > > near but not necessarily equal to a fusion-type reaction. Other > > > possibilities can be considered but this is a good step toward believing > > > a fusion-type reaction is the source of heat.-- > > > > > So can we now acknowledge that the Mills-Bush measurements are not the > > greatest evidence for the production of excess heat? They need to > > be "supported" by some other research, but how are we to analyze and > > evaluated all this "gray" evidence? Let me suggest that the proper > > approach is to forget all the weak claims and examine only the strongest > > evidence, but you won't help us do that. You won't clean the CF house. > > A large collection of "strong" evidence exists which I have summarized > in my latest review. The problem is that Dick and I have a different > criteria for what is "strong". To make matters worse, I have no idea > what Dick means by "clean the CF house". Of course some experiments are > less useful than are others. However, some of these studies reveal > aspects of the phenomenon which are valuable. What Dick wants is an > experiment which is so well done and which shows such a large effect > that he can find no errors. If we clean house using this criteria, > there will be nothing left to discuss. > > > > > If the Mills-Bush results are important because they show a correlation > > between excess heat and helium, where are we if the excess heat data is > > a bit shakey? By the way, could you confirm something for me about > > the Mills-Bush technique. Am I correct in saying that there was no > > catalytic recombining of deuterium and oxygen? That is to say the > > electrolysis was done in an "open" configuration, not a sealed cell. > > I wonder how you can rule out atmospheric contamination for an > > "open" system. > > Although the system does not contain a recombiner, it is sealed from the > atmosphere by a bubbler. When excess heat is detected, a sample of the > evolving gas is passed through a steel flask, which is then sealed and > sent for analysis.. As a result, any He is flushed from the system > before a sample is taken and any He in the air is prevented from > entering the system. > Read carefully these words "sealed from the atmosphere by a bubbler." We are supposed to believe that some liquid (unspecified) forms an effective seal against helium while bubbles of evolving gas constantly disrupt that seal. The point Ed Storms, as well as Miles and Bush, continue to overlook, is that sealing against leakage by helium is much more demanding than sealing against nitrogen, for example. What appears to be a gas-tight seal may actually leak helium like a sieve. > > I do not suggest Dick read all the "trash". I do suggest he read my > latest review in Infinite Energy and we confine our debate to > experimental results mentioned therein. > However, what I think I am establishing is that your reviews aren't sufficiently critical when it comes to the details of the experiments. At best we could expect you to spot the inconsistant claims that have long characterized this field, but I am not sure you even do that. > We seem to have regressed back to the idea that negative data can offset > positive data to produce a net effect. This idea only applies to random > events which CANR is not. However, I get the idea that Dick still > believes we are all deceived by a random process. > I don't believe this is a "regression." There is a proper, logical approach to the merging of data sets to form a summary result. Isn't it obviously irrational to discard all the results that you personally dislike because they are "negative"? Isn't it obvious that information can be derived from "negative" outcomes that should also be considered along with the "positive" results? I don't want to make meaningless generalizations as to who is being deceived or why, but I can cite specific examples in the literature which you review where someone is clearly being deceived. I would have more confidence in your reviews if you were one of the people who spots the problems with the doubtful or bogus CF claims. Clearly you are not doing that. > an exact comparison can not be made between different studies. All we > can use are general patterns of behavior. It is important that we all > see the same patterns, regardless of these variables. > OK, so we are dealing with a phenomenon that is too variable to make replication in detail possible. I believe that is a very important observation about CF claims, and it means that extra precautions are in order in such addressing of the statistical aspects of the data. You can't just plow ahead using methods that are appropriate only for data that is rather more well behaved. When someone uses a phrase like "general patterns of behavior", special precautions should be taken to insure that the "patterns" are not just an artifact being introduced during the data reduction process. > > > I'd be glad to discuss, in detail, (d,alpha) reactions, if you would > > care to state your hypothesis for such a reaction to account for the > > observed excess heat at the watt level. > > I will hold off on this for a later discussion. > > > > If we are dealing (as I think we should be) with the testing of specific > > hypotheses with regard to possible CANR processes, the experiments > > should be designed to yield definitive results. For example, in the > > context of cold fusion I would suggest that neutron detection should > > play a key role, because of the superior sensitivity and selectivity it > > provides. There aren't many processes that could result in a neutron > > signal, but "excess heat" is just heat and that's to be expected > > regardless of what reaction process occurs. We've been there and done > > that. The results are in, but you won't acknowledge the established > > facts. > > No, I will not acknowledge facts that do not apply to the conditions of > the present experiments. In addition, having accepted the fact that > CANR does occur, the established facts you would use do not seem to > explain the observations. You only use them to show that the > observations can not be true. On the other hand, if you accepted CANR, > you would choose a different set of facts, and we could have a good > debate about how this new collection applies. > > But we have to ask a very key question here. How is it that Ed Storms justifies his bald assertion that certain facts "do not apply to the conditions of the present experiment"? That is clearly just an excuse to discard data that Ed Storms cannot address any other way. I can, of course, make a different choice as to what I decide does not apply to the conditions of the present experiment. I can decide, for example, that calorimeters do not work as expected because the laws of thermodynamics do not apply to the PdD lattice. I, however, do not operate that way. I want to insist that the fundamental physics we all know and love still is applicable unless and until we have compelling evidence to the contrary. I will not buy into vague notions about "special conditions" on the basis of poorly controlled calorimetric measurements alone. If you want to accumulate tons of "supportive" evidence you are, in essence, calling for a majority vote. I just say you then cannot justify a simple discard of all the "Nays". > > Now you are indicating interest in some (d,alpha) process. That's OK > > with me. It's quite likely we already have information in hand that has > > bearing on that question. Care to guess what the evidence already > > shows? > > Yes, I can. > > > > > Let me clear up the question relating to input power. If the cell is > > driven at constant current the cell voltage is, in general, highly > > variable. In fact that's one of the measured parameters that gets > > logged, right? Of course, the voltage is confined to limits, perhaps > > zero and the power supply maximum. Based on the data I have examined, I > > would say it is still appropriate to characterize the cell voltage, and > > thus the power input", as being "noisey." I presume that is due to > > bubbles, cell polarization, and buildup of insulating layers on the > > cathode and stuff like that. > > Yes, the voltage is noisy . The extent of the variation is severely > limited by the low impedance of the power supply (about 0.01 ohm) > compared to the higher impedance of the cell (about 10 ohm). Therefore, > the voltage has a random variation of perhaps 100 mW. Over a period of > time, as the cell conditions change, the average voltage slowly changes, > as you surmise. This noise is averaged by many measurements and the > drift has no effect because the voltage is measured at regular > ntervals. Ed Storms, shame on you! You just committed a very big oops! I hope this was just a slip of the bits. Let's review some basic electrical circuit theory. There are two types of ideal power sources to be considered -- an ideal voltage source which maintains a constant voltage at its output independent of load, or an ideal current source which maintains a constant current from its output independent of the load. I specifically said I was considering "constant current" excitation of the electrochemical cell. That means, I presume, that the power supply is operated in the constant current mode. That power supply darned well better not have a low impedence as you suggest. It should have as high an output impedence as can be practically achieved in order to insure that the total circuit impedence, supply + cell, is nearly independent of the cell portion. What you describe is a voltage supply, with low impedence such that essentially all the impedence is in the electrochemical cell. Indeed that will maintain the cell voltage constant within +/- 100 mV as you suggest. However, the cell current will not be constant unless the cell impedence is constant. Are you as confused about this as it appears? Perhaps you simply do not know what the power input to your cell is. Please assure us that you know the difference between a constant voltage supply and a constant current supply. Which do you use in your experiments? > > > > Now you say your data show a positive temperature coefficient. Does the > > cell voltage show a temperature coefficient, and can you explain what > > you see in that regard? Pons and Fleischmann, of course, found you can > > boil water that way, at constant current. Because the resistance of the > > cell went up as a function of temperature so did the power input with > > just the result one would expect > > The positive temperature coefficient is seen as an increase in excess > power when the temperature of the cell is increased. Of course, a > calibration as a function of temperature is required. When the > temperature is raised, the voltage goes down at constant applied > current. In other words, the resistance of the cell drops as > temperature is increased. > > Of course, one can boil water by applying sufficient electrolytic power. > The question is whether the power being applied equals the power being > used during the boiling process. Pons and Fleischmann find that more > power is being applied than is required to boil the measured amount of > water. Only problem is they did not measure the power input during the boiloff! They could only estimate it on the basis of infrequently logged measurements. They also did not time the boiloff with sufficient precision to determine the actual energy input. In your reviews did you fail to take note of any of the shortcomings of these experiments? Did you not recognize that zero current lies below your assumed threshold for CANR such that a dry cell is unlikely to produce any "excess heat" as was claimed? Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 10:31:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA06357; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:28:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:28:14 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <6d285f6f.363b5698 aol.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 13:27:36 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with K Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 84 Resent-Message-ID: <"h-_wj.0.FZ1.-QrEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23931 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince, Congratulations on your forthcoming retirement, and on your leak-proof vacuum system. It's a kind of advance Christmas present to know that you'll be resuming your experiments. Your fans here are looking forward to the opening of the new experimental season. If it gets delayed until January because of the holiday rush, well, you'll still be doing better than the NBA. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 11:59:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA25261; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 11:58:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 11:58:29 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981031200541.00e38044 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 15:05:41 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Dennis views Resent-Message-ID: <"5GLIH.0.YA6.alsEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23932 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; The idea I had was to use palladium black. I did a websearch and found Jed Rothwell's report on a 1995 ICCF5. They already tried palladium black and reported 3000 hrs at 25 watts or so. I see that a Kawasaki worked on the translation of the paper. Was that you Akira? Could I get a copy of that paper? Anyways, previous ZPE ideas were along the lines of the palladium lattice holding atomic hydrogen in an array which coincided with a quatum wave and exhibited a coherent superconductor like vibration which tapped ZPE. This did really explain the unexplainable particles though. Then I learned of David Hudson's monatomic discovery and his statement of monatomic palladium easily transmuting when the superconducting field collapses due to exceding the magnetic critical field. It made sense that the atomic hydrogen could break palladium atoms off the lattice and the field collapse inducing transmutation of the palladium atom would explain the subatomic particle production. I wasn't sure if all the excess energy could be accounted for. Then I read a book which stated that the CF excess energy was from H to H2 recombination. In this transition, the hydrogen atom shrinks and ZPE is squeezed out as heat. I think this combo of processes is it! So, I was flipping through an old chemistry book and saw a page on palladium black being able to absorb 1000 somethings of hydrogen. Cool. With this, there is more surface area so it should work better. There is no lattice so this would definitely eliminate the first ZPE theory if the palladium black was a small enough particle size to avoid a lattice structure. As it turns out, I found your paper and I believe you say that palladium black is a better material than solid palladium metal. This makes sense for a monatomic palladium/hydrogen model of CF. I am just weird enough to read two 'wacko' books that few others would consider. If I could get a copy of that paper, I'd have a few more ideas maybe. Could you please send me that paper Akira? At 06:04 AM 10/31/98 -0800, you wrote: >October 31, 1998 > >Dennis wrote in part: > >> After the interim years have proved fruitless as to any additional evidence >> supporting fusion mechanisms in any way, ---- > >All I can say is: you go your way, I go mine. Don't you remember that MIT scientist who also had a clip of a movie he was producing. The actors were worse than bad? He had that palladium lattice figured out to the angstrom everywhich way and direction. Then he figured how the hydrogen would fit in the lattice with all the distances between the hydrogen atoms jammed in the lattice figured out every which way and direction. And this and that for 2 hours or so it seemed. Conclusion, the distances aren't close enough and the lattice can't push them together to cause fusion under any circumstances. Plus there are a whole bunch more unexplained particles left over. I fell asleep after an hour or so. I decided he was dedicated to the task he set out to do so I took his word for it. That was when I stopped thinking about CF innovation. Now is the time I'd like to start thinking about CF again. Best Regards; Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 12:02:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA26436; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 12:01:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 12:01:00 -0800 Message-Id: <199810312000.OAA25127 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:59:17 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Comments from Paul Dore re SETI hit Resent-Message-ID: <"X_vWM3.0.-S6.ynsEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23933 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell - > >I wrote: > > > By the way, I think that second guy's dish is > > supposedly 4.5 meters, and not 1.5 meters. > > Haven't checked the web site version to > > confirm that yet. Saw Dore's traces on the > > Geocities site though. > >Ok, now I checked it. Here's the message from the second source. It is 4.5 >meters: > > > From: gu0nhd hotmail.com > > > > > > > > Greetings, > > > > I am an amateur radio operator on the Isle of > > Guernsey offshore from Normandy. When I > > saw the story of the possible SETI discovery > > on the BBC I immediately went to work to > > see if I could pick the signals up. I normally > > work stations in the 23cm band which is > > near the frequency that the signals were > > allegedly transmitted (1296Mhz as opposed > > to 1450 Mhz). I have a 4.5 meter dish I use > > for point to point communication as well as > > moonbounce (whereby we bounce signals off > > of the moon) I also have an ICOM 8500 > > receiver so I was readily equipped to follow > > this up. I set my dish to the coordinates I > > found on your website after I converted them > > to azimuth and elevation and I set my radio > > and a program called Setifox (which I > > downloaded off of the Internet) to search > > between 1445 and 1455Mhz. At > > approximately 12:30 GMT (about the time > > when EQ Pegasi rose in my sky) the > > program began logging what looked like a > > faint carrier signal. It slowly faded into > > view and when the signal became strong > > enough the computer alerted me. I began to > > set the antenna to track the source over the > > next few hours. I started into this > > completely skeptical and sure this was > > another UFO scare now I am just as puzzeled > > as the scientists. If this is a signal from > > another star it is incredibly strong. This > > would have to be beamed directly at us as far > > as I can tell. I hope this information is of > > some value. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > K F Benton - GU0NHD, Castel, Guernsey, UK > > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI ***{There was apparently a typo in the original message, which said 1.5 meters. Thus when I pulled it off of www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193/verified.html and posted it here, that is what it said. Since then, it has apparently been corrected. This is a matter of some importance, because the smaller the dish size that can detect this signal, the more vulnerable this matter is to independent--which means *private*--verification, and the harder it will be to cover up. There aren't very many amateur radio astronomers with 4.5 meter dishes--I would guess a few hundred--and pure intimidation might work with such a small group. Of course, the best spin control effort still looks to me like one based on a cover story: simply lie and claim that Vandenberg launched a secret military deep space probe several years ago, and that this signal is coming from it. If anyone asks what the military is doing mucking around in the outer solar system, simply say the reasons are classified, but have nothing to do with aliens. The only people who would be able to refute such a story would be in the military, and could be ordered to keep their mouths shut for "national security" reasons. By not denying that the signal exists or that it is from an intelligent source, such a response would cut the ground from under the feet of Paul Dore and anyone else who verifies his claim. In order to believe that ET's are out there, you have to take that last step across the chasm of disbelief, and actually accept the fact that virtually everything the government says on this topic is a lie. Since the number of people who are sufficiently independent minded to do that is vanishingly small, they can be labelled kooks and ignored. It's game, set, and match. Those who rule us win, and we lose--as usual. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 12:02:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAB26465; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 12:01:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 12:01:02 -0800 Message-Id: <199810312000.OAA25130 mail11.jump.net> X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:59:19 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mjones jump.net (Mitchell Jones) Subject: Re: Alleged SETI Hit Resent-Message-ID: <"pRB_e2.0.NT6.-nsEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23934 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 14:23 30/10/98 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>... However, since the world's governments have a virtual >>monopoly on radiotelescope facilities, ... > >This is simply not true. ***{Of course it is true. You confirm it yourself, below: Project Phoenix does not own the telescopes it uses. They are owned by the government. That is the whole point. --Mitchell Jones}*** Project Phoenix is privately funded >and uses various world class radiotelescopes as and how they >wish once they have booked time on it. The same goes for any >other research groups and scientists that want to use them. >There are no government officials breathing down your neck >and saying "no you can't point in that direction or monitor >at that frequency just now"! ***{Irrelevant. You simply don't understand how the game is played. Perhaps an example from a different area will lend clarity to this point. Consider, therefore, Supreme Court appointees. Have you perhaps noticed that the people on the U.S. Supreme Court use the U.S. constitution--the supposed supreme law of the land--for toilet paper? How do you suppose that happens? Here is the answer: the other two branches of government, which want to operate free of constitutional limitations, get to decide who sits on the Supreme Court. Result: they are careful to select people whom they know, through years of experience, will twist the constitution in whatever direction they want it twisted. As a result, we have a government that rides us as if we have saddles on our backs, and there isn't a damn thing any of us can do about it. The point is that when you have the power to decide who has access, that is the whole ball game. There are thousands of groups vying for radiotelescope access, and you can bet your bottom dollar that "Project Phoenix" was the one selected because the administrators who chose them knew that they would not make waves. How could they know that? Who cares? It doesn't matter whether Project Phoenix is a CIA front, or whether its leaders are subject to blackmail, or whether they are just known to have jelly in their backbones. The point is that when the government has a virtual monopoly on ownership of radiotelescope facilities, they are in a position to cover up any radiotelescope findings that they may not like. Without private ownership of the instruments themselves, there is no freedom of access, and no freedom of information. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Even *I* got to choose a star or two to point the big radio- >telescope dish at Parkes in Australia. (Our Australian SETI >group got to use the Phoenix equipment to do a few searches >of our own just before they packed up and left for elsewhere >- Aricebo now). I am pretty certain there is no coverup going >on there having worked with them for a few days. If we had >cracked onto one while we were there, there was absolutely >nothing to stop the news getting out. ***{Sure there was: if you got a tentative hit and insisted on squawking about it, you would have been shoved away from the telescope by groups with more clout, who would have done the "verification." Those groups would have been selected as per the criterion which I outlined above--to wit: a willingness to kowtow to the desires of our rulers. Result: your "hit" would have been debunked, and you, lacking your own privately owned instruments, would have been unable to defend yourselves. Bottom line: without private ownership of the instruments, there is no freedom of information, and the beliefs of most of the populace can be strictly controlled by their rulers. Those who can't be so controlled, because they are bright enough to reach the truth despite the limitations on their access to information, will be sufficiently few in number that they can be marginalized as kooks. Result: it is game, set, and match. The people get the privilege of having saddles on their backs, and the rulers get the privilege of riding them. (Is this a great country, or what?) --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 12:06:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA29703; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 12:04:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 12:04:57 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981031201150.00e15910 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 15:11:50 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palladium isotopes Resent-Message-ID: <"rsVlM3.0.sF7.ersEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23935 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 10:11 AM 10/31/98 -0500, you wrote: >After the >>interim years have proved fruitless as to any additional evidence supporting >>fusion mechanisms in any way, > > > Not true. > > There is significant evidence of fusion processes in cf, including >low level xray emission, helium-4 production, and other data, >that suggests that people who believe Dennis' last statement >ought get off the internet and into a library. Well I meant on a mechanical level as I recall that MIT scientist in the Dennis views message. A palladium atom busting up every which way would explain the full variety range of unexplained particles present. Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 12:22:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA01102; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 12:21:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 12:21:45 -0800 Message-ID: <004301be050c$13620550$a31a010a ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: [OFF TOPIC] More on EQ Pegasi Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:21:34 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 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-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA01082 Resent-Message-ID: <"YS-HN1.0.8H.P5tEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23936 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Did you guyes see this story from MSNBC. Again, EQ Pegasi, and again, a narrow-beam signal... Of course, it may be the story that started the hoax... http://msnbc.com/news/198553.asp -------------------------------------- ARECIBO, Puerto Rico, Sept. 20 — Command Central for Project Phoenix is pretty unimpressive. There’s a low shelf on which three computer workstations are perched like a short row of ducks. That’s it. No flashing lights. No eerie synthesizer sounds. No kni fe switches on the wall. Booooring. The observing can be boring, too. But there’s a reason for that. THE REASON is that humans are fallible. Their attention wanders. They are lured from their chairs by the thought of a tuna fish sandwich or the call of nature. Consequently, the search for cosmic company is highly automated. Computers do the list ening and decide whether a signal is worthy of the astronomer’s attention. When I’m observing for Project Phoenix, I spend a lot of time catching up on my reading or writing e-mail. I don’t have to squint endlessly at the computer screens. Come to think o f it, Chris Columbus probably didn’t spend a lot of time squinting across the bow of the Santa Maria either. Fortunately, the computers don’t get bored. They search without complaint through the Phoenix data stream, trying to find narrow-band spikes poking up out of a noisy sea of 28 million channels. On the night of Sept. 15, around midnight, they found something. It was a signal picked up in Arecibo, and verified at the 250-foot telescope in Jodrell Bank. The star was an unremarkable M dwarf with the moniker EQ Pegasi, 22 light-years from Earth. Project scientist Jill Tarter and I watched in fascination as a thin, white line began to appear on a display screen. We had picked up a narrow-band, rapidly drifting signal, the very kind of thing that would be the hallmark of alien intelligence. I stood up out of my chair. The excitement was short-lived. Within 10 minutes, we noticed that the signal, whatever it was, could also be seen when the telescope was pointed away from the star. It was probably a telecommunications satellite – a sign of intelligence all right, but not alien intelligence. Such false alarms are frequent in Arecibo. The island is crawling with radar and telecommunications installations, all of which present a formidable challenge to those trying to tune in the cosmos. This fish got away. In fact, it wasn’t really a fi sh. So Jill and I sat back down in our chairs, and starting writing in the log books. The computers, neither disappointed nor interested, continued their search, looking for the big one, the signal that would result in the most important news story of all time. The faint radio squeal that will someday end 4 billion years of isolatio n. Seth Shostak, an astronomer working at the SETI Institute, left Arecibo on Sunday in advance of Hurricane Georges’ approach. But the SETI search is due to continue at the Arecibo Radio Telescope, the largest radio ear in the world, during two-wee k campaigns each March and September. To learn more about the search for extraterrestrials, what they might be like and how humans would react to finding them, you can check out Shostak’s new book, “Sharing the Universe: Perspectives on Extraterrestrial Life.” From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 13:55:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA26853; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 13:53:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 13:53:29 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palldium isotopes -- Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 21:53:20 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <363b864b.100133127 24.192.1.20> References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> <363AB01C.BFC2DF42@gte.net> <363B143E.263D@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <363B143E.263D ix.netcom.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: <"TxbB12.0.VZ6.PRuEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23937 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:44:30 -0800, aki ix.netcom.com wrote: [snip] >On furthur thought, perhaps, instead of yes. Cost considerations (at a >quote of $7K for 3 grams of a Pd isotope) may inhibit doing this along >with not knowing what the results would be in an exact CETI cell >replication which did not call for it. Also, in electrolysis, All of the [snip] At this rate, enough isotopically pure Pd for a powergen style experiment would cost $93.- (hardly going to break the bank). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 14:29:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA04910; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:28:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:28:16 -0800 Message-ID: <363B966C.645F ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:59:56 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki Reply-To: "aki ix.netcom.com"@netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palldium isotopes -- References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> <363AB01C.BFC2DF42@gte.net> <363B143E.263D@ix.netcom.com> <363b864b.100133127@24.192.1.20> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"29zX13.0.aC1.0yuEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23938 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > At this rate, enough isotopically pure Pd for a powergen style > experiment would cost $93.- (hardly going to break the bank). Thanks for the calculations. How much beads would it ($93.00) produce volume wise? Make some more while they are at it. No reason for Ceti or Miley not to proceed then. Also determine the isotopic balances of other active materials used. It wouldn't hurt to analyze CETI beads at hand in their "before' and 'after isotopic states. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 14:58:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA12042; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:57:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:57:08 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palldium isotopes -- Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 22:57:04 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <363d95af.104074134 24.192.1.20> References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> <363AB01C.BFC2DF42@gte.net> <363B143E.263D@ix.netcom.com> <363b864b.100133127@24.192.1.20> <363B966C.645F@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <363B966C.645F ix.netcom.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: <"DUH8b2.0.4y2.4NvEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23939 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:59:56 -0800, Akira Kawasaki wrote: >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >> At this rate, enough isotopically pure Pd for a powergen style >> experiment would cost $93.- (hardly going to break the bank). > >Thanks for the calculations. How much beads would it ($93.00) produce >volume wise? Make some more while they are at it. No reason for Ceti or >Miley not to proceed then. Also determine the isotopic balances of other >active materials used. It wouldn't hurt to analyze CETI beads at hand in >their "before' and 'after isotopic states. > >-AK- Actually I forgot about the mass difference between Ni and Pd when I did the above, so $150.- might be more realistic. Still not really a problem for a laboratory of any significance. I based the calculation on Jed's powergen report, where the mass of the Ni in the beads was 40 mg (due to the very thin layer on each bead). I think that the total volume of beads was on the order of several cc, but I'm sure Jed can give a better answer than I. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 15:21:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA18853; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 15:20:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 15:20:18 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Comments from Paul Dore re SETI hit Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 23:20:04 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <363f9a7f.105306137 24.192.1.20> 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: <"meClS3.0.Vc4.oivEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23940 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:41:27 +1000, Kenneth A HUNTER wrote: >From http://web1.tusco.net/ourlady/chapter2.htm#PARTIII >More on Nostradamus:- > >X.72 July 1999, the World War III shall begin. > > L'an mil neuf cent nonante neuf sept mois > Du ciel viendra un grand Roy d'effrayeur > Ressusciter le grand Roy d'Angoulmois > Avant apres Mars regner par bonheur > >NOTE: >An: year; mil: thousand; neuf: nine; cent: hundred; nonante: ninety; sept: seven; mois: month; ciel: sky; >viendra (venir): to come; roy: king; effrayeur: to terrify; ressusciter: to resurrect; Angoulmois: the >anagram of Mongoulois which means Mongolian; avant apres: before and after; bonheur: luck, good >fortune; Mars: war. > > The year 1999 and seven months > From the sky shall come the great king of terror Maybe he's sending a signal ahead ;) > The great Mongolian King of old shall resurrect > Before and after wars shall reign at will Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 16:46:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA11522; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 16:45:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 16:45:07 -0800 Message-ID: <363BB672.7F9C ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 17:16:34 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki Reply-To: "aki ix.netcom.com"@netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dennis views References: <1.5.4.32.19981031200541.00e38044 popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mqsm_2.0.yp2.IywEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23941 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 31, 1998 Dennis C. Lee wrote: > The idea I had was to use palladium black. I did a websearch and found >Jed Rothwell's report on a 1995 ICCF5. They already tried palladium >black --- Jed is on top of many things CF. > Could I get a copy of that paper? You can. But it might be more useful to you to read some IE issues, one of which covers Arata's experiment & papers reviewed by Mike Carrell. And look at Swartz's Cold Fusion Times, Hal Fox's fusion publications. Review the Abstracts of the cold fusion conferences, read the 'pro and con' book publications of the recent past. The other is to read through the Vortex archieves near the end of 1997 and beginining of 1998 to cover some discussions of Arata's work. Make sure to visit Dieter Britz's cold fusion on-line extensive archive of cold fusion papers. Be aware that Vortex partricipants and others have actrive websites concerning excees eneregy, new eneregy, and theoritical discussions frequently cross posted by Rich Murray. > Then I learned of David Hudson's monatomic discovery and his statement >of monatomic palladium easily transmuting when the superconducting >field ---- Just get a definitive experiment going on it. > energy was from H to H2 recombination. In this transition, the >hydrogen atom shrinks and ZPE is squeezed out as heat. You seem to be talking about Blacklight Power (they hAve a websight) > So, I was flipping through an old chemistry book and saw a page on >palladium black being able to absorb 1000 somethings of hydrogen. Cool. This finding goes back over a hundred years (1860's) with Graham with his work on palladium. Actually the 'CHEMIsorption' rate ranges from 1000 to 3000 times the volume of palladium for hydrogen. Much less for other metals including platinum. He also observed monotomic (h) hydrogen escaping from loaded palladium by noting the reactions. >With this, there is more surface area so it should work better. There >is no lattice ---- You do not know this. More surface area, yes. No lattice, no. >so this would definitely eliminate the first ZPE theory if the >palladium black was a small enough particle size to avoid a lattice >structure. Nobody said there were no lattice structures, fine as pallaium black is to our eyes. Least of all palladium is not amorphous. > Don't you remember that MIT scientist who also had a clip of a movie >he was producing. The actors were worse than bad? I faintly remember, more on the faint side. You put faith too easily to authority figures. -AK- ps: The paper is too long to e-mail. What's your address? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 16:52:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA13729; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 16:51:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 16:51:58 -0800 Message-ID: <363BB7FA.1B9C ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 17:23:06 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki Reply-To: "aki ix.netcom.com"@netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palldium isotopes -- References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> <363AB01C.BFC2DF42@gte.net> <363B143E.263D@ix.netcom.com> <363b864b.100133127@24.192.1.20> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"csnDx.0.NM3.k2xEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23942 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > At this rate, enough isotopically pure Pd for a powergen style > experiment would cost $93.- (hardly going to break the bank). Forgot to remind you there are six stable isotopes of palladium to study to really track things down. Then afterwards you don't know how many isotopes of palladium you will find out of the 29 listed. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 17:28:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA27566; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 17:27:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 17:27:31 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palldium isotopes -- Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 01:27:27 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3641b68e.112490927 24.192.1.20> References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> <363AB01C.BFC2DF42@gte.net> <363B143E.263D@ix.netcom.com> <363b864b.100133127@24.192.1.20> <363BB7FA.1B9C@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <363BB7FA.1B9C ix.netcom.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: <"OH-BR3.0.ek6.3axEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23943 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 31 Oct 1998 17:23:06 -0800, Akira Kawasaki wrote: >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >> At this rate, enough isotopically pure Pd for a powergen style >> experiment would cost $93.- (hardly going to break the bank). > >Forgot to remind you there are six stable isotopes of palladium to study >to really track things down. Then afterwards you don't know how many >isotopes of palladium you will find out of the 29 listed. > >-AK- Yes, I know there are 6 different isotopes, but still 6 x $150.- is only $900.- . This is not a major expense. In fact most places could pay for it out of petty cash. Here is another somewhat interesting variation: Place beads made of different isotopes in layers from light to heavy from cathode to anode (i.e. Pd102 layer, Pd104 layer etc., ending with the Pd 110 layer). If electromigration is playing a role, then this should also be obvious from the final distribution of isotopes. (Heavy to light is OK too). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 17:32:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA28268; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 17:31:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 17:31:48 -0800 Message-ID: <363BC179.2262 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 18:03:37 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki Reply-To: "aki ix.netcom.com"@netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palldium isotopes -- References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> <363AB01C.BFC2DF42@gte.net> <363B143E.263D@ix.netcom.com> <363b864b.100133127@24.192.1.20> <363B966C.645F@ix.netcom.com> <363d95af.104074134@24.192. 1.20> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"IXaS62.0.Yv6.4exEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23944 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 31, 1998 Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Actually I forgot about the mass difference between Ni and Pd when I > did the above, so $150.- might be more realistic. Still not really a > problem for a laboratory of any significance. Well, add six stable palladium isotopes I mentioed earlier plus the nickel you mentioned. Nickel has five stable isotopes out of 24 total, of which three, if it appears in the reaction, has half lives of years. If you try all the cross possible combinations of 11 isotopes, even at $93.00 per isotope, it starts adding up. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 18:04:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA01855; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 18:01:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 18:01:40 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palldium isotopes -- Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 02:01:34 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3645c0e5.115139547 24.192.1.20> References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> <363AB01C.BFC2DF42@gte.net> <363B143E.263D@ix.netcom.com> <363b864b.100133127@24.192.1.20> <363B966C.645F@ix.netcom.com> <363d95af.104074134@24.192. 1.20> <363BC179.2262 ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <363BC179.2262 ix.netcom.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: <"QSjQy3.0.vS.34yEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23945 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 31 Oct 1998 18:03:37 -0800, Akira Kawasaki wrote: >October 31, 1998 > >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >> Actually I forgot about the mass difference between Ni and Pd when I >> did the above, so $150.- might be more realistic. Still not really a >> problem for a laboratory of any significance. > >Well, add six stable palladium isotopes I mentioed earlier plus the >nickel you mentioned. Nickel has five stable isotopes out of 24 total, >of which three, if it appears in the reaction, has half lives of years. >If you try all the cross possible combinations of 11 isotopes, even at >$93.00 per isotope, it starts adding up. > >-AK- I would start with Pd or Ni only, till the most active isotope for each element was determined, then start combining elements, using only those most active isotopes. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 19:01:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA18108; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 18:59:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 18:59:38 -0800 Message-ID: <363BD600.32A0 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 19:31:12 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki Reply-To: "aki ix.netcom.com"@netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A cheaper 3rd suggestion ... Palldium isotopes -- References: <3636d4e9.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> <36374155.737E@ix.netcom.com> <3637662F.C7A@ix.netcom.com> <363AB01C.BFC2DF42@gte.net> <363B143E.263D@ix.netcom.com> <363b864b.100133127@24.192.1.20> <363B966C.645F@ix.netcom.com> <363d95af.104074134@24.192. 1.20> <363BC179.2262 ix.netcom.com> <3645c0e5.115139547@24.192.1.20> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RSpCV.0.rQ4.PwyEs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23946 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 31, 1998 Robin wrote: > I would start with Pd or Ni only, till the most active isotope for > each element was determined, then start combining elements, using only > those most active isotopes. That's ok. I would recommend the third suggestion where a regular CETI cell is run with their regular beads except they are analyzed for distribution of isotopes (both Pd, Ni and electrolytes) before and after a run. You should be able to pick out the active isotopes and changes that occurred. Then change bead coatings to optimize the activities. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Oct 31 21:47:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA08689; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 21:46:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 21:46:29 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19981101055338.00e69be8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 00:53:38 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: I'll just start postin'? Resent-Message-ID: <"U6KSZ.0.h72.rM_Es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23947 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To Vortex; I have some innovative CF ideas I want to talk about. I don't think that I will have the resources to do this all on my own. So I'll just post it here in my next message and it will be up to you guys to determine its' worth and originality and help me put it together by the one year patent disclosure time limit or it will become public domain? This way though, we'll all be able to contribute with refinements. Has something like this been tried before? I trust every one understands and respects proper Consideration and Mutual Ascent concepts and rights? Is this a good idea guys? If it turns out to be a good one and it just goes by it may be a while before I can put another one together. Any comments? Anybody interested? Regards; Dennis Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html