From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 1 05:42:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA13164; Fri, 1 Jan 1999 05:42:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 05:42:03 -0800 Message-ID: <003101be358c$64823120$d3441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: The Magneto Check for Bendix and Slick aircraft magnetos (http://www.sierra.net Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 06:40:36 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0044_01BE3551.A3A56060" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"iiBPB2.0.cD3.g2DZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25506 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_0044_01BE3551.A3A56060 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sacramento Sky Ranch =20 The Magneto Check Single ignition operation during engine run-up is intended primarily to = see that all plugs are firing evenly and regularly on each magneto. If = the RPM drop is outside of limits, therefore, the first question is = whether or not the engine runs smoothly. If the engine runs smoothly = then engine timing on BOTH magnetos should be checked first. If the engine's rough on one magneto but smooth on both magnetos then = check for a cold cylinder. Allow the engine to cool down and then start = and idle the engine for a minute or two on the magneto that gives you = the roughness. Shut down the engine and feel each cylinder for the cold = one. Most likely you will find the cylinder has a fouled spark plug or a = bad ignition lead. If the engine is rough regardless of the magneto = setting then the problem is not ignition. Suspect an induction leak or a = valve train problem. Specifically check to make sure the hydraulic = lifter is pumping up and that the camshaft lobe isn't flattened. Magneto problems are characterized by irregular roughness that cannot be = isolated to a particular cylinder. Breaker point and capacitor problems = fall within this category. A magneto that doesn't fire indicates that the magneto's primary circuit = is grounded. Suspect that the P lead or ignition switch is grounding out = the magneto, the breaker points aren't opening, or the capacitor is = internally shorted.=20 Excessive RPM drop on one magneto and not the other indicates improper = engine to magneto timing or improper E gap setting. Copyright 1995 by Sacramento Sky Ranch Inc. All rights reserved=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01BE3551.A3A56060 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The Magneto Check for Bendix and Slick = aircraft magnetos
 
Sacramento Sky=20 Ranch =20

The Magneto Check

Single ignition operation during = engine=20 run-up is intended primarily to see that all plugs are firing evenly and = regularly on each magneto. If the RPM drop is outside of limits, = therefore, the=20 first question is whether or not the engine runs smoothly. If the engine = runs=20 smoothly then engine timing on BOTH magnetos should be checked first.

If the engine's rough on one magneto but smooth on both magnetos then = check=20 for a cold cylinder. Allow the engine to cool down and then start and = idle the=20 engine for a minute or two on the magneto that gives you the roughness. = Shut=20 down the engine and feel each cylinder for the cold one. Most likely you = will=20 find the cylinder has a fouled spark plug or a bad ignition lead. If the = engine=20 is rough regardless of the magneto setting then the problem is not = ignition.=20 Suspect an induction leak or a valve train problem. Specifically check = to make=20 sure the hydraulic lifter is pumping up and that the camshaft lobe isn't = flattened.

Magneto problems are characterized by irregular roughness that cannot = be=20 isolated to a particular cylinder. Breaker point and capacitor problems = fall=20 within this category.

A magneto that doesn't fire indicates that the magneto's primary = circuit is=20 grounded. Suspect that the P lead or ignition switch is grounding out = the=20 magneto, the breaker points aren't opening, or the capacitor is = internally=20 shorted.=20

Excessive RPM drop on one magneto and not the other indicates = improper engine=20 to magneto timing or improper E gap setting.

Copyright 1995 by Sacramento Sky Ranch Inc. All rights = reserved=20

------=_NextPart_000_0044_01BE3551.A3A56060-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 1 05:46:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA14074; Fri, 1 Jan 1999 05:45:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 05:45:30 -0800 Message-ID: <003301be358c$df252680$d3441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Independent Ignition Supplies - Specialist magneto repairers and component supp Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 06:44:08 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004D_01BE3552.21F2C020" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"0A_nd3.0.qR3.v5DZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25507 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_004D_01BE3552.21F2C020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit There goes your lawn mower, Frank. :-) http://www.magneto.co.uk/ ------=_NextPart_000_004D_01BE3552.21F2C020 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Independent Ignition Supplies - Specialist magneto repairers and component suppliers.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Independent Ignition Supplies - Specialist magneto repairers and component suppliers.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.magneto.co.uk/ Modified=0076F9958C35BE0184 ------=_NextPart_000_004D_01BE3552.21F2C020-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 1 06:04:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA16488; Fri, 1 Jan 1999 06:04:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 06:04:27 -0800 Message-ID: <003401be358f$863b9600$d3441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: The Magneto Ignition System - Table of Contents (http://www.avweb.com/sponsors/ Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 07:03:12 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0056_01BE3554.CC042020" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"l8vAb.0.T14.hNDZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25508 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_0056_01BE3554.CC042020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Why not buy rather than build? http://www.avweb.com/sponsors/skyranch/magnetoc.html ------=_NextPart_000_0056_01BE3554.CC042020 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="The Magneto Ignition System - Table of Contents.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="The Magneto Ignition System - Table of Contents.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.avweb.com/sponsors/skyranch/magnetoc.html Modified=205C5B3F8F35BE0199 ------=_NextPart_000_0056_01BE3554.CC042020-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 1 06:09:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA18555; Fri, 1 Jan 1999 06:08:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 06:08:30 -0800 Posted-Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 16:07:16 +0300 (MEST) Message-ID: <368CCFE4.82ED4A36 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999 15:38:44 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win98; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex , freenrg Subject: Superluminal Signal Velocity (eprint:physics/9812053) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OzSb53.0.gX4.URDZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25509 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, (posted also to freenrg list regarding interest to FTL on this list, sorry to who will receive it twice.) This should be an important paper on FTL from G. Nimtz who widely known from his superluminal experiments. Very interesting properties of this signal are stated on the abstract below. Just released today and available from LANL archive at http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/9812053. Regards, hamdi ucar Physics, abstract physics/9812053 From: Guenter Nimtz Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 17:52:11 GMT (95kb) Superluminal Signal Velocity Authors: Guenter Nimtz Comments: 7 pages, 4 figures Subj-class: Classical Physics Journal-ref: Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 7 (1998) 618 It recently has been demonstrated that signals conveyed by evanescent modes can travel faster than light. In this report some special features of signals are introduced and investigated, for instance the fundamental property that signals are frequency band limited. Evanescent modes are characterized by extraordinary properties: Their energy is {\it negative}, they are not directly measurable, and the evanescent region is not causal since the modes traverse this region instantaneously. The study demonstrates the necessity of quantum mechanical principles in order to interprete the superluminal signal velocity of classical evanescent modes. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 1 07:30:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA02163; Fri, 1 Jan 1999 07:29:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 07:29:54 -0800 Message-ID: <003701be359b$76038de0$d3441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Antiferromagnetic-Magneto Pulsed-Electrostatic ZPE Motor Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 08:28:07 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0068_01BE3560.A954EBC0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"n4N-23.0.jX.odEZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25510 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_0068_01BE3560.A954EBC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To; Vortex This should do it for the Magneto (80,000 volts). A rotating (negative)disc with a flywheel driving the Mag and a low voltage Magneto to Pulse the electromagnets attached to the fixed (positive stator) that torque the antiferromagnetic (negative)disc around when the electrons draw ZPE from the stator and heat it to the Neel temperature. Simple, Huh? :-) http://www.karata.com/catalog/magnetos.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0068_01BE3560.A954EBC0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="magnetos.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="magnetos.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.karata.com/catalog/magnetos.htm Modified=C041B9339935BE017A ------=_NextPart_000_0068_01BE3560.A954EBC0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 1 16:47:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA23097; Fri, 1 Jan 1999 16:42:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 16:42:47 -0800 Message-ID: <006701be35e8$b0ad8840$d3441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: innovat (http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/Innovat.htm) Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 17:41:30 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0096_01BE35AD.F71C6480" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"DymR63.0.pe5.7kMZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25511 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_0096_01BE35AD.F71C6480 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/Innovat.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0096_01BE35AD.F71C6480 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="innovat.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="innovat.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/Innovat.htm Modified=A0663B85E835BE01A2 ------=_NextPart_000_0096_01BE35AD.F71C6480-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 2 04:47:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA13063; Sat, 2 Jan 1999 04:41:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 04:41:42 -0800 Message-ID: <000101be364d$1df17e20$4c441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Antiferromagnetic-Magneto Pulsed-Electrostatic ZPE Motor Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 05:39:54 -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: <"3EwBo.0.zB3.6GXZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25512 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Before this conjecture gets too far afield, an experiment to see if the rapid application of an electric field to the plates of a capacitor causes a temperature rise on the negative plate. The less thermal mass,the better. Pulse Rate, Polarity,Area, and Field Intensity vs dT? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 3 03:55:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA11704; Sun, 3 Jan 1999 03:52:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 03:52:20 -0800 Message-Id: <199901031142.WAA18911 turbo.turboweb.net.au> X-Mailer: Eudora Pro 1.1 for Newton Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 10:34:00 +1100 To: From: Allan Alderson Subject: Re: I need help Resent-Message-ID: <"o947H3.0.ls2.qdrZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25514 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 31 Dec 1998 18:12:57 -0600, nmb wrote with snips : >> >I have had enough of the police officers with their high tech radars and >strategic locations on the road. I could scramble all >police radar signaling and become virtually invisible while.... > >Darryl > Try not speeding :) When the police officer targets your car with his radar, what reading would you like him to get? 0 mph? 999 mph? -999 mph? Is it an offence in your country to withhold evidence or to suppy false evidence? To interfere with the operations of a law enforcement officer/agency? The cure could be Worse than the disease! For now why not just pannel-beat your car to resemble the lending edge of a stealth aircraft. . .replace all the curved surfaces with sharp edges. It will probably improve you mpg too! Regards, Allan. ---- ---- ---- ---- http://www.mpx.com.au/~adsaa ---- ---- ---- ---- Dogs have masters; Cats have staff. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 3 03:55:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA11676; Sun, 3 Jan 1999 03:52:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 03:52:14 -0800 Message-Id: <199901031142.WAA18908 turbo.turboweb.net.au> X-Mailer: Eudora Pro 1.1 for Newton Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 14:15:00 +1100 To: From: Allan Alderson Subject: Re: Wanted: Old dead tubes (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"UlP2x2.0.Ms2.kdrZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25513 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 30 Dec 1998 20:42:05 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: > >Dear Folks, > >I am looking to see if any of you or your friends have any old >dead ... or not dead but used .... Snip If there is a cinema in your area, chances are they have converted from carbon-arc to xenon. They usually throw-out their old short-arc lamps after their hours are up. (I know I do.) They will probably glady give you (or keep for you) the dead ones. Regards, Allan. ---- ---- ---- ---- http://www.mpx.com.au/~adsaa ---- ---- ---- ---- Dogs have masters; Cats have staff. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 3 11:09:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA01735; Sun, 3 Jan 1999 11:05:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 11:05:00 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19990103141249.00c95e90 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 14:12:51 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: RQM? Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Jm3zB.0.0R.RzxZs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25515 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi folks. Remember RQM? JLN has a pretty substantial chunk of their material at his site. More exists www.rqm.com. I don't know what to make of it; slick presentation but lacking in substantive details. However, the patent for the device can be found here http://www.cyberportal.net/nuenergy/rqm.pdf in pdf form. Any comments from the peanut gallery? K. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 3 19:23:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA10116; Sun, 3 Jan 1999 19:22:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 19:22:32 -0800 Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 22:14:27 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: RQM? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19990103141249.00c95e90 cnct.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Kurqx.0.-T2.uF3as" mx1> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25516 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., I sent for their wole package... it is fluff... resembels switched parallel-series batteries. On Sun, 3 Jan 1999, Keith Nagel wrote: > Hi folks. > > Remember RQM? JLN has a pretty substantial chunk of their material > at his site. More exists www.rqm.com. I don't > know what to make of it; slick presentation but lacking > in substantive details. However, the patent for the > device can be found here > > http://www.cyberportal.net/nuenergy/rqm.pdf > > in pdf form. Any comments from the peanut gallery? > > K. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 3 21:57:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA25362; Sun, 3 Jan 1999 21:56:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 21:56:25 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19990104060307.011dc094 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="iso-8859-1" Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 01:03:07 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: Robert Park reviews Mizuno book Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA25332 Resent-Message-ID: <"L8TnP2.0.AC6.9W5as" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25517 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; At 12:19 PM 12/31/98 -0500, you wrote: >Robert Park of the APS asked us for a review copy of the Mizuno book, >"Nuclear Transmutation: the Reality of Cold Fusion." We sent him one, and >I faxed him the attached letter. He wrote this whimsical review in his >periodic e-mail bulletin, " WHAT'S NEW." > Whimsical? I'd say ignorant assasination. > December 18, 1998 > >Dr. Robert Park >Fax: 202-662-8711 > >Dear Dr. Park, > > Since any publicity is good publicity I welcome your offer to review the >Mizuno book. However, this is a popular book intended for the general >audience, not a scientific treatise. You cannot judge experimental evidence >except by reading the original scientific papers and examining the data. > > A claim of this nature can only be validated when it has been widely >replicated, by dozens of laboratories. Cold fusion has, in fact, been >replicated in hundreds of laboratories at high signal to noise ratios. >Therefore, to judge the issue, you would have sit down and spend a few >weeks poring through papers from Hitachi, Los Alamos, the National Fusion >Institute (which confirmed tritium production), BARC, and so on. Some of >these papers are strongly positive – irrefutably positive, in my opinion. >Some are negative, many are muddled or inconclusive. Cold fusion is >difficult to replicate. The best laboratories, like Mitsubishi, report that >seven out of seven experiments over the past two years produced heat and >gamma rays. In other successful laboratories about half of the cathodes >produce excess heat and nuclear ash. However, most labs only see heat in >perhaps 1 in 10 experiments, because of problems with cathode materials: >the metal does not absorb deuterium, or it absorbs but expands, warps and >fractures. This kind of difficulty replicating an effect is not unusual in >solid state and catalysis applications. In the 1950s, many transistor >production runs failed, or produced only 1 or 2 working devices per >hundred. That is why transistors remained more expensive than vacuum tubes >for several years. > > I presume you do not have time to review hundreds of papers. Therefore, I >recommend you read a small selection of three representative papers: > >M. McKubre et al., "Isothermal flow calorimetric investigations of the D/Pd >and H/Pd systems," J. Electroanal. Chem. 368 (1994) 55 (You could read the >full EPRI report instead, "Development of Advanced Concepts for Nuclear >Processes in Deuterated Metals," EPRI TR-104195, but it is 342 pages.) >Attached please find the Overview and Abstract. > >M. Miles et al., "Anomalous Effects in Deuterated Systems," NAWCWPNS TP >8302, September 1996, Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, China >Lake, CA 93555-6100. This was reprinted in our magazine. > >T. N. Claytor, D. D. Jackson and D. G. Tuggle, "Tritium Production from a >Low Voltage Deuterium Discharge on Palladium and Other Metals," Los Alamos >National Laboratory. You can read this right away, on Internet: >http://wwwnde.esa.lanl.gov/cf/tritweb.htm > > We would be happy to send you copies of the other two papers along with >the book. > > Sincerely, > > > > Jed Rothwell > > >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > >[The date should have been 1 Jan 99] > >WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 1 Jan 98 Washington, DC > >1. THE UNDEAD: A REVIEW OF "NUCLEAR TRANSMUTATION." The subtitle of this >thin volume by Tadahiko Mizuno is "The Reality of Cold Fusion." The >publisher is Infinite Energy Press, which probably tells you everything you >need to know. The above statement tells me everything I need to know about Mr. Park. He thinks (and probably will) get brownie points with the 'good old boy$' for this piece of dirty work. >This year marks the tenth anniversary of the announcement by >the University of Utah that Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann had >achieved deuterium fusion in a simple electrolytic cell (WN 24 Mar 89). >Within a matter of weeks, a DOE panel officially pronounced cold fusion >dead, amidst revelations of altered data and suppression of evidence. A matter of WEEKS? Convincing evidence that there was nothing political about this DOE pronouncement! Sounds like they were letting word out to people like Mr. Park of the appropriate behavior to publicize about the subject. What could possibly be ascertained in a few weeks other than that something may be politically incorrect. >But >the corpse does not rest peacefully. DOE says thumbs down, therefore no grant money, therefore it's a corpse. It's probably that simple in Mr. Park's mind. >This personal account by one of a >small corps who have not given up on cold fusion is wonderfully Wonderfully? Does this mean that Mr. Park is happy and uplifted about what he is about to say next? >revealing >-- but not for what it tells us about science. I gave up hope of hearing anything about truth or science on this matter with Mr. Park's opening statements above. >"If you limit your goal to >finding fusion products," Mizuno snorts, "anyone can see you will not learn >much. This is why the focus is now on transmutation." Transmutation? Is this an even dirtier word than CF in Mr. Park's mind? Perhaps justification to cash in on a few more hate inspired brownie points? >He says of his >fellow believers, "They have been treated like heretics by the rest of the >scientific community. This has formed a bond of solidarity between them. >Working with practically no funding against a tide of opposition ... Another reminder that if you mess with the CF can of worms, forget about getting any grants and expect many to work against one. >they >have slowly but surely brought about a new discovery." It is an eloquent >statement of how pathological science survives. pathology - the scientific study of disease disease - 1. an abnormal condition of an organism or part 2. a condition or tendency, as of society, regarded as abnormal and pernicious pernicious - destructive or deadly Does this mean that 'pathological science' can mean technology that is perceived as politically incorrect? What does destructive or deadly technology mean to a society that builds nuclear weapons and powerplants? This must refer to a perceived threat to the almighty dollar. Again, no mention of the idea of truth here, only the impression that there is a dis-ease associated with the CF subject. >In the final chapter Mizuno >asks rhetorically, "What sort of reaction is cold fusion? As you have seen >in this account we still have no clear idea." After ten years, nothing has >changed. > > > Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html Concentric Tori http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/GoldCTori_A.JPG Circle Of Fire - Dreamland - VR Avatars! Great Fun! http://www.artbellchatclub.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 4 01:15:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA30784; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 01:09:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 01:09:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 09:09:44 +0000 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: DC delusions Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Mq-iv1.0.sW7.VL8as" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25518 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Amazing how we get blinded! Of course George was right, I didn't need to build the sucker! You can't have your cake and eat it too on this one: Want the flux to change, gotta have your back emf. Seasonal madness and probably job boredom caused this blindless! It can't be that simple. All this stuff is out there on some wild frontier where people have barely trodden... (it ain't linear for a start!) BUT.... Could there be a way to absorb this back emf? If so, why do I need the bifiliar setup? Just have this 'damping circuit' on an inductor from the start. It's to do with prebiasing - I have most of the desired current already there. If I make dphi/dt small enough (easy, make the secondary resistance not infinity when switch opened), the back emf can be construed as a small signal... If one can pin the voltage excursions, the current through the inductor won't change. We make a small signal loop that looks like a short across the inductor... Geez! I get the stupids sometimes. Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 4 03:33:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA16936; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 03:32:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 03:32:41 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19990104113930.011e0efc popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 06:39:30 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: RQM? Resent-Message-ID: <"Ar_Fo2.0.Y84.PRAas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25519 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi; The nested switched coil looks something like the coil in the Harry E. Perrigo device. Regards; Dennis At 02:12 PM 1/3/99 -0500, you wrote: >Hi folks. > >Remember RQM? JLN has a pretty substantial chunk of their material >at his site. More exists www.rqm.com. I don't >know what to make of it; slick presentation but lacking >in substantive details. However, the patent for the >device can be found here > >http://www.cyberportal.net/nuenergy/rqm.pdf > >in pdf form. Any comments from the peanut gallery? > >K. Tall Ships http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html Concentric Tori http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/GoldCTori_A.JPG Circle Of Fire - Dreamland - VR Avatars! Great Fun! http://www.artbellchatclub.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 4 05:30:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA07329; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 05:29:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 05:29:51 -0800 Message-ID: <19990104132918.18534.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.73.204.24] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: RQM? Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 05:29:18 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"NvxxF.0.Oo1.E9Cas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25520 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hmmm, I don't think you tried the link before you emailed it K. Try this: http://www.rqm.ch/eng/tech-inf.htm Rob King >Hi; > >The nested switched coil looks something like the coil in the Harry E. >Perrigo device. > >Regards; >Dennis > > > >At 02:12 PM 1/3/99 -0500, you wrote: >>Hi folks. >> >>Remember RQM? JLN has a pretty substantial chunk of their material >>at his site. More exists www.rqm.com. I don't >>know what to make of it; slick presentation but lacking >>in substantive details. However, the patent for the >>device can be found here >> >>http://www.cyberportal.net/nuenergy/rqm.pdf >> >>in pdf form. Any comments from the peanut gallery? >> >>K. > > > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 4 07:27:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA23607; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 07:21:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 07:21:08 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <3690CF32.6794 ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 06:24:50 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: innovat (http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/Innovat.htm) References: <006701be35e8$b0ad8840$d3441d26 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"AYoax3.0.mm5.anDas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25521 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: January 4, 1999 Fred, Thanks for the Innovat.html. Beats wandering in Disneyland (your favorite haunt?) anyday. I have forwarded the site to my son who is into creating business webpages and I hope also has some of the tinkering blood in him. -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 4 09:46:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA18845; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 09:44:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 09:44:44 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990104124619.00e5ac90 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 12:46:19 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Fast Electron ZPE Pump In-Reply-To: <000101be34b8$54b00080$494fccd1 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lNQX7.0.Jc4.CuFas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25522 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:15 AM 12/31/98 -0500, Mike Carrell wrote: >Not quite. the color of a low pressure sodium vapor lamp is pure yellow, and >everything is monochromatic. These are generally no longer used for street >lighting because of the offensive color. However, one town near an >observatory was persuaded to use such lamps, so that the diffuse sky light >could be easily filtered without much net loss of light from the stars. I guess that everyone has their own opinion as to what constitutes ghoulish colors, but you need to look at the work of Edwin Land. He was trying to develop a two dye full color process for Polaroid cameras (he eventually came up with at three dye process). His idea was that since the human eye has two type of dectectors (rods and cones) there must be a color scheme where with just two frequencies of light you can create the illusion of full color. He did find that it can be done--but it won't work for photographs, since they will be very sensitive to the type of light you view them in. Back to sodium. Sodium vapor is not monochromatic. There are two major lines ten angstroms apart in the yellow. Edwin land separated these lines and projected full color images using just the two sodium lines. In any case, it is possible to percieve color in sodium vapor lighting, but it takes about 30 foot candles for most people, so you won't see colors near the periphery of the area illuminated by a street light, which is why I suggested standing right underneath. >The Luclox lamps, which have a pinkish cast, are high pressure sodium vapor. >The high pressure in the lamp capsule spreads out the sodium spectrum to a >pleasing color which is centered near the peak sensitivity of the human eye. I personally hate the "pinkish" color, but I thought they added metal halides to the sodium. >The goulish, greenish cast come from mercury vapor lamps. Sometimes these >are enclosed in a bulb with a phosphor coating which emits in the red, >excited by the UV radiation from the mercury discharge, as in a conventional >fluorescent lamp. I think of the mercury vapor lighting as blue, not green, but it is all a perceptions game. If you look at the (computed) color temperature of light sources sodium vapor falls between incandesent and mercury vapor. If you want to call it chartruse instead fine. 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 Jan 4 10:24:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA06019; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:23:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:23:33 -0800 Message-ID: <001801be380f$31218da0$b3441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "Youri" Subject: Re: innovat (http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/Innovat.htm) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 11:22:20 -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: <"hDmv73.0.wT1.aSGas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25523 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 Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 8:26 AM Subject: Re: innovat (http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/Innovat.htm) Akira wrote: >January 4, 1999 > >Fred, > >Thanks for the Innovat.html. You're welcome. >Beats wandering in Disneyland (your >favorite haunt?) anyday. The closest I ever was to Disneyland (physically)was a visit to Knots Berry Farm in 1954 and they were getting ready to "build" it. >I have forwarded the site to my son who is into >creating business webpages and I hope also has some of the tinkering >blood in him. Tinkering is the cradle of innovation isn't it? If it costs a lot, it is called Research and Development. :-) Regards, Frederick > >-ak- > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 4 12:10:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03753; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 12:07:44 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 12:07:44 -0800 (PST) From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <36911211.4B5B ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 11:10:09 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: innovat (http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/Innovat.htm) References: <001801be380f$31218da0$b3441d26 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wgDPi2.0.Xw.D-Has" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25524 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: January 4, 1999 Fred, > The closest I ever was to Disneyland (physically)was a visit to Knots >Berry Farm in 1954 and they were getting ready to "build" it. That was when Knott's claim to reknown was their chicken dinner, their berry jam, and the gold panning setup. I was giving refernce to your presense in the Disney channel where you caught my 'telepathic' message'. :) -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 4 20:26:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA25817; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 20:24:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 20:24:54 -0800 Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 23:16:49 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: Newman .... (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-WnUb2.0.JJ6.MGPas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25525 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: y Dear Evan and Vo.,., I like the idea of Newman's concept... but am having a little trouble getting my hands on it. I have the book. Will Mr. Newman let us know a simple demonstration of principle? Maybe: A single sraight conductor ... and what to do with it and magnet... and what to expect as output? I personally have skill in measuring tiny effects. JHS... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 4 20:26:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA26500; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 20:26:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 20:26:04 -0800 Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 23:17:58 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: Grain and Chaff Release from Joseph Newman for 1/1/1999 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"UX7EE3.0.kT6.RHPas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25526 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Folks, Can we dispense with the personality ... and get on with some data and facts....PLEASEEE??? I have to discard stuff if I exceed amount of incoming .... I wouls rather save grain, as oppsed to chaff. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 4 22:51:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA08648; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 22:50:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 22:50:11 -0800 From: JNaudin509 aol.com Message-ID: Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 01:49:28 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: herman antioch-college.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Improved apparatus and method for gravitational modification... Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailer: AOL 4.0.i for Windows 95 sub 141 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id WAA08626 Resent-Message-ID: <"5IwWH.0.272.ZORas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25527 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 05/01/99 05:26:44, herman antioch-college.edu wrote : > Can we dispense with the personality ... and get on with some data > and facts....PLEASEEE?? Hi John, Have you done some additional and reproducible tests and could give us some experimental measurements about this patent below ? http://www.patents.ibm.com/cgi-bin/viewpat.cmd/WO9823976A2 Best Regards, Jean-Louis Naudin WO9823976A2: IMPROVED APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR GRAVITATIONAL MODIFICATION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- Applicant(s): SCHNURER, John Issued/Filed Dates: N.A. / Nov. 14, 1997 Application Number: WO1997US0021791 A method and apparatus for gravitational modification is described. The prior art has discovered that a rotating high temperature ceramic superconductor cooled below 70 °K creates a gravitational "shielding" effect. The present invention substantially improves the prior art by, instead of rotating a superconductor material, holding the material fixed in a varying magneticfield to maximize the continuous variation of the distribution, location and configuration of circulating currents so as to continuously vary the sites of transition of the material between more stressed and less stressed conditions of circulating currents to produce a gravitational alteration effect which, in a superconductor corresponding to sites transitioning between superconducting and normal conducting states, produces an even more pronounced gravitational alteration effect. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 02:26:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA22012; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 02:23:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 02:23:36 -0800 Posted-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 12:22:27 +0300 (MEST) Message-ID: <3691E771.F27C9192 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 12:20:33 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win98; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of Zero Point Energy (eprint:hep-th/9901011) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SzZuw2.0.oN5.dWUas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25528 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, Not read it yet, but its title is enough to take attention, isn't it? Available at http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9901011. If one prefer PDF, fetch it from CERN archive. Regards, hamdi ucar High Energy Physics - Theory, abstract hep-th/9901011 From: Kimball A. Milton Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 19:06:19 GMT (43kb) The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of Zero Point Energy Authors: Kimball A. Milton Comments: 55 pages, 4 ps figures, Invited Lectures at 17th Symposium on Theoretical Physics, Seoul National University, Korea, June 29-July 1, 1998 Report-no: OKHEP-99-01 Zero-point fluctuations in quantum fields give rise to observable forces between material bodies, the so-called Casimir forces. In these lectures I present the theory of the Casimir effect, primarily formulated in terms of Green's functions. There is an intimate relation between the Casimir effect and van der Waals forces. Applications to conductors and dielectric bodies of various shapes will be given for the cases of scalar, electromagnetic, and fermionic fields. The dimensional dependence of the effect will be described. Finally, we ask the question: Is there a connection between the Casimir effect and the phenomenon of sonoluminescence? Paper: Source (43kb), PostScript, or Other formats From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 07:05:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA19426; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 07:04:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 07:04:13 -0800 Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:56:07 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: JNaudin509 aol.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, John Schnurer Subject: Re: Improved apparatus and method for gravitational modification... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA19400 Resent-Message-ID: <"9nppA1.0.Sl4.idYas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25529 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., I have been working with GM, or Gravity Modification, on and off now for about 4 years. The initial work indicates, to me anyway, and no to the USPTO, finally, that GM is possible. A 2 % to 3 % GM, negative, is achievable. It is certainly possible to go higher and we have had brief excursions to 7 %. The basic premise is the same as Dr. Eugene Podkletnov disclosed to us all. He opened the door for us all, he should have the credit. Some people have called this the Podkletnov-Schnurer Effect. I have to take exception to this. This would be like someone finding a different way to make an airplane... although still using the same principles ... and calling it the "Wright 'xxx' Effect". Eugene gets all the credit. I am strapped finanically, further work will require the services of an angel. John Herman Schnurer On Tue, 5 Jan 1999 JNaudin509 aol.com wrote: > On 05/01/99 05:26:44, herman antioch-college.edu wrote : > > > Can we dispense with the personality ... and get on with some data > > and facts....PLEASEEE?? > > Hi John, > > Have you done some additional and reproducible tests and could give us some > experimental measurements about this patent below ? > > http://www.patents.ibm.com/cgi-bin/viewpat.cmd/WO9823976A2 > > Best Regards, > > Jean-Louis Naudin > > WO9823976A2: IMPROVED APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR GRAVITATIONAL MODIFICATION > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -- > Applicant(s): SCHNURER, John > Issued/Filed Dates: N.A. / Nov. 14, 1997 > > Application Number: WO1997US0021791 > > A method and apparatus for gravitational modification is described. The prior > art has discovered that a rotating high temperature ceramic superconductor > cooled below 70 °K creates a gravitational "shielding" effect. The present > invention substantially improves the prior art by, instead of rotating a > superconductor material, holding the material fixed in a varying magneticfield > to maximize the continuous variation of the distribution, location and > configuration of circulating currents so as to continuously vary the sites of > transition of the material between more stressed and less stressed conditions > of circulating currents to produce a gravitational alteration effect which, in > a superconductor corresponding to sites transitioning between superconducting > and normal conducting states, produces an even more pronounced gravitational > alteration effect. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 08:32:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA21553; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 08:31:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 08:31:39 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0AF XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of Zero Point Ene rgy (eprint:hep-th/9901011) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 08:23:52 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"xBABx3.0.hG5.gvZas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25530 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hamdi Is this on the internet somewhere. Hank > ---------- > From: hamdi ucar[SMTP:hamdix verisoft.com.tr] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 1999 2:20 AM > To: vortex > Subject: The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of Zero Point > Energy (eprint:hep-th/9901011) > > Hi, > > Not read it yet, but its title is enough to take attention, isn't it? > Available at http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9901011. If one prefer PDF, > fetch it from CERN archive. > > Regards, > hamdi ucar > > > High Energy Physics - Theory, > abstract > hep-th/9901011 > > From: Kimball A. Milton > Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 19:06:19 GMT (43kb) > > The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of > Zero Point Energy > > Authors: Kimball A. Milton > Comments: 55 pages, 4 ps figures, Invited Lectures at 17th Symposium on > Theoretical Physics, Seoul National University, Korea, June 29-July 1, > 1998 > Report-no: OKHEP-99-01 > > Zero-point fluctuations in quantum fields give rise to observable > forces between material bodies, the so-called Casimir forces. In > these lectures I present the theory of the Casimir effect, primarily > formulated in terms of Green's functions. There is an intimate > relation between the Casimir effect and van der Waals forces. > Applications to conductors and dielectric bodies of various > shapes will be given for the cases of scalar, electromagnetic, and > fermionic fields. The dimensional dependence of the effect will be > described. Finally, we ask the question: Is there a connection > between the Casimir effect and the phenomenon of > sonoluminescence? > > Paper: Source (43kb), PostScript, or Other formats > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 09:52:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA20642; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:50:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:50:54 -0800 Message-ID: <001301be38d3$cc1166e0$3b441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 10:49:06 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"p_hNK.0.P25.z3bas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25531 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Applying a high potential (D.C. or Pulsed) electric field to a pair of capacitor plates as previously stated may show up as a change in temperature on the plates (electrocaloric effect). Silvered glass plates (like a mirror) or ordinary Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs) with fine thermocouple leads attached might work well enough to detect down to a fraction of a degree K. If the field stays below about 3 million volts/meter, one might do this in air without corona "artifacts". The object is to see what displacement of the free electrons in a conductor by high fields on the surface does to the temperature, and why. Field interaction/ZPE effect, or compression of the "free electron gas" at the conductor surface? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 10:50:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA10604; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 10:48:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 10:48:24 -0800 Message-ID: <001901be38db$d135a660$3b441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: ZPE Pumping in Themocouples? Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 11:47:10 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"ruukA1.0.Ob2.tvbas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25532 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex In the thermocouple circuit: T cold T hot ________A_____/\______B_____/\___A____ | | | | |_____________ battery________________| If this was done in a water/calorimeter bath without external heat gain (adiabatic)using a very high current density through the TC wires , could one tell if ZPE Pumping due to charge flow is occurring? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 11:42:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA04703; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 11:41:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 11:41:05 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990105144316.00efd320 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 14:43:16 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? In-Reply-To: <001301be38d3$cc1166e0$3b441d26 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"GlOoM1.0.I91.Ghcas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25533 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:49 AM 1/5/99 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >Applying a high potential (D.C. or Pulsed) electric field to a pair of >capacitor plates as previously stated may show up as a change in temperature >on the plates (electrocaloric effect). I'm trying to figure out where you are going here. I used to "characterize" high-voltage capacitors by measuring at frequencies from DC to 1 Megahertz to determine the effective resistance, leakage resistance, impedence, and effective capacitance. (The variation in capacitance with frequency was very low but detectable in low impedence oil-filled capacitors. The capacitance of mylar caps was much more sensitive to charge history.) In any case, what I am saying is that for certain applications, we rejected capacitors if they dissipated more than a hundred milliwatts. (Not because of power loss, this is out of several KVA, but because high dissipation was an indication of short life, usually due to a bad internal connection.) So I think that either I would have seen capacitors cooking off, or any "excess" heat is a very small fraction of the power involved. I've run 75 joule capacitors at several hundred KVA with only a few watts dissipated in the whole resonant part of the circut. By the way, if you want to try this for yourself be sure to use a very good faraday cage in addition to designing the circut to limit electromagnetic radiation. The FCC takes a dim view of unlicensed radio transmissions in the medium wave bands. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 13:01:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA09721; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 12:58:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 12:58:52 -0800 Message-ID: <000601be38ed$fed61480$90441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 13:56:20 -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: <"_NeGo1.0.YN2.Bqdas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25534 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robert I. Eachus To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, January 05, 1999 12:42 PM Subject: Re: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? Robert I. Eachus wrote: > > I'm trying to figure out where you are going here. > Too simple for you Robert? Forget about dielectric loss. I was talking about a pair of plates in air with a thin film coating and measuring the temperature of the conductive films with a pulsed voltage applied. > > So I think that either I would have seen capacitors cooking off, or any >"excess" heat is a very small fraction of the >power involved. > >By the way, if you want to try this for yourself be sure to use a very >good faraday cage in addition to designing the circuit to limit >electromagnetic radiation. The FCC takes a dim view of unlicensed radio >transmissions in the medium wave bands. Horse Puckey! The pulses at up to 10,000 pulses/sec, applied with a MOSFET or IGBT off three 12 volt batteries in series, won't get up their nose. You get 3.6 million volts/meter with 36 volts and 10 micron Air/Vacuum spacing BETWEEN the TWO PLATES. Regards, Frederick > > Robert I. Eachus > >with Standard_Disclaimer; >use Standard_Disclaimer; >function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 13:54:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA32278; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 13:53:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 13:53:32 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0B3 XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 13:51:44 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"Tj6F_.0.Gu7.Sdeas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25535 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred How are you going to measure temperature and calibrate the system? Hank > ---------- > From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 1999 12:56 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert I. Eachus > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Tuesday, January 05, 1999 12:42 PM > Subject: Re: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? > > Robert I. Eachus wrote: > > > > I'm trying to figure out where you are going here. > > > Too simple for you Robert? Forget about dielectric loss. I was talking > about > a pair of plates in air with a thin film coating and measuring the > temperature of the conductive films with a pulsed voltage applied. > > > > So I think that either I would have seen capacitors cooking off, or > any > >"excess" heat is a very small fraction of the >power involved. > > > >By the way, if you want to try this for yourself be sure to use a very > >good faraday cage in addition to designing the circuit to limit > >electromagnetic radiation. The FCC takes a dim view of unlicensed radio > >transmissions in the medium wave bands. > > Horse Puckey! The pulses at up to 10,000 pulses/sec, applied with a MOSFET > or IGBT off three 12 volt batteries in series, won't get up their nose. > > You get 3.6 million volts/meter with 36 volts > and 10 micron Air/Vacuum spacing BETWEEN the TWO PLATES. > > Regards, Frederick > > > > Robert I. Eachus > > > >with Standard_Disclaimer; > >use Standard_Disclaimer; > >function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 14:04:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA02545; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 14:00:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 14:00:21 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990105170242.00f06b90 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 17:02:42 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? Cc: In-Reply-To: <000601be38ed$fed61480$90441d26 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"pm4si1.0.hd.rjeas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25536 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:56 PM 1/5/99 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >Horse Puckey! The pulses at up to 10,000 pulses/sec, applied with a MOSFET >or IGBT off three 12 volt batteries in series, won't get up their nose. Hmmm. Depends on other factors. But the experiment I was speaking of did very definitely get up the FCC's nose. (Well not the experiment as such--that was done in a faraday cage, but getting type approval for the equipment we used the capacitors in was a son of a bitch. We started out with several watts ERP, and had to get down to a few milliwatts. The problem was that almost all the "simple fixes" increased inductance. Putting a metal shield around the xenon tube sort of defeats the purpose of the whole thing, but we ended up using a neat quartz with a thin layer of silver on it. Less than 10% absorption between 300 and 800 nm. But even then we needed to cool the quartz with a fan.) Since I've also gotten DC to AC converters through FCC type approval, I'll warn you that ringing during semiconductor switching can be a problem. The FCC doesn't twich much about 10 kHz, but you get ringing in the AM band if you don't have a bridging capacitor across the SCR or other power switch. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 14:23:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA13702; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 14:23:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 14:23:04 -0800 Message-ID: <001001be38f9$d13869e0$90441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 15:21:06 -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: <"ivZ23.0.0M3.73fas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25537 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scudder, Henry J To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Tuesday, January 05, 1999 2:54 PM Subject: RE: Re; Field Induced Electrocaloric Effects or ZPE? Hank wrote: >Fred > How are you going to measure temperature and calibrate the system? >Hank > Since I only do "thought experiments" it's very simple. :-) If Casimir can bring two plates together within a fraction of a micron where van derWaals forces and the residual charge due to the difference in the number of electrons in the two plates cause them to go together, I figure on holding them apart at 10 microns or more, and applying a potential, whereupon this sucks the ZPE energy from the Vacuum which will force them apart? :-) A bit more seriously,Pyroelectric sensors or other Infrared Temperature sensing devices might be required. With Standard capacitors regardless of their KVA rating are operating at 100 volts/mil and even at gigahertz frequencies the dE = hbar/dT the dT requirement of 6.6E-16 seconds for a 1.0 ev photon isn't even close. So the backdoor approach might be to get the high fields between the plates with air/vacuum dielectrics and see what develops in the way of electron displacement/temperature effects. Or one can just keep on theorizing until the next time we get two Blue Moons in 90 Days. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 20:41:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA19986; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 20:40:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 20:40:22 -0800 Message-ID: <000001be392e$82ace3c0$b8441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Pyroelectric Sensor Package (http://www.acroname.com/robotics/parts/R3-PYRO1.ht Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 21:38:39 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01BE38F3.C2565A00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"SbXMn2.0.2u4.sakas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25538 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01BE38F3.C2565A00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Pyroelectric Sensor Package =20 This sensor package allows you to detect movement of humans and pets. = It can also be used for finding candles and other sources of heat. The = package is simple, efficient and entirely self contained including an = op-amp to condition the output. Interfacing the sensor is simple with = only one analog output to sample with a micro. The sensitivity of this = sensor is tuned to the human body's infra-red emissivity. This part is = discussed in depth in the book "Mobile Robots: Inspiration to = Implementation". This package is also the easiest enhancement to the = Rug Warrior robot kits.=20 =20 Rug Warrior with Pyroelectric sensor installed in expansion socket on = Rug Warrior board =20 The package includes an Eltec 442-3 detector, fresnel lens that is = matched to the detector, application notes, instructions on building a = concentrating cone to focus a wide area of detection, and a pattern for = building the cone.=20 =20 Fresnel lens and cone from pattern Thanks to Eltec for providing a great product and helping with the = application notes! Price: $45.00 each=20 Part Number: R3-PYRO1=20 =20 Ordering Information =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01BE38F3.C2565A00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Pyroelectric Sensor = Package
 

 Pyroelectric Sensor = Package

 
This=20 sensor package allows you to detect movement of humans and pets.  = It can=20 also be used for finding candles and other sources of heat.  The = package is=20 simple, efficient and entirely self contained including an op-amp to = condition=20 the output.  Interfacing the sensor is simple with only one analog = output=20 to sample with a micro.  The sensitivity of this sensor is tuned to = the=20 human body's infra-red emissivity.  This part is discussed in depth = in the=20 book "Mobile Robots: Inspiration to Implementation".  = This=20 package is also the easiest enhancement to the Rug Warrior robot kits.=20
 =20
Rug Warrior with Pyroelectric sensor installed = in=20 expansion socket on Rug Warrior board
 
The = package=20 includes an Eltec 442-3 detector, fresnel = lens that=20 is matched to the detector, application notes, instructions on building = a=20 concentrating cone to focus a wide area of detection, and a pattern for = building=20 the cone.
 =20
Fresnel lens and cone from = pattern
 
Thanks to Eltec for providing a great product and helping with = the=20 application notes!

Price: $45.00 each
Part Number: R3-PYRO1
 =20

 Ordering = Information
 
 
  ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01BE38F3.C2565A00-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 20:43:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA22210; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 20:43:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 20:43:14 -0800 Message-ID: <000101be392e$ea8de840$b8441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Fast, Sensitive Pyroelectric Infrared Detectors (http://www.intrel.com/) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 21:41:48 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01BE38F4.326666A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"sY3xU2.0.yQ5.Ydkas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25539 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_0015_01BE38F4.326666A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 Last update: August 9, 1998 ...Copyright Intrel Service Company http://www.intrel.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- New! Model 500, Ring Clamp Mount accessory. New! Model 501, Thermal Flux Conduit Adapter, eliminates costly IR = lenses. See Specifications and Users' Manual. Enhanced Pyroelectric Detector... =20 Intrel's infrared, Electro-optically Enhanced detector dramatically = reduces response time in the familiar pyroelectric sensor yet has little effect = on detectivity. Model 101B shortens the normal 1 second response to 300us = (.0003 seconds). That's right, the pyroelectric's wavelength-independent 1e8 = D-star (1.8um to 23um) now comes with a 1KHz electrical bandwidth! Need more speed? Model 101D responds in 30us while retaining a 2e7 = D-star. Its 1Hz to 10KHz bandwidth captures transient temperatures, pulse = trains, or frequency modulated signals. = -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Features... =20 - 300us (microsecond) response time, 1KHz bandwidth - D-star of 1e8 - 1.8um (micron)- 23um spectral response - extremely linear: .02% harmonic distortion, 140Hz, 6Vpp output - no liquid nitrogen or Stirling coolers - no delay for thermoelectric cooling, ready in 5 seconds - low power consumption, less than 1 watt - rugged construction, 200Khr mean-time-before-failure - built in wide band IR test source - ready to use, no amplifiers to build - modest price, $975 = -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Applications... =20 - broad spectrum, fast scan spectrometers - tool tip temperature monitors and feed controllers - ball bearing failure detectors - process control feedback loops - CO2 laser communications - quick acting intrusion detectors - 360 degree scanning intrusion detectors - slow scan TV surveillance cameras - transient heating studies - low distortion FTIR spectrometers - gas flow monitors - thermopile upgrades =20 = -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- =20 Menu: More Information... =20 =20 a..=20 09Aug98 Specifications =20 =20 b..=20 09Aug98 Price and ordering information =20 =20 c..=20 27Jul98 Users' Manuals =20 =20 d..=20 07Apr98 Application Notes =20 =20 e..=20 03Aug98 Download files =20 =20 f..=20 20Oct97 About Intrel = -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Comments or Questions... =20 * Postal service: Box 1247, Nashua NH 03061 =20 * FAX: (603)-883-4815 =20 * Email: iscmail intrel.com http://www.intrel.com ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01BE38F4.326666A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Fast, Sensitive Pyroelectric Infrared = Detectors
 

3D"[Intrel =

Last update: August 9, 1998 ...Copyright Intrel Service Company

3D"[Home     http://www.intrel.com

New! Model 500, Ring Clamp Mount accessory.

New! Model 501, Thermal Flux Conduit Adapter, eliminates costly IR =
lenses.
     See Specifications and Users' Manual.


 Enhanced Pyroelectric Detector...  
    Intrel's infrared, Electro-optically Enhanced detector dramatically =
reduces
response time in the familiar pyroelectric sensor yet has little =
effect on
detectivity.  Model 101B shortens the normal 1 second response to 300us =
(.0003
seconds).  That's right, the pyroelectric's  wavelength-independent =
1e8 D-star
(1.8um to 23um) now comes with a 1KHz electrical bandwidth!

    Need more speed?  Model 101D responds in 30us while retaining =
a 2e7 D-star.
Its 1Hz to 10KHz bandwidth captures transient temperatures, pulse =
trains, or
frequency modulated signals.  


 Features...  
    - 300us (microsecond) response time, 1KHz bandwidth
    - D-star of 1e8
    - 1.8um (micron)- 23um spectral response
    - extremely linear: .02% harmonic distortion, 140Hz, 6Vpp output
    - no liquid nitrogen or Stirling coolers
    - no delay for thermoelectric cooling, ready in 5 seconds
    - low power consumption, less than 1 watt
    - rugged construction, 200Khr mean-time-before-failure
    - built in wide band IR test source
    - ready to use, no amplifiers to build
    - modest price, $975
    


 Applications...  
    - broad spectrum, fast scan spectrometers
    - tool tip temperature monitors and feed controllers
    - ball bearing failure detectors
    - process control feedback loops
    - CO2 laser communications
    - quick acting intrusion detectors
    - 360 degree scanning intrusion detectors
    - slow scan TV surveillance cameras
    - transient heating studies
    - low distortion FTIR spectrometers
    - gas flow monitors
    - thermopile upgrades
     
    

    

    Menu: More Information...
    


    
    


 Comments or Questions...


   
* Postal service: Box 1247, Nashua NH 03061


   
* FAX: (603)-883-4815

   

* Email: iscmail intrel.com




3D"[^Back
    http://www.intrel.com
------=_NextPart_000_0015_01BE38F4.326666A0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 5 21:58:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA19660; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 21:56:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 21:56:45 -0800 Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 00:48:40 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: John Schnurer Subject: Re: Fast, Sensitive Pyroelectric Infrared Detectors In-Reply-To: <000101be392e$ea8de840$b8441d26 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"0BP032.0.3p4.Tilas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25540 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., Such detectors come in various ways. At about 10 bucks, mail order, you can get the 'standard' Niobium Tantalate pyro. The kings, in my opinion, for broad band.... RF to UV are bolometers ...At 28 to 55 for the detector itself, it is a real buy. Poled and stressed Kynar based detectors, made by yourself with 4" by 4" area, blackened suitably, can fairly easily 'see' the IR from a mosquito at 5 feet. The next level is-are cooled detectors... liquid nitrogen is standard. Broad band from stars can be seen... The 45 dollar unit cited in the original post uses the 1 dollar LiTa type detectot and is has, typically, a 200 milisecond rise time, at the most rapid. J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 01:23:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA16631; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 01:21:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 01:21:53 -0800 Message-ID: <000f01be3955$da572460$b8441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: CNN - Wind power capacity grew rapidly in 1998 - January 5, 1999 (http://www.cn Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 02:20:37 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0025_01BE391B.2624D1C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Eiq4t.0.n34.nioas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25541 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_0025_01BE391B.2624D1C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Now about 10,000 Megawatts Worldwide.The Palo Verde Nuclear Behemoth West of Phoenix Has Four 1,000 Megawatt Units, and lots on Nuke waste to store for a few thousand years or more. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9901/05/windpower.enn/ ------=_NextPart_000_0025_01BE391B.2624D1C0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="CNN - Wind power capacity grew rapidly in 1998 - January 5, 1999.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CNN - Wind power capacity grew rapidly in 1998 - January 5, 1999.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9901/05/windpower.enn/ Modified=A0276B155539BE0194 ------=_NextPart_000_0025_01BE391B.2624D1C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 01:52:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA25609; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 01:51:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 01:51:25 -0800 Message-ID: <001a01be3959$facc05e0$b8441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: CNN - Pulling the plug on nukes could hurt safety, scientists warn - January 3, Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 02:50:07 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003E_01BE391F.44E6D320" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"8zvB52.0.zF6.T8pas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25542 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_003E_01BE391F.44E6D320 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Worried about Nuclear Power Plant Safety? Visit: www.nrel.gov http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9901/03/nukes.ap/ ------=_NextPart_000_003E_01BE391F.44E6D320 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="CNN - Pulling the plug on nukes could hurt safety, scientists warn - January 3, 1999.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CNN - Pulling the plug on nukes could hurt safety, scientists warn - January 3, 1999.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9901/03/nukes.ap/ Modified=00F8EFBF5939BE01F7 ------=_NextPart_000_003E_01BE391F.44E6D320-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 07:49:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA19043; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 07:44:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 07:44:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:44:33 +0000 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: OU Double coil In-Reply-To: <01be34f8$a992da60$0c6cd626 george.varisys.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"mhdCa1.0.Tf4.gJuas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25543 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 31 Dec 1998, George Holz wrote: > Remi, > - > Let me try this one more time. Electron flow has no significant > intrinsic momentum. The continued electron flow in a coil continues > only because of the voltages induced by the changing magnetic flux. > When S2 is opened, there is nearly zero flux in the coil and there is > no flux to collapse and induce continuing current flow. > - > George > - > George Holz - george varisys.com > Varitronics Systems > > Thanks George, sorry for delay in responding. Power failure on main uni servers, can you believe it?! Even the UPS went down. No got your pwerful argument first time, nice 'kill argument in one line type' argument but we are postualting that we can make flux discontinuous, so... Anyway, next step is to 'absorb' that back emf. Sounds idiotic but I have a very clear way of doing it, won't tell you all, hint: apply short across coil. Coil looks like permeanent magnet - supercurrent, superconductor (opps given it away, no you don't need a superconductor - just something to cancel the resistance ...) I trust in logic no matter how fanciful the outcome. Sometimes if nature present us with something 'illogical' then change ones logic. Anyway we have teamed up with London group on many fronts, not just em devices, cf, Meyer, Browns etc. etc. Some very nice sincere people, would classfy them as the true heroic, principled engineering/science types with a deep moral concious and care about what we let out of Pandora's box. At moment at work, means to end, nice perks. Will be in Texas in 1.5 weeks. If I have something working by then, I could meet the Little/Putoff team for verification. Is Houston near Austin? Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 11:07:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA28434; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 11:02:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 11:02:05 -0800 Message-ID: <002901be39a6$e0d59280$b8441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 12:00:03 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"bdHWD3.0.7y6.iCxas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25544 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I am presently designing a device (hopefully NOT patentable)to get a feel for what happens when you vary capacitance while an A.C., D.C. or Pulsed D.C. is applied to the plates. The "STATOR" will be a segmented design on both sides of Printed Circuit Boards spaced and tied together with long bolts and conductive spacers. The "ROTOR" will be segmented circular plates mounted on a rotatable shaft and spaced to fit between the stator plates. Anyone who can come up with a practical application for such a device is welcome to all rights and privileges thereto. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 11:34:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17819; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 11:32:12 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 11:32:12 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990106133128.00934b24 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 13:31:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: OU Double coil In-Reply-To: References: <01be34f8$a992da60$0c6cd626 george.varisys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4m0dJ.0.HM4.uexas" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25545 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 15:44 1/6/99 +0000, Cornwall RO wrote: >At moment at work, means to end, nice perks. Will be in Texas in 1.5 >weeks. If I have something working by then, I could meet the Little/Putoff >team for verification. >Is Houston near Austin? As Texas distances go, yes. Houston is about 150 miles southeast of here. You are welcome to visit us, Remi....especially if you have a possibly o-u device with you! Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 11:40:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA13052; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 11:38:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 11:38:46 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990106133832.00925500 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 13:38:32 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application In-Reply-To: <002901be39a6$e0d59280$b8441d26 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"1-wEj1.0.qB3.5lxas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25546 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:00 1/6/99 -0700, you wrote: >I am presently designing a device.... >The "STATOR" will be a segmented design... >The "ROTOR" will be segmented circular plates.... Add a few judiciously placed brushes and you've got a Wimhurst generator...but don't worry, his patent expired about 100 years ago. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 13:33:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30755; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 13:31:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 13:31:48 -0800 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: OU Double coil Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 16:39:23 -0500 Message-ID: <01be39bd$0659e770$0c6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"Tciit1.0.EW7.3Pzas" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25547 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Remi wrote: >Anyway, next step is to 'absorb' that back emf. Sounds idiotic but I have >a very clear way of doing it, won't tell you all, hint: apply short across >coil. Coil looks like permeanent magnet - supercurrent, superconductor >(opps given it away, no you don't need a superconductor - just something >to cancel the resistance ...) - Capturing and using the back EMF is a standard technique used in flyback voltage converters, plasma panel drive circuits and many other places. Since I have designed many flyback converters for plasma drive applications, I tried this for OU using some unusual core materials with high mu and a large mu vs frequency variation. The most efficient operation was with low output voltages and correspondingly long output pulses. I never achieved better than 99% conversion efficiency, even when drive circuit and rectification losses were not included. Understanding why this limitation occurs, for any of the known magnetic materials is an important step in formulating ideas for devices which do not have this limitation. - George - George Holz - george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 17:52:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA15480; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 17:50:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 17:50:53 -0800 Message-ID: <000f01be39df$ff5c93a0$e9441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 18:48:41 -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: <"kUxOP1.0.jn3.zB1bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25548 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "Wimhurst" Indeed, Scott. :-) Look a bit deeper while you're figuring out what Newton's balls weredoing in a cradle. A flat projection of the Printed Circuit Board ROTOR and STATOR Layout,2 Quadrants: ___________________________________________ _________ ___________ _________ | | | | STATOR | | | | |_____| |______| ____________________________________________ __________ ____________ _________ | | | | ROTOR ---> | | | | |_____| |______| Force = dW/ds = (V^2/2)* dC/ds Torque = (V^2/2)* dC/d(theta) Radians Now what happens when the Rotor is driven at some RPMs 1, when a D.C. was applied at max C? 2, to an A.C. signal at some frequency that is a multiple of the rotation frequency? 3. Will it use the input energy to "amplify" the initial conditions? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 18:22:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA30211; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 18:19:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 18:19:51 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 17:28:26 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application Cc: Resent-Message-ID: <"zVoPB3.0.zN7.6d1bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25549 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 12:00 PM 1/6/99, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >I am presently designing a device (hopefully NOT patentable)to get a feel >for what happens when you vary capacitance while an A.C., D.C. or Pulsed >D.C. is applied to the plates. > >The "STATOR" will be a segmented design on both sides of Printed Circuit >Boards spaced and tied together with long bolts and conductive spacers. > >The "ROTOR" will be segmented circular plates >mounted on a rotatable shaft and spaced to fit between the stator plates. > >Anyone who can come up with a practical application for such a device is >welcome to all rights and privileges thereto. :-) > >Regards, Frederick Lots of work has been done with electrostatic motor/generators, especially in the realm of nanodevices. A matched pair works like a selsyn motor generator and can be used in nanodevices to transfer mechanical linkages around. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 18:41:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA05294; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 18:39:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 18:39:42 -0800 Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 21:31:19 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, fstenger@interlaced.net Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"LJl821.0.dI1.kv1bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25550 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Horace, You don't have to worry about someone patenting your idea if you publish in the public domain. On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, Horace Heffner wrote: > At 12:00 PM 1/6/99, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > >To: Vortex > > > >I am presently designing a device (hopefully NOT patentable)to get a feel > >for what happens when you vary capacitance while an A.C., D.C. or Pulsed > >D.C. is applied to the plates. > > > >The "STATOR" will be a segmented design on both sides of Printed Circuit > >Boards spaced and tied together with long bolts and conductive spacers. > > > >The "ROTOR" will be segmented circular plates > >mounted on a rotatable shaft and spaced to fit between the stator plates. > > > >Anyone who can come up with a practical application for such a device is > >welcome to all rights and privileges thereto. :-) > > > >Regards, Frederick > > > Lots of work has been done with electrostatic motor/generators, especially > in the realm of nanodevices. A matched pair works like a selsyn motor > generator and can be used in nanodevices to transfer mechanical linkages > around. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 19:02:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA12447; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 19:01:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 19:01:19 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19990106220909.00cb1940 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 22:09:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WG7vD3.0.J23.-D2bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25551 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:48 PM 1/6/99 -0700, you wrote: >Now what happens when the Rotor is driven at >some RPMs 1, when a D.C. was applied at max C? > 2, to an A.C. signal at some frequency that is a multiple of the >rotation frequency? >3. Will it use the input energy to "amplify" the initial conditions? Congrats, you've invented the parametric oscillator :^) Slap an inductor with sufficiently high Q in parallel with the capacity, making a resonant frequency as an even harmonic of the capacitive variation (1/2 or 2 is best). A small initial DC charge will amplify, until the components fail. Remember, the trick is to make the Q high enough. These things always work better with inductors though. K. PS: You might find the rotor harder to turn during all that amplifying.... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 19:50:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA29671; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 19:43:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 19:43:55 -0800 Message-ID: <001e01be39ef$c94ebc60$e9441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 20:39:57 -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: <"4YWxo2.0.TF7.wr2bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25552 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com ; fstenger@interlaced.net Date: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 7:40 PM Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application John S. wrote: > > Dear Horace, > > You don't have to worry about someone patenting your idea if you >publish in the public domain. Horace?? :-) Check out these patents and their references,John. 3,049,690 (1962) Quick disconnect Connector.used on about all aircraft weapons releases. 3,751,869 (1973) Structural Panel. In use worldwide in all-steel building construction. 3,782,352 Pressure Actuated Fluid Injector. GM picked up on one similar. 3,801,446 Radioisotope-Heat Pipe Power Flattening System. Used with on Pioneer and Voyager Space Probes to keep the power "within 15% of launch level after over 25 years". 3,943,889 (1976) Floating Heat-Pipes in Stock Tanks. Keeps a place where livestock can push the buoyant tanks down to get a drink when there is several inches of ice on the watering tanks. The heavier 4 degree C water at lower levels in the tank provides enough heat to keep the tanks from freezing in the ice. Great for your ice-hole if you are an ice fishing buff like Horace. :-) Regards, Frederick > > >On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, Horace Heffner wrote: > >> At 12:00 PM 1/6/99, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >> >To: Vortex >> > >> >I am presently designing a device (hopefully NOT patentable)to get a feel >> >for what happens when you vary capacitance while an A.C., D.C. or Pulsed >> >D.C. is applied to the plates. >> > >> >The "STATOR" will be a segmented design on both sides of Printed Circuit >> >Boards spaced and tied together with long bolts and conductive spacers. >> > >> >The "ROTOR" will be segmented circular plates >> >mounted on a rotatable shaft and spaced to fit between the stator plates. >> > >> >Anyone who can come up with a practical application for such a device is >> >welcome to all rights and privileges thereto. :-) >> > >> >Regards, Frederick >> >> >> Lots of work has been done with electrostatic motor/generators, especially >> in the realm of nanodevices. A matched pair works like a selsyn motor >> generator and can be used in nanodevices to transfer mechanical linkages >> around. >> >> Regards, >> >> Horace Heffner >> >> >> > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 6 21:27:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA04034; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 21:26:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 21:26:18 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 18:11:32 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application Resent-Message-ID: <"1_ISX2.0.y-.wL4bs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25553 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:31 PM 1/6/99, John Schnurer wrote: > Dear Horace, > > You don't have to worry about someone patenting your idea if you >publish in the public domain. That's Fred Sparber, not me, who is designing the "hopefully NOT patentable" devices - and I applaud his efforts! Actually, if you accidentally publish only principles and not adequate specifications for the device you do yourself a lot of harm if you should want to later patent devices arising from your concepts, or even if you want the material placed in public domain. You need to include enough description to disarm the novelty arguments of the other would-be inventors. Getting a good description written is just about as much work as filing a patent, possibly more, because here you don't have the advantage of good drawings to diuscuss from. Also, in the US, you then set a one year clock ticking on your patent application. I think you also then preclude the possibility of getting a patent on the published material in many other countries. At minimum, you find yourself having to argue novelty over your own concepts. If your goal is just to help advance the art, regardles of who makes the profits, then you just blab away, like many of us on this list. 8^) Personally, I think that is what makes a lot of the content here so interesting - the free discussion of juicy new ideas, especially ones soon to be implemented, or implemented and ostensibly working to some degree. Regards, Horace Heffner > > >On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, Horace Heffner wrote: > >> At 12:00 PM 1/6/99, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >> >To: Vortex >> > >> >I am presently designing a device (hopefully NOT patentable)to get a feel >> >for what happens when you vary capacitance while an A.C., D.C. or Pulsed >> >D.C. is applied to the plates. >> > >> >The "STATOR" will be a segmented design on both sides of Printed Circuit >> >Boards spaced and tied together with long bolts and conductive spacers. >> > >> >The "ROTOR" will be segmented circular plates >> >mounted on a rotatable shaft and spaced to fit between the stator plates. >> > >> >Anyone who can come up with a practical application for such a device is >> >welcome to all rights and privileges thereto. :-) >> > >> >Regards, Frederick >> >> >> Lots of work has been done with electrostatic motor/generators, especially >> in the realm of nanodevices. A matched pair works like a selsyn motor >> generator and can be used in nanodevices to transfer mechanical linkages >> around. >> >> Regards, >> >> Horace Heffner >> >> >> From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 7 17:54:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA22683; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 17:51:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 17:51:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 17:51:48 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A Useless Device Looking For An Application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Hfdn_2.0.HY5.tIMbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25554 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, Horace Heffner wrote: > Lots of work has been done with electrostatic motor/generators, especially > in the realm of nanodevices. A matched pair works like a selsyn motor > generator and can be used in nanodevices to transfer mechanical linkages > around. Since macro-scale forces of physical contact are all fundamentally electrostatic, it makes sense that that motor/generator pairs at the micro scale would behave like solid shafts. Wait a few years, and perhaps the boundaries between "motors" and "everyday objects" will become fuzzy, especially if "computer" is in there somewhere too. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com 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 Jan 8 05:03:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA01056; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 05:02:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 05:02:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 13:02:04 +0000 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: OU Double coil In-Reply-To: <01be39bd$0659e770$0c6cd626 george.varisys.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"aOKPl2.0.QG.M7Wbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25555 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, George Holz wrote: > Remi wrote: > >Anyway, next step is to 'absorb' that back emf. Sounds idiotic but I have > >a very clear way of doing it, won't tell you all, hint: apply short across > >coil. Coil looks like permeanent magnet - supercurrent, superconductor > >(opps given it away, no you don't need a superconductor - just something > >to cancel the resistance ...) > - > Capturing and using the back EMF is a standard technique used in > flyback voltage converters, plasma panel drive circuits and many > other places. Since I have designed many flyback converters for > plasma drive applications, I tried this for OU using some unusual > core materials with high mu and a large mu vs frequency variation. > The most efficient operation was with low output voltages and > correspondingly long output pulses. I never achieved better than > 99% conversion efficiency, even when drive circuit and rectification > losses were not included. Understanding why this limitation occurs, > for any of the known magnetic materials is an important step in > formulating ideas for devices which do not have this limitation. > - > George > - > George Holz - george varisys.com > Varitronics Systems > > > > I'm on about level two now :) Harry Aspden mentioned flyback convertors. It's a trip to IEE library near Waterloo bridge I think. Looking forward to the weekend with some more time you bet. Will do the analysis over the week end. As we Brits say, I'm sure its 'swings and roundabout'. I form a small signal loop around the coil and unless it has zero resistance, the counter circulatory current will cancel the main current, I'm sure we still do electrical wor, short or rapid field change it'll probanly be the same. Anyway its in the maths. I have a nice little rapid prototyping breadboard in the living room next to the computer and the scopes. It's drawing board to breadborad kind of iterative. I believe its the same wheteher you want to tap heat or zpe, give something that is random a preferred direction by ';coherign it'. Scott, I'll try my best to get something in the remaining time. Netherless, we have pool car so might as well use it. If I come, I'll phone you from Houston and let you know. Remi. 'xcuse the typos From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 8 07:34:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08885; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 07:33:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 07:33:27 -0800 Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 10:25:05 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: Consumer electronics Show, Las Vegas.. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"5a1O62.0.hA2.6LYbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25556 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., One of my clients is flying me to the show.... any Vos nearby? J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 8 08:09:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA21978; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 08:05:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 08:05:36 -0800 Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 10:57:14 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: NOTES....Re: Statement from Joseph Newman, January 7, 1999 (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"o5AsY3.0.KN5.FpYbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25557 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: From free energy list... Hello, I would like to re-post something that the wonderful Barney Tyrwhitt-Drake posted ages ago on the Gen-Brit list. The following is a direct quote and I think it is almost too true to be funny :-) Q: How many newsgroup subscribers does it take to change a light bulb? A: 1,331. : 1 to change the light bulb and to post to the mail list that the light bulb has been changed. : 14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently. : 7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs. : 27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs. : 53 to flame the spell checkers. : 156 to write to the list administrator complaining about the light bulb discussion and its inappropriateness to this mail list. : 41 to correct spelling in the spelling/grammar flames. : 109 to post that this list is not about light bulbs and to please take this email exchange to alt.lite.bulb : 203 to demand that cross posting to alt.grammar, alt.spelling and alt.punctuation about changing light bulbs be stopped. : 111 to defend the posting to this list saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts **are** relevant to this mail list. : 306 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique, and what brands are faulty. : 27 to post URLs where one can see examples of different light bulbs. : 14 to post that the URLs were posted incorrectly, and to post corrected URLs. : 3 to post about links they found from the URLs that are relevant to this list which makes light bulbs relevant to this list. : 33 to concatenate all posts to date, then quote them including all headers and footers, and then add "Me Too." : 12 to post to the list that they are unsubscribing because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy. : 19 to quote the "Me Too's" to say, "Me Three." : 4 to suggest that posters request the light bulb FAQ. : 1 to propose new alt.change.lite.bulb newsgroup. : 47 to say this is just what alt.physic.cold_fusion was meant for, leave it here. : 143 votes for alt.lite.bulb From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 8 10:31:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA05630; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 10:28:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 10:28:27 -0800 Message-ID: <001f01be3b34$83492660$e0441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 11:26:25 -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: <"Rvkh-1.0.mN1.Avabs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25558 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Suppose the Speed of Light was 1,000 meters/sec and at night you had two aircraft one above the other,each with a beacon light blinking on for one second and off for one second, flying a circle 10,000 meters in circumference so close to 1,000 meters/second that their relativistic "gammas" [1/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2] were 3600. What rate of beacon flash would each pilot see for the other aircraft: 1,Circling in the same direction? 2, Circling in opposite directions? 3, Could they have coherent radio contact? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 8 12:10:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA09982; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:09:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:09:13 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0BB XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: A Light Moment Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:08:05 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"clrJo2.0.uR2.eNcbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25559 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Suppose "h" =1 in MKS units, and you are in a 2500 lb car approaching the toll boot at the end of the bay bridge. 40 booths, spaced 10 feet apart at 60 mph. Describe what happens? Exam question at Berkeley undergrad physics exam. Hank > ---------- > From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, January 08, 1999 10:26 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: A Light Moment > > To: Vortex > > Suppose the Speed of Light was 1,000 meters/sec > and at night you had two aircraft one above the other,each with a beacon > light blinking on for one second and off for one second, flying a circle > 10,000 meters in circumference so close to 1,000 meters/second that their > relativistic "gammas" [1/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2] were 3600. > > What rate of beacon flash would each pilot see > for the other aircraft: 1,Circling in the same direction? 2, Circling in > opposite directions? > 3, Could they have coherent radio contact? > > Regards, Frederick > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 8 12:44:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA25489; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:43:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:43:22 -0800 MR-Received: by mta SOCCER; Relayed; Fri, 08 Jan 1999 15:28:06 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Fri, 08 Jan 1999 15:42:30 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 12:58:31 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: Pogue Carburettor In-reply-to: <19990108062323.3367.rocketmail send105.yahoomail.com> To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 15:27:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E1893ZXSTM3021 X400-MTS-identifier: [;60825180109991/3447445 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"93igk.0.BE6.gtcbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25560 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael, You seem to have fallen into a common trap offered up by conventional wisdom. Or you have made the assumption that modern engines are 100% fuel efficient. We are not trying to get extra energy to appear out of thin air, we are trying to release more of the energy that is in the fuel. Modern internal combustion engines are very inefficient. That's why we need catalytic converters to finish burning the fuel in the exhaust fumes, before it is vented to the environment. Our research has two goals, (1) release more of the energy from the fuel, and (2) convert more of this energy into useful work. Examples: By pre-processing the fuel prior to ignition we can start the process of separating the hydrogen out of the molecule so that it will burn/explode more rapidly & thoroughly at ignition. Much of the energy released is in the form of heat, when what we really want is mechanical energy. The military used to inject water into the exhaust polonium of a jet. The water would turn into instant high pressure steam, the exhaust temperature would decrease, but the exhaust pressure (thrust) would increase because of the steam content. While not creating any more energy, the water was used as leverage to accomplish more work. Bill webriggs concentric.net >Yes, such rumors abound. >However, a catalyst cannot add energy that is not already present. >Converting petrol or any other common fuel to "gas" does not add any >energy. Chemists have been through all this for about two centuries, >now. It might yield a gaseous fuel that is more convenient in one way >or another, but more energy? No. >Are you going to test this carburetor? Please tell us the results. >== >Michael J. Schaffer From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 8 13:30:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA07005; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 13:28:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 13:28:39 -0800 MR-Received: by mta SOCCER; Relayed; Fri, 08 Jan 1999 16:17:27 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Fri, 08 Jan 1999 16:28:10 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 15:45:55 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: Pogue Carburettor In-reply-to: To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 16:16:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E1898ZXSTN90Y6 X400-MTS-identifier: [;72716180109991/3447570 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"i3OMc3.0.Nj1.7Ydbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25561 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vorts, Oops! Exhaust polonium of a jet? That should have read "exhaust plenum". That will teach me not to read my work after the spell checker has mangled it! Bill webriggs concentric.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 8 14:25:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA29295; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 14:24:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 14:24:09 -0800 Message-ID: <003801be3b55$768773c0$e0441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 15:22:25 -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: <"M3C552.0.b97.9Mebs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25562 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scudder, Henry J To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Friday, January 08, 1999 1:10 PM Subject: RE: A Light Moment Hank, Before I work it out, I need to know if I'm driving an electric car with braking power recharge, and if they will accept payment in Euros. :-) Regards, Frederick >Suppose "h" =1 in MKS units, and you are in a 2500 lb car approaching the >toll boot at the end of the bay bridge. 40 booths, spaced 10 feet apart at >60 mph. Describe what happens? > >Exam question at Berkeley undergrad physics exam. > >Hank > >> ---------- >> From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] >> Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Sent: Friday, January 08, 1999 10:26 AM >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Subject: Re: A Light Moment >> >> To: Vortex >> >> Suppose the Speed of Light was 1,000 meters/sec >> and at night you had two aircraft one above the other,each with a beacon >> light blinking on for one second and off for one second, flying a circle >> 10,000 meters in circumference so close to 1,000 meters/second that their >> relativistic "gammas" [1/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2] were 3600. >> >> What rate of beacon flash would each pilot see >> for the other aircraft: 1,Circling in the same direction? 2, Circling in >> opposite directions? >> 3, Could they have coherent radio contact? >> >> Regards, Frederick >> >> >> >> >> > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 8 16:12:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA02450; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 16:10:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 16:10:00 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: OU Double coil Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 00:09:53 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36966f38.62015665 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: <"0FpFd3.0.Cc.Ovfbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25563 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 8 Jan 1999 13:02:04 +0000 (BST), Cornwall RO wrote: [snip] >I believe its the same wheteher you want to tap heat or zpe, give >something that is random a preferred direction by ';coherign it'. [snip] I suspect it might actually be exactly the other way around. The ZPE is already coherent, and when it comes across a discontinuity in spacetime it shows up as mass. If you want it to appear as "random" thermal energy, then you need to supply a mechanism whereby the entropy can increase, and time symmetry is destroyed. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 8 20:13:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA02169; Fri, 8 Jan 1999 20:12:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 20:12:24 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19990108232018.00cc7100 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 23:20:20 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: RE: A Light Moment Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"XodBp2.0.hX.dSjbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25564 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:08 PM 1/8/99 -0800, you wrote: >Suppose "h" =1 in MKS units, and you are in a 2500 lb car approaching the >toll boot at the end of the bay bridge. 40 booths, spaced 10 feet apart at >60 mph. Describe what happens? With any luck, a passband exists at that frequency in the lattice ;^) K. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 9 04:00:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA22377; Sat, 9 Jan 1999 04:00:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 04:00:03 -0800 Message-ID: <000501be3bc7$6ba8ae20$aa441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 04:58:03 -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: <"kg_Bu1.0.ZT5.2Jqbs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25565 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Where did all of the experts on relativity go? BTW. Any Mass with a Relativistic Energy equal to it's Rest Mass/Energy will have a Relativistic Mass EQUAL to TWICE it's REST MASS and a Velocity ~= 0.9999*c: Mrel = Mo[(Erel/Mo*c^2) + 1] I.e., an electron accelerated to 0.511 Mev will have an Mrel of Twice 9.1E-31 Kg, or a proton at 931.5 Mev will have an Mrel of Twice 1.66E-27 Kg. This trivial pursuit does not answer the question regarding what the pilots of two craft with blinky lights on their ships with on-off at one second intervals, moving side-by-side, each with a gamma of 3600, see from the other craft, or if they are moving in opposite directions. And will they have coherent radio communication in either case? The "Gravity" of this problem is important. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 9 20:00:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA12050; Sat, 9 Jan 1999 19:59:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 19:59:38 -0800 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:48:46 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001f01be3b34$83492660$e0441d26 default> X-Mailer: YAM 2.0Preview6 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck - http://www.yam.ch Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: BLP website is updated MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"UkhI13.0.Cy2.fM2cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25566 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vorts, The BLP website has some new information posted at: http://www.blacklightpower.com/announce.html Calims relate to new chemical compounds built with hydrinos. Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 10 09:34:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA11956; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 09:32:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 09:32:49 -0800 Message-ID: <000301be3cbf$112c7960$89441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "AntiGravity" Calculations Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 10:30:46 -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: <"I7E99.0.kw2.1HEcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25567 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The Compton Wavelength of an Electron: Lambda = 2(pi)R = 2.425E-12 meters is the diameter of the "String-Circle" that make up Leptons or Quarks. Thus for a Quark: Lambda = 2.425E-12/624 where 624 is the quark/electron mass ratio. The frequency of the wave-pulse circling the string-circle is c/2(pi)R, and the current is q*c/2(pi)R where q is (+/-)1.602E-19 coulombs. With 5A - 2Z quarks in each nucleus (2A up,2A-Z down, and A - Z neutrinos) with pairing such that a negative "rotating" in opposite sense to a positive creates the same effect as two loops with current in the same direction like the turns in a solenoid. "G" factors out in "magnetostatic" units to 0.025826 Ampere-Meters/Kg which puts the relativistic time-length dilation for the electron at a factor of 2.03E21 and for a quark the time-length dilation is 3.34E18. Thus "gravity" frequency for the electron is 0.060 Hz, and for the quarks it is 22,980 Hz. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 10 12:36:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA06608; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:35:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:35:25 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "AntiGravity" Calculations Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 20:35:20 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36990ea4.65518435 24.192.1.20> References: <000301be3cbf$112c7960$89441d26 default> In-Reply-To: <000301be3cbf$112c7960$89441d26 default> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KK41F2.0.6d1.DyGcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25568 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 10:30:46 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >The Compton Wavelength of an Electron: > >Lambda = 2(pi)R = 2.425E-12 meters is the diameter of the "String-Circle" >that make up Leptons or Quarks. [snip] Hi Frederick, I know you like changing things, but I think changing the circumference to the diameter is a bit drastic ;). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 10 13:28:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21285; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 13:26:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 13:26:05 -0800 Message-ID: <001001be3cdf$a6b054a0$89441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "AntiGravity" Calculations Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:24:34 -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: <"CgWcW3.0.VC5.jhHcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25569 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, January 10, 1999 1:36 PM Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "AntiGravity" Calculations Robin wrote: >On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 10:30:46 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > >>To: Vortex >> >>The Compton Wavelength of an Electron: >> >>Lambda = 2(pi)R = 2.425E-12 meters is the diameter of the "String-Circle" >>that make up Leptons or Quarks. >[snip] >Hi Frederick, > >I know you like changing things, but I think changing the >circumference to the diameter is a bit drastic ;). Oops! That is the nice thing about you early risers, you see things more clearly than I do. :-) Thanks, Robin. BTW. If the Length (circumference)dilation is 2.03E21 for the electron, and 3.34E18 for a quark, does this mean that the circumference or Compton wavelength h/mc = 2(pi)R is 2.03E21* 2.425E12 = 4.9E9 meters for the electron and 3.34E18*3.8867E-15 = 1.3E4 meters for a quark if you were in their reference frame? IOW is this the "strong force" in a nucleus but the time/length-dilated gravitational/magnetic force external to the nucleus? :-) Regards, Frederick > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 10 16:13:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA08459; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 16:11:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 16:11:51 -0800 Message-ID: <002101be3cf6$cbf7f940$89441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "Antigravity" Calculations Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 17:09:40 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"de1dV3.0.u32.67Kcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25570 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I don't think there is any length contraction, Robin. The circular current q*c/Lambda = 19.68 amperes for the electron, and 12,354 amperes for a quark with a mass/energy 1/3 that of a proton. Interestingly, q*c = 4.8E-11 ampere-meters the constant for any quark or lepton. Then the undilated force between two quarks is: 1.0E-7 *(4.8E-11)^2/r^2 = 2.304E-28/r^2 where r is the separation between two string-circles (quarks). Also, 2.304E-28 = k*q^2 where k = 1/4(pi)eo. :-) At a separation equal to the quark radius (6.186E-16 meters) which is close to the 1.0E-15 meter or 1 Fermi radius of a nucleus the force (Strong?)would be about 60 newtons. This suggests that the Gravity Force and the Strong Force are the Same Thing, which reduces the "four forces of Nature" to three. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 10 22:18:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA03601; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:16:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:16:01 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "AntiGravity" Calculations Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 06:15:51 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <369c96b9.100365442 24.192.1.20> References: <001001be3cdf$a6b054a0$89441d26 default> In-Reply-To: <001001be3cdf$a6b054a0$89441d26 default> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"s3jUy2.0.Bu.XSPcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25571 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:24:34 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: [snip] >BTW. If the Length (circumference)dilation is 2.03E21 for the electron, and >3.34E18 for a quark, does this mean that the circumference or [snip] Hi, Would you refresh my memory again, on the derivation of the dilation factors? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 10 22:20:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA05052; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:18:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:18:49 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "Antigravity" Calculations Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 06:18:18 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <369d976f.100547430 24.192.1.20> References: <002101be3cf6$cbf7f940$89441d26 default> In-Reply-To: <002101be3cf6$cbf7f940$89441d26 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: <"Qf5NF1.0.eE1.5VPcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25572 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 17:09:40 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: [snip] >This suggests that the Gravity Force and the Strong Force are the Same >Thing, which reduces the "four forces of Nature" to three. :-) This is the same conclusion that Charles Cagle came to. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 11 03:16:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA32569; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 03:16:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 03:16:03 -0800 Message-ID: <002f01be3d53$97d12a80$89441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "AntiGravity" Calculations Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 04:13:58 -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: <"c2MRE.0.py7.orTcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25573 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, January 10, 1999 11:17 PM Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "AntiGravity" Calculations Robin wrote: >On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:24:34 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >[snip] >>BTW. If the Length (circumference)dilation is 2.03E21 for the electron, and >>3.34E18 for a quark, does this mean that the circumference or >[snip] >Hi, > >Would you refresh my memory again, on the derivation of the dilation >factors? The gravitational force Fg = 6.67E-11*M1*M2/R^2 But Big "G" if factored out to magnetostatic units: (6.67E-11/1.0E-7)^1/2 = 0.025926 Ampere-Meters/Kg. Then Fg = 1.0E-7 *0.025826^2*M1*M2/R^2 newtons. Thus the Ampere-meters for an electron is: 9.1E-31*0.025826 = 2.35E-32 Ampere-meters and for a quark in a proton is: (1.66E-27/3)*0.025826 = 1.429E-29 Ampere-Meters But undilated the constant for ANY quark or lepton is: q*c = 4.8E-11 Ampere-meters Thus the dilation or "gamma"for the electron is: 4.8E-11/2.35E-32 = 2.03E21 For the Proton quark the dilation or "gamma" is: 4.8E-11/1.429E-29 = 3.35E18 Thus the weak electro-gravitational force that we measure from our reference frame. Or from a frequency or current standpoint: f = c/2(pi)R and i = q*c/2(pi)R is reduced by the respective dilation or "gamma" factors, resulting in the the weak measurement, but in the frame of the particles it results in the Strong Force??? I Think. :-) Regards, Frederick >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 11 03:45:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA05867; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 03:40:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 03:40:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 11:39:26 +0000 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: OU Double coil In-Reply-To: <36966f38.62015665 24.192.1.20> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"0QkLL1.0.XR1.2DUcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25574 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Explain. Isn't a Casmir plate a coherer? It excludes certain modes to cause a prefered direction in ortherwise random motion. Oh BTW, tell someone that you can't use SR in non uniform motion. Remi. On Sat, 9 Jan 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Fri, 8 Jan 1999 13:02:04 +0000 (BST), Cornwall RO wrote: > [snip] > >I believe its the same wheteher you want to tap heat or zpe, give > >something that is random a preferred direction by ';coherign it'. > [snip] > I suspect it might actually be exactly the other way around. The ZPE > is already coherent, and when it comes across a discontinuity in > spacetime it shows up as mass. > If you want it to appear as "random" thermal energy, then you need to > supply a mechanism whereby the entropy can increase, and time symmetry > is destroyed. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 11 04:56:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA21837; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 04:55:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 04:55:38 -0800 Message-ID: <003801be3d61$8015ffc0$89441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "Antigravity" Calculations Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 05:53:34 -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: <"g9Ubr.0.7L5.9JVcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25575 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: BTW, Robin. If the undilated force between two quarks at one meter separation is: 1.0E-7*(4.8E-11)^2 = 2.304E-28 newtons, then two objects of one kilogram each (1.8E27 quarks each)at one meter separation should experience an undilated gravity force of: 2.304E-28*(1.8E27)^2 = 7.46E26 newtons as opposed to 6.67E-11 newtons! :-) This what is bothering me, and why I posted the question about two aircraft circling each with a gamma of 3600 with a blinky-light (clock) with one second on-off, what will each pilot see dilation-wise wrt.the other, and could they have coherent radio communication? Is there a distance factor glitch, or such,in Special Relativity,when fields are involved? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 11 13:12:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA18842; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 13:07:07 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 13:07:07 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <003e01be3da5$64b479c0$89441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re; A Light Moment & "Antigravity" Calculations Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 13:59:28 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"1eZ9X1.0.Kc4.uVccs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25576 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Whilst you're polishing off your Crocodile Soup, and Albatross-Feather Tea, Robin. :-) The 23 Kilohertz charge rotation frequency in each quark should add up like turns in a solenoid, and electromagnets being what they are will Always Align to Attract For the electrogravity force of the earth on a proper 1.0 ampere-meter current loop. F = 1.0E-7*0.025826*5.98E24/(6.38E6)^2 = 380 nt Is it going to require speed-of-light pulses at 23 KiloHz rep rate, or some kind of pulses of speed-of-light electron bunches to synchronize with the quark "current loops"? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 11 19:27:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA15796; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 19:24:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 19:24:32 -0800 Message-ID: <000101be3dda$e0d876c0$83441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "Antigravity" Calculations Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:22:22 -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: <"KJhiB.0.ks3.m1ics" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25577 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nobody left on vortex-l, Robin? Lurkers Beware! I think I used the wrong analogy for a point charge revolving about a circle for quarks or leptons. This is an relativistic accelerated reference frame problem where the velocity vector is constantly changing directions. :-( If it discriminates at 0.4181 degrees it should change directions 861 times in one revolution or 2(pi)*137 times. :-) Does this mean that it is changing directions at 137*c, the "phase velocity"? Now all that needs to be figured out is how this dilates time in the electron by a factor of 2.03E21 to give a frequency of 0.060 Hz, and in a quark by a factor of 3.3E18 to give a frequency of 23 kiloHz. Any "Relative" types around? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 12 03:16:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA08945; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 03:14:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 03:14:42 -0800 Message-ID: <001f01be3e1c$91cead00$83441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "Antigravity" Calculations Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 04:12:28 -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: <"lNdop3.0.dB2.Ywocs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25578 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: BTW,Robin Another way to find what I believe to be the relativistic dilation effect is to compare the electrostatic force (Fes)to the gravitational force (Fg)at one meter separation: For the electron Fes = kq^2 = 2.304E-28 newtons Fg = 6.67E-11*(9.1E-31)^2 = 5.523E-71 nt Dilation = (2.304E-28/5.523E-71)^1/2 = 2.04E21 For a quark 1/3 the mass of the proton: Fes = kq^2 = 2.304E-28 Fg = 6.67E-11(1.66E-27/3)^2 = 2.04E-65 newtons Dilation = (2.304E-28/2.04E-65)^1/2 = 3.358E18 Or: (6.67E-11/1.0E-7)^1/2 = 0.025826 amp-meters/kg 9.1E-31*0.025826 = 2.35E-32 ampere-meters [1.66E27/3]*0.025826 = 1.429E-29 ampere-meters But, undilated ampere meters q*c = 4.8E-11 for any string-circle particle. Thus: 4.8E-11/2.35E-32 = 2.04E21 (electron) 4.8E-11/1.429E-29 = 3.358E18 (quark) Circular reasoning? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 12 10:37:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA28784; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:35:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:35:56 -0800 Message-ID: <003601be3e5a$31e4a780$83441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "Antigravity" Calculations Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 11:33:44 -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: <"tutPP1.0.S17.AOvcs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25579 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex IF the radial acceleration c^2/R, 2.328E29 for the Electron, and 1.45E32 for the Quark is relativistically time dilated by Gamma: For the Electron, Gamma = 2.03E21 For the Quark, Gamma = 3.358E18 Then acceleration (a) for the Electron = 1.141E8 meters/sec^2 and acceleration for the Quark = 4.315E13 m/sec^2 The Larmor Synchrotron Radiation Loss: R = 0.66*q^2*a^2/4(pi)eo*c^3 By this conjecture: For the Electron, R = 7.332E-38 For the Quark, R = 1.05E-26 Does that mean that the Electron has a lifetime of 1.11E24 seconds, and the Proton Quark a lifetime of 4.75E15 seconds, or are they "restored" by ZPE tapping? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 12 16:50:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA19451; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:41:28 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:41:28 -0800 (PST) From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 19:40:09 EST To: vortex-L eskimo.com Cc: rwormus lock-load.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: BLP website is updated Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84 Resent-Message-ID: <"_e-Ih3.0.ql4.qk-cs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25580 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ron, Thanks for telling us that there was something new on the BLP website. A major announcement indeed. What do you make of it? Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 12 17:32:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA17954; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:28:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:28:55 -0800 Message-ID: <000801be3e93$57aef130$5552ddcf craig> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: BLP website is updated Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 19:23:34 -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 RAA17926 Resent-Message-ID: <"jwoRB.0.SO4.NR_cs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25581 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I thought BLP was promising a 10KW prototype on this month. Did I misunderstand it? Now they're still promising the future. I'm baffled. Craig Haynie (Houston) -----Original Message----- From: Tstolper aol.com To: vortex-L eskimo.com Cc: rwormus lock-load.com Date: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 6:43 PM Subject: Re: BLP website is updated >Ron, > >Thanks for telling us that there was something new on the BLP website. A >major announcement indeed. What do you make of it? > >Tom Stolper > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 12 20:27:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA19486; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 20:24:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 20:24:32 -0800 Message-ID: <001101be3eac$3b7d0a60$6a49ccd1 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Re: BLP website is updated Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 23:20:51 -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: <"GrgKw.0.Im4.002ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25582 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Craig said: >I thought BLP was promising a 10KW prototype on this month. Did I misunderstand it? Now they're still promising the future. > >I'm baffled. > >Craig Haynie (Houston) ----------------- Perhaps I was the source of the 10 kW impression. I had talked to John Farrell some time back, who said that BLP was building a prototype reactor in the 10 kW+ range. This was not a "promise" from anyone. BLP did in fact invest in the construction of a scaled-up vapor phase test reactor. BLP did come through with the promised "major breakthrough", which it is. It just isn't what some of us assumed it would be. Like Jed, I recommend studying source material. In this case it is the BLP Website itself, with 200+ pages of information to understand. A primary lesson to be learned in research of a new field is that one **must** follow Nature's lead and not impose on Nature one's preconceptions about what should or should not be. My take on the BLP position as published to date is that the problems of scaling up the reaction are much more difficult than anticipated (which would surprise no-one who has actually done R&D). On the way, BLP has discovered that hydrinos are not necessarily chemically inert, as first surmised, but can acquire an electron and become chemically active. This can be dazzling new stuff, of great value, and perhaps easier to produce than megawatts of power. The power will come, but perhaps not as easily as anticipated. I suspect that making pound lots of the new hydrino hydride compounds isn't going to be easy either. That's why BLP is talking about hiring 80-100 PhD's in the next two years. They will need them. And lots of money. There is perhaps a parallel in the case of CETI, which has also found the problem of industrial-scale reproducibility to be tougher than anticipated, and they are turning to secondary products for cash flow. There is absolutely no reason for sarcastic remarks by anyone. Those in the Vortex community who have actually done hard-core R&D, especially in the process industry, will understand the very vexing problems of scale-up, especially when the science is new and know-how is lacking. There is ample information in the BLP Web site to validate the basic findings. Whether LENR are actually instances of the BLP process, as Mills infers, will remain to be seen in future work. In the meantime, the basic validity of the F&P experiment is now well established by many researchers, including Arata & Zhang, and Lew Case. There is ongoing work with both systems which will be published in due course. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 12 21:37:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA31389; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 21:35:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 21:35:27 -0800 Message-ID: <000b01be3eb6$4b2f17a0$74441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Light Moment & "Antigravity" Calculations Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 22:33:41 -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: <"BIOdV1.0.1g7.R23ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25583 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex It is possible that the apparent 0.60 Hertz frequency for the Electron and the 23 KiloHz frequency for the quark are Strobing Effects from the oscillating string-circles or a form of "Superstrings" in Simple Harmonic Motion (SHM). There is an implication here that much lower pulse frequencies would suffice, and would explain the ability of the G field to readily penetrate matter. The wave/force interaction would be somewhat like Frank Stenger using a timing light on his Farmall Super A,in preparation for doing battle with that pesky woodchuck comes Feb 2nd. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 12 22:12:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA15850; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 22:10:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 22:10:19 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Shell filling Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 06:10:03 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <369c3848.272846391 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: <"8xnXg2.0.Wt3.AZ3ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25584 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, Can someone tell me if shell filling differs, between various isotopes of the same element? (Not the number of electrons, just the shells that they occupy). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 02:04:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA30255; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 02:03:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 02:03:54 -0800 Posted-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 12:02:23 +0300 (MEST) Message-ID: <369C5A9E.1D11DD2 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:34:38 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win98; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Gravitational Anomalies by HTC Superconductors:...(eprint:physics/9901011) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"S-tXn.0.fO7.A-6ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25585 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/9901011 Physics, abstract physics/9901011 From: Giovanni Modanese Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:51:11 GMT (119kb) Gravitational Anomalies by HTC Superconductors: a 1999 Theoretical Status Report Authors: G. Modanese Comments: PostScript, 30 pages, 12 figures. HTML and Winword available at this http URL (http://www.gravity.org) Subj-class: General Physics In this report we summarize in an informal way the main advances made in the last 3 years and give a unified scheme of our theoretical work. ...... Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 06:57:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA20697; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 06:51:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 06:51:16 -0800 Message-ID: <003701be3f03$f8aa1360$74441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: index (http://www.sunpower.com/engines/biowatt/index.html) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 07:49:38 -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_0034_01BE3EC9.454A5300" Resent-Message-ID: <"kHXAp.0.J35.ZBBds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25586 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_0034_01BE3EC9.454A5300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit While you are waiting for BLP, CETI, Newman, Case,and Watson,10Kw units, put those leaf piles, trash, and bovine substitute (BS) fuels to use. :-) Regards, Frederick http://www.sunpower.com/engines/biowatt/index.html ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01BE3EC9.454A5300 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="index.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="index.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.sunpower.com/engines/biowatt/index.html Modified=2061E62C033FBE0194 ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01BE3EC9.454A5300-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 08:49:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA30226; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 08:48:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 08:48:01 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990113114741.007a5cc0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 11:47:41 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Newman's Capacitor Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WUzMg.0.6O7.0vCds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25588 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a burst of frustration, Mitchell Jones writes: I see no basis for wasting any more time trying to figure out what Newman is doing. The fact of the matter is that we don't have the slightest idea what he is talking about, and no amount of analysis is going to clarify the matter. We simply need more information from him. However, we aren't going to get it, so to hell with it. When I expressed similar sentiments some months ago, Jones chided me for throwing the baby out with the bath water. Perhaps he now can sympathize with my frustration. I spent years trying to convince people like Newman to act in their own best interests, whereas Jones burned out after a few months. We will never get information out of Newman or any of the other magic motor inventors, but some of the people who have tried to replicate them have been helpful and forthcoming, particularly Naudin. The only way these mysteries will ever be solved (if there are any mysteries) will be when sane, third party independent replications-at-a-distance are reported in detail. I encourage Jean-Louis Naudin to keep up the good work and keep us informed. This discussion is somewhat over my head, but I gather Jones believes the phenomenon Naudin has observed is fundamentally different from the one Newman describes, and that Naudin's effect has a prosaic, conventional explanation. I myself am a little concerned about Naudin's technique for measuring energy by letting the machine run down with a single discharge, and measuring how long the machine turns. I fear he may be seeing meaningless variations in friction. Friction varies with temperature and other stray factors. With a good bearing, there is little friction in the first place. When you make minor adjustments or accidentally introduced a little grit or sand, you can easily increase the friction. It would be better to have the machine do a fixed, easily measured amount of work. The classic technique is to lift a small weight by winding up a string on a spindle. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 08:49:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA30190; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 08:47:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 08:47:59 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990113114733.007a1100 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 11:47:33 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: CETI's reproducibility problem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"8ciM5.0.eN7.zuCds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25587 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message about Blacklight Power, Mike Carrell writes: There is perhaps a parallel in the case of CETI, which has also found the problem of industrial-scale reproducibility to be tougher than anticipated, and they are turning to secondary products for cash flow. The specifics of the CETI case are heartbreaking. We should learn a lesson from them. I have not been at liberty to discuss this in detail. I think I am off the hook now, because partial descriptions of CETI's problems appeared in the Wired magazine article and in recent public comments by people from CETI. Patterson uses plastic beads coated with copper. He had a large supply of beads that was manufactured in the 1960s by two different companies. He coated these beads with thin-film layers of palladium and nickel, fabricating several batches. Many batches produced no excess heat; some produced a little, and some produced spectacular levels of excess heat. He assumed that the major difference between the batches was in the thin-film composition. That may be so, but it turns out the underlying copper layer and possibly the plastic are also critical. He found this out when he ran out of beads. The supply from the 1960s was large, but eventually it ran out. CETI ordered beads from other suppliers, and fabricated new batches, but none of them worked. They tried to contact the two companies that made the original beads. One had gone out of business; the other no longer makes that type. Apparently, nobody knows precisely how these beads were fabricated, or what trace contamination may have been added to the copper and plastic. It Patterson had realized how important the substrate is, he might have taken steps to conserve his supply of beads. Or, he might have contracted to have the unused beads analyzed in depth with SIMS and other spectroanalytic techniques. If he had understood the importance of this issue in time, he could have done something about it. Unfortunately, his attention was turned elsewhere, and by the time it became apparent that the beads themselves are a critical factor, the information was lost. This is similar to one of the misadventures Mizuno describes in his book. One of his cathodes with coated with a mysterious black substance. Instead of investigating the substance carefully, he scraped it off with a piece of glass and reused the cathode. The black substance was probably critical evidence about nature of the reaction. If I found myself in Patterson's situation, and I realized I faced a limited, dwindling supply of critical material, here are three ways I might try to rescue the situation: 1. As noted above, I would contract with expert labs to have the remaining unused beads investigated with SIMS. 2. I would order additional beads from other suppliers before the original supply ran out, and I would have the expert labs compare the new stock with the old stock. 3. I would put together a demonstration cell and invite many scientists, engineers and outside experts to observe it closely with their own instruments. When CETI made the large cell, they demonstrated it at Power-Gen, then they showed it to ABC News, and then they hid it. I think they assumed they had the luxury of building many more large cells -- as many more as they wanted. If they had known that they had only enough material to make one or two more large cells, perhaps they would not have hid it. They should have used it to convince as many influential people as they could during the months the cell operated, before it self-destructed from oxygen. Since they cannot reproduce the excess heat, CETI is casting around looking for some other salable technology. They're talking about a clever technique to separate tritium from radwaste contaminated water. Frankly, I see no point to this process, and no commercial prospects. The half life of tritium is short. You can leave the water in a barrel for 20 years and most of the tritium will be gone. If CETI could separate out long-lived dangerous radioisotopes, they might be on to something, but I do not think the DOE will spend a great deal of money on tritium. All of us face a limited, dwindling supply of two critical materials: time and money. It is difficult to know which priority is most critical. It is sometimes difficult to realize you face a crisis. I hope that other people can learn a lesson from this fiasco. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 10:44:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13267; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:37:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:37:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:37:36 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: gravity article (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"tbD2c1.0.1F3.qVEds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25589 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Forwarded message, see below ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 03:09:02 PST From: Giovanni Modanese To: billb eskimo.com Subject: Re: article "Gravitational Anomalies by HTC Superconductors: a 1999 Theoretical Status Report" G. Modanese Abstract - In this report we summarize in an informal way the main advances made in the last 3 years and give a unified scheme of our theoretical work. This scheme aims at connecting in a consistent physical picture (by the introduction of some working hypotheses when necessary) the technical work published in several single articles. The part of our model concerning the purely gravitational aspects of the weak shielding phenomenon is almost complete; the part concerning the density distribution of the superconducting carriers in the HTC disks is still qualitative, also due to the very non-standard character of the experimental setup. The main points of our analysis are the following: coherent coupling between gravity and a Bose condensate; induced gravitational instability and "runaway" of the field, with modification of the static potential; density distribution of the superconducting charge carriers; energetic balance; effective equations for the field; existence of a threshold density. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 11:01:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA22145; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:59:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:59:37 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990113200123.01049db0 mail.bahnhof.se> X-Sender: david mail.bahnhof.se X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:01:23 +0100 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: David Jonsson Subject: Room temperature superconductivity solved! In-Reply-To: References: <000001bda093$aa078c60$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"42WM6.0.qP5.PqEds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25590 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The following resoning began about a question about superconductivity but it contains questions about the relative or absolute nature of motion. Is it possible to emulate superconductivity by giving an object a net charge and then put the object into motion? That will result in a motion of charges which is equal to a current but is the current producing electrical resistance like an ordinary current? If it is producing electrical resistance how do you explain that? In that case motion can not be relative. If it is producing electrical resistance what is the case if I have the object at rest and move myself? Something in this universe is always moving which means that net charges would always emit energy due to electrical resistance which they do not. With this reasoning the object has to be superconducting when it moves and I get the soultion to room temperature superconductivity. The alternative has to be that motion is not relative but that there is an absolute room. David From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 13:56:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21592; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 13:54:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 13:54:16 -0800 Message-ID: <002101be3f3e$dad27360$3f49ccd1 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:45:36 -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: <"l_LEb1.0.GH5.8OHds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25591 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, I won't repeat or quote at length Jed's excellent essay on this tragedy. Go read his post for reference. I wish everyone on vortex would read and reread this, particularly all those who are quick with barbs and off-hand cute or clever remarks. I have told a story before, which I took as true, but may not be. It goes this way. Once upon a year, Eastman Kodak had a sudden and catastrophic loss of sensitivity in their production emulsions, for no apparent reason. Fortunately, they kept samples of every batch of every component of their film. They traced the problem to disappearance of a trace of selenium in the gelatin of the emulsions. The source of the gelatin was cattle, and when they changed the forage to one low in selenium, the emulsion sensitivity crashed. A scintilla of doubt comes from the notion that surely the square miles of film must use gelatin from many sources, all mixed together, so change of forage for one herd could not make the difference. But it is a cautionary tale, nonetheless. I don't agree with Jed that all magic motor developers will obfuscate. The jury is still out. As for Joseph Newman, please note that Stefan Hartmann has obtained oscillograms from Newman not published in Newman's book by taking the effort to build models and study them, and not going into attack mode. Same for Naudin. I don't think anyone, including Newman, has a correct and comprehensive theory of what goes on in the device. You really have to study the material Naudin has posted and get the Newman machine inside your head and live with it before you begin to see everything going on. Superficial analysis will get you nowhere. You have to account for every wiggle in the oscillograms before you make pronouncements, and not dismiss anything as "artifact" or "error" unless you can show that it is. In a sense, these are dark days for new energy enthusiasts. Expectations of quick miracle gadgets have foundered on materials problems, which are related to a lack of theory. There are reasons to hope that developments will continue and decisive evidence for the LENR or CANR will continue to emerge. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 14:19:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA30582; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 14:17:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 14:17:05 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990113171651.007a16d0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:16:51 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem In-Reply-To: <002101be3f3e$dad27360$3f49ccd1 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"UnrP63.0.iT7.XjHds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25592 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mike Carrell wrote: I don't agree with Jed that all magic motor developers will obfuscate. All of the ones I have tried to deal with have obfuscated! I keep hoping I will run into one who does not. Many CF scientists also obfuscate, hide, distort or downplay their results, for political reasons. For that matter, many programmers do too! A less-than-honest programmer will try to arrange a demonstration for the boss or the review committee that hides the bugs. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 15:40:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA28732; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 15:39:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 15:39:07 -0800 Message-ID: <000001be3f4d$b46e1ee0$c5441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: American Stirling Co. - Stirling Engines, Sterling Engines, Consulting (http:// Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:37:13 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE3F12.F9C12AE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"eMl7l1.0.f07.PwIds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25593 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_01BE3F12.F9C12AE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Since these engines will run off the heat of your hand they should work on BLP, Case, and other low grade O-U heat sources. They should work like a champ up in Horace's neck of the woods. :-) Regards, Frederick http://www.stirlingcycle.com/ ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE3F12.F9C12AE0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="American Stirling Co. - Stirling Engines, Sterling Engines, Consulting.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="American Stirling Co. - Stirling Engines, Sterling Engines, Consulting.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.stirlingcycle.com/ Modified=40A99E084D3FBE01DA ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE3F12.F9C12AE0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 13 16:24:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA13681; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:22:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:22:18 -0800 Message-Id: <199901140021.TAA13978 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem Date: Wed, 13 Jan 99 19:23:45 -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: <"XDkdU3.0.dL3.vYJds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25594 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed wrote, >Since they cannot reproduce the excess heat, CETI is casting around looking >for some other salable technology. This is not strictly correct. CETI has developed OTHER proprietary technology for generating excess heat. These cold fusion cells, which do not require beads, are very robust and of large output both in magnitude and percentage -- but nowhere near the 200/1 or 1000/1 or infinite power ratio (heat after death) that the beads were able to achieve. Their tritium work IS bringing in good prospects of revenues, though not as much as they would have gained, in my view, if they had smoother sailing with their excess heat. I am sure they will return to the heater development as soon as possible. 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 Wed Jan 13 23:06:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA26480; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:04:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:04:48 -0800 Message-ID: <000a01be3f8b$f7c8f960$6a441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Off Topic; Y2K+1 Question Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 00:02:28 -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: <"AsPII1.0.gT6.FSPds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25595 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If Mrs. Dole becomes President in Y2K+1, what will her husband's title be? Will their Retreat be Camp David, or Viagra Falls? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 09:10:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA14298; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 09:06:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 09:06:19 -0800 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: Tstolper aol.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:01:31 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: YAM 2.0Preview6 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck - http://www.yam.ch Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: BLP website is updated MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"UFxQD2.0.DV3.9GYds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25596 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Tom, I tend to agree with Mike Carrells assessment. Nothing is ever as easy and straight foward as hoped for intially. If "Hydrinos" are real they must be very elusive to have escaped detection until now but they seem as probable as "quarks" to me. I personally believe tht BLP has discovered something important and that they are making public only enough info. to secure financing while filing patent applications. I wish there was more independent confirmation available. I wonder if Vince has resumed his BLP type experiment. It seems he quit just as it was getting interesting. Ron On 12-Jan-99, Tstolper aol.com wrote: > Ron, > > Thanks for telling us that there was something new on the BLP website. A > major announcement indeed. What do you make of it? > > Tom Stolper > Regards From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 11:09:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA11258; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:07:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:07:20 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:04:41 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: fjsparb sprintmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: American Stirling Co. - Stirling Engines, Sterling Engines, Consulting (http:// Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84 Resent-Message-ID: <"qRMle2.0.ql2.e1ads" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25597 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred, Thanks for the interesting link to this maker of model Stirling engines. As you said, "they should work on BLP, Case, and other low grade O-U heat sources," although I wouldn't call the output of BLP's high-temperature gas- phase cells low-grade heat. Which leads to a question: would one of these model Stirling engines work on the kind of cell that Vince Cockeram has pioneered, i.e., on a small high- temperature cell? Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 11:49:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA30542; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:48:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:48:02 -0800 Message-ID: <001301be3ff6$932f2e00$6a441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: , Subject: Re: American Stirling Co. - Stirling Engines, Sterling Engines, Consulting (http:// Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:46:18 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"a4tZN2.0.zS7.mdads" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25598 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Tom Stolper wrote: >Fred, > >Thanks for the interesting link to this maker of model Stirling engines. > >As you said, "they should work on BLP, Case, and other low grade O-U heat >sources," although I wouldn't call the output of BLP's high-temperature gas- >phase cells low-grade heat. > >Which leads to a question: would one of these model Stirling engines work on >the kind of cell that Vince Cockeram has pioneered, i.e., on a small high- >temperature cell? I would think so Tom, if materials that can handle the temperature are selected. You might even be able to use hydrogen and build Vince's device into either the "Displacer" or Two-Piston type Stirling Engine. Regards, Frederick > >Tom Stolper > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 12:28:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA16250; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:25:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:25:33 -0800 Message-ID: <002801be3ffb$fd978760$a31a010a ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:25:02 -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 MAA16160 Resent-Message-ID: <"eO_vF.0.nz3.yAbds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25599 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Didn't Dr. George Miley construct the beads from scratch, with his verification tests? Craig Haynie (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 12:44:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24337; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:42:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:42:55 -0800 Message-ID: <000601be3ffe$3ee216c0$f1441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: American Stirling Co. - Stirling Engines www.stirlingcycle.com Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:40:23 -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: <"ykcgR3.0.By5.ERbds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25600 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: BTW, Tom You can modify a pressure cooker to make a Stirling Engine,and since steam will compress any non-condensable gases, you might use water or liquid metal vapors for compression and heat transfer, thus you can "buffer" the higher temperature, but at a loss in thermal efficiency. Otherwise, you can use 55 gallon steel barrels with modified lids and a cobbed up displacer "piston". I get top quality steel 55 gallon barrels for storage for about $10.00 each. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 12:53:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA29813; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:52:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:52:44 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990114155225.0079b430 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:52:25 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"MuSn92.0.hH7.Sabds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25601 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A Gene Mallove writes: This is not strictly correct. CETI has developed OTHER proprietary technology for generating excess heat. I know nothing about these developments. These cold fusion cells, which do not require beads, are very robust and of large output both in magnitude and percentage -- but nowhere near the 200/1 or 1000/1 or infinite power ratio (heat after death) that the beads were able to achieve. If this is true, they are making another tragic mistake by not publicly demonstrating this technology. The beads were fairly robust when they were not exposed to oxygen. They do not work at high temperatures but they would be ideal for space heating. If CETI had demonstrated them publicly, it would have attracted a flood of capital -- hundreds of millions of dollars -- the way these maniac Internet start-up companies do. Any viable cold fusion device would, in today's overheated capital market. We are in the middle of the largest speculative bubble in history. Any speculative proposal will attract capital. Harebrained, half-baked proposals are being funded left and right. Companies which have never made significant profit, like Yahoo! and Amazon.com are worth billions of dollars. In this market only a colossal fool would have difficulty financing a viable cold fusion device. Their tritium work IS bringing in good prospects of revenues . . . I do not see how it could. The only prospective customer is the DOE, and I do not see why the DOE would seriously investigate a radically new technology. They have no motivation. The more it costs them to clean up rad waste, the higher their budget will be. They have an unlimited expense account. They are motivated to find least efficient, most expensive methods, as long as those methods are effective. If the rad waste is still there three years into a cleanup project, they are in trouble. But if it costs an extra $100 million to clean up, they get a promotion and a bigger staff. Estimates of the cost of cleaning up rad waste sites have been wildly inflated. According to the DOE WebSite and the book "Linking Legacies" (DOE/DM-0319), they have consistently overestimated the cost and duration of projects. Some projects take only 20 percent of the time and money predicted. I suspect DOE planners are rewarded for wildly overestimating and padding project costs. That is common in other large bureaucracies, in both government and private industry. I am sure they will return to the heater development as soon as possible. I hope so, but I doubt it. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 14:37:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA13463; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:36:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:36:35 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:35:31 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Albuquerque in June? In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990114155225.0079b430 pop.mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"cFmJI3.0.CI3.o5dds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25602 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The SSE (Soc. for Scientific Exploration) holds its 18th annual meeting this June 3-5 at the U. of NM at Albuquereque. I'm thinking about possibly attending. Their announcement mentions Storms/Miley/Claytor/ Miles/McKubre, also Peter Graneau. (But does this mean they'll all actually be there?) The main sections are: Shaking the Pillars of the Paradigm Cold Fusion Reports on Anomalous Phenomena Suppression of New Science See http://www.jse.com/eighteenth.html Is anyone else thinking of attending? Should we reserve a "Vortex Suite?" ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com 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 Jan 14 14:47:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA18228; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:45:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:45:26 -0800 Message-ID: <002301be400f$5d476640$f1441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Albuquerque in June? Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:43:40 -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: <"90R8L3.0.gS4.5Edds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25603 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, January 14, 1999 3:37 PM Subject: Albuquerque in June? Good Deal, Bill! I'll Alert the National Guard. :-) FJS > >The SSE (Soc. for Scientific Exploration) holds its 18th annual meeting >this June 3-5 at the U. of NM at Albuquereque. I'm thinking about >possibly attending. Their announcement mentions Storms/Miley/Claytor/ >Miles/McKubre, also Peter Graneau. (But does this mean they'll all >actually be there?) The main sections are: > > Shaking the Pillars of the Paradigm > Cold Fusion > Reports on Anomalous Phenomena > Suppression of New Science > >See http://www.jse.com/eighteenth.html > >Is anyone else thinking of attending? Should we reserve a "Vortex Suite?" > > >((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) >William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website >billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com >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 Jan 14 16:31:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA28768; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 16:30:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 16:30:21 -0800 Message-ID: <369E8CB3.538846C8 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 17:32:51 -0700 From: "Richard T. Murray" Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Eighth Miley Critique 7.21.97 References: <002801be3ffb$fd978760$a31a010a ar91037.argis.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------63ACB80F7751BEBB981E205A" Resent-Message-ID: <"BGmpT.0.K17.Smeds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25604 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. --------------63ACB80F7751BEBB981E205A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit B.S. in history and physics, M.I.T., 1964, M.A. in psychology, Boston U. Graduate School, 1967. My life has been devoted to a private exploration of expanded states of consciousness. For the past eight years, I have supported myself as a home hospice worker. Maintaining a keen interest in science, I have perused every issue of Scientific American, Science, Physics Today, and Speptical Inquirer. I've followed the cold fusion field closely for eight years, subscribed to Vortex-L discussion group since January, 1996, and attended the September Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Conference. Some critical posts on Vortex-L led me to examine Miley's first two Preprints carefully. I found plenty of nits to pick, got on my high horse, and sent a long, detailed, rude post to Vortex-L early in December. Being a little tenacious at times, I've written a total of seven Miley Critiques. This one I will call for convenience, the Eighth Critique. Responding to Miley's post of July 20, I have given up some skeptical claims, and added more analysis of the data. I will take the space here to reiterate my after/before ratios in my First Miley Critique, [posted Dec 7, 1996, on George H. Miley, "Nuclear Transmutations in Thin-Film Nickel Coatings Undergoing Electrolysis," "Infinite Energy" magazine, # 9, July-August, 1996] calculated from his own data in Table 3 in his First Preprint, based on NAA analysis, given accuracy by him of +- 2 to 4 % in his July 20 post: [I have arranged the data by element, in order, and calculated the ratio, after/before. When helpful, I added natural abundance, the estimated SIMS count from a double-scale zerox of Fig. 3b., and possible same-mass interferences. Fig. 3b is labeled, "Typical low resolution SIMS scan after the run (average of microspheres in 3 layers in the cell).] I have added for the less common isotopes a second line with three abundance ratios, compared to the most common isotope: official, before, and after, along with the percentage change from official. #atoms per microsphere ratio, after/before before after 23-V50 3.54E10 70.1E10 19.8 23-Cr50? 399r 407r = + 2 % 408r = + 2 % 23-V51 1.44E13 28.6E13 19.9 24-Cr50 omitted, 4.4%, SIMS=~500, 23-V50? 24-Cr52 5.63E14 1070E14 190. 24-Cr53 6.27E13 1360E13 217. 8.82r 8.98r = + 2 % 7.87r = - 11 % 24-Cr54 1.53E13 255E15 167. 35.4r 36.8r = + 4 % 42.0r = + 20 % 26-Fe54 2.82E15 17.8E15 6.31 15.2r 15.2r = 0 % 15.2r = 0 % 26-Fe56 4.29E16 27.0E16 6.29 26-Fe57 1.01E15 14.1E15 14.0 42.5r 42.5r = 0 % 19.2r = - 55 % 26-Fe58 omitted, 0.28 %, SIMS=~1000, 28-Ni58? 27-Co59 1.23E14 19.9E14 16.2 100% 29-Cu63 3.57E15 116E15 32.5 29-Cu65 1.54E15 49.7E15 32.3 2.24r 2.30r = + 2.6 % 2.33r = 4.2 % 30-Zn64 1.42E15 16.7E15 11.8 28-Ni64? 30-Zn66 7.82E14 92.2E14 11.8 1.74r 1.82r = + 6.2 % 1.81r = + 4.1 % 30-Zn67 1.14E14 21.6E14 19.0 4.1%, SIMS=~10 11.9r 12.5r = + 7.4 % 7.73r = - 35 % 30-Zn68 5.08E14 130E14 25.6 18.8%, SIMS=~11 2.64r 2.80r = + 5.9 % 1.29r = -51 % 30-Zn70 1.64E13 124E13 75.6 0.6%, SIMS=~1, 32-Ge70? 81r 86.6r = +6.9 % 13.5r = - 83 % 47-Ag107 7.32E15 76.1E15 10.4 47-Ag109 6.68E15 61.4E15 9.2 1.07r 1.10r = +3 % 1.24r = + 17 % Of these 7 NAA elements, the V pair is typical, with after/before ratios astonishingly close at 19.8 and 19.9, giving absolutely no hint of changes in isotopic abundances, but suggesting strongly a 20-fold transfer of metal from one measured set of ten beads to another within the cell. This is obviously the same for Cu, while there is provocative data for Cr, Ag, and the specific isotopes: Fe57, Zn67, Zn68, and Zn70, considering the +- 2 to 4 % precision of NAA, given by Miley in his July 20 post. The most out-of-line isotope is 30-Zn70, with ratio 75.6, has only 0.6 % natural abundance, making its measurement more susceptible to dust contamination, and, shall we say, random glitches, as well possible interferences from 32-Ge70. Also, the SIMS count for 30-Zn-70 in Fig. 3b is about 1. The remarkably close match of some of the isotope pairs for V, Fe, Cu, Zn, and Ag is surprising and gratifying, and gives us more faith in the NAA measurements. The before isotopic ratio changes, compared to official values, range from 0 to + 7.4 %, largely confirming Miley's estimates in his post of July 20. The after ratios, compared to official values, range from 0 to + 20 to - 83 %. This data does not suggest isotopic shifts for V and Cu, but provides grounds for spirited debate about Cr, Fe, Zn, and Ag. Table 4a in First Preprint shows that the cells contain l91 micrograms V in the two Ti electrodes: if 1 % somehow dissolved out, then that would roughly equal the 1.52 micrograms of V that Miley measured as added to the beads. At any rate, there seems to be no evidence of isotope shift for V. If we had the specific before and after data for the other five runs, then more of this simple analysis could be done. Zn-68, with an estimated SIMS count of ~11, was listed as enhanced 15.84 % in First Preprint. Here is Miley's data from Table 3 for three isotopes of Si, a non-NAA element, so the data is from SIMS only: Atoms per microsphere Mass No. Fresh Reacted After/Before SIMS counts, from Fig. 3b 28 8.14E+16 3.02E+17 3.7 ~300 29 0 2.04E+16 ? ~ 30 30 0 1.02E+16 ? ~ 10 Again, the poverty of raw data precludes any claims about isotopic shifts, especially to four-digit accuracy! Miley's Table 3 claims Si 30 has a +14.66 % shift, based on a raw data SIMS count of about 10. Presumably, Fig. 3b presents Miley's best raw data-- why else would he publish it? By the way, why is the after data for Si 29 twice that for Si 30 ? My first five Miley Critiques present plenty of data from Miley's first two Preprints that show massive transfer of Ni from some beads to other beads within the thousand beads in a cell. So, since much of the Ni is dissolved from some beads and redeposited on other beads, any trace elements will be liberated and redeposited, perhaps as concentrated spots, which would then be likely to be noticed and measured by the micron-scale SIMS scans on the few spots on the about 10 or so beads selected for study out of the thousand in a cell. Only a thorough, detailed, exact, expensive inventory of cell contents and products, including gunk, gases, and grit, could determine if transmutation or transfer is the model to be applied to the data. Since SIMS on before beads would be on smooth, unremarkable locations of pure metal, while SIMS on after beads would presumably be on interesting, noticable specific reaction sites, like the pits, bubbles, and volcanos imaged by Mizuno, Ohmori, and Dash, then it is conceivable that 18-Kev oxygen ion bombardment on such concentrations of impurities or products, vaporizing them, could produce even more nuclear transmutations, if they are already possible under the very mild conditions of electrolysis. I will provide by email or mail copies of my Critiques. Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 rmforall earthlink.net 505-986-9103 --------------63ACB80F7751BEBB981E205A Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="rmforall.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Richard T. Murray Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="rmforall.vcf" begin:vcard n:Murray;Richard T. "Rich" tel;home:505-986-8250 tel;work:505-986-9103 x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:rmforall earthlink.net fn:Richard T. "Rich" Murray end:vcard --------------63ACB80F7751BEBB981E205A-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 19:13:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA29773; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 19:09:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 19:09:08 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <1cf2a4c7.369eaea0 aol.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 21:57:36 EST To: vortex-L eskimo.com Cc: Verdian aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: H2 with K Glow discharge Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 226 Resent-Message-ID: <"CwH-e1.0.7H7.J5hds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25605 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 01/14/1999 09:10:09 Pacific Standard Time, rwormus lock- load.com writes: <> > I wish there was more independent confirmation > available. > > I wonder if Vince has resumed his BLP type experiment. It seems he quit just > as it was getting interesting. > > Ron Ron, and of course all Vortexians; No, I never quit, just had to put the project on the back burner so I could get my affairs in order. I was handling an extreamly heavy workload at my day job with big blue, installing a large amount of hardware at a large customers data center here in town. Was putting in sometimes 90 hours a week and so had no time for anything else. This has all been completed. I retired December 31st after 32 years with IBM. I was a good 32 years. Now I am free to do what I want. Like today, I was removing cottonwood tree roots from my lawn in the back yard...what fun! Getting on topic here, I have in the past two weeks: Prepared 40 quartz tubes as reactor vessels; Purchased two K-Type thermocouples at WW Grainger...damn! now they cost 20 bucks each...used to be 15 bucks a year ago. I am scouting for a high voltage (15-20 kV), high freq (10-20 kHz) , low current (10-50 mAmp) power supply. Anyone have any ideas about this? Grainger has an electronic flourescent lamp ballast for 30 bucks that is usable for one or two lamps I may try. Thanks to Horace for that suggestion. Reading through the material he sent me on these ballasts I'm not sure if they will work as they have built in error circuts and it sure will show up as an error trying to couple one of these things to my reactor tube. The one I will try specs as a 72 watt input to the ballast and thats pretty close to what I want. I will also try the brute force 4 kV 1 amp power supply that I built last spring. The devil with that thing is getting accurate input measurements without smoking the digital meters. As suggested here I will bridge the meters with zener diodes. The voltage spikes destroyed two meters already. They were cheap meters, 12 bucks each so I cant complain to much. Yes, I know I was told to do this before running the experiment, but it was a weekend and no zeners were available. I jumped the gun and...poof. Serves me right. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 21:58:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA25520; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 21:56:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 21:56:06 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: OU Double coil Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 05:56:00 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36a1d266.443420811 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: <"Ob_0o.0.gE6.rXjds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25606 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 11:39:26 +0000 (BST), Cornwall RO wrote: >Explain. Isn't a Casmir plate a coherer? It excludes certain modes to >cause a prefered direction in ortherwise random motion. I was thinking about Tom Bearden's mirror image photons, i.e. stationary waves as zpe. I thought that in order to get OU energy out of the zpe, you need to break the symmetry, converting the stationary wave into a travelling wave (by perturbing the forward and backward going halves of the stationary wave differently - hence time symmetry breaking). The casimir force derives from exclusion of lower frequencies, but does nothing to alter the time symmetry of both constituents of each individual frequency. It also isn't OU. A gravity field does alter the time symmetry of ingoing and outgoing waves, because ingoing waves are increased in frequency (blue shifted), while outgoing waves are decreased (red shifted). Is the resulting difference perhaps the cause of gravitational force? (Hal was that the essence of your gravity paper?). If so, then either I'm wrong about being able to derive OU energy from such an asymmetry, or a gravitational field is not truly a conservative field. (Perhaps just nearly conservative, when the gradient in the field is minimal). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 14 23:01:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA18675; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 22:59:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 22:59:56 -0800 Message-ID: <001501be4054$73578a60$40441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: H2 with K Glow discharge Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 23:57:36 -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: <"RmUZS1.0.hZ4.hTkds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25607 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: VCockeram aol.com To: vortex-L eskimo.com Cc: Verdian aol.com Date: Thursday, January 14, 1999 8:11 PM Subject: H2 with K Glow discharge Vince wrote: snip.. > > Getting on topic here, I have in the past two weeks: Prepared 40 quartz tubes >as reactor vessels; Planning on mass production here, Vince? :-) > > I am scouting for a high voltage (15-20 kV), high freq (10-20 kHz) , low >current (10-50 mAmp) power supply. Anyone have any ideas about this? Might be easier to wind your own with some advice from the folks on vortex. >Grainger has an electronic flourescent lamp ballast for 30 bucks that is >usable for one or two lamps I may try. Thanks to Horace for that suggestion. Since I had sent the Motorola Application Notes to Horace and others on those, I'm glad he forwarded them to you. Since then Motorola has restricted access to the notes (ANXX) on the web. :-( > Reading through the material he sent me on these ballasts I'm not sure if >they will work as they have built in error circuts and it sure will show up as >an error trying to couple one of these things to my reactor tube. The one I >will try specs as a 72 watt input to the ballast and thats pretty close to >what I want. > > I will also try the brute force 4 kV 1 amp power supply that I built last >spring. The devil with that thing is getting accurate input measurements >without smoking the digital meters. BE CAREFUL HEAR! >As suggested here I will bridge the meters >with zener diodes. The voltage spikes destroyed two meters already. With the voltages/frequencies you're pushing, you could use NE-2s or Spark Plugs as meter protectors, Vince. :-) Keep up the GOOD WORK! Regards, Frederick > >Regards, >Vince Cockeram >Las Vegas Nevada > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 00:17:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA06176; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:16:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:16:30 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:16:25 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Russian torsion fields Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"PgC9r.0.MW1.Tblds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25608 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: While searching for more pages on "torsion", I came across this one: > Intellectual Property offerings in the area of interdisciplinary > discoveries in Natural Sciences, including bio-medical, energy, > bio-mineralization, new phenomenon, torsion fields, etc. USA > Laboratories and Bio-Tech companies > should contact us... http://www.csica.com/development/ It just seems odd to me that torsion fields should be mentioned offhand on a website apparently for entrepreneurs. Are they a big deal in Russian science, even though the US has never heard of them? Or perhaps the Russians say "torsion fields" where we would say "ZPE?" I still don't have a solid idea of the status of "torsion" research in Russia. How much of it is pathological (or simply taboo) science, and how much of it is legit? Dr. Puthoff, might have you encountered this topic before? Any opinions? P.S. Torsion field links http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/tors/ ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com 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 Jan 15 08:20:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA25703; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 08:14:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 08:14:07 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Message-ID: <4b4cd7bf.369f6846 aol.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 11:09:42 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: OU Double coil Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 54 Resent-Message-ID: <"s1cpP2.0.KH6.Cbsds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25609 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 1/14/99 11:57:03 PM, rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au writes: << ingoing waves are increased in frequency (blue shifted), while outgoing waves are decreased (red shifted). Is the resulting difference perhaps the cause of gravitational force? (Hal was that the essence of your gravity paper?). >> I never looked at it that way. Our ZPE gravity model is based on the fact that the correlation between particle responses to the ZPE in two bodies results in a decrease (because of cancellation) in field energy that is greater the closer the bodies are, and therefore there is an attractive force due to this decrease, as in F = - grad (energy). Hal From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 13:51:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06576; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 13:49:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 13:49:19 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 16:40:45 EST To: lizardhaven zippnet.net Cc: PetMagic aol.com, donadams@telusplanet.net, Vince Goetsch <3wishes wishgranted.com>, "Dennis C. Lee" , bill@basselectronics.com, biotron pacbell.net, grstewar@tva.gov, "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , Terri Schoolden , johnhoffman@webtv.net, kvp mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , richarda@icx.net, rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, Robin van Spaandonk , trknute earthlink.net, werosser@hotmail.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Alternative plant growth techniques... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"Btil_2.0.bc1.TVxds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25610 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-14 18:33:16 EST, you write: >hybrids don't produce seeds that produce plants identical to the parent >plant. they produce a genetic range of plants instead. the thing about >genetic diddling is big news, not actual practice. there is no way they >could do all that stuff to seeds outside of a few handfuls of seeds in a >laboratory. regular seed companies work on a low margin of profit. >and if they were able to do all that stuff, most plants would revert to >the natural gene pool in a couple generations. buy a green daffodil and >in two years it will go back to white. genetic diddling is forced and >nature tends to exclude it stadily and certainly-the hard part is >keeping it in. no one has managed so far-and if they did try to >sterilize seeds they could not do it to grocery food, so those seeds are >safe. you may not get a great cop the first time, but the plant that >make it are those genetically suited to your conditions, their seds will >giv you a beter crop. and you better believe i know what i am talking >about-i grow edible food crops in desert soil so salty it crusts. three >years later i grow bananas in the same soil. This is fascinating--the public is told that hybrids produce seeds that don't produce ANYTHING. Should I infer, then, that because the charactersitics for which agricultural hybrids are marketed don't reproduce in successive generations, Monsanto, et al. merely promulgate the *lie* that the plants themselves cannot reproduce (contributing to inflated orders for new seed each year)? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 14:00:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23967; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 13:51:33 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 13:51:33 -0800 (PST) From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 16:40:48 EST To: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Cc: PetMagic aol.com, Vince Goetsch <3wishes@wishgranted.com>, "Dennis C. Lee" , bill@basselectronics.com, biotron pacbell.net, grstewar@tva.gov, "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , Terri Schoolden , johnhoffman@webtv.net, lizardhaven zippnet.net, lkvp@mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , richarda@icx.net, rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, Robin van Spaandonk , trknute earthlink.net, werosser@hotmail.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Alternative food production techniques... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"kJsKW1.0.Js5.PXxds" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25611 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-14 15:14:12 EST, you write: <> Thanks. Perhaps you agree that in any case, we need to clean up our diets in favor of fresh, raw, & sprouted foods; and to withdraw our economic support of environmentally destructive methodologies. Moreover, if one's goal is dietary self-sufficiency, methods must must be found--quickly--that don't inevitably redound to further dependency on mfg. technologies and societal systems beyond one’s capability and control; systems which might be disrupted by Y2K, climatic or geomagnetic upheaval, etc., etc This might ultimately necessitate total indoor (underground?) cultivation (where plants would benefit from steady temperature & increased CO2 levels, and people would benefit from the O2 & negative ions). Growlights require high wattage and eventually need replacing; therefore, super-efficient, low-tech alternatives are called for...and as I’ve mentioned, there’s ample evidence suggesting that we’ve barely glimpsed the true range of horticultural possibilities. Regards, Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 15:28:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA10530; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 15:26:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 15:26:18 -0800 Message-ID: <19990115231121.10737.rocketmail web1.rocketmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 15:11:21 -0800 (PST) From: james cox Subject: FICAR Antigravity Conference, June, 1999, Reno, Nv To: vortex-L eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"ivfzA3.0.Ja2.Pwyds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25612 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: PRELIMINARY ANNOUNCEMENT --FICAR The First International Congress on Antigravity Research (FICAR)is tentatively scheduled for the end of June in Reno, Nevada. Topics covered: Theories of Antigravity, Inertial Propulsion Engines, History of Electrogravitaion, Force Field Propulsion (classic), Exotic Forcefield Effect Propulsion,Anomalous Biologica l Weight Loss, Free energy relation to AG, Cold Fusion for Exotic Propulsion, Government policies concerning AG, Commercializtion of AG for Automotive Transport, The X-Prize Contest Update, and Back-engineering of Alledged Extraterrestrial Spacecraft.Featured speaker will be Bob Dean, son of Norman L. Dean. Five Hundred word abstract due March 31 to AGN, P.O.Box 71151, Reno, Nv 89570-1151. See the Antigravity News website for details: . _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 17:23:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA21706; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 17:21:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 17:21:51 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: <6f15c3f1.369fe80a aol.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:14:50 EST To: PetMagic aol.com Cc: donadams telusplanet.net, Vince Goetsch <3wishes@wishgranted.com>, "Dennis C. Lee" , bill@basselectronics.com, biotron pacbell.net, grstewar@tva.gov, "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , Terri Schoolden , johnhoffman@webtv.net, lizardhaven zippnet.net, lkvp@mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , richarda@icx.net, rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, Robin van Spaandonk , trknute earthlink.net, werosser@hotmail.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Alternative horticulture... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"aaIHC.0.3J5.kc-ds" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25613 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I greatly appreciate your input. I know I'm caling for experimentation, but if I can find one proven, hopeful result, perhaps others will jump on teh experimental bandwagon & the particpants can delegate experimental phases among themselves over the internet--it's certainly happening WRT energy devices. Offhand, and without all the relevant data as yet, I might envision something like: Modulating the *Sonic Bloom* audio signal over low-amp *current* running through (highly electrolytic) *hydroponic* solution--which, as evidenced by a very successful operation in FL, might consist of straight seawater diluted 5:1 (or equivalent sea salt). As long as there's good soil & plenty of sun, why not use them? Of course...but aside from preparing against their unavailability (and there are many more people to feed than have access to these simple things), what if there were actually something altogether BETTER? What if plants have been waiting for millions of years, making do amid weather & sunlight--for man to come along and finally unlock their *true*, hidden potential? No one is qualified to say it's not so. Everything is "impossible"--until someone does it. All I seen thus far are published indications that radically alternative horticulture has been done--certainly, that it *might* be done--and well- meaning but failed attempts to dampen the idea. Re: greenhouses: My understanding is that plastic is an aggressive UV blocker, but that glass only filters out the progressively higher frequencies (which are progressively more destructive, generally speaking). Assuming that German greenhouses are plastic or fiberglass (like ours), and that plants need mostly *longwave* UV (like people do) Germany's prohibition against greenhouse cultivation of staples wouldn't discredit glass as a benign covering. Perhaps techniques like French intensive gardening, which crowd maximum yield into minimal space, could reduce glass area enough to allow it to be sufficiently study & affordable. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 19:12:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA21761; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:09:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:09:32 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <26023e1d.36a002c8 aol.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:08:56 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 with K Glow discharge Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 226 Resent-Message-ID: <"JhspA3.0.sJ5.hB0es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25614 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 01/14/1999 23:01:04 Pacific Standard Time, fjsparb sprintmail.com writes: > BE CAREFUL HEAR! Yeah, always. If you remember I told the story about getting nailed before I even built this supply, when it was still a microwave supply with a .5 mfd (1/2 microfarad) capacitor. It had been powered off for about 3 hours when reaching for a tool I brushed against it. Current path was forearm to thumb. When my arm was thrown upwards, hit the shelf loaded with garage goodies (oil cans and like stuff) and tore the shelf from it's mounts with gravity completing it's work by sending all the above down on my head. Now the supply has 25 mfd capacitors. Lethal stuff and I stay far away from the hot stuff. I also built in double crowbar relay protection using heavy duty power contactors that short the supply when input power is off. I also use a manual crowbar that is in when power is off. This last has cost me a dozen or so fuses that pop when I forget to remove the bar. Fuses are cheap and would rather blow them than wipe myself out. > > >As suggested here I will bridge the meters > >with zener diodes. The voltage spikes destroyed two meters already. > > With the voltages/frequencies you're pushing, you could use NE-2s or Spark > Plugs as meter protectors, Vince. :-) Frederick, you are wonderful!! The voltage "seen" by the meters is in the range of 2 to 10 volts (voltage dividers) The spikes are the meter killers. A NE-2 will probably do the trick. They flash over at about 60 volts if I recall and that will be just fine. A couple of those in parallel just to be sure. > > Keep up the GOOD WORK! Thanks for the encouragement, I really appreciate your and everyones help > > Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 20:43:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA15824; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:42:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:42:16 -0800 Message-ID: <19990116044417.4933.rocketmail send103.yahoomail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:44:17 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"-4fhU2.0.At3.eY1es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25615 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Craig Haynie wrote: > > Didn't Dr. George Miley construct the beads from scratch, with his verification tests? Yes, Miley did make his own beads. He also made an agreement with CETI, through which he had some of their beads, too. Miley never claimed large excess heat. In fact, as time goes by, he seems to have backed away from his early claims of some excess heat, and he has concentrated on the nuclear reactions instead. Miley made his beads by a different technique than Patterson described in his patent. Miley coated his beads in a plasma sputtering coater. He knows plasma physics, and he has both equipment and expertise to apply this technique. Plasma sputtering is growing in popularity for coating all kinds of things. Plasma sputtering is one of the techniques used to deposit thin films in the electronics industry. Plasma sputter units can be bought in many sizes and configurations. Patterson's methods (at least the ones described in his patent) were chemicals. One of the steps in the proceedure to lay down the Cu first layer used a rather dangerous reagent - sulfonic acid, if I remember correctly. It's interesting that Jed said that Patterson's base beads, copper coated polystyrene spheres, came from a commercial source and were not made by Patterson himself. When my colleagues and I were trying to reproduce Patterson's excess heat from the information in his patents, we had two skilled chemists try to put that first Cu layer on polystyrene spheres, but they could not get the Cu to stick well enough to last through even a brief experiment. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 21:26:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA28117; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 21:24:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 21:24:12 -0800 Message-ID: <19990116052610.22978.rocketmail send103.yahoomail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 21:26:10 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: H2 with K Glow discharge To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"kVPLv3.0.Ft6.y92es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25616 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince Cockeram wrote: [snip] > I am scouting for a high voltage (15-20 kV), high freq (10-20 kHz) , low > current (10-50 mAmp) power supply. Anyone have any ideas about this? You might check power supplies for "neon" advertizing signs. The old ones were transformers (about 20 kV) with built-in inductive (choke) ballast (limiting current to a few tens of mA). Of course, these are 60 Hz, not 10-20 kHz. But if you put a variable transformer on the primary, an old neon sign transformer makes a cheap high voltage AC source. Modern "neon" sign power supplies are differend. I think they have some kind of a high frequency generator inside, and the ballast is probably capacitive (nothing wrong with that). You could ask at a local advertizing lighting store. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 22:41:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA24281; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:38:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:38:55 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: <8fed535e.36a032ea aol.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 01:34:18 EST To: dwenbert spacey.net Cc: PetMagic aol.com, donadams@telusplanet.net, Vince Goetsch <3wishes wishgranted.com>, "Dennis C. Lee" , bill@basselectronics.com, biotron pacbell.net, grstewar@tva.gov, "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , Terri Schoolden , johnhoffman@webtv.net, lizardhaven zippnet.net, lkvp@mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , richarda@icx.net, rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, Robin van Spaandonk , trknute earthlink.net, werosser@hotmail.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Alternative horticulture... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"LZec-.0.Ix5.-F3es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25617 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-15 21:14:58 EST, you write: > >What Florida demonstration were you referring to? Not just a demonstration--a productive operation, I understand. Check out Winston Kao's (PRONOUNCED "GOW") Natural Plus Plus Co. (not a typo); 727.447.2344; fx -3276; powerfd gte.net >Is there a Web URL you could direct me to on this? www.finallynourished.com >I am building a greenhouse in Central Florida right now and will be trying >some aggressive hydroponic techniques. Mr. Kao doesn't use hydroponics; he has clearly surpassed conventional hydroponics by means of his extraordinary techniques for composting and treating soil & water. I've just cited hydroponics in superior relation to conventional gardening make the point that there's always room to progress, when you challenge the assumptions taken for granted the most (the "everybody knows..." fallacy). Progress conforms to a pattern of 1) *annexing* new discoveries, and 2) synoptically *reducing* the totality of what has been discovered to its simplest unit. Hydroponics is reductionary. Mr. Kao has harnessed microbial processes as yet unfathomed, much less chemically reproduced. Yet for all the inscrutable micro-parameters inherent in this organic growth medium, a simpler form would still be possible. I feel that one key to unlocking a new horticultural paradigm lies in energetic input of some form or combination thereof; that under the right conditions, light were interchangeable with other energies; that energetic signatures constitute the ultimate significance of nutrients; and when these operators are isolated, the super-efficient result will obviate the usual light requirements. What did you think of my hydroponic + Beck + Sonic Bloom suggestion? or more importantly, the synoptic principle behind the hypothesis? I've spoken to Mr. Kao about radiating minerals' infra-red *emissions* at plants, in addition to (or instead of) providing them materially; and in spite of all his success to date, he expressed interest in the prospect. Besides these experimental shemes, I've got a few hydropics ideas aimed at reducing maintence & power input--but please share what you mean by "aggressive" techniques. Regards, Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 15 23:07:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA31136; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 23:04:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 23:04:49 -0800 Message-ID: <003501be411e$4913a0c0$40441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: H2 with K Glow discharge Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 00:02:26 -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: <"qMGMp1.0.Lc7.He3es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25618 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Another way to get around trashing meters, Vince. In the late 50s I used NE-2s in series with the high voltage side of insulation resistance and breakdown testing. The NE-2s were in a dark tube with a Cadmium Sulfide Photoconductor looking at them. In this manner you could detect nanoamperes to milliamperes with total isolation of the delicate measuring meters. I looked at packaging these and using the possible combinations for applications as logic devices etc. :-) With today's off-the-shelf optoelectronic devices you can do this whether you use NE-2s, incandescent light bulbs, or solid state lasers, all available at friendly neighborhood electronics supply. With calibration at low voltage, it saves unwrapping the needles from the peg. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 08:16:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05117; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 08:13:32 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 08:13:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:04:29 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: PetMagic aol.com, donadams@telusplanet.net, Vince Goetsch <3wishes wishgranted.com>, "Dennis C. Lee" , bill@basselectronics.com, biotron pacbell.net, grstewar@tva.gov, "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , Terri Schoolden , johnhoffman@webtv.net, lizardhaven zippnet.net, lkvp@mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , John Schnurer , richarda@icx.net, rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, Robin van Spaandonk , trknute earthlink.net, werosser@hotmail.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Alternative horticulture... In-Reply-To: <6f15c3f1.369fe80a aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"swao91.0.tF1.egBes" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25619 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Folks, My associates and myself have developed several plant related methodologis, including but not limited to; polymers which can pass SW UV ... others that block it...and others to form band pass and pand reject filters ... anti fungals, anti pest and so on... growth modification J Schnurer From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 08:18:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15252; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 08:18:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 08:18:01 -0800 Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:09:35 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: Notes....Re: 'Thought Translation Device' Allows Thinking On Screen BBC News (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"EIPwU1.0.Dk3.ukBes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25620 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 10:51:59 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: "Don J. S. Adams" Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com Subject: Notes....Re: 'Thought Translation Device' Allows Thinking On Screen BBC News Dear Folks, Since 1987 there ahve been at least 5 labs able to do this. The one I worked with for over 9 years... ending 1995... was able to yield nice smooth analog signals... in more than one 'domain' or axis. Since then provate research has yielded severals 'alternative' methods of extracting control signals from humans. J On Fri, 15 Jan 1999, Don J. S. Adams wrote: > 'Thought Translation Device' > Allows Thinking On Screen > BBC News > 1-13-99 > > > Paralysed people have been taught to type using their > brainwaves, > thanks to a device which measures the electrical waves > through the > skull. > > Last year two patients were able to write messages on a > computer > via electrodes implanted in their brains but the new > method does not > require risky surgery, simply placing electrodes on the > top of the > head. > > "We have got patients writing messages who couldn't > communicate > at all," said Edward Taub of the University of Alabama > at > Birmingham in New Scientist magazine. > > Motor cortex signals > > The scientists, led by Niels Birbaumer of the > University of Tubingen, > Germany, has to train the three patients to harness > their brain power. > The two electrodes, the size of contact lenses, picked > up signals from > near the motor cortex. > > > The patients had to learn to make their cortical > potentials more > negative or positive to move a cursor up and down a > computer > screen. At each successive session the researchers made > the task > more difficult, requiring the patients to generate > bigger and bigger > changes in their cortical potentials. > > Alphabet choice > > When the patients could control the cursor well, they > began to write. > They selected each letter by whittling down the > alphabet. First they > choose one half of the alphabet, then half of that half > and so on. > > It took the patients an average of 80 seconds to pick a > letter, > meaning a short sentence could be written in about 30 > minutes. > > Dr Taub recognises that a system based solely on > either-or choices > will always be limited. But he believes it will be > possible to train > patients to make choices between more than two options > if they can > create several levels of positive or negative cortical > potential. > > In the meantime, the "thought translation device" could > be speeded > up by using the context of the sentence to make > accurate guesses of > the word after the first letters are typed. > > The patients were suffering from amyotrophic lateral > sclerosis, a > neurodegenerative disease which often leads to total > paralysis > -- > We must accept the truth, > even if it changes our > point of view. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Don J. S. Adams > Managing Consultant > Microsoft > Main Campus, Bldg 1 > Redmond, WA > USA > > 425-882-3431 USA > 403-998-4066 Canada > > http://www.intergate.bc.ca/business/rave > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 08:19:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15653; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 08:18:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 08:18:18 -0800 Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:09:53 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: NOT Thought translation ....papers. Annot. (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"cabJV2.0.Vq3.9lBes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25621 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: NOT Thought translation ....papers. Annot. (fwd) I personally designed and built this system still in use by USAF.. JHS ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 11:14:19 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: John Schnurer Subject: papers. Annot. Junker, A.M., Downey, C.W., Schnurer, J.H., and Ingle, D.F. Loop-closure of the visual-cortical Response, Proceedings of the 1988 NAECON , 1523-1529, 1988.  Junker, A.M., Ingle, D.F., Schnurer, J.H., and Downey, C.W. Resource measurement using a closed-loop EEG control system. Proceedings of the 1988 NAECON , 1519-1522, 1988. Junker, A.M., Schnurer, J.H., Ingle, D.F., and Downey, C.W. Brain actuated control of a roll axis tracking simulator. Proceedings of the 1989 NAECON, 714-717, 1989. Junker, A.M., Schnurer, J.H., Ingle, D.F., and Downey, C.W. Loop-Closure of the Visual-Cortical Response. Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Human Systems Division, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, AAMRL- TR-88-014, 1988. Junker, A.M., Schnurer, J.H., Ingle, D.F., and Downey, C.W. Steady state evoked potentials possibilities for mental state estimation. Proceedings of the 1987 NASA Mental State Estimation Conference , 1 , 131-154, 1987. Junker, A.M., Tumey, D.M., Schnurer, J.H., Ingle, D.F., and Downey, C.W. Brain actuated control of a motion base simulator. Proceedings of the 1989 NAECON, 750-751, 1989. Schnurer, J.H., Ingle, D.F., Downey, C.W., and Junker, A.M. A real time frequency analysis methodology for evoked potential loop-closure. Proceedings of the NAECON , 1530-1535, 1988. Nasman, V.T., Ingle, D. and Schnurer, J. (1994). Differential hemispheric activation as a possible mechanism for SSVER self-regulation. Psychophysiology, 31, S71. (abstract) Calhoun, G.L., McMillan, G.R., Morton, P.E., Middendorf, M.S., Schnurer, J.H., Ingle, D.F., Glaser, R.M., & Figoni, S.F. (1995). Control of functional electrical stimulation with a direct brain interface. Proceedings of the RESNA 18th Annual Conference, 696-698. McMillan, G.R., Calhoun, G.L., Middendorf, M.S., Schnurer, J.H., Ingle, D.F. & Nasman, V.T. (1995). Direct brain interface utilizing self-regulation of the steady state visual evoked response. Proceedings of the RESNA 18th Annual Conference, 693-698. POPULAR PRESS: *Mind over Matter.* Discover, p. 16, August 1990. Whitaker, Robert, *Mind Games: Devices give new dimension to power of the brain.* Times Union, Albany New York, , pp. A-1, A-8, August 8, 1993. Whitaker, Robert, *Mind Control: A thought can move computers to action.* The Boston Globe, pp. 25-26, August 16, 1993. *Just give it some thought.* Skywrighter: for the Wright-Patterson Community, pg. 5, October 22, 1993. Williams, Lisa, *Brain Over Matter: New Virtual reality technolgoy enables people to operate machine simplay by thinking about it.* Skywrighter: for the Wright-Patterson Community, Vol. 34, No. 43, pps 1, 6, October 29, 1993. Oliveri, Frank, *Flying with Brain Waves*, a side bar in *Virtual Warriers*, Air Force Magazine, pg. 33, January 1994. Daviss, Bennett, *Brain Powered*. Discover, pp 58-65, May 1994. Hitchens, Theresa, *For the USAF, It*s the Thought That Counts: Service Experiments With Human Brain Waves to Control Fighter Cockpits*. Defense News, pg. 12, August 15-21, 1994. (Correction printed Defense News, pg. 4, August 29-September 4, 1994.) *Nervenimpulse steuern Computer: Forscher zapfen das Gehirn an auf der Suche nach neuen Kommunikationskanalen*. Focus, Nr. 28, pp. 104-112, Juli 1994. [German] Scott, William, *Neurotechnologies Linked to Performance Gains.* Aviation Week and Space Technolgoy, pp 55-56, August 15, 1994. Daviss, Bennett, *Thinking It Through*, Air and Space, Vol. 9, No. 3, p. 10, August/September, 1994, *Pilot steuert Maschine mit seinem Geist*, P.M.: Peter Moosleitners interessantes Magazin, Nr. 10, p. 26, 23 Septeber 1994. [German] Shine, Jerry, *Mind Games: Thanks to brain-actuated control, the phrase *Look Ma, no hands* may take on a whole new meaning.* Sky magazine, Delta Air Lines, Volume 23, No. 10, pp. 120-127, October 1994. Shine, Jerry, *Control by Thought: Think and it*s done! Electrodes can now monitor brain waves and convert them into electronic signals that turn off the light or move a computer*s cursor.* The World and I, The Washington Times Corporation, Vol. 9, No. 10, pp. 194-201, October 1994. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 09:41:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA02260; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 09:40:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 09:40:07 -0800 Message-ID: <004101be4177$08da7200$40441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Think about it,and it shall be. Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 10:38:07 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0049_01BE413C.4E690060" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"5n0db1.0.AZ.sxCes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25622 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_0049_01BE413C.4E690060 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.spie.org/web/abstracts/2500/2591.html ------=_NextPart_000_0049_01BE413C.4E690060 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="2591.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="2591.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.spie.org/web/abstracts/2500/2591.html Modified=807F12C67641BE014D ------=_NextPart_000_0049_01BE413C.4E690060-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 10:35:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA24882; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 10:33:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 10:33:37 -0800 Message-ID: <004a01be417e$7f4a19c0$40441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: (301) 869-9293 (http://www.patton.com/pages/faqs/fx102894.html) Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:31:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0066_01BE4143.C3FE74C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"N5j0q2.0.h46.1kDes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25623 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_0066_01BE4143.C3FE74C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable About Optical Isolation What is It? When Do You Need It? You have probably noticed that optical isolation is a popular feature on = datacom products. But what is optical isolation? And why is this feature = in demand? This article will present a brief overview of optical = isolation and identify some "flags" to alert you that the solution = you're recommending ought to incorporate it. Some Background In 1887, Gustav Hertz discovered that particular surfaces liberated = electrons when influenced by light. Subsequent work by Max Planck and = Albert Einstein in the early 1900s established that bundles of light = energy, called "photons", could transfer their energy to free electrons = and liberate them from metal surfaces in a mathematically predictable = way. The application of this "photoelectric phenomenon" to the field of = semiconductors is the basis for optical isolation. The Basic Theory Optical isolation has two basic elements: a light source (usually a = light emitting diode) and a photo-sensitive detector. These two elements = are positioned facing one another and inserted in an electrical circuit = to form an optocoupler. The key property of an optocoupler is that there = is an insulating gap between the light source and the detector. No = current passes through this gap, only the desired light waves = representing data. Thus the two sides of the circuit are effectively = "isolated" from one another. Primary Application In data communications, the primary application for optical isolation is = in a point-to-point data circuit that covers a distance of several = hundred feet or more. Because the connected devices are presumably on = different power circuits, a ground potential difference likely exists = between them. When such a condition exists, the voltage of "ground" can = be different, sometimes by several hundred volts.=20 Where a ground potential difference exists, a phenomenon called ground = looping can occur. In this phenomenon, current will flow along the data = line in an effort to equalize the ground potential between the connected = devices. Ground looping can, at the very least, severely garble = communications--if not damage hardware! Optical isolation solves the problem of ground looping by effectively = lifting the connection between the data line and "ground" at either end = of the line. If an optically coupled connection exists at each end, the = data traffic "floats" above the volatility of ground potential = differences. Optical Isolation vs. Transformer Isolation A common belief is that optical isolation is superior to transformer = isolation in every case. Theoretically this is true, because optical = isolation provides a "true" physical barrier, whereas transformer = isolation is a coupling designed to merely "absorb" unwanted = frequencies. However, in practice optical isolation is a less efficient = transmitter of energy than transformer isolation--an important = consideration when signal strength is an issue. Therefore transformer = isolation is sometimes the best choice for very long- distance = applications. And optical isolation also becomes a prohibitively = expensive solution at higher data rates. So in the real world, = transformer isolation still has its place. Optical Isolation vs. Surge Protection Another common belief is that optical isolation takes the place of surge = protection. After all, if optical isolation provides a barrier against = ground loops, won't it provide a barrier against transients as well? = This belief fails to account for the fundamental difference between = ground loops and transients.=20 Ground loops tend to be of long duration and relatively low voltage. = Transients, on the other hand, tend to be of short duration and very = high voltage. Consequently, the amount of current instantly presented by = a transient must be directed safely to ground. An optocoupler will be = destroyed by a high voltage transient exceeding its rating. True, the = transient will not get past the barrier, and components on the other = side of the optocoupler will be spared. But components on the side = receiving the "hit" (usually the analog line side) can be damaged. In = any case, the unit will no longer pass data. What's needed, therefore, is surge protection (such as the Silicon = Avalanche Diodes used by Patton) placed ahead of the optocoupler-- right = where the line enters from the outside world. Surge protectors respond = instantly and shunt relatively large amounts of current quickly to = chassis ground. This dangerous current is not permitted to roam around = and damage components (including the optocoupler). Then the optocoupler = can do its job of providing a constant barrier to low voltage ground = loops.=20 Conclusion Ideally this article has "illuminated" the subject of optical isolation = enough to give you added confidence when recommending Patton short range = modems or interface converters. And hopefully it has proven to be a = worthy companion to this week's release of the Patton Model 590 RS-232 = opto-isolator. Maybe you know several customers who could use a Model = 590. Patton Announces RS-232 Opto-Isolator If you've read the above article, you know the benefits of optical = isolation in guarding data circuits against ground looping. Now the = Patton Model 590 RS-232 opto-isolator lets you add ground loop = protection to the majority of asynchronous applications you're likely to = encounter. Supporting data rates to 19.2 Kbps, the Model 590 provides 500V RMS of = DTE/DCE isolation to any full or half-duplex RS-232 circuit. The Model = 590 is powered by 12V DC, which may be supplied on RS- 232 (DB-25) pin 9 = or via wall-mount transformer. Suitable for point-to-point or multipoint = connections, the unit passes data plus one control signal in each = direction.=20 The Patton Model 590 has one male (DCE) and one female (DTE) DB- 25, and = is priced at $109.00 each. We have already starting shipping, but since = the product is new delivery is 4 weeks ARO. Tech Support Quiz Q. "I'm using your Model 222N RS-232 to RS-422 converter in an = industrial environment. My goal is to connect an RS-232 PC to RS422 = equipment, so that I can download temperature control information. I = know I've made all the terminations correctly (as shown below), but I = just get garbage. What's going on?"=20 Model 222N RS-422 Equipment =09 TX+ RX+ TX- RX- =09 RX+ TX+ RX- TX- A. This may sound odd, but some manufacturers of RS-422 equipment use = the opposite polarity notation on the TX and RX terminals: What we call = "positive", they call "negative" (and visa versa). This has to do with = the relative manner in which the RS-422 Standard defines polarity. Once = the connections are made, the resulting data is a stream of garbage that = more closely resembles hieroglyphics than the intended control = information. The solution is simply to change the polarity of the = transmit to receive connection. Make the connections this way:=20 Model 222N RS-422 Equipment =09 TX+ RX- TX- RX+ =09 RX+ TX- RX- TX+ ------=_NextPart_000_0066_01BE4143.C3FE74C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Patton Electronics Co. Phone: (301) = 975-1000 Fax: (301) 869-9293
 

About Optical Isolation

What is It? When Do You Need It?

You have probably noticed that = optical=20 isolation is a popular feature on datacom products. But what is optical=20 isolation? And why is this feature in demand? This article will present = a brief=20 overview of optical isolation and identify some "flags" to = alert you=20 that the solution you're recommending ought to incorporate it.

Some Background
In 1887, Gustav Hertz discovered that = particular=20 surfaces liberated electrons when influenced by light. Subsequent work = by Max=20 Planck and Albert Einstein in the early 1900s established that bundles = of light=20 energy, called "photons", could transfer their energy to free=20 electrons and liberate them from metal surfaces in a mathematically = predictable=20 way. The application of this "photoelectric phenomenon" to the = field=20 of semiconductors is the basis for optical isolation.

The Basic Theory
Optical isolation has two basic elements: = a light=20 source (usually a light emitting diode) and a photo-sensitive detector. = These=20 two elements are positioned facing one another and inserted in an = electrical=20 circuit to form an optocoupler. The key property of an optocoupler is = that there=20 is an insulating gap between the light source and the detector. No = current=20 passes through this gap, only the desired light waves representing data. = Thus=20 the two sides of the circuit are effectively "isolated" from = one=20 another.

Primary Application
In data communications, the primary = application=20 for optical isolation is in a point-to-point data circuit that covers a = distance=20 of several hundred feet or more. Because the connected devices are = presumably on=20 different power circuits, a ground potential difference likely exists = between=20 them. When such a condition exists, the voltage of "ground" = can be=20 different, sometimes by several hundred volts.=20

Where a ground potential difference exists, a phenomenon called = ground=20 looping can occur. In this phenomenon, current will flow along the data = line in=20 an effort to equalize the ground potential between the connected = devices. Ground=20 looping can, at the very least, severely garble communications--if not = damage=20 hardware!

Optical isolation solves the problem of ground looping by effectively = lifting=20 the connection between the data line and "ground" at either = end of the=20 line. If an optically coupled connection exists at each end, the data = traffic=20 "floats" above the volatility of ground potential differences.

Optical Isolation vs. Transformer Isolation
A common belief = is that=20 optical isolation is superior to transformer isolation in every case.=20 Theoretically this is true, because optical isolation provides a=20 "true" physical barrier, whereas transformer isolation is a = coupling=20 designed to merely "absorb" unwanted frequencies. However, in = practice=20 optical isolation is a less efficient transmitter of energy than = transformer=20 isolation--an important consideration when signal strength is an issue.=20 Therefore transformer isolation is sometimes the best choice for very = long-=20 distance applications. And optical isolation also becomes a = prohibitively=20 expensive solution at higher data rates. So in the real world, = transformer=20 isolation still has its place.

Optical Isolation vs. Surge Protection
Another common = belief is=20 that optical isolation takes the place of surge protection. After all, = if=20 optical isolation provides a barrier against ground loops, won't it = provide a=20 barrier against transients as well? This belief fails to account for the = fundamental difference between ground loops and transients.=20

Ground loops tend to be of long duration and relatively low voltage.=20 Transients, on the other hand, tend to be of short duration and very = high=20 voltage. Consequently, the amount of current instantly presented by a = transient=20 must be directed safely to ground. An optocoupler will be destroyed by a = high=20 voltage transient exceeding its rating. True, the transient will not get = past=20 the barrier, and components on the other side of the optocoupler will be = spared.=20 But components on the side receiving the "hit" (usually the = analog=20 line side) can be damaged. In any case, the unit will no longer pass = data.

What's needed, therefore, is surge protection (such as the Silicon = Avalanche=20 Diodes used by Patton) placed ahead of the optocoupler-- right where the = line=20 enters from the outside world. Surge protectors respond instantly and = shunt=20 relatively large amounts of current quickly to chassis ground. This = dangerous=20 current is not permitted to roam around and damage components (including = the=20 optocoupler). Then the optocoupler can do its job of providing a = constant=20 barrier to low voltage ground loops.=20

Conclusion
Ideally this article has "illuminated" = the=20 subject of optical isolation enough to give you added confidence when=20 recommending Patton short range modems or interface converters. And = hopefully it=20 has proven to be a worthy companion to this week's release of the Patton = Model=20 590 RS-232 opto-isolator. Maybe you know several customers who could use = a Model=20 590.

Patton Announces RS-232 Opto-Isolator
If you've read the = above=20 article, you know the benefits of optical isolation in guarding data = circuits=20 against ground looping. Now the Patton Model 590 RS-232 opto-isolator = lets you=20 add ground loop protection to the majority of asynchronous applications = you're=20 likely to encounter.

Supporting data rates to 19.2 Kbps, the Model 590 provides 500V RMS = of=20 DTE/DCE isolation to any full or half-duplex RS-232 circuit. The Model = 590 is=20 powered by 12V DC, which may be supplied on RS- 232 (DB-25) pin 9 or via = wall-mount transformer. Suitable for point-to-point or multipoint = connections,=20 the unit passes data plus one control signal in each direction.=20

The Patton Model 590 has one male (DCE) and one female (DTE) DB- 25, = and is=20 priced at $109.00 each. We have already starting shipping, but since the = product=20 is new delivery is 4 weeks ARO.

Tech Support Quiz

Q. "I'm using your Model 222N RS-232 to = RS-422=20 converter in an industrial environment. My goal is to connect an RS-232 = PC to=20 RS422 equipment, so that I can download temperature control information. = I know=20 I've made all the terminations correctly (as shown below), but I just = get=20 garbage. What's going on?"=20 

	Model 222N 	RS-422 Equipment
=09
	TX+	 	RX+
	TX- 		RX-
=09
	RX+	 	TX+
	RX- 		TX-

A. This may sound odd, but some manufacturers of RS-422 equipment use = the=20 opposite polarity notation on the TX and RX terminals: What we call=20 "positive", they call "negative" (and visa versa). = This has=20 to do with the relative manner in which the RS-422 Standard defines = polarity.=20 Once the connections are made, the resulting data is a stream of garbage = that=20 more closely resembles hieroglyphics than the intended control = information. The=20 solution is simply to change the polarity of the transmit to receive = connection.=20 Make the connections this way:=20 

	Model 222N 	RS-422 Equipment
=09
	TX+	 	RX-
	TX- 		RX+
=09
	RX+ 		TX-
	RX- 		TX+
------=_NextPart_000_0066_01BE4143.C3FE74C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 13:41:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA22198; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:38:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:38:02 -0800 Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:29:37 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: Barker...Interesting clean-up? (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nyYzR3.0.gQ5.uQGes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25624 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Barker...Interesting clean-up? (fwd) Dear Folks, Wm A. Barker's methods.... not requiring a reactor, work fine. J ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:15:08 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: John Schnurer Subject: Interesting clean-up? (fwd) LONDON - European and American physicists are in a race to come up with a viable solution to destroy hazardous radioactive waste with a neutron treatment called transmutation, the New Scientist reported on Wednesday. The magazine said transmutation might destroy the existing inventory of deadly plutonium, minimise the threat of nuclear terrorism and might even help to generate electricity. "Add a neutron or two to some of the most dangerous radioactive elements and you destroy then," the weekly said. "Plutonium, for example, is split asunder, while the most intractable fission products are rendered harmless." Physicists believe that transmutation can shorten to 15.8 seconds from 200,000 years the time it takes for one of the most noxious constituents of radioactive waste, technetium-99, to decay to half its initial radioactive level. Technetium-99 is a fission product of uranium and reactors around the world spew out about six tonnes of it each year. Because it dissolves easily in water, it accumulates in the food chain. Concentrations of the product have risen 100-fold in some parts of the ocean since the 1960s because of nuclear policy. Despite some scepticism, the Spanish, French and Italian governments are about to receive a report outlining the details needed to build a prototype transmutation reactor, the magazine reported, while the U.S. Department of Energy is ploughing $4.0 million into its own research and development. With new research into a theory that had been rejected as technologically and economically unfeasible, European physicists are also now trying to produce cheap power on top of destroying plutonium and reducing hazardous waste. Their proposed machine has been dubbed the "Energy Amplifier" by its designer, the Nobel prize winning physicist Carlo Rubbia. But so far, all research is at an early stage. Despite being bullish, experts only have a simulation and a series of experiments on isolated aspects of a system. And observers remain cautious. Richard Bush, the fuel processing manager at Britain's AEA Technology science and engineering business, said too many untested claims were being made. Others say technically the process is on the "edge of the possible" but still question whether it makes economic sense. (C) Reuters Limited 1999. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 13:57:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30279; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:56:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:56:13 -0800 Message-ID: <005601be419a$cfe03920$40441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Gasification Technology for Clean, Biomass Electricity Generation (http://www.e Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 14:52:46 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_007F_01BE415F.E1581FA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"RFkZ81.0.1P7.zhGes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25625 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_007F_01BE415F.E1581FA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/library/gasification.html ------=_NextPart_000_007F_01BE415F.E1581FA0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Gasification Technology for Clean, Biomass Electricity Generation.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Gasification Technology for Clean, Biomass Electricity Generation.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/library/gasification.html Modified=A068DE729A41BE01F2 ------=_NextPart_000_007F_01BE415F.E1581FA0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 14:59:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA18444; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 14:57:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 14:57:49 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Wimps or bare nuclei? Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 22:57:44 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36a215b8.43825607 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: <"qsBc4.0.2W4.ibHes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25626 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The solar wind makes it all the way to the earth (and further) without electrons recombining with the nuclei to form neutral atoms. Suppose that in the depths of space they manage to remain separate during long periods of time. Perhaps caught up in the galactic magnetic field. Bare nuclei don't interact with light to nearly the extent that neutral atoms do, and hence are nearly invisible (dark matter). They would interact however to some extent, in as much as they would occasionally "surf" on electromagnetic radiation, and become accelerated in the process. This would have two consequences. First such particles would gain more energy, the further they travelled (ultra high energy cosmic rays), and secondly the electromagnetic radiation present in the universe would lose energy to such particles, the further it had to travel (red shift). This process is epitomised in current "bench top" particle accelerators, where particles in a plasma are accelerated to high energies using lasers. In summary, perhaps the missing dark matter of the universe comprises an extremely thin cold plasma. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 16:18:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA07573; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:16:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:16:39 -0800 Message-ID: <059001be41ae$e0885aa0$8e8080d8 btech> From: "Bill Wallace`" To: Subject: Re: FICAR Antigravity Conference, June, 1999, Reno, Nv Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 19:18:11 -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 4.72.3110.1 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"XSmQO2.0.Fs1.clIes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25627 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: With connectivity at the level it is today, do you feel perhaps they can videotape this - or perhaps do a live real video feed over the internet? -----Original Message----- From: james cox To: vortex-L eskimo.com Date: Friday, January 15, 1999 6:42 PM Subject: FICAR Antigravity Conference, June, 1999, Reno, Nv > >PRELIMINARY ANNOUNCEMENT --FICAR > >The First International Congress on Antigravity >Research (FICAR)is tentatively scheduled for the end >of June in Reno, Nevada. Topics covered: Theories of >Antigravity, Inertial Propulsion Engines, History of >Electrogravitaion, Force Field Propulsion (classic), >Exotic Forcefield Effect Propulsion,Anomalous >Biologica l Weight Loss, Free energy relation to AG, >Cold Fusion for Exotic Propulsion, Government >policies concerning AG, Commercializtion of AG for >Automotive Transport, The X-Prize Contest Update, and >Back-engineering of Alledged Extraterrestrial >Spacecraft.Featured speaker will be Bob Dean, son of >Norman L. Dean. Five Hundred word abstract due March >31 to AGN, P.O.Box 71151, Reno, Nv 89570-1151. See >the Antigravity News website for details: >. > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 16:45:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA16190; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:44:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:44:20 -0800 Message-ID: <059201be41b2$c10ea860$8e8080d8 btech> From: "Bill Wallace`" To: Subject: Re: Alternative horticulture... Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 19:45:55 -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 4.72.3110.1 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"HiJS4.0.oy3.Z9Jes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25628 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Has anyone heard about this new Jacobsen Resonance Technology? It is supposed to make foods grow faster as well as the medical claims they make. I believe the frequencies to be close to schumann resonant frequencies. We will be doing some tests here in south georgia (agriculture central) soon. > > Dear Folks, > > My associates and myself have developed several plant related >methodologis, including but not limited to; > > polymers which can pass SW UV ... others that block it...and >others to form band pass and pand reject filters ... anti fungals, anti >pest and so on... growth modification > > > J Schnurer > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 20:35:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA18847; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:34:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:34:05 -0800 To: freenrg-L eskimo.com Cc: vortex-L eskimo.com Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:28:31 -0800 Subject: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem Message-ID: <19990116.202840.10046.0.tv juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1-2,5-6,8-9,13-14,22-23,25-31 From: tv juno.com (Tim Vaughan) Resent-Message-ID: <"s0NWO.0.Kc4.yWMes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25629 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Please, I need some help with what should be an easy physics problem. I seem to be confusing myself. An isolated hollow metal sphere has a certain capacitance. Would the capacitance of the sphere be effected if the hollow sphere were filled with a dielectric ? I know that a dielectric placed near or around the sphere will increase its capacitance. When I first thought about this, it seemed that Gauss's law would apply here. The electric field in the sphere would be zero, so my first reaction would be to say that the internal dielectric would not be effected by any charge applied to the sphere. However, what confuses me is this: Say the sphere and internal dielectric are initially neutral (same number of electrons and protons), but then a strong external potential pulls electrons from the metal sphere making it positive. Since the electrons remaining are all mutually repulsive, it would seem they would redistribute themselves slightly, including the electrons in the dielectric. So this would seem to mean that the capacitance of the sphere would be greater if it were filled with a dielectric (or maybe even a conductor)/ Or would it just be the electrons in the conductor that would redistribute ? Thanks in advance, Tim ( tv juno.com ) ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 16 23:06:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA09201; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 23:05:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 23:05:07 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 02:04:09 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 with K Glow discharge Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 4 Resent-Message-ID: <"7nuhk2.0.hF2.ZkOes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25630 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vortexians, I am going to be out of touch for a couple of weeks due to a family emergency in Florida and so will not be able to read/post to the group. I plan on firing up the experiment as soon as I get back. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 00:50:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA25593; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:49:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:49:11 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:49:06 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem In-Reply-To: <19990116.202840.10046.0.tv juno.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"L8ciR2.0.mF6.6GQes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25631 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 16 Jan 1999, Tim Vaughan wrote: > However, what confuses me is this: Say the sphere and internal > dielectric are initially neutral (same number of electrons and protons), > but then a strong external potential pulls electrons from the metal > sphere making it positive. Since the electrons remaining are all > mutually repulsive, it would seem they would redistribute themselves > slightly, including the electrons in the dielectric. So this would seem > to mean that the capacitance of the sphere would be greater if it were > filled with a dielectric (or maybe even a conductor)/ > > Or would it just be the electrons in the conductor that would > redistribute ? I think that only the electrons in the surface atoms of the conductor would redisribute. And they redistribute so as to eliminate any e-fields in the metal, therefor no e-fields can extend through the metal and into the dielectric. If you took ALL the electrons out of the metal, it would be an insulator, and finally the fields could get in. But it takes huge energy to remove major amounts of electrons. I remember a homework problem in Halliday and Resnik where you take all the conduction electrons out of a penny and place them upon another penny, then separate the pennies until the attraction force decreases to some thousands of tons. The distance is some godawful huge number of kilometers. Therefor, if you take all the electrons out of a penny, the remaining positive ions will self-repel, and your neighborhood will have a very large crater in it. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 00:57:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA28450; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:56:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:56:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:56:13 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: New torsion-fields article Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"mwUFF1.0.Dy6.kMQes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25632 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A new review article on Russian torsion field research is now on my tors page: Theoretical Basics of Experimental Phenomena Yu.V.Nachalov http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/tors/tors3.html Vacuum spin fields page http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/tors/ ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 02:15:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA08576; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 02:14:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 02:14:36 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19990117101337.0090ad38 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, 17 Jan 1999 05:13:37 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: BLP website is updated Resent-Message-ID: <"yXNqH2.0.w52.BWRes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25633 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Like Robin, I have not been able to access the Black Light Power Home Page today. A few days ago, it was there; today it is not. Could this non-accessibility be related to their move to their new facilities? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 06:29:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA13033; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 06:28:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 06:28:43 -0800 Message-ID: <000701be4225$75fb9e00$ba441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Battle Hymn of The Republic-ans? Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 07:26:15 -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: <"l-7fW3.0.VB3.QEVes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25634 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire! Who's? Is? Were? Are? Will be? :-) FJS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 08:36:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12327; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 08:34:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 08:34:58 -0800 Message-ID: <001201be4237$18d688e0$ba441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 09:32:38 -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: <"66DRF2.0.U03.n4Xes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25635 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin wrote: Snip good stuff. An interesting occurrence with neutrino capture by 17Cl37 which loses a negative charge (electron or negative quark and an antineutrino)from the nucleus and becomes 18Ar37, yet gains 0.813 Mev mass/energy. About 35 days later the electron is recaptured by the nucleus (probably with the formation of a neutrino-antineutrino pair) with uptake of the antineutrino and expulsion of the neutrino, thus reverting to 17Cl37, dropping in mass by 0.813 Mev. This indicates that the neutrinos/antineutrinos "floating" in space near c, with a rest mass of about 0.5 ev or less must have a relativistic mass/energy much greater than 0.813 Mev, which are either captured by the 17Cl37, Or are just "spun up" to a temporary higher mass-energy with electron and antineutrino expulsion by the collision. Mrel = Mo[(E'/Mo*c^2)+1]could mean that neutrinos can have enormous mass and are WIMPs,and, are acted on by electro-gravitation, and space must be full of them. Any thoughts on measuring the force of gravity on neutrinos,and determining if the Earth's Electro-G-Field is deflecting some of them and causing the "Missing Solar Neutrino Problem", Robin? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 12:37:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA21045; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 12:35:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 12:35:55 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19990116182312.010fce70 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 15:44:06 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: Re: Barker...Interesting clean-up? (fwd) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"jJJQr3.0.c85.fcaes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25636 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hmm.... Does the presense of a Phi field alter alpha decay rates? Patents that refer back to Barker concern concentrating or steering the alpha particles with electrostatic fields. I remember reading about Barkers work from a trade journal put out by Glassman High Voltage. We had one of their 250kv DC supplies; and it so happened that was the same make as Barker was using. It sorely tempted me at the time to try to replicate. However, no alpha emitters to be had... So I never tried it. And you? K. At 04:29 PM 1/16/99 -0500, you wrote: >Subject: Barker...Interesting clean-up? (fwd) > > > > Dear Folks, > > Wm A. Barker's methods.... not requiring a reactor, work fine. > > J > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 12:41:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA23553; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 12:40:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 12:40:01 -0800 Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 15:31:38 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 with K Glow discharge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Vqy1R3.0.wl5.Wgaes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25637 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vince, My prayers are with you and yours. Hope all will be well. JHS On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 VCockeram aol.com wrote: > Vortexians, > I am going to be out of touch for a couple of weeks due to a family emergency > in Florida and so will not be able to read/post to the group. > I plan on firing up the experiment as soon as I get back. > > Regards, > Vince Cockeram > Las Vegas Nevada > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 13:35:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10850; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 13:34:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 13:34:20 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:34:32 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36a25337.125116863 24.192.1.20> References: <001201be4237$18d688e0$ba441d26 default> In-Reply-To: <001201be4237$18d688e0$ba441d26 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: <"gOjB3.0.Of2.RTbes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25638 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 09:32:38 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >Robin wrote: > >Snip good stuff. Without comment I notice. ;(. > >An interesting occurrence with neutrino capture by 17Cl37 which loses a >negative charge (electron or negative quark and an antineutrino)from the >nucleus and becomes 18Ar37, yet gains 0.813 Mev mass/energy. It might be interesting to take a look at the putative neutrino creating reactions in the sun, and see just how much mass/energy the neutrinos could in theory be carrying. Also, does this experiment use liquid chlorine, on a chlorine compound? If the latter, then perhaps they are detecting a sporadic CF reaction, and not neutrino capture. [snip] >Mrel = Mo[(E'/Mo*c^2)+1]could mean that neutrinos can have enormous mass and >are WIMPs,and, are acted on by electro-gravitation, and space must be full >of them. I don't really know much about relativity, but I was under the impression that relativistic mass was non-gravitational. I.e. a body can't go so fast that it collapses under it's own gravitational attraction as a consequence of relativistic mass increase. > >Any thoughts on measuring the force of gravity on neutrinos,and determining >if the Earth's Electro-G-Field is deflecting some of them and causing the >"Missing Solar Neutrino Problem", Robin? :-) I thought the "Electro-G-Field" was just the gravitational equivalent of the electromagnetic E field, and was what we normally just call the force of gravity. In which case, why would it repel anything? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 14:01:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA29632; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 13:59:28 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 13:59:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 16:50:33 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: A little bit of Soapbox..Barker....Radioactivity (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"0J6vh1.0.uE7._qbes" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25639 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 16:49:14 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: John Schnurer Subject: A little bit of Soapbox..Barker....Radioactivity (fwd) Dear Folks, Please study and consider US PTO number. I just checked and this is the correct number and you can call it up at IBM Patent Server. 4,961,880 Wm. Barker. Brief History of Independent Replication Introduction: I had heard of this patent for several years before acting. A few years ago we called the patent attorney involved with this work and got in touch with Barker and his brother. With their blessing we ran a verification of their work. NOTE: a] Prior to replication I asked one of the patent attorneys who was involved if he though the method worked... and he said "No." I asked about a specific sample cited in the patent and asked also did he think the sample was damaged or tampered with and he said no, he did not think the sample was compromised.... So then I asked why he did no think the process was valid ... and he said "I just don't think it can work." b] I had discussion, via E mail, with one party who said they had tried a replication, not sucessful and I asked about he experimental set up details. Now please understand the method requires exposure to a low current, high voltage field.... the experimental set up I was asking about used a radioactive sample WRAPPED IN METAL. The point is here.... one has to read and follow the work. I made some changes in the methodology, based on what I though to be logical extensions in the thinking governing the work, based on reading the patent literature and discussions with the Barkers, and contributed a significant body of new work and art in the discipline. The results we got agreed with the patent data in that there was a remediation of radioactive emission. There was, in fact, an improvement in performance and simplicty. Another way to say this is we made the method simpler to execute.... and it worked just fine. NOTE: I am NOT a nuclear scientist nor am I good at mathmatics... find all the information you want regarding this in the patent. The general idea is the Coulomb barrier is altered and radioactive decay rates can be altered. All the nuclear math is in the patents. Some interesting points regarding the work which are interesting to me include but are not limited to; 1] The process requires no particle accelerators, vacuum equipment and so no. The work is conducted at STP, That is Standard Temperature and Pressure. 2] A high voltage low current electric field is used. One could literally conduct a successful experimental run powered by 4 "D" sized flash light alkaline dry batteries. This would be accomplished using a standard DC to DC high voltage conversion set up. 3] The field used for excitation is applied for 12 to 14 hours... we used a 14 hour exposure. After that no further energy input is required. The events drive themselves. This is one aspect which made the work so interesting to me. 4] Our radiactive material was a radioactve mineral sample, a periclase probably substituted in part with isotopes of strontium and-or radium. The 'guestimated' half life is thought to be AT LEAST 7,500 years. The control sounded like a pop corn maker in operation .... and still does. The test replication was completed in 1992 ... and 9 months after the 14 hour exposure the treated mineral sample is at background counts. 5] We used tape, cardboard and a defunct Van de Graff generator with a total costs outlay of about 25 dollars. This does NOT include the costs of the power supply, 'old-dead-horse' V de G generator, G-M counter. 6] I have been involved in some recent work in materials sciences of dielectrics and in manipulation of fields. This work, in part, applies dierctly to this process and offers even further improvements and simplification. Editorial comment: I post on this work about every 6 months... and of date no one has EVER offered to fund duplication of the work.... and rarely does there seem to be a whole lot of interest. The contributions to the art I and my associates have made allow this to be easily tested. How will it scale up? I have no solid idea. I have some thoughts in the issue and would be glad to work with any entity who might want to do this. I think it can be scaled up. Is this a "do-all-end-all-be-all"? .... No, but it is a heck of a good start. I am a "hardball, nuts and bolts, belt and suspenders", make-it-work-and-do-it-under-my-won-two-hands experimentalist. I had my skeptical feelings when I started out with a 'college-student-on-loan' and no backing or funding ... But I DID do the work.... and it DOES work. I can guide any serious entity through the process and pretty much assure success, Mr. Murphy willing.... One of the things I like about this is its simplicity and low power requirements.... one sets up the rig... and you 'give it the gas' and then that is it.... it goes along by itself. JHS PS Notes: PS: To replicate this work radioactive materials are used, and one should NEVER NEVER NEVER work with radioactive materials unless the control and skill levels are there. This is NOT a hobby type experiment. I cannot stress this enough. The additional skill level requires knowledge of high voltage safety. AGAIN: This is dangerous. One will also need skill and experience in measurement of high voltage and measurement of radioactivity. Should you be interested in this work please contact me. A kit can be obtained, not including radioactive material. J. H. Schnurer From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 14:52:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03510; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 14:50:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 14:50:49 -0800 Message-ID: <000301be426b$97287ee0$f0441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 15:48:22 -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: <"5ak3L.0.es.7bces" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25640 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, January 17, 1999 2:35 PM Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Robin wrote: >On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 09:32:38 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > >>Robin wrote: >> >>Snip good stuff. >Without comment I notice. ;(. Only because I didn't look up the 5 grams/cm^2 of "regular" matter in 4.0E6 light years that a cosmic ray comes through before it reaches our Solar System. Not to mention the 0.5E-9 Tesla magnetic field in our Galaxy that helps determine the radius swept by a charged particle that can get up to 1.0E20 ev energy near a Pulsar or such where their fields are in the TevaTesla range and they are rotating at several hundred revs/second. :-) >> >>An interesting occurrence with neutrino capture by 17Cl37 which loses a >>negative charge (electron or negative quark and an antineutrino)from the >>nucleus and becomes 18Ar37, yet gains 0.813 Mev mass/energy. > >It might be interesting to take a look at the putative neutrino >creating reactions in the sun, and see just how much mass/energy the >neutrinos could in theory be carrying. There should be 4 Protons ---> He4 + 2e+ + 2 neutrinos, according to the "Standard Model", Look up "Solar Neutrinos" on the web. >Also, does this experiment use liquid chlorine, on a chlorine >compound? Tons of Perchloroethylene, Dry Cleaning solvent. If the latter, then perhaps they are detecting a sporadic CF >reaction, and not neutrino capture. Far out, Robin. :-) >[snip] >>Mrel = Mo[(E'/Mo*c^2)+1]could mean that neutrinos can have enormous mass and >>are WIMPs,and, are acted on by electro-gravitation, and space must be full >>of them. > >I don't really know much about relativity, but I was under the >impression that relativistic mass was non-gravitational. By that reasoning leptons would experience the same gravitational force as quarks?? I.e. a body >can't go so fast that it collapses under it's own gravitational >attraction as a consequence of relativistic mass increase. I think the Supercollider buffs would disagree with that statement, even if they are 15 orders of magnitude below it at 1 TEV. > >> >>Any thoughts on measuring the force of gravity on neutrinos,and determining >>if the Earth's Electro-G-Field is deflecting some of them and causing the >>"Missing Solar Neutrino Problem", Robin? :-) > >I thought the "Electro-G-Field" was just the gravitational equivalent >of the electromagnetic E field, and was what we normally just call the >force of gravity. Depends on what field you mean. the time dilated field due to spin or m*c*R of each lepton or quark results in a very weak magnetic field, which is what I think is the gravity field. The magnetic force of attraction between two conductors with currents flowing in the same direction, exists because they are both in the SAME Reference FRAME. > >In which case, why would it repel anything? It doesn't have to repel to deflect a massive (relativistic) neutrino, it can do the "slingshot" effect same as a space probe shot at Venus. Regards, Frederick >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 16:22:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA00429; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 16:20:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 16:20:59 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19990117192905.01101e90 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 19:29:07 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: Re: A little bit of Soapbox..Barker....Radioactivity (fwd) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"eifOQ3.0.d6.gvdes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25641 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi. I first became aware of Barkers work from reading the trade journals; Glassman High Voltage had an article about him as he was using one of their power supplies. The experiment involved placing the material INSIDE a metal sphere charged to some potential. A picture is shown in the article of the setup; a geiger counter tube is positioned over the sphere pointing into it. The sphere was charged, and readings taken. The patent refers to radioactive materials being conductors and being housed in a metallic environment. However, in the Glassman article it was stated that ONLY dielectric samples would show a change in decay rate. Metallic would not. This was attributed to the fact that the coulomb barrier was being modified by the orientation of electric dipoles in the sample. Article date was summer of 91, after patents had been submitted. The thing that most struck me about these experiments was the fact that the material was in the sphere. Granted, it was close to the surface, but inside. With no electric field inside of a charged sphere, one again wonders what exactly was the intent. If the potential itself affects the decay rate; why all the noise about dielectric samples? So, what became of Barker? K. By the way, patent 5076971 is also Barkers. At 04:50 PM 1/17/99 -0500, you wrote: > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 16:49:14 -0500 (EST) >From: John Schnurer >To: John Schnurer >Subject: A little bit of Soapbox..Barker....Radioactivity (fwd) > > > > > Dear Folks, > > Please study and consider US PTO number. I just checked and this >is the correct number and you can call it up at IBM Patent Server. > > 4,961,880 Wm. Barker. > > > Brief History of Independent Replication > > Introduction: > > I had heard of this patent for several years before acting. > > A few years ago we called the patent attorney involved with this >work and got in touch with Barker and his brother. With their blessing we >ran a verification of their work. > > NOTE: > a] Prior to replication I asked one of the patent attorneys >who was involved if he though the method worked... and he said "No." I >asked about a specific sample cited in the patent and asked also did he >think the sample was damaged or tampered with and he said no, he did not >think the sample was compromised.... So then I asked why he did no think >the process was valid ... and he said "I just don't think it can work." > b] I had discussion, via E mail, with one party who said >they had tried a replication, not sucessful and I asked about he >experimental set up details. Now please understand the method requires >exposure to a low current, high voltage field.... the experimental set >up I was asking about used a radioactive sample WRAPPED IN METAL. > The point is here.... one has to read and follow the work. > > I made some changes in the methodology, based on what I though to >be logical extensions in the thinking governing the work, based on reading >the patent literature and discussions with the Barkers, and contributed a >significant body of new work and art in the discipline. The results we >got agreed with the patent data in that there was a remediation of >radioactive emission. There was, in fact, an improvement in performance >and simplicty. Another way to say this is we made the method simpler to >execute.... and it worked just fine. > > NOTE: I am NOT a nuclear scientist nor am I good at mathmatics... >find all the information you want regarding this in the patent. > > The general idea is the Coulomb barrier is altered and >radioactive decay rates can be altered. All the nuclear math is in the >patents. > > > Some interesting points regarding the work which are interesting >to me include but are not limited to; > > 1] The process requires no particle accelerators, vacuum >equipment and so no. The work is conducted at STP, That is Standard >Temperature and Pressure. > > 2] A high voltage low current electric field is used. One could >literally conduct a successful experimental run powered by 4 "D" sized >flash light alkaline dry batteries. This would be accomplished using a >standard DC to DC high voltage conversion set up. > > 3] The field used for excitation is applied for 12 to 14 hours... >we used a 14 hour exposure. After that no further energy input is >required. The events drive themselves. This is one aspect which made >the work so interesting to me. > > 4] Our radiactive material was a radioactve mineral sample, a >periclase probably substituted in part with isotopes of strontium and-or >radium. The 'guestimated' half life is thought to be AT LEAST 7,500 >years. The control sounded like a pop corn maker in operation .... and >still does. The test replication was completed in 1992 ... and 9 months >after the 14 hour exposure the treated mineral sample is at background >counts. > 5] We used tape, cardboard and a defunct Van de Graff generator >with a total costs outlay of about 25 dollars. This does NOT include the >costs of the power supply, 'old-dead-horse' V de G generator, G-M counter. > > 6] I have been involved in some recent work in materials sciences of >dielectrics and in manipulation of fields. This work, in part, applies >dierctly to this process and offers even further improvements and >simplification. > > Editorial comment: > > I post on this work about every 6 months... and of date no one >has EVER offered to fund duplication of the work.... and rarely does >there seem to be a whole lot of interest. > > The contributions to the art I and my associates have made allow >this to be easily tested. How will it scale up? I have no solid idea. I >have some thoughts in the issue and would be glad to work with any entity >who might want to do this. I think it can be scaled up. > > Is this a "do-all-end-all-be-all"? .... No, but it is a heck of a >good start. I am a "hardball, nuts and bolts, belt and suspenders", >make-it-work-and-do-it-under-my-won-two-hands experimentalist. I had my >skeptical feelings when I started out with a 'college-student-on-loan' >and no backing or funding ... But I DID do the work.... and it DOES work. > I can guide any serious entity through the process and pretty >much assure success, Mr. Murphy willing.... > > One of the things I like about this is its simplicity and low >power requirements.... one sets up the rig... and you 'give it the gas' >and then that is it.... it goes along by itself. > > JHS > > > > PS Notes: > PS: To replicate this work radioactive materials are used, and >one should NEVER NEVER NEVER work with radioactive materials unless the >control and skill levels are there. > > This is NOT a hobby type experiment. I cannot stress this enough. > > The additional skill level requires knowledge of high voltage >safety. > > AGAIN: This is dangerous. > > One will also need skill and experience in measurement of high >voltage and measurement of radioactivity. > > Should you be interested in this work please contact me. A kit >can be obtained, not including radioactive material. > > J. H. Schnurer > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 17:16:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA10378; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 17:15:24 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 17:15:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000b01be427f$0823db40$f0441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 18:07:18 -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: <"JanZF.0.3Y2.giees" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25642 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin also wrote: > >I don't really know much about relativity.. > My limits are not very far ranging either, but it stands to reason that there Must be interaction between the neutrinos and the quarks in the nucleus that can accelerate the neutrinos and antineutrinos to high energies. This is where I believe that the neutrino and the antineutrino have charges (+/-)that is y = sin x, and the quarks/leptons have charges that are y = cos x or vice versa. Thus if you plot the sine/cosine curves they are 90 and 270 degrees apart from the 0 and 180 of the quarks/leptons and thus act ALMOST NEUTRAL toward them,but they couple enough within a nucleus to be given energy/acceleration. Then Mrel = Mo[(E'/Mo*c^)+1] = Mo/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2 which means that when imparted with an acceleration energy equal to their rest energy they invariably have a relativistic mass equal to TWICE their Rest Mass and are traveling at 0.99c. So if the rest mass as recently determined, is about 0.5 ev or less you can see what this does to their velocity/mass at a few ev. When SuperKam detected neutrinos from Supernova 1987 about a day after it's light arrived, they had traveled some 40,000 light-years slow enough to arrive a day later. :-) It's anyone's guess as to what their energy was. There could've been gravitational interaction effects that bent others away from the Earth. With about one "collision" out of 1.0E32 near misses,for a collision cross section, who knows? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 21:46:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA08319; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:43:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:43:09 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 00:42:11 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Alternative horticulture... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"iTVS93.0.v12.jdies" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25643 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-16 19:45:20 EST, you write: >Has anyone heard about this new Jacobsen Resonance Technology? It is >supposed to make foods grow faster as well as the medical claims they make. >I believe the frequencies to be close to schumann resonant frequencies. We >will be doing some tests here in south georgia (agriculture central) soon. * Among the unorthodoxies promulgated by physicist Bob Beck, is an *electric* plant growth stimulator. * Chi Enterprises cites experiments confirming (they say) that their patented *infra-red* generator markedly prolongs the viability of plant cuttings, when the device is used to irradiate the water. * I believe it was Dr. Flannigan that studied water's capacity to retain the *vibrational signatures* of mineral colloids stirred into water. * I've read claims that plants exposed to the Sonic Bloom *audio* track--having been observed growing away from windows and toward the loudspeakers--were proven to thrive in a dark closet, nourished only by fertilizer spray and sound. * Now, "Jacobsen Resonance Technology"... Electricity, infra-red, crystal frequencies, acoustic vibration...there is evidence enough that some combination of these *invisible* energies might portend an agricultural breakthrough, just as our need to conserve resources and power--and to become responsible for our own diets--is becoming acute. Anybody interested in comparing notes? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 22:08:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA14065; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 22:05:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 22:05:00 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: herman antioch-college.edu Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:32:46 -0800 Subject: Re: Barker Patent Message-ID: <19990117.215920.3398.0.tv juno.com> References: X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 2-3,5-6,8-12 From: tv juno.com (Tim Vaughan) Resent-Message-ID: <"I-Pfu1.0.dR3.Byies" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25644 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The thing that puzzles me about the Barker patent is the placement of the radioisotope into the ball of the van-de-graph where the electric fields should be zero. It even mentions this in the patents. It would seem to work with just an electrostatic scalar potential (no electric field). John, Does it really change the decay rate if you place it into a fully enclosed charged container with zero electric field inside ? Tim ( tv juno.com ) ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 17 22:08:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA14123; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 22:05:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 22:05:06 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: herman antioch-college.edu, billb@eskimo.com Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:59:11 -0800 Subject: Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem Message-ID: <19990117.215920.3398.2.tv juno.com> References: X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,4-5,9-10,12-13,16-21,23-27,29-32,34-41,43,45, 47-49,51-55,57-71 From: tv juno.com (Tim Vaughan) Resent-Message-ID: <"tUXlN1.0.WS3.Hyies" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25645 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Bill, Thank you for your reply. I think your arguments pretty much settle my question. The capacity of a hollow metal sphere should be the same no matter what is placed inside. Ironically, what prompted me to ask this question is the Barker patent discussed by John Schnurer (Patent # 4,961,880 Wm. Barker.) which claims to be able to alter the decay rate of a radioisotope placed inside the hollow ball of a van-de-graph. What seems strange is how the decay rate could be effected by being within the ball when there is a zero electric field inside. I can understand some kind of effect if the sample is placed between the plates of a high voltage capacitor where there is an electric field, but inside the ball ?? Tim ( tv juno.com ) On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:49:06 -0800 (PST) William Beaty writes: >On Sat, 16 Jan 1999, Tim Vaughan wrote: > >> However, what confuses me is this: Say the sphere and internal >> dielectric are initially neutral (same number of electrons and >>protons),>> but then a strong external potential pulls electrons from the metal >> sphere making it positive. Since the electrons remaining are all >> mutually repulsive, it would seem they would redistribute themselves >> slightly, including the electrons in the dielectric. So this would >> seem to mean that the capacitance of the sphere would be greater if it >> were filled with a dielectric (or maybe even a conductor)/ >> >> Or would it just be the electrons in the conductor that would >> redistribute ? > >I think that only the electrons in the surface atoms of the conductor >would redistribute. And they redistribute so as to eliminate any >e-fields in the metal, therefor no e-fields can extend through the metal and >into the dielectric. If you took ALL the electrons out of the metal, it >would be an insulator, and finally the fields could get in. But it takes >huge energy to remove major amounts of electrons. I remember a homework >problem in Halliday and Resnik where you take all the conduction >electrons out of a penny and place them upon another penny, then separate the >pennies until the attraction force decreases to some thousands of >tons. >The distance is some godawful huge number of kilometers. Therefor, if >you take all the electrons out of a penny, the remaining positive ions >will self-repel, and your neighborhood will have a very large crater in it. > > >((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) >))))))))))))))))))))) >William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST >website >billb eskimo.com >http://www.amasci.com >EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird >science >Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L >webhead-L > > ___________________________________________________________________ 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 Sun Jan 17 22:59:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA27990; Sun, 17 Jan 1999 22:59:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 22:59:04 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 22:59:00 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: Tim Vaughan cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, herman@antioch-college.edu Subject: Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem In-Reply-To: <19990117.215920.3398.2.tv juno.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"qlrO81.0.Fr6.ukjes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25646 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 17 Jan 1999, Tim Vaughan wrote: > Hi Bill, > > Thank you for your reply. I think your arguments pretty much settle my > question. The capacity of a hollow metal sphere should be the same no > matter what is placed inside. > > Ironically, what prompted me to ask this question is the Barker patent > discussed by John Schnurer (Patent # 4,961,880 Wm. Barker.) which > claims to be able to alter the decay rate of a radioisotope placed inside > the hollow ball of a van-de-graph. When John was discussing this, he described the radioactive sample as occupying a dimple or a hole drilled in the sphere of a vandegraaff machine, so it was right on the surface (and not inside, where the metal would shield it.) Perhaps the ideal design would be to build the entire VDG sphere out of a carved thin shell of radioactive rock, then operate the generator and see if the radioactivity decreased faster than the half-life says it should. (I dunno, maybe also paint the inside of the stone shell with nickel-print, to make it conductive?) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 01:03:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA21417; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 01:02:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 01:02:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 00:11:17 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem Resent-Message-ID: <"CrwjM2.0.ZE5.IYles" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25647 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:49 AM 1/17/99, William Beaty wrote: >On Sat, 16 Jan 1999, Tim Vaughan wrote: > >> However, what confuses me is this: Say the sphere and internal [snip] >... So this would seem >> to mean that the capacitance of the sphere would be greater if it were >> filled with a dielectric (or maybe even a conductor)/ [snip] > >I think that only the electrons in the surface atoms of the conductor >would redisribute. [snip] Yes - and if the sphere is negative there will be extra electrons besides those in the atoms. If the sphere is positive, the electrons on the surface will be conducted away from the sphere by whatever charged it. One thing that might be of interest is that, even though a dielectric inside the sphere has no effect, a dielectric outside would have an effect on the sphere's capacitance. If Barker's method works for a dielectric on (in) the surface of the sphere, the field gradient at the surface should be increased by encasing the sphere in a dielectric, like wax. It would also improve the efficiency of the van deGraff by reducing air ionization on the sphere surface. If would have the effect of reducing any current, but a dielectric should have no current within it anyway. Just a thought. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 01:03:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA21447; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 01:02:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 01:02:14 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 00:11:21 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Resent-Message-ID: <"ozxFC1.0.yE5.LYles" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25648 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:34 PM 1/17/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: [snip] >I don't really know much about relativity, but I was under the >impression that relativistic mass was non-gravitational. I.e. a body >can't go so fast that it collapses under it's own gravitational >attraction as a consequence of relativistic mass increase. This can not be, that relativistic mass is non-gravitational. The mass of excited nuclei increases corresponding to the trapped kinetic energy. It is also of interest that the relativistic mass increase due to lateral translation is not observed in the (zero relative velocity) particles' own reference frames. However, if gravitons have a frequency, they would be blue shifted upon approach, thus might appear stronger. Being red shifted upon departure, if that notion has any meaning, then the gravitational force might appear weakened? Very strange. It does seem paradoxical that a two particle object, say a hydrogen atom, can not both collapse and not collapse, gravitationally speaking, depending on your frame of reference. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 03:31:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA09962; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 03:30:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 03:30:47 -0800 Message-ID: <001801be42d5$c38393c0$f0441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Supernova 1987A (http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/StarDeath/sn1987a.html) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 04:28:30 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000B_01BE429B.00E19360" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"tMzQg1.0.aR2.djnes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25649 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_000B_01BE429B.00E19360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The story of Supernova 1987 A Occurred in Large Magellanic Cloud, 170 thousand light years from us. Progenitor star: Sanduleak -69o 202, a blue supergiant. Discovery=20 a.. 24 February, 1987=20 b.. in Tarantula Nebula in Large Magellanic cloud,=20 c.. by Ian Shelton, University of Toronto,=20 d.. at Las Campanas Observatory, Chile.=20 Is the theory right? At the core of the theory, so to speak, is the production of vast = numbers of neutrinos. Neutrino detectors available at the time.=20 Prediction: each detector should see 10 or so neutrinos from SN 1987A in = a space of about 10 seconds. Results.=20 Timing (times in Universal Time)=20 a.. 7:36, 23 February, neutrinos observed=20 b.. 9:30, 23 February=20 a.. Albert Jones, amateur astronomer, observes Tarantula Nebula = in LMC=20 b.. He sees nothing unusual=20 c.. 10:30, 23 February=20 a.. Robert McNaught photographs LMC=20 b.. When plate is developed, SN1987A is there.=20 d.. Some 20 hours later, Ian Shelton's discovery.=20 Conclusion:=20 a.. It took between two and three hours for the shock wave to get to = the surface of the star.=20 b.. This agrees with the model prediction.=20 One surprize:=20 a.. It was thought that type II supernovae came from red supergiant = stars, but the star SK -69 202 was a blue supergiant (~ 20 times smaller = than a red supergiant.)=20 b.. It took some thinking to conclude that some very evolved stars = could have a smaller size with higher surface temperatures.=20 c.. SN 1987A was not as bright as moster type II supernovae. This = was explained based on its smaller initial size.=20 a.. Initially, it was so hot it radiated mostly in the = ultraviolet, not the visible.=20 b.. After it expanded greatly, it was cool enough to be = radiating in the visible.=20 c.. But by then a lot of its energy had been expended in the = expansion.=20 What do we see now? The remnant from Supernova 1987A has been expanding since 1987. Here is = what it looked like in 1994, using th Hubble Space Telescope. The inner = ring is about 1.3 ly in diameter. The rings are presumably parts of = shells of gas ejected by the star long before the explosion. SN 1987A's remnant SN 1987A's remnant, enhanced version Davison E. Soper, Institute of Theoretical Science, University of = Oregon, Eugene OR 97403 USA soper bovine.uoregon.edu=20 ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BE429B.00E19360 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Supernova 1987A
 

The story of Supernova 1987 A

Occurred in Large Magellanic Cloud, 170 thousand light = years from=20 us.

Progenitor star: Sanduleak -69o 202, a blue supergiant.

Discovery=20

  • 24 February, 1987=20
  • in Tarantula Nebula in Large Magellanic cloud,=20
  • by Ian Shelton, University of Toronto,=20
  • at Las Campanas Observatory, Chile.

Is the theory right?

At the core of the theory, so to speak, is = the=20 production of vast numbers of neutrinos.

Neutrino detectors available at the = time.

Prediction: each detector should see 10 or so neutrinos from SN 1987A = in a=20 space of about 10 seconds.

Results.

Timing (times in Universal Time)=20

  • 7:36, 23 February, neutrinos observed=20
  • 9:30, 23 February=20
    • Albert Jones, amateur astronomer, observes Tarantula Nebula = in LMC=20
    • He sees nothing unusual
  • 10:30, 23 February=20
    • Robert McNaught photographs LMC=20
    • When plate is developed, SN1987A is there.
  • Some 20 hours later, Ian Shelton's discovery. =
Conclusion:=20
  • It took between two and three hours for the shock wave to get to = the=20 surface of the star.=20
  • This agrees with the model prediction.
One surprize:=20
  • It was thought that type II supernovae came from red supergiant = stars,=20 but the star SK -69 202 was a blue supergiant (~ 20 times smaller = than a red=20 supergiant.)=20
  • It took some thinking to conclude that some very evolved stars = could=20 have a smaller size with higher surface temperatures.=20
  • SN 1987A was not as bright as moster type II supernovae. This = was=20 explained based on its smaller initial size.=20
    • Initially, it was so hot it radiated mostly in the = ultraviolet, not=20 the visible.=20
    • After it expanded greatly, it was cool enough to be = radiating in the=20 visible.=20
    • But by then a lot of its energy had been expended in the = expansion.=20

What do we see now?

The remnant from Supernova 1987A has been = expanding=20 since 1987. Here is what it looked like in 1994, using th Hubble Space=20 Telescope. The inner ring is about 1.3 ly in diameter. The rings are = presumably=20 parts of shells of gas ejected by the star long before the explosion.

SN 1987A's remnant

SN 1987A's remnant, = enhanced=20 version

Davison E. Soper, Institute of Theoretical Science, University = of=20 Oregon, Eugene OR 97403 USA soper bovine.uoregon.edu =
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BE429B.00E19360-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 08:57:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA06619; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 08:54:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 08:54:50 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990118114729.00901ab0 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:47:29 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: Alternative horticulture... In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"IqBKK3.0.Fd1.PTses" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25650 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vorts, FJS recently posted , where was noted how efficiently the new techniques of biomass gasification & electric generators are competing with standard oil and (hydrocarbon) gas fired electricity generators. If Alternative Horticulture techniques were used for growing the actual biomass-- we might be able to create a continuous source of *inexpensive* and non-polluting renewable energy. I didn't have much luck searching for web sites, but I've posted a bit re Electrohorticulture below. At 12:42 AM 18/01/99 EST, you wrote: > >* Among the unorthodoxies promulgated by physicist Bob Beck, is an *electric* >plant growth stimulator. >* Chi Enterprises cites experiments confirming (they say) that their patented >*infra-red* generator markedly prolongs the viability of plant cuttings, when >the device is used to irradiate the water. >* I believe it was Dr. Flannigan that studied water's capacity to retain the >*vibrational signatures* of mineral colloids stirred into water. >* I've read claims that plants exposed to the Sonic Bloom *audio* >track--having been observed growing away from windows and toward the >loudspeakers--were proven to thrive in a dark closet, nourished only by >fertilizer spray and sound. >* Now, "Jacobsen Resonance Technology"... >Electricity, infra-red, crystal frequencies, acoustic vibration...there is >evidence enough that some combination of these *invisible* energies might >portend an agricultural breakthrough, just as our need to conserve resources >and power--and to become responsible for our own diets--is becoming acute. >Anybody interested in comparing notes? > Quoting ( without permission ) from From 'Homemade Lightning', by R.A.Ford, 2nd Ed., 1996, ISBN 0-07-021528-6, Chapter 12, ELECTROHORTICULTURE p.139-142: -- ".. most of the research concerns overhead wires charged with either high voltage direct current, high-frequency alternating current ( as with the Tesla coil transformer ), and low-frequency periodic pulses of direct or alternating current at high potential." -- " Some of the benefits claimed in these extended tests [ Professor Selim Lemstrom of Helsingfors (at that time in Russia ) ] included yield increases from 21 to 65 percent, increased sugar content in fruits and vegetables, richer colors in flowers, and especially improved resistance to drought and diseases." -- "Even though the current density is tiny for setting up an effective electrical field (less than1/2 milliampere per acre or 1.2X10E-11 amps per square cm), this current is still 50,000 times the natural average air-earth current density. -- "After 1929, research rapidly declined in the United States and Britain. It is not clear whether the reduced research resulted from the economic depression or because of fears about overproduction. A study of the history of this unusual aspect of agriculture would itself be most interesting." [and from the Index] p.212: -- Lemstrom, Selim. 'Electricity in Agriculture and Horticulture' London: The Electrician Printing & Publishing Co., 1904. -- U.S. Patent No. 1,268,949, Fessenden. -- U.S. Patent No. 1,952,588, Golden. Best Regards, Colin Quinney From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 09:10:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12996; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:09:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:09:14 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0CD XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Wimps and nuclei Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:08:13 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"Pf-OF3.0.-A3.wgses" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25651 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Consider a mass falling into a black hole. It's mass increases to infinity as it passes through the horizon of the black hole, as its velocity reaches the speed of light. This to an observer a long distance away back in flat space time. Hank > ---------- > From: > rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au[SMTP:rvanspaa@vic.bigpond.net.au] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 1999 1:34 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei > > On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 09:32:38 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > > >Robin wrote: > > > >Snip good stuff. > Without comment I notice. ;(. > > > >An interesting occurrence with neutrino capture by 17Cl37 which loses a > >negative charge (electron or negative quark and an antineutrino)from the > >nucleus and becomes 18Ar37, yet gains 0.813 Mev mass/energy. > > It might be interesting to take a look at the putative neutrino > creating reactions in the sun, and see just how much mass/energy the > neutrinos could in theory be carrying. > Also, does this experiment use liquid chlorine, on a chlorine > compound? If the latter, then perhaps they are detecting a sporadic CF > reaction, and not neutrino capture. > [snip] > >Mrel = Mo[(E'/Mo*c^2)+1]could mean that neutrinos can have enormous mass > and > >are WIMPs,and, are acted on by electro-gravitation, and space must be > full > >of them. > > I don't really know much about relativity, but I was under the > impression that relativistic mass was non-gravitational. I.e. a body > can't go so fast that it collapses under it's own gravitational > attraction as a consequence of relativistic mass increase. > > > > >Any thoughts on measuring the force of gravity on neutrinos,and > determining > >if the Earth's Electro-G-Field is deflecting some of them and causing the > >"Missing Solar Neutrino Problem", Robin? :-) > > I thought the "Electro-G-Field" was just the gravitational equivalent > of the electromagnetic E field, and was what we normally just call the > force of gravity. In which case, why would it repel anything? > [snip] > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 09:58:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAB32676; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:55:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:55:50 -0800 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:54:38 -0500 (GMT) From: Carlos Henry Castano To: From Carlos Henry Castano Giraldo Subject: Dear Wortexers.... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"072qh1.0.P-7.bMtes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25652 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I am going to USA tomorrow to with a student Visa, I am changing my address, the new one is: 84 Taylor Avenue, Unit 14 Norwalk, CT 06854 and my e-mail are below. Thank you. Carlos Henry Casta~o G. *********************************************************** I do not have E-mail address on Perseus now, please send your mail to: Ya no tengo correo en Perseus, ahora me pueden escribir a: (Main-Principal) vmcastan aol.com (other) chcastan hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 11:14:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA24848; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:12:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:12:40 -0800 Message-ID: <36A387DA.4E8F interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:13:30 -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: Wimps and nuclei References: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0CD XCH-CPC-02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Ncq6v2.0.A46.eUues" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25653 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > Consider a mass falling into a black hole. It's mass increases to infinity > as it passes through the horizon of the black hole, as its velocity reaches > the speed of light. This to an observer a long distance away back in flat > space time. Hey, Hank, can this be right? It seems to me that if the initial black hole had a mass of, say, 5 suns, if a mass of one ton (distant) reached infinite mass at the event horizon AND the speed of light, that we would have a glitch in momentum conservation. The initial one-ton mass would cross the event horizon with infinite momentum and it and the black hole should go scooting away from the hole's location at c??? What's the deal, Hank? My relativity is about as clear as my snow-covered driveway so fill me in! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 11:41:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA02115; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:36:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:36:13 -0800 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:27:46 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Jacobson....Re: Alternative horticulture... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"X_F652.0.vW.iques" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25654 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: So what exactly IS the Jacobson Res. Tech??? On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 UNIR2B1NM aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 99-01-16 19:45:20 EST, you write: > > >Has anyone heard about this new Jacobsen Resonance Technology? It is > >supposed to make foods grow faster as well as the medical claims they make. > >I believe the frequencies to be close to schumann resonant frequencies. We > >will be doing some tests here in south georgia (agriculture central) soon. > > * Among the unorthodoxies promulgated by physicist Bob Beck, is an *electric* > plant growth stimulator. > * Chi Enterprises cites experiments confirming (they say) that their patented > *infra-red* generator markedly prolongs the viability of plant cuttings, when > the device is used to irradiate the water. > * I believe it was Dr. Flannigan that studied water's capacity to retain the > *vibrational signatures* of mineral colloids stirred into water. > * I've read claims that plants exposed to the Sonic Bloom *audio* > track--having been observed growing away from windows and toward the > loudspeakers--were proven to thrive in a dark closet, nourished only by > fertilizer spray and sound. > * Now, "Jacobsen Resonance Technology"... > Electricity, infra-red, crystal frequencies, acoustic vibration...there is > evidence enough that some combination of these *invisible* energies might > portend an agricultural breakthrough, just as our need to conserve resources > and power--and to become responsible for our own diets--is becoming acute. > Anybody interested in comparing notes? > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 11:47:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07244; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:45:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:45:40 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0CE XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Wimps and nuclei Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:44:15 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"bFy_i.0.4n1.Zzues" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25655 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: As I understand it, the key is which coordinate system you refer your momentum to. I carefully refered to flat-space time an infinite distance from the hole. I'll look this stuff up tonight in my relativity text. Hank > ---------- > From: Francis J. Stenger[SMTP:fstenger interlaced.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Monday, January 18, 1999 11:13 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei > > Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > > > Consider a mass falling into a black hole. It's mass increases to > infinity > > as it passes through the horizon of the black hole, as its velocity > reaches > > the speed of light. This to an observer a long distance away back in > flat > > space time. > > Hey, Hank, can this be right? It seems to me that if the initial black > hole had a mass of, say, 5 suns, if a mass of one ton (distant) reached > infinite mass at the event horizon AND the speed of light, that we would > have a glitch in momentum conservation. The initial one-ton mass would > cross the event horizon with infinite momentum and it and the black hole > should go scooting away from the hole's location at c??? What's the > deal, Hank? My relativity is about as clear as my snow-covered driveway > so fill me in! > > Frank Stenger > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 11:51:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA05952; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:49:22 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:49:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:40:23 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: Tim Vaughan , vortex-l@eskimo.com, John Schnurer Subject: Barker... placement of test sample Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"3KFi53.0.wS1.01ves" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25657 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Folks, Reading the patent helped.... talking with Barker helped... independent thinking helped.... How it works...in brief.... On the outside of the VDG generator sphere the voltage amy be, for example, 40 KV.... on the inside zero KV.... NOW: there is a 1/2 inch hole drilled in the sphere.... 'along the equator'... if you will. If the wall of the sphere is ..say, 0.050 inches thick, then there is a variation in potential from zero to 40 kv .. in a VERY small distance .... Sort of like zero to 60 in a car in 0.1 seconds.... sort of... SO: the sample is placed JUST BARELY inside the sphere... centered in the opening and is thereby subjected to a strong local field variation. As was written earlier on experimenter used a sample wrapped in metal shielding ... and got no change in radioactivity ...This is not surprising. SO: READ the patent!!! STUDY the drawings !!! THINK ...... !!! Hope that helps.... On Sun, 17 Jan 1999, William Beaty wrote: > On Sun, 17 Jan 1999, Tim Vaughan wrote: > > > Hi Bill, > > > > Thank you for your reply. I think your arguments pretty much settle my > > question. The capacity of a hollow metal sphere should be the same no > > matter what is placed inside. > > > > Ironically, what prompted me to ask this question is the Barker patent > > discussed by John Schnurer (Patent # 4,961,880 Wm. Barker.) which > > claims to be able to alter the decay rate of a radioisotope placed inside > > the hollow ball of a van-de-graph. > > When John was discussing this, he described the radioactive sample as > occupying a dimple or a hole drilled in the sphere of a vandegraaff > machine, so it was right on the surface (and not inside, where the metal > would shield it.) Perhaps the ideal design would be to build the entire > VDG sphere out of a carved thin shell of radioactive rock, then operate > the generator and see if the radioactivity decreased faster than the > half-life says it should. (I dunno, maybe also paint the inside of the > stone shell with nickel-print, to make it conductive?) > > > ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website > billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science > Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 11:53:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07330; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:45:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:45:58 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990118143336.007a3880 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:33:36 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Remediation is a tough sell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"XsV8-1.0.So1.rzues" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25656 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The other day I said I doubt the DOE will make use of CETI's tritium remediation process even if it is cheaper and better than conventional methods. The DOE and other large bureaucracies in government and private industry have no economic incentive to use superior technology. An article in this month's Scientific American bears this out. It is in the Technology and Business section, p. 39, titled "Not Cleaning Up." It describes a new technique for cleaning polluted ground (soil) by injecting steam. Southern California Edison was faced with the task of removing up to one million pounds of creosote and other highly toxic toxic chemicals from the soil at one side. Using conventional techniques they were able to remove 500 pounds of creosote per year. In 16 months the steam extraction method pulled up 900,000 pounds of creosote and other "gunk." Quote from article: "The company expects the site to meet state standards by 2001, about a century ahead of schedule at a price of $20 million -- roughly what 20 years of pumping had cost the utility." The problem is that other companies refuse to test this method and the engineering firms trying to sell the method are going bankrupt. A company president is quoted: "It has been very frustrating. Nobody was to be the first, or even third. Tenth, perhaps." He describes another problem: "if the technology really works, then regulators may force them to clean up all their sites within five years to obviously they don't want anything to do with it. If after four years there still only demonstration project here or their and regulators are still not as supported as they should be, we'll call it quits." The Scientific American points out, "given the choice between spending $25 million on a risky but as cleanup fast cleanup ... or paying lawyers $1 million a year to delay, any sensible CEO will choose the latter." This story was also reported in the New York Times. This issue features an article by T. Beardsley, "The Way to Go in Space," on page 81. It describes a number of futuristic spacecraft technologies. Some are intriguing;some strike me as Rube Goldberg contraptions. Most would be unnecessary with cold fusion, which would allow brute force techniques. Robert Forward and Robert Hoyt wrote a short article on page 86 and 87 about space tethers, which are like sling shots. Forward is one of the early supporters of cold fusion. I was disappointed but not surprised to see that he made no mention of it here. (I doubt the editors would allow a comment in the case.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 12:32:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA23472; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:30:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:30:18 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <687373c2.36a39995 aol.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:29:09 EST To: vortex-L eskimo.com Cc: JedRothwell infinite-energy.com, editor@infinite-energy.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84 Resent-Message-ID: <"-Eam23.0.bk5.Qdves" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25658 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Is Dennis Cravens still working for CETI? Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 12:36:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA25344; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:32:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:32:54 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:29:11 EST To: vortex-L eskimo.com Cc: schaffermj yahoo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84 Resent-Message-ID: <"sBwDD2.0.vB6.rfves" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25659 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a post dated Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:44:17 -0800 (PST), Michael Schaffer wrote: "Miley never claimed large excess heat. In fact, as time goes by, he seems to have backed away from his early claims of some excess heat, and he has concentrated on the nuclear reactions instead." I agree that Miley never claimed large excess heat, but I don't think that he has backed away from his excess heat claims. It seems to me that he's just become more secretive about them. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 13:19:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA11058; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 13:17:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 13:17:40 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19990118162433.00fd3af0 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:25:33 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: Re: Barker... placement of test sample Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"yScYw1.0.Ki2.mJwes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25660 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi. Well, makes some sense to me. Is it fair to say then, that a large electric field gradient is the key to the technique? I'll buy this more readily than the potential argument... The patents are misleading in this regard; in fact it seems one could patent the whole mess again as you could explicitly propose this mechanism. On the other hand, bearing this in mind, I can think of a way to generate ungodly gradients, without need of the HV source. Pity I've not the necessary permits for the rad material. By the way, am I the only one to notice that if the technology works than one could conceivably take low grade fissionable materials and take them to criticality? I think not :^) K. PS: John, you've talked to Barker, is he still pursuing this? At 02:40 PM 1/18/99 -0500, you wrote: > > > Dear Folks, > > Reading the patent helped.... talking with Barker helped... >independent thinking helped.... > > How it works...in brief.... > > On the outside of the VDG generator sphere the voltage amy be, >for example, 40 KV.... on the inside zero KV.... > NOW: there is a 1/2 inch hole drilled in the sphere.... 'along >the equator'... if you will. > If the wall of the sphere is ..say, 0.050 inches thick, then >there is a variation in potential from zero to 40 kv .. in a VERY small >distance .... > Sort of like zero to 60 in a car in 0.1 seconds.... sort of... > > SO: the sample is placed JUST BARELY inside the sphere... >centered in the opening and is thereby subjected to a strong local field >variation. > As was written earlier on experimenter used a sample wrapped in >metal shielding ... and got no change in radioactivity ...This is not >surprising. > > SO: READ the patent!!! > STUDY the drawings !!! > THINK ...... !!! > > > Hope that helps.... > >On Sun, 17 Jan 1999, William Beaty wrote: > >> On Sun, 17 Jan 1999, Tim Vaughan wrote: >> >> > Hi Bill, >> > >> > Thank you for your reply. I think your arguments pretty much settle my >> > question. The capacity of a hollow metal sphere should be the same no >> > matter what is placed inside. >> > >> > Ironically, what prompted me to ask this question is the Barker patent >> > discussed by John Schnurer (Patent # 4,961,880 Wm. Barker.) which >> > claims to be able to alter the decay rate of a radioisotope placed inside >> > the hollow ball of a van-de-graph. >> >> When John was discussing this, he described the radioactive sample as >> occupying a dimple or a hole drilled in the sphere of a vandegraaff >> machine, so it was right on the surface (and not inside, where the metal >> would shield it.) Perhaps the ideal design would be to build the entire >> VDG sphere out of a carved thin shell of radioactive rock, then operate >> the generator and see if the radioactivity decreased faster than the >> half-life says it should. (I dunno, maybe also paint the inside of the >> stone shell with nickel-print, to make it conductive?) >> >> >> ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) >> William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website >> billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com >> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science >> Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L >> >> > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 13:42:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21296; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 13:40:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 13:40:10 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990118163955.0079fdb0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:39:55 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"7vFhM2.0.RC5.uewes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25661 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks to an e-mail quirk, Tom Stolper twice asked: Is Dennis Cravens still working for CETI? Is Dennis Cravens still working for CETI? No, and no. He isn't. He isn't. Michael Schaffer speculated that "Miley never claimed large excess heat. In fact, as time goes by, he seems to have backed away from his early claims of some excess heat . . ." Tom agrees "that Miley never claimed large excess heat, but I don't think that he has backed away from his excess heat claims." I have spoken with Miley about this at length, especially when I was chauffeuring him around Hokkaido and demonstrating why you must never lose your rail ticket. (I lost mine!) With all due respect for Schaffer and Stolper, these statements are totally unfounded. They should check with Miley before saying things like this. Miley *did* claim large excess heat -- larger than Patterson, adjusted for input power. He has never backed away from these claims or retracted them as far as I know. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 14:28:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA06821; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:26:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:26:39 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990118171834.009eed90 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:18:34 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: Jacobson....Re: Alternative horticulture... In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"aBO1w.0.Pg1.VKxes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25662 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:27 PM 18/01/99 -0500, John S. wrote: > > > So what exactly IS the Jacobson Res. Tech??? > Hi John, Jerry Jacobsen patents 5366435 5269746 5198181 Best Regards, Colin Quinney From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 14:43:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA23639; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:39:54 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:39:54 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990118163907.00945248 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:39:07 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990118163955.0079fdb0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"eWD5P2.0.En5.sWxes" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25663 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:47 1/13/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >...it turns out the underlying copper layer >and possibly the plastic are also critical. This is an interesting hypothesis but I doubt that it has been rigorously proved. A direct comparison with everything ELSE held constant would be required. I know of at least one other thing that has changed at CETI since the days of large excess heat...they now have better calorimetry. At 16:39 1/18/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Miley *did* claim large excess heat >-- larger than Patterson, adjusted for input power. He has never backed >away from these claims or retracted them as far as I know. I also talked with Miley a lot about heat. His calorimetric methods were very casual. For example, he did not enclose his experiment in a temperature-controlled box, nor did he arrange for precise temperature regulation of the inlet electrolyte. In my opinion, you simply cannot make meaningful low-level calorimetric measurements without such steps. Further, we performed careful calorimetric measurements on Miley's own beads (which are included in his excess heat claims) using our Dual-Method Calorimeter and saw no sign of excess heat (our detection limit was about 0.1 watt). 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 Jan 18 16:23:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA18269; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:18:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:18:23 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990118191613.007081a0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 19:16:13 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990118163907.00945248 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990118163955.0079fdb0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WREOu3.0.GT4.Dzyes" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25664 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 11:47 1/13/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >>...it turns out the underlying copper layer >>and possibly the plastic are also critical. >At 04:39 PM 1/18/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >This is an interesting hypothesis but I doubt that it has been rigorously >proved. A direct comparison with everything ELSE held constant would be >required. I know of at least one other thing that has changed at CETI >since the days of large excess heat...they now have better calorimetry. Scott: Nice to have agreement on both points. The oxygen, purported layer, and material claims may not pivotal. What controls these reactions may be the knowledge of the optimal operating point of the system, and the maximal amount of heat available. [refs for vorts Swartz. M., 1997, "Consistency of the Biphasic Nature of Excess Enthalpy in Solid State Anomalous Phenomena with the Quasi-1-Dimensional Model of Isotope Loading into a Material" Fusion Technology. 31, 63-74. Swartz. M.., 1998, Patterns of Failure in Cold Fusion Experiments, Proceedings of the 33RD Intersociety Engineering Conference on Energy Conversion, IECEC-98-I229, Colorado Springs, CO, August 2-6, 1998. Swartz, M, 1998, "Optimal Operating Point Characteristics of Nickel Light Water Experiments", Proceedings of ICCF-7 and a few others at: http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html with ICCF Proceedings available at loc'ns described at http://world.std.com/~mica/cftrefs.html#conferences ] ============================================================ >At 16:39 1/18/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >>Miley *did* claim large excess heat >>-- larger than Patterson, adjusted for input power. He has never backed >>away from these claims or retracted them as far as I know. > At 04:39 PM 1/18/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >I also talked with Miley a lot about heat. His calorimetric methods were >very casual. For example, he did not enclose his experiment in a >temperature-controlled box, nor did he arrange for precise temperature >regulation of the inlet electrolyte. In my opinion, you simply cannot make >meaningful low-level calorimetric measurements without such steps. > >Further, we performed careful calorimetric measurements on Miley's own >beads (which are included in his excess heat claims) using our Dual-Method >Calorimeter and saw no sign of excess heat (our detection limit was about >0.1 watt). Dr. Miley's calorimetry is not necessarily at issue, IMO. Dr. Miley may have correctly adjusted the optimal operating point of his system, and accounted for the relatively low possible power gain for nickel-H2O systems. BTW because of that, the detection limit should be lower when small amounts of nickel are used [eg. Swartz, M, 1998, Improved Electrolytic Reactor Performance Using pi-Notch System Operation and Gold Anodes, Transactions of the American Nuclear Association, Nashville, Tenn 1998 Meeting, (ISSN:0003-018X publisher LaGrange, Ill) 78, 84-85. [And box enclosures are only useful if there is no leakage of heat from the room to the inner cell.] Have a good day. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 19:32:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA18984; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 19:30:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 19:30:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 19:24:32 -0800 Subject: Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem Message-ID: <19990118.192441.25222.0.tv juno.com> References: <3.0.32.19990118162433.00fd3af0 cnct.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-4,6,9-10,14-18 From: tv juno.com (Tim Vaughan) Resent-Message-ID: <"yL1zh3.0.Ye4.Nn_es" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25665 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On the other hand, bearing this in mind, I can think >of a way to generate ungodly gradients, without need of >the HV source. Pity I've not the necessary permits for >the rad material. You don't need a permit to buy a smoke detector. $5 to $10 at hardware stores. The ~1 micro curie americium 241 source is encased in a small plastic pill mounted on a small metal disk. Makes a geiger counter go crazy about an inch away. It is easy to remove the small disk. Although it is very tough and you are unlikely to do so, be careful not to crush the plastic pill. If you somehow made small particles of it, it would be nasty stuff to have in the lungs. Tim ( tv juno.com ) ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 21:09:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA24021; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:06:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:06:50 -0800 Message-ID: <19990119050758.815.rocketmail send106.yahoomail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:07:58 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"ZX9v71.0.Ft5.gB1fs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25666 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > >Michael Schaffer speculated that "Miley never claimed large excess heat. In >fact, as time goes by, he seems to have backed away from his early claims >of some excess heat . . ." Tom agrees "that Miley never claimed large >excess heat, but I don't think that he has backed away from his excess heat >claims." > >I have spoken with Miley about this at length, especially when I was >chauffeuring him around Hokkaido and demonstrating why you must never lose >your rail ticket. (I lost mine!) With all due respect for Schaffer and >Stolper, these statements are totally unfounded. They should check with >Miley before saying things like this. Miley *did* claim large excess heat >-- larger than Patterson, adjusted for input power. He has never backed >away from these claims or retracted them as far as I know. I meet Miley once or twice a year at Hot fusion meetings. We usually chat about Cold fusion. I do not say that Miley thinks that he has no excess heat. However, I find that he now backs away from discussing excess heat in his experiments. On the other hand, it seems to me that he thinks that the transmutation results will provide the clues to understanding what is going on. The transmutation excites him. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 21:30:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA32691; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:29:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:29:13 -0800 From: John Logajan Message-Id: <199901190529.XAA05971 mirage.skypoint.com> Subject: Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem In-Reply-To: <19990117.215920.3398.2.tv juno.com> from Tim Vaughan at "Jan 17, 99 09:59:11 pm" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:29:09 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"K3wrD1.0.j-7.fW1fs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25667 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > What seems strange is how the decay rate could be effected by being > within the ball when there is a zero electric field inside. In my air compressor tank, the pressure gradient inside is zero. Yet pressure still has some effects. Is there an electric charge analog? -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 651-633-8928 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 21:42:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA06275; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:41:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:41:23 -0800 Message-ID: <19990119054123.20239.rocketmail send105.yahoomail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:41:23 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Barker... placement of test sample To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"8DMcA2.0.vX1.3i1fs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25668 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I'm not disputing anyone's experimental observation, just the theory: John Schnurer wrote: > [snip] > How it works...in brief.... > > On the outside of the VDG generator sphere the voltage amy be, > for example, 40 KV.... on the inside zero KV.... The potential is the SAME inside the sphere as on its outer surface. The potential varies a bit in the neighborhood of a small how. What can get large is the electric FIELD, which is what John seems to say later. However, the electric field is SMALL by atomic standards, much less by nuclear standards. Consider. It is very difficult to withstand more than 10 MV/m electric field at a solid surface. This works out to 1 mV/Angstrom, or a few mV across the diameter of a typical atomic electron shell. Such a weak electric field makes a minor perturbation on the electron, which can be seen as a slight change in the spectrum of free atoms (stark effect). Now consider that nuclei are about 100,000 times smaller in diameter, so nuclei experience only a few tens of nV (that's nano volt) across their diameter. The Coulomb barrier is usually several MV (that's mega volt). We have a theoretical mismatch of about 14 powers of ten here. It is unlikely that a macroscopically achievable electric field can noticeably affect the nuclear radioactive decay rate. A different theory is needed. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 18 22:06:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA17134; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 22:04:18 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 22:04:18 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000501be4371$346ee1c0$01441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Oscillating Particles and Charge? Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:00:54 -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: <"fljw22.0.eB4.W12fs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25669 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Assuming that charge/force is merely a 180 degree phase difference between charges based on y = sin x for regular particles and y = cos x for neutrinos: Degrees y(sin x) Inverse y(cos x) Inverse 0 0 1.00 1.00 -1.00 15 .259 -.259 .966 -.966 30 .50 -.50 .866 -.866 45 .707 -.707 .707 -.707 60 .866 -.866 .50 -.50 75 .966 -.966 .259 -.259 90 1.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 105 .966 -.966 .259 -.259 120 .866 -.866 .50 -.50 135 .707 -.707 .707 -.707 150 .50 -.50 .866 -.866 165 .259 -.259 .966 -.966 180 0.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 what will be the net charge or force that a neutrino y(cos x) or an antineutrino Inverse of y(cos x) wrt a particle y(sin x) or inverse of y(sin x)? Totally swamped. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 00:30:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA29441; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 00:28:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 00:28:52 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:37:59 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Barker... placement of test sample Resent-Message-ID: <"L_CEP2.0.xB7.394fs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25670 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:41 PM 1/18/99, Michael Schaffer wrote: [snip]The Coulomb >barrier is usually several MV (that's mega volt). We have a >theoretical mismatch of about 14 powers of ten here. It is unlikely >that a macroscopically achievable electric field can noticeably affect >the nuclear radioactive decay rate. A different theory is needed. This is like the classic CF standoff. Shaffer shows clearly why it can't be and Schnurer says he has personally observed the effect. The only reasonable way to obtain a resolution is through more testing by addtional parties. Experiment rules over theory, but, to the degree the results are unexpected, more rigor and replication are required. If the experimental results remain, perhaps there is room for shoe horning in a theory based upon energy transfer from orbital electrons. The coulomb barrier becomes a coulomb well in the case of the electron. By displacing electron orbitals the probability of electron presence in the nucleus might be greatly affected. Electrostatic fields do displace orbitals, though not as much as strong magnetic fields, or a combination of both. The problem becomes one of finding a mechanism for the nucelus to be come excited in a continuous and incremental fashion, pumped, by repeated electron traversals of the nucleus. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 02:55:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA20764; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 02:54:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 02:54:15 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 10:54:10 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36a46400.102236318 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: <"jjiy11.0.M45.NH6fs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25671 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 00:11:21 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 12:34 PM 1/17/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >[snip] >>I don't really know much about relativity, but I was under the >>impression that relativistic mass was non-gravitational. I.e. a body >>can't go so fast that it collapses under it's own gravitational >>attraction as a consequence of relativistic mass increase. > > >This can not be, that relativistic mass is non-gravitational. The mass of >excited nuclei increases corresponding to the trapped kinetic energy. [snip] I think mass spectrographs measure inertial mass, not gravitational mass. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 08:50:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA17417; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 08:46:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 08:46:08 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 08:45:58 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: [off topic] Warning! Gullibility spread by email! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/ALTERNATIVE; BOUNDARY=------------394006B95AC7CF3D957321AA Content-ID: Resent-Message-ID: <"ht8Ls3.0.uF4.FRBfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25672 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. Send mail to mime docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. --------------394006B95AC7CF3D957321AA Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii Content-ID: Looks like the Internet Groupmind is evolving an "Immune System" - Bill B. Forward this dire warning to all of your friends! (seriously.) Keep a copy for later sending, or you'll regret it! **************************************************** WARNING, CAUTION, DANGER, AND BEWARE! Gullibility Virus Spreading over the Internet! **************************************************** WASHINGTON, D.C.--The Institute for the Investigation of Irregular Internet Phenomena announced today that many Internet users are becoming infected by a new virus that causes them to believe without question every groundless story, legend, and dire warning that shows up in their In Box or on their browser. The Gullibility Virus, as it is called, apparently makes people believe and forward copies of silly hoaxes relating to cookie recipes, E-Mail viruses, taxes on modems, postcards for child cancer research and the merits of melanza. "These are not just readers of tabloids or people who buy lottery tickets based on fortune cookie numbers," a spokesman said. "Most are otherwise normal people, who would laugh at the same stories if told to them by a stranger on a street corner." However, once these same people become infected with the Gullibility Virus, they believe anything they read on the Internet. "My immunity to tall tales and bizarre claims is all gone," reported one weeping victim. "I believe every warning message and sick child story my friends forward to me, even though most of the messages are anonymous." Another victim, now in remission, added, "When I first heard about Good Times, I just accepted it without question. After all, there were dozens of other recipients on the mail header, so I thought the virus must be true." It was a long time, the victim said, before she could stand up at a Hoaxes Anonymous meeting and state, "My name is Jane, and I've been hoaxed." Now, however, she is spreading the word. "Challenge and check whatever you read," she says. Internet users are urged to examine themselves for symptoms of the virus, which include the following: * the willingness to believe improbable stories without thinking * the urge to forward multiple copies of such stories to others * a lack of desire to take three minutes to check to see if a story is true T. C. is an example of someone recently infected. He told one reporter, "I read on the Net that the major ingredient in almost all shampoos makes your hair fall out, so I've stopped using shampoo." When told about the Gullibility Virus, T. C. said he would stop reading e-mail, so that he would not become infected. Anyone with symptoms like these is urged to seek help immediately. Experts recommend that at the first feelings of gullibility, Internet users rush to their favorite search engine and look up the item tempting them to thoughtless credence. Most hoaxes, legends, and tall tales have been widely discussed and exposed by the Internet community. Courses in critical thinking are also widely available, and there is online help from many sources, including * Department of Energy Computer Incident Advisory Capability at * Symantec Anti Virus Research Center at * McAfee Associates Virus Hoax List at * Dr. Solomons Hoax Page at * The Urban Legends Web Site at * Urban Legends Reference Pages at * Datafellows Hoax Warnings at Those people who are still symptom free can help inoculate themselves against the Gullibility Virus by reading some good material on evaluating sources, such as: * Evaluating Internet Research Sources at * Evaluation of Information Sources at * Bibliography on Evaluating Internet Resources at Lastly, as a public service, Internet users can help stamp out the Gullibility Virus by sending copies of this message to anyone who forwards them a hoax. **************************************************** This message is so important, we're sending it anonymously! Forward it to all your friends right away! Don't think about it! This is not a chain letter! My lawyer told me it is entirely legal! This story is true! Don't check it out! This story is so timely, there is no date on it! This story is so important, we're using lots of exclamation points! For every message you forward to some unsuspecting person, the Home for the Hopelessly Gullible will donate ten cents to itself. (If you wonder how the Home will know you are forwarding these messages all over creation, you're obviously thinking too much.) --------------394006B95AC7CF3D957321AA-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 08:55:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14809; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 08:50:56 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 08:50:56 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990119114923.007a02a0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 11:49:23 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"-rb8v.0.Id3.hVBfs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25673 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: "...it turns out the underlying copper layer and possibly the plastic are also critical." Scott Little responded: This is an interesting hypothesis but I doubt that it has been rigorously proved. Oh, the proof is quite rigorous, albeit inadvertent and involuntary. It is statistical: most batches of beads made with the original stock worked, none of the batches made with the replacement stock worked. The test was repeated many times. This is excellent statistical proof, but alas it does tell us what critical differences between the materials cause the problem. A direct comparison with everything ELSE held constant would be required. Everything else was held constant, as much as possible. They used the same processes to add additional layers of metal. I should add that as far as I know, Miley's beads worked and continue to work, and I have no idea why CETI does not purchase beads from U. Illinois. I know of at least one other thing that has changed at CETI since the days of large excess heat...they now have better calorimetry. They had excellent calorimeters before and after they ran out of stock. I described one of the good calorimeters, which they brought to ICCF4. It was as good as any of Scott Little's instruments. It had more expensive and precise power and flow meters than Scott's, and better redundancy. They also had some lousy calorimeters, like the large one used at Power Gen. Both the good calorimeters and the lousy ones agreed there was no heat. I also talked with Miley a lot about heat. His calorimetric methods were very casual. Miley is casual, but his methods are more rigorous than he lets on. I asked him many questions about cross checks and ambient temperatures, and he had the information at his fingertips. (He might not have it now, years later.) For example, he did not enclose his experiment in a temperature-controlled box . . . I believe it was an air-temperature controlled hood, but this does not matter much, as long as the enclosure temperature is lower than the cell and it does not fluctuate much. . . . nor did he arrange for precise temperature regulation of the inlet electrolyte. As long as the temperature is *measured* precisely in a well-mixed sample, and it does not fluctuate rapidly, drift in the inlet temperature does not matter. Inlet temperatures never stays exactly the same even with top-quality lab-cooler regulators, and these lab-cooler regulators are a pain in the butt. Even the good ones add more noise than they remove, in my opinion. Therefore you should direct the regulator output into a large reservoir instead, or immerse the inlet tube in a large, regulated bath (SRI method). Either way, the temperature of a large body of water will always drift. The best inlet temperature regulation I know of is at SRI. It varied from 36.47 deg C to 36.50 deg C over 102 hours in one example (ICCF2, p. 439). In my opinion, you simply cannot make meaningful low-level calorimetric measurements without such steps. "Low level" should be defined. I would call it measuring 100 mW at overall power levels below 500 mW. Anyway, in my opinion, you can make meaningful measurements with the kind of equipment Miley used. Chris Tinsley and I achieved surprisingly meaningful measurements with the crudest of crude instruments imaginable. Miley had far better (read: more expensive) stuff than we had. In my opinion, Scott overstates the difficulties of calorimetry, while he understates and does not appreciate difficulties with electrochemistry, materials, and contamination. People like Storms, Mizuno and Cravens spend six months preparing, purifying and testing cathodes, recombiners and other cell materials, and only a few weeks preparing calorimeters. I think Scott reverses those proportions, spending more time on the calorimetry than the electrochem. That may explain why his experiments have not produced excess heat. (Actually, Storms, Mizuno and Cravens think so; I am merely parroting their opinions.) Further, we performed careful calorimetric measurements on Miley's own beads (which are included in his excess heat claims) using our Dual-Method Calorimeter and saw no sign of excess heat (our detection limit was about 0.1 watt). No doubt the calorimetric measurements were careful, but unless you have many years experience doing electrochemistry, or at least six months intensive bench work side-by-side with someone who has, my impression is that you probably made a mistake on the chemical or electrochemical side. Also, you must repeat the tests many times or so before you can reach a firm conclusion. Fritz Will, for example, analyzed 125 blank, unused cathodes before going on to the used ones. After 125 warm-up tests his people must have been good at looking for tritium! Of course, I myself *do not* have this experience, so I cannot imagine what might have gone wrong with Scott's experiment. I have spent a good deal of talking with and working with people like Storms, Mizuno, Bockris, Fleischmann and Fritz Will, who have decades of experience. I have learned to appreciate their formal knowledge and informal know-how. They can list dozens of ways to botch an experiment, just as I can tell you at least a hundred ways to screw up a computer program. Doing electrochem is roughly as difficult as debugging 50,000 lines of Pascal programs. I would not trust the job to a person with less than two years intense, full-time experience working alongside an expert. That is why it is so difficult to get a PhD in electrochemistry, especially when you are indentured to a slave-driver like Bockris. I repeat: doing careful calorimetry is the first, essential step, but it is *far* easier than doing careful electrochemistry. Michael J. Schaffer writes: I meet Miley once or twice a year at Hot fusion meetings. We usually chat about Cold fusion. I do not say that Miley thinks that he has no excess heat. However, I find that he now backs away from discussing excess heat in his experiments . . . However you find?!? Yo, Mike, let's be a little more rigorous in our reporting here. Either he does back away or he does not. I have not spoken with him for some time; I do not know. He had not backed away as of last April. Ask him! E-mail him, and report what he says. Last I heard they were not doing any CF experiments for lack of funding. That is not a measure of Miley's confidence or enthusiasm. It is strictly dollars and cents. On the other hand, it seems to me that he thinks that the transmutation results will provide the clues to understanding what is going on. The transmutation excites him. Right. He has always been more interested in the nuclear evidence than in the excess heat, and his experiment designs have sacrificed calorimetric precision to improve the transmutation results. That trade-off is even more pronounced with Iwamura's experiment. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 09:09:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28966; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 09:03:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 09:03:30 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990119120308.007a28c0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 12:03:08 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: [off topic] Warning! Gullibility spread by email! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"VMiO62.0.Q47.XhBfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25674 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I like that! In fairness, we should note that tall tales and bizarre claims are also published by the New York Time, ABC, CNN and other mainstream publications. They do not always check facts, especially when their sources are at places like the DOE. Also, the Wall Street Journal and the business sections of your daily newspapers often report claims of enormous success in business which later turn out to be fraud. Companies ship bricks packed in disk drive boxes, or report vast gold deposits where none exist, or sell billions in worthless "junk bonds." Thousands of S&Ls are driven into bankrupcy. Speculators kite up the value of internet companies to absurd levels. "Hedge funds" lose billions overnight, and are bailed out by massive government welfare operations. In the initial stages, when these companies appear successful, the financial-page reporters describe the stories with a straight face and no hint that something fishy is going on. Later on, after things fall apart, they do report the gory details. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 10:56:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13246; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 10:55:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 10:55:13 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: <14b339f0.36a4d4dc aol.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 13:54:20 EST Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Alternative horticulture... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"eSlO53.0.qE3.HKDfs" mx1> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25675 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-18 13:16:54 EST, you write: > -- ".. most of the research concerns overhead wires charged with either >high voltage direct current, high-frequency alternating current ( as with >the Tesla coil transformer ), and low-frequency periodic pulses of direct >or alternating current at high potential." >-- " Some of the benefits claimed in these extended tests [ Professor Selim >Lemstrom of Helsingfors (at that time in Russia ) ] included yield >increases from 21 to 65 percent, increased sugar content in fruits and >vegetables, richer colors in flowers, and especially improved resistance to >drought and diseases." >-- "Even though the current density is tiny for setting up an effective >electrical field (less than1/2 milliampere per acre or 1.2X10E-11 amps per >square cm), this current is still 50,000 times the natural average >air-earth current density. An hypothetical sprout peeks out from under the compost as I read the foregoing contribution to this collective dialogue. _Secrets of the Soil_ references towers built by the Druids on an Irish island reknown for its lush, mineral-rich grass (area farmers actually ferry their herds there to graze). Recognizing the geometric earmarks of antennae, an EE calculated their putative tuning. The result corresponded to a freq. known to emanate from a certain stellar contellation whose diagram precisely matches the towers' topological layout! What causal relationship between RF and plant growth was known to the Druids? One explanation postulated in SOTS is that the cosmic energy collected by the towers negatively charges the soil, creating an affinity between the minerals & the plants' roots, which carry an inherently positive. This explanation, however, would apply to cosmic energy in general without accounting for the specific tuning accuracy that the Druids so painstakingly incorporated. I'm therefore inclined to regard EM as the carrier, but the frequency modulated thereupon as an all-important message. These emails reference plants’ responding to every conceivable energy form--electric, acoustic, infra-red, EM, even “orgone”, “eloptic”, etc. Perhaps the message is more important than the medium. If the we understood the essential encoding of the command “Grow!”, perhaps we could relay it over whatever media were most energy-efficiency. Modern science surged forth from the discovery that matter & energy are interchangeable. All energy forms are frequency-tuned. We say that plants need energy (light) and matter (minerals) suspended in a carrier medium (water). Sea salt represents all geological minerals in crystalline form. Crystal is matter in frequency-tuned form. is the common denominator among . is . age was begun with the each mineral has a vibrational signature. The Sonic Bloom simulates the frequencies of the song of birds that inhabit The proven, positive responsiveness of plants when exposed to various *invisible* energy forms (electrical current, acoustic vibration, infra-red, etc.) compels me theorize that the message (“Grow!”) were communicable over a variety media, and that more energy-efficient forms than light--or even of which could be selected. Modern science surged forth from the discovery that matter & energy are interchangeable. All energy forms are frequency-tuned. We say that plants need energy (light) and matter (minerals) suspended in a carrier medium (water). Sea salt represents all geological minerals in crystalline form. Crystal is matter in frequency-tuned form. is the common denominator among . is . age was begun with the each mineral has a vibrational signature. The Sonic Bloom simulates the frequencies of the song of birds that inhabit From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 12:33:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA17789; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 12:24:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 12:24:28 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 11:33:09 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Resent-Message-ID: <"nrOjS1.0.nL4.xdEfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25676 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:54 AM 1/19/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 00:11:21 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>At 12:34 PM 1/17/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >>[snip] >>>I don't really know much about relativity, but I was under the >>>impression that relativistic mass was non-gravitational. I.e. a body >>>can't go so fast that it collapses under it's own gravitational >>>attraction as a consequence of relativistic mass increase. >> >> >>This can not be, that relativistic mass is non-gravitational. The mass of >>excited nuclei increases corresponding to the trapped kinetic energy. >[snip] >I think mass spectrographs measure inertial mass, not gravitational >mass. When heavy nuclei are formed the kinetic energy of the constituants, including the relativistic component, is "converted" to mass. This is mass that can be weighed on a scale, as well as can be showed to be equivalent inirtially. When the heavy nuclei fission, this energy is returned. But so is the mass, because total mass remains constant in any reference frame. The mass of released photons plus the relativistic mass increase of the released particles plus the rest mass of the fission released particles corresponds to the mass of the previously fused particles, including the relativistic component, regardless of the refernce frame. I know of no example where *both* mass and energy are not conserved. I also know of no test which shows that inirtial mass is not equal to gravitational mass. Do you? Does some magic have to be invoked that "converts" relativistic mass increments to energy or vice versa, when energy and mass are always in the E=mc^2 correspondence? They can be viewed as one and the same, always matching. One is not "converted" to the other. Their totals are always constant. Photons are bent around heavy gravitational objects in space. This could be viewed as a curvature of space, but could it not also be interpreted as a gravitational attraction of the heavy body to the mass corresponding to the photon's energy? Aren't these synonymous and operationally equivalent, isomorphic, views? If the mass of photons, which are comprised entirely of EM fields, is gravitational, then the fields of charged particles must also be gravitational. Every particle exhibiting any electromagnetic phenomena must have a gravitational component, if this line of thinking is correct. It would be interesting to hear counter examples to the above, because one consequence to the above thinking is that free energy creating devices must also create corresponding mass. Any scheme which supposedly creates free energy yet has no mechanism for creating new mass is therefore higly suspect. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 13:25:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA24018; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 13:22:23 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 13:22:23 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0D1 XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Wimps and nuclei Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 13:03:39 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <"tLO142.0.Ct5.DUFfs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25677 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace As far as I know, your statement is correct. The big thing you need to be sure of is understanding which four dimensional coordinate system(s) you are working in, or transforming between. There are weird effects in different systems. The main ones used in general relativity are 1) flat-spacetime, a long distance away from any significant mass or energy, 2) a system riding with a particle as it approaches a mass. 3) an observer, sited near a large mass or blackhole, stationary with respect to it. (Consider a framework of kyrtonite, built one meter outside the horizon of a black hole, held stationary by very powerful rocket engines). You can then work with metrics in these different systems, and transform between one and the other. Tomorrow, if I can find it, I will recommend a good book, at the high school physics teacher level, dealing with this stuff. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner mtaonline.net[SMTP:hheffner@mtaonline.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 1999 12:33 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei > > At 1:54 AM 1/19/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 00:11:21 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: > > > >>At 12:34 PM 1/17/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >>[snip] > >>>I don't really know much about relativity, but I was under the > >>>impression that relativistic mass was non-gravitational. I.e. a body > >>>can't go so fast that it collapses under it's own gravitational > >>>attraction as a consequence of relativistic mass increase. > >> > >> > >>This can not be, that relativistic mass is non-gravitational. The mass > of > >>excited nuclei increases corresponding to the trapped kinetic energy. > >[snip] > >I think mass spectrographs measure inertial mass, not gravitational > >mass. > > When heavy nuclei are formed the kinetic energy of the constituants, > including the relativistic component, is "converted" to mass. This is > mass > that can be weighed on a scale, as well as can be showed to be equivalent > inirtially. When the heavy nuclei fission, this energy is returned. But > so is the mass, because total mass remains constant in any reference > frame. > The mass of released photons plus the relativistic mass increase of the > released particles plus the rest mass of the fission released particles > corresponds to the mass of the previously fused particles, including the > relativistic component, regardless of the refernce frame. I know of no > example where *both* mass and energy are not conserved. I also know of > no > test which shows that inirtial mass is not equal to gravitational mass. > Do > you? Does some magic have to be invoked that "converts" relativistic > mass > increments to energy or vice versa, when energy and mass are always in the > E=mc^2 correspondence? They can be viewed as one and the same, always > matching. One is not "converted" to the other. Their totals are always > constant. > > Photons are bent around heavy gravitational objects in space. This could > be viewed as a curvature of space, but could it not also be interpreted as > a gravitational attraction of the heavy body to the mass corresponding to > the photon's energy? Aren't these synonymous and operationally > equivalent, > isomorphic, views? If the mass of photons, which are comprised entirely > of > EM fields, is gravitational, then the fields of charged particles must > also > be gravitational. Every particle exhibiting any electromagnetic phenomena > must have a gravitational component, if this line of thinking is correct. > > It would be interesting to hear counter examples to the above, because one > consequence to the above thinking is that free energy creating devices > must > also create corresponding mass. Any scheme which supposedly creates free > energy yet has no mechanism for creating new mass is therefore higly > suspect. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 14:53:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09972; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 14:51:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 14:51:43 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990119165127.00948f20 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 16:51:27 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990119114923.007a02a0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"fCbH83.0.XR2.-nGfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25678 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:49 1/19/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >People like Storms, Mizuno >and Cravens spend six months preparing, purifying and testing cathodes, >recombiners and other cell materials, and only a few weeks preparing >calorimeters. I think Scott reverses those proportions, spending more time >on the calorimetry than the electrochem. That may explain why his >experiments have not produced excess heat. ...or it could explain why their experiments appeared to produce excess heat. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 20:10:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA01646; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 20:08:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 20:08:20 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 04:08:13 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36a8534c.26456136 24.192.1.20> References: <000301be426b$97287ee0$f0441d26 default> In-Reply-To: <000301be426b$97287ee0$f0441d26 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: <"HCDIa1.0.eP.qQLfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25679 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 15:48:22 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: [snip] >Only because I didn't look up the 5 grams/cm^2 of "regular" matter in 4.0E6 >light years that >a cosmic ray comes through before it reaches our Solar System. Not to >mention the 0.5E-9 Tesla magnetic field in our Galaxy that helps >determine the radius swept by a charged particle that can get up to 1.0E20 >ev energy near a Pulsar or such where their fields are in the TevaTesla >range and they are rotating at several hundred revs/second. :-) Ok, point partly taken. Not sure what the mean free path is for cosmic rays. >There should be 4 Protons ---> He4 + 2e+ + 2 neutrinos, according to the >"Standard Model", Look up "Solar Neutrinos" on the web. >>Also, does this experiment use liquid chlorine, on a chlorine >>compound? I suspect there are several other possible reactions as well, especially given that fusion reactions don't appear to be nearly as well understood as modern physics would have us believe. [snip] >>I don't really know much about relativity, but I was under the >>impression that relativistic mass was non-gravitational. > >By that reasoning leptons would experience the >same gravitational force as quarks?? This assuming that the only difference between the two is kinetic energy. [snip] >>In which case, why would it repel anything? > >It doesn't have to repel to deflect a massive (relativistic) neutrino, it >can do the "slingshot" effect same as a space probe shot at Venus. [snip] We were talking about why the neutrino count is lower than expected. I.e. why the number of neutrinos actually arriving at the planet is less than the number that should be "pointed at it". In order to deflect a particle by the slingshot effect, I think that particle must already be on a course that doesn't intersect the disk of the planet. I.e. not actually be pointed directly at the planet. But this means that we wouldn't expect to measure them anyway, so they wouldn't be missed. What I am trying to say is that I believe that neutrinos that would be missed can't be deflected by a slingshot effect, but must of necessity be deflected by some repulsive force, if they are deflected at all. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 20:20:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA06080; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 20:18:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 20:18:50 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 04:18:44 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36a956f8.27396478 24.192.1.20> References: <000b01be427f$0823db40$f0441d26 default> In-Reply-To: <000b01be427f$0823db40$f0441d26 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: <"CD1Nj1.0.vU1.faLfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25680 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 18:07:18 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: [snip] >This is where I believe that the neutrino and the antineutrino have charges >(+/-)that is y = sin x, and the quarks/leptons have charges that are y = cos >x or vice versa. Thus if you plot the sine/cosine curves they are 90 and 270 >degrees apart from the 0 and 180 of the quarks/leptons and thus act ALMOST >NEUTRAL toward them,but they couple enough within a nucleus to be given >energy/acceleration. Isn't this Ross Tessien's proposition? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 19 22:23:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA12021; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 22:22:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 22:22:09 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 06:22:02 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36aa594b.27991411 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: <"Fadr01.0.kx2.GONfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25681 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 19 Jan 1999 11:33:09 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >>>This can not be, that relativistic mass is non-gravitational. The mass of >>>excited nuclei increases corresponding to the trapped kinetic energy. >>[snip] >>I think mass spectrographs measure inertial mass, not gravitational >>mass. IOW I doubt the *gravitational* mass of an *excited* nucleus has ever been measured. I also wonder if the inertial mass of a relativistic object increases in a direction perpendicular to it's direction of travel. > >When heavy nuclei are formed the kinetic energy of the constituants, >including the relativistic component, is "converted" to mass. This is mass >that can be weighed on a scale, as well as can be showed to be equivalent >inirtially. True, but need not still be relativistic mass. It may by then have turned into normal non-relativistic mass. IOW relativistic mass may simply be a measure of the resistance a body exhibits to further acceleration, and that resistance may not necessarily be related to an increase in the amount of "stuff" that is present. (I'm thinking along the lines of a bow wave in the aether). Perhaps when kinetic energy is converted into gravitational mass (during a collision), some of the aether compressed in the bow wave "condenses" to use Rosses model, and is incorporated into the "stuff" of the object. >When the heavy nuclei fission, this energy is returned. But >so is the mass, because total mass remains constant in any reference frame. What is wrong with the following: >From the frame of reference of a particle in a particle accelerator, the rest of the universe is accelerating, while it stands still. Hence the mass of the universe is increasing relativistically. Eventually, if the particle goes fast enough, the universe will collapse due to the vast increase in gravitational force created by the relativistic mass of the universe ;^). My conclusion: All frames are not created equal and/or gravitational and total relativistic mass are not equal. (Actually I'm inclined to think it's "and"). [snip] >Photons are bent around heavy gravitational objects in space. This could >be viewed as a curvature of space, but could it not also be interpreted as >a gravitational attraction of the heavy body to the mass corresponding to >the photon's energy? Apparently not, as the gravitational mass of the photon appears to depend upon it's trajectory relative to the gravitational field, while this isn't the case for it's relativistic "mass". [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 00:15:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA20204; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 00:14:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 00:14:16 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:23:25 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Resent-Message-ID: <"IWkMi.0.Yx4.O1Pfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25682 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:22 PM 1/19/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >On Tue, 19 Jan 1999 11:33:09 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >>>>This can not be, that relativistic mass is non-gravitational. The mass of >>>>excited nuclei increases corresponding to the trapped kinetic energy. >>>[snip] >>>I think mass spectrographs measure inertial mass, not gravitational >>>mass. >IOW I doubt the *gravitational* mass of an *excited* nucleus has ever >been measured. It seems to me that *all* nuclei are excited, though this is not the conventional meaning of the term. Radioactive nuclei are excited to the point that, on occasion, a nuclear state permitting fission spontaneously arises, true? Is there some reason to believe the kinetic energy that goes into a particle ever changes its nature, except that the initial linear motion is converted to angular motion in a small volume, due to the attraction of one force or another? It all depends upon your point of view, I suppose. High energy positron-electron collisions can create any kind of particle. This, to me, seems to indicate an unseen structure more fundamental than quarks and leptons, though this is certainly not a new concept! The relativistic mass of the progenitors is "converted" to the rest mass of the product particles. I just wonder if possibly this "conversion" is realy just a matter of how we do our book keeping. Maybe the rest mass of most or all particles consists of some amount of relativistic mass due to internaly trapped kinetic energy. >I also wonder if the inertial mass of a relativistic object increases >in a direction perpendicular to it's direction of travel. Yes, the mass increases from side, otherwise the bubble chamber radius would change - the Lorentz force is lateral. >> >>When heavy nuclei are formed the kinetic energy of the constituants, >>including the relativistic component, is "converted" to mass. This is mass >>that can be weighed on a scale, as well as can be showed to be equivalent >>inirtially. > >True, but need not still be relativistic mass. It may by then have >turned into normal non-relativistic mass. IOW relativistic mass may >simply be a measure of the resistance a body exhibits to further >acceleration, and that resistance may not necessarily be related to an >increase in the amount of "stuff" that is present. >(I'm thinking along the lines of a bow wave in the aether). >Perhaps when kinetic energy is converted into gravitational mass >(during a collision), some of the aether compressed in the bow wave >"condenses" to use Rosses model, and is incorporated into the "stuff" >of the object. Or maybe the "stuff" retains its kinetic energy and thus its relativistic mass, with the distinction between mass and energy being that energy involves linear motion and mass involves rotational motion confined to a particle. The interpretation depends on the model, but it seems to me macroscopically that mass and energy remain always *both* in balance, thus is there something that demands they not stay in balance in nuclear transactions, other than our mental models of the transactions? It seems possible to build a theory where the terms mass and energy might be combined into one term, as they are synonymous. > >>When the heavy nuclei fission, this energy is returned. But >>so is the mass, because total mass remains constant in any reference frame. > >What is wrong with the following: >From the frame of reference of a particle in a particle accelerator, >the rest of the universe is accelerating, while it stands still. >Hence the mass of the universe is increasing relativistically. >Eventually, if the particle goes fast enough, the universe will >collapse due to the vast increase in gravitational force created by >the relativistic mass of the universe ;^). Nothing that I can see. Another view is that the time dilation for the observer in the particle's frame collapses the universe. Of course, the particle doesn't approach c close enough or long enough for it to observe the collapse. Interesting - this is a proof that the universe will collapse? >My conclusion: All frames are not created equal and/or gravitational >and total relativistic mass are not equal. >(Actually I'm inclined to think it's "and"). >[snip] >>Photons are bent around heavy gravitational objects in space. This could >>be viewed as a curvature of space, but could it not also be interpreted as >>a gravitational attraction of the heavy body to the mass corresponding to >>the photon's energy? > >Apparently not, as the gravitational mass of the photon appears to >depend upon it's trajectory relative to the gravitational field, while >this isn't the case for it's relativistic "mass". I don't understand. All the mass of the photon is "relativistic." It has a rest mass of zero. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 05:30:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA14640; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 05:28:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 05:28:48 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990120082835.007aa9a0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 08:28:35 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Message from George Miley Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WzLmC1.0.fa3.FeTfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25683 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yesterday, I wrote "last I heard [Miley et al.] were not doing any CF experiments for lack of funding." Today, by coincidence, I have a fax of a letter from Miley for publication in Infinite Energy. It sounds like the research is continuing. I do not know the details, but he says the lab at U. Illinois is called the Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) Laboratory. It sounds like they are continuing research in CF. He is optimistic about the near future: "Now, as new results emerge, new young scientists and engineers are beginning to look at the field afresh, without fear of criticism or ridicule." I hope he is right about that. This letter says nothing about calorimetry. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 06:35:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA04534; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 06:32:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 06:32:41 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990120093233.0079aa10 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 09:32:33 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"GPpFS.0.h61.9aUfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25684 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Regarding Storms, Mizuno and Cravens, Scott Little writes: ...or it could explain why their experiments appeared to produce excess heat. Well, Scott . . . you have met these people, spoken with them extensively, read their papers, heard their lectures and visited their labs, and you know a great deal about their calorimeters. Calorimetry is your area of expertise. So if you know about errors in their work, I think you should tell us about them. Write a good critique and we will publish it. And if you do not know of any errors, I think you refrain from making comments like that. It looks flippant. It looks as if you are dismissing their work without a valid reason. After all, calorimetry is not *all that* complicated. Not as many things can go wrong with it as with chemistry or electrochemistry, for reasons I have often enumerated: people have been doing calorimetry for 150 years; there are only 3 or 4 control parameters; and measuring at the 100 mW level is not pushing the state of the art. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 08:00:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA02549; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 07:55:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 07:55:53 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 15:55:44 +0000 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: hello Scott Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"ree1f2.0.kd.8oVfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25685 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sorry Scott, I don't have your email readily to hand. I am in Houston now and could see you at the weekend if I hire a car. Can't follow day to day on vortex too busy. Interesting stuff from Robin and Hal. Currently reading Moray. I believe you have a web page with route to AUstin. Drop off a telephone number as well please I can call before I come. Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 08:01:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA03020; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 07:56:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 07:56:49 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990120095614.00946404 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 09:56:14 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: CETI's reproducibility problem In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990120093233.0079aa10 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"T7ONN.0.6l.1pVfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25686 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:32 1/20/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Well, Scott . . . you have met these people, spoken with them extensively, >read their papers, heard their lectures and visited their labs, and you >know a great deal about their calorimeters. Calorimetry is your area of >expertise. So if you know about errors in their work, I think you should >tell us about them. I don't KNOW of errors in their work, I'm just pointing out the possibility that they exist. In the case of Mizuno, I know almost nothing about his calorimetry. He apparently did not think it worthwhile to describe in his paper! In the case of Storms, he has rebuilt his calorimeter to incorporate the dual-method strategy that I used in my Patterson bead quest. At the time he was doing it, I made him a friendly wager that he would never see the same significant excess heat signal in both channels at once. To date (about a year later) he has not called to collect on the wager. In the case of Cravens...all I can is that he has asked to borrow my low-power water flow calorimeter (the one at ICCF-7). I think this would be a good use of the thing and will probably deliver it to him within a month or two. >..if you do not know of any errors, I think you refrain from making comments >like that. It looks flippant. No, it's good science. I am merely raising an alternative hypothesis to explain the difference between their results and mine. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 14:18:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA07060; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:17:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:17:11 -0800 Message-ID: <001601be44c2$60e1af60$eb441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 15:15:08 -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: <"2XZzQ3.0.Dk1.dNbfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25687 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, January 19, 1999 9:19 PM Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Robin wrote: >On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 18:07:18 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >[snip] >>This is where I believe that the neutrino and the antineutrino have charges >>(+/-)that is y = sin x, and the quarks/leptons have charges that are y = cos >>x or vice versa. Thus if you plot the sine/cosine curves they are 90 and 270 >>degrees apart from the 0 and 180 of the quarks/leptons and thus act ALMOST >>NEUTRAL toward them,but they couple enough within a nucleus to be given >>energy/acceleration. > >Isn't this Ross Tessien's proposition? I think Ross Tessian arrived at a similar conclusion for charge and/or partial charge in quarks. When you draw the y(sin x) and y(cos x) curves and their 180 degree opposites and superimpose them in an overlay it certainly supports the idea that the neutrino and antineutrino should for the most part act like neutral particles,or particles with fractional charge. The spin m*c*R =(+/-) 1/2 certainly indicates a small rest mass that can be "spun" up to higher mass/energy by electrons and/or nuclei, which might explain the so-called "Oscillations" of the neutrinos especially when they pass through the Earth and are measured before and after. Regards, Frederick >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 14:31:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA12735; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:29:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:29:28 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 22:29:27 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36a64c8c.90275898 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: <"Eul2s3.0.o63.7Zbfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25688 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:23:25 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >>IOW I doubt the *gravitational* mass of an *excited* nucleus has ever >>been measured. > > >It seems to me that *all* nuclei are excited, though this is not the >conventional meaning of the term. Radioactive nuclei are excited to the >point that, on occasion, a nuclear state permitting fission spontaneously >arises, true? Not necessarily. It's possible that the energy required to initiate fission is borrowed from the Heisenberg bank, as is the (much smaller) energy involved in initiating the decay of excited atomic states. >Is there some reason to believe the kinetic energy that goes >into a particle ever changes its nature, except that the initial linear >motion is converted to angular motion in a small volume, due to the >attraction of one force or another? It all depends upon your point of Yes, there is. When an atomic electron absorbs kinetic energy from an outside source, it goes into a "higher orbit". Yet in this "higher orbit", the velocity of the electron is lower (not higher), while the potential energy increases by more than the kinetic energy absorbed. It would appear that energy can be stored in the field itself, and not as kinetic energy. [snip] >>I also wonder if the inertial mass of a relativistic object increases >>in a direction perpendicular to it's direction of travel. > >Yes, the mass increases from side, otherwise the bubble chamber radius >would change - the Lorentz force is lateral. Thanks, point taken. [snip] >Or maybe the "stuff" retains its kinetic energy and thus its relativistic >mass, with the distinction between mass and energy being that energy >involves linear motion and mass involves rotational motion confined to a >particle. The interpretation depends on the model, but it seems to me The problem I have with this harks back to my example above with atomic electrons absorbing external energy. If that energy were absorbed as circular kinetic energy within the electron, and the electrons mass were to increase accordingly, then I would expect the electron to take up a "lower" rather than "higher" "orbit" (as happens when negative muons are substituted for electrons). [snip] >>What is wrong with the following: >>From the frame of reference of a particle in a particle accelerator, >>the rest of the universe is accelerating, while it stands still. >>Hence the mass of the universe is increasing relativistically. >>Eventually, if the particle goes fast enough, the universe will >>collapse due to the vast increase in gravitational force created by >>the relativistic mass of the universe ;^). > >Nothing that I can see. Where does the mass/energy come from that is used to increase the relativistic mass of the universe? >Another view is that the time dilation for the >observer in the particle's frame collapses the universe. Of course, the >particle doesn't approach c close enough or long enough for it to observe >the collapse. Interesting - this is a proof that the universe will >collapse? Only if someone accelerates a particle fast enough :^). > > >>My conclusion: All frames are not created equal and/or gravitational >>and total relativistic mass are not equal. >>(Actually I'm inclined to think it's "and"). >>[snip] >>>Photons are bent around heavy gravitational objects in space. This could >>>be viewed as a curvature of space, but could it not also be interpreted as >>>a gravitational attraction of the heavy body to the mass corresponding to >>>the photon's energy? >> >>Apparently not, as the gravitational mass of the photon appears to >>depend upon it's trajectory relative to the gravitational field, while >>this isn't the case for it's relativistic "mass". > > >I don't understand. All the mass of the photon is "relativistic." It has >a rest mass of zero. True, but not the point. E.g. a photon with a wavelength of 400 nm only has one relativistic mass (i.e. h/(c*400nm) as I presume you would calculate it), but various gravitational masses, depending upon trajectory. That is to say, it has a different apparent gravitational mass when approaching the earth dead centre, than when passing the earth tangentially (according to GR). However my lack of comprehension WRT relativity could be showing here. Maybe it really does have different masses under GR. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 17:03:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA10118; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 17:02:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 17:02:32 -0800 Message-ID: <36A67D38.9E91E128 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 18:04:57 -0700 From: "Richard T. Murray" Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [Fwd: "Palladium Electrochemistry" Session at Centennial APS meeting] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------3EA9828F3364F82C2731B729" Resent-Message-ID: <"0XhGn1.0.xT2.dodfs" mx1> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25689 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. --------------3EA9828F3364F82C2731B729 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --------------3EA9828F3364F82C2731B729 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil (ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.112.13]) by grebe.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA21055 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:49:46 -0800 (PST) From: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil Received: by ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil; id AA09077; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 17:35:39 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990121174015.0070aad8 ccf.nrl.navy.mil> X-Sender: chubb ccf.nrl.navy.mil X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.2 (32) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 17:40:15 -0500 To: wdmil aol.com, griggs@mindspring.com, tutt@wente.llnl.gov, drom vxcern.cern.ch, francesco.premuda@mail.ing.unibo.it, safwanh nol.com.jo, rmatlock@pilot.lsus.edu, LForsley@jwk.com, mizuno hune.hokudai.ac.jp, tohmori@pop.cat.hokudai.ac.jp, 72050.2111 compuserve.com, mica@world.std.com, la@utkux.utk.edu, orian001 maroon.tc.umn.edu, coppedge@students.uiuc.edu, go4ceti aol.com, mokuniewsk@aol.com, celani@frascati.infn.it, opa aps.org, akito@nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp, szpak@nosc.mil, bossp nosc.mil, dashj@psu4.pdx.edu, jstanly@mse.ogi.edu, dg cco.caltech.edu, collis@netcity.it, ell@lanl.gov, sphkoji sci.shizuoka.ac.jp, jdunn@ctc.org, bakealamos@juno.com, g-miley uiuc.edu, ceti@msn.com, design73@aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mike_mckubre qm.sri.com, chubb@ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil, jaeger eneco-usa.com, cincygrp@ix.netcom.com, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil, jjones ebs330.eb.uah.edu, mel_miles@imdgw.chinalake.navy.mil, z ccyber.com, ldhansen@chemdept.byu.edu, 76002.1473@compuserve.com, wolfy2 erols.com, rwall@ix.netcom.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, kirk.shanahan srs.gov, blue@pilot.msu.edu, sejones@physics1.ln.byu.edu, terry4 llnl.gov, wireless@amigo.net, ikegami@nifs.ac.jp, takahashi bnlarm.bnl.gov, kitamura@cc.kshosen.ac.jp, bressani to.infn.it, sanchez@bosque.sdi.uam.es, tsarev@x4.nrl.navy.mil, rmforall earthlink.net Subject: "Palladium Electrochemistry" Session at Centennial APS meeting Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Dear all, There will be a "Cold Fusion" session at the meeting, commemorating the APS centennial, which will be held 20-26 March 1999, in Atlanta. All of the abstracts for this session are available, on-line, through the WEB. The WEB location of these abstracts is the following: http://www.aps.org/meet/CENT99/BAPS/abs/S9500.html The associated session, which is called "Palladium Electrochemistry", is scheduled for Friday afternoon, 14:00, Room 365W, in the Georgia World Congress Center (which is the primary location for the meeting). A number of the abstracts have hypertext links to locations where additional information about Cold Fusion can be found. I would appreciate your forwarding this information to anyone that you think might be interested. SCOTT --------------3EA9828F3364F82C2731B729 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="rmforall.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Richard T. Murray Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="rmforall.vcf" begin:vcard n:Murray;Richard T. "Rich" tel;home:505-986-8250 tel;work:505-986-9103 x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:rmforall earthlink.net fn:Richard T. "Rich" Murray end:vcard --------------3EA9828F3364F82C2731B729-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 21:17:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA10155; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:10:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:10:46 -0800 Message-ID: <36A6B754.71CB5B08 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 22:12:52 -0700 From: "Richard T. Murray" Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Britz: Mizuno book is careful 1.13.99 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------439AE3929A83435A911A9363" Resent-Message-ID: <"or84Z3.0.aU2.LRhfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25690 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. --------------439AE3929A83435A911A9363 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Storms: Schultz: Miles He data 12.14.98 Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 09:32:27 +0100 From: Dieter Britz Organization: University of Aarhus, Department of Computer Science (DAIMI) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion [re long and bitter controversy between Mitchel Swartz and various critics] > : One important issue discussed by Dr. Miles includes: > : "How does any critic propose to explain the fact that 30 out of 33 > : of our heat and helium studies yielded either excess helium when > : excess power was measured or no excess helium when no excess power > : was present. > > How does Dr. Miles propose to explain the fact that his "control" > cell produced excess heat, and that he never went back and repeated > the experiment with a properly designed control? How does Dr. Miles [...] Is it not time to put an end to this discussion? I believe all the points that can be made have been made. The skeptics (me among them) do not regard the results of Miles as conclusive either way; they might give some interesting hints at helium production, but they are too rough for one to be sure. The enthusiasts believe the results. We have seen a lot of argument (and personal exchanges) to and fro, and I do not think that we can get any further with this. It is also a bit much to expect Mitch to speak for Miles - a pity Miles himself is not in on the discussion directly. Miles himself must be aware of the tentative nature of those results and would no doubt like to do more work, to get more definite results. I believe he is prevented from doing so, however. That is another reason this cannot be resolved, unless someone else takes over Miles' work. I must admit that Miles does provide some evidence, though perhaps not proof, of helium production; this is supported by the findings of Arata & Zhang, although their work, too, has been criticised. But then, everything can be criticised, noone does the perfect experiment. I have repeatedly tried to make the point that we skeptics have to stay reasonable. When we can't point to glaring errors in some claim, we do not have to believe the claim, but we ought not to express ourselves too strongly against it. I am reminded of this just now, reading the book by Mizuno (I'll report on this soon). If the English translation by Rothwell is a faithful rendering of Mizuno's Japanese, it is very hard to doubt that author's work; Mizuno seems to be a very pedantic and excruciatingly careful scientist, reluctant to accept a result unless he has done it, in some cases, a ridiculous number of times. He himself (and his coworkers) think of all possible errors, in true Paneth & Peters style - and yet they get positive results. It is not going to be easy to knock this work down by pointing at particular weaknesses in the experiments, that Mizuno himself is well aware of. More about this later. (Before someone else says it, the Mizuno work I am describing was of course done in 1989-90, and there has been plenty of chance to do the knocking down). So, boys, how about a clean slate, and a start on some other discussion, preferably confined to technical issues? Close the Miles chapter for the moment at least, and start, for example, a sober discussion on the 4He thing? All the scientific arguments on how those 24 MeV would generate X-rays etc, or how they would not, in some Moessbauer-like fashion. Or how fractofusion is possible, and how it is not. All without abuse, rancour, etc, please! -- Dieter Britz alias db kemi.aau.dk; http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db --------------439AE3929A83435A911A9363 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="rmforall.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Richard T. Murray Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="rmforall.vcf" begin:vcard n:Murray;Richard T. "Rich" tel;home:505-986-8250 tel;work:505-986-9103 x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:rmforall earthlink.net fn:Richard T. "Rich" Murray end:vcard --------------439AE3929A83435A911A9363-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 21:21:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA14116; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:19:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:19:51 -0800 Message-ID: <36A6B974.7F8EDF79 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 22:21:57 -0700 From: "Richard T. Murray" Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rmforall earthlink.net, Vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Jabon: Catalytically Induced D-D Fusion in Ferroelectrics Dec, 1997 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------4681B270DFDC292C63E4B6DE" Resent-Message-ID: <"y-Hjq2.0.LS3.rZhfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25691 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. --------------4681B270DFDC292C63E4B6DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --------------4681B270DFDC292C63E4B6DE Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Path: nntp.earthlink.net!newsbackup.it.earthlink.net!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!news.idt.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone.bc.net!news.sfu.ca!not-for-mail From: "David Naugler" Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Catalytically Induced D-D Fusion in Ferroelectrics Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 19:10:49 -0800 Organization: IMBB Message-ID: <77192c$3mh$1 morgoth.sfu.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: ssb6134e.chem.sfu.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Xref: nntp.earthlink.net sci.physics.fusion:25416 Brazilian Journal of Physics, vol. 27, no. 4, december, 1997 515 "Catalitically Induced D­D Fusion in Ferroelectrics V.D. Dougar Jabon 1 , G.V. Fedorovich 2 and N.V. Samsonenko 3 1 Escuela de Fisica, Universidad Industrial de Santander, Bucaramanga, A.A.678, Colombia 2 Theoretical Problem Department, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 121002, Russia 3 Department of Theoretical Physics, Russian Friendship University, Moscow, 117198, Russia Received March 15, 1997 Abstract: A model of deuteron acceleration in ferroelectrical crystals under the process of domain polarization reversal is proposed. Experimental verification of the model with LiTaO 3 crystals saturated with deuterium was fulfilled. It was shown that in the 75 kV/cm a.c. field the neutron emission attributed to D­D fusion is two order magnitude higher the Jones level." The entire paper can be obtained as a zip compressed file of the original postscript at: http://www-sbf.if.usp.br/WWW_pages/Journals/BJP/Vol27/Num4/index.htm Could this possibly portend of a 'fusion gap' with Columbia? NOTE: this is a repost. The original post contained foreign characters which may cause problems for some readers. I have changed the spelling of the subject line. --------------4681B270DFDC292C63E4B6DE Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="rmforall.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Richard T. Murray Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="rmforall.vcf" begin:vcard n:Murray;Richard T. "Rich" tel;home:505-986-8250 tel;work:505-986-9103 x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:rmforall earthlink.net fn:Richard T. "Rich" Murray end:vcard --------------4681B270DFDC292C63E4B6DE-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 20 21:52:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA24662; Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:51:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:51:43 -0800 Message-ID: <01BE44BE.A5EE85A0.bhorst gte.net> From: Bob Horst Reply-To: "bhorst gte.net" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: CETI's reproducibility problem Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:48:06 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Encoding: 26 TEXT Resent-Message-ID: <"TICKP3.0.C16.l1ifs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25692 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed wrote: Miley is casual, but his methods are more rigorous than he lets on. I asked him many questions about cross checks and ambient temperatures, and he had the information at his fingertips. (He might not have it now, years later.) For example, he did not enclose his experiment in a temperature-controlled box . . . I believe it was an air-temperature controlled hood, but this does not matter much, as long as the enclosure temperature is lower than the cell and it does not fluctuate much. I visited Miley's lab shortly after his first results were announced. I saw the hood, and it certainly was not temperature controlled. The calorimetry looked very poor to me, and I asked him about it. Even then he admitted that he had not spent much effort on the calorimetry, and was concentrating more on his own specialty, which was the nuclear byproducts. I think the confusion is that he has never backed away from his measurments (which showed a small amount of excess heat) but he never did the work to find the error bounds on those measurements. -- Bob Horst From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 07:29:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA27213; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 07:26:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 07:26:59 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 10:25:56 EST To: vortex-L eskimo.com Cc: eachus mitre.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Self-Charging Nickel-Iron Battery? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84 Resent-Message-ID: <"ER1Q41.0.4f6.2Tqfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25693 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In going through some old notes, I found the following comment by Robert I. Eachus, from a Vortex-L post of Oct. 20, 1997: "Ever seen a Nickel-Iron battery? Completely replaced today with Nickel-Cadmium (NiCads), but they share one very interesting property. If you left a discharged Nickel-Iron battery unshorted, it would recharge itself, but you would have to keep adding water during the process. In the Nickel-Iron batteries it was much more pronounced than in NiCads, which are sealed and use an alkali, not an acid." That sounds like an electrochemical perpetual motion machine. What's going on here? Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 10:23:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25448; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 10:18:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 10:18:55 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990121132141.00eba330 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:21:41 -0500 To: Tstolper aol.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Self-Charging Nickel-Iron Battery? Cc: vortex-L eskimo.com, eachus@mitre.org In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"L4o-z2.0.UD6.F-sfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25694 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:25 AM 1/21/99 EST, Tstolper aol.com wrote: >In going through some old notes, I found the following comment by Robert I. >Eachus, from a Vortex-L post of Oct. 20, 1997: > > "Ever seen a Nickel-Iron battery? Completely replaced today with >Nickel-Cadmium (NiCads), but they share one very interesting property. If >you left a discharged Nickel-Iron battery unshorted, it would recharge >itself, but you would have to keep adding water during the process. In the >Nickel-Iron batteries it was much more pronounced than in NiCads, which are >sealed and use an alkali, not an acid." > >That sounds like an electrochemical perpetual motion machine. What's going on >here? Is the above "common knowledge" and a readily observable phenomena? Yes. Is it energy from nowhere? No. Could you use it as a power source? Yes, but not at all efficiently. If you want to see this for yourself, grab a NiCad battery, totally discharge it, then leave it "open circut" and measure the voltage the next day. Unless the humidty is high, there will be some--but milli- if not microwatts of power. Now try a similar experiment with a mylar capacitor--charge it up to say a kilovolt, leave it that way for a few weeks, then totally discharge it. A week later the capacitor may be charged to over 200 volts, but about 150 volts is typical. If you try the same thing with a Nickel-Iron battery, as commented above, the battery will charge itself fully over a period of months--but it won't last long. This is why Nickel-Iron batteries were typically shipped and stored discharged and shorted. What gives? In the case of the NiCad battery, an interesting application of a Maxwell's demon effect. It is easier to charge the battery than to discharge it, so the net effect of ions in the air will be to charge the battery. (But creating those ions takes much more energy than you get out of the battery.) In the case of the mylar capacitor, the mylar has a "memory" of being charged. However you really did put that energy in when you charged the capacitor. We used to model it as two capacitors with an extremely high resistance (and higher impedence) connection between them. The NiFe battery case is much more complex, but the easy way of describing the effect is that the iron rusts/corrodes and as a side effect charges the battery. If there is no voltage difference between the electrodes, the reaction does not occur. So what happens with a NiFe battery left discharged but open circut is that the same phenomenum as in the NiCd starts the charge, and the oxidation effect takes over. Steel ships take advanage of a different side of this effect to prevent rusting By putting a slight charge on the hull in the opposite direction, the hull stays rust free, while "sacrificial" electrodes corrode away. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 11:06:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA09821; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:03:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:03:21 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: <6cd8cbc1.36a778fe aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:59:10 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: IR-toDC -- jxcrystals.com Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"KvFCT2.0.NP2.vdtfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25695 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Highlights from my conversation w/ Jason Keyes at JX Crystals (near Seattle): APPLICATION: This is a way to harvest electricity where you already have a high heat application (furnaces, water heaters, etc.)--not a preferential way of producing electricity...unless, like the military, you’re determined to eliminate all moving parts (except cooling fan) at any cost. AVAILABILITY: About 20 Midnite Sun furnaces are available for $2500 as “beta site” units--pref. sold to end-users located in the Seattle vicinity, and who can provide the most salient feedback during this latter development phase. The units consist of a 25K BTU/hr. heater (comparable to a wood-burning stove) with thermo/photo/voltaic cells built in. OPERATION: Pressurized propane or natural gas flame heats silicon carbide ceramic “emitter” which glows white hot. Forced air is mixed w/propane to increase flame heat to just under 1300 C required to induce the requisite IR frequencies from the emitter. 144 cells are positioned 1” away. Between them is a “dielectric” (I think they mean “DICHROIC”) filter: a glass w/sprayed-on layers that reflects higher (non-electricity producing) IR wavelengths back at the emitter, cooling the cells while increasing emitter efficiency by re- heating it. Cells respond to 1.7 microns & slightly higher (whereas conventional silicon cells are optimized for 1.1+ microns). OUTPUT: The unit produces 100W, 15W of which is diverted to the forced air system, leaving an available output of 85W 12V or 24V. The fans improve heater efficiency by circulating warm air. The Midnite Sun heater is about 1/4 as electrically efficient as solar--about 1.5% efficient--when comparing equal collector area, and assuming optimum energy input: in peak sunlight, ~1KW falls on a sq. meter of PV module, producing ~100W; Midnite Sun, ~40W. MORE R & D: If you wanted to buy a few cells for experimentation, they could had for ~$200/pc; for a few hundred, $40/pc. (the best deal is to buy a furnace). Cells are theoretically capable of 6W: 1W is affordable w/air forced over cooling fins behind cells; 2W is expensive, a military application w/water cooling (or A LOT of air); more W requires extravagant cooling measures. --Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 11:15:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA15785; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:09:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:09:59 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:59:12 EST To: PetMagic aol.com Cc: UNIR2B1NM aol.com, richarda@icx.net, lizardhaven@zippnet.net, werosser hotmail.com, bill@basselectronics.com, rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, johnhoffman@webtv.net, biotron@pacbell.net, grstewar tva.gov, powerfd@gte.net, Serwitz@aol.com, dawnames hotmail.com, donadams@telusplanet.net, Vince Goetsch <3wishes wishgranted.com>, "Dennis C. Lee" , "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , Terri Schoolden , lkvp@mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , Robin van Spaandonk , trknute earthlink.net, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, dwenbert spacey.net, John Schnurer , oleprospector worldaccessnet.com, Mattias , Quinney Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: jxcystalls info you requested Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"PlRqq3.0.Zs3.7ktfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25696 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-21 00:46:14 EST, you write: << of course, hydrogen should work in the unit as supplied, just provide proper pressure.... >> Jason said 'That's precisely our problem--too many potential applications (throughout industry, etc.), which is why I asked about buying just the emitter/cell combination for experiments (cheapest to buy & dismantle the whole furnace). I see these being coupled to the exhaust of hydrogen-powered internal comb. eng.'s...but, again, the weakest link is BATTERIES--their cumbersome size & weight, dammit! --Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 11:18:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA19056; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:17:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:17:03 -0800 Message-ID: <000301be4572$5fce5aa0$9d441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Spin and FTL-Phase Velocity Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:14:10 -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: <"BbMH_1.0.gf4.kqtfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25697 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex For the Superstring-String Circle Theories the "Classical" Radius R of the Electron or Quark: R = kq^2/E where k = 1/4/(pi)eo and E is the rest energy (joules). However, for a wave front or particle moving in a circle, to an observer a point on the circle approaches and recedes at 137 c,the "Phase Velocity". Thus for the classical radius of the Electron or Quark, 2.81E-15 meters or 4.5E-18 meters respectively: R = kq^2/E*alpha, where alpha is the fine structure constant,0.00727729 making the true "radius" of the electron 3.86E-13 meters and the radius of a proton quark 6.2E-16 meters, which is close to the 1.0 Fermi value observed in scattering experiments. Thus Spin, m*c*r = hbar Will Not give a FTL velocity of 137*c, as is seen for the "classical" radius. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 12:18:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA10662; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:16:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:16:47 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0E2 XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Spin and FTL-Phase Velocity Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:15:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"tbXV62.0.Sc2.liufs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25698 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The good book on General Relativity I am recommending (high school physics teacher level-uses calculus) Scouting Black Holes Exploring General Relativity with Calculus by Edwin F. Taylor (Carnegie Mellon ) and John Archibald Wheeler (Princeton) W.H.Freeman & Co. NY 1992 ISBN 0-7167-2327-1 It is an easy read, a fun read too. Lots of good problems, adventures. Even has a nice explanation of GPS operation, for us navigators. Hank > ---------- > From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, January 21, 1999 11:14 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Cc: Ron.Brodzinski pnl.gov > Subject: Re: Spin and FTL-Phase Velocity > > To: Vortex > > For the Superstring-String Circle Theories the "Classical" Radius R of the > Electron or Quark: > R = kq^2/E where k = 1/4/(pi)eo and E is the rest energy (joules). > > However, for a wave front or particle moving in > a circle, to an observer a point on the circle approaches and recedes at > 137 > c,the "Phase Velocity". > Thus for the classical radius of the Electron or Quark, 2.81E-15 meters or > 4.5E-18 meters respectively: R = kq^2/E*alpha, where alpha is the fine > structure constant,0.00727729 making the true "radius" of the electron > 3.86E-13 meters and the radius of a proton quark 6.2E-16 meters, which is > close to the 1.0 Fermi value observed in scattering experiments. > > Thus Spin, m*c*r = hbar Will Not give a FTL velocity of 137*c, as is seen > for the "classical" radius. > > Regards, Frederick > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 12:29:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA17981; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:28:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:28:25 -0800 Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:19:58 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: WHO ???Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem In-Reply-To: <19990118.192441.25222.0.tv juno.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"rVbT3.0.sO4.ftufs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25699 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Who wrote they can think of.... On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Tim Vaughan wrote: > >On the other hand, bearing this in mind, I can think > >of ####a way to generate ungodly gradients, without need of > >the HV source. ######### I would like to know about this! Pity I've not the necessary permits for > >the rad material. > > You don't need a permit to buy a smoke detector. $5 to $10 at hardware > stores. > The ~1 micro curie americium 241 source is encased in a small plastic > pill mounted on a small metal disk. Makes a geiger counter go crazy > about an inch away. > > It is easy to remove the small disk. Although it is very tough and you > are unlikely to do so, be careful not to crush the plastic pill. If you > somehow made small particles of it, it would be nasty stuff to have in > the lungs. What is the half life of this stuff? As long as it is not in metal wrapping then it should be a good candidate for the test experiment. JHS > > Tim > > ( tv juno.com ) > > ___________________________________________________________________ > You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. > Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html > or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 13:35:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14224; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:34:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:34:19 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:29:17 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"VgJEP3.0.8U3.Qrvfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25700 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little writes: In the case of Mizuno, I know almost nothing about his calorimetry. He apparently did not think it worthwhile to describe in his paper! Which paper are we talking about? I have tons of info in some of the longer Japanese originals. In the case of Storms, he has rebuilt his calorimeter to incorporate the dual-method strategy that I used in my Patterson bead quest. At the time he was doing it, I made him a friendly wager that he would never see the same significant excess heat signal in both channels at once. To date (about a year later) he has not called to collect on the wager. That's not the way I heard it, so I called Ed this afternoon for a chat. He says last fall he saw heat on both channels. It was 600 mW in the flow, and roughly 400 mW by isoperibolic measurements. That is pretty good for thin film, low power cathodes. The flow is more reliable with this setup. At these power levels, with only bubble stirring, the isoperibolic measurement will not be precise. You need mechanical stirring to measure to the nearest ~200 mW, and this cell design did not allow a stirrer. However, both channels were positive and accuracy is more important than precision. I asked him why he did not collect on the wager with Scott and he said, well, it wasn't such an outstanding result, he will wait for something bigger. Since last fall he has been busy fabricating and testing cathodes. He has not done any CF runs. He has fired up the calorimeter this month, and he is running a platinum control at this moment. In the case of Cravens...all I can is that he has asked to borrow my low-power water flow calorimeter (the one at ICCF-7). I think this would be a good use of the thing . . . Ah, that makes sense. He no longer has access to CETI equipment, and he is lazy, like me. Never build an instrument when you can beg, borrow or buy a perfectly good one! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 13:36:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14279; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:34:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 13:34:26 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990121154932.007a33e0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:49:32 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com, britz@kemi.aau.dk From: Jed Rothwell Subject: RE: Britz: Mizuno book is careful Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"B1bea.0.zU3.Xrvfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25701 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dieter Britz says peculiar things. I do not understand what goes through his head. He writes: If the English translation by Rothwell is a faithful rendering of Mizuno's Japanese, it is very hard to doubt that author's work; Mizuno seems to be a very pedantic and excruciatingly careful scientist, reluctant to accept a result unless he has done it, in some cases, a ridiculous number of times. He himself (and his coworkers) think of all possible errors, in true Paneth & Peters style . . . First of all, he should not judge Mizuno's work based on this book, which is a popularized and not technical. Britz should read the original, peer-reviewed scientific papers. That's the drum *he* always pounds! (Actually, he would have to trust my abilities with the formal scientific papers too, because I translated 'em. However, with the formal papers, Mizuno and his co-authors go over my rendition line by line, word by work, to be sure everything is correct. He did not examine my version of the book as closely.) Second, ALL leading cold fusion scientists are pedantic and excruciatingly careful. They ALL thought of all possible errors. Some of these people, in fact, thought of all possible errors back when Dieter Britz was wearing diapers. Where has Britz been all these years? Has he not read papers by Fleischmann, Pons, Bockris, Will, Claytor, McKubre, Oriani or Storms? All of these results have been repeated a ridiculous number of times at absurdly high signal to noise ratios. If this was anything other than cold fusion, the debate would have ended in 1990, back when Will (NCFI) got 100% reproducible tritium 70 times over background. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 14:03:08 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26458; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 14:00:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 14:00:46 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: WHO ???Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 22:00:54 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36a8a262.177798646 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: <"puY4G3.0.FT6.CEwfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25702 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:19:58 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: [snip] > What is the half life of this stuff? > > As long as it is not in metal wrapping then it should be a good >candidate for the test experiment. > > JHS [snip] Am241 has a half life of 432 years, Am243 - 7370 years. Not only is it readily available, it comes neatly packaged in a measuring device designed to provide an audible signal if the half life increases ;). Actually designed to detect smoke, it depends on a reduction in the count rate to generate a signal. You could probably use the entire smoke detector without modification. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 15:07:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA23821; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:06:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:06:22 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990121180317.0079b740 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:03:17 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com, britz@kemi.aau.dk From: Jed Rothwell Subject: RE: Britz: Mizuno book is careful Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NeEsA3.0.7q5.jBxfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25703 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: ". . . the debate would have ended in 1990, back when Will (NCFI) got 100% reproducible tritium 70 times over background." That should be 52, not 70. The exact statement is "Tritium enhancements up to a factor of 52 were observed." (F. G. Will, K. Cedzynska, et al., ICCF2, p. 382.) I was looking right at the text; I do not know why I typed "70." Must be dyslexic or something . . . Below that it says the tritium concentration was "4.5nCi/gPd or 10^10 tritium atoms/g Pd . . ." compared to "a maximum possible tritium contamination level in the Pd of 4 x 10^8 atoms/g Pd." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 15:21:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA31449; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:20:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:20:48 -0800 MR-Received: by mta SOCCER; Relayed; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:12:56 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:20:14 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 17:10:30 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Bouncing Magnets To: freenrg-l , vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:12:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal Sensitivity: Company-Confidential UA-content-id: E1910ZXTGQ0WZ7 X400-MTS-identifier: [;65218112109991/3475001 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"LPb5P2.0.0h7.DPxfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25704 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: All, We have all seen many instances of a magnet floating above another, without any outside energy being input, work is being accomplished. There has to be a way to harness this. Dumb question time. We have magnetically attracted materials such as iron, and magnetically repulsed materials such as another magnet of the same polarity. We also have magnetically transparent materials like paper & glass. Do we also have magnetically shielding material such that when passed between two magnets with the same poles pointed at each other they stop repulsing each other. Conversely if the two magnets have opposite poles pointed at each other this material would then act to eliminate the attraction to each other. Also it would be beneficial if the magnets would not impart any resistance to having this material passed between them. Could we not then put together a device that would have a fixed magnet on the bottom with say north pointing up, and another magnet above it with north pointing down. You would want the upper magnet to be fixed from moving left/right and forward/backward, but free to move up and down. Also you would want to maintain a certain distance between them so that you can pass this material in between. When this shielding material is not between them the upper floating magnet moves up. When the material is slid between them, the repulsion disappears, gravity takes over and the upper magnet moves down. You should then be able to harness the bobbing up & down of the floating magnet to do useful work. I have seen references to aluminum affecting magnetic fields, but does it do what I want it too. Could someone please clarify this for me. I have some neodymium magnets on order and I would like to start testing various materials. Has this already been tried? Is there a reference table somewhere of different materials and how they interact with magnetic fields? Working with computers, hardware & software, I feel more like a mechanic than an electronics technician. My electronics training from twenty some years ago has mostly atrophied. Any comments and suggestions would be appreciated? Bill webriggs concentric.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 16:11:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA02919; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 16:07:09 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 16:07:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:01:10 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"On87V2.0.Sj.g4yfs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25705 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 15:29 1/21/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Scott Little writes: > > In the case of Mizuno, I know almost nothing about his > calorimetry. He apparently did not think it worthwhile to > describe in his paper! > >Which paper are we talking about? I have tons of info in some of the longer >Japanese originals. The Incandescent Pt one...ICCF-7 proceedings p. 247. There's also Ohmori's Incandescent W paper (p. 279) which appears closely related. Neither one provides a decent description of the calorimetry. BTW, I have yet to read the book, maybe I'll get it all there. >That's not the way I heard it, so I called Ed this afternoon for a chat. He >says last fall he saw heat on both channels. It was 600 mW in the flow, and >roughly 400 mW by isoperibolic measurements. I heard about these values. As Ed said, they weren't big enough to announce. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 16:28:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA30815; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 16:27:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 16:27:19 -0800 Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 19:18:50 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: WHO ???Re: Puzzling simple electrostatics problem In-Reply-To: <36a8a262.177798646 24.192.1.20> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"BU-ag1.0.EX7.cNyfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25706 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Grat idea! You get 3 "YB"s for that... 'you bad, you bad, you bad' Detector, source and the whole thing... VERY nice. On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:19:58 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: > [snip] > > What is the half life of this stuff? > > > > As long as it is not in metal wrapping then it should be a good > >candidate for the test experiment. > > > > JHS > [snip] > Am241 has a half life of 432 years, Am243 - 7370 years. > Not only is it readily available, it comes neatly packaged in a > measuring device designed to provide an audible signal if the half > life increases ;). Actually designed to detect smoke, it depends on a > reduction in the count rate to generate a signal. > You could probably use the entire smoke detector without modification. > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 17:19:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA21295; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 17:16:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 17:16:59 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990121201258.0070ba50 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 20:12:58 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"YiG3j2.0.fC5.A6zfs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25707 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:01 PM 1/21/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >>That's not the way I heard it, so I called Ed this afternoon for a chat. He >>says last fall he saw heat on both channels. It was 600 mW in the flow, and >>roughly 400 mW by isoperibolic measurements. > >I heard about these values. As Ed said, they weren't big enough to announce. 600 mW, if true excess heat, IS important. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 18:51:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA27000; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:49:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:49:24 -0800 Message-ID: <36A7E886.597 lcia.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 21:55:02 -0500 From: B25B LCIA.COM (RON BRENNEN) Reply-To: b25b LCIA.COM X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com CC: vortex-l Subject: Re: Bouncing Magnets References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OqpOx1.0.cb6.pS-fs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25708 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 wrote: > > All, > > We have all seen many instances of a magnet floating above another, without > any outside energy being input, work is being accomplished. There has to be > a way to harness this. > > Dumb question time. We have magnetically attracted materials such as iron, > and magnetically repulsed materials such as another magnet of the same > polarity. We also have magnetically transparent materials like paper & > glass. > > Do we also have magnetically shielding material such that when passed > between two magnets with the same poles pointed at each other they stop > repulsing each other. Conversely if the two magnets have opposite poles > pointed at each other this material would then act to eliminate the > attraction to each other. > > Also it would be beneficial if the magnets would not impart any resistance > to having this material passed between them. > > Could we not then put together a device that would have a fixed magnet on > the bottom with say north pointing up, and another magnet above it with > north pointing down. You would want the upper magnet to be fixed from > moving left/right and forward/backward, but free to move up and down. Also > you would want to maintain a certain distance between them so that you can > pass this material in between. > > When this shielding material is not between them the upper floating magnet > moves up. When the material is slid between them, the repulsion disappears, > gravity takes over and the upper magnet moves down. You should then be able > to harness the bobbing up & down of the floating magnet to do useful work. > > I have seen references to aluminum affecting magnetic fields, but does it do > what I want it too. Could someone please clarify this for me. > > I have some neodymium magnets on order and I would like to start testing > various materials. Has this already been tried? Is there a reference table > somewhere of different materials and how they interact with magnetic fields? > > Working with computers, hardware & software, I feel more like a mechanic > than an electronics technician. My electronics training from twenty some > years ago has mostly atrophied. > > Any comments and suggestions would be appreciated? > > Bill > webriggs concentric.net Bismuth is said to repel magnetism. Ron Brennen From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 18:55:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA29238; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:54:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:54:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:03:15 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Resent-Message-ID: <"vW57I1.0.j87.IX-fs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25709 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:29 PM 1/20/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >On Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:23:25 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >>>IOW I doubt the *gravitational* mass of an *excited* nucleus has ever >>>been measured. >> >> >>It seems to me that *all* nuclei are excited, though this is not the >>conventional meaning of the term. Radioactive nuclei are excited to the >>point that, on occasion, a nuclear state permitting fission spontaneously >>arises, true? > >Not necessarily. It's possible that the energy required to initiate >fission is borrowed from the Heisenberg bank, as is the (much smaller) >energy involved in initiating the decay of excited atomic states. Good point - though it seems at first glance the amount borrowed could not typically account for much mass, i.e. most fissions would involve only a very small amount of borrowed mass-energy. The shorter the half-life the more true this is. This is based on the notion that the borrowing process occurs continuously at a regular mean rate but at sporadic random times, without success until the necessary threshold is exceeded by the combination of events. Thinking further, the fission event itself is very short, so maybe this logic is not valid, in that the energy to push over the fission threshold does not have to be borrowed very long, thus the amount which can be borrowed can be large. To understand the trade-off it is necessary to have an understanding of conditions that cause borrowing and the rates (half-life) as a function of mass-energy borrowed, and I don't have that information. I suppose if this were fully understood one could borrow as much as necessary to cause fission on a more regular and speedy basis. This would be a very handy gold card! Note that I am not discussing the borrowing time limit, but rather the rate at which borrowing is *initiated* for various energies borrowed. I do not have a handle on this topic, and probably have a misunderstanding of the process. > >>Is there some reason to believe the kinetic energy that goes >>into a particle ever changes its nature, except that the initial linear >>motion is converted to angular motion in a small volume, due to the >>attraction of one force or another? It all depends upon your point of > >Yes, there is. When an atomic electron absorbs kinetic energy from an >outside source, it goes into a "higher orbit". Yet in this "higher >orbit", the velocity of the electron is lower (not higher), while the >potential energy increases by more than the kinetic energy absorbed. >It would appear that energy can be stored in the field itself, and not >as kinetic energy. I don't understand. If the electron absorbs energy, the velocity of the electron increases, the orbit radius increases, the *frequency* of the orbit decreases, right? The relativistic mass increase would be a very small percentage at ionization voltages, right? Say less than 20 eV vs 512 keV? >[snip] >>>What is wrong with the following: >>>From the frame of reference of a particle in a particle accelerator, >>>the rest of the universe is accelerating, while it stands still. >>>Hence the mass of the universe is increasing relativistically. >>>Eventually, if the particle goes fast enough, the universe will >>>collapse due to the vast increase in gravitational force created by >>>the relativistic mass of the universe ;^). >> >>Nothing that I can see. > >Where does the mass/energy come from that is used to increase the >relativistic mass of the universe? >From the *frame* of the particle, which is infinite in size, the energy of the apparently accelerated universe is actually available energy. Photons coming from the oncoming universe will be blue shifted. Particles from the oncoming universe will have more kinetic energy. From a universal standpoint, though, the *total* mass energy added to the universe by accelerating mass m depends on the mass product mM, thus is higly limited. The potential energy available from the universe from the point of view of a high velocity reference frame, though, can be unlimited, as the frame has no mass consideration, it is not real, it is only an imaginary reference frame. Of interest, though, is the fact that in all cases, the mass and energy are preserved in a E = mc^2 relationship, which is my main point. If you create one (in this case based on reference frame) then you create the other in proportion. If the reference is from a point in the frame, then it is interesting that mass-energy of the universe is created or destroyed depending on whether more mass of the universe is ahead of the point or behind it. Weird. Still maintains the fixed ratio of mass to energy, though. > >>Another view is that the time dilation for the >>observer in the particle's frame collapses the universe. Of course, the >>particle doesn't approach c close enough or long enough for it to observe >>the collapse. Interesting - this is a proof that the universe will >>collapse? > >Only if someone accelerates a particle fast enough :^). A new recipe for a doomsday machine? 8^) > >> >> >>>My conclusion: All frames are not created equal and/or gravitational >>>and total relativistic mass are not equal. >>>(Actually I'm inclined to think it's "and"). >>>[snip] >>>>Photons are bent around heavy gravitational objects in space. This could >>>>be viewed as a curvature of space, but could it not also be interpreted as >>>>a gravitational attraction of the heavy body to the mass corresponding to >>>>the photon's energy? >>> >>>Apparently not, as the gravitational mass of the photon appears to >>>depend upon it's trajectory relative to the gravitational field, while >>>this isn't the case for it's relativistic "mass". >> >> >>I don't understand. All the mass of the photon is "relativistic." It has >>a rest mass of zero. > >True, but not the point. E.g. a photon with a wavelength of 400 nm >only has one relativistic mass (i.e. h/(c*400nm) as I presume you >would calculate it), but various gravitational masses, depending upon >trajectory. That is to say, it has a different apparent gravitational >mass when approaching the earth dead centre, than when passing the >earth tangentially (according to GR). >However my lack of comprehension WRT relativity could be showing here. >Maybe it really does have different masses under GR. I think the flaw in this logic is using a specific wavelength. The wavelength is a function of the reference frame, as is the corresponding mass. I hope I've got all this stuff right. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 19:19:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA02703; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 19:14:09 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 19:14:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:17:14 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Bouncing Magnets Resent-Message-ID: <"4nXvO1.0.9g.yp-fs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25710 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:10 PM 1/21/99, Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 wrote: >All, > >We have all seen many instances of a magnet floating above another, without >any outside energy being input, work is being accomplished. There has to be >a way to harness this. This is a misunderstanding of the principles of (definition of) work. Work is not being accomplished if the magnet is floating at a constant elevation. This is a common misunderstanding typically caused by knowing that work must be expended in the rotors to hover a helicopter, for example. This is only an indication of the inefficiency of the helicopter, however. If one builds a tower under the helicopter and supports it, the rotors can be turned off and no work is required to maintain the helicopter's elevation. No work is expended supporting a magnet hovering over a superconductor, for example, so it is possible more efficient mades of transprotation than the helicopter might be produced. The rest of the post is based upon this misunderstanding, so is not delt with in detail. However, it is still worthwhile to mention that the energy required to move a shield into a field exactly offsets the energy that can be gained from the shield being there vs the initial conditions. Still, despite these discouraging remarks, I have spent hundreds of hours playing with magets and similar concepts, and had lots of fun, so encourage you to do the same. However, I suggest you not bet the farm on ideas that are not fully tested. 8^) This message is routed only to vortex as posting to vortex and simultaneously copying another newsgroup is against the vortex rules. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 20:15:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA25508; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 20:14:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 20:14:02 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990121221528.00867450 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 22:15:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990121201258.0070ba50 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"juIU_.0.SE6.9i_fs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25711 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:12 PM 1/21/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > 600 mW, if true excess heat, IS important. I agree. In fact, ANY excess heat is extremely important. The problem with a result like this is its validity. The reason Storms wasn't jumping up and down about this result is that it is only ~10% of the total input power. At that level, it is quite possible that some systematic error is responsible for the positive result. In order to verify such a small result, you need the opportunity to check and double-check calorimeter zero and sensitivity and then switch back to the active experiment to see if the signal is still there. If it is, then you really ought to move the experiment to a different calorimeter to see if a similar result can be obtained. I gather that a lot of cold fusion experiments won't "sit still" for such scrutiny. 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 Jan 21 20:59:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09618; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 20:56:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 20:56:57 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990121235312.00706a8c world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 23:53:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990121221528.00867450 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990121201258.0070ba50 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"mXXe33.0.-L2.OK0gs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25712 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:15 PM 1/21/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 08:12 PM 1/21/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> 600 mW, if true excess heat, IS important. > >I agree. In fact, ANY excess heat is extremely important. > >The problem with a result like this is its validity. The reason Storms >wasn't jumping up and down about this result is that it is only ~10% of the >total input power. At that level, it is quite possible that some >systematic error is responsible for the positive result. No. Anyone who does hundreds of these experiments has a good feel of the systematic errors, Scott. ====================================================== > In order to >verify such a small result, you need the opportunity to check and >double-check calorimeter zero and sensitivity and then switch back to the >active experiment to see if the signal is still there. That is true. And as other begin to incorporate thermal waveform reconstruction (or its equivalent) and other controls, the significance will increase accordingly. Cold fusion is real, and those who have trouble repeating some, or all, of the experiments might consider taking a closer look at their own systematic errors. [More info for newbies at http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html Have a good day. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 21:05:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA13274; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 21:04:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 21:04:13 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990122000035.0070bc4c world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 00:00:35 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990121221528.00867450 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990121201258.0070ba50 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"zVapq.0.FF3.DR0gs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25713 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:15 PM 1/21/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 08:12 PM 1/21/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> 600 mW, if true excess heat, IS important. > >I agree. In fact, ANY excess heat is extremely important. If your purported ZPE(vacuum) [which some of us, think is negligible even compared to ZPE(lattice) which is itself is pretty small] can be shown to make 600 mW of power, the respect for purported ZPE(vacuum) would go way up. ;-) Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 22:45:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA14904; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 22:44:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 22:44:14 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 01:42:31 EST To: donadams telusplanet.net Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, dwenbert@spacey.net, John Schnurer , oleprospector worldaccessnet.com, Mattias , Quinney , lkvp@mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , rolfe_hauser@hotmail.com, Robin van Spaandonk , trknute earthlink.net, Vince Goetsch <3wishes@wishgranted.com>, "Dennis C. Lee" , grstewar@tva.gov, "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , Terri Schoolden , UNIR2B1NM@aol.com, richarda icx.net, lizardhaven@zippnet.net, werosser@hotmail.com, bill basselectronics.com, johnhoffman@webtv.net, PetMagic@aol.com, biotron pacbell.net, powerfd@gte.net, Serwitz@aol.com, dawnames hotmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Alternative horticulture--SPIRULINA Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"kkSJU2.0.Le3.xu1gs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25714 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ...I have an ideally robust strain growing on humanure compost. I want to propagate the culture (not to mention, to obviate losing it). _Food from Sunlight_, loaned by a friend, deals with chlorella (less than ideal), and the growth medium published on the UT website is complicated and impossibly expensive without complete chem lab facilities. I'm soliciting any suggestions about affordable growth media. Once a stable culture is ensured, I'll apply various 'Alternative horticultural techniques' that have been referenced on this thread (e.g., electrical signals conducting through the water, or some of my own hypotheses like exposing a culture to IR emissions from a layer of heated sea salt radiating through a glass-bottom container). Positive results will be relayed, and viable specimens freely distributed to anyone interested, as availability permits. Anyone can *buy* non-propagating, freeze dried algae at the health food store--more addiction to the centralized system of the international bankers. How radically different the world would be if everyone had his own spirulina culture, directly from the omnipresent system of Nature. A few ergs of your intellect diverted to this project might equal an otherwise neglected investment in our collective future. --Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 21 23:16:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA23511; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 23:08:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 23:08:15 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 22:17:30 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Example of Nucleus Pumping Resent-Message-ID: <"uGqlJ.0.Gl5.UF2gs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25715 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From the American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 411 January 19, 1999 by Phillip F. Schewe and Ben Stein: "Physicists at the University of Texas at Dallas (Carl Collins, 972-883-2864, cbc utdallas.edu) and their colleagues in Russia, Romania, Ukraine, and the US begin with a sample (prepared at Los Alamos) of a metastable (31-year lifetime) isomer of Hf-178 with 4 participating nucleons, possessing a stored energy of 2.5 MeV. Then, like a transistor triggered by the merest of gate signals, the isomer material can, with the input of some x rays (amounting to only 1.6% of the output energy), produce induced gamma emission (IGE); thus x ray energy is stockpiled in the Hf and later extracted at higher gamma-ray energy. The emitted rays are not coherent, however, so this is not yet an example of gamma lasing. [snip] ... (C.B. Collins et al., Physical Review Letters, upcoming article; see http://www.utdallas.edu/research/quantum.)" Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 02:13:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA07919; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 02:12:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 02:12:43 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 01:22:00 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Resent-Message-ID: <"kcNnD2.0.fx1.Ry4gs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25716 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:29 PM 1/20/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Yes, there is. When an atomic electron absorbs kinetic energy from an >outside source, it goes into a "higher orbit". Yet in this "higher >orbit", the velocity of the electron is lower (not higher), while the >potential energy increases by more than the kinetic energy absorbed. >It would appear that energy can be stored in the field itself, and not >as kinetic energy. Oh, yes, you are right about this, of course. I am not sure what I was thinking. We have v = (q^2/((4pi)(e0)(r)(m))^0.5 so the electron velocity is inversely proportional to radius r, looking at this classically, which is how I was looking at it. I think the excess mass all goes into the increase in (dipole) field size, unless the electron escapes. I have seen something similar about gravtational fields (more distance requires more gravitons to sustain the field) but this is very confusing to me because if gravity affects gravitons then it seems to me that black holes could not exert much gravity on their neighborhood. Like light, gravity itself would be kept inside the event horizon, for the most part. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 04:44:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA30588; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 04:43:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 04:43:05 -0800 Message-ID: <36A8724E.42B4 club-internet.fr> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 13:42:55 +0100 From: Jean-Pierre LENTIN Reply-To: jplentin club-internet.fr X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 [fr]C-CLUB (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: freenrg-l eskimo.com, KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net Subject: Science Frontieres symposium Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"241Yc.0.kT7.O97gs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25717 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi all, and particularly French-speaking members This is a (late) announcement for this year's Science Frontieres festival in Cavaillon (south of France), january 27th to 31st 1999. As usual, Science Frontieres may be expected to be a pleasant and laid-back meeting between practitioners of new science AND conventional science, with dozens of lectures and debates. For this edition I was asked to invite representatives of the "free energy" field in France. Dates on this topic will be : - january 28th, 10 AM, my lecture on the history of water motors, from Keely and Schauberger to current research in electrolysis or cavitation. - january 28th, 9.30 PM, debate on "Inventions for tomorrow" (mainly free energy and antigravity) with Jean-Louis Naudin, Jean-Paul Biberian, Patrick Cornille, Alexandre Szames and Joel Sternheimer, with me as moderator. - january 29th, 10 AM. Lecture by Jean-Paul Biberian on cold fusion and his experiments for the French state-funded CEA (Atomic Energy Commission). - same day and hour (shame !), Jean-Louis Naudin on electromagnetic O/U and antigrav devices, with help from physicist Patrick Cornille, PhD, and science writer Alexandre Szames (who just published a magnificent 500 pages book on Thomas Townsend Brown and related topics - most of it in French, alas....). Full program is available (in French only) at : http://www.transfert.net/mag/reportag/pages/m1frepor.htm I'll post a report after the festival. Cheers to all From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 06:35:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA06166; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 06:34:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 06:34:21 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990122083414.009392a0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 08:34:14 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990121235312.00706a8c world.std.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19990121221528.00867450 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121201258.0070ba50 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Xx1bk2.0.CW1.hn8gs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25718 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 23:53 1/21/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>...At that level, it is quite possible that some >>systematic error is responsible for the positive result. > > No. Anyone who does hundreds of these experiments >has a good feel of the systematic errors, Scott. You'd think so. However, I've noticed a disturbing double-standard in several CF researchers who have done hundreds of experiments. When their measured power balance comes up somewhat negative, they say, "Hmmmm...something's wrong with my system today." However, when the result comes up somewhat positive they say, "Ahhh! This run is showing some excess heat!" Systematic errors in calorimetry are frequently episodic in nature. Without a rigorous program of checks and double-checks, such errors could lead one to conclude that the excess heat phenomenon is real, difficult to reproduce, and not well correlated with the experimental parameters. However, the lack of any obvious correlation would not hamper the investigator's imagination. Possible correlations would be seized, developed into theories, and expounded upon at length. Hey...this is starting to sound familiar! Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 07:37:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA25837; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 07:35:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 07:35:45 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990122103535.007ad100 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 10:35:35 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990122083414.009392a0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990121235312.00706a8c world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19990121221528.00867450 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121201258.0070ba50 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4QHhg3.0.dJ6.Gh9gs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25719 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little writes: I've noticed a disturbing double-standard in several CF researchers who have done hundreds of experiments. When their measured power balance comes up somewhat negative, they say, "Hmmmm...something's wrong with my system today." However, when the result comes up somewhat positive they say, "Ahhh! This run is showing some excess heat!" Be specific, Scott. Who does this? When and where did you hear or read it? I've noticed a disturbing double-standard in several CF critics, who demand specific critiques of their own work, yet they spread unsupported allegations about unnamed researchers, vague statements that cannot be defended or contradicted, and incorrect nonsense which are contradicted by the literature, such as the notion that as calorimeters improve, the signal to noise ratio has generally declined. Here is another strange double standard: some people who claim that a 10% excess at a half-watt would be quite significant if *they* measured it, and they easily distinguish that power level during calibration, but when Storms, Miley, Bockris or McKubre detect that kind of power, they say well, it does not mean much. Who could I have in mind? - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 08:10:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05883; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 08:08:11 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 08:08:11 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990122110121.01996f00 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 11:01:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990122083414.009392a0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990121235312.00706a8c world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19990121221528.00867450 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121201258.0070ba50 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"AvBAm3.0.rR1.g9Ags" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25720 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:34 AM 1/22/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >>>...At that level, it is quite possible that some >>>systematic error is responsible for the positive result. >At 23:53 1/21/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> No. Anyone who does hundreds of these experiments >>has a good feel of the systematic errors, Scott. >At 08:34 AM 1/22/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >You'd think so. However, I've noticed a disturbing double-standard in >several CF researchers who have done hundreds of experiments. When their >measured power balance comes up somewhat negative, they say, >"Hmmmm...something's wrong with my system today." However, when the result >comes up somewhat positive they say, "Ahhh! This run is showing some excess >heat!" > >Systematic errors in calorimetry are frequently episodic in nature. >Without a rigorous program of checks and double-checks, such errors could >lead one to conclude that the excess heat phenomenon is real, difficult to >reproduce, and not well correlated with the experimental parameters. The is a double standard in pseudo-cf researchers who do a very small number of experiments; and those often with little correlation to the experimental conditions reported in successful experiments. Some of them erroneously conclude the field does not exists because of their own sophomoric failures - including failure to use appropriate controls, standards, materials, loading, and the correct optimal operating point. Worse some of them, fail to correct their own methods and standards, and then incorrectly portray the entire field as if it had their own (low) standards. In contrast, good researchers in this field do hundreds of experiments and rule out the errors including the systematic ones. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 12:13:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA12704; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:10:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:10:05 -0800 Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 14:56:12 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: UNIR2B1NM aol.com cc: donadams telusplanet.net, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, dwenbert spacey.net, oleprospector@worldaccessnet.com, Mattias , Quinney , lkvp mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, Robin van Spaandonk , trknute earthlink.net, Vince Goetsch <3wishes@wishgranted.com>, "Dennis C. Lee" , grstewar@tva.gov, "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , Terri Schoolden , UNIR2B1NM@aol.com, richarda icx.net, lizardhaven@zippnet.net, werosser@hotmail.com, bill basselectronics.com, johnhoffman@webtv.net, PetMagic@aol.com, biotron pacbell.net, powerfd@gte.net, Serwitz@aol.com, dawnames hotmail.com, John Schnurer Subject: Re: Alternative horticulture--SPIRULINA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"BQwMX.0.J63.QiDgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25721 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Folks, Apologies in advance for possible typo errors.. the machine I am borrowing has 'hair trigger' keybooard. I work with a small groupp of investigators who apply mulltidisciplinary approaches to many efforts. The bioloogicall sciences are among some of the many areas we study. We do real worlld applied science.... noot conceppts about what MIGHT work, among other areas we have quite a bit of IP, intellectual property which has been reduced to practiice [dang key bd!]inn the field of growing plants..[ha!] please contact me off line. some of the woork includes but is not limited to: non chemical pest conntrol and plant control true organic methoods propagation methods methods for alltering growth of plannts. This is an abbreviated listing ... Any legitimate, serious investigators wishing to On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 UNIR2B1NM aol.com wrote: > ...I have an ideally robust strain growing on humanure compost. I want to > propagate the culture (not to mention, to obviate losing it). _Food from > Sunlight_, loaned by a friend, deals with chlorella (less than ideal), and the > growth medium published on the UT website is complicated and impossibly > expensive without complete chem lab facilities. > I'm soliciting any suggestions about affordable growth media. Once a stable > culture is ensured, I'll apply various 'Alternative horticultural techniques' > that have been referenced on this thread (e.g., electrical signals conducting > through the water, or some of my own hypotheses like exposing a culture to IR > emissions from a layer of heated sea salt radiating through a glass-bottom > container). Positive results will be relayed, and viable specimens freely > distributed to anyone interested, as availability permits. > > Anyone can *buy* non-propagating, freeze dried algae at the health food > store--more addiction to the centralized system of the international bankers. > How radically different the world would be if everyone had his own spirulina > culture, directly from the omnipresent system of Nature. A few ergs of your > intellect diverted to this project might equal an otherwise neglected > investment in our collective future. > > --Russ > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 12:32:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA21400; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:28:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:28:52 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990122142853.00946bf8 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 14:28:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990122103535.007ad100 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990122083414.009392a0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121235312.00706a8c world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19990121221528.00867450 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121201258.0070ba50 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"hQrFc1.0.EE5.3-Dgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25722 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:35 1/22/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Be specific, Scott. Who does this? When and where did you hear or read it? Naming them would publicly accuse them of sloppy research. I am not going to do that. Even if I did drag them out in public, they'd deny it vehemently. It's a subconscious thing they do without even realizing it. Yes, I could be confident of a 10% excess heat result but not without an orgy of tests to confirm it. Even then, the possibility would still remain that an undiscovered systematic error was responsible. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 12:42:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA25320; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:35:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:35:52 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0E6 XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:34:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"ODNFw.0.QB6.d4Egs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25723 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Why not give a set of high quality calorimic procedures, that someone could follow exactly, and which would yield statistically significant results. Sort of a standard calorimic test. Hank > ---------- > From: Scott Little[SMTP:little eden.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, January 22, 1999 12:28 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results > > At 10:35 1/22/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > >Be specific, Scott. Who does this? When and where did you hear or read > it? > > Naming them would publicly accuse them of sloppy research. I am not going > to do that. Even if I did drag them out in public, they'd deny it > vehemently. It's a subconscious thing they do without even realizing it. > > Yes, I could be confident of a 10% excess heat result but not without an > orgy of tests to confirm it. Even then, the possibility would still > remain > that an undiscovered systematic error was responsible. > > > > Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little > Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA > 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 13:33:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14148; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 13:30:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 13:30:20 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990122163007.007a4e80 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 16:30:07 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Storms dual-mode calorimeter results In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990122142853.00946bf8 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990122103535.007ad100 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19990122083414.009392a0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121235312.00706a8c world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19990121221528.00867450 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121201258.0070ba50 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121180110.0093f6d0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19990121152917.00796260 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"i9aiz3.0.nS3.gtEgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25724 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little writes: Naming them would publicly accuse them of sloppy research. I am not going to do that. Why not!?! What harm? I do it all the time! People have been accusing CF scientists of sloppy research for 10 years! They have thick skin. If you are restraining yourself out of a sense of politeness or because you do not want cause harm, I think you should reconsider, and name names. You cause more harm by circulating rumors about unnamed people. You could mean anyone; you could mean everyone! Dick Blue will say you mean everyone. Even if I did drag them out in public, they'd deny it vehemently. It's a subconscious thing they do without even realizing it. I doubt it! Yes, I could be confident of a 10% excess heat result but not without an orgy of tests to confirm it. And how do you know Storms has not performed an orgy of tests? He has been working at this full time for many years, and he has been doing similar experiments for decades. You know how careful and thorough he is. Even then, the possibility would still remain that an undiscovered systematic error was responsible. Not a chance. That would be black magic, not science. After a while you must draw the line, or you might as well say the law of gravity might be the result of a systematic error. When the chances fall to 1 in 750,000, as they have with Melvin Miles' helium, systematic error is ruled out. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 15:05:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA19152; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 15:00:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 15:00:37 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 23:00:57 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36aaec7e.262319982 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: <"xNDZO3.0.ug4.JCGgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25725 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:03:15 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >is *initiated* for various energies borrowed. I do not have a handle on >this topic, and probably have a misunderstanding of the process. Neither do I. It may be related to both "density" and distribution of energy in the ZPE, as well as phase differences between nuclei (or components thereof), and ZPE photons. Hal do you have any ideas? [snip] >>>Is there some reason to believe the kinetic energy that goes >>>into a particle ever changes its nature, except that the initial linear >>>motion is converted to angular motion in a small volume, due to the >>>attraction of one force or another? It all depends upon your point of >> >>Yes, there is. When an atomic electron absorbs kinetic energy from an >>outside source, it goes into a "higher orbit". Yet in this "higher >>orbit", the velocity of the electron is lower (not higher), while the >>potential energy increases by more than the kinetic energy absorbed. >>It would appear that energy can be stored in the field itself, and not >>as kinetic energy. > >I don't understand. If the electron absorbs energy, the velocity of the >electron increases, the orbit radius increases, the *frequency* of the >orbit decreases, right? I may be wrong, but I think the velocity of the electron decreases. The original Sommerfeld "orbits", are still reasonable approximations, and AFAIK they are based on the concept of balance between centrifugal force and electric attraction. Because both electric attraction and gravity go as 1/r^2, the balance for an atom should take the same form as the balance for stable orbits around the earth. And we both know that in stable earth orbits the higher you are, the slower you go. {I.e. v = sqrt((G x Mearth)/r)} (unless I screwed up the formula :) So an increase in r means that the velocity of a stable orbit is less. (The further you are away from a planet, the weaker the gravitational field, thus you don't need to go as fast to produce sufficient centrifugal force to counter the field). > The relativistic mass increase would be a very >small percentage at ionization voltages, right? Say less than 20 eV vs 512 >keV? Because the velocity decreases, the relativistic mass also decreases. [snip] >>Where does the mass/energy come from that is used to increase the >>relativistic mass of the universe? > >From the *frame* of the particle, which is infinite in size, the energy of >the apparently accelerated universe is actually available energy. Photons >coming from the oncoming universe will be blue shifted. Particles from the >oncoming universe will have more kinetic energy. This seems reasonable. >From a universal >standpoint, though, the *total* mass energy added to the universe by >accelerating mass m depends on the mass product mM, thus is higly limited. Presumably, here M is the mass of the universe? If so, where do you get the product mM from? >The potential energy available from the universe from the point of view of >a high velocity reference frame, though, can be unlimited, as the frame has >no mass consideration, it is not real, it is only an imaginary reference >frame. Heh man, I'm a particle travelling through the universe, and I like to think of my reference frame as very real ;). (What exactly is an imaginary reference frame? Are there also real reference frames? What is the difference? And what is a "mass consideration"?) >Of interest, though, is the fact that in all cases, the mass and >energy are preserved in a E = mc^2 relationship, which is my main point. You have just finished agreeing, that depending on frame of reference, the total energy of the universe goes up and down like a yoyo. Now how can you say that mass-energy is conserved? (There are infinitely many frames of reference, all different. Hence not only does the total energy of the universe go up and down, it has an infinite number of different values, all at once :>). If this is going to be true, then I think we need to look at something like a law of conservation of mass-energy-time. Now having said that, I must confess that I realise that you are arguing for preservation of the relationship, not the total. >If you create one (in this case based on reference frame) then you create >the other in proportion. If the reference is from a point in the frame, >then it is interesting that mass-energy of the universe is created or >destroyed depending on whether more mass of the universe is ahead of the >point or behind it. Weird. Still maintains the fixed ratio of mass to >energy, though. Interesting point. [snip] >>>>My conclusion: All frames are not created equal and/or gravitational >>>>and total relativistic mass are not equal. >>>>(Actually I'm inclined to think it's "and"). >>>>[snip] >>>>>Photons are bent around heavy gravitational objects in space. This could >>>>>be viewed as a curvature of space, but could it not also be interpreted as >>>>>a gravitational attraction of the heavy body to the mass corresponding to >>>>>the photon's energy? >>>> >>>>Apparently not, as the gravitational mass of the photon appears to >>>>depend upon it's trajectory relative to the gravitational field, while >>>>this isn't the case for it's relativistic "mass". >>> >>> >>>I don't understand. All the mass of the photon is "relativistic." It has >>>a rest mass of zero. >> >>True, but not the point. E.g. a photon with a wavelength of 400 nm >>only has one relativistic mass (i.e. h/(c*400nm) as I presume you >>would calculate it), but various gravitational masses, depending upon >>trajectory. That is to say, it has a different apparent gravitational >>mass when approaching the earth dead centre, than when passing the >>earth tangentially (according to GR). >>However my lack of comprehension WRT relativity could be showing here. >>Maybe it really does have different masses under GR. > > >I think the flaw in this logic is using a specific wavelength. The >wavelength is a function of the reference frame, as is the corresponding >mass. I think the problem is that I don't know what the parameters were that were used to make the calculations I was referring to. So I can't really say. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 15:45:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA01905; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 15:43:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 15:43:30 -0800 Message-ID: <004b01be4660$bdad2b80$a4441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Solar Neutrino Oscillations, Cold Fusion, and ZPE Fluctuations Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 16:41:24 -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: <"p6E_D.0.ZT.XqGgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25726 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Try this, Robin. The higher energy Solar neutrinos (about 4E10/cm^2/sec)interact ever so slightly with matter releasing a few ev, here and there. Now that it is high Solar Flux (Summer)time down your way you should be seeing these O-U Effects. So at near 0 deg K you will also see neutrino induced "Zero Point Fluctuations". Dig out your O-U data and a calendar, especially in San Diego a few years ago. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 18:44:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA05077; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 18:41:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 18:41:29 -0800 Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 21:33:04 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex , John Schnurer Subject: Lost John Allen ... again.... He bounces.... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"kzRI21.0.BF1.ORJgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25727 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Header said 'er.... Can anyone help? JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 18:55:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA11486; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 18:54:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 18:54:11 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990122205540.008782e0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 20:55:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: systematic errors Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"3q-on2.0.Lp2.JdJgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25728 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:34 1/22/99 -0800, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Scott >Why not give a set of high quality calorimic procedures, that >someone could follow exactly, and which would yield statistically >significant results. Sort of a standard calorimic test. Good idea, but it would take a book to do it. Experience has shown that it would have to be laid out in great detail with supporting explanations for each critical step. Two groups that have built calorimeters after seeing mine have had significant difficulties because of either corner-cutting or "ego improvements". Jed writes: >And how do you know Storms has not performed an orgy of tests? ...because he did not feel like announcing his 600 mW result. >When the chances fall to 1 in 750,000, as >they have with Melvin Miles' helium, systematic error is ruled out. When "the chances fall to 1 in 750,000" it just means that statistical error has been reduced to a small value. That doesn't affect systematic error at all. For example, suppose you can measure He with a standard deviation of +/-1 ppm and you observe 11 ppm He in your active sample compared to 5 ppm He in your control sample. The 6 ppm difference is equal to 6 standard deviations and that means there's only about a 10^-7 percent chance that the 11 ppm reading actually came from a sample that is only 5 ppm He. But that says NOTHING about whether or not a systematic error, such as contamination from the sample container, might be responsible for the extra 6 ppm He! Systematic errors can be very insidious. Sometimes a given investigator has little or no chance of discovering his own systematic errors. That's why independent replication is such a powerful tool in experimental science. 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 Jan 22 19:25:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22603; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 19:19:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 19:19:31 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19990122222748.0095f290 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 22:27:50 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: Re: systematic errors Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"3Aezc1.0.5X5.3_Jgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25729 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:55 PM 1/22/99 -0600, you wrote: >Systematic errors can be very insidious. Sometimes a given investigator >has little or no chance of discovering his own systematic errors. That's >why independent replication is such a powerful tool in experimental science. > >Scott Little I'm trying to think of the equivalent term for "Systematic Success", when the original experiment works due to some component or system which functions in a manner unknown to the inventor yet is essential for results. Equally insidious, and annoying to peers and coworkers. "Well, it worked for me..." :^) K. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 22:43:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA00739; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 22:42:13 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 22:42:13 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990123005908.007020cc world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 00:59:08 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: systematic errors In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990122205540.008782e0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"idhYi3.0.SB.3zMgs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25730 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:55 PM 1/22/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 12:34 1/22/99 -0800, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >>Why not give a set of high quality calorimic procedures, that >>someone could follow exactly, and which would yield statistically >>significant results. Sort of a standard calorimic test. > >Good idea, but it would take a book to do it. Experience has shown that it >would have to be laid out in great detail with supporting explanations for >each critical step. Two groups that have built calorimeters after seeing >mine have had significant difficulties because of either corner-cutting or >"ego improvements". > >Jed writes: >And how do you know Storms has not performed an orgy of tests? > >...because he did not feel like announcing his 600 mW result. > >>When the chances fall to 1 in 750,000, as >>they have with Melvin Miles' helium, systematic error is ruled out. > >When "the chances fall to 1 in 750,000" it just means that statistical >error has been reduced to a small value. That doesn't affect systematic >error at all. For example, suppose you can measure He with a standard >deviation of +/-1 ppm and you observe 11 ppm He in your active sample >compared to 5 ppm He in your control sample. The 6 ppm difference is equal >to 6 standard deviations and that means there's only about a 10^-7 percent >chance that the 11 ppm reading actually came from a sample that is only 5 >ppm He. But that says NOTHING about whether or not a systematic error, >such as contamination from the sample container, might be responsible for >the extra 6 ppm He! > >Systematic errors can be very insidious. Sometimes a given investigator >has little or no chance of discovering his own systematic errors. That's >why independent replication is such a powerful tool in experimental science. "Systematic errors" is becoming the mantra of those who dont use meticulous methods, the scientific method, and/or the efforts it takes to achieve these difficult-to-produce phenomena. In fact, systematic errors can account for some of the failures to reproduce the cold fusion effect. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 22 22:55:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA00824; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 22:54:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 22:54:14 -0800 X-WebTV-Signature: 1 ETAsAhQVF/8OIFQJt4y+RV3qjYhATFhjiAIUNkWRZ26IAqNn5XWlH/eP2oi63fc= From: dennisgarrett webtv.net (Dennis Garrett) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 22:54:15 -0800 (PST) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: systematic errors Message-ID: <28225-36A97217-2790 mailtod-171.iap.bryant.webtv.net> In-Reply-To: Mitchell Swartz 's message of Sat, 23 Jan 1999 00:59:08 -0500 Content-Disposition: Inline Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV) Resent-Message-ID: <"qbfri.0.oC.L8Ngs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25731 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: unsubscribe vortex From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 23 00:33:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA26149; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 00:31:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 00:31:53 -0800 Message-ID: <36A98AB8.3FC94CEE mccir3.crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 09:39:20 +0100 From: Jean-Paul Biberian X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l Subject: The truth in science Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XCDjF.0.OO6.uZOgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25732 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortexians and truth seekers, I am reading some of the discussions between Jed Rothwell, Scot Little and others, and this leads me to think more about an interesting topic: the truth in science. There are many aspects of science that are widely accepted by the scientific community without really a solid proof. I w'ont go into details of those, but I am sure every scientist in his own field knows some. However, when something as big and important as cold fusion is involved, we need more proofs than usually accepted in an ordinary scientific field. When Marie Curie discovered natural radioactivity, Lord Kelvin did'nt accept her claims, nor the rest of the scientific community. The signal levels were way too low, and only good experimentalists as herself and her husband were capable of knowing that this was a real fact, not physics, not chemistry. They managed to isolate a new element radium, and then only the proof became obvious to everyone. With cold fusion, we face the same kind of challenge. I am convinced that there is something there. I absolutely agree with Scott Little that there might be systematic errors in the measurements. I have now years of experience in low level calorimetry. This is not a trivial work. I agree again with Scott, a book will not suffice. People won't believe the crooked way things go that make safe asumptions wrong! One must have spent time to resolve all of them. I also agree with Jed Rothwell, I have seen both the CETI demos in Monaco and at Power Gen, I don't understand why they showed excess heat then. There is no obvious fault, but I did'nt have the leasure to play with the experiments to check them. Also at that time I was new in the field, and lacked experience myself. Because this field is so exciting, it attracts all kinds of people: good scientists, but also some people who want to take the fast lane to success. Unfortunately, after 10 years of work, it turns out that the field is more challenging than we thought at first. As many people are now involved, it is very likely that someone will make a breakthrough, but God knows when. At this point, the field is still a family business. Only parents know the value of their kids. When they mature and become geniuses then everybody else will know. For the time being we must be realistic. With the clues we get from all the experiments, the sloppy ones and the good ones, we can acquire informations to do the experiments that will proove without a doubt that the effect is real. So, there is only one solution: make it bigger!!! Untill then, good work and luck to everyone Jean-Paul Biberian PS: In science, we must be very humble. After all the foundations of science as we know it, is not a century old yet, and we have been around for million years, so a lot can happen in the future. I won't bet a kopek on any scientific truth. Just wait a few centuries and that truth might turn out to be wrong. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 23 02:47:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA15745; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 02:44:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 02:44:57 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 02:44:48 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: taoshum-l eskimo.com Subject: Lots More Torsion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hLkDz1.0.kr3.dWQgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25733 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: New additions: reviews of torsion: papers by Yu.V.Nachalov links to A.A. Shpilman's torsion device pages See: http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/tors/ ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com 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 Jan 23 04:43:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA32546; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 04:42:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 04:42:29 -0800 Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <36A97AA6.1E86EF2E mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 07:30:46 +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: Wimps and nuclei References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"P_I4D1.0.Oy7.qESgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25734 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: This can not be, that relativistic mass is non-gravitational. The mass of excited nuclei increases corresponding to the trapped kinetic energy. Robin van Spaandonk wrote: I doubt the *gravitational* mass of an *excited* nucleus has ever been measured. Horace Heffner wrote: It seems to me that *all* nuclei are excited, though this is not the conventional meaning of the term. Radioactive nuclei are excited to the point that, on occasion, a nuclear state permitting fission spontaneously arises, true? Is there some reason to believe the kinetic energy that goes into a particle ever changes its nature, except that the initial linear motion is converted to angular motion in a small volume, due to the attraction of one force or another? It all depends upon your point of view, I suppose. ... Maybe the rest mass of most or all particles consists of some amount of relativistic mass due to internaly trapped kinetic energy. Robin van Spaandonk wrote: Yes, there is. When an atomic electron absorbs kinetic energy from an outside source, it goes into a "higher orbit". Yet in this "higher orbit", the velocity of the electron is lower (not higher), while the potential energy increases by more than the kinetic energy absorbed. It would appear that energy can be stored in the field itself, and not as kinetic energy. Horace Heffner wrote: I don't understand. If the electron absorbs energy, the velocity of the electron increases, the orbit radius increases, the *frequency* of the orbit decreases, right? Robin van Spaandonk wrote: I may be wrong, but I think the velocity of the electron decreases. The original Sommerfeld "orbits", are still reasonable approximations, and AFAIK they are based on the concept of balance between centrifugal force and electric attraction. Because both electric attraction and gravity go as 1/r^2, the balance for an atom should take the same form as the balance for stable orbits around the earth. And we both know that in stable earth orbits the higher you are, the slower you go. {I.e. v = sqrt((G x Mearth)/r)} (unless I screwed up the formula :) So an increase in r means that the velocity of a stable orbit is less. (The further you are away from a planet, the weaker the gravitational field, thus you don't need to go as fast to produce sufficient centrifugal force to counter the field). Hi Horace and Robin, What do you think of the alternative interpretation of the apparent mass increase of a charged particle noving at a velocity near the speed of light proposed by Dr. Paul M. Brown, "An Alternate Interpretation Of Mass-Gain At Near Light Velocities," Infinite Energy, Vol. 3, No. 13 and No. 14, 1997, pages 52-53: KE = mv^2/2 + q^2v^2k/3r where r = radius of the charged particle, q = the charge, and v = the velocity of the particle. k = 3.336 x 10^-4. m is the gravitational or rest mass of the particle. This design equation also fits the data very well. The term "q^2v^2k/3r" is "non-gravitational." Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 23 06:40:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA25643; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 06:40:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 06:40:19 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990123093759.0070c7a8 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 09:37:59 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: The truth in science In-Reply-To: <36A98AB8.3FC94CEE mccir3.crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NiV32.0.bG6.JzTgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25735 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:39 AM 1/23/99 +0100, Jean-Paul Biberian wrote: >When Marie Curie discovered natural radioactivity, >Lord Kelvin did'nt accept her claims, nor the rest of the scientific >community. The signal levels were way too low, and only good >experimentalists as herself and her husband were capable of knowing that >this was a real fact, not physics, not chemistry. They managed to >isolate a new element radium, and then only the proof became obvious >to everyone. > Even then there were time delays of acceptance. Thermoelectricity is classic case of the problems with the "scientific" community coming to grips with the reality of the observations. ============================================================= >Because this field is so exciting, it attracts all kinds of people: good >scientists, but also some people who want to take the fast lane to >success. Unfortunately, after 10 years of work, it turns out that the >field is more challenging than we thought at first. As many people are >now involved, it is very likely that someone will make a breakthrough, >but God knows when. There are probably breakthroughs already reported, which are not being considered EVEN by some of those working in the field. Good points, Jean-Paul. Autant des hommes, autant d'avis. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 23 07:28:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA06462; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 07:27:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 07:27:36 -0800 From: BriggsRO aol.com Message-ID: <2cf8baee.36a9ea2f aol.com> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 10:26:39 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: The truth in science Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 236 Resent-Message-ID: <"1Frt23.0.ua1.dfUgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25736 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 1/23/99 12:32:58 AM Pacific Standard Time, biberian mccir3.crmc2.univ-mrs.fr writes: << So, there is only one solution: make it bigger!!! >> Hi Jean-Paul, Also, make it repeatable? Bob Briggs From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 23 09:03:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA05296; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 09:01:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 09:01:58 -0800 Message-ID: <006701be46f1$d0280960$a4441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Off on a Tangent Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 09:58:46 -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: <"lLAlf3.0.gI1.52Wgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25737 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex If one mounts a laser on a wheel pointing radially and another pointing at right angles (Tangent) to it, as the wheel rotates through an angle of 0.4181 degrees at some tangential velocity, won't light detectors for the tangential laser beam indicate that the velocity is 137 times faster than the wheel is rotating? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 23 13:14:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19872; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 13:12:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 13:12:22 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19990123131245.00a41f64 pop3.oro.net> X-Sender: Tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 13:12:47 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Ross Tessien Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"aggDO.0.Ls4.riZgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25738 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:30 AM 1/23/99 +0000, you wrote: > >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >I doubt the *gravitational* mass of an *excited* nucleus has ever >been measured. > "Radioactive" isotopes such as Uranium, plutonium, etc. ARE "excited" nuclei. The unstable excess energy was put into them in the interior of a star, due to neutron absorption or during the supernova process. Also, there are unstable Isomeric states of the nuclei with long half lives. The energy differences can be measured. Basically, this means that a lump of material of a certain isomere could be weighed, to determine the gravitational mass. Other nuclei that are gamma unstable or beta unstable could be weighed too. That said, I know that to measure a weight difference for chemical changes is not possible with present balances, but I am not so certain that we wouldn't be capable of measuring these nuclear differences. Obviously we can measure their mass via mass spectroscopy. But it seems to me that we should also be capable of measuring their masses gravitationally, when you get a lump of material that is composed of such an excited state at the nuclear level. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 23 23:23:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA32310; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 23:21:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 23:21:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 23:21:13 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Strategies for Dissenting Scientists Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"gLW7f2.0.hu7.idigs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25739 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: An *excellent* new paper, just added to the SSE website: Strategies for Dissenting Scientists http://www.jse.com/martin/1.html Strategies for Dissenting Scientists Brian Martin University of Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia brian_martin uow.edu.au, http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/ Abstract Those who challenge conventional views or vested interests in science are likely to encounter difficulties. A scientific dissenter should first realize that science is a system of power as well as of knowledge, in which interest groups play a key role and insiders have an extra advantage. Dissenters are likely to be ignored or dismissed. If dissenters gain some recognition or outside support, they may be attacked. In the face of such obstacles, several strategies are available, which include mimicking science, aiming at lower status outlets, enlisting patrons, seeking a different audience, exposing suppression of dissent, and building a social movement. Introduction Science is normally presented to the public as an enterprise based on skepticism and openness to new ideas, in which evidence and argumentation are examined on their own merits. Trusting newcomers who present views that conflict with conventional ideas may thus expect that their work will be given a prompt, fair, and incisive analysis, being accepted if it passes scrutiny and being given detailed reasons if not. When, instead, their work is ignored, ridiculed, or rejected without explanation, they assume that there has been some sort of mistake, and often begin a search to find the "right person" --someone who fits the stereotype of the open-minded scientist. This can be a long search! ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 24 13:04:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25400; Sun, 24 Jan 1999 13:03:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 13:03:15 -0800 Message-ID: <19990124205811.26296.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 12:58:11 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: The truth in science To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"YfSYX1.0.mC6.Jgugs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25740 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jean-Paul Biberian wrote: [snip] > When Marie Curie discovered natural radioactivity, [snip] Becquerel discovered natural radioactivity. I don't remember the exact year, but I think it was one of the last years of the 19th century. That makes it just about 100 years ago. Marie Curie discovered radium, polonium and other things. == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 24 13:32:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA01504; Sun, 24 Jan 1999 13:29:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 13:29:26 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: <20670dce.36ab8ff7 aol.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 16:26:15 EST To: b25b LCIA.COM Cc: donadams telusplanet.net, Vince Goetsch <3wishes@wishgranted.com>, "Dennis C. Lee" , grstewar@tva.gov, "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , Terri Schoolden , lkvp@mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , rolfe_hauser@hotmail.com, Robin van Spaandonk , trknute earthlink.net, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, dwenbert spacey.net, John Schnurer , oleprospector worldaccessnet.com, Mattias , Quinney Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Black Light Power energy cell Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"KE-7k1.0.8N.p2vgs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25741 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-21 20:18:29 EST, you write: > There is a firm in Miami that makes caps for storage batteries > that use a platinum catalyst to convert the gas from a charging >battery back to water. I believe the name is Hydro-cap. I believe > this is all they make. I haven't been in touch with them for years. > Ron Brennen > back to water so that you don't need to add water Thanks, indeed! Perhaps they--or someone else--broadened the technology's applicability. My info is that the water-producing reaction is also exothermic, and has been optimized to make an alternative, H-powered heating method. This might be more efficient than rapid H oxidation via flame, which over-produces potentially destructive heat concentration, necessitating additional energy input (like fan-forcing) to dissipate that energy excess. --Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 24 20:34:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA32261; Sun, 24 Jan 1999 20:32:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 20:32:59 -0800 From: SciBorg8 aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 23:29:36 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Magnet concept Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 214 Resent-Message-ID: <"23owy.0.xt7.wF_gs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25742 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is about the conversation that went on before about the "Bouncing Magnets." The like poles repelling forces the magnet up and it hovers there. I understand that no work is done because it isn't through a distance. But is there an applied force??? That's it. Thanks Eric Iliff From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 24 20:56:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA07565; Sun, 24 Jan 1999 20:53:10 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 20:53:10 -0800 (PST) From: John Logajan Message-Id: <199901250452.WAA04312 mirage.skypoint.com> Subject: Re: Magnet concept In-Reply-To: from "SciBorg8@aol.com" at "Jan 24, 99 11:29:36 pm" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 22:52:12 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pFcFc3.0.7s1.lY_gs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25743 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > This is about the conversation that went on before about the "Bouncing > Magnets." The like poles repelling forces the magnet up and it hovers there. I > understand that no work is done because it isn't through a distance. But is > there an applied force??? That's it. Thanks > Eric Iliff Not quite sure what you mean, but there are two forces, the force of gravity, and the force of magnetic repulsion. For a levitating magnet, they are equal and opposite. If either one were absent, the magnet would either fall or shoot away. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 651-633-8928 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 04:31:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA12797; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 04:29:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 04:29:27 -0800 Message-ID: <01BE485E.0D436980 ip165.vpop143.psi.net.uk> From: Nick Palmer To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: SMOTS... Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 12:27:01 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id EAA12777 Resent-Message-ID: <"_o8r52.0.p73.dE6hs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25744 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Craig Haynie wrote:- << Incidentally, did Greg Watson ever return, either your, or anyone else's, money from the SMOT purchase?>> Well, I finally asked for a refund before Christmas but have heard nothing since. I now believe that Greg Watson hoped to set up a "chain letter" type of thing to sell the initial SMOT, which most seem to have forgotten was never advertised as being OU ( he claimed to have achieved OU with his rotary device and a custom SMOT but only offered the SMOT as a device to experiment with the effect - the "rollaround" would come later when he showed us how to link four or so of them). At one point he was offering free SMOTS to people who would put his offer on their web sites in a way reminiscent of pyramid schemes. Provided he stays put, I will get a refund because I have some friends in OZ who would be happy to go round and ask him for my refund in person and I don't think he would be so "impolite" as to refuse them. Unfortunately, they live up the other end of th e country and have no plans to go to Greg's bit yet! Nick Palmer - Jersey Friends of the Earth From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 04:40:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA14510; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 04:33:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 04:33:26 -0800 Message-ID: <000301be485e$a065bba0$d2441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 05:31:15 -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: <"AEc3k.0.cY3.MI6hs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25745 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Planck Length (Lp) = (G*hbar/c^3)^1/2 = 1.61E-35 meters Planck Time (Tp) = (G*hbar/c^5)^1/2 = 5.37E-44 seconds Planck Mass (Mp) = (hbar*c/G)^1/2 = 2.17E-8 Kg Are these little buggers running around in circles making Superstrings/String circles,particles,Wimps, or "quarks"? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 08:07:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15173; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 08:06:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 08:06:07 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990125110339.0079b190 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 11:03:39 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Systematic errors Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ZV4wh3.0._i3.lP9hs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25746 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I quoted the statistics from Melvin Miles' paper, 1 in 750,000 chances of an error. Scott Little writes: When "the chances fall to 1 in 750,000" it just means that statistical error has been reduced to a small value. That doesn't affect systematic error at all. For example, suppose you can measure He with a standard deviation of +/-1 ppm and you observe 11 ppm He in your active sample . . . This analysis is irrelevant. It would apply to errors in one instrument (as Little says), but Miles is not discussing instrument errors. He is discussing the correlation between heat and helium in 33 experiments. The heat was measured with thermocouples at China Lake, the helium was confirmed in three independent helium analyses at other labs in single-blind tests. Quoting Miles: The probability of exactly three mismatches in 33 experiments . . . would be P3 = 30!3! (0.512)^30(0.488)^3 = 1.203 x 10^-6 Similar terms can be calculated for two (P2 = 1.221 x 10^-7), one (P1 = 8.009 x 10^-9), or zero (P0 = 2.546 x 10^-10) mismatches in 33 experiments. The total probability of three or less mismatches in 33 studies would be P= P3 +P2 +P1 +P0 = 1.333 x l0^-6 = 1/750,000 - M. H. Miles et al., "Anomalous Effects in Deuterated Systems," September 1996, Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, NAWCWPNS TP 8302 Little writes: . . . compared to 5 ppm He in your control sample. The 6 ppm difference is equal to 6 standard deviations and that means there's only about a 10^-7 percent chance that the 11 ppm reading actually came from a sample that is only 5 ppm He. This is not the kind of analysis Miles is discussing, which is not to say this kind of analysis is unimportant. But that says NOTHING about whether or not a systematic error, such as contamination from the sample container, might be responsible for the extra 6 ppm He! No, because that would not affect both the thermocouples and helium detection. That is the point. No systematic error can affect all four measurement systems (one temperature and three helium) at four locations. Systematic errors can be very insidious. But not magical! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 08:26:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA23023; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 08:24:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 08:24:20 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 11:23:34 EST To: freenrg-l eskimo.com Cc: PetMagic aol.com, lizardhaven@zippnet.net, werosser@hotmail.com, bill basselectronics.com, rolfe_hauser@hotmail.com, johnhoffman webtv.net, biotron@pacbell.net, grstewar@tva.gov, powerfd gte.net, Serwitz@aol.com, dawnames@hotmail.com, lkvp mail.awod.com, trknute@earthlink.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com, Mattias , Vince Goetsch <3wishes@wishgranted.com>, votex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Fwd: Urine Batteries] Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"uCtb.0.Xd5.pg9hs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25747 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Jorg, In a message dated 99-01-25 06:50:21 EST, you write: >...Do you or anyone else want to >build this battery? Does any one have any practical experience to >relate on this topic? We have a waterless toilet and I could make >revisions to divert this valuable resource. Now is it is used as liquid >fertilizer. Once I have had a chance to review the web site, I would >consider building a prototype, together with other interested parties. >Any practical suggestions welcomed. I like being practical. Jorg Ostrowski My RAM upgrade arrives this week--I'll then be able to visit the url--but I'm interested in all forms of home-mde energy to help the greatest numbers become self-sufficient. What metals are used? The Chinese-made Salt Water Lantern uses copper & alum. alloys. Its exclusive global exporter of is sending me a free sample (otherwise anavailable until March) for R & D purposes, in response to my suggesting that its power supply (battery) be adapted to uses beyond energizing the built-in flourescent tubes. I'll be measuring pH, voltages, alloy composition, etc. Perhaps I'll determine some transferable principles. BTW--Do you dilute the "resource" 5:1 for fertilizer use, or compost it first? What plant types do you cultivate? The prof. from whom I got my spirulina had a vat that he maintained by urinating in it once/day! --Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 08:32:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA28318; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 08:31:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 08:31:57 -0800 Message-ID: <36AC9C87.58705DA5 ihug.co.nz> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 05:32:09 +1300 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Intentional community References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"HseYY.0.2w6.yn9hs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25748 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I need the email of the guy who was starting the intentional community, I had the feeling it could have been you so I decided to test my theory before I bother the whole list. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 08:41:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA00720; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 08:38:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 08:38:34 -0800 Message-ID: <36AC9E15.6E6E204D ihug.co.nz> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 05:38:47 +1300 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Intentional community References: <36AC9C87.58705DA5@ihug.co.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"iGjng.0.AB.9u9hs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25749 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Stupid email program, I forgot you can't just past the email address into the To: field in netscape messenger 4.5, you have to edit it and press return. As this went to the list anyway I might as well ask, Who was starting an intentional community (just hope it was on vort and not on freenrg) John Berry wrote: > I need the email of the guy who was starting the intentional community, I had the > feeling it could have been you so I decided to test my theory before I bother the > whole list. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 09:40:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA18956; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 09:38:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 09:38:18 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: <2978466e.36acaaa8 aol.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 12:32:24 EST To: freenrg-l eskimo.com, lizardhaven@zippnet.net, werosser@hotmail.com, bill basselectronics.com, rolfe_hauser@hotmail.com, johnhoffman webtv.net, biotron@pacbell.net, grstewar@tva.gov, powerfd gte.net, Serwitz@aol.com, dawnames@hotmail.com, lkvp mail.awod.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: HOW LONG WILL THIS BE SUPPRESSED? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"25akS3.0.zd4.8mAhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25750 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello, All-- My reading, from contemporaneous (1975) local newspaper reportage, indicates that this was REAL--prototype motors produced 400-1000HP, running off a standard vehicle battery, and returned almost all the power they withdrew; IOW, they ran until the battery literally wore out from age. Capacitors created pulsed, high V routed to ciols, producing huge EM fields, which exerted force against a circular array of permanent magnets. Initially, the motor was cooled with compressed air; later versions had an integral fan. EvGray had an impressive “battery” of engineers on staff & was ready to fill orders...but a sudden barrage of legal & health problems (incl. a fortuitous car accident) intervened. Patent Server: 3890548 Pulsed Capacitor Discharge Electric Engine Gray; Edwin, Northridge, CA ASSIGNEES: Evgray Enterprises, Inc., Van Nuys, CA ATTORNEY, AGENT, or FIRM: Price; Gerald L. PRIMARY/ASSISTANT EXAMINERS: Schaefer; Robert K.; Feldhaus; John J. There is disclosed herein an electric machine or engine in which a rotor cage having an array of electromagnets is rotatable in an array of electromagnets, or fixed electromagnets are juxtaposed against movable ones. The coils of the electromagnets are connected in the discharge path of capacitors charged to relatively high voltage and discharged through the electromagnetic coils when selected rotor and stator elements are in alignment, or when the fixed electromagnets and movable electromagnets are juxtaposed. The discharge occurs across spark gaps disclosed in alignment with respect to the desired juxtaposition of the selected movable and stationary electromagnets. The capacitor discharges occur simultaneously through juxtaposed stationary movable electromagnets wound so that their respective cores are in magnetic repulsion polarity, thus resulting in the forced motion of movable electromagnetic elements away from the juxtaposed stationary electromagnetic elements at the discharge, thereby achieving motion. In an engine, the discharges occur successively across selected ones of the gaps to maintain continuous rotation. Capacitors are recharged between successive alignment positions of particular rotor and stator electromagnets of the engine. Show the 3 patents that reference this one #2085708, Spencer 1937 #2800619, Brunt 1957 #3579074, Roberts 1971 ELECTRONIC POWERED PULSE AMPLIFIER #3619638" 3619638, Phinney 1971 #3619638" PULSE GENERATING APPARATUS Exemplary claims: An electric engine, comprising: fixed electromagnets; movable electromagnets movable into alignment with said fixed electromagnets; capacitor means; means for charging said capacitor means; and means for discharging said charged capacitor means through said fixed and movable electromagnets to polarize said aligned fixed and movable FOREIGN APPLICATION PRIORITY DATA: none OTHER REFERENCES: Frungel, High Speed Pulse Technology, Academic Press Inc., 1965, pp. 140-148. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 13:13:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA00378; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:11:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:11:19 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:04:11 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intentional community Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"47kx71.0.p5.ttDhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25751 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-25 11:32:36 EST, you write: >I need the email of the guy who was starting the intentional community, I had >the >feeling it could have been you... Dear John Berry, That would be me. Perhaps you agree with our rationale for an ‘intentional community’: Why is the National Guard making ready to mobilize in case of power outages? Why are executive orders in place for commandeering private property under FEMA-controlled martial law? Because of ignorance. People are ignorant of alternatives to the prevailing systems of water, food, & energy production. When these systems are disrupted, people will panic. The same ignorance is also evident in the usual idea of "preparedness". If a “survival retreat” means a place to merely hide & defend one’s family & provisions from chaos for a finite length of time, then disaster "preparedness" presupposses disaster *acceptance*. As we see it, these critical systems--in their petrochemically-based form--spell our inevitable extinction, anyway. Our actual problem, therefore, is our multifarious addiction to the unsustainable. REAL preparedness against global economic correction, Earth changes, Y2K, etc., means discovering, developing, and implementing alternative systems of water, food, & energy production. In turn, this indicates collaboration among people who have the equipment, knowledge and attitude requisite for innovation...which requires a safe place to launch the effort. According to various “future maps”, NE Alabama is comparatively safe from earthquakes and oceanic flooding. The climate, although hot in July & Aug., could stand greater extremes in either direction, in the event of ‘Earth changes’. The people still evince the congeniality of the "Bible belt", without the reputed closed-mindedness. This is a rural area with access to a town of decent size. Should the SHTF, marauders would never survive this far into the surrounding, well-armed area. Given a good rain, we even have running creeks fed by the Lookout Mt. foothills. These 40 acres are situated between two dead-end gravel roads for privacy. Innovators who are seeking the keys to averting millennium hardships, and who wish to relocate their search from an urban area to a "scientific haven', should contact me 256-546-5945. Thanks. --Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 13:44:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12994; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:43:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:43:04 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990125154304.00945e40 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:43:04 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Systematic errors In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990125110339.0079b190 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Af3oP1.0.uA3.eLEhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25752 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:03 1/25/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >This analysis is irrelevant. It would apply to errors in one instrument (as >Little says), but Miles is not discussing instrument errors. He is >discussing the correlation between heat and helium in 33 experiments. OK, that is different...but still subject to systematic errors. >No systematic error can affect all four >measurement systems (one temperature and three helium) at four locations. A systematic error which actually did contaminate the samples taken from the heat producing runs (and not the samples from the non-heat producing runs) with helium would produce exactly the results Miles observed. Such an error seems highly unlikely but it wouldn't require magic to occur. 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 Jan 25 14:00:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA18644; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:59:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:59:31 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990125165511.00711208 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:55:11 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Systematic errors In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990125154304.00945e40 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990125110339.0079b190 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Qzwng2.0.5Z4.2bEhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25753 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:43 PM 1/25/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 11:03 1/25/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >>This analysis is irrelevant. It would apply to errors in one instrument (as >>Little says), but Miles is not discussing instrument errors. He is >>discussing the correlation between heat and helium in 33 experiments. > >OK, that is different...but still subject to systematic errors. > >>No systematic error can affect all four >>measurement systems (one temperature and three helium) at four locations. > >A systematic error which actually did contaminate the samples taken from >the heat producing runs (and not the samples from the non-heat producing >runs) with helium would produce exactly the results Miles observed. Such >an error seems highly unlikely but it wouldn't require magic to occur. Such an error is indeed unlikely at this time. "Systematic error" remains the mantra of the TB-skeptics, who do not look closely at some of the described experiments. The de novo helium measurements of excess heat expts in Pd/D2O systems have been confirmed by other laboratories. BTW, IMO, the Miles & Bush [et alia] work was better than many of the "rough-and-ready" experiments that have been purported to be serious cold fusion experiments. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 14:16:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA24473; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:14:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:14:13 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990125171359.007a2cf0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:13:59 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Systematic errors In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990125154304.00945e40 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19990125110339.0079b190 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"56Mf61.0.F-5.qoEhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25754 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little writes: A systematic error which actually did contaminate the samples taken from the heat producing runs (and not the samples from the non-heat producing runs) with helium would produce exactly the results Miles observed. Such an error seems highly unlikely but it wouldn't require magic to occur. True, true . . . I discussed this with Miles. The only scenario I can think up is a situation in which real heat from a prosaic source affects the seals, allowing in slightly more helium than normally. However, this is impossible because the increase in temperature is minute, and because in many runs without excess heat, the temperature was higher than it was in other runs with excess heat. In other words, joule heating from electrolysis was sometimes intense even though there was no excess heat. Really, in practical terms, although I used the word "magical" facetiously, I think we can completely discount this scenario. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 16:22:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA01035; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:20:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:20:35 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 19:13:18 EST To: freenrg-l eskimo.com Cc: lizardhaven zippnet.net, werosser@hotmail.com, bill@basselectronics.com, rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, johnhoffman@webtv.net, biotron@pacbell.net, grstewar tva.gov, powerfd@gte.net, Serwitz@aol.com, dawnames hotmail.com, lkvp@mail.awod.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Fwd: Urine Batteries] Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"jv5kb2.0.0G.JfGhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25755 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-25 14:58:37 EST, you write: >question of below, the ratio of compost tea to >greywater is 10/1. Is 5:1 better? That book recommended a 5:1 dilution for un-composted (i.e., outdoor) use. >We use this for all our plants >indoors. We have 10" window sills (13" thick walls) ...Impressive! Did you build this from rammed earth? straw, etc.? Where (in the world) are you, BTW? >for edible, medicinal >and air cleaning plants, plus the greenhouse. Do you have the contact for >the salt batteries? Yes, but he just now asked me not to disseminate it further; there are no more available units yet, and he's in mid-distribution-negotiations. But stay tuned...I'll be announcing developments well in advance of their release. So far, the units have been available (in limited supply) only as fluorescent lanterns; however, I'm moving the company toward selling the battery separately, and/or incorporating other innovative, self-sufficiency features at OEM prices. I'm told, however, that in the meantime it would usher things along if you organized a tally of prospective orders (contingent on my scrutiny the device, in which I’ll share info & welcome any advice) from among friends, neighbors, internet acquaintances, etc. >Is your spirulina for fresh water? We have been >wanting to grow some in our solar aquatic system (greywater treatment). Fresh water, yes. However, I know of 20% sea water being used in one of the most prodigious horticultural projects in existence; IOW, superior cultivation may be a matter of *how much* sea salt is included, not whether! (I just received my RAM upgrade & will imminently be able to surf, but I’m open to & needful of suggestions about spirulina growth media!) Regards, Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 17:23:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA30755; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:21:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:21:53 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 20:20:43 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84 Resent-Message-ID: <"Vbby22.0.TW7.nYHhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25756 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 1/25/99 8:35:09 AM, Fred Sparber wrote: <> --------------------------------------------------------------- Why is the Planck mass so much closer to the realm of everyday experience than the Planck length or the Planck time? Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 17:51:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09253; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:48:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:48:00 -0800 Message-ID: <002701be48cd$9a3c6f20$d2441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 18:45:41 -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: <"rdena.0.RG2.ExHhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25757 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Tom Stolper wrote: > >In a message dated 1/25/99 8:35:09 AM, Fred Sparber wrote: > ><Planck Length (Lp) = (G*hbar/c^3)^1/2 = 1.61E-35 meters > >Planck Time (Tp) = (G*hbar/c^5)^1/2 = 5.37E-44 seconds > >Planck Mass (Mp) = (hbar*c/G)^1/2 = 2.17E-8 Kg > >Are these little buggers running around in circles making > >Superstrings/String circles,particles,Wimps, or "quarks"? :-) >> >---------------------------------------------------------------> >Why is the Planck mass so much closer to the realm of everyday experience than >the Planck length or the Planck time? It would take about 2.0 Billion Joules ie., about 1.2E28 ev to make that little bugger,Tom.:-) Only about 15 orders of magnitude above the "supercollider" energy. Methinks the quarks and leptons (312 Mev for a proton quark,0.511 Mev for the electron, and less than 0.5 ev for the neutrinos)kinda makes the "collider" a bit ambitious,don't you think? Regards, Frederick > >Tom Stolper > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 17:58:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12788; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:57:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:57:15 -0800 Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 20:48:45 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Me too! ..Re: Intentional community In-Reply-To: <36AC9E15.6E6E204D ihug.co.nz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"oeAeX.0.g73.w3Ihs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25758 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear JB., I too would like this info.... Thanks, J On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, John Berry wrote: > Stupid email program, I forgot you can't just past the email address into the To: > field in netscape messenger 4.5, you have to edit it and press return. > As this went to the list anyway I might as well ask, Who was starting an intentional > community (just hope it was on vort and not on freenrg) > > John Berry wrote: > > > I need the email of the guy who was starting the intentional community, I had the > > feeling it could have been you so I decided to test my theory before I bother the > > whole list. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 18:44:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA29112; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 18:43:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 18:43:14 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <4789221f.36ad29a0 aol.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 21:34:08 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: fjsparb sprintmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84 Resent-Message-ID: <"uLqai3.0.o67.1lIhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25759 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred, You wrote that the Planck mass would be about 1.2 E28 eV. I see your point that a single particle with the Planck mass would be outlandishly massive compared to other known particles. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 21:17:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA07550; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 21:15:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 21:15:39 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 05:15:34 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36b14ef8.549787067 24.192.1.20> References: <36A97AA6.1E86EF2E@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: <36A97AA6.1E86EF2E mail.pc.centuryinter.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: <"s2qAT1.0.tr1.wzKhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25760 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 23 Jan 1999 07:30:46 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: [snip] >What do you think of the alternative interpretation of the apparent >mass increase of a charged particle noving at a velocity >near the speed of light proposed by >Dr. Paul M. Brown, "An Alternate Interpretation Of Mass-Gain >At Near Light Velocities," Infinite Energy, Vol. 3, No. 13 >and No. 14, 1997, pages 52-53: > >KE = mv^2/2 + q^2v^2k/3r > >where r = radius of the charged particle, q = the charge, >and v = the velocity of the particle. k = 3.336 x 10^-4. >m is the gravitational or rest mass of the particle. This >design equation also fits the data very well. > >The term "q^2v^2k/3r" is "non-gravitational." > >Jack Smith > To be frank, I have no idea how well this works out. However I am curious how close it is to the ZPE calculations. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 25 21:20:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA09240; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 21:18:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 21:18:05 -0800 Message-ID: <36AD605F.570C mail.teleport.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:27:43 -0800 From: Michael McCoy Reply-To: mrm mail.teleport.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: HOW LONG WILL THIS BE SUPPRESSED? References: <2978466e.36acaaa8 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"D4Ku9.0.IG2.D0Lhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25761 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: UNIR2B1NM aol.com wrote: > > Hello, All-- > > My reading, from contemporaneous (1975) local newspaper reportage, indicates > that this was REAL--prototype motors produced 400-1000HP, running off a > standard vehicle battery, and returned almost all the power they withdrew; > IOW, they ran until the battery literally wore out from age. Capacitors > created pulsed, high V routed to ciols, producing huge EM fields, which > exerted force against a circular array of permanent magnets. Initially, the > motor was cooled with compressed air; later versions had an integral fan. > EvGray had an impressive “battery” of engineers on staff & was ready to fill > orders...but a sudden barrage of legal & health problems (incl. a fortuitous > car accident) intervened. > > Patent Server: 3890548 > Pulsed Capacitor Discharge Electric Engine > Gray; Edwin, Northridge, CA > ASSIGNEES: Evgray Enterprises, Inc., Van Nuys, CA > ATTORNEY, AGENT, or FIRM: Price; Gerald L. > PRIMARY/ASSISTANT EXAMINERS: Schaefer; Robert K.; Feldhaus; John J. > > There is disclosed herein an electric machine or engine in which a rotor cage > having an array of electromagnets is rotatable in an array of electromagnets, > or fixed electromagnets are juxtaposed against movable ones. The coils of the > electromagnets are connected in the discharge path of capacitors charged to > relatively high voltage and discharged through the electromagnetic coils when > selected rotor and stator elements are in alignment, or when the fixed > electromagnets and movable electromagnets are juxtaposed. The discharge occurs > across spark gaps disclosed in alignment with respect to the desired > juxtaposition of the selected movable and stationary electromagnets. The > capacitor discharges occur simultaneously through juxtaposed stationary > movable electromagnets wound so that their respective cores are in magnetic > repulsion polarity, thus resulting in the forced motion of movable > electromagnetic elements away from the juxtaposed stationary electromagnetic > elements at the discharge, thereby achieving motion. In an engine, the > discharges occur successively across selected ones of the gaps to maintain > continuous rotation. Capacitors are recharged between successive alignment > positions of particular rotor and stator electromagnets of the engine. > > Show the 3 patents that reference this one > #2085708, Spencer 1937 > #2800619, Brunt 1957 > #3579074, Roberts 1971 ELECTRONIC POWERED PULSE AMPLIFIER > #3619638" 3619638, Phinney 1971 > #3619638" PULSE GENERATING APPARATUS > > Exemplary claims: > > An electric engine, comprising: > > fixed electromagnets; > movable electromagnets movable into alignment with said fixed electromagnets; > capacitor means; > means for charging said capacitor means; and > means for discharging said charged capacitor means through said fixed and > movable electromagnets to polarize said aligned fixed and movable > > FOREIGN APPLICATION PRIORITY DATA: none > OTHER REFERENCES: Frungel, High Speed Pulse Technology, Academic Press Inc., > 1965, pp. 140-148. Would there be a possibility to get a copy of that newspaper article or any related info. Michael From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 05:42:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA24423; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 05:41:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 05:41:41 -0800 Message-ID: <36ADC5D2.1EA9B4AE ro.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 07:40:35 -0600 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: SMOTS... References: <01BE485E.0D436980 ip165.vpop143.psi.net.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"b1s5t1.0.Tz5.LOShs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25762 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nick Palmer wrote: > Craig Haynie wrote:- > > << Incidentally, did Greg Watson ever return, either your, or anyone else's, money from the SMOT purchase?>> > At one point he was offering free SMOTS to people who would put his offer on their web sites in a way reminiscent of pyramid schemes. > > > Nick Palmer - Jersey Friends of the Earth I was one of those gullible people that advertised the Watson SMOT on my webpage. Greg never responded to my request that he honor his offer. But, then again, you can't have every thing (where would you put it?). At least it was an inexpensive lesson.. .. -- Regards, Patrick V. Reavis http://ro.com/~preavis http://ro.com/~preavis/Quiz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 07:34:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA24938; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 07:31:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 07:31:40 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990126093133.0094808c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:31:33 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Have calorimeter, will travel Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"PcmYy2.0.Y56.Q_Ths" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25763 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Earthtech now has a water-flow calorimetry system designed specifically for field trips. It is essentially a repackaging (in closest packing!) of the versatile water-flow system that we have employed in recent months in our Case, BLP, Incandescent W, etc. studies. A virtual tour of this new system can be found at: http://www.eden.com/~little/vwfc/vwfc.html Earthtech is now offering to perform on-site calorimetric measurements of potentially o-u devices...free of charge. To qualify for this service, you must already have reasonably convincing measurements of your own, which indicate substantial o-u performance. A good example would be Dr. Case. Yesterday, I sent Dr. Case a letter offering to bring the new system to his place and perform a rigorous power balance measurement on his own apparatus. I am confident that the necessary heat exchanger could be arranged so as not to significantly perturb Case's existing temperature measurements. That means we could get Case's phenomenon working as it usually does for him...then look over at my instruments to see if it really is excess heat. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 13:11:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17243; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 13:09:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 13:09:15 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 12:18:39 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Resent-Message-ID: <"gzYkM3.0.GD4.xxYhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25764 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:00 PM 1/22/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >On Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:03:15 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >>From a universal >>standpoint, though, the *total* mass energy added to the universe by >>accelerating mass m depends on the mass product mM, thus is higly limited. > >Presumably, here M is the mass of the universe? If so, where do you >get the product mM from? I made a misstatement and oversimplified above. I should have said that by adding a mass to the universe you add a gravitational potential to the universe proportional to m*M. By adding delta m relativistic mass you add a gravitational potential to the universe proportional to (delta m)*M. The energy required to create a mass m, and especially a relativistic mass, is always in the relatio E=m*c^2. However, the energy tha does that, unless only temporarily borrowed or coming from some unknown process not diminishing mass of the universe and therefore not conserving energy, comes from the universe and thus balances the total gravitational potential of the universe. If the balance is always maintained, then the total mass *and* energy of the universe remains constant. Looking at this another way, if energy and mass are not always in balance in the proportion E=mc^2, then, by definition, total energy of the universe is not conserved. By adding mass to the universe you add gravitational potential energy, which can then be converted to more mass via acceleration of mass. If mass and energy are not *both* conserved then the law of conservation of energy is kaput, from a universal standpoint, and vice versa. > >>The potential energy available from the universe from the point of view of >>a high velocity reference frame, though, can be unlimited, as the frame has >>no mass consideration, it is not real, it is only an imaginary reference >>frame. > >Heh man, I'm a particle travelling through the universe, and I like to >think of my reference frame as very real ;). (What exactly is an >imaginary reference frame? Are there also real reference frames? What >is the difference? And what is a "mass consideration"?) There is no energy carried by a reference frame - none can be extracted from it. Energy is only associated with mass that is associted with the reference frame. The fact that the total kinetic energy of the universe can be adjusted by chosing a reference frame does not mean that that new found energy (or energy loss) is real in any sense. In a real sense, it seems to me that *both* energy and mass must be conserved, or that conservation of energy is a false law. It similarly seems to me that physics has gone overboard with the desire to relativise everything. If conservation of energy holds, then the universe must have a center of mass, and that center provides a unique inirtial reference frame. Similarly, and I know how controversial and inflamitory this statement is, the universe provides a unique reference frame with regards to rotation. If spun with sufficient angular velocity, any fool can tell he is rotating with respect to the fixed stars, without any way to "see" them. Though I have repeatedly said these things over recent years here, I hesitate to say these things now because I do not have the time to put into discussion or defense or refinement or correction of them. > >>Of interest, though, is the fact that in all cases, the mass and >>energy are preserved in a E = mc^2 relationship, which is my main point. > >You have just finished agreeing, that depending on frame of reference, >the total energy of the universe goes up and down like a yoyo. Now how >can you say that mass-energy is conserved? Because from a universal standpoint, energy due to your reference frame is not real, can not be made real, or used, without spending the energy (and mass) to put (a large amount) of mass into the reference frame. Choice of reference frame can not be arbitrary in determining total energy in the universe. Total energy of the universe depends on a unique reference frame associated with the center of mass of the universe. >(There are infinitely many frames of reference, all different. Hence >not only does the total energy of the universe go up and down, it has >an infinite number of different values, all at once :>). > >If this is going to be true, then I think we need to look at something >like a law of conservation of mass-energy-time. > >Now having said that, I must confess that I realise that you are >arguing for preservation of the relationship, not the total. [snip] Actually, I am arguing for both, as one depends on the other. If the universe consisted of only two particles, then the kinetic energy available for extraction is dependent only upon their relative velocity, regardless of what reference frame you chose. Extracting the "apparent" kinetic energy from some reference frame not associted with their center fo gravity is only imaginary and/or requires creation of some new mass to realize. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 13:11:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17293; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 13:09:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 13:09:22 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 12:18:44 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Resent-Message-ID: <"vra_f.0.4E4.1yYhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25765 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:30 PM 1/22/99, Taylor J. Smith wrote: [snip] >What do you think of the alternative interpretation of the apparent >mass increase of a charged particle noving at a velocity >near the speed of light proposed by >Dr. Paul M. Brown, "An Alternate Interpretation Of Mass-Gain >At Near Light Velocities," Infinite Energy, Vol. 3, No. 13 >and No. 14, 1997, pages 52-53: > >KE = mv^2/2 + q^2v^2k/3r > >where r = radius of the charged particle, q = the charge, >and v = the velocity of the particle. k = 3.336 x 10^-4. >m is the gravitational or rest mass of the particle. This >design equation also fits the data very well. > >The term "q^2v^2k/3r" is "non-gravitational." > >Jack Smith I think all the mass and energy carried by the EM field must be "gravitational." If not, photons, which consist entirely of the EM field would readily escape black holes - or otherwise the term "black hole" would have no meaning and black holes would not exist. Evidence seems to point to the existence of black holes. The mass of the electron must be due largely or entirely (depending on the electron's "radius," or field distribition near its center of mass) to its field. If this be the case, then it is obvious that the the field acts relativistically, with repect to the inirtial mass of the field, because it is well known the electron behaves relativistically. As far as I know, there is no experimental evidence for a difference between inirtial and gravitational masses of the electron or any other particle. This is an interesting but difficult area to investigate due to the large difference between the EM force and gravity. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 16:09:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA11989; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 16:06:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 16:06:17 -0800 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 18:57:27 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: freenrg-l eskimo.com cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com, PetMagic@aol.com, lizardhaven@zippnet.net, werosser hotmail.com, bill@basselectronics.com, rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, johnhoffman@webtv.net, biotron@pacbell.net, grstewar tva.gov, powerfd@gte.net, Serwitz@aol.com, dawnames hotmail.com, lkvp@mail.awod.com, trknute@earthlink.net, vortex-l eskimo.com, Mattias , Vince Goetsch <3wishes wishgranted.com>, votex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Fwd: Urine Batteries] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"NlRHe2.0.Fx2.vXbhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25766 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Can you please tell us the name of the supplier of the battery and-or how to get in touch with them? Thank You JHS On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 UNIR2B1NM aol.com wrote: > Dear Jorg, > > In a message dated 99-01-25 06:50:21 EST, you write: > > >...Do you or anyone else want to > >build this battery? Does any one have any practical experience to > >relate on this topic? We have a waterless toilet and I could make > >revisions to divert this valuable resource. Now is it is used as liquid > >fertilizer. Once I have had a chance to review the web site, I would > >consider building a prototype, together with other interested parties. > >Any practical suggestions welcomed. I like being practical. Jorg Ostrowski > > My RAM upgrade arrives this week--I'll then be able to visit the url--but I'm > interested in all forms of home-mde energy to help the greatest numbers become > self-sufficient. What metals are used? > > The Chinese-made Salt Water Lantern uses copper & alum. alloys. Its exclusive > global exporter of is sending me a free sample (otherwise anavailable until > March) for R & D purposes, in response to my suggesting that its power supply > (battery) be adapted to uses beyond energizing the built-in flourescent tubes. > I'll be measuring pH, voltages, alloy composition, etc. Perhaps I'll > determine some transferable principles. > > BTW--Do you dilute the "resource" 5:1 for fertilizer use, or compost it first? > What plant types do you cultivate? > > The prof. from whom I got my spirulina had a vat that he maintained by > urinating in it once/day! > > --Russ > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 16:56:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA02236; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 16:55:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 16:55:05 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 00:55:00 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36b062cc.620419520 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: <"vo_Lg.0.sY.fFchs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25767 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 12:18:39 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >mass) to put (a large amount) of mass into the reference frame. Choice of >reference frame can not be arbitrary in determining total energy in the >universe. Total energy of the universe depends on a unique reference frame >associated with the center of mass of the universe. [snip] This is more or less what I was implying previously, when I said that "all frames are not created equal". There is probably a single absolute frame, though we may not currently be able to determine which frame that is. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 17:13:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09341; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:12:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:12:11 -0800 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:03:45 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: re gaging .. or is it re gague ..?? (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"uaQ1B3.0.qH2.gVchs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25768 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Folks, A simple question or set of questions; 1] is the term re gage ... or re gague? a] first, I do not want to get into a Tom Beardon type answer... so the answer to the question, while it may use one of Tom's terms... is desired in PLAIN LANGUAGE ... please.... Q: What doe re gage MEAN? Thanks, John Schnurer From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 17:14:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09454; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:12:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:12:34 -0800 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:04:08 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: General Questions...See notes...Meyer's Speculation (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"MDwH1.0.eJ2.1Wchs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25769 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:01:48 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: John Schnurer Subject: General Questions...See notes...Meyer's Speculation (fwd) Please see notes, comments ... questions, below.. -------- some cuts --------- Original letter from H. Norris.... with much thanks to him... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 22:45:52 PST From: Harvey Norris To: freenrg-l eskimo.com Subject: Meyer's Speculation The laws of AC resonance are well known; but what is seldom mentioned is the effect of DC resonance. In a heavy induction coil an arc forms across a break in the circuit. _________________________ +++++ method of creating Browns gas Q: I am not sure, exactly, what Brown's gas is.... Can you help? How does it differ from hydrogen and oxygen? __________________ we obviously want to pulse the dc, so this filter should be as small as possible.In fact an inductor could be used to limit the current through a Browns gas electrolysizor, instead of a capacitance which is the design used by the world leader in the field, George Wiseman. __________________ Q: Who is George Wiseman? Do you have information about him and-or his work? Patents ... www site and so on? ________________ Now while it definitely is going to be more costly to use the inductive method, it also is a means to harness this dc resonance. This is then done simply by choosing a capacitance that will resonate with the inductance as if it were a 120 hz. ac signal, which it is not, it is a 120 dc pulse/sec signal but nevertheless this combination entirely changes the induction arc and seems to give it a ______________ Q: What is 'laser like quality of penetration' ? _ ____ laser like quality of penetration. Now where the Meyer consideration comes in is here. Q: Can you elaborate, please? _________________ ___________ Instead of the capacitive filter being in place the ACTUAL electrolysizor itself could serve as that same value of CAPACITY. This means that only a certain size inductor ------ but thats the idea his process gave to me. He does refer to the idea of a resonant choke circuit in some patent material. --------------- following; the capacitive limiting used by Wiseman to limit the current into the electrolysizor will provide no resonant rise of voltage that might be available by using a capacitor AND inductor designed to resonate with the input frequency. All of the above is only a suggestion and as a matter of fact not something I plan to immediately build because I think there are even better ways of appoaching this problem using the rectification system across the midpoints of the binary resonant system. HDN Q: What is 'binary resonant system'? Thank you, JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 17:23:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA11632; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:20:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:20:01 -0800 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:02:27 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex , John Schnurer Subject: re gaging .. or is it re gague ..?? (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"9-_xU3.0.gr2.0dchs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25770 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: re gaging .. or is it re gague ..?? Dear Folks, A simple question or set of questions; 1] is the term re gage ... or re gague? a] first, I do not want to get into a Tom Beardon type answer... so the answer to the question, while it may use one of Tom's terms... is desired in PLAIN LANGUAGE ... please.... +++++++++++++++++ Q: What doe re gage MEAN? Thanks, John Schnurer From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 17:36:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA24528; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:32:09 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:32:09 -0800 (PST) From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 01:31:13 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36b26649.621311960 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: <"7Cqye3.0._-5.Gochs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25771 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 12:18:39 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >Actually, I am arguing for both, as one depends on the other. If the >universe consisted of only two particles, then the kinetic energy available >for extraction is dependent only upon their relative velocity, regardless >of what reference frame you chose. Extracting the "apparent" kinetic >energy from some reference frame not associted with their center fo gravity >is only imaginary and/or requires creation of some new mass to realize. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > Hi Horace, You may remember my earlier question: >What is wrong with the following: >From the frame of reference of a particle in a particle accelerator, >the rest of the universe is accelerating, while it stands still. >Hence the mass of the universe is increasing relativistically. >Eventually, if the particle goes fast enough, the universe will >collapse due to the vast increase in gravitational force created by >the relativistic mass of the universe ;^). >My conclusion: All frames are not created equal and/or gravitational >and total relativistic mass are not equal. >(Actually I'm inclined to think it's "and"). Well, I think that I may have the answer, and it means agreeing with you, though in a way that may surprise you (or it may just be a different way of wording what you have been saying all along). I think the answer is that gravitational attraction does indeed depend on relativistic mass, but because that mass itself depends upon frame of reference, then so does gravitational attraction. Hence in the above scenario, the universe doesn't collapse under it's own attraction, because that attraction doesn't vary. It doesn't vary because it has zero relative velocity in it's own frame of reference, and the internal gravitational attraction that might cause any such collapse, is relative to the internal frame of reference, not relative to the frame in which the high speed particle is travelling. I.e. the gravitational attraction of the universe is between pairs of particles that have relatively low velocities. The universe would however be strongly attracted to the high velocity particle, and as you pointed out, because said attraction is based on the product mM, for a given percentage relativistic increase, it doesn't matter whether it is in m or M, the product increases by the same amount. Hence choice of frame is irrelevant. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 17:45:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA21059; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:41:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:41:05 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: re gaging .. or is it re gague ..?? (fwd) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 01:41:00 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36b56df3.623274593 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: <"ftP1q2.0.p85.nwchs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25772 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:03:45 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: [snip] > 1] is the term re gage ... or re gague? Neither. It is re "gauge". It basically means to reassign the origin of measurement (i.e. where you put your zero value). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 18:44:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA09083; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 18:43:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 18:43:15 -0800 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:34:50 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: John Schnurer Subject: SO: Re gauge In-Reply-To: <36b56df3.623274593 24.192.1.20> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-yZfV3.0.rD2.2rdhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25773 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: SO: It means to ... reset a meter...? Or put the SMOT ball back at the starting point? On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:03:45 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: > [snip] > > 1] is the term re gage ... or re gague? > > > Neither. It is re "gauge". It basically means to reassign the origin > of measurement (i.e. where you put your zero value). > [snip] > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > HM..... How about some analogy and real world equivalents... PLEASE... Thanks.... John From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 20:39:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA23049; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:38:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:38:14 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: SO: Re gauge Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 04:37:51 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36b894eb.633253850 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: <"NOuzc.0._d5.rWfhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25774 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:34:50 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: > SO: It means to ... reset a meter...? Or put the SMOT ball back >at the starting point? Sorry John, I didn't realise your question had to do with SMOT (I've just been deleting all SMOT messages as a waste of time). In this case however, I suspect it was used in the "Bearden" sense, i.e. put the ball back at the beginning with more energy than conventional physics says it should have. "Regauging" is Bearden's "magic wand", i.e. how he purports to work miracles, without actually saying where the energy is supposed to come from. At least that's the impression I get. [snip] > How about some analogy and real world equivalents... PLEASE... > I don't think there are any real world equivalents. I.e. I don't know of any example that actually works. It's more or less something that Bearden made up. The word gauge (or gage in US) exists, but regauge is a Beardenism AFAIK. If you want to know exactly how it was intended in context in the thread, then you'll just have to ask the person who first used it directly, exactly what they meant. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 21:18:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA05385; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:12:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:12:21 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990126231349.00871a00 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 23:13:49 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: interesting example Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"exvsE1.0.sJ1.p0ghs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25775 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is an interesting example of the kinds of things that can go wrong with an experiment: In the latest issue of Air & Space there is a great article about the engineering effort, led by Kelly Johnson, behind the A-12 (SR-71). They talk about the many new processes that had to be developed in order to build the thing, including methods of welding Ti. "Skunk Works engineers were at a loss to explain why A-12 wing panels that were spot-welded in the summer failed early, while thise that were welded in the winter held together indefinitely. They traced the trouble to a characteristic of titanium: It is absolutely incompatible with chlorine. "We finally traced the problem to the Burbank water system, which had heavily chlorinated water in the summer to prevent algae growth, but not in winter," Johnson related in a classified CIA journal article in 1982. "Changing to distilled water to wash the parts solved the problem." Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 21:27:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA09615; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:25:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:25:18 -0800 Message-ID: <19990127052550.17947.rocketmail send105.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:25:50 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Have calorimeter, will travel To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"_a_Yw3.0.9M2.zCghs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25776 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > >Earthtech now has a water-flow calorimetry system designed specifically for >field trips. [snip] > A good example would be Dr. Case. Yesterday, I sent Dr. Case a letter > offering to bring the new system to his place and perform a rigorous power > balance measurement on his own apparatus. I am confident that the > necessary heat exchanger could be arranged so as not to significantly > perturb Case's existing temperature measurements. It would be wonderful if someone who has a Pons-Fleischmann type cell, especially one that undergoes "heat after death" were to make it available for measurement. >>> Jean-Paul Biberian and colleagues? == Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 26 22:31:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA25170; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 22:29:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 22:29:50 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0E9 XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Wimps and nuclei Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 22:28:58 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <"H4_mD1.0.C96.U9hhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25777 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: An imaginary reference frame is a real frame observed by an imaginary person. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner mtaonline.net[SMTP:hheffner@mtaonline.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 1999 1:18 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei > > At 2:00 PM 1/22/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >On Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:03:15 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: > [snip] > >>From a universal > >>standpoint, though, the *total* mass energy added to the universe by > >>accelerating mass m depends on the mass product mM, thus is higly > limited. > > > >Presumably, here M is the mass of the universe? If so, where do you > >get the product mM from? > > I made a misstatement and oversimplified above. I should have said that > by > adding a mass to the universe you add a gravitational potential to the > universe proportional to m*M. By adding delta m relativistic mass you add > a gravitational potential to the universe proportional to (delta m)*M. > The > energy required to create a mass m, and especially a relativistic mass, is > always in the relatio E=m*c^2. However, the energy tha does that, unless > only temporarily borrowed or coming from some unknown process not > diminishing mass of the universe and therefore not conserving energy, > comes from the universe and thus balances the total gravitational > potential > of the universe. If the balance is always maintained, then the total mass > *and* energy of the universe remains constant. > > Looking at this another way, if energy and mass are not always in balance > in the proportion E=mc^2, then, by definition, total energy of the > universe > is not conserved. By adding mass to the universe you add gravitational > potential energy, which can then be converted to more mass via > acceleration > of mass. If mass and energy are not *both* conserved then the law of > conservation of energy is kaput, from a universal standpoint, and vice > versa. > > > > > > >>The potential energy available from the universe from the point of view > of > >>a high velocity reference frame, though, can be unlimited, as the frame > has > >>no mass consideration, it is not real, it is only an imaginary reference > >>frame. > > > >Heh man, I'm a particle travelling through the universe, and I like to > >think of my reference frame as very real ;). (What exactly is an > >imaginary reference frame? Are there also real reference frames? What > >is the difference? And what is a "mass consideration"?) > > > There is no energy carried by a reference frame - none can be extracted > from it. > Energy is only associated with mass that is associted with the reference > frame. The fact that the total kinetic energy of the universe can be > adjusted by chosing a reference frame does not mean that that new found > energy (or energy loss) is real in any sense. In a real sense, it seems to > me that *both* energy and mass must be conserved, or that conservation of > energy is a false law. > > It similarly seems to me that physics has gone overboard with the desire > to > relativise everything. If conservation of energy holds, then the universe > must have a center of mass, and that center provides a unique inirtial > reference frame. Similarly, and I know how controversial and inflamitory > this statement is, the universe provides a unique reference frame with > regards to rotation. If spun with sufficient angular velocity, any fool > can tell he is rotating with respect to the fixed stars, without any way > to > "see" them. Though I have repeatedly said these things over recent years > here, I hesitate to say these things now because I do not have the time to > put into discussion or defense or refinement or correction of them. > > > > > >>Of interest, though, is the fact that in all cases, the mass and > >>energy are preserved in a E = mc^2 relationship, which is my main point. > > > >You have just finished agreeing, that depending on frame of reference, > >the total energy of the universe goes up and down like a yoyo. Now how > >can you say that mass-energy is conserved? > > Because from a universal standpoint, energy due to your reference frame is > not real, can not be made real, or used, without spending the energy (and > mass) to put (a large amount) of mass into the reference frame. Choice > of > reference frame can not be arbitrary in determining total energy in the > universe. Total energy of the universe depends on a unique reference > frame > associated with the center of mass of the universe. > > > >(There are infinitely many frames of reference, all different. Hence > >not only does the total energy of the universe go up and down, it has > >an infinite number of different values, all at once :>). > > > >If this is going to be true, then I think we need to look at something > >like a law of conservation of mass-energy-time. > > > >Now having said that, I must confess that I realise that you are > >arguing for preservation of the relationship, not the total. > [snip] > > Actually, I am arguing for both, as one depends on the other. If the > universe consisted of only two particles, then the kinetic energy > available > for extraction is dependent only upon their relative velocity, regardless > of what reference frame you chose. Extracting the "apparent" kinetic > energy from some reference frame not associted with their center fo > gravity > is only imaginary and/or requires creation of some new mass to realize. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 00:19:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA13429; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 00:18:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 00:18:54 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 23:28:23 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Spin and FTL-Phase Velocity (Scouting Black Holes) Resent-Message-ID: <"ArUBF2.0.hH3.klihs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25778 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:15 PM 1/21/99, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >The good book on General Relativity I am recommending (high school physics >teacher level-uses calculus) > Scouting Black Holes > Exploring General Relativity with Calculus > by Edwin F. Taylor (Carnegie Mellon ) > and John Archibald Wheeler (Princeton) > W.H.Freeman & Co. NY 1992 > ISBN 0-7167-2327-1 > >It is an easy read, a fun read too. Lots of good problems, adventures. Even >has a nice explanation of GPS operation, for us navigators. > >Hank I checked the above ISBN at amazon.com and found "Spacetime Physics: Introduction to Special Relativity", also by Taylor and Wheeler. A search for "Scouting Black Holes" found nothing. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 00:21:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA14546; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 00:21:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 00:21:19 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 23:30:46 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Wimps and nuclei Resent-Message-ID: <"diBQh1.0.CZ3._nihs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25779 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:31 PM 1/26/99, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 12:18:39 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >>Actually, I am arguing for both, as one depends on the other. If the >>universe consisted of only two particles, then the kinetic energy available >>for extraction is dependent only upon their relative velocity, regardless >>of what reference frame you chose. Extracting the "apparent" kinetic >>energy from some reference frame not associted with their center fo gravity >>is only imaginary and/or requires creation of some new mass to realize. >> >>Regards, >> >>Horace Heffner >> >Hi Horace, > >You may remember my earlier question: >>What is wrong with the following: >>From the frame of reference of a particle in a particle accelerator, >>the rest of the universe is accelerating, while it stands still. >>Hence the mass of the universe is increasing relativistically. >>Eventually, if the particle goes fast enough, the universe will >>collapse due to the vast increase in gravitational force created by >>the relativistic mass of the universe ;^). >>My conclusion: All frames are not created equal and/or gravitational >>and total relativistic mass are not equal. >>(Actually I'm inclined to think it's "and"). > >Well, I think that I may have the answer, and it means agreeing with >you, though in a way that may surprise you (or it may just be a >different way of wording what you have been saying all along). >I think the answer is that gravitational attraction does indeed depend >on relativistic mass, but because that mass itself depends upon frame >of reference, then so does gravitational attraction. >Hence in the above scenario, the universe doesn't collapse under it's >own attraction, because that attraction doesn't vary. It doesn't vary >because it has zero relative velocity in it's own frame of reference, >and the internal gravitational attraction that might cause any such >collapse, is relative to the internal frame of reference, not relative >to the frame in which the high speed particle is travelling. >I.e. the gravitational attraction of the universe is between pairs of >particles that have relatively low velocities. >The universe would however be strongly attracted to the high velocity >particle, and as you pointed out, because said attraction is based on >the product mM, for a given percentage relativistic increase, it >doesn't matter whether it is in m or M, the product increases by the >same amount. Hence choice of frame is irrelevant. > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk I would say you gauged that one correctly Robin. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 03:34:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA09455; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 03:33:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 03:33:33 -0800 Message-ID: <000301be49e8$95c35780$f7441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Wet Biomass-Injected Engines vs The Urine Battery Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 04:30:40 -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: <"Ljp4H1.0.fJ2.Cclhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25780 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Biomass wastes, and manures in particular, can be wet scrubbed with CO2 (Carbonic Acid)to remove the Cations such as K+,Na+,and Ca++, etc.,as water soluble salts such as KHCO3, Ca(HCO3)2 etc. The anions such as Cl- and Phosphate HPO4--, SiO3-- etc. can be "sequestered" with Ammonia to form the water soluble salts. The manures containing Urea (NH2-CO-NH2)which is due to urination by all animals and humans hydrolyzes with water with the help of the Urease enzyme prevalent in nature: Urea + H2O ---> 2 NH3 + CO2. With 50 pounds of CO2 (readilly gotten from an engine exhaust or a campfire) and a few pounds of ammonia per ton, wet-ground and scrubbed biomass can be fed to ANY Internal Combustion Engine including the Gas Turbine Ranging from a fraction of a HorsePower to Several Thousand HorsePower as a water/biomass slurry at a temperature and pressure such that it will flash to steam and a biomass powder as it enters the combustion chamber. The Electrical Power, up to TENs of MEGAWATTS can then be used rather than the URINE BATTERY to charge any Battery. IF this doesn't do the job, then PISS ON IT! :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 05:23:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA01645; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 05:21:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 05:21:53 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990127081921.0073c7c8 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 08:19:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: interesting example In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990126231349.00871a00 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WOTt83.0.cP.nBnhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25781 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:13 PM 1/26/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >This is an interesting example of the kinds of things that can go wrong >with an experiment: > >In the latest issue of Air & Space there is a great article about the >engineering effort, led by Kelly Johnson, behind the A-12 (SR-71). They >talk about the many new processes that had to be developed in order to >build the thing, including methods of welding Ti. > >"Skunk Works engineers were at a loss to explain why A-12 wing panels that >were spot-welded in the summer failed early, while thise that were welded >in the winter held together indefinitely. They traced the trouble to a >characteristic of titanium: It is absolutely incompatible with chlorine. >"We finally traced the problem to the Burbank water system, which had >heavily chlorinated water in the summer to prevent algae growth, but not in >winter," Johnson related in a classified CIA journal article in 1982. >"Changing to distilled water to wash the parts solved the problem." Yes. This demonstrates the importance of electrochemistry (specifically corrosion) and actually READING the literature. Chlorine-induced titanium corrosion previously wrought havoc with the SST. It is shame if the same problems were repeated thereafter. By '72 when I first studied electrochemistry at MIT, the chlorine titanium reaction was well covered both in the literature and some of the electrochem. and corrosion tests. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 15:48:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA25004; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 15:45:10 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 15:45:10 -0800 (PST) From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:38:38 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: PetMagic aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Wet Biomass-Injected Engines vs The Urine Battery Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"1-eYq3.0.Z66.4Kwhs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25782 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-27 06:34:34 EST, you write: > a water/biomass slurry at a temperature and pressure >such that it will flash to steam and a biomass powder as it enters the >combustion chamber. ...sounds deleterious to steel, internal combustion engines. ...? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 16:47:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA07303; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 16:43:55 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 16:43:55 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0EA XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Spin and FTL-Phase Velocity (Scouting Black Holes) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 16:41:56 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"k2hwg3.0.-n1.zAxhs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25783 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This book is a continuation of the "Spacetime Physics: > Introduction to Special Relativity", you may have to get it directly from > the author. I used it in an internet course at Montana State University > last year. Yo! I just looked at the front cover. Edwin F. Taylor, Center for Innovation in learning, Carnegie Mellon University, 4800 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburg, PA 15213. e-mail, eftaylor mit.edu Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner mtaonline.net[SMTP:hheffner@mtaonline.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 1999 12:28 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Spin and FTL-Phase Velocity (Scouting Black Holes) > > At 12:15 PM 1/21/99, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > >The good book on General Relativity I am recommending (high school > physics > >teacher level-uses calculus) > > Scouting Black Holes > > Exploring General Relativity with Calculus > > by Edwin F. Taylor (Carnegie Mellon ) > > and John Archibald Wheeler (Princeton) > > W.H.Freeman & Co. NY 1992 > > ISBN 0-7167-2327-1 > > > >It is an easy read, a fun read too. Lots of good problems, adventures. > Even > >has a nice explanation of GPS operation, for us navigators. > > > >Hank > > > I checked the above ISBN at amazon.com and found "Spacetime Physics: > Introduction to Special Relativity", also by Taylor and Wheeler. A search > for "Scouting Black Holes" found nothing. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 17:21:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA31673; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 17:20:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 17:20:16 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 20:01:51 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: fjsparb sprintmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84 Resent-Message-ID: <"iQLnE2.0.kk7.Gjxhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25784 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Should that Planck mass have been 1.2 X 10E28 eV rather than 1.2E28 eV? Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 17:37:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA04529; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 17:26:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 17:26:30 -0800 Message-ID: <000b01be4a5c$eaab63e0$eb441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: , Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:21:25 -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: <"bC8jK3.0.h61.5pxhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25785 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Tstolper aol.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: fjsparb sprintmail.com Date: Wednesday, January 27, 1999 6:18 PM Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? Tom Stolper wrote: >Should that Planck mass have been 1.2 X 10E28 eV rather than 1.2E28 eV? > >Tom Stolper That would be the proper way to put it, but usually the power of 10 is understood. I Think. :-) Regards, Frederick > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 17:47:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA20803; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 17:44:48 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 17:44:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000201be4a5b$c2fa1040$eb441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Wet Biomass-Injected Engines vs The Urine Battery Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:14:02 -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: <"8ctdx1.0.z45.D4yhs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25786 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: PetMagic aol.com Date: Wednesday, January 27, 1999 4:45 PM Subject: Re: Wet Biomass-Injected Engines vs The Urine Battery UNIR....wrote: >In a message dated 99-01-27 06:34:34 EST, you write: > >> a water/biomass slurry at a temperature and pressure >>such that it will flash to steam and a biomass powder as it enters the >>combustion chamber. > >...sounds deleterious to steel, internal combustion engines. ...? Let's see, gasoline (high end hydrocarbons), C12H26 (170 Pounds) + 18.5 O2 (592 pounds)---> 12 CO2 (528 pounds)+ 13 H2O (234 pounds). Sounds "deleterious to steel,internal combustion engines." too? :-) It's all relative? Regards, Frederick > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 18:28:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA00958; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:26:26 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:26:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 20:55:45 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex cc: John Schnurer Subject: John Allen Bounces.... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"qoGkK3.0.qE.9hyhs" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25787 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The header said 'er.... anyone out there has a valid address? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 18:51:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA02945; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:47:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:47:47 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 17:56:56 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? Resent-Message-ID: <"iEN_b3.0.tj.I_yhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25788 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:21 PM 1/27/99, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >-----Original Message----- >From: Tstolper aol.com >To: vortex-l eskimo.com >Cc: fjsparb sprintmail.com >Date: Wednesday, January 27, 1999 6:18 PM >Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? > >Tom Stolper wrote: > > >>Should that Planck mass have been 1.2 X 10E28 eV rather than 1.2E28 eV? >> >>Tom Stolper > >That would be the proper way to put it, but usually the power of 10 is >understood. > >I Think. :-) > >Regards, Frederick >> Any old time FORTRAN progammer quickly recognizes that Enn means "x 10^nn". I think FORTRAN or SCATRAN or one of those type languages is the origin of the notation, though there may be something that predates that. I was programming in SCATRAN, which used the E notation, in 1962, so another origin of the notation must predate that. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 27 19:11:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA11404; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 19:08:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 19:08:39 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Planck-Length Point Particles,Fundamental Particles? Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 03:08:32 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36afd424.714998190 24.192.1.20> References: <000b01be4a5c$eaab63e0$eb441d26 default> In-Reply-To: <000b01be4a5c$eaab63e0$eb441d26 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: <"SfCH9.0._n2.sIzhs" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25789 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:21:25 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: [snip] >>Should that Planck mass have been 1.2 X 10E28 eV rather than 1.2E28 eV? >> >>Tom Stolper > >That would be the proper way to put it, but usually the power of 10 is >understood. > >I Think. :-) > >Regards, Frederick >> I always understood the whole point of the E notation to be that if was designed to save having to write the x and the 10, i.e. 1.2E28 is correct, and always refers to a power of 10, and never anything else. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 28 10:36:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA20786; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 10:30:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 10:30:47 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 09:40:10 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Spin and FTL-Phase Velocity (Scouting Black Holes) Resent-Message-ID: <"BOWaa2.0.h45.MpAis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25790 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:41 PM 1/27/99, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > This book is a continuation of the "Spacetime Physics: >> Introduction to Special Relativity", you may have to get it directly from >> the author. I used it in an internet course at Montana State University >> last year. Yo! > I just looked at the front cover. Edwin F. Taylor, Center for >Innovation in learning, Carnegie Mellon University, 4800 Forbes Avenue, >Pittsburg, PA 15213. e-mail, > eftaylor mit.edu > > Hank Thanks for the info. I wrote to Edwin Taylor. Here is his response: >Dear Mr. Heffner: Thank you for your inquiry. The situation is this: The >book Scouting Black Holes has been, for the past dozen years or so, through >many drafts in desktop-published form. Now it is scheduled to be published >late in 1999 by Addison Wesley Longman. In the meantime I have yet a newer >desktop version available from me for $25 including shipping to USA, $35 >including airmail elsewhere. Send check or money order (no plastic, >please) to > >Edwin Taylor >22 Hopkins Road >Arlington, MA 02476-8109 Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 28 13:49:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06661; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 13:46:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 13:46:59 -0800 Message-ID: <000f01be4b07$6b29ac20$c9441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:43:53 -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: <"eqEA01.0._d1.IhDis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25791 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A To: Vortex Snell's Law for the critical angle for total internal reflection of a wave: Sin theta critical = (eo/e1)^1/2 |/ |/ |/ eo _____________________|/ \ |/ \ |/ angle theta |/ \ |/ e1 \ /|/ \ / |/ \ / |/ / |/ Since theta = 89.58189, Sin Theta = 0.9999733 Then (0.9999733)^2 = 0.9999467 Thus e1, the permittivity of a particle: e1 = 8.84E-12/0.9999467 = 8.840470E-12 coulombs/joule-meter, which says in effect that a particle builds it's own boundary in space and gives a phase velocity of 137*c. Ie.,The wave front is making a 0.418108 degree angle with the vertical thus giving the 137*c phase velocity. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 28 14:49:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA29942; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:48:05 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:48:05 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990128174711.007a27b0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 17:47:11 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: interesting example Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ppZP2.0.jJ7.VaEis" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25792 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Regarding the SR-71 (Blackbird), Mitchell Swartz writes: This demonstrates the importance of electrochemistry (specifically corrosion) and actually READING the literature. Chlorine-induced titanium corrosion previously wrought havoc with the SST. . . . Research on the AR-71 came first, before the Anglo-French Concorde SST. Work on the Concorde began in 1962, whereas work on AR series began in 1958. It would not surprise me to learn that the Skunk Works engineers knew about the corrosion problem, but kept it secret, forcing the SST engineers to learn about it all over again. That would be the standard operating procedure during the Cold War, because the Skunk Works people did not want to tell the Russians how to build super-high-speed, high-altitude recon aircraft. The Hubble Telescope fiasco was different. It was after the cold war. The Pentagon experts understood the mistakes NASA was making, and they tried hard to inform NASA, but the NASA did not want to hear, so billion of dollars and countless opportunities went down the drain. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 28 15:35:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA13217; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 15:32:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 15:32:52 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990128182758.00737af8 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 18:27:58 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: interesting example In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990128174711.007a27b0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"zNGhE2.0.FE3.XEFis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25793 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:47 PM 1/28/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Regarding the SR-71 (Blackbird), Mitchell Swartz writes: > > This demonstrates the importance of electrochemistry > (specifically corrosion) and actually READING the literature. > Chlorine-induced titanium corrosion previously wrought havoc > with the SST. . . . > >Research on the AR-71 came first, before the Anglo-French Concorde SST. >Work on the Concorde began in 1962, whereas work on AR series began in >1958. Here is the time-line, for those vorts interested. Check out the relevant 4th paragraph below. Mitchell Swartz ================================================ From the Dryden Flight Research Center Archives. The SR-71 Blackbird is one of, if not THE, fastest aerial reconnaissance planes ever built. It has a "released" top speed of over Mach 3.2 (over 2,300 miles per hour), but in reality can go faster, and is able to sustain this for over an hour without refueling. This breaks down to around 38 miles per minute, or 3370 feet per second. It's normal cruise altitude is 75,000 feet (14.2 miles) for the SR-71A, and 80-85,000 feet (15-16 miles) for the SR-71B. ---------- From NASA Dryden Flight Research Center Document: FS-1994-11-030-DFRC Two SR-71 aircraft are being used by NASA as testbeds for high speed, high altitude aeronautical research. The aircraft, an SR-71A and an SR- 71B pilot trainer aircraft are based at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA. They have been loaned to NASA by the U.S. Air Force. Developed for the USAF as reconnaissance aircraft more than 30 years ago, SR-71s are still the world's fastest and highest-flying production aircraft. DRYDEN'S MACH 3 HISTORY Dryden has a decade of past experience at sustained speeds above Mach 3. Two YF-12 aircraft were flown at the facility between December 1969 and November 1979 in a joint NASA/USAF program to learn more about the capabilities and limitations of high speed, high altitude flight. The YF-12s were prototypes of a planned interceptor aircraft based on a design that later evolved into the SR-71 reconnaissance aircraft. Research information from the YF-12 program was used to validate analytical theories and wind tunnel test techniques to help improve the design and performance of future military and civil aircraft. The American supersonic transport project of the late 1960's-early 1970's would have benefited greatly from YF-12 research data. (relevant paragraph above) >From February 1972 until July 1973, a YF-12A was used for heat loads testing in Dryden's High Temperature Loads Laboratory (now the Thermostructures Research Facility). The data helped improve theoretical prediction methods and computer models of that era dealing with structural loads, materials, and heat distribution at up to 800 degrees (F), the same surface temperatures reached during sustained speeds of Mach 3. The two SR-71s at Dryden have been assigned the following NASA tail numbers: NASA 844 (A model), military serial 64-17980, manufactured in July 1967, and NASA 831 (B model), military serial 64-17956, manufactured in September 1965. From 1991 through 1994, Dryden also had another "A" model, NASA 832, military serial 64-17971, manufactured in October 1966. This aircraft was returned to the USAF inventory and was the first aircraft reactivated for USAF reconnaissance purposes in 1995. The SR-71 was designed by a team of Lockheed personnel led by Clarence "Kelly" Johnson, at that time vice president of the Lockheed's Advanced Development Company, commonly known as the "Skunk Works." The basic design of the SR-71 and YF-12 aircraft originated in secrecy in the late l950's with the aircraft designation of A-11. Its existence was publicly announced by President Lyndon Johnson on Feb. 29, 1964, when he announced that an A-11 had flown at sustained speeds of over 2000 mph during tests at Edwards AFB, CA. Development of the SR-71s from the A- 11 design, as strategic reconnaissance aircraft, began in February 1963. First flight of an SR-71 was on Dec. 22, 1964. NASA Dryden Flight Research Center Document: FS-1994-11-030-DFRC From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 28 18:40:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA12142; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 18:37:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 18:37:57 -0800 Message-ID: <000101be4b30$112e1a20$e1441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Particle Acrobatics Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 19:33:02 -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: <"-Cdly2.0.Yz2.5yHis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25794 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sharpen your pencils, Robin and Horace. :-) 1, eo = 8.84E-12 coulombs/joule-meter 2, Lambda (for the electron)= h*c/E = 2.427E-12 The Compton Wavelength (meters) 3, Radius R = hbar*c/E (meters) 4, C = Lambda*eo = 2.14775E-23 (Farads) 5, q = C*V = 1.602E-19 (coulombs) a Constant. 6, V = q/C = 7.46E3 (volts) 7, E = .5*C*V^2/Alpha Alpha is the fine structure constant 0.00729729 = 1/137.037. Then, if eo is 8.84E-12 coulomb/joule-meter, if C*V is constant at 1.602E-19 coulombs, even though something is oscillating in simple harmonic motion at frequency f = E/h = 1.23 E20 hertz, 1, What is the Lamda and frequency of a 312 Mev proton "quark"? 2, Is it oscillating in length,diameter, or is it a pulse moving in a circle to give spin = m*c*r = hbar? Have Fun. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 28 20:16:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA15252; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 20:14:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 20:14:53 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 23:11:05 EST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Wet Biomass-Injected Engines vs The Urine Battery Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"_Xnef3.0.Ek3.yMJis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25795 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-27 20:46:05 EST, you write: >Let's see, gasoline (high end hydrocarbons), C12H26 (170 Pounds) + 18.5 O2 >(592 pounds)---> 12 CO2 (528 pounds)+ 13 H2O (234 pounds). > >Sounds "deleterious to steel,internal combustion engines." too? :-) It's >all relative? Agreed--they're *both* deleterious, and to more than engines. Combustion of both hydrocarbons and biomass by-products pollutes; and with gasoline currently $.70 hereabouts, I view its ultimate unsustainability as the fundamental reason for seeking energy alternativesis. I'm focussing on hydrogen; pricing solar panels, electrolyzers, etc. (Of course, I'd welcome an unambiguous set of plans for a hydroxy fuel cell!) --Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 28 20:32:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA20735; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 20:29:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 20:29:10 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 23:19:24 EST To: John Schnurer Cc: UNIR2B1 aol.com, candace1@usa.net, Mike Connolly , DD <11111119@lava.net>, Vince Goetsch <3wishes wishgranted.com>, ark@Millennium-ark.net, "Dennis C. Lee" , biotron@pacbell.net, powerfd gte.net, Serwitz@aol.com, celiag@email.com, michael romack , cturner@npwt.net, Carolyn , dawnames@hotmail.com, Diane Durham-Bothwell , Reality_Pump2@onelist.com, donadams telusplanet.net, dwenbert@spacey.net, Mattias , freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l eskimo.com, goldbug@worldaccessnet.com, Heather and Andrew Tinley , "John H.St.John" , David House , JADE , "Jorg D. Ostrowski" , jkinsley beyond-the-illusion.com, johnhoffman@webtv.net, PetMagic aol.com, Julie Reiner , Thomas Spellman , lizardhaven@zippnet.net, lkvp mail.awod.com, Plasmatic , Terri Schoolden , UNIR2B1NM@aol.com, markland rockisland.com, murrayjm@juno.com, piercemark@hotmail.com, nhne nhne.com, oleprospector@worldaccessnet.com, ponski@soft-link.com, Quinney , richarda@icx.net, rolfe_hauser hotmail.com, rtoler@cland.net, Robin van Spaandonk , SedonaY2K mail-list.com, seer7@netusa1.net, "George A. Abbott" , Sharon , Shekhina Canyon , spot , Tom , Henri Calitri , John Michaels , trknute@earthlink.net, UFOLAWYER1 aol.com, visited@onelist.com, Marsha Doyenne , werosser@hotmail.com, bill basselectronics.com, WhiteDove , John Berry , y2k-survival@infostream.net, Y2K , David Openheimer Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Me too! ...Re: Intentional community Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"7dgvz2.0.h35.JaJis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25796 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 99-01-25 20:58:43 EST, you write: > I too would like this info.... > Thanks, Dear John Schnurer and lists, I fielded my initial posts, re: 'Progressive Community', last summer; perhaps I should again broadcast the call for like-minded (i.e., collaborative, problem-solving) people to congregate within a common location, so as not to be sundered in the looming event of long-term telecommunications failure or even gov't-imposed travel restrictions. NOT REALLY OFF TOPIC: Many interpret the current global predicament (economic, ecological, moral) in light of prophecy. If I were to sermonize, I'd cite Revelations 11:18--"...thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead...that thou shouldest...destroy them which destroy the earth." The "dead" are distinguished from "the quick" in the parable of the talents (Matthew 25:15-), which is summarized in Mark 4:25--"For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath." IOW, everything compounds itself (like, but not limited to, Nietche's "will to power" doctrine): the bad worsens, exacerbating depletion; and the good ('fruitful') increases ("Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over..." Luke 6:38). ON TOPIC: Accordingly, sane horticulture enriches the soil 20%/yr.; corporate agriculture depletes it in 5. Hydrogen combustion enriches atmospheric O2 content; fossil fuels jeopardize even current, meager levels. It’s not that the Earth is God, but that warming oneself by burning down the house is “double minded” (James 1:8). Real “Y2K preparation”, then, should revolve around replacing suicidal systems with sane ones, developing and implementing sustainable systems of water, food, & energy production. "If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" (John 3:12) "Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing...he will make him ruler over all that he hath." (Luke 12:43, 4) Our planetary problems are being worked out over long-distance forums like this; however, the worst-case scenario calls for knowledgeable, innovative people to aggregate their equipment & research projects into a safe place of mutual accessibility. According to various “future maps”, NE Alabama is comparatively safe from earthquakes and oceanic flooding. The climate, although hot in July & Aug., could stand greater extremes in either direction, in the event of ‘Earth changes’. The people here still evince the congeniality of the "Bible belt", without the disreputable closed-mindedness. This is a rural area with access to a town of decent size. Should the SHTF, marauders would never survive this far into the surrounding, well-armed area. After a good rain, we even have running creeks fed by the Lookout Mt. foothills. These 40 acres are situated between two dead-end, gravel roads for privacy. Innovators who seek to confront and avert hardships of the millennial transition, rather than to merely cowering from them, and who wish to relocate their research from urban areas to a rural, 'scientific haven', should contact me 256-546-5945. Thanks. Regards, Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 28 20:48:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA26751; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 20:46:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 20:46:42 -0800 Message-ID: <000701be4b42$0d807640$43441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Wet Biomass-Injected Engines vs The Urine Battery Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 21:42:00 -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: <"K4Jz12.0.vX6.nqJis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25797 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, January 28, 1999 9:15 PM Subject: Re: Wet Biomass-Injected Engines vs The Urine Battery I agree, but if you"ve ever been near a group of 250,000 head feedlots where each head is producing about 10 lbs/day and it is "rotting" and poluting the atmospere regardless why not get about 25 Megawatts out of it and recycle the plant nutrients? About the same story for a dairy where the manures are now trucked or run by pipeline to farmers fields and have to be immediately plowed under so that the nitrates from oxidized urea/NH3 don't get into the ground water. Bet your milk, eggs, and Tyson chicken products would get cheaper along with your electricty,too. :-) Regards, Frederick >In a message dated 99-01-27 20:46:05 EST, you write: > >>Let's see, gasoline (high end hydrocarbons), C12H26 (170 Pounds) + 18.5 O2 >>(592 pounds)---> 12 CO2 (528 pounds)+ 13 H2O (234 pounds). >> >>Sounds "deleterious to steel,internal combustion engines." too? :-) It's >>all relative? > >Agreed--they're *both* deleterious, and to more than engines. Combustion of >both hydrocarbons and biomass by-products pollutes; and with gasoline >currently $.70 hereabouts, I view its ultimate unsustainability as the >fundamental reason for seeking energy alternativesis. I'm focussing on >hydrogen; pricing solar panels, electrolyzers, etc. (Of course, I'd welcome an >unambiguous set of plans for a hydroxy fuel cell!) > >--Russ > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 28 21:04:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA32509; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 21:02:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 21:02:05 -0800 Message-ID: <000201be4b40$74aae6e0$43441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: The Neutrino Space Drive Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 21:31:59 -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: <"ujM9W2.0.ax7.A3Kis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25798 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex If 99% of the "Missing or Dark Matter" is neutrinos, then there should be about 2.7E19 of them per cm^3 with a rest energy of about 0.5 ev and a charge(+/-) 1.6E-19 displaced 90 and 270 degrees wrt regular charge. Thus all you need is an accelerator that will act on them so as to suck them up and squirt them out the back of your spacecraft at a relativistic mass: Mrel = Mo[(Ve/Mo*c^2)+1]= Mo/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2. The others will pass unimpeded through your craft except for causing some Zero Point Fluctuations in the atoms. Shouldn't be to hard to do. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 02:33:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA21224; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 02:31:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 02:31:48 -0800 Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <36B14502.48349F56 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 05:20:02 +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: The Neutrino Space Drive References: <000201be4b40$74aae6e0$43441d26 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vSYwi1.0.XB5.KuOis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25799 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 > > If 99% of the "Missing or Dark Matter" is neutrinos, ... Shouldn't be to hard to do. :-) Hi Frederick, I can't resist. IMHO, neutrinos and black holes are about as real as phlogiston. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 05:18:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA18422; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 05:16:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 05:16:05 -0800 Message-ID: <001401be4b89$37cae880$43441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: The Neutrino Space Drive Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 06:13:43 -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: <"T7gOH1.0.mV4.KIRis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25800 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: Friday, January 29, 1999 3:32 AM Subject: Re: The Neutrino Space Drive T.J. Smith wrote: >Frederick J Sparber wrote: >> >> To: Vortex >> >> If 99% of the "Missing or Dark Matter" is > neutrinos, ... Shouldn't be to hard to do. :-) > >Hi Frederick, > >I can't resist. IMHO, neutrinos and black holes >are about as real as phlogiston. That's It! Phlogistated Neutrinos,will exceed the local lightspeed and give the bluish Cherenkov Glow that you see on the Drive Pods of the Enterprise, on Star Trek. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Jack Smith > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 07:55:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA07220; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 07:53:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 07:53:54 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0EE XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 07:53:16 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"4NkOC1.0.km1.IcTis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25801 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What ARE you talking about??? Hank > ---------- > From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 1:43 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity > > To: Vortex > > Snell's Law for the critical angle for total internal reflection of a > wave: > > Sin theta critical = (eo/e1)^1/2 > > |/ > |/ > |/ eo > _____________________|/ > \ |/ > \ |/ > angle theta |/ > \ |/ > e1 \ /|/ > \ / |/ > \ / |/ > / |/ > > Since theta = 89.58189, Sin Theta = 0.9999733 > > Then (0.9999733)^2 = 0.9999467 > > Thus e1, the permittivity of a particle: > > e1 = 8.84E-12/0.9999467 = 8.840470E-12 coulombs/joule-meter, which says > in > effect that a particle builds it's own boundary in space and gives a phase > velocity of 137*c. > > Ie.,The wave front is making a 0.418108 degree angle with the vertical > thus > giving the 137*c phase velocity. > > Regards, Frederick > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 08:04:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA11771; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:03:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:03:32 -0800 Message-Id: <199901291601.LAA17666 mercury.mv.net> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Re: SO: Re gauge Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:42:25 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"LQJL52.0.ht2.IlTis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25802 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Schnurer: > > > SO: It means to ... reset a meter...? Or put the SMOT ball back > >at the starting point? > Robin van Spaandonk: > Sorry John, I didn't realise your question had to do with SMOT (I've > just been deleting all SMOT messages as a waste of time). > In this case however, I suspect it was used in the "Bearden" sense, > i.e. put the ball back at the beginning with more energy than > conventional physics says it should have. "Regauging" is Bearden's > "magic wand", i.e. how he purports to work miracles, without actually > saying where the energy is supposed to come from. At least that's the > impression I get. > [snip] > > How about some analogy and real world equivalents... PLEASE... > > > I don't think there are any real world equivalents. I.e. I don't know > of any example that actually works. It's more or less something that > Bearden made up. The word gauge (or gage in US) exists, but regauge is > a Beardenism AFAIK. > If you want to know exactly how it was intended in context in the > thread, then you'll just have to ask the person who first used it > directly, exactly what they meant. You might try Chapter 17 of _The New Physics_ edited by Paul Davies, referenced by Bearden. The book is a collection of chapters written by different physicists. John Taylor wrote ch. 17, "Gauge theories in particle physics." It gives some background on relativity, Minkowski space-time and quantum mechanics. The writing is comprehendable to a non-physicist (sort of). "The name [gauge theory] is due to an historical accident. In 1921, Herman Weyl proposed a theory of charged particles in which lengths could be changed arbitrarily from point to point. The theory was quite untenable, but the word 'gauge', meaning 'scale', has stuck." The chapter starts with an explanation of strong and weak nuclear forces, the elucidation of which requires the use of quantum theory. "The discovery that has been made in the last twenty years is that, in spite of the obvious differences, the same principle controls strong and weak forces as controls the electromagnetic ones. This principle is called 'gauge invariance'." I did not see the term 're-gauge.' Ed Wall New Energy Research Laboratory Cold Fusion Technology, Inc., P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302-2816 voice: (603) 226-4822 fax: (603) 224-5975 website: www.infinite-energy.com "I believe it is better to learn what is probable about important matters than to be certain about trival ones." Ian Stevenson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 08:12:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15521; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:11:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:11:05 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990129110954.0079b100 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:09:54 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: interesting example Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"rykyH.0.Ro3.OsTis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25803 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz quotes the Dryden Flight Research Center Archives: Research information from the YF-12 program was used to validate analytical theories and wind tunnel test techniques to help improve the design and performance of future military and civil aircraft. The American supersonic transport project of the late 1960's-early 1970's would have benefitted greatly from YF-12 research data. The basic design of the SR-71 and YF-12 aircraft originated in secrecy in the late l950's with the aircraft designation of A-11. Its existence was publicly announced by President Lyndon Johnson on Feb. 29, 1964 . . . Right. The research information from the YF-12 tests would have helped "greatly" but it must have been secret, at least until 1964 when Johnson let the cat out of the bag. I am sure the details of electrochemical problems during production were kept secret. Details like this are crucial in weapons development and industrial processes. One of the biggest intelligent coups of WWII was achieved when the U.S. captured an intact Japanese zero fighter plane in Alaska. The plane was disassembled carefully, examined in every detail, and extensively flight tested. The knowledge thus gained about mundane details, components, and construction techniques proved to be very valuable. During the cold war, a Russian pilot defected to Japan aboard a late model MIG fighter plane. This was another intelligence gold mine. The Russians raised a stink and demanded the plane be returned immediately, but the U.S. and Japan ignored them. The plane was taken apart down to the last bolt. Months later it was reassembled, loaded into a U.S. C5A and returned to the Russians. As it was being bundled off and the press photos were taken, the Japanese hung huge posters behind it saying (approximately): "Thanks for the stay! It was a nice visit! Sorry to cause so much trouble!" ("Ojama shimashita! Nagai aida gomeiwaku wo o-kake shimasita!") Who says the Japanese military has no sense of humor? Many history books say that war speeds up change. WWII accelerated the development of radar, antibiotics, nuclear energy, jet aircraft and many other technologies. Recently, however, this view has been brought into question. The war accelerated the development of radar but it may have retarded television. The demand for antibiotics was so strong that the civilian economy would have spurred rapid development in the 1940s with or without a war. WWII ended after six years and most of the secret technologies like radar were quickly placed in the public domain. The Cold War dragged on for decades, and much of the technology developed for it was arcane, expensive, useless for civilian purposes, and may still be classified. Things like reconnaissance satellites and MIRV missiles have had little or no impact on the civilian economy so far. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 08:31:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA23161; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:29:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:29:54 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:29:46 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: freenrg-L eskimo.com Subject: Detecting and shielding Torsion radiation Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"dWNKg.0.Wf5.18Uis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25804 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: See below, also see http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/tors/doc15.html ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L Yu.V.Nachalov, E.A.Parkhomov. Experimental detection of the torsion field. Torsion fields are extremely unusual objects of investigation. Since a torsion field is identical to the transverse spin polarization of the physical vacuum, and a gravitational field is identical to the longitudinal spin polarization of the physical vacuum [1], then some properties of torsion fields are identical to the properties of gravitational fields. For instance, experiments show that torsion fields cannot be shielded by natural media, and in this way their behavior is similar to that of gravitational fields [2]. However, unlike gravitational fields which cannot be shielded even by artificial materials, torsion fields are shielded by artificial materials possessing orthonormal topology of structure. In practice, it is possible to screen torsion radiation with lengths of stretched polyethylene film commonly produced by industry. This film is manufactured in such a manner that the polymers form an aligned unidirectional structure. The unidirectional orientation of the polymers results in a molecular spin ordering. And this results in the generation of a collective torsion field. Two crossed polyethylene films are transparent to light, and are transparent to most of the radio-frequency spectrum. However, they can effectively shield torsion radiation. Fig. 1 Torsion generator within a shielded enclosure In experiments with torsion generators, apparently the main difficulty lies in verifying that the generated radiation actually is torsion radiation. To confirm the nature of the generated emission, the following experiments can be performed (Fig.1). A torsion generator 1 is shielded by a screen 2 (the screen should effectively shield EM radiation to make sure that the generated radiation has a nonelectromagnetic nature). Detectors 3 and 4 are two pieces of tungsten wire. Detector 3 is placed left of the torsion generator, and detector 4 is placed to the right of the torsion generator as depicted in Fig.1. Before turning the generator 1 on, the electrical resistance of each detector (3 and 4) should be measured. (The spin structure of tungsten is altered significantly if it is subjected to the influence of torsion radiation. As a result of spin structure change, the electrical resistance of tungsten will also change. Other substances can be used as detectors as well, but the magnitude of changes to tungsten's electrical resistance influence of torsion radiation is greater than that of other substances. Detectors made of tungsten wire were first utilized by N.A.Kozyrev, and later by A.I.Veinik, A.V.Chernetsky and others.) Fig. 2 Spatial configuration of the emitted torsion field The spatial configuration of a torsion field as generated by an object with a torque is depicted on Fig.2. (It should be noted that the generator 1 (an object having torque) generates only a "right" or a "left" torsion field depending on the sense of the torque (i.e. depending on the direction of rotation). The generated torsion field lacks the radial symmetry of electromagnetic or gravitational fields, but instead has axial symmetry (i.e. the torsion field has cone-shaped spatial configuration). Fig.2 shows the situation when a "right" torsion field is generated. If the torque is reversed, then a "left" torsion field having the same spatial configuration is generated.) In Fig.2 the torsion generator 1 is turned on, and a torsion field acts upon the detectors 3 and 4. The duration of the influence needed alter the spin structure of objects 3 and 4 depends upon the intensity of the generated torsion radiation. After the objects 3 and 4 have been affected by torsion radiation, the generator can be turned off and the electrical resistance of both detectors measured. (The resistance measurement can be performed not only after the generator is turned off, but also during the operation of the generator as well.) Fig. 3 The torsion fields are not shielded by parallel films of aligned PE After the intensity of the influence is determined, i.e. after establishing the fact that the radiation created by generator 1 is of nonelectromagnetic nature (since the generator is shielded), and determining that it is able to change the electric resistance of detectors 3 and 4, the next experiment can be performed (Fig.3). A torsion polarizer 5 (e.g. the polyethylene film) is placed between generator 1 and detector 3. Another torsion polarizer 6 is placed between generator 1 and detector 4. If polarizers 5 and 6 have unidirectional orientation of torsion fields (this situation is depicted in Fig.3), then the influence of the torsion fields generated by generator 1 still can be detected. This situation is identical to the earlier situation where no polarizers were utilized. In this case, both detectors are influenced by the torsion field being created by generator 1. (This fact can be verified by measuring the electrical resistance of detectors 3 and 4.) But if the orientation of any of the polarizers is changed to an orthogonal position in relation to another polarizer (Fig.4) then neither detector is influenced by the torsion field. Thus the observed situation can be interpreted as "locking" of the spin-polarized space between polarizers 5 and 6, as though this space behaves as a solid body. (The first experimental verification of this effect was performed by V.D.Pronin [3].) Fig. 4 The torsion fields are shielded if one PE film is rotated 90deg Changes in electrical resistance of various conductors is not the only effect of the influence of torsion fields. It is necessary to emphasize that torsion fields can be detected by a variety of methods. The influence of a torsion field upon a physical material results in the change of a spin state of only this material, but alterations of the spin state of the physical vacuum can result in changes to a light beam's polarization angle, and change to the spin state of a substance can result in alterations of its magnetizability, Hall's coefficient, thermal conduction, and other properties. Since changes in the spin state of an electrical conductor may result in the alteration of its electrical resistance, then an elementary torsion field detector can be based upon a comparison bridge (Wheatstone bridge). This type of detector was first utilized by N.A.Kozyrev [4], and later by an academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences M.M.Lavrentiev [5,6] and others. Another type of elementary torsion field detector is the torsion balance. Torsion balances were employed in experiments conducted by N.P.Myshkin at the end of the IXX century, and later were employed in the experiments of N.A.Kozyrev and others. As discovered by N.A.Kozyrev, the direction of motion of the torsion balance indicator depends upon the orientation of the torsion field. For instance, if the torsion balances are subjected to the influence of a "right" torsion field, and the indicator moves in one direction, then after influencing the torsion balance with a "left" torsion field, the indicator will move in the opposite direction. Torsion fields are able to change the rate of any physical process, for instance, they significantly alter the oscillation frequency of quartz crystals. Thus this property can be employed in torsion field detectors. The possibile affect upon the oscillation frequency of a quartz plate by torsion radiation was experimentally discovered by N.A.Kozyrev [4], and later was employed in various torsion detectors developed by a member of the Belarus Academy of Sciences, A.I.Veinik [2]. A.I.Veinik used the term "chronal detector," since he assumed a connection between the detected fields and the rate of the course of time. He experimentally discovered that it is possible to alter the rate of any process (including the process of a radioactive decay) by subjecting that process to the influence of torsion radiation [2]. This fact is stipulated by the ability of torsion fields to affect the inertial forces in any circulating mechanical system. This was demonstrated rigorously by G.I.Shipov [1]. Since the superposition of a torsion field and a gravitational field in a local area of space may result in the reduction of gravity in this area (the so called "torsion compensation of gravity"), then the influence of torsion radiation upon any physical object may result in a reduction in weight of that object. This significant property of torsion fields was discovered in the 1950s by N.A.Kozyrev [4], and later, it was confirmed in the investigations conducted by A.I.Veinik [2], M.M.Lavrentiev [6], and others. If any substance (or even the physical vacuum in general) is subjected to the influence of an external torsion field, then this influence causes a transverse spin polarization of that substance. Since this transverse spin polarization can be retained as a metastable state, then a torsion field of a given spatial configuration can be "recorded" upon any physical object. Due to this property of torsion fields, the new value of electrical resistance produced in the experiment with tungsten wire described above will continue for a significant period of time. (Up to many hours, if the intensity of the environmental torsion fields is low enough. And up to many months, if the tungsten wire is shielded by crossed polyethylene films immediately after the wire is subjected to the influence of the torsion fields.) The simplest matrix for the "recording" of a torsion field is a piece of sugar. (As is well known, the methods of recording information upon sugar, wax, water, etc. are effectively applied in practice, but basically understood only as experimental anomalies. It is possible to record a "right" or "left" torsion field upon a piece of sugar (as well as upon water in a container, etc). This fact is easily detected by various torsion detectors (e.g. by torsion balances, or by electronic detectors based upon the comparison bridge, etc.) But it must be noted that the "charged" object shouldn't be subjected to any shocks, otherwise the "torsion charge" will "disappear". This is due to the fact that torsion fields are closely coupled to inertial forces [1]. 1.Shipov G.I. "Teoriya fizicheskogo vakuuma.", Moscow, NT-Centr, 1993, 362 p. (russian) ("Theory of physical vacuum.") 2.Veinik A.I. "Termodinamika realnykh protsessov.", Minsk, Nauka i Tekhnika, 1991, 576 p. (russian) ("Thermodynamics of real processes.") 3.Akimov A.E. "Evristicheskoye obsuzhdeniye problemy poiska novyh dalnodeistvii. EGS-kontseptsii.", Moscow, CISE VENT, preprint # 7A. (russian) ("Heuristic discussion of search for new long-range actions. EGS-concepts.") 4.Kozyrev N.A. "Izbrannyye trudy.", Leningrad State University (LGU), 1991, 448 p. (russian) ("Selected works.") 5.Lavrentiev M.M., Eganova I.A., Lutset M.K., Fominykh S.F. "O distantsionnom vozdeistvii zvyeozd na rezistor." //Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1990, vol. 314, # 2. (russian) ("On the remote influence of stars on a resistor.") 6.Lavrentiev M.M., Eganova I.A., Lutset M.K., Fominykh S.F. "O registratsii reaktsii veshestva na vneshnii neobratimyi protsess." //Doklady AN SSSR, 1991, vol. 317, # 3. (russian) ("On registration of substance reaction to an external irreversible process.") From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 08:39:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA26373; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:37:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:37:09 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:37:00 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? In-Reply-To: <000f01be4b07$6b29ac20$c9441d26 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"SzU9v2.0.xR6.rEUis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25805 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I recall seeing something about the above. Did NASA ever hire Dr. Podkletnov? Anyone know the current status of the failed NASA attempts to build a huge HTSC ceramic disks? The "torsion fields" stuff is interesting: it claims that gravity effects arise in gyroscopes, but only if the gyroscopes are vibrated, braked, forced to precess, etc. Spin, with 2nd derivative of acceleration. Maybe the "Dean Drive" was real after all???? ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com 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 Jan 29 09:07:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA11654; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:04:40 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:04:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000c01be4ba9$1057d360$e2441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:57:12 -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: <"cAzLB1.0.0s2.beUis" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25806 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scudder, Henry J To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 8:54 AM Subject: RE: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity Hank Scudder wrote: >What ARE you talking about??? >Hank Phase velocity, Hank. EE 101 as applied to the spin velocity m*v*r = hbar for the electron. If the "classical radius" r = 2.81E-15 meters: 9.1E-31*v*2.81E-15 = 1.04E-34 the v = 137*c IOW this is impossible and the radius of the electron is 3.866E-13 meters and the 137*c velocity is the phase velocity. The angle wrt the boundary is 0.4181 degrees and the energy wave is circling at c, but this makes the phase velocity 137*c. Imagine a paper shear 137 inches wide and the blade angled such that the heel is even on one side an the other is 1 inch above the plane of the table. Push the blade down at some velocity, v, and the blade will close across the table at 137*v. Happens all the time on transmission lines and in waveguides. Check it out. Regards, Frederick > >> ---------- >> From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] >> Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 1:43 PM >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Subject: Re: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity >> >> To: Vortex >> >> Snell's Law for the critical angle for total internal reflection of a >> wave: >> >> Sin theta critical = (eo/e1)^1/2 >> >> |/ >> |/ >> |/ eo >> _____________________|/ >> \ |/ >> \ |/ >> angle theta |/ >> \ |/ >> e1 \ /|/ >> \ / |/ >> \ / |/ >> / |/ >> >> Since theta = 89.58189, Sin Theta = 0.9999733 >> >> Then (0.9999733)^2 = 0.9999467 >> >> Thus e1, the permittivity of a particle: >> >> e1 = 8.84E-12/0.9999467 = 8.840470E-12 coulombs/joule-meter, which says >> in >> effect that a particle builds it's own boundary in space and gives a phase >> velocity of 137*c. >> >> Ie.,The wave front is making a 0.418108 degree angle with the vertical >> thus >> giving the 137*c phase velocity. >> >> Regards, Frederick >> > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 09:15:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA08606; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:14:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:14:11 -0800 Message-ID: <001101be4baa$7ada4140$e2441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 10:11:51 -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: <"R9otK3.0.O62.ZnUis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25807 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A -----Original Message----- From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 9:38 AM Subject: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? Bill Beaty wrote: > >The "torsion fields" stuff is interesting: it claims that gravity effects >arise in gyroscopes, but only if the gyroscopes are vibrated, braked, >forced to precess, etc. Spin, with 2nd derivative of acceleration. Nothing surprising there, Bill. If the quarks in each atom act as tiny gravitational "magnets" they have to align with those in the atoms that make up the Earth or other mass. So if you spin any mass around a horizontal axis the atoms have to act like a gimbaled gyro also, thus weird effects with spinning masses. FJS > >((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) >William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website >billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com >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 Jan 29 09:20:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA10507; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:18:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:18:10 -0800 From: mrb ap.net Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990129091546.008c3140 mail.ap.net> X-Sender: mrb mail.ap.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:15:46 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? In-Reply-To: References: <000f01be4b07$6b29ac20$c9441d26 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cHxv23.0.1a2.IrUis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25808 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:37 AM 1/29/99 -0800, you wrote: > >I recall seeing something about the above. Did NASA ever hire Dr. >Podkletnov? Anyone know the current status of the failed NASA attempts to >build a huge HTSC ceramic disks? > >The "torsion fields" stuff is interesting: it claims that gravity effects >arise in gyroscopes, but only if the gyroscopes are vibrated, braked, >forced to precess, etc. Spin, with 2nd derivative of acceleration. Maybe >the "Dean Drive" was real after all???? > >((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) >William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website >billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com >EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science >Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L > > >PODKLETNOV GRAVITY SHIELD: NASA INVESTS ANOTHER $600,000. The Small Business Innovation Research grant went to Superconductive Components in Columbus, OH to make a 12-inch superconductive disk for an experimental shield. It's a coveted Phase II award, which goes to the top projects. A 6-inch shield built under Phase I didn't work (WN 15 May 98), but NASA, which has been working on this for 4 years, hopes a bigger one will. The Columbus Dispatch quotes a NASA official: "Let your imagination run wild. What could you do if you could cut gravity 50 percent or negate it altogether?" Well, for one thing you could build a perpetual motion machine, in violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 09:22:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA11252; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:19:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:19:15 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990129121045.00ec1c90 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:10:45 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: interesting example In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990129110954.0079b100 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"I-EP83.0.fl2.HsUis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25809 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:09 AM 01/29/99 -0500, Jed wrote: > >Many history books say that war speeds up change. WWII accelerated the >development of radar, antibiotics, nuclear energy, jet aircraft and many >other technologies. Recently, however, this view has been brought into >question. The war accelerated the development of radar but it may have >retarded television. The demand for antibiotics was so strong that the >civilian economy would have spurred rapid development in the 1940s with or >without a war. WWII ended after six years and most of the secret >technologies like radar were quickly placed in the public domain. The Cold >War dragged on for decades, and much of the technology developed for it was >arcane, expensive, useless for civilian purposes, and may still be >classified. Things like reconnaissance satellites and MIRV missiles have >had little or no impact on the civilian economy so far. > >- Jed And the ongoing classification of patents to secret categories in spite of the cold war's demise. They may not even know the reasons, but perhaps the MI believes that the device in question might enhance some obscure weapons in development at some black lab ...somewhere, someday. Meanwhile, the inventor is restrained from further development, from investments, from profits-- and is threatened with jail (or something worse ) if he dares to engage in any discourse about his own intellectual property. All this in the name of advancing democracy and humanity... I suspect that an explosion of technological advancements benefiting mankind would surely follow, if most-all of the classified inventions were suddenly opened. That would surely take some courage. Colin Quinney From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 09:53:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA27098; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:51:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:51:16 -0800 Message-ID: <001801be4baf$a80655a0$e2441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 10:48:45 -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: <"V6zL73.0.Kd6.KKVis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25810 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: mrb ap.net To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 10:19 AM Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? mrb writes: >The Small Business Innovation Research grant went to Superconductive Components in >Columbus, OH to > make a 12-inch superconductive disk for an experimental shield. It's a >coveted Phase II award, > which goes to the top projects. A 6-inch shield built under Phase I >didn't work (WN 15 May 98), > but NASA, which has been working on > this for 4 years, hopes a bigger one will. The Columbus Dispatch quotes a >NASA official: "Let > your imagination run wild. What could you do if you could cut gravity 50 >percent or negate it > altogether?" Well, for one thing you could build a perpetual motion >machine, in violation of the > First Law of Thermodynamics." > Most importantly ANY EFFECT no matter how small that exposes GENERAL RELATIVITY for the CRAP IT IS is Giant Leap towards GOOD PHYSICS! Forget negating gravity to a large scale and concentrate on ANTIGRAV where you have to expend at least 9.8 watts to levitate ONE Kg to One Meter Height in One Second. Or you can set up Attractive or Repulsive FORCE FIELDS between masses if you have the energy to do so. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 10:05:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA00308; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 10:03:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 10:03:34 -0800 From: Chuck Davis To: Jed Rothwell Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 10:04:40 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19990129110954.0079b100 pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Re: interesting example MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"sok9A.0.k4.rVVis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25811 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 29-Jan-99, Jed Rothwell, wrote: [...] > Things like reconnaissance satellites and MIRV missiles have >had little or no impact on the civilian economy so far. ^^^^^^ >- Jed Whew! I'd say that's a very good thing ;^) -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 10:16:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA06696; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 10:15:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 10:15:27 -0800 Message-ID: <002201be4bb2$e4ef4320$da4accd1 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Re: interesting example Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:11:10 -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: <"fV-gv1.0.Oe1.-gVis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25812 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed said: > Things like reconnaissance satellites and MIRV missiles have >had little or no impact on the civilian economy so far. The reconnaissance satellites laid the foundation for remote imaging, which include the nice cloud cover pictures on the weather channel and the multichannel imaging available from several sources. The value of these images is so great that some countries have set up their own ground stations to get images from the unclassified satellites. They tell about vegetation, minerals, etc. that would take myriad overflights in planes or years of crawling over the ground. Some have said that the overall value of these images to the world's economy would pay for the space programs manyfold. The highest resolution images from the Keyhole satellites remain classified, but the next layer down are available publicly for a fee. The technology also includes remote radar mapping which gave us nice detailed pictures of the surface of Venus. Jed neglected to mention the stimulus of the ICBM and Apollo programs on the IC industry. The first ICs cost a kilobuck and there was little commercial interest. The USAF and NASA needed them, cost no object, and funded the microelectronics development, the rest being history. Some say "computers" are the great invention of the last half of the 20th century. No way -- they are part of the story, but a byproduct. The great invention was the confluence of factors that gave birth to microelectronics -- enormous, reliable technology at vanishing cost per function. Such technology defines the state of a civilization between those that can and those who can't. It is as much a marker as the Stone Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age, etc. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 11:57:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA16951; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:55:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:55:30 -0800 From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 14:53:11 EST To: freenrg-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: intentional community Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 2.5 for Windows Resent-Message-ID: <"ejjFx2.0.n84.n8Xis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25813 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subj: Re: Me too! ...Re: Intentional community Date: 99-01-28 23:19:24 EST From: UNIR2B1NM To: herman antioch-college.edu (John Schnurer) In a message dated 99-01-25 20:58:43 EST, you write: > I too would like this info.... > Thanks, Dear John Schnurer and lists, I fielded my initial posts, re: 'Progressive Community', last summer; perhaps I should again broadcast the call for like-minded (i.e., collaborative, problem-solving) people to congregate within a common location, so as not to be sundered in the looming event of long-term telecommunications failure or even gov't-imposed travel restrictions. NOT REALLY OFF TOPIC: Many interpret the current global predicament (economic, ecological, moral) in light of prophecy. If I were to sermonize, I'd cite Revelations 11:18--"...thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead...that thou shouldest...destroy them which destroy the earth." The "dead" are distinguished from "the quick" in the parable of the talents (Matthew 25:15-), which is summarized in Mark 4:25--"For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath." IOW, everything compounds itself (like, but not limited to, Nietche's "will to power" doctrine): the bad worsens, exacerbating depletion; and the good ('fruitful') increases ("Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over..." Luke 6:38). ON TOPIC: Accordingly, sane horticulture enriches the soil 20%/yr.; corporate agriculture depletes it in 5. Hydrogen combustion enriches atmospheric O2 content; fossil fuels jeopardize even current, meager levels. It’s not that the Earth is God, but that warming oneself by burning down the house is “double minded” (James 1:8). Real “Y2K preparation”, then, should revolve around replacing suicidal systems with sane ones, developing and implementing sustainable systems of water, food, & energy production. "If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" (John 3:12) "Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing...he will make him ruler over all that he hath." (Luke 12:43, 4) Our planetary problems are being worked out over long-distance forums like this; however, the worst-case scenario calls for knowledgeable, innovative people to aggregate their equipment & research projects into a safe place of mutual accessibility. According to various “future maps”, NE Alabama is comparatively safe from earthquakes and oceanic flooding. The climate, although hot in July & Aug., could stand greater extremes in either direction, in the event of ‘Earth changes’. The people here still evince the congeniality of the "Bible belt", without the disreputable closed-mindedness. This is a rural area with access to a town of decent size. Should the SHTF, marauders would never survive this far into the surrounding, well-armed area. After a good rain, we even have running creeks fed by the Lookout Mt. foothills. These 40 acres are situated between two dead-end, gravel roads for privacy. Innovators who seek to confront and avert hardships of the millennial transition rather than to merely cower from them, and who wish to relocate their research from urban areas to a rural, 'scientific haven', should contact me 256-546-5945. Thanks. Regards, Russ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 12:10:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA21811; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:08:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:08:42 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0F0 XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:57:42 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"GAHpo1.0.fK5.9LXis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25814 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Phase velocity is for sinusoidal excitation in a medium in which EM waves travel slower then the velocity of light. I don't see how this applies here. Phase velocity is the velocity of a fictitious point of intersection of a wavefront of a sine wave (ie. a phase angle of 0 radians) and a line drawn in the selected direction. Hank > ---------- > From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, January 29, 1999 8:57 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scudder, Henry J > To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' > Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 8:54 AM > Subject: RE: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity > > Hank Scudder wrote: > > > >What ARE you talking about??? > >Hank > > Phase velocity, Hank. EE 101 as applied to the > spin velocity m*v*r = hbar for the electron. If the "classical radius" r = > 2.81E-15 meters: > > 9.1E-31*v*2.81E-15 = 1.04E-34 the v = 137*c > IOW this is impossible and the radius of the electron is 3.866E-13 meters > and the 137*c velocity is the phase velocity. > > The angle wrt the boundary is 0.4181 degrees > and the energy wave is circling at c, but this makes the phase velocity > 137*c. > > Imagine a paper shear 137 inches wide and the blade angled such that the > heel is even on one side an the other is 1 inch above the plane of the > table. > Push the blade down at some velocity, v, and the blade will close across > the > table at 137*v. > > Happens all the time on transmission lines and in waveguides. Check it > out. > > Regards, Frederick > > > >> ---------- > >> From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] > >> Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > >> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 1:43 PM > >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com > >> Subject: Re: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity > >> > >> To: Vortex > >> > >> Snell's Law for the critical angle for total internal reflection of a > >> wave: > >> > >> Sin theta critical = (eo/e1)^1/2 > >> > >> |/ > >> |/ > >> |/ eo > >> _____________________|/ > >> \ |/ > >> \ |/ > >> angle theta |/ > >> \ |/ > >> e1 \ /|/ > >> \ / |/ > >> \ / |/ > >> / |/ > >> > >> Since theta = 89.58189, Sin Theta = 0.9999733 > >> > >> Then (0.9999733)^2 = 0.9999467 > >> > >> Thus e1, the permittivity of a particle: > >> > >> e1 = 8.84E-12/0.9999467 = 8.840470E-12 coulombs/joule-meter, which > says > >> in > >> effect that a particle builds it's own boundary in space and gives a > phase > >> velocity of 137*c. > >> > >> Ie.,The wave front is making a 0.418108 degree angle with the vertical > >> thus > >> giving the 137*c phase velocity. > >> > >> Regards, Frederick > >> > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 12:35:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA31482; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:33:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:33:23 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0F1 XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: intentional community Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:32:47 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"vNWX32.0.ph7.IiXis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25815 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: You should read the end of Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged". You are advocating a similar community I think. Hank > ---------- > From: UNIR2B1NM aol.com[SMTP:UNIR2B1NM@aol.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, January 29, 1999 11:53 AM > To: freenrg-l eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: intentional community > > Subj: Re: Me too! ...Re: Intentional community > Date: 99-01-28 23:19:24 EST > From: UNIR2B1NM > To: herman antioch-college.edu (John Schnurer) > > In a message dated 99-01-25 20:58:43 EST, you write: > > > I too would like this info.... > > Thanks, > > Dear John Schnurer and lists, > > I fielded my initial posts, re: 'Progressive Community', last summer; > perhaps > I should again broadcast the call for like-minded (i.e., collaborative, > problem-solving) people to congregate within a common location, so as not > to > be sundered in the looming event of long-term telecommunications failure > or > even gov't-imposed travel restrictions. > > NOT REALLY OFF TOPIC: Many interpret the current global predicament > (economic, ecological, moral) in light of prophecy. If I were to > sermonize, > I'd cite Revelations 11:18--"...thy wrath is come, and the time of the > dead...that thou shouldest...destroy them which destroy the earth." The > "dead" are distinguished from "the quick" in the parable of the talents > (Matthew 25:15-), which is summarized in Mark 4:25--"For he that hath, to > him > shall be given: and he that hath not, from him shall be taken even that > which > he hath." IOW, everything compounds itself (like, but not limited to, > Nietche's "will to power" doctrine): the bad worsens, exacerbating > depletion; > and the good ('fruitful') increases ("Give, and it shall be given unto > you; > good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over..." Luke > 6:38). > > ON TOPIC: Accordingly, sane horticulture enriches the soil 20%/yr.; > corporate > agriculture depletes it in 5. Hydrogen combustion enriches atmospheric O2 > content; fossil fuels jeopardize even current, meager levels. It's not > that > the Earth is God, but that warming oneself by burning down the house is > "double minded" (James 1:8). > > Real "Y2K preparation", then, should revolve around replacing suicidal > systems > with sane ones, developing and implementing sustainable systems of water, > food, & energy > production. "If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how > shall > ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" (John 3:12) "Blessed is > that > servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing...he will make > him > ruler over all that he hath." (Luke 12:43, 4) > > Our planetary problems are being worked out over long-distance forums like > this; however, the worst-case scenario calls for knowledgeable, innovative > people to aggregate their equipment & research projects into a safe place > of > mutual accessibility. > According to various "future maps", NE Alabama is comparatively safe from > earthquakes and oceanic flooding. The climate, although hot in July & > Aug., > could stand greater extremes in either direction, in the event of 'Earth > changes'. The people here still evince the congeniality of the "Bible > belt", > without the disreputable closed-mindedness. This is a rural area with > access > to a > town of decent size. Should the SHTF, marauders would never survive this > far > into the surrounding, well-armed area. After a good rain, we even have > running creeks fed by the Lookout Mt. foothills. These 40 acres are > situated > between two dead-end, gravel roads for privacy. > > Innovators who seek to confront and avert hardships of the millennial > transition rather than to merely cower from them, and who > wish to relocate their research from urban areas to a rural, 'scientific > haven', > should contact me 256-546-5945. Thanks. > > Regards, Russ > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 12:37:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA00253; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:36:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:36:08 -0800 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C0215B0F2 XCH-CPC-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:35:09 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"YVCFJ1.0.r3.tkXis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25816 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If General Relativity is crap, then why do we have to allow for it to make GRS receivers work? Hank > ---------- > From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, January 29, 1999 9:48 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: mrb ap.net > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 10:19 AM > Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? > > mrb writes: > > >The Small Business Innovation Research grant went to Superconductive > Components in > >Columbus, OH to > > make a 12-inch superconductive disk for an experimental shield. It's a > >coveted Phase II award, > > which goes to the top projects. A 6-inch shield built under Phase I > >didn't work (WN 15 May 98), > > but NASA, which has been working on > > this for 4 years, hopes a bigger one will. The Columbus Dispatch quotes > a > >NASA official: "Let > > your imagination run wild. What could you do if you could cut gravity > 50 > >percent or negate it > > altogether?" Well, for one thing you could build a perpetual motion > >machine, in violation of the > > First Law of Thermodynamics." > > > Most importantly ANY EFFECT no matter how small > that exposes GENERAL RELATIVITY for the CRAP IT IS is Giant Leap towards > GOOD PHYSICS! > > Forget negating gravity to a large scale and concentrate on ANTIGRAV where > you have to expend at least 9.8 watts to levitate ONE Kg to > One Meter Height in One Second. Or you can set up Attractive or Repulsive > FORCE FIELDS between masses if you have the energy to do so. > > Regards, Frederick > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 13:07:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14460; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:04:16 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:04:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <002601be4bc9$d658b500$e2441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Critical Angle and FTL Phase Velocity Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:55:26 -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: <"Hn6VF2.0.sX3.E9Yis" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25817 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hank Scudder wrote: Snip Good Stuff I think we are on the same side of the issue,Hank. c^2 = Vp*Vg in which case if the phase velocity Vp is 137*c, the group velocity must be c/137. By a strange coincidence the "orbital velocity" of the ground state Bohr Electron is c/137. :-) The reason for the post and sketch was to point out that a spin velocity of 137*c for the Electron based on m*v*r = hbar, is as you say fictitious if the classical radius of 2.81E-15 meters is used. For wavefront making an angle of 89.5819 degrees from normal incidence, the tangent is 137.036 which gives the FTL (Faster Than Light Phase Velocity. >From this, Snell's law : sin theta critical for total internal reflection (at a boundary of two indices of refraction) equals (eo/e1)^1/2 for an EM wave indicating that particles (Quarks and other Leptons) are circular, and the energy velocity DOES NOT exceed c. IOW since c^2 = Vp*Vg the Phase velocity Vp and the Group velocity Vg are both equal to c. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 13:07:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09067; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:04:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:04:14 -0800 Message-ID: <002b01be4bca$9b432b20$e2441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 14:01:49 -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: <"tbP-A.0.XD2.E9Yis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25818 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scudder, Henry J To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 1:37 PM Subject: RE: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? LOL! Amazing how touchy and cranky we get with two full moons in the same month. :-) I was referring to the Big AL's gravitation explanation. Last I heard any Hypothesis can be partially correct. Frederick Hank wrote: >If General Relativity is crap, then why do we have to allow for it to make >GRS receivers work? >Hank > >> ---------- >> From: Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com] >> Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Sent: Friday, January 29, 1999 9:48 AM >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mrb ap.net >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 10:19 AM >> Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? >> >> mrb writes: >> >> >The Small Business Innovation Research grant went to Superconductive >> Components in >> >Columbus, OH to >> > make a 12-inch superconductive disk for an experimental shield. It's a >> >coveted Phase II award, >> > which goes to the top projects. A 6-inch shield built under Phase I >> >didn't work (WN 15 May 98), >> > but NASA, which has been working on >> > this for 4 years, hopes a bigger one will. The Columbus Dispatch quotes >> a >> >NASA official: "Let >> > your imagination run wild. What could you do if you could cut gravity >> 50 >> >percent or negate it >> > altogether?" Well, for one thing you could build a perpetual motion >> >machine, in violation of the >> > First Law of Thermodynamics." >> > >> Most importantly ANY EFFECT no matter how small >> that exposes GENERAL RELATIVITY for the CRAP IT IS is Giant Leap towards >> GOOD PHYSICS! >> >> Forget negating gravity to a large scale and concentrate on ANTIGRAV where >> you have to expend at least 9.8 watts to levitate ONE Kg to >> One Meter Height in One Second. Or you can set up Attractive or Repulsive >> FORCE FIELDS between masses if you have the energy to do so. >> >> Regards, Frederick >> > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 13:43:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21165; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:41:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:41:00 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990129163954.0079f320 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:39:54 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: interesting example Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"jkrlu1.0.bA5.ihYis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25819 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Chuck Davis may be the only person who sees humor in my statement that MIRV missiles have had little or no impact on the civilian economy. Mike Carrell describes the conventional view of history, that reconnaissance satellites led to improved weather forecasting, and the space program ICBM and Apollo programs stimulated rapid progress in integrated circuits. To which I say: Yes, But. Riordan and Hoddeson's book, "crystal fire" got me to thinking this is something of an over simplification. Of course military contracts did have a major impact on these technologies, but suppose the Cold War had not happened, and the contracts had never been let? Would there be no computer industry, no integrated circuits? I think not! Some other organization, like AT&T or IBM would have let contracts sooner or later. Perhaps progress would not have been as rapid. Transistors were, in fact, invented outside the military R&D establishment, at AT&T, TI and Fairchild, although the military soon become involved. The first substantial markets were for hearing aids, radios, and proximity fuses during the Korean War. The transistor was invented by the phone company for their own internal use. Their switching applications alone guaranteed a huge market. By the 1970s, children's toys like TI's "Speak and Spell" were on the cutting edge of high-technology. Mike says: The first ICs cost a kilobuck and there was little commercial interest. Well, the first customer was NASA, but they were cheap. The first ICs were sold in March 1961 by Fairchild for $120. By that summer they dropped to $100. I think there would have been tremendous interest, with or without NASA, and I thik the prices would have fallen faster without NASA. NASA was an enthusiastic customer, willing to pay premium prices. Inflated prices can sometimes retard progress, and prevent growth of a mass market. Guaranteed high prices and a captive audience spoil manufacturers, by making them lazy. High prices held back progress in software until a mass market developed in the 1980s. IBM was not known for innovation during the 1960s when it made huge profit margins. The lean and hungry minicomputer makers were innovative, and they forced IBM to become more innovative. The idea of integrating circuits would certainly have to someone sooner or later, because the customers were already "integrating" circuits, that is, assembling them by hand, with tweezers. Photolithography had been used in printing for decades, and it was used to fabricate transistors for a short while before it occurred to people to fabricate integrated circuits. It was only a matter of time before someone put 2 + 2 together. Riordan and Hoddeson describe the event on page 264: Where Kilby had concentrated on how to fashion different components from the same piece of material, Noyce focused on the electrical connections. Instead of using clumsy wires, which were often thicker than the features being connected and had to be attached by hand, they could employ photolithography to deposit fine lines of metal such as aluminum during batch processing. . . . From there it was a relatively minor leap of the imagination to create multiple devices inside the very same crystalline slice and link them all together in a single miniature circuit. With the advent of diffusion and photolithography, Noyce recalled, it had become possible to make hundreds of transistors on a single silicon wafer. "But then people cut these beautifully arranged things into little pieces and had girls hunt for them with tweezers in order to put leads on them and wire them all back together again," he recalled. "Then we would sell them to our customers, who would plug all these separate packages into a printed circuit board." And all the components had to be painstakingly tested at both ends of the line, too. His new approach would eliminate a tremendous amount of labor and cost. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 14:42:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09471; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 14:39:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 14:39:35 -0800 Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 17:30:53 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: freenrg-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: Detecting and shielding Torsion radiation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"rJgwt1.0.jJ2.bYZis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25820 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A y Dear Bill, Which text tells us how to make a torsion field generator? Thanks, John From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 16:18:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA12783; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:16:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:16:44 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Particle Acrobatics Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 00:16:37 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36b24ef6.147912806 24.192.1.20> References: <000101be4b30$112e1a20$e1441d26 default> In-Reply-To: <000101be4b30$112e1a20$e1441d26 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: <"f8yYM.0.b73.hzais" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25821 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 28 Jan 1999 19:33:02 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: >Sharpen your pencils, Robin and Horace. :-) > >1, eo = 8.84E-12 coulombs/joule-meter > >2, Lambda (for the electron)= h*c/E = 2.427E-12 > The Compton Wavelength (meters) > >3, Radius R = hbar*c/E (meters) > >4, C = Lambda*eo = 2.14775E-23 (Farads) > >5, q = C*V = 1.602E-19 (coulombs) a Constant. > >6, V = q/C = 7.46E3 (volts) > >7, E = .5*C*V^2/Alpha Alpha is the fine structure constant 0.00729729 >= 1/137.037. What made you decide to change the formula for energy of a capacitor, by including a factor of alpha? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 16:47:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24250; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:46:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:46:23 -0800 Message-ID: <000801be4be9$a57f5040$6f441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Particle Acrobatics Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 17:44:00 -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: <"x2fAF3.0.mw5.VPbis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25822 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 5:17 PM Subject: Re: Particle Acrobatics Robin wrote: >On Thu, 28 Jan 1999 19:33:02 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > >>Sharpen your pencils, Robin and Horace. :-) >> >>1, eo = 8.84E-12 coulombs/joule-meter >> >>2, Lambda (for the electron)= h*c/E = 2.427E-12 >> The Compton Wavelength (meters) >> >>3, Radius R = hbar*c/E (meters) >> >>4, C = Lambda*eo = 2.14775E-23 (Farads) >> >>5, q = C*V = 1.602E-19 (coulombs) a Constant. >> >>6, V = q/C = 7.46E3 (volts) >> >>7, E = .5*C*V^2/Alpha Alpha is the fine structure constant 0.00729729 >>= 1/137.037. >What made you decide to change the formula for energy of a capacitor, by >including a factor of alpha? The results that came up on my calculator. :-) Either the wavelength, Lambda (thus C ) is off or is it the the energy, or what by Alpha or its inverse (137). :-( Regards, Frederick >[snip] >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 16:50:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24990; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:48:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:48:32 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:48:26 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? In-Reply-To: <001101be4baa$7ada4140$e2441d26 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"aN0iY3.0.N66.VRbis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25823 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > >The "torsion fields" stuff is interesting: it claims that gravity effects > >arise in gyroscopes, but only if the gyroscopes are vibrated, braked, > >forced to precess, etc. Spin, with 2nd derivative of acceleration. > > Nothing surprising there, Bill. If the quarks in each atom act as tiny > gravitational "magnets" they have to align with those in the atoms that make > up the Earth or other mass. Maybe not unexpected to an "anomalies" person, but not something that I've ever heard of being detected (in US physics). There's lots of talk of torsion as part of early universe and cosmic strings. WHat we need is a "faraday" type torsion experiement. One which anyone can perform, but nobody can explain. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com 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 Jan 29 16:55:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA26746; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:53:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:53:31 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:53:28 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Detecting and shielding Torsion radiation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"AdKTJ1.0.hX6.AWbis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25824 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, John Schnurer wrote: > Which text tells us how to make a torsion field generator? All of the links on on http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/tors labeled SPIN FIELD GENERATOR or AXION FIELD GENERATOR. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com 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 Jan 29 17:31:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA07832; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 17:27:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 17:27:53 -0800 From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Particle Acrobatics Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 01:27:45 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <36b35f88.152155516 24.192.1.20> References: <000801be4be9$a57f5040$6f441d26 default> In-Reply-To: <000801be4be9$a57f5040$6f441d26 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: <"C9uJq1.0.Iw1.O0cis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25825 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 17:44:00 -0700, Frederick J Sparber wrote: [snip] >>What made you decide to change the formula for energy of a capacitor, by >>including a factor of alpha? > >The results that came up on my calculator. :-) > >Either the wavelength, Lambda (thus C ) is off >or is it the the energy, or what by Alpha or its inverse (137). :-( [snip] Have you tried toying with a different value of eo inside the electron, compared to that in free space? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 17:44:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12584; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 17:40:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 17:40:43 -0800 Message-ID: <001301be4bf1$3acf0580$6f441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Particle Acrobatics Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:37:58 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"DCqVK1.0.Y43.RCcis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25826 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 6:28 PM Subject: Re: Particle Acrobatics Robin wrote: [snip] >Have you tried toying with a different value of eo inside the electron, compared >to that in free space? Yes. That was the point on the FTL Phase velocity thread. Snell's Law for total internal reflection of an EM wave: Sin Theta Critical = (eo/e1)^1/2 says that Theta has to be 89.5899 degrees from normal incidence, thus the particle/wave establishes it's own boundary and e1 is only slightly greater than eo. The tangent of the critical angle is 137. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 29 19:48:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA31035; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:47:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:47:05 -0800 Message-ID: <002a01be4c02$ca41ad60$8e4bccd1 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Re: interesting example Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 22:43:15 -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: <"cqgdt.0.na7.v2eis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25827 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A few caveats to keep the pot stirred, Jed's comments on my comments: >Riordan and Hoddeson's book, "crystal fire" got me to thinking this is >something of an over simplification. It was the way it happened, conventional or not. > Of course military contracts did have >a major impact on these technologies, but suppose the Cold War had not >happened, and the contracts had never been let? Would there be no computer >industry, no integrated circuits? I think not! Some other organization, >like AT&T or IBM would have let contracts sooner or later. Perhaps progress >would not have been as rapid. By decades, perhaps. There was a computer industry with vacuum tubes -- very, very small. A somewhat larger one with transistors (larger industry, smaller computers). Transistors were, in fact, invented outside >the military R&D establishment, at AT&T, TI and Fairchild, although the >military soon become involved. AT&T Bell Labs invented the transistor. TI saw it as a new market and used the cash flow from their oil exploration business to finance it. >The first substantial markets were for >hearing aids, radios, and proximity fuses during the Korean War. Proximity fuses were made by RCA in Camden during the Korean war. They used miniature vacuum tubes since no transistor had the power/bandwidth for the job at the time. Sony saw the commercial market and got a license from Bell Labs when they stopped giggling long enough to sign the paper. Rest is history. The >transistor was invented by the phone company for their own internal use. >Their switching applications alone guaranteed a huge market. Yes, a compelling need, like the ICBMs later. >By the 1970s, children's toys like TI's "Speak and Spell" were on the >cutting edge of high-technology. With IC's made cheap by the space programs. The toy/game market still drives the PC industry. The prime application for PCs with 450 MHz processors is to run action photorealistic games, not word processors and spreadsheets. >Mike says: > > The first ICs cost a kilobuck and there was little commercial interest. According to a source I recently saw -- I think it was a TV documentary "The Machine that Changed the World". I was at RCA in the 50s and the Signal Corps was sponsoring a program for MicroModules, which was based on stacking discrete components mounted on standard ceramic wafers. The wafers included transistors, capacitors, resistors, etc. and were connected by wires running up the side of the stacks, welded in place. All this, a rather desperate program, while the USAF was sponsoring IC development. It wasn't obvious for a while who would win. > >Well, the first customer was NASA, but they were cheap. The first ICs were >sold in March 1961 by Fairchild for $120. By that summer they dropped to >$100. I think there would have been tremendous interest, with or without >NASA, and I thik the prices would have fallen faster without NASA. NASA was >an enthusiastic customer, willing to pay premium prices. Speculation. The devil in the details. The price of ICs has always been determined by yield of the process and once an integrated processor was built, an insatiable demand for increased functionality. I won't go into the process problems, but there are compelling reasons to reduce the size of a circuit in the face of escalating problems in making it. NASA, ICBMs needed reliability at any cost. Minuteman command and control systems were built by RCA with a MTBF of 10 years. Out of discrete components. $4 resistors with pedigrees; drop one on the floor and it goes into the trash immediately. Inflated prices >can sometimes retard progress, and prevent growth of a mass market. >Guaranteed high prices and a captive audience spoil manufacturers, by >making them lazy. High prices held back progress in software until a mass >market developed in the 1980s. IBM was not known for innovation during the >1960s when it made huge profit margins. The lean and hungry minicomputer >makers were innovative, and they forced IBM to become more innovative. > >The idea of integrating circuits would certainly have to someone sooner or >later, because the customers were already "integrating" circuits, that is, >assembling them by hand, with tweezers. Photolithography had been used in >printing for decades, and it was used to fabricate transistors for a short >while before it occurred to people to fabricate integrated circuits. It was >only a matter of time before someone put 2 + 2 together. Riordan and >Hoddeson describe the event on page 264: > > Where Kilby had concentrated on how to fashion different > components from the same piece of material, Noyce focused on the > electrical connections. Instead of using clumsy wires, which > were often thicker than the features being connected and had to > be attached by hand, they could employ photolithography to > deposit fine lines of metal such as aluminum during batch > processing. . . . From there it was a relatively minor leap of > the imagination to create multiple devices inside the very same > crystalline slice and link them all together in a single > miniature circuit. > > With the advent of diffusion and photolithography, Noyce > recalled, it had become possible to make hundreds of transistors > on a single silicon wafer. "But then people cut these > beautifully arranged things into little pieces and had girls > hunt for them with tweezers in order to put leads on them and > wire them all back together again," he recalled. "Then we would > sell them to our customers, who would plug all these separate > packages into a printed circuit board." And all the components > had to be painstakingly tested at both ends of the line, too. > His new approach would eliminate a tremendous amount of labor > and cost. All perfectly obvious in retrospect. What is not seen here are the manifold problems of actually doing the obvious with real materials, real processes, battling Mother Nature. In the many discussions here on vortex, I have seen few participants who really have any grasp of what this world is like. It is not like writing software, for all the honor due those who do a good job of that. It is like little details such as the composition of plastic beads, or the chlorination of water (to mention two topics of recent discussion) multiplied hundreds of times. I heard once that in IBM's IC factory, there were engineers whose sole function was to look after the purity of the water used in washes. The investment in "cheap" ICs is measured in tens of thousands of man-years, and the capital cost of a modern plant exceeds $1 billion. Mike Carrell > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 30 12:42:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA10004; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:40:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:40:54 -0800 Message-ID: <36B36E50.593E77D5 ro.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 14:40:48 -0600 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8laC82.0.9S2.Mvsis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25828 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A William Beaty wrote: > I recall seeing something about the above. Did NASA ever hire Dr. > Podkletnov? Anyone know the current status of the failed NASA attempts to > build a huge HTSC ceramic disks? > Bill, As far as I know, NASA did not hire Dr. Podkletnov. He did "visit" us for a week. And as for the disk, Dr. Ning Li did fabricate a 12 inch disk, but the last I heard, it still sits on a shelf at UAH (Univ. of Ala., Huntsville). The good news is that NASA contracted with a company to attempt to create a large disk ( Superconductive Components, Inc. if I recall correctly). I'll ask the guys for an update, and pass it on to you.... -- Regards, Patrick V. Reavis http://ro.com/~preavis http://ro.com/~preavis/Quiz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 30 13:41:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30832; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 13:40:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 13:40:56 -0800 Message-ID: <001b01be4c98$e57f0780$6f441d26 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Gravity Fields and Thermal Effects? Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 14:37:00 -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: <"owrHC.0.gX7.entis" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25829 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex One way to see how the gravity force influences a mass without the need for direct field penetration is to visualize a mass as being comprised of pivoted/gimbaled solenoids (atoms) that act in a "Relay" sequence when two masses are brought into proximity. Going by that, if a mass (particularly a conductive one, like copper) if rapidly rotated Might show a slight temperature increase due to the Ferris Wheel Effect on the atoms. An experiment which excludes the Geomagnetic Field, hence Magnetocaloric Effects, would be in order. No SMOT Remarks Please. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 31 03:06:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA27927; Sun, 31 Jan 1999 03:05:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 03:05:41 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 03:05:39 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Podkletnov ever get to NASA? In-Reply-To: <36B36E50.593E77D5 ro.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"yI3YJ1.0.Hq6.5a3js" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/25830 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 30 Jan 1999, Patrick V. Reavis wrote: > As far as I know, NASA did not hire Dr. Podkletnov. Too bad. If he's done it before, then perhaps he could do it faster the second time. > He did "visit" us for a week. And as for the disk, Dr. Ning Li did > fabricate a 12 inch disk, but the last I heard, it still sits on a shelf > at UAH (Univ. of Ala., Huntsville). The good news is that NASA > contracted with a company to attempt to create a large disk ( > Superconductive Components, Inc. if I recall correctly). I'll ask the > guys for an update, and pass it on to you... Thanks! If those people can tolerate weird stuff, maybe you'd like to turn them on to Russian torsion claims. The one article by Hal Fox says that the Russians think that gravity is a torsion field distinct from the type which they detect surrounding spinning masses. If all this torsion stuff is real, then perhaps a spinning HTSC disk does not shield gravity, but instead creates a torsion field of its own which interacts with gravity's torsion, and leaves a vertical wake extending above it. A quantum gravity effect, but based upon quantum spin, rather than upon gravitons. (Or were Modanese and others actually investigating torsion concepts?) The Russian stuff implies that gyroscopes behave oddly when braked or when forced to precess. Maybe the key is to VIBRATE the disk as it spins. (Or does this simply create AC antigravity, rather than Podkletnov's DC type that comes from uniform decrease in speed over time?) TORSION STUFF http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/tors/ ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L