From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 02:59:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA14333; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 02:58:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 02:58:22 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 21:58:18 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3ov94s8o8qcliil8r9au57i1r8krodugtu 4ax.com> References: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber> In-Reply-To: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 CAA14316 Resent-Message-ID: <"WULxX.0.tV3.EzFHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31855 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 28 Nov 1999 15:33:41 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > > > http://www.laurin.com/Content/Mar99/techScatter.html Since light will interact with charged particles, why can't this be an explanation for the Hubble "constant"? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 06:36:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA19178; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 06:36:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 06:36:00 -0800 From: JNaudin509 aol.com Message-ID: <0.77850bf9.25768c30 aol.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:35:28 EST Subject: Trans. : Returned mail: User unknown To: billb eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com CC: HLafonte aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_0.77850bf9.25768c30_boundary" X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 30 Resent-Message-ID: <"haKgb3.0.ah4.F9JHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31856 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_0.77850bf9.25768c30_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Bill, William, Is the freeNrg-list ead ? :-( see the fatal error below Regards Jean-Louis > > > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- > > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > ... while talking to mx1.eskimo.com.: > >>> RCPT To: > <<< 550 ... User unknown > 550 ... User unknown > > -------------------- > Final-Recipient: RFC822; freenrg-l eskimo.com > Action: failed > Status: 5.1.1 > Remote-MTA: DNS; mx1.eskimo.com > Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 ... User unknown > Last-Attempt-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 199 --part1_0.77850bf9.25768c30_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <> Received: from rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (rly-yc03.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.35]) by air-yc05.mail.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 1999 09:33:05 -0500 Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com (imo-d08.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.232]) by rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (v65.4) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 1999 09:32:53 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost) by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) with internal id JAA11755; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:32:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:32:53 -0500 (EST) From: Mail Delivery Subsystem Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Message-Id: <199912011432.JAA11755 imo-d08.mx.aol.com> To: JNaudin509 aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="JAA11755.944058773/imo-d08.mx.aol.com" Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) --JAA11755.944058773/imo-d08.mx.aol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The original message was received at Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:32:39 -0500 (EST) from root localhost *** ATTENTION *** An e-mail you sent to an Internet destination could not be delivered. The Internet address is listed in the section labeled: "----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----". The reason your e-mail could not be delivered is listed in the section labeled: "----- Transcript of Session Follows -----". The line beginning with "<<<" describes the specific reason your e-mail could not be delivered. The next line contains a second error message which is a general translation for other e-mail servers. Please direct further questions regarding this message to the e-mail administrator or Postmaster at that destination. ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mx1.eskimo.com.: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown 550 ... User unknown --JAA11755.944058773/imo-d08.mx.aol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Final-Recipient: RFC822; freenrg-l eskimo.com Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Remote-MTA: DNS; mx1.eskimo.com Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 ... User unknown Last-Attempt-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:32:52 -0500 (EST) --JAA11755.944058773/imo-d08.mx.aol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: from JNaudin509 aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v24.4.) id o.0.f1341b7e (4006) for ; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:32:39 -0500 (EST) Return-path: JNaudin509 aol.com From: JNaudin509 aol.com Message-ID: <0.f1341b7e.25768b87 aol.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:32:39 EST Subject: Test, delete To: freenrg-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 30 This is only a test, sorry --JAA11755.944058773/imo-d08.mx.aol.com-- --part1_0.77850bf9.25768c30_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 07:32:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA00313; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 07:30:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 07:30:49 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3ov94s8o8qcliil8r9au57i1r8krodugtu 4ax.com> References: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber> <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:27:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Resent-Message-ID: <"AF_ui1.0.o4.fyJHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31857 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Sun, 28 Nov 1999 15:33:41 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > >> >> >> http://www.laurin.com/Content/Mar99/techScatter.html > >Since light will interact with charged particles, why can't this be an >explanation for the Hubble "constant"? ***{Light that has been frequency shifted by interaction with charged particles is also scattered. The scattering would smear out the images of distant objects, if it were the source of the Hubble frequency shift. If your goal is to jettison the "expanding universe" theory, there are, I think, several alternative ideas that are more plausible: (1) It may be that photons gradually lose energy with the passage of time, due to an accumulation of losses that are too tiny to measure in terrestrial laboratories. In that case, the Hubble constant--the observed redshift of light in proportion to our distance from the source--would not be due to a doppler shift, and hence would not indicate that the universe is expanding. (2) It may be that matter gradually accumulates energy with the passage of time. In that case, electron transitions in *old* matter would involve larger energy changes than those in young matter, and hence the "old" matter which we see through our telescopes--i.e., that which is closest to Earth--would emit at the highest frequencies. Result: since light from distant galaxies was emitted billions of years ago, by much younger matter, it would have been emitted at lower frequencies. (3) It may be that it is only the *visible* universe that is expanding. That is, as galaxies rush away from one another, they also give off massive amounts of energy. Logically, (a) the emitting galaxies will eventually emit *all* of their energy, and simply disappear, while (b) the emitted energy will condense to form hydrogen atoms in the voids which the galaxies leave behind as they rush away from one another. Result: the *visible* accumulations of matter--galaxies--are, in fact, always rushing away from one another, but, despite that, the universe is *not* expanding, due to the fact that the emitted matter builds up in the voids to form *new* galaxies. In my view (1) and (3) are certain to be true, while (2) is highly unlikely. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 07:49:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA04160; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 07:41:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 07:41:48 -0800 Message-ID: <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 17:31:49 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission References: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"BRaI.0.s01.y6KHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31858 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > > > >It appears the experiment is not complicated and results are clear. They > >have observed no "delay" on the effect of the oscillating charge at > >distance. > > ***{I obtained the paper and glanced over it. (I don't have time to wade > through the math right now.) My impression is that this is a theoretical > paper, describing experiments that *could* be done, not experiments that > have actually been done. --MJ}*** Yes, you right here, there is no report about the experiment. May they done it, but not give them here the "null" results. > > So the effect is propagating instantly. This is not surprising because, we > know that classical electric theory accept that the presence of an electric > charge or an magnetic field is sensed instantly at distance, say a magnetic > field does not consume time to circle an solenoid, or if you have to > solenoid coupled at distance, there would be no delay on induction. > > ***{Several points: > > (1) The principle of continuity (that no entity my come into existence out > of nothing or vanish into nothing) is satisfied by any velocity, however > great--even by velocities that are hundreds of millions of times the speed > of light--but is *not* satisfied by "instantaneous" velocities. Thus > superluminal transmission does not violate continuity: it merely violates > the opinions of Albert Einstein. But "instantaneous" transmission *really > does* violate continuity. (An object that moved instantaneously from point > A to point B would, in essence, vanish from its position at A and reappear > at B.) Thus we can speak of "virtually instantaneous" transmission, but it > is erroneous to delete the qualifier and speak of "instantaneous" > transmission. > > (2) A magnetic flux line is a material entity, analogous to a pearl > necklace centered around a moving charge, in which the pearls are photons, > all spinning in the same direction around the string that holds them > together. (The direction of inside rotation is the same as the direction of > charge movement.) As such, the limit velocity of translation of a magnetic > flux line is dictated by the entities of which it is composed--photons--and > is therefore c, the speed of light. I do not agree here. magnetic flux is not material. same a electric field. It does not have momentum, IMO. I think there is no difference between electric and magnetic field in this criteria (magnetic flux lines is just an visualization, same is true for the electric field, you can visualize an electric field by lines. For example, you can say: if entering and exiting lines trough a closed surface are equal, total charge inside is zero.) > > (3) An electric field line is not a material entity: it is the path that > would result if a test charge were placed at a specific point and then > repeatedly displaced a differentially small distance in the direction of > the Coulomb force resultant. Thus the velocity of translation of the > Coulomb force, unlike that of the magnetic force, is not obstructed by > limitations on the motion of photons: there are no photons incorporated > into electric field lines, which have no material structure and hence no > existence beyond that of mathematical abstractions. Instead, the Coulomb > force is conveyed by *electric microparticles*--particles that radiate out > from charges in straight lines, and, due to the observed absence of > aberration of electric fields, must be enormously smaller and faster than > any of the ordinary particles with which physics is familiar, including > photons. I think we dont need microparticles to understand fields in general. I do not see an advantage to introduce particles to understand fields. > (4) A gravitational field line is not a material entity: it is the path > that would result if a test mass were placed at a specific point and then > repeatedly displaced a differentially small distance in the direction of > the gravitational force resultant. Thus the velocity of translation of the > gravitational force, unlike that of the magnetic force, is not obstructed > by limitations on the motion of photons: there are no photons incorporated > into gravitational field lines, which have no material structure and hence > no existence beyond that of mathematical abstractions. Instead, the > gravitational force is conveyed by *ultramundane corpuscles* (particles > that fly in from deep space in straight lines and have the effect of > pushing nearby objects toward one another) and which, due to the observed > absence of aberration of gravitational fields, must be enormously smaller > and faster than any of the ordinary particles with which physics is > familiar, including photons. > > --Mitchell Jones}*** This is based on Newtonian gravity if you omit particles. But a recent paper "Do Gravitational Fields Have Mass?" (http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/9911007) predict the gravitational field have a mass or equivalent, results matches very good with experimen ts. I think it would be not incorrect to assume the gravitational field is an extension of the body its belong. It is physical, but propagation of the gravity would be still infinite, and does not violate continuity, because, for example if you oscillate a mass to observe its gravitational effect at distance, there would be no delay, as the gravitational field is bounded rigidly to the mass. There is no transmission here. So I can deduce that the instantaneous sensing a change on a body at distance does not violate continuity. Violation would occur when a *finite sized* body i.e. a photon is transmitted instantaneously from a place to an other. Yes, disappearing photon in a place and appearing in other place without passing on neighborhood would violate continuity, as the instantaneous transmission can be described so. But there would be no violation of continuity if an effect related to an object is sensed instantaneously at all the points on the path connecting the object and the location it is sensed. Jumps only violate continuity. But in order to have a clear jump, one need to have an object having no extension (out of the volume its bounded) I think is hard to find a body having no extension. Nothing is completely bounded in a volume. If it be, it presence would not be sensed at neighborhood, at outside the volume it occupy and it will be completely isolated from the continuum. This is not th e case for real things. As everything has extension, transmission concept become complicated. I need to think more. :) Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 07:56:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08043; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 07:54:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 07:54:40 -0800 Message-ID: <003a01bf3c1c$b76ba820$82441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: "Marshall, Wesley J CHPPM" , References: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber><012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26@fjsparber> Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 08:54:13 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"hHwPP1.0.bz1.0JKHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31859 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Mitchell Jones To: Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 7:27 AM Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Mitchell Jones wrote: > >On Sun, 28 Nov 1999 15:33:41 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: I didn't ask the question, Robin van Spaandonk did. :-) My question is, related to photon (Raman-Type) scattering off of Neutrinos. Are the Anti-Stokes lines of a few hundreths of an ev due to molecules, or could they also be due to Photon-Neutrino scattering? And, would certain Laser photons scatter off of Neutrinos in a Dark Hard Vacuum chamber? Regards, Frederick > > > >> > >> > >> http://www.laurin.com/Content/Mar99/techScatter.html > > > >Since light will interact with charged particles, why can't this be an > >explanation for the Hubble "constant"? > > ***{Light that has been frequency shifted by interaction with charged > particles is also scattered. The scattering would smear out the images of > distant objects, if it were the source of the Hubble frequency shift. If > your goal is to jettison the "expanding universe" theory, there are, I > think, several alternative ideas that are more plausible: > > (1) It may be that photons gradually lose energy with the passage of time, > due to an accumulation of losses that are too tiny to measure in > terrestrial laboratories. In that case, the Hubble constant--the observed > redshift of light in proportion to our distance from the source--would not > be due to a doppler shift, and hence would not indicate that the universe > is expanding. > > (2) It may be that matter gradually accumulates energy with the passage of > time. In that case, electron transitions in *old* matter would involve > larger energy changes than those in young matter, and hence the "old" > matter which we see through our telescopes--i.e., that which is closest to > Earth--would emit at the highest frequencies. Result: since light from > distant galaxies was emitted billions of years ago, by much younger matter, > it would have been emitted at lower frequencies. > > (3) It may be that it is only the *visible* universe that is expanding. > That is, as galaxies rush away from one another, they also give off massive > amounts of energy. Logically, (a) the emitting galaxies will eventually > emit *all* of their energy, and simply disappear, while (b) the emitted > energy will condense to form hydrogen atoms in the voids which the galaxies > leave behind as they rush away from one another. Result: the *visible* > accumulations of matter--galaxies--are, in fact, always rushing away from > one another, but, despite that, the universe is *not* expanding, due to the > fact that the emitted matter builds up in the voids to form *new* galaxies. > > In my view (1) and (3) are certain to be true, while (2) is highly unlikely. > > --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > > > > >Regards, > > > >Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 09:55:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12652; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:53:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:53:24 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> References: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 11:50:51 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Resent-Message-ID: <"Rw48d1.0.c53.K2MHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31860 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >> > >> >It appears the experiment is not complicated and results are clear. They >> >have observed no "delay" on the effect of the oscillating charge at >> >distance. >> >> ***{I obtained the paper and glanced over it. (I don't have time to wade >> through the math right now.) My impression is that this is a theoretical >> paper, describing experiments that *could* be done, not experiments that >> have actually been done. --MJ}*** > >Yes, you right here, there is no report about the experiment. May they done >it, but not give them here the "null" results. >> > > >> So the effect is propagating instantly. This is not surprising because, we >> know that classical electric theory accept that the presence of an electric >> charge or an magnetic field is sensed instantly at distance, say a magnetic >> field does not consume time to circle an solenoid, or if you have to >> solenoid coupled at distance, there would be no delay on induction. >> >> ***{Several points: >> >> (1) The principle of continuity (that no entity my come into existence out >> of nothing or vanish into nothing) is satisfied by any velocity, however >> great--even by velocities that are hundreds of millions of times the speed >> of light--but is *not* satisfied by "instantaneous" velocities. Thus >> superluminal transmission does not violate continuity: it merely violates >> the opinions of Albert Einstein. But "instantaneous" transmission *really >> does* violate continuity. (An object that moved instantaneously from point >> A to point B would, in essence, vanish from its position at A and reappear >> at B.) Thus we can speak of "virtually instantaneous" transmission, but it >> is erroneous to delete the qualifier and speak of "instantaneous" >> transmission. >> >> (2) A magnetic flux line is a material entity, analogous to a pearl >> necklace centered around a moving charge, in which the pearls are photons, >> all spinning in the same direction around the string that holds them >> together. (The direction of inside rotation is the same as the direction of >> charge movement.) As such, the limit velocity of translation of a magnetic >> flux line is dictated by the entities of which it is composed--photons--and >> is therefore c, the speed of light. > >I do not agree here. magnetic flux is not material. same a electric field. >It does not have momentum, IMO. ***{To say that a thing is material is to say that it is composed entities--to wit: things which have mass, occupy space, and are thus capable of exerting force. All forces are exerted by entities, and all entities have parts--which means: they are accumulations of lesser entities which, near the limits of understanding, are known simply as particles. Thus when you demonstrate the presence of a force, you demonstrate the presence of particles in collision. The precise nature of the particles, of course, must be inferred from the details of the specific situation. Thus when you observe that, by passing a permanent magnet near a wire, you can cause electrons to move, you demonstrate that a force is exerted within the wire, despite the fact that the visible portion of the permanent magnet is entirely outside the wire. Result: it is proper to infer that some sort of invisible structure exists in the space surrounding the permanent magnet, and that a portion of that invisible structure extends into the wire, where it interacts with the electrons and causes them to move. Since the lesser entities of which that structure is composed are elusive and extremely difficult to characterize, it is appropriate to refer to them as particles. The question then becomes a matter of what sort of particles we are talking about, and how they are arranged--i.e., what sort of structure do they form, in the space surrounding the permanent magnet? There is no possibility, however, that the forces in question--those which cause the electrons to move--are *not* impressed upon the electrons by virtue of collisions with other particles, for in that case the energy required would simply leap into existence out of nothing, in violation of the principle of continuity. --Mitchell Jones}*** I think there is no difference >between electric and magnetic field in this criteria (magnetic flux lines >is just an visualization, same is true for the electric field, you can >visualize >an electric field by lines. For example, you can say: if entering and exiting >lines trough a closed surface are equal, total charge inside is zero.) ***{The difference is that when we attempt to account for the properties of a magnetic field, we are forced to infer the existence of linear structures in the space surrounding the body to which the field is attached, whereas when we attempt to account for the properties of an electric field, it is sufficient to postulate that tiny particles with very specific properties are being hurled in straight lines outward from charges. What properties? Simple: (1) A negative charge throws off microparticles which I call *negites*, which move at hundreds of millions of times the speed of light. When they strike another negative charge, they are absorbed, giving that charge an impulse that tends to move it away from the charge which emitted the negite. When, on the other hand, they strike a positive charge, they cause it to emit two particles in the opposite direction, which travel at the same velocity as the negites and have the same mass. (2) A positive charge throws off microparticles which I call *posites*, which also move at hundreds of millions of times the speed of light. When they strike another positive charge, they are absorbed, giving that charge an impulse that tends to move it away from the charge which emitted the posite. When, on the other hand, they strike a negative charge, they cause it to emit two particles in the opposite direction, which travel at the same velocity as the posites and have the same mass. As a result of (1) and (2), like charges repel, while opposites attract. --Mitchell Jones}*** >> > >> (3) An electric field line is not a material entity: it is the path that >> would result if a test charge were placed at a specific point and then >> repeatedly displaced a differentially small distance in the direction of >> the Coulomb force resultant. Thus the velocity of translation of the >> Coulomb force, unlike that of the magnetic force, is not obstructed by >> limitations on the motion of photons: there are no photons incorporated >> into electric field lines, which have no material structure and hence no >> existence beyond that of mathematical abstractions. Instead, the Coulomb >> force is conveyed by *electric microparticles*--particles that radiate out >> from charges in straight lines, and, due to the observed absence of >> aberration of electric fields, must be enormously smaller and faster than >> any of the ordinary particles with which physics is familiar, including >> photons. > >I think we don't need microparticles to understand fields in general. I do >not >see an advantage to introduce particles to understand fields. ***{The advantage of treating fields as the result of elementary particle interactions is that you avoid violating the principle of continuity. When you treat a field as an entity without parts, on the other hand, you fall into the trap of imagining energy leaping into existence out of nothing. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >> (4) A gravitational field line is not a material entity: it is the path >> that would result if a test mass were placed at a specific point and then >> repeatedly displaced a differentially small distance in the direction of >> the gravitational force resultant. Thus the velocity of translation of the >> gravitational force, unlike that of the magnetic force, is not obstructed >> by limitations on the motion of photons: there are no photons incorporated >> into gravitational field lines, which have no material structure and hence >> no existence beyond that of mathematical abstractions. Instead, the >> gravitational force is conveyed by *ultramundane corpuscles* (particles >> that fly in from deep space in straight lines and have the effect of >> pushing nearby objects toward one another) and which, due to the observed >> absence of aberration of gravitational fields, must be enormously smaller >> and faster than any of the ordinary particles with which physics is >> familiar, including photons. >> >> --Mitchell Jones}*** > >This is based on Newtonian gravity if you omit particles. But a recent >paper "Do Gravitational Fields Have >Mass?" >(http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/9911007) predict the gravitational field >have a mass or equivalent, >results matches very good with experiments. I >think it would be not incorrect to assume the gravitational >field is an >extension of the body its belong. ***{The aether is a material medium that exists as an infinite series of substrates, each comprised of smaller and smaller particles, which I label as E1, E2, E3, etc. The first substrate, E1, consists of what I call etherons--extremely low mass particles which are subject to the influence of gravity, and are the core entities from which magnetic flux particles (photons) are constructed. What this means is that the gravitational field of the earth does not merely attract solids, liquids, and gases, but also attracts etherons. Result: there is a mass associated with a gravitational field which does not come from the matter at the center of the field. It is an error, however, to attribute that mass to the field itself. It is, in fact, merely the mass of the entrained etherons. --Mitchell Jones}*** >It is physical, but propagation of the gravity would be still infinite, >and does >not violate continuity, because, for example if you oscillate a mass to >observe >its gravitational effect at distance, there would be no delay, as the >gravitational field is bounded rigidly to the mass. There is no >transmission here. ***{If you treat a gravitational field as an entity without parts, you are forced to imagine energy leaping into existence out of nothing, in violation of continuity. Thus it is proper either (a) to treat it as an entity with parts, in which case motion of the mass at the center cannot be propagated instantaneously outward from the center, or else (b) to treat it as the effect of invisible and rapidly moving microparticles (e.g., of ultramundane corpuscles). Based on a consideration of the details of the situation, I opt for (b). --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >So I can deduce that the instantaneous sensing a change on a body at distance >does not violate continuity. Violation would occur when a *finite sized* body >i.e. a photon is transmitted instantaneously from a place to an other. Yes, >disappearing photon in a place and appearing in other place without passing >on neighborhood would violate continuity, as the instantaneous transmission >can be described so. > >But there would be no violation of continuity if an effect related to an >object >is sensed instantaneously at all the points on the path connecting the object >and the location it is sensed. Jumps only violate continuity. But in order to >have a clear jump, one need to have an object having no extension (out of >the volume its bounded) I think is hard to find a body having no extension. >Nothing is completely bounded in a volume. If it be, it presence would not >be sensed at neighborhood, at outside the volume it occupy and it will be >completely isolated from the continuum. This is not the case for real things. >As everything has extension, transmission concept become complicated. I >need to think more. :) ***{Yes. Think about whether the notion of entities without parts does or does not violate continuity. You will find, I think, that it does. Once you accept that, and begin to visualize entities as being composed of parts, you will realize that an effect is transmitted from one point to another within an entity only by means of collisions (e.g., between the parts of the entity), and, as such, must propagate at some finite velocity. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >Regards, > >hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 10:13:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17524; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 10:11:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 10:11:29 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 12:08:47 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Resent-Message-ID: <"elFAB.0.hH4.GJMHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31861 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{Normally I would not correct a structural error in a sentence that was merely due to the inadvertent omission of a word. However, since Hamdi is not a native speaker of English, I do not want to be a bad influence, and so I must note that the following sentence is wrong: "To say that a thing is material is to say that it is composed entities--to wit: things which have mass, occupy space, and are thus capable of exerting force." The word "composed" should have been followed by "of", but my brain got ahead of my fingers, and I inadvertently omitted it. The sentence should have read as follows: "To say that a thing is material is to say that it is composed of entities--to wit: things which have mass, occupy space, and are thus capable of exerting force." Sorry, Hamdi. :-( --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 11:49:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA09887; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 11:47:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 11:47:45 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <003a01bf3c1c$b76ba820$82441d26 fjsparber> References: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber><012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26@ fjsparber> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 13:45:12 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Resent-Message-ID: <"odGMu.0.LQ2.XjNHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31862 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >----- Original Message ----- >From: Mitchell Jones >To: >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 7:27 AM >Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >> >On Sun, 28 Nov 1999 15:33:41 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > >I didn't ask the question, Robin van Spaandonk did. :-) ***{I know. The reference to you was carried forward from Robin's post. Such things are handled in the background by my e-mail program. The only clue it offers is the > which preceded the sentence (in my post). That indicates it came from Robin rather than from me. Sorry for the misunderstanding. --MJ}*** > >My question is, related to photon (Raman-Type) scattering off of >Neutrinos. Are the Anti-Stokes lines of a few hundreths of an ev due >to molecules, or could they also be due to Photon-Neutrino scattering? > >And, would certain Laser photons scatter off of Neutrinos in a Dark >Hard Vacuum chamber? > >Regards, Frederick ***{Fred, I'm not a fan of the neutrino concept. Frankly, I'm not yet completely convinced that they exist. My recollection is that they were originally postulated to account for the fact that, in the beta decay of a specific isotope, the emitted electrons/positrons carry with them energies which are continuously variable up to some maximum, rather than all being emitted at a finite number of specific energy levels. This fact clashed with the already entrenched quantum mechanical assumption that electrons inside a nucleus must exist at discrete energy levels, in a manner analogous to those which they occupy when orbiting outside the nucleus. Given that assumption, it follows that an electron which was ejected from a nucleus should carry with it in the form of kinetic energy whatever potential energy it had at the discrete orbital which it occupied within the nucleus, and thus a continuous distribution of exit energies would not be observed. To account for the irritating fact that they *were* observed, therefore, someone (Pauli?) proposed that a virtually indetectible particle with near-zero mass and charge, the "neutrino," carried away the missing energy like a ghost. My problem with this postulate is simply the fact that it rests on extending the quantization idea into the nucleus, where it may not strictly apply--that is: the assumption that electrons and positrons inside a nucleus must exist at discrete energy levels, in a manner analogous to those which they occupy when orbiting outside the nucleus, seems implausible to me. Electrons and positrons, after all, are relatively light particles, and, in the crowded, chaotic environment of the nucleus, I can easily see them being continuously buffetted about in ways that would render their energies continuously variable. Result: in those cases where they were ejected from the nucleus, the energies which they carried away with them could also be continuously variable. Result: no neutrino. Admittedly, I am not firmly committed to the view that neutrinos do not exist. I simply am not yet convinced that they do. (Frankly, it isn't a subject that I have read very much about.) Since you seem to be this group's resident neutrino expert, what is your response to the above? What is the smoking-gun proof that neutrinos really do exist? Or, as I suspect, is belief in neutrinos akin to belief in witches and demons? :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.laurin.com/Content/Mar99/techScatter.html >> > >> >Since light will interact with charged particles, why can't this be an >> >explanation for the Hubble "constant"? >> >> ***{Light that has been frequency shifted by interaction with charged >> particles is also scattered. The scattering would smear out the images of >> distant objects, if it were the source of the Hubble frequency shift. If >> your goal is to jettison the "expanding universe" theory, there are, I >> think, several alternative ideas that are more plausible: >> >> (1) It may be that photons gradually lose energy with the passage of time, >> due to an accumulation of losses that are too tiny to measure in >> terrestrial laboratories. In that case, the Hubble constant--the observed >> redshift of light in proportion to our distance from the source--would not >> be due to a doppler shift, and hence would not indicate that the universe >> is expanding. >> >> (2) It may be that matter gradually accumulates energy with the passage of >> time. In that case, electron transitions in *old* matter would involve >> larger energy changes than those in young matter, and hence the "old" >> matter which we see through our telescopes--i.e., that which is closest to >> Earth--would emit at the highest frequencies. Result: since light from >> distant galaxies was emitted billions of years ago, by much younger matter, >> it would have been emitted at lower frequencies. >> >> (3) It may be that it is only the *visible* universe that is expanding. >> That is, as galaxies rush away from one another, they also give off massive >> amounts of energy. Logically, (a) the emitting galaxies will eventually >> emit *all* of their energy, and simply disappear, while (b) the emitted >> energy will condense to form hydrogen atoms in the voids which the galaxies >> leave behind as they rush away from one another. Result: the *visible* >> accumulations of matter--galaxies--are, in fact, always rushing away from >> one another, but, despite that, the universe is *not* expanding, due to the >> fact that the emitted matter builds up in the voids to form *new* galaxies. >> >> In my view (1) and (3) are certain to be true, while (2) is highly unlikely. >> >> --Mitchell Jones}*** >> >> > >> > >> >Regards, >> > >> >Robin van Spaandonk >> >> From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 14:45:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA17732; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 14:43:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 14:43:01 -0800 Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 14:42:55 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991130084628.008b0100 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"PFouS2.0.-K4.qHQHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31863 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: You are neglecting the fact that no velocity relative to another one can be faster then the speed of light. Plot your World Lines (light cone). If B is going .9c relative to A, and C is going .9c relative to B in the same direction, C is going about 1.8/1.81*c relative to A. Hank From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 15:25:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA10020; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:23:06 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:23:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:20:22 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine In-Reply-To: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"iG8zE2.0.QS2.NtQHu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31864 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I just finished an experiment in Nuclear Lab, using Cosmic rays as a radiation source. When an incoming proton hits a gas atom (Oxygen or Nitrogen in the ionosphere, about 300 km above the earth, it smashes it to smithereens(to be technical), resulting in a lot of Pi Mesons traveling at(very near) the speed of light. The Pi mesons have a lifetime of about 20 nanoseconds. The resulting decomposition product are mostly muons (also traveling at about the speed of light) which have a lifetime of about 2 microseconds. In the lab system you would expect them to travel a distance of (2*10^-6)*(3*10^8)=600 meters (d=t*c) before decaying. Yet I receive them in my detector in the lab 300000 meters away, where they decay in my NaI detector, and I can see them on a scope, and put them into a multi-channel-analyzer and plot their spectrum. The only way the muons could travel such a distance is if their time is much slower then mine, which is a definite proof of special relativity. I saw this with my own eyes. Connected things up with my own hands. It is an experiment which you could do at home if you have a photomultiplier and a dtector. Mine was a 3" cylinder of NaI. Fantastick!! The spectrum is relatively flat out to about 50 MeV, and it decays more or less linearly to about 70Mev. The experiment ran overnight, and I collected about 50000 mesons. Hank On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > As I see it your choices are two > > 1) Einsteins special relativity theory (SRT) is correct. > > 2) There is a preferred reference frame (which we might call the aether). > > Well, as far as we know. There are always other possibilities, but those > are the most likely. > > > This choice does not in any way > > rule out time dilation, Lorentz contraction, or most of the > > standard stuff that gets spoken of as proof for SRT. > > An ether, if it exists, would most likely not be detectable by any normal > system. AFAIK, if you had a system which could propagate a signal at > superluminal velocity, you could use that to measure how fast you were > moving relative to the ether. In other words, the superluminal effect is > probably Lorentz VARIANT, as opposed to invariant. > > > Or worse still, whereas in frame S event A occurs before event B, > > in frame S' event B occurs before event A. > > Classical causality violation. I fire a bullet, time elapses, it hits the > target. My counterpart, recessed in space and time, sees things > differently: the target is hit, time passes, and the bullet reenters the > gun. A good source for learning about this sort of thing is Taylor and > Wheeler's "Spacetime Physics." Easy to understand, and it is quite > informative. One must note, however, that these results are mathematical in > nature, not necessarily true to reality. We have never sent anything faster > than light* and seen whether or not time travel paradoxes occur or not. [My > opinion: FTL does not result in time travel.] > > > If it was possible for the causal connection > > between A and B to be propagated at a speed greater than c, so > > that the time between them was less than d/c, then since their > > relative timing as viewed from a moving frame can be adjusted > > by +/-(d/c), there would be some velocities (ie moving at just > > less than c in the direction of the propagation) for which B > > occurs before A and thus violates causality. > > Yes, within the scope of Einsteinian relativity. If there is a Lorentzian > ether frame, or its equivalent, there are no time travel effects, even if > you move faster than light. To say that since the mathematical theory is > supported to this point, and therefore must hold for objects moving faster > than light is bad form. A better way for scientists to put it is this way: > we do not know what effects will occur when an object moves faster than > light, assuming it can. As far as we know, it would travel backwards in > time, but we are not sure. Do an experiment, and lets find out. > > * in this sense. No superluminal effect has been tested for the telltale > signs of time travel paradoxes. > > --Kyle R. Mcallister > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 15:32:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11249; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:31:03 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:31:03 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Rest Mass of the Hydrogen Atom ...(physics/9911066) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 09:35:42 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <383E9623.681C615D verisoft.com.tr> In-Reply-To: <383E9623.681C615D verisoft.com.tr> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id PAA11210 Resent-Message-ID: <"5nOv5.0.gl2.q-QHu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31865 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 16:16:03 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: [snip] >This is a surprising paper calculating mass of the hydrogen atom precisely without using atomic fundamental constants (except h) by a simple calculation. Incredible isn't it? [snip] Then perhaps you could explain it to me. I keep getting the wrong answer, and also the wrong dimensions when I use his formulae. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 16:36:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA18461; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 16:29:32 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 16:29:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:30:03 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: hamdi ucar Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine In-Reply-To: <38438B9D.71F1310 verisoft.com.tr> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-VUEs.0.IW4.drRHu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31866 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hamdi In the lab, unless you have extreamly good instruments and experimental setup, it is very difficult to measure these quantities. Hank On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, hamdi ucar wrote: > > "Kyle R. Mcallister" wrote: > > > > One must note, however, that these results are mathematical in > > nature, not necessarily true to reality. We have never sent anything faster > > than light* and seen whether or not time travel paradoxes occur or not. [My > > opinion: FTL does not result in time travel.] > > I pointed 1 month ago to a paper on experiment the propagation of electric fields from oscillating (vibrating) charge on the axis of the oscillation. (said longitudinal). > Longitudinally, this not produce electromagnetic fields and the effect attenuate very fast by distance. See paper for the formula. > > Propagation Speed of Longitudinally Oscillating Gravitational and Electrical Fields > (http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9706082) > > > It appears the experiment is not complicated and results are clear. They have observed no "delay" on the effect of the oscillating charge at distance. So the effect is propagating instantly. This is not surprising because, we know that classical electri c theory accept that the presence of an electric charge or an magnetic field is sensed instantly at distance, say a magnetic field does not consume time to circle an solenoid, or if you have to solenoid coupled at distance, there would be no delay on indu ction. Or if you have a single loop of wire, if you apply a potential to ends, current start (to rise) immediately to flow. But to test this one should reduce the inductance of the loop which oppose to current build immediately. So I think it is testable anyway. > > What would be strange is the electric field obeys SR, and produce a delay, just like the loop was open somewhere at the moment of the voltage is applied, and close after waiting a while for not violate SR. Did Einstein miss something, or me? > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 17:26:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA01187; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:25:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:25:02 -0800 Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:24:55 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: Mitchell Jones Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"EHHMo2.0.TI.kfSHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31867 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell There really is no difference between electric and magnetic fields. It is all relative. An electric field situation viewed from a stationary system becomes a magnetic field situation when viewed from a moving one. Pretend you are an electron in a wire in a generator armature, and think of what you feel. Hank From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 17:28:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA02210; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:26:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:26:53 -0800 Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:01:27 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: Scott Little Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Reply from Mizuno In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19991130212803.009f3b40 mail.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"9befS2.0.NY.ThSHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31868 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Why is the heat transfered from the tube that much different whether the tube is full or 2/3 full of boiling liquid. I would think that the liquid and vapor phase temperatures are the same, and that the heat conductivity of the tube would quickly make the overall tube outside temperature uniform, unless it is quite long, with a large heat sink at the top? Hank From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 17:35:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA04825; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:34:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:34:30 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991201203238.007cc520 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 20:32:38 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Mitchell Jones From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"QT_kq3.0.DB1.boSHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31869 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:24 PM 12/1/99 -0800, hank scudder wrote: >Mitchell > There really is no difference between electric and magnetic >fields. It is all relative. An electric field situation viewed from a >stationary system becomes a magnetic field situation when viewed from a >moving one. Pretend you are an electron in a wire in a generator armature, >and think of what you feel. > >Hank There are several differences. They differ with respect to their divergence, and their curl (as when J is added), and also on their impact on materials. For example, the electric flux density (D) is not derived the same way as the magnetic flux density (B) when the polarizations are superimposed from the applied field intensities (E and H). Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 17:37:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA06101; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:35:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 17:35:56 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991201203522.007a1c70 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 20:35:22 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Reply from Mizuno In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19991130212803.009f3b40 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"amwSI1.0.EV1.ypSHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31870 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little quotes Mizuno: >I think you need not scratch the surface, just clean by aqua regia and >distilled water. Well, *I* think you should. Since you have several cathodes, you could try one without scrathing and if does not work, scratch the next one. Or if it is still intact, scratch it and try again. I do not understand why he said this. I think Ohmori is much more enthusiastic about scratching. I think you should do some electrolysis treatment the way Ohmori does, too. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 20:39:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA15166; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:37:50 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:37:50 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 15:34:37 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber> <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26@fjsparber> <3ov94s8o8qcliil8r9au57i1r8krodugtu@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id UAA15144 Resent-Message-ID: <"kpxnx2.0.si3.SUVHu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31871 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:27:08 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >>Since light will interact with charged particles, why can't this be an >>explanation for the Hubble "constant"? > >***{Light that has been frequency shifted by interaction with charged >particles is also scattered. The scattering would smear out the images of >distant objects, if it were the source of the Hubble frequency shift. If Is it perhaps possible that if the energy loss per interaction were only very small, that the scattering angle would also be very small? Furthermore, scattering within a "cloud" of particles still results in the largest number / deg. of scattering angle, going straight ahead (Binomial distribution?) Besides, I get the distinct impression, looking at photos of very distant galaxies, that they are indeed somewhat fuzzy (though I must admit that the very farthest all seem to have a blue tint, while I would expect them, if the light had been scattered, to have a red tint). Or perhaps the colouring is a side effect of the photographic process - does anyone know if photographic emulsions are more sensitive to blue than to red? (I.e. very faint images would then tend to be blue). >your goal is to jettison the "expanding universe" theory, there are, I >think, several alternative ideas that are more plausible: > >(1) It may be that photons gradually lose energy with the passage of time, >due to an accumulation of losses that are too tiny to measure in >terrestrial laboratories. In that case, the Hubble constant--the observed >redshift of light in proportion to our distance from the source--would not >be due to a doppler shift, and hence would not indicate that the universe >is expanding. This is sort of what I'm getting at. The interactions with the charged particles providing the mechanism whereby they lose energy. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 20:39:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09025; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:37:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:37:44 -0800 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 21:40:35 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Reply from Mizuno In-reply-to: <3.0.6.32.19991201203522.007a1c70 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912020439.VAA07271 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <3.0.5.32.19991130212803.009f3b40 mail.eden.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"w2-kX.0.tC2.OUVHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31872 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:35 PM 12/1/99 -0500, you wrote: >Scott Little quotes Mizuno: > >>I think you need not scratch the surface, just clean by aqua regia and >>distilled water. > >Well, *I* think you should.... Don't forget to chant a few incantations. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 20:46:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA16328; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:45:14 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:45:14 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991117224227.006a82e4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:42:27 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine In-Reply-To: References: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"0ttzi2.0.x-3.NbVHu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31874 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:20 PM 12/1/99 -0800, hank scudder wrote: >I just finished an experiment in Nuclear Lab, using Cosmic rays as a >radiation source. When an incoming proton hits a gas atom (Oxygen or >I saw this with my own eyes. Connected things up with my own >hands. It is an experiment which you could do at home if you >have a photomultiplier and a dtector. Mine was a 3" cylinder >of NaI. Did you put the detector in a shielded chamber to get the natural gamma background down? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 20:47:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA16244; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:45:03 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:45:03 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991117223047.006a6b54 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:30:47 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Reply from Mizuno In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991201203522.007a1c70 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19991130212803.009f3b40 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"hY2WJ1.0.ez3.8bVHu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31873 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:35 PM 12/1/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Scott Little quotes Mizuno: > >>I think you need not scratch the surface, just clean by aqua regia and >>distilled water. > >Well, *I* think you should. Since you have several cathodes, you could try >one without scrathing and if does not work, scratch the next one. Or if it >is still intact, scratch it and try again. I agree...thanks. >I do not understand why he said this. I think Ohmori is much more >enthusiastic about scratching. > >I think you should do some electrolysis treatment the way Ohmori does, too. That also sounds like a good idea, especially if I don't get excess heat right off at 200+ volts. I'm going to want to try everything they've ever thought was important. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 20:47:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA15000; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:46:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:46:18 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991117224635.006a0180 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:46:35 -0600 To: hank scudder From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Reply from Mizuno Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.5.32.19991130212803.009f3b40 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"59xxW2.0.Ig3.PcVHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31875 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:01 PM 12/1/99 -0800, hank scudder wrote: >Scott > Why is the heat transfered from the tube that much different >whether the tube is full or 2/3 full of boiling liquid. I would think that >the liquid and vapor phase temperatures are the same, and that the heat >conductivity of the tube would quickly make the overall tube outside >temperature uniform, unless it is quite long, with a large heat sink at >the top? Good points, Hank. Perhaps you are right and the effect would be negligible. However, the vessel is made of glass, which is a poor conductor. This means the exposed part of the vessel (above the electrolyte surface) will have room temp air on one side and hot vapor on the other. I can imagine that the temp of that part of the vessel wall would be about midway between the air and vapor temps. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 20:54:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA17210; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:53:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:53:45 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991117225354.006a6b54 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:53:54 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"JdltM1.0.XC4.OjVHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31876 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:24 PM 12/1/99 -0800, hank scudder wrote: >Mitchell > There really is no difference between electric and magnetic >fields. It is all relative. An electric field situation viewed from a >stationary system becomes a magnetic field situation when viewed from a >moving one. Hank, that is certainly true for straight-line motion of charges. But what about current flowing in a loop? Even if you transform yourself to a frame that is rotating around with one particular electron and thus demagnetize it's field, there are still the other electrons across the way on the other side of the loop that are moving w.r.t you. So it seems that you can create situations in which the magnetic field has an absolute existence. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 21:24:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA29444; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 21:22:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 21:22:24 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:22:20 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> In-Reply-To: <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 VAA29425 Resent-Message-ID: <"BBQU_3.0.zB7.G8WHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31877 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 01 Dec 1999 17:31:49 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: [snip] >I do not agree here. magnetic flux is not material. same a electric field. It does not have momentum, IMO. This statement, I think goes right to the heart of physics. It also leads to the following questions which I put to all on this list: Does potential energy have mass (I think this is the same as field energy)? Does kinetic energy have mass? Be warned, your answers will elicit more questions. :> >I think there is no difference between electric and magnetic field in this criteria (magnetic flux lines is just an visualization, same is true for the electric field, you can visualize an electric field by lines. For example, you can say: if entering an d exiting lines trough a closed surface are equal, total charge inside is zero.) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 21:28:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA21411; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 21:25:42 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 21:25:42 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 15:53:17 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id VAA21336 Resent-Message-ID: <"dJtAZ2.0.PE5.JBWHu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31878 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:20:22 -0800 (PST), hank scudder wrote: [snip] >have a lifetime of about 20 nanoseconds. The resulting decomposition >product are mostly muons (also traveling at about the speed of light) >which have a lifetime of about 2 microseconds. In Is this a "lifetime", or a half-life? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 23:58:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA02501; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:54:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:54:58 -0800 Message-ID: <006401bf3c50$b987d3c0$82441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber><012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26@fjsparber> Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:05:38 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"vOFMb3.0.uc.HNYHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31879 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Mitchell Jones To: Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 11:45 AM Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Mitchell Jones wrote: > > Admittedly, I am not firmly committed to the view that neutrinos do not > exist. I simply am not yet convinced that they do. (Frankly, it isn't a > subject that I have read very much about.) Since you seem to be this > group's resident neutrino expert, what is your response to the above? What > is the smoking-gun proof that neutrinos really do exist? Cold Fusion and possibly even Hot Fusion for starters. The D + D ---> He4 + ~ 24 Mev Reaction Cannot happen without a neutrino participation. I Propose D + e- + localized neutrino-antineutrino pair production creating a neutral D* particle similar to your propose "Protoneutron". Forgive the use of D Star (which is used in optical detector technology) which then can "tunnel" into another deuteron forming Hydrogen 4 (1H4) + neutrino which beta decays to 2He4 + e- + antineutrino + Energy most of which (~24 Mev) is carried off as mass-energy or kinetic energy of the neutrinos, Thus you get Cold Fusion and localized heat sans Gammas or Neutrons. Interaction of Neutral D* or H* with nuclei above Atomic Weight of ~ 100 can result in add-on and/or Fission Reactions, such as cleanup of Rad wastes also. The Plethora of positive results in CF-OU-LENR experiments, as well as Mills' Hydrino-Hydrino Hydride (his fractional orbit theory woud be tractable if there was neutrino-antineutrino pair production below ~ 1,000 deg K included in it) and low energy "Stripping" of Deuterons at plasma temperatures as low as 0.5 ev or less, tends to substantiate this approach. Nature makes the Electron-Positron pair from a 1.02 Mev Photon, and using the FINE STRUCTURE CONSTANT "ALPHA" 0.00729729: Alpha* 1.02E6 ev = 7443 ev (86 Million Deg K) Alpha*7443 ev = 54.4 ev (631,000 Deg K) Alpha*54.4 ev = 0.396 ev (460 Deg K or photons of ~3.1 to 6.2 microns wavelength) Indicating that Lepton Pairs whether or not they have charge,SHOULD FORM at these Resonance energies or therabouts. If you get too far from these Resonance Energies (up or down), you miss Mitch Swartz's "Optimum Operating Point" OOP. Note that the magic number, 27.2 ev (the total energy of the Bohr Electron V = k*q/R) is Alpha^2 times the 0.511E6 ev energy of the electron. :-) >Or, as I suspect, > is belief in neutrinos akin to belief in witches and demons? :-) Are you calling Mother Nature a Witch? That's why they call 'em Leptons. :-) Regards, Frederick > > --Mitchell Jones}*** > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 00:23:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA10476; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 00:22:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 00:22:30 -0800 Posted-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 02:12:34 +0300 (MEST) Message-ID: <3845B84E.C5A35EAD verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 02:07:42 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Fundementals - was Re: Superluminal Transmission References: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6Op7T.0.cZ2.6nYHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31880 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In order to understand design rules of the universe and the matter, I think it would be useful to try to make there rules if we have to opportunity to make a small universe. :) We would choose to do it simple as possible. We would not put different kind of objects, components, different functions, different behaviors to design the fundamental components. If we do so, we need to specify their interaction separately, for every kin d of interaction. More important is we need to embed all this information in their design, because there would be no rule checker or computer to force these component act as we intend from outside. Like the DNA on biological entities, every fundamental pr operties of the physical entities should be coded inside the design of fundamental components. We are totally free to design as we wish, nothing is defined before the design, no dimensions, no time, no conservation rules. Everything should be defined by the behavior of the components, they should have their own reality, their own dimensions, not th e ones we provide to them. For example it would be incorrect to say "Let be time and space dimensions". This would be our design rules. If intelligent beings will evolve in this environment, they would have right to ask "Why we live in such a universe with such dimensions?", and the answer they would find be "because our basic components are designed to have this dimensions. Dimensions ar e the variables or freedoms of the mechanism (functions) of our basic components" Otherwise, if we had externally provided the dimensions (not embed in the design of their basic components) to this environment, they will we be no scientifically satisfacto ry answer to this question. Only answer would be "Our universe is designed so". If we did successfully our design, fundamental physical constants will not have arbitrary values, everything in this universe would be self explanatory. For example if electrons create magnetic field while moving, the nature and the reason of this magneti c field would be available in the design of the electron. This would be great guide for the scientist evolved on this universe. They will not satisfied by finding the exact relation between mass and gravity but they will sure to find how the gravity is a part of their basic constituents. If the components their directly observe (microscopically and macroscopically) are dynamic behavior, i.e., moving, they will be sure that basic constituents are not static entities, the time variable is embedded in their functions, the set equations which define them. This is why I find describing everything by fields idea promising. If fields are produced by matter components, it would be logical to think that matter components are made by fields. Otherwise how it is possible to encode the matter components, say elect rons to have fields? On the other hand if one choose the particle way instead of fields (like M.J), this time, It may be two solutions: 1) Everything (basic constituents and basic interactions) would be made by the *same* micro/virtual particles so everything would be simply type self arrangements of these basic particles. This sound good but there are difficulties: These particles should embed dimensional properties of the continuum they exist. They should embed characteristics or mechanism od their self organization types. For example, in the case random-like self organization, These particles should embed and random/chaotic behavior in their structures. There would would be also a deadlock here: If basic constituent of the matter thought as particle, the question of what this particle is made, may remain as an open question. This lead to the endless "particles made of particles" itera tions. This will not satisfy our design criteria, IMO. 2) Only interactions (I named them previously as extensions) made of these particles, and they are not primary type of components. This relax the responsibility these tiny particle carry all the design info of the physical world their exist and made it. But this time, the basic constituents of the matter should also carry the mechanism to produce these particles. The design getting complicated even on the basic level. To avoid this overhead one can introduce the ether concept which is the sea of these mi cro/vitual particles. Now the matter constituents dont need have the design info and the mechanism to create these particles but only to interact them. But this time the whole design is split to two parts: material constituents and ether constituents. mat ter constituents will not exist by them selves and need the ether environment. Ether constituents may exists stand alone but does not carry the fundamental characteristics of the material they content. I mean conservation laws or the metrics of the contin uum can not be extracted by the ether it self. Once you design the ether, and next the matter constituent from the ether rules. Ether host the matter, ok but this not simply hosting, but the whole design rules of the matter co! nstituents will base to ether. A serious complication. I have suspicious on this solution. Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] > > ***{To say that a thing is material is to say that it is composed of > entities--to wit: things which have mass, occupy space, and are thus > capable of exerting force. All forces are exerted by entities, and all > entities have parts--which means: they are accumulations of lesser entities > which, near the limits of understanding, are known simply as particles. > Thus when you demonstrate the presence of a force, you demonstrate the > presence of particles in collision. The precise nature of the particles, of > course, must be inferred from the details of the specific situation. [snip] I will replay to the other issues on your letter if time permits. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 04:25:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA14299; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 04:23:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 04:23:54 -0800 Message-ID: <00cf01bf3cc8$74c8b6a0$82441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Fuel Capsule Surprise Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 05:22:48 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"qEilP1.0.JV3.PJcHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31881 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A mix of Lithum (Metal), Potassium Carbonate, and Oil, in a Pressure Capsule made using 1/2 inch iron pipe with caps heated to about 900 deg K should make an interesting CF-OU experiment: Li + K2CO3 + CxHy ----> Li, + LiH, Li2O, + KH + CO + H2 + K2CO3 + C .... :-) All the fixins for the reaction, H* + Li7 ---> 2 He4 + ~ 17.0 Mev where H* is the quasineutron. Lynn Kurtz, (your local Shaman) can guide you on the right portions and incantations. :-) WITH SAFETY DISCLAIMER! Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 06:36:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA10462; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 06:35:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 06:35:05 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991202083210.01b8a530 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 08:32:10 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: SR explains magnetic field Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"mu8hx3.0.JZ2.PEeHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31882 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In "Electricity and Magnetism" by Purcell (p. 174), there is a mind-blowing explanation of the origin of the magnetic field which shows that it is fundamentally electrical in nature AND entirely due to the Lorentz contraction of Special Relativity! motion of positive charges -----> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <----- motion of negative charges ^ direction of force on test charge | Q--------> moving test charge (positive) A test charge Q moves along a wire in which a current is flowing. We represent the flowing current as the balanced sum of positive charges moving to the left and negative charges moving to the right. In the inertial frame of the wire, it appears to be neutral so there is no electrostatic interaction between the test charge and the wire. Since the positive current is flowing to the right in the figure above, the right-hand rule tells us that the magnetic field at the charge, Q, is going into the screen. Since the test charge is moving to the right, the right-hand rule tells us the resulting VxB force on the test charge will be towards the wire, as indicated in the figure. motion of positive charges --> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <---------- motion of negative charges ^ direction of force on test charge | Q stationary test charge (positive) Now let's transform to a frame that is moving along with the test charge. What does the wire look like now? Since we're now moving in the same direction as the positive charges, their velocity w.r.t. us is lower. But the velocity of the negative charges w.r.t us is higher. Due to DIFFERING Lorentz contractions, this makes the positive charges appear somewhat further spaced apart and the negative charges somewhat closer spaced. In other words, the wire now appears to have a net negative charge. This net negative charge produces an attractive electrostatic force towards the wire...equal to the magnetic force observed in the other frame. 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 Dec 2 07:18:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08842; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:11:02 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:11:02 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <00e201bf3cdf$6e969880$82441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Fuel Capsule Surprise Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 08:07:30 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"Z_hjy3.0.-92.4meHu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31883 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A mix of Lithium (metal) plus Boric Acid (H3BO3) and Potassium Carbonate (K2CO3) when heated to about 900 deg K will produce Li, Li2O, LiH, H2, K, KH, CO, B, C, etc. With an excess of Lithium the air that was in the capsule will form more Li2O and Li3N plus leaving some Argon which should help catalyze the H* (H Star) formation. Then H* + Li7 ----> 2 He4 + ~17.0 Mev and H* + B10 ----> Li7 + He4 + ~2.78 Mev On subsequent heating the reactions should kick in, but, about the only way to shut it off is to quench it in cold water. :-) The oil (CxHy) that the Lithium is stored in shouldn't bother things much. WITH SAFETY DISCLAIMER! Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 07:34:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA27616; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:33:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:33:00 -0800 Message-ID: <384691B0.E4A45F1B bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 10:35:12 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: SR explains magnetic field References: <3.0.1.32.19991202083210.01b8a530 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-DWiD.0.Ll6.h4fHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31884 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > In "Electricity and Magnetism" by Purcell (p. 174), there is a mind-blowing > explanation of the origin of the magnetic field which shows that it is > fundamentally electrical in nature AND entirely due to the Lorentz > contraction of Special Relativity! Fascinating perspective! Since most of you don't subscribe to vortexb-l, I shall risk flames by posting here a message originally sent there. Did you know that Maxwell's "Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism" is available in paperback form from Amazon.com? Terry <><><><><><><><><><><> Excerpted from: http://www.sightings.com/ufo5/gwen.htm <><><><><><><><><><> The Hertzian Conspiracy In late 1864, James Clerk Maxwell published his epic material on electromagnetic waves. His material dealt not only with electrical and magnetic waves, but also the relativistic/ etherial psycho-active component of these waves (representing electromagnetics of the second order and above). The equations also included transformations that enabled the change from inertial frames of reference to non-inertial frames of reference. Maxwell's original equations were written in Quaternion notation, a complex mathematical system available at that time before Vector Analysis was introduced by Oliver Heaviside. Today's generalized equivalent of Quaternions is Tensors. In short, Maxwell's original work gave the necessary information for gravitational propulsion and psychoactive devices. Someone somewhere recognized this, for shortly after his death, the mathematician Oliver Heaviside, the chemist Willard Gibbs, and physicist Heinrich Hertz decided to "edit" or "interpret" Maxwells famous equations which were, in the original form, the foundations of electromagnetics and Unified Field Theory (UFT). This "unholy trio, especially Heaviside, disregarded the Quaternions or Scalar components of Maxwells original equations, because they represented potentials and not fields. He thought potentials were akin to "mysticism", because "everybody knows that fields contain mass, and mass cannot be created from apparently nothing, which is what potentials are, both literally and mathematically; they are an accumulation or reservoir of energy. Furthermore, not only did they throw away the gravitational component with the Quatern- ion/Scalar, but also postulated that gravitation and electro- magnetism were mutually exclusive, not interdependent. That was the death blow to subsequent efforts by scientists to realize a functioning unified field theory. Because of this one act, electromagnetism was reduced from its original five dimensions to only four: X, Y, Z, and time. The element of G was removed. Because of this deliberate act, twenty-two other errors exist today in electromagnetic theory. The very concepts of force, mass and charge are ill-defined, and the so-called "static" electrical charge has been discovered by Quantum mechanics not to be static at all, but to move rotationally by virtue of the quantum mechanical spin. Finally, adding insult to injury, the so-called "imaginary components" of Maxwells original equations as well as the mutilated version of the equations have also been discarded or ignored. With this last error, the door to hyperspacial domains was forever closed, for the present mathematics and physics of electromagnetic theory do not allow for hyperspacial domains (domains out- side of three dimensions), superluminal signals (signals that exceed the speed of light or are infinite in speed), and a unified field theory. The edited version of Maxwells work, which every physicist and engineer has had to contend with, discards electrogravitation, and avoids the unification of gravitation and electromagnetics. It also prevents the direct engineering of gravitation, space-time, time flow rates, free energy devices, and quantum changes, which is viewed by the altered equations that are vector-based as only a statistical change. The quaternion approach captures the ability to utilize electromagnetics and produce local curvature of spacetime. Heaviside wrote a subset of Maxwell's equations where this capability is excluded. Dr. Henry Monteith has independently discovered that Maxwell's original quaternion theory was a unified field theory. Einstein assumed, because he only had access to the altered equations, that curving spacetime could only be achieved by the weak gravitational force due to mass, that the local frame would always be a Lorentz frame, which would mean that all operations would be constrained to "conservation laws of physics." In the 1960's the Hertz (Hz) replaced Cycles Per Second. Since, then everyone thinks that all electromagnetic waves are hertzian. Only the upper portion of the spectrum before Infra- red contains Hertzian waves. ELF and ULF are not; waves in biosystems and natural phenomena are not Hertzian in nature. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 07:42:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA31919; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:41:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:41:35 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 09:38:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: References: <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"LOMbO.0.bo7.kCfHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31885 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:22 PM 12/2/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Does potential energy have mass (I think this is the same as field energy)? Surely it does. For example, the reason 8Be weighs more than the two 4He nuclei it disintegrates into is because of the ~92 keV of potential energy in the 8Be nucleus that is released upon disintegration. Also, one can come up with the rest mass of the electron by integrating the energy in its Coulomb field from infinity down to the classical radius 2.8E-15 meters (which is how they got the classical radius in the first place). >Does kinetic energy have mass? It is easy to show that kinetic energy is equivalent to mass. If you accept that E = mc^2 and then replace m with the proper SR expression for relativistic mass: m = m0/(1-v^2/c^2)^0.5 you get: E = (m0/(1-v^2/c^2)^0.5)*c^2 expanding this with a binomial series we get: E = m0*c^2 + 1/2*m0*v^2 + .... Recognize the second term? It means that kinetic energy results from the relativistic increase in an object's mass. 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 Dec 2 07:58:08 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA04658; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:56:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:56:40 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <3846A522.474149F5 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:58:10 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? References: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber> <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"7Hedb1.0.i81.uQfHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31886 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber wrote: Since light will interact with charged particles, why can't this be an explanation for the Hubble "constant"? Mitchell Jones wrote: (1) It may be that photons gradually lose energy with the passage of time, due to an accumulation of losses that are too tiny to measure in terrestrial laboratories ... In that case, the Hubble constant--the observed redshift of light in proportion to our distance from the source--would not be due to a doppler shift, and hence would not indicate that the universe is expanding. (2) It may be that matter gradually accumulates energy with the passage of time. In that case, electron transitions in *old* matter would involve larger energy changes than those in young matter ... (3) It may be that it is only the *visible* universe that is expanding. That is, as galaxies rush away from one another, they also give off massive amounts of energy ... In my view (1) and (3) are certain to be true, while (2) is highly unlikely. Robin quotes Mitchell: (1) It may be that photons gradually lose energy with the passage of time, due to an accumulation of losses that are too tiny to measure in terrestrial laboratories. Robin wrote: This is sort of what I'm getting at. The interactions with the charged particles providing the mechanism whereby they lose energy. Mitchell wrote: ***{Fred, I'm not a fan of the neutrino concept. Frankly, I'm not yet completely convinced that they exist. My recollection is that they were originally postulated to account for the fact that, in beta decay ... What is the smoking-gun proof that neutrinos really do exist? Frederick wrote: Cold Fusion and possibly even Hot Fusion for starters ... The Plethora of positive results in CF-OU-LENR experiments, as well as Mills' Hydrino-Hydrino Hydride (his fractional orbit theory woud be tractable if there was neutrino-antineutrino pair production below ~ 1,000 deg K included in it) and low energy "Stripping" of Deuterons at plasma temperatures as low as 0.5 ev or less, tends to substantiate this approach. On Wed, 01 Dec 1999 17:31:49 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: I do not agree here. magnetic flux is not material. same a electric field. It does not have momentum, IMO. Robin wrote: This statement, I think goes right to the heart of physics. It also leads to the following questions which I put to all on this list: Does potential energy have mass (I think this is the same as field energy)? Does kinetic energy have mass? If the frequency changes dependant upon reference frame (doppler effect), then surely the mass is also dependant upon reference frame. Hi All, This most interesting exchange prompts me to throw in my 2 cents worth. First of all, I agree with Mitchell's scepticism about neutrinos. My objection is based on the abysmal lack of experimental data for the existence of neutrinos, including Reynes' work, the explosion of supernova what's--its--number, and the recent Super K effort. I don't recall Randall Mills advancing neutrinos for an explanation of anything. Perhaps Fred could quote some passage from Mills' work. Secondly, E = mc^2 is a DESIGN equation, and all it says is that when a certain amount of mass disappears, so much energy appears; its "truth" is strictly in the eye of the beholder (although, in defiance of Hume, I accept post hoc ergo propter hoc in this case). E = mc^2 says nothing about whether energy has mass (or vice versa). Mitchell wrote: "In my view (1) and (3) are certain to be true, while (2) is highly unlikely." I think (2) is the most likely: On page 108 of "Seeing Red", Halton Arp writes "In 1964, Fred Hoyle and Jayant Narlikar proposed ... a theory of mass which had its origin in Mach's principle ... As time goes on it [the electron] receives signals from a volume of space that enlarges as the velocity of light ... Its mass grows in proportion to the number and strength of the signals it receives." Arp's primary interest seems to be experiment, not theory; and he has adopted Hoyle's ideas because they provide a plausible explanation for the physical association (certainly proved to my satisfaction in "Seeing Red") between high redshift quasars and their low redshift "parent" galaxies. As the electron "ages", it becomes more massive. Arp (and Hoyle) consider this to be an experimental observation like water always flowing down hill. This mass increase has several consequences: p. 227 "When a less massive electron makes a transition between atomic orbits, the photon involved has lower energy and the resulting spectral line is redshifted." I don't think anyone will disagree that a small amount of energy can release a large amount of energy in the combustion of hydrogen and oxygen. By E = mc^2, some mass must be lost by a subatomic particle, for the sake of discsussion, let's say an electron. Randall Mills proposes to gain more energy from the same amount of hydrogen by reacting the hydrogen with potassium ions in the presence of a catalyst. Again, a plausible (useful?) mechanism is the production of a lower-mass higher-velocity electron. The evidence presented by Peter Graneau ("Infinite Energy", Volume 5, Issue 25, 5-99, p. 9) for the liberation of chemical energy by "the ejection of ions from the atmospheric arc through the strong encircling magnetic field should generate MHD (magneto hydrodynamic) power" may also produce lower-mass electrons. The tapping of the Zero Point Field could occur by producing lower-mass electrons which are then regenerated by the ZPF. Thinking about processes (devices) form the viewpoint of producing lower-mass electrons could be useful. Maybe! Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 08:13:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA10500; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 08:11:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 08:11:40 -0800 From: JNaudin509 aol.com Message-ID: <0.ee14ea36.2577f42a aol.com> Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 11:11:22 EST Subject: Re: SR explains magnetic field To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: little eden.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 30 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA10480 Resent-Message-ID: <"1PfRT3.0.-Z2.yefHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31887 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dans un courrier daté du 02/12/99 15:36:26 Paris, Madrid, little eden.com a écrit : > In "Electricity and Magnetism" by Purcell (p. 174), there is a mind-blowing > explanation of the origin of the magnetic field which shows that it is > fundamentally electrical in nature AND entirely due to the Lorentz > contraction of Special Relativity! Hi Scott and all, Have you seen this site : http://www.geocities.com/nayado/ This may interest you...... Best Regards Email: Jnaudin509 aol.com Overunity Web site: http://members.aol.com/jnaudin509/index.htm eGroup:http://www.egroups.com/group/jlnlabs/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 08:37:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18188; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 08:36:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 08:36:34 -0800 Message-Id: <199912021636.LAA03094 fh105.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:31:09 -0600 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: <"ZMfSJ3.0.2S4.I0gHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31888 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > You are neglecting the fact that no velocity relative to another one can > be faster then the speed of light. Plot your World Lines (light cone). If > B is going .9c relative to A, and C is going .9c relative to B in the same > direction, C is going about 1.8/1.81*c relative to A. True enough. But this does not prove that superluminal velocities are unachievable by a unique means. It also does not disagree with the idea of a preferred reference frame. If said frame exists, you will not see its effects, due to time dilation and length contraction. Think if it like this: the preferred reference frame we are imagining is the propagation frame of TEW's (transverse EM waves; all freq.'s of light). Call this frame Z. Now, light (or whatever form) always moves at speed C with respect to the Z frame. Now, if you move with respect to frame Z, obviously the velocity of light with respect to you is not isotropic. However, since you are moving, your length is contracted and time is dilated depending on your gamma factor. So you see the velocity of light with respect to you to be isotropic even though it is really anisotropic. This also provides some explanation for why light speed is measured to be constant aboard and off board the moving vehicle...light ALWAYS moves at C in free space*, never faster or slower, but only with respect to frame Z. Of course, we do not know if this theory is correct or not. Nor do we yet know if special relativity is correct. Time and experimentation will determine the answer. But to deny superluminal effects outright because of a purely mathematical analysis is not good form. Physicist John Bell apparently agreed. * under normal circumstances. --Kyle From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 09:21:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA01056; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 09:18:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 09:18:41 -0800 Message-Id: <199912021718.MAA02588 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Stan Gleeson Died Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 12:12:51 -0000 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: "Eugene F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"-NKM73.0.QG.mdgHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31889 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: All, I have just heard the very sad news that Stan Gleeson of the Cincinnati Group died at age 48 on Monday night, November 28, 1999. The immediate cause of death was a brain aneurism, acording to Don Holloman, who conveyed the news to me. Stan entered the hospital in a coma on Sunday night, Nov. 28. Stan's cancer (some kind of leukemia, I believe) had been in remission, which makes this even more tragic an unexpected. Don Holloman, who works with the group, told us that work will continue on tile melting discharge experiments and transmutation experiments. Stan is survived by his father, Pat, who is about 80. I will miss Stan. He was a very good man who worked hard and loved life. Sincerely, Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 11:25:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA04275; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 11:12:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 11:12:49 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1267960675==_ma============" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991202083210.01b8a530 mail.eden.com> Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 13:09:34 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: SR explains magnetic field Resent-Message-ID: <"FcfBv.0.h21.mIiHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31890 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --============_-1267960675==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >In "Electricity and Magnetism" by Purcell (p. 174), there is a mind-blowing >explanation of the origin of the magnetic field which shows that it is >fundamentally electrical in nature AND entirely due to the Lorentz >contraction of Special Relativity! > > motion of positive charges -----> >+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > <----- motion of negative charges > > ^ direction of force on test charge > | > Q--------> moving test charge (positive) > >A test charge Q moves along a wire in which a current is flowing. We >represent the flowing current as the balanced sum of positive charges >moving to the left and negative charges moving to the right. ***{The positive charges in a wire do not move. The electron is the moving unit of electric charge in a wire. --MJ}*** In the >inertial frame of the wire, it appears to be neutral ***{The reality is that the charges would not move if there were not a potential gradient along the wire. The direction of the gradient, of course, is parallel to the wire, and, since the electrons are moving to the left, the gradient is positive to the left and negative to the right. The wire can never be truly neutral while a current is flowing, due to the presence of that potential gradient. --MJ}*** so there is no >electrostatic interaction between the test charge and the wire. ***{When the positive test charge is placed at a given point near the wire, it attracts electrons in the wire while repelling the protons. If both the electrons and protons in the wire were rigidly fixed in place, there would be no electrostatic interaction. However, some of the electrons are free to move, and they will readjust their positions to bring themselves closer to the positive charge. On the left side of the test charge, that readjustment will be in the opposite direction to the drift of the electrons in the wire, while on the right side it will be in the same direction. Result: as the test charge moves to the right, it will be accompanied by a rolling readjustment of the electrons in the wire, in which they will first speed up, and then slow down. --MJ}*** Since the >positive current is flowing to the right in the figure above ***{I repeat: there is no positive current in the figure. The positive charges are the protons. The protons are in the atomic nuclei, and the nuclei of the atoms in a copper wire are not free to move. Therefore the above statement is obvious, utter nonsense. If you intend to discuss the physics of this situation, you need to abandon the notion of conventional current, and talk about the reality of what is actually going on. --MJ}*** , the >right-hand rule tells us that the magnetic field at the charge, Q, is going >into the screen. ***{The use of the so called "right hand rule" is not required, if you will simply develop a visual model of what a magnetic field *is*. To assist you in doing that, let's begin by imagining a smoothly flowing current (non-turbulent) of some liquid, down a channel. Under such circumstances, friction with the walls of the channel will give a zero velocity to particles of fluid that are actually touching the walls, a slight, positive velocity to the particles that are touching them, and so on as we progress outward toward the center of the channel, where the fluid particles will be moving with some maximum velocity. And, of course, as we approach the opposite bank of the flow, velocities will slow down again. An ASCII art representation of the situation follows. (Note: Viewers of ASCII art should always switch to a fixed length font such as Courier, in order to see the image without distortion.) =================================== > -> --> ---> ----> -----> ----> ---> --> -> > =================================== In the above, the banks of the channel are represented by the strings of equal signs, and the velocity of the current, at various distances from the banks, is represented by the lengths of the arrows, which are intended as vectors. Now suppose that we drop thousands of ping-pong balls into the current, at random locations. What, if any, will be the pattern of their rotations, as viewed from above? The answer: the ones above the center of the channel will rotate counter clockwise, and those that below the center will rotate in the clockwise direction. The reason: the portion of the fluid stream closest to the center of the flow will always be moving faster than the portion that is further from the center. If we now extend our thinking from two dimensions to three, and imagine, say, a flow with circular symmetry that is ten feet wide, moving through the ocean at a depth of 1000 feet, it is easy to see that similar considerations will apply: any objects that are carried along by the flow will rotate in such a way that the direction of inside rotation--i.e., the side closest to the center of the flow--will rotate in the same direction as the flow. Now let's go a step further: suppose that the objects that are introduced into the flow have an intrinsic spin--i.e., that they are rotating when they are introduced into the flow, and have sufficient angular momentum to continue spinning for awhile. Will they reorient their spin axes so that the direction of their inside rotation is in the same direction as the flow? The answer is yes: that is the stable equilibrium state; the opposite is an unstable equilibrium; and all of the in-between states experience a torque that tends to twist the axis of rotation toward the stable state. Well, then, what happens to the spinning spheres once they have all lined up so that their inside rotations are in the direction of the current flow? The answer: they will attractively interact to form circular loops around the center of the current flow--quasi flux lines, if you will. Why? Because as they spin in the fluid, they will each suck in a downstream of fluid at their polar axes, which will then flow across the surface toward the equator of the sphere, and then be thrown away from the sphere along its equatorial plane. As a result of the suction at the poles of the rotating spheres, the north pole of one sphere will attract the south pole of the sphere above it, and they will become coupled together by the fluid flow. Thus the north pole of one sphere will become fluid coupled to the south pole of the sphere above it, and the north pole of that sphere will couple to the south pole of the one above *it*, and so on, until the spheres couple themselves together into a closed loop, like a pearl necklace. Each of the "pearls" in the necklace will be spinning with its inside rotation in the direction of the flow of fluid in the channel. Result: a structure analogous to a loop of flux--a "flux line"--will be formed. How do actual flux lines form? Simple: there exists a particulate medium, the aether, which pervades the universe, and is composed of an infinite series of substrates, E1, E2, E3, etc., with the particles of each successive substrate being smaller than those of the previous one. Just as the objects of ordinary experience are immersed in an ocean of air, so molecules of air are immersed in an ocean of E1 particles, and the particles of E1 are immersed in an ocean of E2 particles, etc. Result: when excess electrons move through a copper wire, they stir up parallel currents in E1, E2, etc. Since the particles of E1--which I call etherons--have an intrinsic spin and float in the ocean of E2 particles, the effect of the moving electrons is to stir a current in E2, which then causes the particles of E1--the etherons--to snap together, thereby forming closed loops of flux centered on the axis of the current flow and perpendicular to it. As I noted the other day, Coulomb forces can be explained as follows: (1) A negative charge throws off microparticles which I call *negites*, which move at hundreds of millions of times the speed of light. When they strike another negative charge, they are absorbed, giving that charge an impulse that tends to move it away from the charge which emitted the negite. When, on the other hand, they strike a positive charge, they cause it to emit two particles in the opposite direction, which travel at the same velocity as the negites and have the same mass. (2) A positive charge throws off microparticles which I call *posites*, which also move at hundreds of millions of times the speed of light. When they strike another positive charge, they are absorbed, giving that charge an impulse that tends to move it away from the charge which emitted the posite. When, on the other hand, they strike a negative charge, they cause it to emit two particles in the opposite direction, which travel at the same velocity as the posites and have the same mass. As a result of (1) and (2), like charges repel, while opposites attract. Since each electron is emitting negites in vast numbers, it follows that it contains an immense number of them, stored--a supply of "ammo," as it were--for its future emissions. And since the excess electrons that are in motion along the axis of the wire are being wildly jostled about as they bounce willy-nilly from one copper atom to another, they experience huge and chaotic velocity variations--i.e., accelerations. Result: vast numbers of negites are thrown off, not at hundreds of millions of times the speed of light, but at pedestrian velocities: they arise, within and around the copper wire, in a vast cloud, much as dust billows out behind a speeding dump truck, as it carries a load of dirt down a bumpy road. Result: the negites are carried along in the pattern of E2 flow, which, as I have already explained, is influenced by the spin patterns of the etherons, which are lined up in closed loops around the center of the axis of the electron movement. Here is what happens in the example which you set up: (1) As your positive test charge moves along, parallel to the copper wire, in a direction opposite the flow of electrons in the wire, the excess protons which it contains will approach flux lines. (2) The inside rotation of those flux lines will be parallel to the direction of electron movement in the wire and they will be surrounded by negites that are moving in the same way that the flux lines are rotating. Result: as the excess protons in the test charge approach flux lines, they will be struck by negites that are moving away from the axis of the copper wire. (3) Since when a negite strikes a proton it causes it to move *in the opposite direction to the motion of the negite*, it follows that the positive test charge will tend to move toward the wire. Once you have incorporated the above described visual model into your thinking about magnetic fields, you will have no further need for the so called "right hand rule." --Mitchell Jones}*** Since the test charge is moving to the right, the >right-hand rule tells us the resulting VxB force on the test charge will be >towards the wire, as indicated in the figure. ***{This is correct because the test charge is positive. If it were negative, the direction of the force would be away from the wire. --MJ}*** > > motion of positive charges --> >+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > <---------- motion of negative charges > > ^ direction of force on test charge > | > Q stationary test charge (positive) > >Now let's transform to a frame that is moving along with the test charge. >What does the wire look like now? Since we're now moving in the same >direction as the positive charges, their velocity w.r.t. us is lower. ***{As noted earlier, the positive charges are immobile--fixed in the nuclei of the atoms in the wire--and hence have a velocity of zero with respect to the wire. If you switch to the frame of the test charge, then the wire, and hence the protons in the wire, are moving to the left at some velocity. Whether that velocity is "lower" depends on which direction you arbitrarily declare to be positive. If you declare motion to the left to be positive, then their velocity with respect to the test charge is higher; and if you declare velocity to the right to be positive, then their velocity is lower. (A negative velocity is lower than a zero velocity.) But such stipulations have *nothing whatsoever* to do with the physics of what is going on. --MJ}*** >the velocity of the negative charges w.r.t us is higher. ***{The above statement tells me that you have arbitrarily decreed motion to the left (with respect to the positive charge) to be positive. Thus the excess electrons in the wire, from the perspective of a positive coordinate axis extending to the left of the test charge, are moving to the left with a positive velocity Ve, while the protons are now moving to the left with a positive velocity Vp, such that Ve > Vp. --MJ}*** Due to DIFFERING >Lorentz contractions, this makes the positive charges appear somewhat >further spaced apart and the negative charges somewhat closer spaced. ***{For the benefit of those not versed in the history of physics, Scott is here referring to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction, which was invoked to explain away the absence of an aether wind, as demonstrated by the Michelson-Morely experiment, and was later incorporated into Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity by postulating that lengths are contracted in the direction of motion, in accordance with l' = l[sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)]. The idea here is that by applying such a formula to the relative motions of electrons and protons in a circuit with respect to the test charge, we will find an intensification of the density of the negative charges with respect to the positive ones, leading to a net attractive force pulling the positive test charge toward the wire, which will have the same effect as the magnetic field. By this argument, therefore, the various formulae which, historically, have been used to describe magnetic fields, are alleged to be be mathematically equivalent to the electric field formulae of STR--which means: they give the same answers when used in calculations. --MJ}*** In >other words, the wire now appears to have a net negative charge. This net >negative charge produces an attractive electrostatic force towards the >wire...equal to the magnetic force observed in the other frame. ***{This is an ingenious argument for the mathematical equivalence of the STR formulations and the classical ones, but it does not address the important question--which is: what are the particulate interactions, in the real world, which cause these mathematical formulations to give true answers? In other words, if we attempt to visualize the underlying particulate behaviors, will we be forced to use the notion of invisible flux lines that exist in closed loops around moving charges, or not? If it turns out that we must do that--and I believe we must--then the fact that the STR formulations give the same answers, in most or all cases, as the classical ones, will be merely an interesting oddity. Bottom line: the question of whether magnetic flux lines exist is, at root, a question about what we must visualize in terms of particulate interactions in the real world, to explain both our experimentally measured data points and the mathematical constructs that have been fitted to those data points. As such, the issue has *nothing whatsoever* to do with whether one set of curve-fitted mathematical constructs gives the same answers as another set of curve-fitted mathematical constructs. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > >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) --============_-1267960675==_ma============ Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii" >In "Electricity and Magnetism" by Purcell (p. 174), there is a mind-blowing >explanation of the origin of the magnetic field which shows that it is >fundamentally electrical in nature AND entirely due to the Lorentz >contraction of Special Relativity! > > motion of positive charges -----> >+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > <<----- motion of negative charges > > ^ direction of force on test charge > | > Q--------> moving test charge (positive) > >A test charge Q moves along a wire in which a current is flowing. We >represent the flowing current as the balanced sum of positive charges >moving to the left and negative charges moving to the right. ***{The positive charges in a wire do not move. The electron is the moving unit of electric charge in a wire. --MJ}*** In the >inertial frame of the wire, it appears to be neutral ***{The reality is that the charges would not move if there were not a potential gradient along the wire. The direction of the gradient, of course, is parallel to the wire, and, since the electrons are moving to the left, the gradient is positive to the left and negative to the right. The wire can never be truly neutral while a current is flowing, due to the presence of that potential gradient. --MJ}*** so there is no >electrostatic interaction between the test charge and the wire. ***{When the positive test charge is placed at a given point near the wire, it attracts electrons in the wire while repelling the protons. If both the electrons and protons in the wire were rigidly fixed in place, there would be no electrostatic interaction. However, some of the electrons are free to move, and they will readjust their positions to bring themselves closer to the positive charge. On the left side of the test charge, that readjustment will be in the opposite direction to the drift of the electrons in the wire, while on the right side it will be in the same direction. Result: as the test charge moves to the right, it will be accompanied by a rolling readjustment of the electrons in the wire, in which they will first speed up, and then slow down. --MJ}*** Since the >positive current is flowing to the right in the figure above ***{I repeat: there is no positive current in the figure. The positive charges are the protons. The protons are in the atomic nuclei, and the nuclei of the atoms in a copper wire are not free to move. Therefore the above statement is obvious, utter nonsense. If you intend to discuss the physics of this situation, you need to abandon the notion of conventional current, and talk about the reality of what is actually going on. --MJ}*** , the >right-hand rule tells us that the magnetic field at the charge, Q, is going >into the screen. ***{The use of the so called "right hand rule" is not required, if you will simply develop a visual model of what a magnetic field *is*. To assist you in doing that, let's begin by imagining a smoothly flowing current (non-turbulent) of some liquid, down a channel. Under such circumstances, friction with the walls of the channel will give a zero velocity to particles of fluid that are actually touching the walls, a slight, positive velocity to the particles that are touching them, and so on as we progress outward toward the center of the channel, where the fluid particles will be moving with some maximum velocity. And, of course, as we approach the opposite bank of the flow, velocities will slow down again. An ASCII art representation of the situation follows. (Note: Viewers of ASCII art should always switch to a fixed length font such as Courier, in order to see the image without distortion.) =================================== > -> --> ---> ----> -----> ----> ---> --> -> > =================================== In the above, the banks of the channel are represented by the strings of equal signs, and the velocity of the current, at various distances from the banks, is represented by the lengths of the arrows, which are intended as vectors. Now suppose that we drop thousands of ping-pong balls into the current, at random locations. What, if any, will be the pattern of their rotations, as viewed from above? The answer: the ones above the center of the channel will rotate counter clockwise, and those that below the center will rotate in the clockwise direction. The reason: the portion of the fluid stream closest to the center of the flow will always be moving faster than the portion that is further from the center. If we now extend our thinking from two dimensions to three, and imagine, say, a flow with circular symmetry that is ten feet wide, moving through the ocean at a depth of 1000 feet, it is easy to see that similar considerations will apply: any objects that are carried along by the flow will rotate in such a way that the direction of inside rotation--i.e., the side closest to the center of the flow--will rotate in the same direction as the flow. Now let's go a step further: suppose that the objects that are introduced into the flow have an intrinsic spin--i.e., that they are rotating when they are introduced into the flow, and have sufficient angular momentum to continue spinning for awhile. Will they reorient their spin axes so that the direction of their inside rotation is in the same direction as the flow? The answer is yes: that is the stable equilibrium state; the opposite is an unstable equilibrium; and all of the in-between states experience a torque that tends to twist the axis of rotation toward the stable state. Well, then, what happens to the spinning spheres once they have all lined up so that their inside rotations are in the direction of the current flow? The answer: they will attractively interact to form circular loops around the center of the current flow--quasi flux lines, if you will. Why? Because as they spin in the fluid, they will each suck in a downstream of fluid at their polar axes, which will then flow across the surface toward the equator of the sphere, and then be thrown away from the sphere along its equatorial plane. As a result of the suction at the poles of the rotating spheres, the north pole of one sphere will attract the south pole of the sphere above it, and they will become coupled together by the fluid flow. Thus the north pole of one sphere will become fluid coupled to the south pole of the sphere above it, and the north pole of that sphere will couple to the south pole of the one above *it*, and so on, until the spheres couple themselves together into a closed loop, like a pearl necklace. Each of the "pearls" in the necklace will be spinning with its inside rotation in the direction of the flow of fluid in the channel. Result: a structure analogous to a loop of flux--a "flux line"--will be formed. How do actual flux lines form? Simple: there exists a particulate medium, the aether, which pervades the universe, and is composed of an infinite series of substrates, E1, E2, E3, etc., with the particles of each successive substrate being smaller than those of the previous one. Just as the objects of ordinary experience are immersed in an ocean of air, so molecules of air are immersed in an ocean of E1 particles, and the particles of E1 are immersed in an ocean of E2 particles, etc. Result: when excess electrons move through a copper wire, they stir up parallel currents in E1, E2, etc. Since the particles of E1--which I call etherons--have an intrinsic spin and float in the ocean of E2 particles, the effect of the moving electrons is to stir a current in E2, which then causes the particles of E1--the etherons--to snap together, thereby forming closed loops of flux centered on the axis of the current flow and perpendicular to it. As I noted the other day, Coulomb forces can be explained as follows: (1) A negative charge throws off microparticles which I call *negites*, which move at hundreds of millions of times the speed of light. When they strike another negative charge, they are absorbed, giving that charge an impulse that tends to move it away from the charge which emitted the negite. When, on the other hand, they strike a positive charge, they cause it to emit two particles in the opposite direction, which travel at the same velocity as the negites and have the same mass. (2) A positive charge throws off microparticles which I call *posites*, which also move at hundreds of millions of times the speed of light. When they strike another positive charge, they are absorbed, giving that charge an impulse that tends to move it away from the charge which emitted the posite. When, on the other hand, they strike a negative charge, they cause it to emit two particles in the opposite direction, which travel at the same velocity as the posites and have the same mass. As a result of (1) and (2), like charges repel, while opposites attract. Since each electron is emitting negites in vast numbers, it follows that it contains an immense number of them, stored--a supply of "ammo," as it were--for its future emissions. And since the excess electrons that are in motion along the axis of the wire are being wildly jostled about as they bounce willy-nilly from one copper atom to another, they experience huge and chaotic velocity variations--i.e., accelerations. Result: vast numbers of negites are thrown off, not at hundreds of millions of times the speed of light, but at pedestrian velocities: they arise, within and around the copper wire, in a vast cloud, much as dust billows out behind a speeding dump truck, as it carries a load of dirt down a bumpy road. Result: the negites are carried along in the pattern of E2 flow, which, as I have already explained, is influenced by the spin patterns of the etherons, which are lined up in closed loops around the center of the axis of the electron movement. Here is what happens in the example which you set up: (1) As your positive test charge moves along, parallel to the copper wire, in a direction opposite the flow of electrons in the wire, the excess protons which it contains will approach flux lines. (2) The inside rotation of those flux lines will be parallel to the direction of electron movement in the wire and they will be surrounded by negites that are moving in the same way that the flux lines are rotating. Result: as the excess protons in the test charge approach flux lines, they will be struck by negites that are moving away from the axis of the copper wire. (3) Since when a negite strikes a proton it causes it to move *in the opposite direction to the motion of the negite*, it follows that the positive test charge will tend to move toward the wire. Once you have incorporated the above described visual model into your thinking about magnetic fields, you will have no further need for the so called "right hand rule." --Mitchell Jones}*** Since the test charge is moving to the right, the >right-hand rule tells us the resulting VxB force on the test charge will be >towards the wire, as indicated in the figure. ***{This is correct because the test charge is positive. If it were negative, the direction of the force would be away from the wire. --MJ}*** > > motion of positive charges --> >+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > <<---------- motion of negative charges > > ^ direction of force on test charge > | > Q stationary test charge (positive) > >Now let's transform to a frame that is moving along with the test charge. >What does the wire look like now? Since we're now moving in the same >direction as the positive charges, their velocity w.r.t. us is lower. ***{As noted earlier, the positive charges are immobile--fixed in the nuclei of the atoms in the wire--and hence have a velocity of zero with respect to the wire. If you switch to the frame of the test charge, then the wire, and hence the protons in the wire, are moving to the left at some velocity. Whether that velocity is "lower" depends on which direction you arbitrarily declare to be positive. If you declare motion to the left to be positive, then their velocity with respect to the test charge is higher; and if you declare velocity to the right to be positive, then their velocity is lower. (A negative velocity is lower than a zero velocity.) But such stipulations have *nothing whatsoever* to do with the physics of what is going on. --MJ}*** >the velocity of the negative charges w.r.t us is higher. ***{The above statement tells me that you have arbitrarily decreed motion to the left (with respect to the positive charge) to be positive. Thus the excess electrons in the wire, from the perspective of a positive coordinate axis extending to the left of the test charge, are moving to the left with a positive velocity Ve, while the protons are now moving to the left with a positive velocity Vp, such that Ve > Vp. --MJ}*** Due to DIFFERING >Lorentz contractions, this makes the positive charges appear somewhat >further spaced apart and the negative charges somewhat closer spaced. ***{For the benefit of those not versed in the history of physics, Scott is here referring to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction, which was invoked to explain away the absence of an aether wind, as demonstrated by the Michelson-Morely experiment, and was later incorporated into Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity by postulating that lengths are contracted in the direction of motion, in accordance with l' = l[sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)]. The idea here is that by applying such a formula to the relative motions of electrons and protons in a circuit with respect to the test charge, we will find an intensification of the density of the negative charges with respect to the positive ones, leading to a net attractive force pulling the positive test charge toward the wire, which will have the same effect as the magnetic field. By this argument, therefore, the various formulae which, historically, have been used to describe magnetic fields, are alleged to be be mathematically equivalent to the electric field formulae of STR--which means: they give the same answers when used in calculations. --MJ}*** In >other words, the wire now appears to have a net negative charge. This net >negative charge produces an attractive electrostatic force towards the >wire...equal to the magnetic force observed in the other frame. ***{This is an ingenious argument for the mathematical equivalence of the STR formulations and the classical ones, but it does not address the important question--which is: what are the particulate interactions, in the real world, which cause these mathematical formulations to give true answers? In other words, if we attempt to visualize the underlying particulate behaviors, will we be forced to use the notion of invisible flux lines that exist in closed loops around moving charges, or not? If it turns out that we must do that--and I believe we must--then the fact that the STR formulations give the same answers, in most or all cases, as the classical ones, will be merely an interesting oddity. Bottom line: the question of whether magnetic flux lines exist is, at root, a question about what we must visualize in terms of particulate interactions in the real world, to explain both our experimentally measured data points and the mathematical constructs that have been fitted to those data points. As such, the issue has *nothing whatsoever* to do with whether one set of curve-fitted mathematical constructs gives the same answers as another set of curve-fitted mathematical constructs. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > >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) --============_-1267960675==_ma============-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 11:54:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17210; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 11:52:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 11:52:31 -0800 Message-ID: <011901bf3d07$20463280$82441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Fuel Capsule Surprise Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 12:51:33 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"eZu4t2.0.pC4._tiHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31891 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ingredients: Lithium Metal Boric Acid (H3BO3) Potassium Carbonate (K2CO3) Paraffin Wax (CxHy) Using an excess of Lithium will sequester the Oxygen forming Li2O and release K, B, H, and C atoms. Heated to ~ 900 deg K the wax will "crack" and release H2 and form a Carbon Char. The H2 will react with the Li, B, and K forming the Hydrides LiH and KH and Boranes (BxHy) or Lithium Borohydride (LixByHz). The H Star (H*) the Quasineutron, if formed by K Catalysis can react with the Lithium and Boron: H* + Li7 ----> 2 He4 + ~ 17.0 Mev H* + B10 ----> Li7 + He4 + ~2.78 Mev H* + B11 ----> 3 He4 + ~ 6.1 Mev Dry-mixed in the right proportions, sealed in a pipe "capsule" and heated, Maybe? WITH SAFETY DISCLAIMER! Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 13:10:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA07287; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 13:07:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 13:07:44 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1267953775==_ma============" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991202083210.01b8a530 mail.eden.com> Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 15:04:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: SR explains magnetic field Resent-Message-ID: <"M8ifo3.0.gn1.V-jHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31892 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --============_-1267953775==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >[snip] >Due to DIFFERING >>Lorentz contractions, this makes the positive charges appear somewhat >>further spaced apart and the negative charges somewhat closer spaced.In >>other words, the wire now appears to have a net negative charge. This net >>negative charge produces an attractive electrostatic force towards the >>wire...equal to the magnetic force observed in the other frame. ***{In my earlier post I was noncommittal about whether the above reasoning was valid within an STR framework, as I preferred to think about it some more. Now that I have done that, however, I am convinced that it is a fallacious application of the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction. The reason: it is only an object in motion, not the path that it is following, which is foreshortened in the direction of motion. This means the diameters of the moving electrons will contract in the direction of their motion by more than the diameters of the protons will contract, with the degree of the contraction being in accordance with l' = l[sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)]. It does not mean, however, that the distance between an electron and the electron behind it will contract: the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction applies only to material bodies in motion, not to the empty space between them. Thus this argument is invalid even within the framework of STR assumptions from which it was taken. (I have numerous disagreements with the STR formalism itself, but they are irrelevant to the present question.) --Mitchell Jones}*** >> >> >> >>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) --============_-1267953775==_ma============ Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii" [snip] Due to DIFFERING >Lorentz contractions, this makes the positive charges appear somewhat >further spaced apart and the negative charges somewhat closer spaced.In >other words, the wire now appears to have a net negative charge. This net >negative charge produces an attractive electrostatic force towards the >wire...equal to the magnetic force observed in the other frame. ***{In my earlier post I was noncommittal about whether the above reasoning was valid within an STR framework, as I preferred to think about it some more. Now that I have done that, however, I am convinced that it is a fallacious application of the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction. The reason: it is only an object in motion, not the path that it is following, which is foreshortened in the direction of motion. This means the diameters of the moving electrons will contract in the direction of their motion by more than the diameters of the protons will contract, with the degree of the contraction being in accordance with l' = l[sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)]. It does not mean, however, that the distance between an electron and the electron behind it will contract: the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction applies only to material bodies in motion, not to the empty space between them. Thus this argument is invalid even within the framework of STR assumptions from which it was taken. (I have numerous disagreements with the STR formalism itself, but they are irrelevant to the present question.) --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > >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) --============_-1267953775==_ma============-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 20:28:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA27718; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 20:26:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 20:26:31 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 15:26:27 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber><012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26@fjsparber> <006401bf3c50$b987d3c0$82441d26@fjsparber> In-Reply-To: <006401bf3c50$b987d3c0$82441d26 fjsparber> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 UAA27698 Resent-Message-ID: <"uBOac.0.0n6.tPqHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31893 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:05:38 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: [snip] >Cold Fusion and possibly even Hot Fusion for starters. > >The D + D ---> He4 + ~ 24 Mev Reaction Cannot happen without a neutrino participation. > >I Propose D + e- + localized neutrino-antineutrino pair production creating a neutral >D* particle similar to your propose "Protoneutron". Forgive the use of D Star (which is >used in optical detector technology) which then can "tunnel" into another deuteron forming >Hydrogen 4 (1H4) + neutrino which beta decays to 2He4 + e- + antineutrino + Energy >most of which (~24 Mev) is carried off as mass-energy or kinetic energy of the neutrinos, > >Thus you get Cold Fusion and localized heat sans Gammas or Neutrons. But you would get betas with a spread of energies, as in all beta decay reactions, and these are apparently not evident in CF reactions. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 20:54:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA03259; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 20:52:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 20:52:31 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 15:52:28 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448@fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0@mail.eden.com> Status: O X-Status: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 UAA03233 Resent-Message-ID: <"7_-C9.0.mo.FoqHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31894 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 02 Dec 1999 09:38:26 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 04:22 PM 12/2/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >>Does potential energy have mass (I think this is the same as field energy)? > >Surely it does. For example, the reason 8Be weighs more than the two 4He >nuclei it disintegrates into is because of the ~92 keV of potential energy >in the 8Be nucleus that is released upon disintegration. Also, one can >come up with the rest mass of the electron by integrating the energy in its >Coulomb field from infinity down to the classical radius 2.8E-15 meters >(which is how they got the classical radius in the first place). Ok, then, what is the mass of the potential energy represented by the potential of the electron relative to the the proton in a hydrogen atom in it's ground state? (See below before replying). > >>Does kinetic energy have mass? > >It is easy to show that kinetic energy is equivalent to mass. If you >accept that E = mc^2 and then replace m with the proper SR expression for >relativistic mass: > > m = m0/(1-v^2/c^2)^0.5 > >you get: > > E = (m0/(1-v^2/c^2)^0.5)*c^2 > >expanding this with a binomial series we get: > > E = m0*c^2 + 1/2*m0*v^2 + .... > >Recognize the second term? It means that kinetic energy results from the >relativistic increase in an object's mass. Ok, now I let the electron approach the proton, converting potential energy into kinetic energy (net no mass change in the system). When it arrives, I convert it's kinetic energy into rest mass (I use E=mc^2, and can do this with 100 % efficiency :), and bring it to a standstill at a distance of 1.5 F from the core of the proton. What is the mass of my "new" atom? What portion of this is due to the mass of the proton alone? What portion of this is due to the mass of the electron alone? How much mass did I create when stopping the electron? Other? Please express masses in amu, or MeV as appropriate. Note: While the above seems petty at first glance, it is going somewhere... I just hope I don't forget where before we get to the end of the line ;). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 22:10:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA20094; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 22:09:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 22:09:48 -0800 From: JNaudin509 aol.com Message-ID: <0.3357416a.2578b8a5 aol.com> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 01:09:41 EST Subject: What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: vortexb-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 30 Resent-Message-ID: <"mqGHi1.0.kv4.hwrHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31895 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All, What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? Does the list has been completly removed/erased/killed ...? :-( Regards Jean-Louis Naudin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 23:21:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA02898; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 23:20:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 23:20:50 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:18:52 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Q8Cm53.0.Cj.HzsHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31896 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:52 PM 12/3/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Ok, now I let the electron approach the proton, converting potential energy >into kinetic energy (net no mass change in the system). When it arrives, I >convert it's kinetic energy into rest mass (I use E=mc^2, and can do this >with 100 % efficiency:), and bring it to a standstill at a distance of 1.5 >F from the core of the proton. >What is the mass of my "new" atom? It's late so I could be dreaming but...since you haven't let any of the potential energy radiate away, which is the usual occurence when an H atom forms, the new "atom" has the same mass as the separate constituents (assuming you leave the converted KE mass in the atom). >What portion of this is due to the mass of the proton alone? same portion as the free proton's mass >What portion of this is due to the mass of the electron alone? same portion as the free electron's mass >How much mass did I create when stopping the electron? Pardon me, but I don't know what 1.5 F is. If you'll permit me to change that to the Bohr radius, I can quote the value from memory: 27.2 eV >Other? The new "atom" also has -27.2 eV of potential energy, whose negative mass precisely cancels the mass you somehow converted from the KE when you stopped the electron. Again, I assumed you left the converted KE mass in this "atom"...it can be the rod that connects the proton and electron. When a H atom forms normally, I believe it ends up 13.6 eV lighter than the separate proton and electron masses because the system necessarily radiates away 13.6 eV of energy when the electron drops into the -27.2 eV potential well that we call the ground state. The electron retains 13.6 eV of kinetic energy in the ground state so the net energy of the ground state is -13.6 eV. Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 04:16:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA14852; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 04:14:12 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 04:14:12 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991203071045.007d39a0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 07:10:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Those who dont learn from the past ..... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"GdNSy2.0.-d3.JGxHu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31897 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On the importance of doing things correctly. http://208.138.42.193/forum/a38477b820988.htm Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 05:22:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA15538; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 05:21:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 05:21:26 -0800 Message-ID: <015e01bf3d99$a7b65be0$82441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Natural Cold Fission of Lithium and Cold Fusion of Potassium Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 06:18:44 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0157_01BF3D56.40AFAD40" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"H2Pem.0.co3.MFyHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31898 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_0157_01BF3D56.40AFAD40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Perhaps Kervran was on the right track all along: The Cold Fusion Reaction: H* + 19K39 ----> 20Ca40 + Neutrino + e- + energy with the neutrion carrying off most of the energy, thus sans gammas or a high energy beta (e-). Note the Na/K ratio of nearly 28:1 in seawater , yet the Dead Sea and Great Salt Lake Na/K ratio is ~ 8:1 or less. http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/geol/Li.html http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/geol/K.html http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/geol/Na.html The Fission Reaction: H* + 3Li7 ---> 2 2He4 + Neutrino + ~16.0 Mev is also reflected in the Low Abundance of Lithium in seawater. Regards, Frederick ------=_NextPart_000_0157_01BF3D56.40AFAD40 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Periodic Table - WebElements lithium geological data.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Periodic Table - WebElements lithium geological data.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/geol/Li.html [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/geol/Li.html Modified=C03BEA3F953DBF01B6 ------=_NextPart_000_0157_01BF3D56.40AFAD40-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 07:20:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA11700; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 07:18:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 07:18:58 -0800 Message-ID: <3847DFEF.FAA58388 bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 10:21:19 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? References: <0.3357416a.2578b8a5 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"A8_5k3.0.ks2.XzzHu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31899 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: JNaudin509 aol.com wrote: > > Hi All, > > What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? > Does the list has been completly removed/erased/killed ...? :-( > > Regards > > Jean-Louis Naudin I think BB's having some server problems. Vortexb was down for a while also. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 08:01:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA23619; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 08:00:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 08:00:49 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <006401bf3c50$b987d3c0$82441d26 fjsparber> References: <012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26 fjsparber><012901bf39f9$354c5c60$70441d26@ fjsparber> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:57:27 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? Resent-Message-ID: <"c3hSr2.0.zm5.na-Hu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31900 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >----- Original Message ----- >From: Mitchell Jones >To: >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 11:45 AM >Subject: Re: Why not Neutrinos Too? > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >> >> Admittedly, I am not firmly committed to the view that neutrinos do not >> exist. I simply am not yet convinced that they do. (Frankly, it isn't a >> subject that I have read very much about.) Since you seem to be this >> group's resident neutrino expert, what is your response to the above? What >> is the smoking-gun proof that neutrinos really do exist? > >Cold Fusion and possibly even Hot Fusion for starters. ***{When CF has been demonstrated to take place--which, at present, it hasn't--there will be a contest between opposing theories, in an attempt to explain it. One of those theories will be my protoneutron theory, which does *not* require neutrinos to explain CF. Instead, neutrinos are merely a side issue. If they exist, then they will be involved in some of the protoneutron reactions; if not, not. --MJ}*** > >The D + D ---> He4 + ~ 24 Mev Reaction Cannot happen without a neutrino >participation. ***{Why not? I see the neutrino as basically a ghost which the proponents of "quantum mechanics" invoke when they need to explain away nuclear radiation that does not exhibit "quantized" energy levels. If it has some property beyond that, something which can assist in explaining how the above reaction can take place at low temperatures, what is it? --MJ}*** > >I Propose D + e- + localized neutrino-antineutrino pair production >creating a neutral >D* particle similar to your proposed "Protoneutron". ***{There is a very simple issue here: does hydrogen have electron orbits below the innermost Bohr radius (the n = 1 level), and, if so, are they stable? According to orthodox quantum mechanics, such orbits are impossible, because electrons literally cannot exist in the region between the n = 1 level and the nucleus. (In K-capture, by this view, the electron simply vanishes from its position in the n = 1 orbit and reappears in the nucleus.) According to Randell Mills, such orbits are possible, and some of them--i.e., all of the orbits where n = 1/m and m is an integer--are stable. Such orbits result in hydrogen atoms that are shrunken to various degrees, which he terms "hydrinos." According to the protoneutron model, which I put forth on sci.physics.fusion about 5 years ago, it is possible for electrons to exist in the region between the n = 1 level and the nucleus, but those orbits are *wildly unstable*. Result: the only way an electron can linger there under relatively ordinary conditions of temperature and pressure (i.e., conditions which you and I can achieve in our home laboratories) is when a hydrogen nucleus and an electron are somehow inserted into a solid state lattice where there isn't enough room for the electron to orbit at the n = 1 level. (As occurs, for example, when a proton meets an electron within a loaded region of a palladium cathode.) In that case, the electron spirals down to 'grazing altitude' above the nucleus, forming a *wildly unstable*, electrically neutral particle which I call a 'protoneutron'. Once the protoneutron (symbolized by pn) exists, then it can act like a neutron, mediating nuclear reactions with other atoms, particularly those that have weak shell structures (such as 1D2). We can obtain, for example: 1D2 + pn --> 2He3 + 3.08 MeV beta The protoneutron, being neutral, can carry the proton into the D nucleus without being influenced by the Coulomb repulsion. The e- particle, being outside the nucleus, is then spat out. Result: a 3.08 MeV beta which is quickly transformed into heat, as it bounces around inside the lattice. The protoneutron theory solves the production of 2He4 the same way as the production of 2He3, by asking: "What happens when a deuteron meets an electron and there isn't enough room for the electron to orbit at the n = 1 radius?" My answer: the electron spirals down to grazing altitude above the deuterium neucleus, forming a wildly unstable particle which I call a deuteroneutron. Once the deuteroneutron (symbolized by dn) exists, then in a cathode loaded from heavy water we can obtain: 1D2 + dn --> 2He4 + 23.7 MeV beta The dn, like the pn in the first example, is electrically neutral and carries the deuteron into the nucleus without being influenced by Coulomb repulsion. As in the earlier case, the beta bounces around in the lattice, giving up its energy as heat. Note: in experiments of the Case type, a pn or dn would be formed when an atom of 1H1 or 1D2 had sufficient kinetic energy (due to the temperature within the cell) so that it passed through a lattice opening which was too small to permit the n = 1 orbit, was collapsed as a result, and then became wedged inside a unit cell which was too small for the n = 1 orbit to be re-established. Now, with that framework established, I have a couple of questions for you: (1) What is a "quasineutron," and how does it differ from a protoneutron? That is, what conditions do you postulate that bring it into existence, other than simply lack of sufficient space for the electron to orbit at the n = 1 level? (2) What does the presence of neutrinos add to the picture, if anything? If they exist, of course, then they will have to be indicated in the equations, so that is not the point of my question. The point is this: do you have some property of a neutrino in mind beyond that of merely carrying away bits of energy like a thief in the night? If so, what is it? --Mitchell Jones}*** [snip] > >Regards, Frederick > >> >> --Mitchell Jones}*** >> From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 08:03:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA24407; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 08:01:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 08:01:25 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 11:10:41 -0500 Message-ID: <19991203161041125.AAA160 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"KkQt62.0.Gz5.Kb-Hu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31901 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jean-Louis writes: >Hi All, > > What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? > Does the list has been completly removed/erased/killed ...? :-( > > Regards > >Jean-Louis Naudin Hi Jean, I just sent a message to Bill Beaty asking about the list. Eskimo North, the server for the FreeNRG-list is, I think, located in West Seattle, close to the downtown area. In case you haven't read about it, Seattle is under seige at the moment because of the World Trade Organization conference. The mainstream news reporters are not reporting the full extent of the conflict in order to minimize it. I lived in Capital Hill, Seattle, on the corner of Broadway and Denny for ten years. The protesters were pushed out of the downtown area, and congregated in that intersection last night. That area is about 10 blocks from the downtown No Protest Zone. Helicopters dropped tear gas cannisters into the crowd which, of course, gassed not only everybody in the crowd, but also all of the *sleeping residents* in that heavily populated area. As people came choking out of their homes and apartments wearing their pajamas, they were met by police who fired pepper spray into their faces, and fired rubber bullets at them. Then they were clubbed to the ground and kicked, and told to get back into their houses. The official reason for this action was because the police said that they suspected that the protestors were going to take over the local precinct police station - 10 blocks away. I haven't heard anything from the West Seattle area, but if it anything like the rest of the downtown. It's a mess. Some big armor has been called in, and many of the military support teams have been seen carrying automatic weapons and live ammo for the past two days. Basically, everything that you see in the paper and on TV is a lie. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 09:43:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA20848; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:36:30 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:36:30 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991203113029.01b93274 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 11:30:29 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"mFhEL3.0.Y55.R-_Hu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31902 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:18 AM 11/19/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >Pardon me, but I don't know what 1.5 F is. Ah! F = fermi = 10^-15 meter. A dimension useful for nuclear geometries. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 09:53:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA24940; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:51:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:51:34 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19991203161041125.AAA160 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 11:47:41 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? Resent-Message-ID: <"dLQT.0.c56.cC0Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31903 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Jean-Louis writes: >>Hi All, >> >> What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? >> Does the list has been completly removed/erased/killed ...? :-( >> >> Regards >> >>Jean-Louis Naudin > >Hi Jean, > >I just sent a message to Bill Beaty asking about the list. Eskimo North, >the server for the FreeNRG-list is, I think, located in West Seattle, close >to the downtown area. In case you haven't read about it, Seattle is under >seige at the moment because of the World Trade Organization conference. The >mainstream news reporters are not reporting the full extent of the conflict >in order to minimize it. > >I lived in Capital Hill, Seattle, on the corner of Broadway and Denny for >ten years. The protesters were pushed out of the downtown area, and >congregated in that intersection last night. That area is about 10 blocks >from the downtown No Protest Zone. Helicopters dropped tear gas cannisters >into the crowd which, of course, gassed not only everybody in the crowd, but >also all of the *sleeping residents* in that heavily populated area. As >people came choking out of their homes and apartments wearing their pajamas, >they were met by police who fired pepper spray into their faces, and fired >rubber bullets at them. Then they were clubbed to the ground and kicked, >and told to get back into their houses. ***{Is this a great country, or what? :-) --MJ}*** > >The official reason for this action was because the police said that they >suspected that the protestors were going to take over the local precinct >police station - 10 blocks away. I haven't heard anything from the West >Seattle area, but if it anything like the rest of the downtown. It's a >mess. Some big armor has been called in, and many of the military support >teams have been seen carrying automatic weapons and live ammo for the past >two days. > >Basically, everything that you see in the paper and on TV is a lie. ***{Yup. But it's what the great masses of mental defectives want to hear. Like Romans in the final days of the Empire, they believe what they are told, dutifully vote for the incumbent fascist and socialist scumbags who are wrecking the country, and keep their eyes firmly focused on the gladitorial diversions (e.g., football). The more things change, the more they stay the same. --MJ}*** > >Knuke >Michael T. Huffman >Huffman Technology Company >1121 Dustin Drive >The Villages, Florida 32159 >(352)259-1276 >knuke LCIA.COM >http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 10:13:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA32114; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:11:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:11:57 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:21:13 -0500 Message-ID: <19991203182113875.AAA234 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"nNOG9.0.er7.jV0Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31904 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitch writes: >***{Is this a great country, or what? :-) --MJ}*** I'm sorry Mitch, I wish I could joke about something like this, but many of these people are my friends. Bill Beaty and his family live in Ballard, which is pretty far North of the main action, so he should be OK, but West Seattle and Capitol Hill are downtown residential areas. Robert Dinse aka Nanook of Eskimo North lives with his family in that area, if I'm not mistaken. Robert for many years has been a big supporter of many good causes, and Eskimo North, like ETS is staffed mainly by volunteers who donate their time and expertise to keep things like this list as cheap as possible. I just hope they are alright. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 10:16:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA02547; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:15:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:15:50 -0800 Message-ID: <012001bf3dba$b16d3980$212f1c3f w98sysrec> Reply-To: "doclewis" From: "doclewis" To: Subject: SR explains magnetic field Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 12:17:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"Rd_CK1.0.fd.LZ0Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31905 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: (snip) >***{I repeat: there is no positive current in the >figure. The positive charges are the protons. The >protons are in the atomic nuclei, and the nuclei >of the atoms in a copper wire are not free to >move. Therefore the above statement is obvious, >utter nonsense. If you intend to discuss the >physics of this situation, you need to abandon the >notion of conventional current, and talk about the >reality of what is actually going on. --MJ}*** I disagree.As an electron moves incrementally through a conductor it will leave an empty "hole" in it's immediate wake. This relatively electron deficient space in the context of a current will appear to flow in a marquee light fashion in the opposite direction of the electrons. There is no need for protons to flow. Hole flow is physical and is equivalent to the notion of proton or positive charge flow. doc (snip) >>>This means the diameters of the moving ?>electrons will contract in the direction of their >motion by more than the diameters of the protons >will contract, with the degree of the contraction >being in accordance with l' = l[sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)]. It >does not mean, however, that the distance >between an electron and the electron behind it will >contract: the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction >applies only to material bodies in motion, not to >the empty space between them. Thus this >argument is invalid even within the framework of >STR assumptions from which it was taken. (I have >numerous disagreements with the STR formalism >>itself, but they are irrelevant to the present >>question.) --Mitchell Jones}*** On the contrary,the contraction of space is precisely what the Lorentz-Fitzgerald transform describes. In the classic twin paradox example the rocket traveling twin whose time has slowed down finds that his 4.5 light year trip to Alpha Centaury at .99 C has only taken a few months by his onboard clock. The resolution of his confusion was that as his velocity reached .99 C, the distance to Alpha Centaury was foreshortened by the amount necessary so that his calculated speed did not exceed C. Therefore the measuring stick as well as the space that was being measured both contracted by the appropriate amount. doc From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 10:24:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA05825; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:23:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:23:52 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> References: <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 12:07:24 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Resent-Message-ID: <"hjorE3.0.tQ1.tg0Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31906 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 04:22 PM 12/2/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >>Does potential energy have mass (I think this is the same as field energy)? > >Surely it does. For example, the reason 8Be weighs more than the two 4He >nuclei it disintegrates into is because of the ~92 keV of potential energy >in the 8Be nucleus that is released upon disintegration. Also, one can >come up with the rest mass of the electron by integrating the energy in its >Coulomb field from infinity down to the classical radius 2.8E-15 meters >(which is how they got the classical radius in the first place). > >>Does kinetic energy have mass? > >It is easy to show that kinetic energy is equivalent to mass. If you >accept that E = mc^2 and then replace m with the proper SR expression for >relativistic mass: > > m = m0/(1-v^2/c^2)^0.5 > >you get: > > E = (m0/(1-v^2/c^2)^0.5)*c^2 > >expanding this with a binomial series we get: > > E = m0*c^2 + 1/2*m0*v^2 + .... ***{Scott, the derivation of the latter expression from the one above it is *not* obvious. (Who do you think you are--Pierre Fermat? :-) For the benefit of those of us who don't have time to play around with the algebra, how about some more detail? To be specific, the binomial series is as follows: (a + b)^n = a^n + (n/1!)[a^(n-1)]b + n(n-1)/2![a^(n-2)]b^2 + n(n-1)(n-2)/3![a^(n-3)]b^3 + ... + b^n. The question is, what values are you using for a, b, and n, and how did you obtain them? --MJ}*** > >Recognize the second term? It means that kinetic energy results from the >relativistic increase in an object's mass. > > > >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 Dec 3 10:51:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA16179; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:50:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:50:54 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Fri, 03 Dec 1999 13:44:05 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Fri, 03 Dec 1999 13:49:52 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 13:35:51 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? In-reply-to: <19991203161041125.AAA160%mail.lcia.com lizard> To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 13:44:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2322ZYFKJMWTA X400-MTS-identifier: [;50443130219991/4298106 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"Haefe3.0.jy3.E41Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31907 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Knuke, Concerning the Seattle WTO riots, >Basically, everything that you see in the paper and on TV is a lie. Is conservative Fox giving a better representation of events then say the liberal CNN? Also, I would think the two biggest factions, Environmentalists -vs- Unions would be fighting each other, as one group thinks the WTO hasn't gone far enough, and the other thinks they have gone too far. Bill webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 11:24:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA27766; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 11:23:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 11:23:10 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:32:26 -0500 Message-ID: <19991203193226578.AAA155 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"cZOof3.0.in6.UY1Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31908 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bill writes >Concerning the Seattle WTO riots, The event on Capitol Hill was not a riot. It consisted, for the most part, a large group of people sitting in the street sing Silent Night until the police showed up. > > >>Basically, everything that you see in the paper and on TV is a lie. > >Is conservative Fox giving a better representation of events then say the >liberal CNN? You can do your own survey of what the papers and TV stations are saying about this. I read through 8 of them before I found this story in the LA Times. In all the other papers, the WTO story was moved from the top to number 5 - 7, and they were reporting the official lie that the protests were over, and that now was the time for "healing" and "learning from the mistakes". In other words "just get back to work, and forget about this. It's over". >Also, I would think the two biggest factions, Environmentalists -vs- Unions >would be fighting each other, as one group thinks the WTO hasn't gone far >enough, and the other thinks they have gone too far. You would think so, and indeed there are a number of conflicting views being offered both by the protesters, and within the WTO itself, however, within the protesting groups, the common themes are that we are being poisoned, underpaid, badly treated, and are forced to pay large amounts of money to the corporations and their corporate controlled government/military. Bill Clinton and Mike Moore are just paid liars. It's obviously not over. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 13:22:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA01016; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:20:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:20:00 -0800 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:19:57 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991117224227.006a82e4 mail.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"4i8Pe3.0.mF.0G3Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31909 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yes, It was in a lead pig, open to the ceiling. Hank On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Scott Little wrote: > At 03:20 PM 12/1/99 -0800, hank scudder wrote: > >I just finished an experiment in Nuclear Lab, using Cosmic rays as a > >radiation source. When an incoming proton hits a gas atom (Oxygen or > > > > >I saw this with my own eyes. Connected things up with my own > >hands. It is an experiment which you could do at home if you > >have a photomultiplier and a dtector. Mine was a 3" cylinder > >of NaI. > > Did you put the detector in a shielded chamber to get the natural gamma > background down? > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 13:24:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA02405; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:22:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:22:26 -0800 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:22:26 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991117224227.006a82e4 mail.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"A1jdP1.0.Nb.II3Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31910 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yes, it was in a lead pig, open to the ceiling. The MCA was set up with 512 channels between 0 KeV and about 80 KeV Hank On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Scott Little wrote: > At 03:20 PM 12/1/99 -0800, hank scudder wrote: > >I just finished an experiment in Nuclear Lab, using Cosmic rays as a > >radiation source. When an incoming proton hits a gas atom (Oxygen or > > > > >I saw this with my own eyes. Connected things up with my own > >hands. It is an experiment which you could do at home if you > >have a photomultiplier and a dtector. Mine was a 3" cylinder > >of NaI. > > Did you put the detector in a shielded chamber to get the natural gamma > background down? > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 13:30:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04846; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:28:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:28:32 -0800 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:28:22 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991117225354.006a6b54 mail.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"KEOTz2.0.eB1.0O3Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31911 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott I think the point is that what exists is an "Electro-Magnetic Field", and it manifests itself as Electric or Magenetic depending on the velocities and geometry involved. The Electric field and Magnetic field are interchangable with each other, depending on who is watching from where. Hank On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Scott Little wrote: > At 05:24 PM 12/1/99 -0800, hank scudder wrote: > >Mitchell > > There really is no difference between electric and magnetic > >fields. It is all relative. An electric field situation viewed from a > >stationary system becomes a magnetic field situation when viewed from a > >moving one. > > Hank, that is certainly true for straight-line motion of charges. But what > about current flowing in a loop? Even if you transform yourself to a frame > that is rotating around with one particular electron and thus demagnetize > it's field, there are still the other electrons across the way on the other > side of the loop that are moving w.r.t you. So it seems that you can > create situations in which the magnetic field has an absolute existence. > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 13:34:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06890; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:33:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:33:23 -0800 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:33:22 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"DM1tZ1.0.Wh1.ZS3Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31912 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin I think the operating equation is M = E/c^2 at least in flat spacetime. General Relativity is much . more complicated. Hank On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Wed, 01 Dec 1999 17:31:49 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: > [snip] > >I do not agree here. magnetic flux is not material. same a electric field. It does not have momentum, IMO. > > This statement, I think goes right to the heart of physics. > It also leads to the following questions which I put to all on this list: > Does potential energy have mass (I think this is the same as field energy)? > Does kinetic energy have mass? > > Be warned, your answers will elicit more questions. :> > > >I think there is no difference between electric and magnetic field in this criteria (magnetic flux lines is just an visualization, same is true for the electric field, you can visualize an electric field by lines. For example, you can say: if entering and exiting lines trough a closed surface are equal, total charge inside is zero.) > [snip] > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 13:36:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA08000; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:34:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:34:24 -0800 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:34:19 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"gt_Tg1.0.uy1.VT3Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31913 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It probably is a half life. Hank On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Wed, 1 Dec 1999 15:20:22 -0800 (PST), hank scudder wrote: > [snip] > >have a lifetime of about 20 nanoseconds. The resulting decomposition > >product are mostly muons (also traveling at about the speed of light) > >which have a lifetime of about 2 microseconds. In > > Is this a "lifetime", or a half-life? > [snip] > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 13:43:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12682; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:42:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:42:55 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19991203182113875.AAA234 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:40:25 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? Resent-Message-ID: <"FnGKf1.0.063.Vb3Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31914 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitch writes: >>***{Is this a great country, or what? :-) --MJ}*** > >I'm sorry Mitch, I wish I could joke about something like this, but many of >these people are my friends. Bill Beaty and his family live in Ballard, >which is pretty far North of the main action, so he should be OK, but West >Seattle and Capitol Hill are downtown residential areas. Robert Dinse aka >Nanook of Eskimo North lives with his family in that area, if I'm not >mistaken. Robert for many years has been a big supporter of many good >causes, and Eskimo North, like ETS is staffed mainly by volunteers who >donate their time and expertise to keep things like this list as cheap as >possible. I just hope they are alright. ***{If there were any decent people among those who were brutalized--that is, if any of the victims were people who oppose the fashionable practice of "solving problems" by taking other people's rights away--then I also hope they are OK. As for the rest, they got what they deserve, because the police state in which they are now living is the one which they helped to create. It is only right that, as America goes into the good night, those who sent her there should get their heads cracked by the goons whom they themselves unleashed. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Knuke > >Michael T. Huffman >Huffman Technology Company >1121 Dustin Drive >The Villages, Florida 32159 >(352)259-1276 >knuke LCIA.COM >http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 13:54:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17924; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:53:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:53:06 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991203165108.00883d40 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 16:51:08 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: NASA coverage of the Mars Polar Lander Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"-0KvG2.0.-N4.2l3Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31915 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: LIVE ONGOING CONFERENCE http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/popoff/STREAM1_video_popoff/index.html This needs Real Player Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 14:11:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA11493; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:08:07 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:08:07 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:01:38 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Resent-Message-ID: <"lQLyc2.0.Mp2.2z3Iu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31916 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >I just finished an experiment in Nuclear Lab, using Cosmic rays as a >radiation source. When an incoming proton hits a gas atom (Oxygen or >Nitrogen in the ionosphere, about 300 km above the earth, it smashes it >to smithereens(to be technical), resulting in a lot of Pi Mesons >traveling at(very near) the speed of light. The Pi mesons >have a lifetime of about 20 nanoseconds. The resulting decomposition >product are mostly muons (also traveling at about the speed of light) >which have a lifetime of about 2 microseconds. In >the lab system you would expect them to travel a distance of >(2*10^-6)*(3*10^8)=600 meters (d=t*c) before decaying. Yet I receive them >in my detector in the lab 300000 meters away, where they decay in my NaI >detector, and I can see them on a scope, and put them into a >multi-channel-analyzer and plot their spectrum. The only way the muons >could travel such a distance is if their time is much slower then mine, >which is a definite proof of special relativity. ***{Several points: (1) Letting t represent the lifetime of a muon at rest, STR indicates that the lifetime, t', of a muon in motion at velocity v = Bc, is such that t' = t/sqrt[1 - (v^2/c^2)] = t/sqrt[1 - B^2] Thus d = t'c = tc/sqrt[1 - B^2], and, if d = 3(10^8) meters, we have 3(10^8) = 2(10^-6)/sqrt[1 - B^2]. Solving for B, we obtain (1 - B^2 = [2(10^-6)/3(10^8)]^2, or B = sqrt{1 - [2(10^-6)/3(10^8)]^2} = 1 - 4.44(10^-29), which is 1 to an accuracy of 28 decimal places. Thus v = Bc = 1c = c The above calculation suggests that when it collides with an air molecule, either the incoming proton must be *a lot* closer to your lab than 300,000 meters, or else the muon lasted longer than its half-life--which is, after all, merely an average--would indicate. Otherwise, the muon's velocity would have to be c to 28 decimal places of accuracy--*very* unlikely, in my opinion. (2) It is important to distinguish between the mathematical formulae of physics and the causal frameworks by means of which those constructs are interpreted. The expression t' = t/sqrt[1 - (v^2/c^2)] is merely a mathematical construct that has been designed to fit experimental results. It tells us that a process which will take t seconds to complete in a frame that is at rest with respect to the observer will take t/sqrt[1 - (v^2/c^2)] seconds to complete, if the frame is in motion at velocity v with respect to the observer. How we *explain* that relationship is up to us, and depends upon philosophical ideas and causal reasoning that have *nothing whatsoever* to do with the mathematical construct itself, or with whether it does in fact fit the experimental data points from which it was supposedly derived. What this means is that the person who came up with the construct can be right in thinking that it fits the data, and wrong in his attempts to explain *why* it fits the data. And that, in turn, means that it is fallacious to argue that the accuracy of the construct is somehow supportive of one particular interpretation of it rather than another. In point of fact, it is much easier to discover a mathematical relationship which will give a proper fit to experimentally determined data points, than it is to construct a causal explanation for why the relationship holds, and the person who designs a mathematical construct, in most cases, is in no better position to explain it than anyone else. (3) Einstein's "time dilation" theory rests upon a basic misunderstanding of what time *is*. What he failed to recognize is that measurements of time, like those of distance, temperature, or any other physical variable, depend upon our selection of standards of measurement that do not vary from one measurement to another. Just as a carpenter would be fired if he used a yardstick the length of which varied widely during the course of building a house, so he would be fired if he arrived at work based on an alarm clock that ran a speeds which varied widely during the course of a day. To solve such problems, he would have to obtain instruments that (a) were consistent in their behavior, and (b) matched up well with similar instruments used by others. In order for people to use instruments that reference back to a common standard, factors that cause variations in the standard must be dealt with. For example, the way temperature related variations in the length of the standard meter were dealt with, back in the days when it was a platinum rod stored in Paris, was to specify the temperature under which its length was to be taken as the standard. And, similarly, the proper response to the STR and GTR claims that velocity and gravitational field intensity influence the speed of a clock, is to specify the velocity and gravitational acceleration under which a chosen clock is to be taken as a standard--e.g., by referencing all other clocks back to the behavior of a standard clock on Earth, at sea level. This means that if, at some future date, we send clock driven instruments into a situation where rapid motion or intense gravitation will cause causal processes to run at a significantly slower rate, then we must compensate for that state of affairs when analyzing the readings of those instruments, by applying mathematical transformations which convert elapsed time readings back to Earth standard. "Time dilation" is nonsense, in other words, because human beings require, and can be counted on to construct and use, clocks that reference consistently back to a uniform standard, using built-in mathematical transforms, where necessary, to ensure that they do so. The implication is that neither gravitation nor motion can be considered to have an affect on time, any more than temperature can be considered to have an affect on distance, because human beings have always been, and will remain, determined to build and use instruments that will remain in step with common standards. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >I saw this with my own eyes. Connected things up with my own >hands. It is an experiment which you could do at home if you >have a photomultiplier and a dtector. Mine was a 3" cylinder >of NaI. > >Fantastick!! > >The spectrum is relatively flat out to about 50 MeV, and it decays more or >less linearly to about 70Mev. The experiment ran overnight, and I >collected about 50000 mesons. > > >Hank [snip] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 14:25:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA28980; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:24:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:24:07 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:18:57 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: SR explains magnetic field Resent-Message-ID: <"HZWr62.0.k47.7C4Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31917 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{This is getting frustrating: first, my reply was routed as private e-mail because you had your reply-to field set. (Please don't do that, people!) Then, when I noticed why my reply didn't appear on vortex, I hit the wrong code character, and sent it to vortex B. So, for the third and last time (I hope :-), here it is. Please reply to this version, and ignore the vortex B and private e-mail versions. Thanks. --MJ}*** >Mitchell Jones wrote: > > (snip) > >>***{I repeat: there is no positive current in the figure. The positive >>charges are the protons. The >protons are in the atomic nuclei, and the >>nuclei of the atoms in a copper wire are not free to move. Therefore the >>above statement is obvious, utter nonsense. If you intend to discuss the >>physics of this situation, you need to abandon the notion of conventional >>current, and talk about the reality of what is actually going on. --MJ}*** > > I disagree. As an electron moves incrementally through a conductor it will >leave an empty "hole" in it's immediate wake. This relatively electron >deficient space in the context of a current will appear to flow in a marquee >light fashion in the opposite direction of the electrons. There is no need >for protons to flow. Hole flow is physical and is equivalent to the notion >of proton or positive charge flow. doc ***{The notion of "hole flow," despite its current popularity as an analytical tool at state controlled "educational" institutions, is just as nonsensical as the notion that the protons move in a wire. If, for example, we suppose that a battlefield contains 10,000 foxholes laid out in a rectangular array, with 9,999 of the foxholes containing a soldier, and that a soldier jumps from an adjacent foxhole into the empty one, then are you going to tell me that it was the soldier, not the hole, that moved? I think not. (Otherwise you would have said "will flow," in your above remarks about the marquee lights, rather than "will appear to flow." :-) And if not, then on what basis could you possibly argue that when an electron moves from one stable location to another in a wire (or in a semiconductor lattice, for that matter), the stable location itself--the "hole"--moves, rather than the electron? Such a notion is obviously preposterous, and that state of affairs is not altered one whit by the fact that it is currently in vogue. (And it is in vogue for the same reasons that "conventional current" refuses to die out: (a) because lots of textbooks got written the wrong way before the electron was discovered and most authors are too lazy to re-write them from scratch, and (b) because anti-rationalist professors are attracted to obscurantism, and use it as a tool to drive bright students out of their classes.) --Mitchell Jones}*** > > (snip) >>>>This means the diameters of the moving ?>electrons will contract in the >direction of their >motion by more than the diameters of the protons >will >contract, with the degree of the contraction >being in accordance with l' = >l[sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)]. It >does not mean, however, that the distance >between >an electron and the electron behind it will >contract: the >Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction >applies only to material bodies in motion, >not to >the empty space between them. Thus this >argument is invalid even >within the framework of >STR assumptions from which it was taken. (I have >>numerous disagreements with the STR formalism >>itself, but they are >irrelevant to the present >>question.) --Mitchell Jones}*** > > On the contrary,the contraction of space is precisely what the >Lorentz-Fitzgerald transform describes. ***{This is historically inaccurate: neither Lorentz nor Fitzgerald was a relativist. They proposed their idea in hopes of saving the aether theory from the results of the Michelson-Morely experiment, and, in their usage, it was the solid portion of the apparatus that was moving against the aether wind, which was said to be foreshortened, not space itself. (The aether theory did not need their help, incidentally, since the aether was gravitationally entrained by the earth, and, thus, there was no "aether wind" to be measured.) --MJ}*** In the classic twin paradox example >the rocket traveling twin whose time has slowed down finds that his 4.5 >light year trip to Alpha Centaury at >.99 C has only taken a few months by his onboard clock. The resolution of >his confusion was that as his velocity reached .99 C, the distance to Alpha >Centaury was foreshortened by the amount necessary so that his calculated >speed did not exceed C. Therefore the measuring stick as well as the space >that was being measured both contracted by the appropriate amount. doc ***{It is my contention that as the E2 pressure increases in a region, causal processes slow down as per the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction. (A swimmer moves slower in molasses than in water. :-) Since E1, E2, and perhaps several other aether substrates are affected by gravity, it follows that the E2 pressure will be greater near the surface of a body with a large gravitational field, and thus causal processes, including oscillators ("clocks") will run slower there. Similarly, the flow of aether through the spaceship of the traveling twin causes an increase in the E2 pressure within the ship, which has the effect of slowing down most causal processes, including those which determine the speed of the onboard clocks. Result: the onboard clocks run slower. Result: if those on the ship calculate the distance they have traveled by multiplying their velocity (.99c) times the elapsed time as measured by onboard clocks, they will get an erroneous answer. You, on the other hand--along with other relativists, including Einstein--claim that the onboard clock is just as valid a measure of time as a clock on Earth, and, thus, you argue that the distance arrived at using the onboard clock readings is just as valid as that calculated using the readings of a clock on Earth. Scott's example provides a perfect gedanken experiment to decide between these two interpretations, since the electrons moving around an electric circuit are within the structure of the wire itself. Thus if we take the relativist view that not merely the electrons, but the space between them, is foreshortened in the direction of their motion, then the faster they move, the more the wire shrinks, and the closer the protons move together. In that case, your argument doesn't work, because the charges that are *not* moving are brought together as well. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 14:41:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA00710; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:38:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:38:42 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 09:38:38 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5bhg4s0p2cb6c77mmsm3m954a8d68iqrr6 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 OAA00687 Resent-Message-ID: <"6rCdi3.0.0B.nP4Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31918 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:34:19 -0800 (PST), hank scudder wrote: >It probably is a half life. > >Hank > In that case, how can you be sure that the lifetime is extended, rather than the possibility that you just happen to detect only those muon which happen to take a particularly long time to decay? (Naturally selected by your distance from the source). What I am really trying to say is, what measures have you taken to ensure that your measurements support your contention, rather than the alternate possibility presented here? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 14:53:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA06042; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:52:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:52:13 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 09:52:10 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 OAA06016 Resent-Message-ID: <"UDTO73.0.KU1.Tc4Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31919 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:01:38 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >>(2*10^-6)*(3*10^8)=600 meters (d=t*c) before decaying. Yet I receive them >>in my detector in the lab 300000 meters away, where they decay in my NaI >>detector, and I can see them on a scope, and put them into a [snip] >(1) Letting t represent the lifetime of a muon at rest, STR indicates that >the lifetime, t', of a muon in motion at velocity v = Bc, is such that t' = >t/sqrt[1 - (v^2/c^2)] = t/sqrt[1 - B^2] Thus d = t'c = tc/sqrt[1 - B^2], >and, if d = 3(10^8) meters, we have 3(10^8) = 2(10^-6)/sqrt[1 - B^2]. Note that Hank said 300000 meters (3E5), not 3E8. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 14:58:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09371; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:57:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:57:46 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 17:57:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Riots in Seattle In-Reply-To: <19991203182113875.AAA234 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"l58ML3.0.LI2.gh4Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31920 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: With all due respect, Knuke, I have seen much worse riots that hardly made the news. Back in the '60s people were killed and buildings burned and it would end up on page D3. I do not think this is a case of suppression. People just don't care much about riots. It isn't newsworthy. There was plenty of coverage in Atlanta, by the way. Also, anyone who thinks this reaches the level of "fascism" or a "police state" has no idea what are real police state is like. A little tear gas and some rubber bullets, and citizens rousted out of bed is heaven compared to life in Japan or Germany before 1945. In a real police state they would be rousted out of bed and never seen again. For that matter, it was far worse here in Georgia before 1920. Hundreds of people were killed in police & Klan sponsored riots in Georgia, Alabama, Florida . . . Whole towns were burned down, and dozens of bodies thrown into mass graves. That was a police state, by golly. Nothing one-tenth as bad happens in the U.S. nowadays, thank goodness. Of course, we must be vigilant to prevent it from happening again. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 14:58:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09639; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:57:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:57:57 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 09:57:52 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0@mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448@fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991203113029.01b93274@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991203113029.01b93274 mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 OAA09510 Resent-Message-ID: <"uoiyj2.0.SM2.rh4Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31921 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 11:30:29 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 01:18 AM 11/19/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: > >>Pardon me, but I don't know what 1.5 F is. > >Ah! F = fermi = 10^-15 meter. A dimension useful for nuclear geometries. > Yes. Perhaps now you could revisit the original questions? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 15:02:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11962; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:00:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:00:27 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 10:00:24 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448@fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA11931 Resent-Message-ID: <"G15DV2.0.mw2.Bk4Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31922 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:18:52 -0600, Scott Little wrote: [snip] >The new "atom" also has -27.2 eV of potential energy, whose negative mass >precisely cancels the mass you somehow converted from the KE when you >stopped the electron. Again, I assumed you left the converted KE mass in >this "atom"...it can be the rod that connects the proton and electron. [snip] So if I weigh this negative mass, the scale will read less than zero? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 15:05:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA14424; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:03:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:03:36 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: What happened to the FreeNRG-List ? Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:12:52 -0500 Message-ID: <19991203231252734.AAA276 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"9S0uf.0.IX3.8n4Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31923 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitch writes: >***{If there were any decent people among those who were brutalized--that >is, if any of the victims were people who oppose the fashionable practice >of "solving problems" by taking other people's rights away--then I also >hope they are OK. As for the rest, they got what they deserve, because the >police state in which they are now living is the one which they helped to >create. It is only right that, as America goes into the good night, those >who sent her there should get their heads cracked by the goons whom they >themselves unleashed. --Mitchell Jones}*** I gotta hand it to you, Mitch. You're a pretty tough nut. The Capitol Hill area is populated with the wildest assortment of people I've ever met. I loved it there. People from every country, race, religion, etc., desparately trying to get along with each other and overcome the language and cultural barriers. Shop keepers, students, gays, lesbians, straights, old people, young, the very wealthy, the not-so-wealthy, and the very poor, all mingling in close proximity on a daily basis, and actually celebrating their rights and freedoms to express themselves in a peaceful fashion. It was such a great place to live. Nobody from that area deserves to have their heads cracked, I can tell you that much. Even the police were extraordinarily mellow in that area the whole time I was there in comparison to many other places that I've been. They rode bicycles, and were on foot for the most part. Very accessable and open to conversation. That is the thing I don't understand. I never saw a Seattle cop use undue force before, and I watched a good number of arrests being made. I still haven't heard back from Bill Beaty, by the way. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 16:27:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA06805; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:25:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:25:36 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:23:03 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Resent-Message-ID: <"hi4Z3.0.Ag1._z5Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31924 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:01:38 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>>(2*10^-6)*(3*10^8)=600 meters (d=t*c) before decaying. Yet I receive them >>>in my detector in the lab 300000 meters away, where they decay in my NaI >>>detector, and I can see them on a scope, and put them into a >[snip] >>(1) Letting t represent the lifetime of a muon at rest, STR indicates that >>the lifetime, t', of a muon in motion at velocity v = Bc, is such that t' = >>t/sqrt[1 - (v^2/c^2)] = t/sqrt[1 - B^2] Thus d = t'c = tc/sqrt[1 - B^2], >>and, if d = 3(10^8) meters, we have 3(10^8) = 2(10^-6)/sqrt[1 - B^2]. > >Note that Hank said 300000 meters (3E5), not 3E8. >[snip] ***{Oops! :-) Thanks. More later. --MJ}*** > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 16:30:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA08839; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:30:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:30:02 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991203182409.0101a8b0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 18:24:09 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"QVSEX1.0.1A2.A26Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31925 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:07 PM 12/3/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >To be specific, the binomial series is as follows: (a + b)^n = a^n + >(n/1!)[a^(n-1)]b + n(n-1)/2![a^(n-2)]b^2 + n(n-1)(n-2)/3![a^(n-3)]b^3 + ... >+ b^n. The question is, what values are you using for a, b, and n, and how >did you obtain them? OK, all you need are the first two terms: (a + b)^n = a^n + (n/1!)[a^(n-1)]b the expression we're expanding (in a form more compatible with the above is: (1-v^2/c^2)^-0.5 this is multiplied by m0*c^2 but we can do that at the end. To apply the expansion as you have correctly given it, set a=1, b = v^2/c^2, and n = -0.5. When you get done, multiply through by m0*c^2 and you'll get what I got. 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 Dec 3 16:32:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA09176; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:30:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:30:10 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 18:27:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"c8D9R1.0.HF2.I26Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31926 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:00 AM 12/4/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >On Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:18:52 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >[snip] >>The new "atom" also has -27.2 eV of potential energy, whose negative mass >>precisely cancels the mass you somehow converted from the KE when you >>stopped the electron. Again, I assumed you left the converted KE mass in >>this "atom"...it can be the rod that connects the proton and electron. >[snip] >So if I weigh this negative mass, the scale will read less than zero? No, but the H atom will weigh less than its separate constituents. The negative mass is "associated" with the atom. You can't pry it loose and put it on the balance by itself. I'll look at your 1.5 F problem later... 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 Dec 3 17:33:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA29225; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 17:31:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 17:31:16 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <38486EF7.611D ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 17:31:35 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Dec 03, 1999] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7uQp92.0.Z87.ax6Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31927 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What's New wrote: > > WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 3 Dec 99 Washington, DC > > 1. BAD NEWS: LOOKS LIKE WE NEED AN ENERGY REVOLUTION. According > to a Science magazine article this week, the accelerating decline > of Arctic ice over the past 46 years is most likely the result of > human activity, rather than normal climate cycles. Based on the > most advanced computer models available, the authors put the > chance that the 46-year trend could be entirely due to natural > fluctuations at less than 0.1%. Not only is the ice area > declining, the remaining ice is thinning rapidly, according to > another article. Since ice does not absorb solar energy as > efficiently as open water, there is a strong positive feedback. > > 2. GOOD NEWS: WE MAY BE ON THE THRESHOLD OF AN ENERGY REVOLUTION. > A report released on Capitol Hill yesterday by the Northeast- > Midwest Institute argues that utility deregulation, combined with > replacement of aging power generators, provides a unique chance > to convert to more efficient technologies and reduce greenhouse > emissions. Lacking incentive to increase efficiency, regulated > monopolies rely heavily on highly-centralized steam turbines with > fuel efficiency of only about 30%. Combined cycle gas turbines > (CCGTs) can double efficiency with far lower emissions. CCGTs > now supply a mere 3% of U.S. demand, but they account for 88% of > planned power plants. However, the full benefit will not be > realized if centralized gigawatt power plants are simply replaced > with CCGTs, for which the optimum size is only about 100 > megawatts. Energy in the form of natural gas is about three > times cheaper to transport than electrical energy. Rather than > focusing on a particular technology, however, the report calls > for incentives to be built into deregulation that will encourage > innovation in generation and distribution. > > 3. OKLAHOMA: WHO CAME FIRST, THE GOVERNOR OR BABOONS? As WN > reported last month (WN 12 Nov 99), eleven biblical literalists > appointed by Gov. Frank Keating to the Oklahoma State Textbook > Committee, mandated that stickers be affixed to biology texts > warning students that evolution is only a theory, since "No one > was present when life first appeared on Earth." WN went straight > to Genesis to check this assertion. Alas, we were quickly in > over our heads. "And out of the ground, LORD God formed every > beast of the field and every fowl of the air; and brought them > unto Adam..." (Genesis 2:19:25). It sort of sounded like Adam was > there first, but we called the Institute for Creation Research > for clarification. "We're not biblical scholars," the spokesman > explained, "we're scientists, but that's an easy one. The animals > and man were all created on the sixth day, but the animals came > first." In any case, WN believes no sentient beings were present > when the textbook committee made its decision. Meanwhile, Gov. > Keating declared he doesn't think he is descended from a baboon. > !!FLASH!! The Mars polar Lander is down, but no signal yet. > > THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY (Note: Opinions are the author's > and are not necessarily shared by the APS, but they should be.) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 18:02:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA04713; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:01:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:01:16 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 13:01:12 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448@fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 SAA04687 Resent-Message-ID: <"ELdMo3.0.V91.iN7Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31928 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 18:27:11 -0600, Scott Little wrote: [snip] >>So if I weigh this negative mass, the scale will read less than zero? > >No, but the H atom will weigh less than its separate constituents. The >negative mass is "associated" with the atom. You can't pry it loose and >put it on the balance by itself. [snip] In that case it doesn't really exist as separate entity does it? Therefore it must represent a reduction in the mass of something that is real. Or not? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 18:35:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA16071; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:33:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:33:58 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Dec 03, 1999] Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 13:33:52 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <38486EF7.611D ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <38486EF7.611D ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 SAA16017 Resent-Message-ID: <"9Vk1w.0.rw3.Ls7Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31929 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 17:31:35 -0800, aki ix.netcom.com wrote: [snip] >> WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 3 Dec 99 Washington, DC >> >> 1. BAD NEWS: LOOKS LIKE WE NEED AN ENERGY REVOLUTION. According Maybe he's now ripe to give CF another chance ;)? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 18:44:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA18950; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:43:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:43:25 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Dec 03, 1999] Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:52:41 -0500 Message-ID: <19991204025241312.AAA242 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"Oy43k2.0.0e4.C_7Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31930 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin writes: >Maybe he's now ripe to give CF another chance ;)? >[snip] He'd have to eat way too much crow for that. I think he would advocate heating our houses with cow farts first. ;) Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 19:12:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA26105; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 19:11:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 19:11:57 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: FreeNRG-List Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 22:21:13 -0500 Message-ID: <19991204032113609.AAA160 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"Sk9hB.0.pN6.zP8Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31931 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I just had a look at the Eskimo North website, and read through their latest service announcements. They have been experiencing difficulties on and off with their carrier service since Monday, which is the last date that I show a posting in the FreeNRG Group. I also looked at their address, and it is out in the Shoreline district which is well away from the downtown area. I sent an e-mail to the support crew, and so it should be operational again fairly soon. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 19:28:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA29928; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 19:27:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 19:27:32 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Nanook's Nook Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 22:36:50 -0500 Message-ID: <19991204033650359.AAA243 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"E86m02.0.SJ7.Ze8Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31932 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I use to read Nanook's stuff periodically, he did some outrageous rants about the phone companies, etc.. This one is really bizarre. It's dated in May of this year, but addresses many issues that are still relevant today. http://www.eskimo.com/~nanook/senseless.html Enjoy, Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 20:03:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA06567; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 20:00:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 20:00:52 -0800 Message-ID: <3848999D.6D92 ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:33:33 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: They thought they were free.... References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------4FD33566192B" Resent-Message-ID: <"axDhQ3.0.Xc1.q79Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31933 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. --------------4FD33566192B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jed Rothwell wrote: (snip) > Whole towns were > burned down, and dozens of bodies thrown into mass graves. That was a > police state, by golly. Nothing one-tenth as bad happens in the U.S. > nowadays, thank goodness. Of course, we must be vigilant to prevent it from > happening again. > > - Jed Well I would ask: Just what good does "being vigilant" do if you are not prepared to do something when you notice things sorta getting out of hand? Here is something I dragged off of Usenet way back in December of 1992, which I think is illustrative of the point, above. - Jim O. --------------4FD33566192B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; name="TTTWFREE.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline; filename="TTTWFREE.TXT" In article sarfatti@well.sf.ca.us (Jack Sarfat= ti) writes in "alt.conspiracy": |Please circulate this to other relevant usenet conferences thankyou. "Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy." -- George Bernard Shaw "Naturally the common people don't want war ... but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along ... All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." - Hermann Goering, 1936 "Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." George Washington, Farewell Address "'My country right or wrong' is like saying, 'My mother drunk or sober.= '" -- G. K. Chesterton "Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear -- kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor -- with the cry of grave national emergency... Always there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real." -- General Douglas MacArthur, 1957. "Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism -- how passionately I hate them!" -- Albert Einstein ----------- Excerpted and condensed without permission from Milton Mayer's _They thought they were free; the Germans, 1933-45_ (U. of Chicago Press, 1955)= =2E The following comments are attributed to a German philologist (pp. 166-17= 2): ``What no one seemed to notice," ... ``was the ever widening gap ... between the government and the people. ... And it became always wider. ... ``What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people ... to be being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that ... it could not be released because of national security. ... ``This separation of government from people ... took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms ... so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath ... ``... the whole process of its coming into being, was above all *diverting*. It provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway. I do not speak of your `little men' ...; I speak of my colleagues and myself, learned men, ... . Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had. ... Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about ... and kept us so busy with continuous changes and `crises' and so fascinated ... by the machinations of the `national enemies,' without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. ... ``To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it ... unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness ... than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, `regretted,' that ... unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these `little measures' that no `patriotic German' could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. ... ``How is this to be avoided ... Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims ... `Resist the beginnings' and `Consider the end.' But one must foresee the end in order to resist ... the beginnings. ... and how is this to be done ...? ... ``Your `little men', ..., were not against National Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders ... ``... One doesn't see exactly where or how to move. ... Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. You don't want to act, or even talk, alone; you don't want to `go out of your way to make trouble.' ... And it is not just fear ... that restrains you; it is also genuine uncertainty. ``Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, =2E.., `everyone' is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. ... you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, `It's not so bad' or `You're seeing things' or `You're an alarmist.' ``And you *are* an alarmist. You are saying that *this* must lead to *this*, and you can't prove it. ... On the one hand, your enemies ... intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh- pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, ... people who have always thought as you have. ``... in small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel that you are talking to yourselves, that you are isolated from the reality of things. This weakens your confidence still further and serves as a further deterrent to - to what? It is clearer all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you must *make* an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a troublemaker. So you wait... ``But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. *That's* the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest... But of course this isn't the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D. ``And one day, too late, your principles ... all rush in upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy, and some minor incident, in my case my little boy ... saying `Jew swine,' collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world you were born in - your nation, your people - is not the world you were born in at all. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves; when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. ... ``... Life ... has flowed to a new level, carrying you with it, without any effort on your part. On this new level you live =2E.. more comfortably every day, with new morals, new principles. You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things that your father ... could not have imagined. ``Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven't done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we do nothing). ... You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair." ----------- =1A=1A --------------4FD33566192B-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 20:41:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA17362; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 20:40:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 20:40:20 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991203233233.007d70b0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 23:32:33 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Riots in Seattle In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <19991203182113875.AAA234 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"IsPCX3.0.5F4.pi9Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31934 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:57 PM 12/3/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >With all due respect, Knuke, I have seen much worse riots that hardly made >the news. Back in the '60s people were killed and buildings burned and it >would end up on page D3. I do not think this is a case of suppression. >People just don't care much about riots. It isn't newsworthy. Rather than the Britannica view, here is the view from the scene: http://208.138.42.193/forum/a384895ff7d03.htm http://208.138.42.193/forum/a384887b56ada.htm http://208.138.42.193/forum/a3848563c31be.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 21:03:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA22341; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:01:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:01:05 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991119230128.006bceb8 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 23:01:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"VNUFH2.0._S5.G0AIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31935 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:01 PM 12/4/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >>No, but the H atom will weigh less than its separate constituents. The >>negative mass is "associated" with the atom. You can't pry it loose and >>put it on the balance by itself. >[snip] >In that case it doesn't really exist as separate entity does it? Therefore >it must represent a reduction in the mass of something that is real. Or not? There are probably several equivalent ways to look at this but one way is to count the energy in the E-field around the electron as part (or all) of its mass. When the electron gets close the proton, their fields cancel somewhat so the mass of each goes down accordingly. Hmmmm...that's different from my original position. Regarding your 1.5 fermi, the 27.2 eV increases to 0.96 MeV, almost twice the rest mass of the electron. If the proton and electron both "donate" half that much mass in the form of field energy to the negative potential energy of the "atom", then the electron is left massless. That's curious. Hmmmm...at 1.4 fermi, the E field around a single proton is so strong that the vacuum should be able to spontaneously decay into a trapped electron and a positron which would drift away from the new "atom". That suggests that protons should spontaneously decay into neutrons and positrons...if it weren't for the puzzling fact that neutrons weigh MORE than the sum of a proton and a neutron. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 22:00:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA07522; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:59:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:59:35 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 16:59:28 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b 7570 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119230128.006bceb8@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991119230128.006bceb8 mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 VAA07504 Resent-Message-ID: <"9eTYn1.0.Sr1.6tAIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31936 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 19 Nov 1999 23:01:28 -0600, Scott Little wrote: [snip] >There are probably several equivalent ways to look at this but one way is >to count the energy in the E-field around the electron as part (or all) of >its mass. When the electron gets close the proton, their fields cancel >somewhat so the mass of each goes down accordingly. Hmmmm...that's >different from my original position. Precisely. I think you will find that no matter how you twist or turn it, something interesting results. Is what you wrote above perhaps another way of saying that each shields the other from ever more of the ZPE as they get closer together, so that each "masses" less (mass used as an intransitive verb)? It leads directly to the concept of infinitely (?) variable mass rather than constant mass. It also has interesting implications for our definition of the mass of free particles, and Mach's principle (law?). > >Regarding your 1.5 fermi, the 27.2 eV increases to 0.96 MeV, almost twice >the rest mass of the electron. If the proton and electron both "donate" >half that much mass in the form of field energy to the negative potential >energy of the "atom", then the electron is left massless. That's curious. Yes, and if you go a bit further, the poor electron doesn't even have enough mass to contribute ;). Of course, there is also the possibility that most or all of the mass is contributed by the proton alone...but that in itself would also be strange. > >Hmmmm...at 1.4 fermi, the E field around a single proton is so strong that >the vacuum should be able to spontaneously decay into a trapped electron >and a positron which would drift away from the new "atom". That suggests >that protons should spontaneously decay into neutrons and positrons...if it >weren't for the puzzling fact that neutrons weigh MORE than the sum of a >proton and a neutron. > Well at least it could "evaporate" into electron-positron pairs, almost analogous to the way in which small black holes are predicted to evaporate. I think something has to give here. Our model is clearly unravelling at the seams. Is "ultraviolet catastrophe" going too far? To start with, we may need to dump the concept of point sources of the Coulomb field. IOW maybe Coulomb's law changes it's form at very small distances? (Note that it was originally derived from measurements made on macroscopic objects, and at macroscopic distances). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 23:40:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA27492; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 23:39:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 23:39:29 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3848999D.6D92 ca-ois.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 22:50:33 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"vTj_V1.0.Uj6.mKCIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31937 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Jed Rothwell wrote: > >(snip) > >> Whole towns were >> burned down, and dozens of bodies thrown into mass graves. That was a >> police state, by golly. Nothing one-tenth as bad happens in the U.S. >> nowadays, thank goodness. Of course, we must be vigilant to prevent it from >> happening again. >> >> - Jed > >Well I would ask: Just what good does "being vigilant" do if you are not >prepared to do >something when you notice things sorta getting out of hand? > >Here is something I dragged off of Usenet way back in December of 1992, >which I think is illustrative of the point, above. - Jim O. > > >In article sarfatti@well.sf.ca.us (Jack Sarfatti) >writes in "alt.conspiracy": > >|Please circulate this to other relevant usenet conferences thankyou. > > > "Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy." > -- George Bernard Shaw > > > "Naturally the common people don't want war ... but after all it is > the leaders of a country who determine policy, and it is always a > simple matter to drag the people along ... All you have to do is > tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for > lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the > same in any country." > > - Hermann Goering, 1936 > > "Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." > George Washington, > Farewell Address > > "'My country right or wrong' is like saying, 'My mother drunk or sober.'" > -- G. K. Chesterton > > "Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear -- kept us > in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor -- with the cry of > grave national emergency... Always there has been some terrible evil > to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing > the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters > seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real." > -- General Douglas MacArthur, 1957. > > "Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome > nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism -- how passionately I > hate them!" > -- Albert Einstein > >----------- > >Excerpted and condensed without permission from Milton Mayer's _They >thought they were free; the Germans, 1933-45_ (U. of Chicago Press, 1955). >The following comments are attributed to a German philologist (pp. 166-172): > >``What no one seemed to notice," ... ``was the ever widening >gap ... between the government and the people. ... And it became >always wider. ... > >``What happened here was the gradual habituation of the >people ... to be being governed by surprise; to receiving >decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation >was so complicated that the government had to act on information >which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that ... >it could not be released because of national security. ... > >``This separation of government from people ... took place >so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not >even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or >associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social >purposes. And all the crises and reforms ... so occupied the >people that they did not see the slow motion underneath ... > >``... the whole process of its coming into being, was above >all *diverting*. It provided an excuse not to think for people >who did not want to think anyway. I do not speak of your `little >men' ...; I speak of my colleagues and myself, learned men, ... . >Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and >never had. ... Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things >to think about ... and kept us so busy with continuous changes >and `crises' and so fascinated ... by the machinations of the >`national enemies,' without and within, that we had no time to >think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by >little, all around us. ... > >``To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to >notice it ... unless one has a much greater degree of political >awareness ... than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. >Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, >on occasion, `regretted,' that ... unless one understood what >the whole thing was in principle, what all these `little >measures' that no `patriotic German' could resent must some day >lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a >farmer in his field sees the corn growing. ... > >``How is this to be avoided ... Many, many times since it >all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims ... >`Resist the beginnings' and `Consider the end.' But one must >foresee the end in order to resist ... the beginnings. ... and >how is this to be done ...? ... > >``Your `little men', ..., were not against National >Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater >offenders ... > >``... One doesn't see exactly where or how to move. ... Each >act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little >worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great >shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, >will join with you in resisting somehow. You don't want to act, >or even talk, alone; you don't want to `go out of your way to >make trouble.' ... And it is not just fear ... that restrains >you; it is also genuine uncertainty. > >``Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of >decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, >..., `everyone' is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly >sees none. ... you speak privately to your colleagues, some of >whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, >`It's not so bad' or `You're seeing things' or `You're an >alarmist.' > >``And you *are* an alarmist. You are saying that *this* must >lead to *this*, and you can't prove it. ... On the one hand, your >enemies ... intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh- >pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your >close friends, ... people who have always thought as you have. > >``... in small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel >that you are talking to yourselves, that you are isolated from >the reality of things. This weakens your confidence still further >and serves as a further deterrent to - to what? It is clearer >all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you must >*make* an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a >troublemaker. So you wait... > >``But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds >or thousands will join with you, never comes. *That's* the >difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had >come immediately after the first and smallest... But of course >this isn't the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds >of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them >preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so >much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step >B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D. > >``And one day, too late, your principles ... all rush in >upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy, and >some minor incident, in my case my little boy ... saying `Jew >swine,' collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, >everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. >The world you were born in - your nation, your people - is not >the world you were born in at all. The forms are all there, all >untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the >mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. >But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the >lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. >Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate >and fear do not even know it themselves; when everyone is >transformed, no one is transformed. ... > >``... Life ... has flowed to a new level, carrying you with >it, without any effort on your part. On this new level you live >... more comfortably every day, with new morals, new principles. >You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years >ago, a year ago, things that your father ... could not have >imagined. > >``Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you >are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven't >done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we >do nothing). ... You remember everything now, and your heart >breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair." > >----------- ***{Brilliantly chosen, Jim, and absolutely on target. Sometimes, just when I begin to arrogantly think I have read everything important about Germany under Hitler, I receive a stunning surprise such as this. What a wonderful, insightful, stunning set of quotes! --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 06:00:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA12469; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 05:59:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 05:59:56 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <38492CC5.64CE71A9 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 15:01:25 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission References: <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119230128.006bceb8@mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"g5ueK1.0.j23.RvHIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31938 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: Hmmmm...at 1.4 fermi, the E field around a single proton is so strong that the vacuum should be able to spontaneously decay into a trapped electron and a positron which would drift away from the new "atom". That suggests that protons should spontaneously decay into neutrons and positrons...if it weren't for the puzzling fact that neutrons weigh MORE than the sum of a proton [****?] and a neutron. Hi Scott, ****? Do you mean "positron"? Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 08:49:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA09080; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 08:43:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 08:43:05 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 11:39:25 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-Reply-To: <3848999D.6D92 ca-ois.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5wTBB3.0.nD2.PIKIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31939 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: >Well I would ask: Just what good does "being vigilant" do if you are not >prepared to do something when you notice things sorta getting out of hand? Well, being vigilant means a lot of things, but here is what it does not mean: When you get a head cold, you do not call an ambulance and pretend you are dying of cancer. When the police stage a riot and bash a few heads, it does no good to pretend the Republic is tottering on the edge of a The Precipice of No Return. If the mayor and police chief of Seattle do not investigate and crack down on the police, you vote them out of office. What will you say if a real threat ever arises? People will assume you are crying wolf again, and they will pay no attention. I think the only danger in democratic society comes from panic stricken people who have no sense of perspective, or history, and who will not vote or participate in government. As Lincoln said, "while the people retain their virtue and vigilance no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can very seriously injure the Government in the short space of four years." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 08:56:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12019; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 08:53:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 08:53:41 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991120105352.006b4264 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 10:53:52 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: <38492CC5.64CE71A9 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> References: <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119230128.006bceb8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"AaHzi.0.jx2.LSKIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31940 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:01 PM 12/4/99 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: >Scott Little wrote: >...if it weren't for the puzzling fact that neutrons weigh >MORE than the sum of a proton [****?] and a neutron. >>****? Do you mean "positron"? Boy, I edited that one to death. I meant "electron". Neutrons weigh more than the sum of a proton and an electron, and I find that counterintuitive. It would seem like a neutron would form naturally from a proton and electron and that lots of energy would be released in the process. I'd like to understand WHY that is not the case. Robin wrote: >To start with, we may need to dump the concept of point sources of the >Coulomb field. We've always had to dump that concept, Robin. If you don't you get an infinite energy for the electric field around such a charge. Your other points are quite interesting. I agree that yet another catastrophe appears to be lurking close to the proton. I'm going to bring this up for discussion with Puthoff and Ibison soon. Surely this has been considered before...? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 09:32:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17998; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 09:21:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 09:21:46 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991203182409.0101a8b0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 11:16:18 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Resent-Message-ID: <"ebw0U3.0.8P4.gsKIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31941 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 12:07 PM 12/3/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>To be specific, the binomial series is as follows: (a + b)^n = a^n + >>(n/1!)[a^(n-1)]b + n(n-1)/2![a^(n-2)]b^2 + n(n-1)(n-2)/3![a^(n-3)]b^3 + ... >>+ b^n. The question is, what values are you using for a, b, and n, and how >>did you obtain them? > >OK, all you need are the first two terms: (a + b)^n = a^n + (n/1!)[a^(n-1)]b > >the expression we're expanding (in a form more compatible with the above is: > > (1-v^2/c^2)^-0.5 > >this is multiplied by m0*c^2 but we can do that at the end. > >To apply the expansion as you have correctly given it, set a=1, b = >v^2/c^2, and n = -0.5. When you get done, multiply through by m0*c^2 and >you'll get what I got. ***{OK, let's get concrete. Consider the following expressions: (1) (a + b)^2 = a^2 + 2ab + b^2 (2) (a + b)^3 = a^3 + 3a^2b + 3ab^2 + b^3 (3) (a + b)^4 = a^4 + 4a^3b + 6a^2b^2 + 4ab^3 + b^4 (4) (a + b)^5 = ? The binomial formula provides a set of rules for expanding a generalized expression of the form (a + b)^n. It states that there will be n + 1 terms, that the first term will be a^nb^0, that the last term will be a^0b^n, that from term to term the exponents of a will decrease by 1 while those of b increase by 1, and that if the coefficient of any term is multiplied by the exponent of a in that term and divided by the number of the term, the coefficient of the next term is obtained. Applying these rules to (4), above, we find that there will be 6 terms and that the first term will be a^5b^0. Thus we quickly jot down the following: a^5b^0 + 5a^4b^1 + 10a^3b^2 + 10a^2b^3 + 5a^1b^4 + a^0b^5 Since anything to the zero power equals 1, and exponents not given are assumed to be 1, we then have a^5 + 5a^4b + 10a^3b^2 + 10a^2b^3 + 5ab^4 + b^5 That procedure seems simple enough, right? OK, now let's apply it to your expression--to wit: (1-v^2/c^2)^-0.5 How many terms will there be in the series? The answer: n + 1. What is the value of n? The answer: n = - .5, so it appears that we will have - .5 + 1 = .5 terms. That's half a term, for Christ's sake! The point: the binomial formula, it would seem, only applies to the expansion of expressions that are being raised to positive, integral exponents. Thinking about the matter a bit further, however, it became apparent that if such a requirement were provisionally dropped, we could procede further in the manipulation of your expression. The number of terms would then be unknown, but the first term would be 1^(-.5)[v^2/c^2]^0. Result: 1^(-.5)[-(v^2/c^2)]^0 + [(-.5)/1][1^(-1.5)][-(v^2/c^2)]^1 + [(-.5)(-1.5)/1*2][1^(-2.5)][-(v^2/c^2)]^2 + [(-.5)(-1.5)(-2.5)/1*2*3][1^(-3.5)][-(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... Since 1 raised to any power is 1 and anything to the 0 power is also 1, we obtain: 1 + (1/2)(v^2/c^2) + [3/8][(v^2/c^2)]^2 + [5/32][(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... Provisionally, therefore, we have: (1-v^2/c^2)^-0.5 = 1 + (1/2)(v^2/c^2) + [3/8][(v^2/c^2)]^2 + [5/32][(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... Since E = mc^2 and m = m0/[(1-v^2/c^2)^.5], it follows that E = m0c^2/[(1-v^2/c^2)^.5] = (m0c^2)[(1-v^2/c^2)^-.5] Substituting our provisional expression, we get E = m0c^2[1 + (1/2)(v^2/c^2) + [3/8][(v^2/c^2)]^2 + [5/32][(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... ], or E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 + (5/32)m0v^6/c^5 + (7/128)m0v^8/c^7 + ... It would appear that when we chase this rabbit to ground, the expression that results is pretty damn complicated--too complicated to be correct, in my opinion. The math seems OK and I am willing to assume that the series is convergent, but I doubt that very many of these terms will withstand laboratory testing. How many of them have been experimentally verified? Anybody? --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little >Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA >512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 10:20:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA04729; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 10:18:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 10:18:28 -0800 Message-ID: <19991204181822.3340.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 10:18:22 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"weS-K1.0.k91.qhLIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31942 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In that case, how can you be sure that the lifetime is extended, rather >than >the possibility that you just happen to detect only those muon which happen >to take a particularly long time to decay? (Naturally selected by your >distance from the source). > >What I am really trying to say is, what measures have you taken to ensure >that your measurements support your contention, rather than the alternate >possibility presented here? This kind of measurement was performed many times and at different altitudes---high mountain and very high altitude balloons, as well as near sea level. The full data set yields the exponential decay history of the muons as seen in our reference frame, fixed to the earth. We can also make muons in the lab and measure the decay of slow moving muons for comparison. There is no contradiction between SR and the full set of experiments. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 10:48:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA11590; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 10:45:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 10:45:35 -0800 Message-ID: <38496AC5.250E ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 11:25:58 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730@pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"l-UoO.0.0r2.F5MIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31943 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > >Well I would ask: Just what good does "being vigilant" do if you are not > >prepared to do something when you notice things sorta getting out of hand? > > Well, being vigilant means a lot of things, but here is what it does not > mean: When you get a head cold, you do not call an ambulance and pretend > you are dying of cancer. When the police stage a riot and bash a few heads, > it does no good to pretend the Republic is tottering on the edge of a The > Precipice of No Return. If the mayor and police chief of Seattle do not > investigate and crack down on the police, you vote them out of office. What > will you say if a real threat ever arises? People will assume you are > crying wolf again, and they will pay no attention. I think the only danger > in democratic society comes from panic stricken people who have no sense of > perspective, or history, and who will not vote or participate in > government. As Lincoln said, "while the people retain their virtue and > vigilance no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can very > seriously injure the Government in the short space of four years." > > - Jed That's really very good, Jed. A most reasonable opinion, I must say. I would say also that probably a good 80 to 90 percent of the sheeple..(ooops, I mean "people") in this country would probably agree with everything you have to say, above. Well in keeping with what we "unindicted co-conspirators" want everyone to think. We "unindicted co-conspirators" hold to the view that if government is succesfull in getting people to think just like you do, using similar reasoning, then the aims and goals of the "conspiracy" are well furthered. If you don't think there is a conspiracy, well that's good too because what you don't know won't hurt you, that is until maybe it's too late. But by then, who will care anyway? The whole world will be at that point dominated by a great big ugly something or other, if it is not in fact so subjugated already, and what you or I posit about the merits or faults of this system won't matter one bit. So great, everything is proceeding according to our evil plan! (sinister laugh omitted) ;) Jim From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 12:22:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA05899; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 12:21:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 12:21:23 -0800 Message-ID: <002b01bf3e95$37919440$6b637dc7 computer> From: "Ed Wall" To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 15:21:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"B_7mo1.0.mR1.1VNIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31944 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Something vigilant does not mean is disarming the law abiding, Jed. I agree that a people solidly based in a knowledge of history, who are moral and who know how to and do actively participate in government are able to be intelligently vigilant, but what good would it do when any thug with a weapon (in uniform or not) can easily control them? What good does the knowledge do when the system of government is such that the only choices available on election day are media constructs (candidates), thoroughly owned by interests we might learn about after their 3rd year in office? Our government is a reflection of what we have allowed ourselves to become. Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: Jed Rothwell To: ; Sent: Saturday, December 04, 1999 11:39 AM Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > >Well I would ask: Just what good does "being vigilant" do if you are not > >prepared to do something when you notice things sorta getting out of hand? > > Well, being vigilant means a lot of things, but here is what it does not > mean: When you get a head cold, you do not call an ambulance and pretend > you are dying of cancer. When the police stage a riot and bash a few heads, > it does no good to pretend the Republic is tottering on the edge of a The > Precipice of No Return. If the mayor and police chief of Seattle do not > investigate and crack down on the police, you vote them out of office. What > will you say if a real threat ever arises? People will assume you are > crying wolf again, and they will pay no attention. I think the only danger > in democratic society comes from panic stricken people who have no sense of > perspective, or history, and who will not vote or participate in > government. As Lincoln said, "while the people retain their virtue and > vigilance no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can very > seriously injure the Government in the short space of four years." > > - Jed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 12:25:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07694; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 12:23:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 12:23:35 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991204152240.0083ddf0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 15:22:40 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-Reply-To: <38496AC5.250E ca-ois.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"HhITY2.0.8u1.6XNIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31945 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:25 AM 12/4/99 -0800, Jim Ostrowski wrote: >Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >> Jim Ostrowski wrote: >> >> >Well I would ask: Just what good does "being vigilant" do if you are not >> >prepared to do something when you notice things sorta getting out of hand? >> >> Well, being vigilant means a lot of things, but here is what it does not >> mean: When you get a head cold, you do not call an ambulance and pretend >> you are dying of cancer. When the police stage a riot and bash a few heads, >> it does no good to pretend the Republic is tottering on the edge of a The >> Precipice of No Return. If the mayor and police chief of Seattle do not >> investigate and crack down on the police, you vote them out of office. What >> will you say if a real threat ever arises? People will assume you are >> crying wolf again, and they will pay no attention. I think the only danger >> in democratic society comes from panic stricken people who have no sense of >> perspective, or history, and who will not vote or participate in >> government. As Lincoln said, "while the people retain their virtue and >> vigilance no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can very >> seriously injure the Government in the short space of four years." >> >> - Jed > >That's really very good, Jed. A most reasonable opinion, I must say. I >would say also that probably a good 80 to 90 percent of the >sheeple..(ooops, I mean "people") in this country would probably agree >with everything you have to say, above. Well in keeping with what we >"unindicted co-conspirators" want everyone to think. > > We "unindicted co-conspirators" hold to the view that if government is >succesfull in getting people to think just like you do, using similar >reasoning, then the aims and goals of the "conspiracy" are well >furthered. If you don't think there is a conspiracy, well that's good >too because what you don't know won't hurt you, that is until maybe it's >too late. But by then, who will care anyway? Interview with Seattle MD: "This is the beginning of a police state" http://208.138.42.193/forum/a38496e694c50.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 12:30:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA08632; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 12:26:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 12:26:42 -0800 Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 13:29:52 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912042028.NAA24627 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <3.0.1.32.19991203182409.0101a8b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448@fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> Resent-Message-ID: <"FpB4Z.0.k62.1aNIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31946 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:16 AM 12/4/99 -0600, you wrote: >>At 12:07 PM 12/3/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: ... >Thinking about the matter a bit further, however, it became apparent that >if such a requirement were provisionally dropped, we could procede further >in the manipulation of your expression. The number of terms would then be >unknown, but the first term would be 1^(-.5)[v^2/c^2]^0. Result: > >1^(-.5)[-(v^2/c^2)]^0 + [(-.5)/1][1^(-1.5)][-(v^2/c^2)]^1 + >[(-.5)(-1.5)/1*2][1^(-2.5)][-(v^2/c^2)]^2 + >[(-.5)(-1.5)(-2.5)/1*2*3][1^(-3.5)][-(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... > >Since 1 raised to any power is 1 and anything to the 0 power is also 1, we >obtain: > >1 + (1/2)(v^2/c^2) + [3/8][(v^2/c^2)]^2 + [5/32][(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... > >Provisionally, therefore, we have: > >(1-v^2/c^2)^-0.5 = 1 + (1/2)(v^2/c^2) + [3/8][(v^2/c^2)]^2 + >[5/32][(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... > >Since E = mc^2 and m = m0/[(1-v^2/c^2)^.5], it follows that > >E = m0c^2/[(1-v^2/c^2)^.5] = (m0c^2)[(1-v^2/c^2)^-.5] > >Substituting our provisional expression, we get > >E = m0c^2[1 + (1/2)(v^2/c^2) + [3/8][(v^2/c^2)]^2 + [5/32][(v^2/c^2)]^3 + >... ], or > >E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 + (5/32)m0v^6/c^5 + >(7/128)m0v^8/c^7 + ... > >It would appear that when we chase this rabbit to ground, the expression >that results is pretty damn complicated--too complicated to be correct, in >my opinion. The math seems OK and I am willing to assume that the series is >convergent, but I doubt that very many of these terms will withstand >laboratory testing. How many of them have been experimentally verified? >Anybody? > >--Mitchell Jones}*** Complicated does not imply incorrect. What you have generated is called a binomial series. The binomial series for the function (1+x)^(-1/2) converges for |x| < 1, which you have if v < c. I am not sure what you mean by "laboratory testing the terms". The sum of the series does equal the function it expands. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 14:20:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA08255; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 14:18:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 14:18:44 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <001101bf3ea5$84b76280$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 16:18:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"T2coM2.0.v02.4DPIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31947 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > the only danger in democratic society comes from panic stricken > people who have no sense of perspective, or history, and who > will not vote or participate in government. It is interesting you should quote Lincoln in this regard. After all, the foundation of the government then at the time legal by every mechanism you endorse, held in the Dred Scott decision of the Supreme Court, that slavery was legal in all states and territories of the United States. By definition of majority rule, the enslavement of a minority did not threaten the democratic society. The democratic society at that time, by their own rules, had left it up to each state to decide whether to allow enslavement. The Supreme Court explicitly upheld this democratic authorization in the Dred Scott decision of 1857. So one has to wonder which "dangers" you are prepared to recognize, since all aspects of democratic social authority had been met in the enslavement of a small minority. (I'll leave it to historians to debate whether some after-the-fact "democratic" rationalization can be made for Lincoln's obvious *anti-democratic* initiation of civil war.) Make no mistake, I am opposed to enslavement of the individual (that's why I oppose taxation) but an opposition to enslavement cannot fundamentally be derived from anything "democratic", since the consequence of majority rule is only limited by the whim of the mob, and cannot itself be the foundation of a means to discover moral imperatives. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 14:40:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA14730; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 14:39:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 14:39:34 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991204173806.007a5bb0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 17:38:06 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-Reply-To: <001101bf3ea5$84b76280$0101a8c0 john> References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"zSpsN2.0.zb3.cWPIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31948 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I quoted Lincoln's First Inagurual. John Logajan wrote: >It is interesting you should quote Lincoln in this regard. >After all, the foundation of the government then at the time >legal by every mechanism you endorse, held in the Dred Scott >decision of the Supreme Court, that slavery was legal in all >states and territories of the United States. I disagree, and Lincoln disagreed too. The foundation was the Constitution, and it said nothing about that either way, so the decision should have been left to the majority and to lawmakers. The majority was in favor of emancipation by 1860, otherwise there would have been no dispute and no war. As Lincoln said: May Congress prohibit slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. Must Congress protect slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. From questions of this class spring all our constitutional controversies, and we divide upon them into majorities and minorities. If the minority will not acquiesce, the majority must, or the Government must cease. . . . The rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left. For the rest of his policy, see the rest of the speech. He said he had no intention of disestablishing slavery, but I think that was disingenuous. He was elected to put an end to the institution, and he would have done it by peaceful means -- paying off the slaveholders -- if the southerners had not resorted to war. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 14:55:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA19653; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 14:54:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 14:54:21 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991204175309.007c9b80 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 17:53:09 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991204173806.007a5bb0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <001101bf3ea5$84b76280$0101a8c0 john> <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"KRvhI1.0._o4.TkPIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31949 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:38 PM 12/4/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >I quoted Lincoln's First Inagurual. John Logajan wrote: > >>It is interesting you should quote Lincoln in this regard. >>After all, the foundation of the government then at the time >>legal by every mechanism you endorse, held in the Dred Scott >>decision of the Supreme Court, that slavery was legal in all >>states and territories of the United States. > >I disagree, and Lincoln disagreed too. The foundation was the Constitution, >and it said nothing about that either way, so the decision should have been >left to the majority and to lawmakers. No. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776 The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained, and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us in many cases of the benefits of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies: For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments: For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. He has abdicated Government here by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends. We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare. That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. The Bill of Rights Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 15:05:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA22417; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 15:04:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 15:04:39 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 10:04:35 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <19991204181822.3340.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <19991204181822.3340.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA22394 Resent-Message-ID: <"LdI6n3.0.BU5.7uPIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31950 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 10:18:22 -0800 (PST), Michael Schaffer wrote: [snip] >This kind of measurement was performed many times and at different >altitudes---high mountain and very high altitude balloons, as well as near >sea level. The full data set yields the exponential decay history of the >muons as seen in our reference frame, fixed to the earth. We can also make >muons in the lab and measure the decay of slow moving muons for comparison. >There is no contradiction between SR and the full set of experiments. [snip] Thank you Michael. I thought muon creation in the lab was a rather high energy event. How does one go about getting slow muons? (Or determining their energy for that matter). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 15:21:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA26994; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 15:20:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 15:20:33 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 10:20:31 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119230128.006bceb8@mail.eden.com> <38492CC5.64CE71A9@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3.0.1.32.19991120105352.006b4264@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991120105352.006b4264 mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA26978 Resent-Message-ID: <"LNj2g.0.ib6.17QIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31951 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 20 Nov 1999 10:53:52 -0600, Scott Little wrote: [snip] >Your other points are quite interesting. I agree that yet another >catastrophe appears to be lurking close to the proton. I'm going to bring >this up for discussion with Puthoff and Ibison soon. Surely this has been >considered before...? A possibility is that the field energy of the proton is partially shielded by the electron forming a "shell" around it. As the size of the shell decreases, the quality of the shielding improves, so the proton masses less and less as the electron gets closer. There may also be a connection to the volume of the space enclosed by the electron, and the energy density within that volume (constant density perhaps?). Maybe the proton and the electron lose mass, in proportion to their own original mass as free particles, rather than in proportion to their charge. I.e. the proton loses 1836 times as much as the electron, that way they both end up with nothing at the same time (if they could get close enough). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 15:35:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA31059; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 15:34:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 15:34:27 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 10:34:23 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570@mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32. 19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119230128.006bceb8@mail.eden.com> <38492CC5.64CE71A9@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3.0.1.32.19991120105352.006b4264@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA31038 Resent-Message-ID: <"RBJw13.0.9b7.3KQIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31952 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 05 Dec 1999 10:20:31 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: [snip] >Maybe the proton and the electron lose mass, in proportion to their own >original mass as free particles, rather than in proportion to their charge. >I.e. the proton loses 1836 times as much as the electron, that way they both >end up with nothing at the same time (if they could get close enough). [snip] Follow-up thought: If the proton loses mass, then if it were to undergo a subsequent fusion reaction, it would release less fusion energy, as a consequence of that lower mass. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 16:54:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA21440; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 16:53:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 16:53:41 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Solar cells in the dark Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 11:53:37 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 QAA21424 Resent-Message-ID: <"Gs08v1.0.wE5.LURIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31953 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, Do solar cells generate a small voltage even in the dark, just from ambient thermal radiation? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 18:54:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA23644; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 18:52:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 18:52:31 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991120205247.006b5184 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 20:52:47 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission In-Reply-To: <199912042028.NAA24627 smtp.asu.edu> References: <3.0.1.32.19991203182409.0101a8b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"iE-T83.0.Hn5.lDTIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31954 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:29 PM 12/4/99 -0700, Lynn Kurtz wrote: >I am not sure what you mean >by "laboratory testing the terms". The sum of the series does equal the >function it expands. Lynn's right, Mitchell. We're not talking about physics now...this is just math. According to SR, an object's mass increases towards infinity as it approaches the speed of light. That means its kinetic energy also approaches infinity. The first two terms are the rest mass energy and the "non-relativistic" kinetic energy respectively. The other terms represent the additional kinetic energy that arises due to the relativistic increase in mass. However, the reason I brought this up in the first place was to point out that the 2nd term, which we normally think of as non-relativistic kinetic energy is itself of relativistic origin. BTW, in this expression: >>E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 + (5/32)m0v^6/c^5 + >>(7/128)m0v^8/c^7 + ... you made a few errors...it should read: >>E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^2 + (5/16)m0v^6/c^4 + >>(35/128)m0v^8/c^6 + ... Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 21:28:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA30214; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 21:26:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 21:26:32 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199912042028.NAA24627 smtp.asu.edu> References: <3.0.1.32.19991203182409.0101a8b0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24@verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 23:23:43 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Resent-Message-ID: <"r7o04.0.0O7.8UVIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31955 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 11:16 AM 12/4/99 -0600, you wrote: >>>At 12:07 PM 12/3/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >... >>Thinking about the matter a bit further, however, it became apparent that >>if such a requirement were provisionally dropped, we could procede further >>in the manipulation of your expression. The number of terms would then be >>unknown, but the first term would be 1^(-.5)[v^2/c^2]^0. Result: >> >>1^(-.5)[-(v^2/c^2)]^0 + [(-.5)/1][1^(-1.5)][-(v^2/c^2)]^1 + >>[(-.5)(-1.5)/1*2][1^(-2.5)][-(v^2/c^2)]^2 + >>[(-.5)(-1.5)(-2.5)/1*2*3][1^(-3.5)][-(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... >> >>Since 1 raised to any power is 1 and anything to the 0 power is also 1, we >>obtain: >> >>1 + (1/2)(v^2/c^2) + [3/8][(v^2/c^2)]^2 + [5/32][(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... >> >>Provisionally, therefore, we have: >> >>(1-v^2/c^2)^-0.5 = 1 + (1/2)(v^2/c^2) + [3/8][(v^2/c^2)]^2 + >>[5/32][(v^2/c^2)]^3 + ... >> > >>Since E = mc^2 and m = m0/[(1-v^2/c^2)^.5], it follows that >> >>E = m0c^2/[(1-v^2/c^2)^.5] = (m0c^2)[(1-v^2/c^2)^-.5] >> >>Substituting our provisional expression, we get >> >>E = m0c^2[1 + (1/2)(v^2/c^2) + [3/8][(v^2/c^2)]^2 + [5/32][(v^2/c^2)]^3 + >>... ], or >> >>E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 + (5/32)m0v^6/c^5 + >>(7/128)m0v^8/c^7 + ... >> >>It would appear that when we chase this rabbit to ground, the expression >>that results is pretty damn complicated--too complicated to be correct, in >>my opinion. The math seems OK and I am willing to assume that the series is >>convergent, but I doubt that very many of these terms will withstand >>laboratory testing. How many of them have been experimentally verified? >>Anybody? >> >>--Mitchell Jones}*** > >Complicated does not imply incorrect. ***{Maybe not, but in the present case it strongly suggests it. Don't forget that we are dealing with a formula, E = mc^2, which was handed down to us from a foggy thinker (Einstein) who thought distance and time were dependent upon velocity, despite the fact that velocity, by definition, equals distance traveled divided by elapsed time. Anyone who failed to notice the circularity of such a proposition, or who noticed it and was undeterred, should not be trusted. --Mitchell Jones}*** What you have generated is called a >binomial series. The binomial series for the function (1+x)^(-1/2) >converges for |x| < 1, which you have if v < c. ***{Yes, that sounds right to me. I experienced some vague deja vu as I was working my way through this derivation, so I have likely encountered the topic before, many years ago. --MJ}*** I am not sure what you mean >by "laboratory testing the terms". The sum of the series does equal the >function it expands. ***{Of course, but I am nevertheless pleased to see it resolved into parts in a way that is likely to be meaningful. (As is suggested by the fact that the 2nd term in the series turns out to be the classical kinetic energy formula.) Once that is done, it is easier to experimentally determine which of the terms enhance the fit, and which do not. For example, does E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 provide a better fit to the empirical data than E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 + (5/32)m0v^6/c^5? Such questions can only be answered by the collection of data. (Remember: the focus of mathematical physics is supposed to be on whether the formulae fit the experimentally determined data points. A mathematical construct which does not fit should be thrown out, regardless of whether it seems aesthetically pleasing, and so any algebraic manipulations that will resolve a suspect equation into meaningful components are a step in the right direction.) --Mitchell Jones}*** > >--Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 01:49:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA03156; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 01:47:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 01:47:04 -0800 Message-ID: <000d01bf3f0e$0a5fb640$4c441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: ET, Call Home? Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 02:46:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"yDSsU.0.En.OIZIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31956 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Two days without any word from the Mars Polar Lander probe......? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 02:01:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA05421; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 02:00:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 02:00:48 -0800 Message-ID: <00c301bf3f06$d9bd9fe0$d8b2fea9 hal-9000> Reply-To: "dwenbert" From: "dwenbert" To: Subject: Re: ET, Call Home? Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 04:55:15 -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 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"V-T_a3.0.dK1.GVZIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31957 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Frederick Sparber Subject: Re: ET, Call Home? >Two days without any word from the Mars Polar Lander probe......? In a quote from John Cleese (the 'Dead Parrot' sketch): "STONE F*CKING DEAD", it is..... ;-) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 05:40:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA28960; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 05:39:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 05:39:00 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <384A795D.5ED4740F mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 14:40:29 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission References: <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119230128.006bceb8@mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"Y1Sf_1.0.L47.phcIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31958 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: ... Does E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 provide a better fit to the empirical data than E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 + (5/32)m0v^6/c^5? Such questions can only be answered by the collection of data. (Remember: the focus of mathematical physics is supposed to be on WHETHER THE FORMULAE FIT THE EXPERIMENTALLY DETERMINED DATA POINTS ...) Jack writes: To paraphrase Archimedes, "Give me a power series with enough terns and I will fit the universe." Or as more aptly put (by Disraeli?), "There are liars, damned liars, and statiticians." Data can be fit by power series, with interaction terms, for design purposes. There is woe unto to those who think, in so doing, they have discovered the secrets of the universe. Try operating outside the range of the data and watch another chemical plant blow up. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 09:01:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12684; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 09:01:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 09:01:02 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <000f01bf3f42$4baec6c0$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com><3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730@pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991204173806.007a5bb0@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 11:00:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"Gp_H73.0.663.DffIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31959 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > >held in the Dred Scott decision of the Supreme Court, that > >slavery was legal in all states and territories of the > >United States. > I disagree, and Lincoln disagreed too. The foundation was the Constitution, > and it said nothing about that either way, so the decision should have been > left to the majority and to lawmakers. Supposedly the "democratic" method had given the Supreme Court, via the Constitution, final authority in this matter. Now you are advocating that at the whim of the majority, such institutional mechanisms be ignored as convenient. You are violating one aspect of the Constitution at the same time you call out its name in support. Clearly you would have the instantaneous whim of the majority superior to any other previous acts they may have established (Constitutions, rule of law, and the like.) > The majority was in favor of emancipation by 1860 ... With the obvious implication that they weren't (or hadn't politically expressed opposition) in the centuries prior. Therefore are we to presume, based upon this majoritarian view, that slavery was good and proper up until the time the majoritarian view swung in opposition? So now we have this historical period of time where the majority has established institutions that uphold the legality of slavery, and the majority has not expressed, through election of its representatives, legal opposition to slavery. The moral dilemmas come fast now. Members of the "underground railroad" are criminals in this view -- violators of the majoritarian will. Outlaws. Fringe elements. And we needn't look so far back in history of this country for similar majoritarian acts -- for instance, FDR was one of the most popular presidents -- elected for life, it turned out. Yet he confined to internment camps American citizens who had the happenstance to have Asian genetic characteristics -- a clear and gross violation of Constitutional safeguards. Yet not only was there no majoritarian outcry, upon FDR's death and Truman's own election run, the majority did not throw out the administration, but re-elected Truman. Clearly the majority did not care, or were quite in favor of such internment. The history of majoritarianism is filled with atrocities of the majority against the minority. Clearly one cannot derive any moral authority from the voice of the majority. Moral knowledge has to come from elsewhere. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 11:48:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26142; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 11:47:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 11:47:54 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000d01bf3f0e$0a5fb640$4c441d26 fjsparber> Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 12:58:32 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: ET, Call Home? Resent-Message-ID: <"oaYx03.0.HO6.f5iIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31960 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Two days without any word from the Mars Polar Lander probe......? > >Regards, Frederick ***{Yup. It must be another one of those pesky "coincidences." :-) --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 11:49:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26166; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 11:47:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 11:47:54 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <384A795D.5ED4740F mail.pc.centuryinter.net> References: <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <199911300117.UAA24448 fh105.infi.net> <38453F65.A7BFDF24 verisoft.com.tr> <3.0.1.32.19991202093826.01b8c9c0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119011852.006b7570 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991203182711.0101efe0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991119230128.006bceb8 mail.eden.com> Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 13:09:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Superluminal Transmission Resent-Message-ID: <"bMzZx1.0.kO6.g5iIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31961 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > > ... Does E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 >provide a better fit to the empirical data >than E = m0c^2 + (1/2)m0v^2 + (3/8)m0v^4/c^3 + (5/32)m0v^6/c^5? > >Such questions can only be answered by the collection of data. >(Remember: the focus of mathematical physics is supposed to be on >WHETHER THE FORMULAE FIT THE EXPERIMENTALLY DETERMINED DATA POINTS ...) > >Jack writes: > >To paraphrase Archimedes, "Give me a power series with enough terns >and I will fit the universe." Or as more aptly put (by Disraeli?), >"There are liars, damned liars, and statiticians." Data can be fit by >power series, with interaction terms, for design purposes. There is woe >unto to those who think, in so doing, they have discovered the secrets >of the universe. Try operating outside the range of the data and >watch another chemical plant blow up. > >Jack Smith ***{Absolutely on target. It is only to the extent that the terms in such a power series seem meaningful--that is, the extent to which they can be independently derived from the specifics of the situation by means of reasoning based on first principles--that the series can be trusted. In the case presently under discussion, the first term is plausible, the second can be independently derived using elementary calculus, and the higher order terms bear no logical relationship to anything anyone has ever heard of. In my view, the question is not whether the fit will break down at some point, but where. --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 13:29:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA27446; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 13:28:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 13:28:23 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 16:37:42 -0500 Message-ID: <19991205213742843.AAA283 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"Z8XnG3.0.hi6.sZjIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31962 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John L. wrote: >The history of majoritarianism is filled with atrocities of >the majority against the minority. Clearly one cannot derive >any moral authority from the voice of the majority. Moral >knowledge has to come from elsewhere. Got any pointers as to where I can find this knowledge? My moral compass is evidently completely out of whack with respect to the majority in this country. I'd settle for a good brain dry cleaners right now, if they guaranteed no shrinkage. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 17:38:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA05016; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 17:36:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 17:36:08 -0800 Message-ID: <384B1C10.3BB8 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 18:14:41 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991205213742843.AAA283 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DkYgR2.0.IE1.8CnIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31963 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael T Huffman wrote: > > John L. wrote: > >The history of majoritarianism is filled with atrocities of > >the majority against the minority. Clearly one cannot derive > >any moral authority from the voice of the majority. Moral > >knowledge has to come from elsewhere. > > Got any pointers as to where I can find this knowledge? You might want to check Charles Darwin's Theory of "Natural Selection" contained in the "Origin of Species". It's called "Survival of the Fittest". IOW might makes right, right? What's the problem? Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 20:36:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA14387; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 20:35:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 20:35:29 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991205232746.00b89690 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 23:27:46 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Orwellian Nightmare Down Under? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4bh8M3.0.ZW3.GqpIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31964 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air - however slight - lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas Click here: http://208.138.42.193/forum/a384b29ac4e54.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 22:42:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA07871; Sun, 5 Dec 1999 22:41:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 22:41:35 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991205232746.00b89690 world.std.com> Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 00:36:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Orwellian Nightmare Down Under? Resent-Message-ID: <"45io82.0.tw1.UgrIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31965 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. >In both instances there is a twilight when everything remains >seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all >must be most aware of change in the air - however slight - >lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." >Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas > > > Click here: >http://208.138.42.193/forum/a384b29ac4e54.htm ***{The Aussies are just trying to catch up with the Gestapo in the U.S., where cops have been using a program called DIRT for several years. By means of it, they can insert a subroutine in your computer via the internet, which operates in the background, secretly monitoring your every keystroke, or searching for keywords and monitoring selected activities, and sends out clandestine e-mails reporting that information. And, as an added bonus, DIRT gives them the capability to plant evidence, if you are someone they particulary want to incarcerate for some reason. Bottom line: "America" continues to exist only in the minds of people who are in denial. Beneath the surface, the machinery of the police state is already in place, and we are merely a stock market crash away from becoming an impoverished 3rd world hell hole. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 00:19:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA22330; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 00:18:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 00:18:25 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 22:18:15 -1000 Subject: Re: Orwellian Nightmare Down Under? From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QoQ0x2.0.qS5.C5tIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31966 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: on 12/5/99 8:36 PM, Mitchell Jones at mjones jump.net wrote: > Bottom line: > "America" continues to exist only in the minds of people who are in denial. > Beneath the surface, the machinery of the police state is already in place, > and we are merely a stock market crash away from becoming an impoverished > 3rd world hell hole. Those wacko right-wing (left-wing, religious-wing, etc.) web sites are bad for a person's sense of proportion, and can cause some people to become wracked with unreasonable fears. I'll leave it to forum members to guess which people. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 02:06:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA08670; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 02:05:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 02:05:51 -0800 Message-ID: <001101bf3fd9$d3448740$1b441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: Orwellian Nightmare Down Under? Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 03:05:30 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"U9weP2.0.O72._fuIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31967 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Monteverde To: Sent: Monday, December 06, 1999 12:18 AM Subject: Re: Orwellian Nightmare Down Under? Rick wrote: > on 12/5/99 8:36 PM, Mitchell Jones at mjones jump.net wrote: > > > Bottom line: > > "America" continues to exist only in the minds of people who are in denial. > > Beneath the surface, the machinery of the police state is already in place, > > and we are merely a stock market crash away from becoming an impoverished > > 3rd world hell hole. > > Those wacko right-wing (left-wing, religious-wing, etc.) web sites are bad > for a person's sense of proportion, and can cause some people to become > wracked with unreasonable fears. I'll leave it to forum members to guess > which people. ROFL! Well said, Rick. Yellow-bellied sapsuckers use their peckers to search for worms in these sociopathic "brains". :-) Regards, Frederick > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 05:19:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA06807; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 05:12:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 05:12:48 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 08:22:09 -0500 Message-ID: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"bvSMu1.0.Gg1.GPxIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31968 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim O. writes: >You might want to check Charles Darwin's Theory of "Natural Selection" >contained in >the "Origin of Species". It's called "Survival of the Fittest". > >IOW might makes right, right? What's the problem? > >Jim O. I haven't actually read this, but I think I'm pretty familiar with the general ideas. I also think that the ideas held up pretty well to the close examination of the behavior of all the living creatures on the Earth for a very long time. It doesn't hold up today, and, as I will explain, something else, hopefully better, has taken its place. I don't know that it has been formally posited, but here is my take on it. With the discovery of nuclear power, the world became a bit different. Suddenly people had the ability to wipe out all life on Earth, and within a fairly short period of time, more than one group had this ability. Like it or not, we are faced today with the fact that this ability is not too difficult to achieve, and now many people have it. The ability has shifted over the years from a small number of large groups that somehow managed to regulate themselves to avoid the total destruction of lifekind to a large number of small groups, and in some cases, even individuals. The race for this type of knowledge has actually become more important to many people than the race to acquire wealth for example, simply because having this ability seems to give one the ability to acquire wealth through intimidation, or at least, so it would seem. This type of knowledge is not just limited to nuclear power either, I'm just using it as an example. Once a knowledge of this sort is discovered, it eventually finds its way into the hands of individuals, and even if the rest of the entire world is able to deal with magnitude of the discovery in a more or less responsible fashion, all it takes is the malevolent action of one individual to take out the rest of us. When a large enough number of individuals has this ability, either with a nuclear threat or any of the other threats, then the probability of that happening becomes a certainty. The same is true for accidents involving the manipulation or use of any of the more powerful physical forces. With this in mind, it becomes apparent that the only way for life to continue for the longest possible time is for people to try and get along better, and to simultaneously try to limit the number of accidents that occur. Being the fittest no longer matters, nor does being a part of any large group, nor does being "right", nor does having the most money. Being mature, and willing to help people understand this is emerging paradigm. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 05:55:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA18139; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 05:54:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 05:54:14 -0800 Message-ID: <001901bf3ff1$7b769360$0b627dc7 computer> From: "Ed Wall" To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991203175712.007a32f0 pop.mindspring.com><3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730@pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991204173806.007a5bb0@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 08:54:24 -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 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"FLfU61.0.LR4.60yIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31969 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed wrote (in quoting Lincoln): > For the rest of his policy, see the rest of the speech. He said he had no > intention of disestablishing slavery, but I think that was disingenuous. He > was elected to put an end to the institution, and he would have done it by > peaceful means -- paying off the slaveholders -- if the southerners had not > resorted to war. > If Lincoln was elected to end slavery, the electorate was not paying much attention to what he was saying during his presidential campaign or his inaugural address: "Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered . . . . I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it now exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and have no inclination to do so." (Don E. Fehrenbacher, ed., _Abraham Lincoln: Speeches and Writings, 1859-1865, p. 215) After the start of the war in 1861, he said: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I couild do it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that." (Robert L. Polley, ed., _Lincoln: His Words and His World_, p. 54) Popular history remembers mainly his Emancipation Proclamation, which attached a moral incentive to a very unpopular war for northern soldiers, lessening the coercion required to build the army. While quoting Lincoln in the fourth debate with Senator Douglas below, I am not supporting in any way his views, which were quite common at the time: "I am not nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races--that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." (Fehrenbacher, p. 636) These words today would define a white supremacist. I don't think he was being disingenuous with his intent to not interfere with States Rights. He was caught in a very bad spot. The war was started and fought for economic and political reasons. Liberty for the slaves, as good a goal as it was, was mainly convenient, not unlike stopping the alleged slaughter of Albanians in Kosovo by Monica Lewinsky's former impeached boyfriend (the difference here is that there was no wholesale slaugher of Albanian civilians -- until our bombing started). No sane person doubts the need to rectify the abuse of blacks as slaves in the old south. It was well recognized by the abolitionists then, of whom Lincoln was not one, until political expedience demanded it. Slavery had already been abolished in England. Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 06:18:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA24080; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 06:17:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 06:17:29 -0800 Message-ID: <384BC609.5C1DA99A bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 09:19:53 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Contact? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4V3GZ2.0.Au5.vLyIu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31970 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: From: http://www.sightings.com/politics5/sig.htm <><><><><><><><><> New Intelligent Signals >From Space George A. Filer MUFON Skywatch Investigations Director - Mutual UFO Network Eastern Filer's Files #48 12-5-99 ARECIBO, PUERTO RICO - Gannett News Service reports that on November 29, 1999, the world's largest radio telescope, picked up what appeared to be an intelligent signal coming from a small star named HD119850. What's more, a backup telescope at Jodrell Bank near Manchester, England was hearing the same beacon a clear sign the signal was not from Earth. Astronomer Jill Tarter, 55, is chief scientist with the SETI Institute of Mountain View. Jody Foster played Jill in the movie "Contact." Other tests were conducted from the Arecibo control room to determine if the signal coming from 106 trillion miles away was real. The telescope was moved away from the target star. The signal vanished and only returned when it was aimed again at the target star. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 08:50:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15683; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 08:47:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 08:47:48 -0800 Message-ID: <384BF21F.6E64 ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 09:27:59 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Orwellian Nightmare Down Under? References: <001101bf3fd9$d3448740$1b441d26@fjsparber> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eUeCP2.0.zq3.qY-Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31971 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber wrote: > > > > on 12/5/99 8:36 PM, Mitchell Jones at mjones jump.net wrote: > > > > > Bottom line: > > > "America" continues to exist only in the minds of people who are in denial. > > > Beneath the surface, the machinery of the police state is already in place, > > > and we are merely a stock market crash away from becoming an impoverished > > > 3rd world hell hole. > > > > Those wacko right-wing (left-wing, religious-wing, etc.) web sites are bad > > for a person's sense of proportion, and can cause some people to become > > wracked with unreasonable fears. I'll leave it to forum members to guess > > which people. > > ROFL! Well said, Rick. > > Yellow-bellied sapsuckers use their peckers to search for worms in these sociopathic "brains". > :-) > Mayer quoting old German who had endured the Hitler regime: ``Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, ..., `everyone' is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. ... you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, `It's not so bad' or `You're seeing things' or `You're an alarmist.' ``And you *are* an alarmist. You are saying that *this* must lead to *this*, and you can't prove it. ... On the one hand, your enemies ... intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh- pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, ... people who have always thought as you have. ``... in small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel that you are talking to yourselves, that you are isolated from the reality of things. This weakens your confidence still further and serves as a further deterrent to - to what? It is clearer all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you must *make* an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a troublemaker. So you wait... ``But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. *That's* the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest... But of course this isn't the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D." ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thought this was worth repeating, here. Personally, I don't think it would be in the best interests of the conspiracy alleged to allow a stock market crash to happen, as long as everyone is behaving themselves and DOING NOTHING about any of the incremental steps between A and Z. On the other hand, stock market crashes merely provide an opportunity for profit taking for those who had the means and the foresight to invest in land and the mortgages on hard capital assets. For those who think it CAN'T happen now, your faith in the system must be greater than the faith those wingnut wackos have in whatever religion is posited on their websites. If the system is YOUR GOD, you have the right to worship THAT, certainly. Go for it! Watch more TV! "For I [God] will send them strong delusion"- The Bible Jim Ostrowski Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 09:46:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA06995; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 09:43:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 09:43:37 -0800 Message-ID: <384BF579.EC43414C verisoft.com.tr> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 19:42:17 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Contact? References: <384BC609.5C1DA99A bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_1BEG2.0.8j1.8N_Iu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31972 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It seems this an incorrect information. See this post to sci.astro.seti: http://x35.deja.com/=infoseek/getdoc.xp?AN=557142799&CONTEXT=944501666.101449839&hitnum=7 Subject: Re: Star HD119850 intelligent signal? Date: 1999/12/06 Author: Kevin Dalley Kevin Dalley writes: > Yup. I can provide more definitive information. The SETI Institute > did not find an intelligent signal. We did look at HD119850 during > this observing run. Other than that, many parts of this report are > accurate. Oops. I mistyped here. We did *not* look at HD119850 during this observing run. We *did*, as I explained below, look at the star during the previous run. In any event, the results remain the same. We did not find an ETI signal. > The SETI Institute did observe HD119850 from Arecibo, on March 20, 21, > 22, 23, 26, and April 4. There were a 4 times where we looked for a > signal away from the target star, followed by an on target > observation. The signals were not confirmed in the on target > followups. -- Kevin Dalley SETI Institute kevin seti.org Terry Blanton wrote: > > From: > > http://www.sightings.com/politics5/sig.htm > > <><><><><><><><><> > > New Intelligent Signals > >From Space > George A. Filer > MUFON Skywatch Investigations > Director - Mutual UFO Network Eastern > Filer's Files #48 12-5-99 > > ARECIBO, PUERTO RICO - Gannett News Service reports that on November 29, 1999, > the world's largest radio telescope, picked up what appeared to be an > intelligent signal coming from a small star named HD119850. What's more, a > backup telescope at Jodrell Bank near Manchester, England was hearing the same > beacon a clear sign the signal was not from Earth. Astronomer Jill Tarter, 55, > is chief scientist with the SETI Institute of Mountain View. Jody Foster played > Jill in the movie "Contact." > > Other tests were conducted from the Arecibo control room to determine if the > signal coming from 106 trillion miles away was real. The telescope was moved > away from the target star. The signal vanished and only returned when it was > aimed again at the target star. > > Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 09:56:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA09646; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 09:53:34 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 09:53:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <384BF809.E649C1CC bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:53:13 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Contact? References: <384BC609.5C1DA99A bellsouth.net> <384BF579.EC43414C@verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"J9SSv2.0.cM2.SW_Iu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31973 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: hamdi ucar wrote: > Bubble = Pop! Thanks, Hamdi! I will forward a copy to George. Terry > It seems this an incorrect information. See this post to sci.astro.seti: > > http://x35.deja.com/=infoseek/getdoc.xp?AN=557142799&CONTEXT=944501666.101449839&hitnum=7 > > Subject: Re: Star HD119850 intelligent signal? > Date: 1999/12/06 > Author: Kevin Dalley > > > Kevin Dalley writes: > > > Yup. I can provide more definitive information. The SETI Institute > > did not find an intelligent signal. We did look at HD119850 during > > this observing run. Other than that, many parts of this report are > > accurate. > > Oops. I mistyped here. We did *not* look at HD119850 during this > observing run. We *did*, as I explained below, look at the star during > the previous run. > > In any event, the results remain the same. We did not find an ETI > signal. > > > The SETI Institute did observe HD119850 from Arecibo, on March 20, 21, > > 22, 23, 26, and April 4. There were a 4 times where we looked for a > > signal away from the target star, followed by an on target > > observation. The signals were not confirmed in the on target > > followups. > > -- > Kevin Dalley > SETI Institute > kevin seti.org > > Terry Blanton wrote: > > > > From: > > > > http://www.sightings.com/politics5/sig.htm > > > > <><><><><><><><><> > > > > New Intelligent Signals > > >From Space > > George A. Filer > > MUFON Skywatch Investigations > > Director - Mutual UFO Network Eastern > > Filer's Files #48 12-5-99 > > > > ARECIBO, PUERTO RICO - Gannett News Service reports that on November 29, 1999, > > the world's largest radio telescope, picked up what appeared to be an > > intelligent signal coming from a small star named HD119850. What's more, a > > backup telescope at Jodrell Bank near Manchester, England was hearing the same > > beacon a clear sign the signal was not from Earth. Astronomer Jill Tarter, 55, > > is chief scientist with the SETI Institute of Mountain View. Jody Foster played > > Jill in the movie "Contact." > > > > Other tests were conducted from the Arecibo control room to determine if the > > signal coming from 106 trillion miles away was real. The telescope was moved > > away from the target star. The signal vanished and only returned when it was > > aimed again at the target star. > > > > > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 10:22:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA14402; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:17:10 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:17:10 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 12:10:27 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"BsD7z1.0.NW3.Ms_Iu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31974 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The other day, in response to Fredrick Sparber's continued postings on the subject of neutrinos, I stated that I had never read much on the subject, and that based on what I had read, I had no idea whether they existed or not. I sumarized the reasons for my misgivings as follows: *********************************************** Fred, I'm not a fan of the neutrino concept. Frankly, I'm not yet completely convinced that they exist. My recollection is that they were originally postulated to account for the fact that, in the beta decay of a specific isotope, the emitted electrons/positrons carry with them energies which are continuously variable up to some maximum, rather than all being emitted at a finite number of specific energy levels. This fact clashed with the already entrenched quantum mechanical assumption that electrons inside a nucleus must exist at discrete energy levels, in a manner analogous to those which they occupy when orbiting outside the nucleus. Given that assumption, it follows that an electron which was ejected from a nucleus should carry with it in the form of kinetic energy whatever potential energy it had at the discrete orbital which it occupied within the nucleus, and thus a continuous distribution of exit energies would not be observed. To account for the irritating fact that they *were* observed, therefore, someone (Pauli?) proposed that a virtually indetectible particle with near-zero mass and charge, the "neutrino," carried away the missing energy like a ghost. My problem with this postulate is simply the fact that it rests on extending the quantization idea into the nucleus, where it may not strictly apply--that is: the assumption that electrons and positrons inside a nucleus must exist at discrete energy levels, in a manner analogous to those which they occupy when orbiting outside the nucleus, seems implausible to me. Electrons and positrons, after all, are relatively light particles, and, in the crowded, chaotic environment of the nucleus, I can easily see them being continuously buffetted about in ways that would render their energies continuously variable. Result: in those cases where they were ejected from the nucleus, the energies which they carried away with them could also be continuously variable. Result: no neutrino. Admittedly, I am not firmly committed to the view that neutrinos do not exist. I simply am not yet convinced that they do. (Frankly, it isn't a subject that I have read very much about.) Since you seem to be this group's resident neutrino expert, what is your response to the above? What is the smoking-gun proof that neutrinos really do exist? Or, as I suspect, is belief in neutrinos akin to belief in witches and demons? :-) *********************************************** Naturally, as soon as I posted the above, the law of the net kicked in--which says: if you start posting on a subject, you will become interested in it, even if you haven't been interested in it before. Result: I became interested in neutrinos, which, frankly, I hadn't given a hoot in hell about before. (Not a capital offense, by the way: everything in the universe, ultimately, reduces to physics, so as a practical matter nobody can master it all.) Thus I began digging about in my collection of physics books, seeking information on the subject, and quickly discovered that what I remembered on the subject, as indicated in the above quote, was pretty much the sum of what was there. Since what I knew on the subject concerned the process of beta decay as described above, I flipped open my *Handbook of Chemistry and Physics*, and began examining the reactions that were listed as pure beta decays. The first one I encountered was the following: n --> p + e- (Note: a beta- particle is the same as an electron, or e- particle, and a beta+ particle is the same as a positron, or e+ particle.) Here the decay energy is listed as .7825 MeV, which is confirmed by subtracting the rest mass of the proton plus electron on the right side from that of the neutron on the left side, and converting from amu to MeV units: 1.008665 - (1.0072764 + .0005485) = .0008401 amu, which is (931)(.008401) = .7821 MeV The discrepancy between .7825 and .7821, I assume, is due to my use of 931 as a conversion factor, rather than a version carried out to more significant digits. As noted in my original post, "in the beta decay of a specific isotope, the emitted electrons/positrons carry with them energies which are continuously variable up to some maximum, rather than all being emitted at a finite number of specific energy levels." In keeping with that description, let's assume that in a specific instance, the energy of the beta- which is emitted from neutron decay is measured and determined to be .3 MeV. That is less than the maximum, which is obviously .7825 MeV. In that case, we have missing energy: the subtraction, above, still applies, since the rest masses of the neutron, proton, and beta- particle (electron) listed in the *Handbook* have not changed. The question is: what happened to the missing .7825 - .3 = .4825 MeV? Well, it would appear that there are two possibilities: either the rest masses of one or more of the listed particles are not constant, or else we must postulate the existence of a neutral particle of very low mass (hey, why not call it the neutrino and symbolize it by v? :-) to carry away the missing energy. Is it plausible that the rest masses vary? Well, .4825 MeV is .4825/931 = .0005183 amu, or a little more than 5 one-hundredths of one percent of the mass of the neutron, so it seems eminently reasonable to me that the rest mass of the neutron could vary by that amount. Indeed, the entire amount of the decay energy is merely .7825/931 = .0008405 amu, which is just a bit more than 8 one-hundredths of one percent of the mass of the neutron. Therefore, where is the proof that the rest mass of the neutron cannot vary by this amount? Maybe *skinny neutrons* exist. If they do, then when they decay into a proton, the resulting beta- particles will have less than the amount of energy they will have coming from a fat, healthy neutron. Clearly, if it has been demonstrated that the rest masses of neutrons cannot vary by enough to account for the observed mass discrepancies in beta decay, then the neutrino is real, and we are stuck with it. But how do we know that each and every neutron in the universe has precisely the same rest mass as every other neutron in the universe? If the skinny neutron theory is wrong, how do we know it is wrong? Once I reached that point in my analysis of this topic, it was apparent that I had to have more information, so I got in my truck and headed for one of my local bookstores, where I began to browse in the physics section. There, after looking up "neutrinos" in an endless parade of books and finding either nothing or very little, I stumbled upon the following absolute gem: *The Particle Hunters*, by Yuval Ne'eman and Yoram Kirsh. [Cambridge University Press, 1989] In it (pg. 70-73), they describe the experiment of Cowan and Reines, who hoped to prove the existence of the neutrino by smacking a proton with an antineutrino, thereby inducing the proton to emit a positron and turn into a neutron. Using v~ for the antineutrino, their intended reaction was as follows: p + v~ --> n + e+ Their first problem, naturally, was to find a likely neutrino source. Since the idea of the neutrino arose as an attempt to account for the missing energy associated with beta decay, and since the uranium in a nuclear reactor is constantly being transformed into isotopes that then undergo beta decay, they decided that a nuclear reactor should produce a massive neutrino flux, if neutrinos existed, and that within that flux there should be plenty of antineutrinos. To supply protons for the v~ particles to hit, they selected water: H2O. Their expectation was that some of the v~ particles would strike 1H1 nuclei in the water molecules, causing them to split into a positron and a neutron. The positrons would then travel a short distance, meet an electron, and undergo mutual annihilation, releasing all of their energy in the form of two oppositely directed gamma photons, each with an energy of .51 MeV. (The rest mass of an electron or a positron is .0005485 amu, which is .51 MeV.) To quickly capture the neutrons, they dissolved CdCl2 (cadmium chloride) in the solution, under the assumption that some neutrons would be captured by 48Cd110, which would transform into highly excited 48Cd111, and then undergo a sequence of isomeric transitions back to the ground state, emitting a series of gammas totaling 9 MeV. The expected reaction: 48Cd110 + n --> 48Cd111* --> 48Cd111 + gammas (9 MeV) To detect the characteristic signature of this reaction--i.e., pairs of .51 MeV gammas, in association with other gammas totaling 9 MeV--they surrounded their CdCl2 solution with an array of scintillation counters, with photomultipliers to count the scintillations. As Ne'eman and Kirsh put it: "...if the photomultipliers detect two simultaneous gamma photons, each with an energy of .51 MeV, and a few thousandths of a second later a number of photons with a total energy of 9 MeV, it is clear beyond doubt that an antineutrino has penetrated the container, like a thief who breaks into a house but leaves behind fingerprints that are unmistakeably his." [pg. 72] The result of the experiment: "After 3 years of work their efforts were crowned with success, and in 1956 Cowan and Reines reported the discovery of the neutrino. The tremendous flux of 10^13 neutrinos per square centimeter per second emitted by the reactor yielded only three reactions per hour that could be detected by the apparatus. However, when the reactor was not in operation, the number of detected reactions dropped to zero. This proved that the neutrinos originated in the reactor and not, for example, in cosmic rays." [pg. 72] The question is, is the above experiment bulletproof? That is, does it prove that the skinny neutron theory is false? At first glance it would seem pretty solid: instead of producing a proton from a neutron, we are starting with a proton and producing a neutron, and it only happens when the reactor is in operation. It thus appears that we have a mass increase, which would seem to require that an unseen particle deliver the needed energy to the proton. However, the appearance of a substantial mass increase is due to our premise--to wit: that the neutron mass is always 1.008665 amu. But if it isn't--if skinny neutrons exist--then perhaps instead of p + v~ --> n + e+, we are really getting p --> n + e+, with the n being a skinny neutron. Is that possible? The question seems to reduce to the following: why would protons only decay into skinny neutrons when the reactor is in operation? At this point, like it or not, the principle of continuity rears its ugly head. What it says to us is this: no thing can come into existence out of nothing or vanish into nothing--which means: all forces are carried by entities, and all work is done by entities--which means: a particle is required, to carry the effect from the reactor to the proton. What particle? Why, the neutrino, of course! Note, however, that if continuous force fields--fields without parts--can exist, and if they can exert force and do work without the mediation of entities, then there is no reason whatsoever to conclude that the neutrino is real. For, in that case, when the reactor is turned on, its field can reach out to the proton, remove an e+ particle from it, and turn it into a skinny neutron, all without any need to postulate the intermediary particle known as a neutrino. Bottom line: if the principle of continuity is valid, then neutrinos exist. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 11:55:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA19611; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 11:50:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 11:50:05 -0800 Message-ID: <384C18BD.357C ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:12:45 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4Kyyn2.0.Lo4.jD1Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31975 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael T Huffman wrote: > > Jim O. writes: > >You might want to check Charles Darwin's Theory of "Natural Selection" > >contained in > >the "Origin of Species". It's called "Survival of the Fittest". > > (snip) > With this in mind, it becomes apparent that the only way for life to > continue for the longest possible time is for people to try and get along > better, and to simultaneously try to limit the number of accidents that > occur. Being the fittest no longer matters, nor does being a part of any > large group, nor does being "right", nor does having the most money. Being > mature, and willing to help people understand this is emerging paradigm. > Actually, I was being somewhat facetious in my reccomendation of where one should look for guidance about the moral authority to impose slavery upon individual(s). Darwin's work doesn't mention slavery, unless you merely define slavery as the condition where the strong subjugate and even kill and eat the weak. I think what many religious people find so abhorrent about Darwin's theory is that it substitutes a concept called Nature for God, and thereafter posits that "Nature-God" operates on principles that have nothing to do with love, justice, mercy, kindness or any of the qualities that would elevate us above the levels of violent self serving "animals" (although I believe there are some animals more in possesion of such qualities than many humans.). Therefore looking to Darwin for guidance about moral principles by which to establish laws to control the behaviour of our fellow human beings is like asking a fox how best to design a chicken coop. Regarding nuclear proliferation and whether or not we will wind up blowing ourselves up or polluting the planet to the point of uninhabitability, time will tell. It's up to us. As to which moral guidance mechanism we should use to try and find our way out of the present dicey situation, it is alleged by some that something called "prayer" works. I don't know, but as the saying goes "Dan't knock it if you've never tried it". Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 15:10:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA24761; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 15:07:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 15:07:36 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 00:09:19 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"gqju01.0.o26.u64Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31976 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: The result of the experiment: "After 3 years of work ... in 1956 Cowan and Reines reported the discovery of the neutrino. The tremendous flux of 10^13 neutrinos per square centimeter per second emitted by the reactor yielded only three reactions per hour that could be detected by the apparatus. However, when the reactor was not in operation, the number of detected reactions dropped to zero. This proved that the neutrinos originated in the reactor and not, for example, in cosmic rays." [pg. 72] Hi Mitchell, Your neutrino research is impressive, but I would raise some questions about the above results: Why would ZERO neutrinos be detected when the reactor was turned off? Surely there would be some neutrinos from elsewhere on the celestial sphere, for example, from the sun. (I hope that the power to the detector didn't drop when the reactor was turned off.) At "three reactions per hour", was it possible that there was an instrument coupling with the operating reactor that introduced a noise of 3 per hour (I guess this was an average value)? (e.g. something in the electrical circuitry of the complex, or a "seimic" vibratory effect -- pumps, "water-hammer", etc.) Is it possible that the Reines detector was seeing something else from the reactor? At such a small fraction of the neutrino flux, other fluxes should be considered that could trigger the apparatus at correspondingly small fractions. I do not claim that neutrinos don't exist; but the above evidence does not convince me that they do. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 16:42:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA23549; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 16:40:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 16:40:16 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> References: Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 18:37:38 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"tk-yo3.0.tl5.mT5Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31977 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >The result of the experiment: "After 3 years of >work ... in 1956 Cowan and Reines reported the discovery >of the neutrino. The tremendous flux of 10^13 neutrinos per >square centimeter per second emitted by the reactor >yielded only three reactions per hour that could be >detected by the apparatus. However, when the reactor was >not in operation, the number of detected reactions dropped >to zero. This proved that the neutrinos originated in >the reactor and not, for example, in cosmic rays." [pg. 72] > >Hi Mitchell, > >Your neutrino research is impressive, but I would raise some >questions about the above results: > >Why would ZERO neutrinos be detected when the reactor was >turned off? Surely there would be some neutrinos from elsewhere >on the celestial sphere, for example, from the sun. ***{Yes, that is true. My assumption is that the solar neutrino flux is so low that there isn't a reasonable probability of getting a hit from that source during the time their experiment was in operation. If, for example, they ran their apparatus for 1000 hours with a reactor flux of 10^13 neutrinos per cm^2 per hour, the mean expectation would be that they would get 3000 hits from the reactor. The question is, how many would they get from solar sources? Assume, for example, that the solar neutrino flux was 10^6 instead of 10^13. In that case, they would expect [10^6/10^13](3000) = 3(10^3)/10^7 = 3(10^-4) neutrinos. That is, they would expect to get .0003 neutrinos from solar sources! To settle this, of course, we need to find out what the solar neutrino flux really is. (As well as other fluxes--from Earth, from cosmic rays, etc.) Anybody? --Mitchell Jones}*** (I hope that >the power to the detector didn't drop when the reactor was turned off.) ***{I think if the lights went out as soon as the reactor was shut down, somebody would have noticed! :-) --MJ}*** > >At "three reactions per hour", was it possible that there was >an instrument coupling with the operating reactor that >introduced a noise of 3 per hour (I guess this was an average value)? >(e.g. something in the electrical circuitry of the complex, or a >"seimic" vibratory effect -- pumps, "water-hammer", etc.) ***{I would say that such an interpretation is precluded by the signature: two .51 MeV gammas, followed a few thousandths of a second later by a quick series of gamma shots totalling 9 MeV. An artifact resulting from noise in the system would be very unlikely to produce such a signature, I would think. --MJ}*** > >Is it possible that the Reines detector was seeing something else >from the reactor? At such a small fraction of the neutrino flux, >other fluxes should be considered that could trigger the apparatus >at correspondingly small fractions. ***{It would have to be a particle that changed protons into neutrons, wouldn't it? Or is there something else that would produce the observed signature? --MJ}*** > >I do not claim that neutrinos don't exist; but the above evidence >does not convince me that they do. ***{The more I think about it, the more convincing it seems to me. I would note, though, that this experiment does not really refute the skinny neutron theory, since the protons may be producing neutrons that vary somewhat in mass. All it proves is that the neutrino exists. --MJ}*** > >Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 20:16:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA03755; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:15:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:15:14 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 15:15:08 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <384C502F.59EB8578@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 UAA03727 Resent-Message-ID: <"6N5id2.0.Xw.Id8Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31978 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 18:37:38 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >>At "three reactions per hour", was it possible that there was >>an instrument coupling with the operating reactor that >>introduced a noise of 3 per hour (I guess this was an average value)? >>(e.g. something in the electrical circuitry of the complex, or a >>"seimic" vibratory effect -- pumps, "water-hammer", etc.) > >***{I would say that such an interpretation is precluded by the signature: >two .51 MeV gammas, followed a few thousandths of a second later by a quick >series of gamma shots totalling 9 MeV. An artifact resulting from noise in >the system would be very unlikely to produce such a signature, I would >think. --MJ}*** > Consider the possibility that stray neutrons from the reactor itself could easily account for the 9 MeV gammas independently, and also beta+ emitters created as fission products could independently provide positrons. The selection criterion itself ensures that only those incidences are considered where both correspond. Note also that when the reactor is shut down, the flow of neutrons drops off almost to zero. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 20:30:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA10251; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:29:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:29:29 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <384C9B8B.6FE750EE mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 05:30:52 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"5nYQv.0.zV2.eq8Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31979 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jack wrote: At "three reactions per hour", was it possible that there was an instrument coupling with the operating reactor that introduced a noise of 3 per hour (I guess this was an average value)? (e.g. something in the electrical circuitry of the complex, or a "seimic" vibratory effect -- pumps, "water-hammer", etc.) Mitchell wrote: {I would say that such an interpretation is precluded by the signature: Jack writes: One way to test this is to run all the apparatus of the reactor with no fuel rods inserted. Jack wrote: Is it possible that the Reines detector was seeing something else from the reactor? At such a small fraction of the neutrino flux, other fluxes should be considered that could trigger the apparatus at correspondingly small fractions. Mitchell wrote: ***{It would have to be a particle that changed protons into neutrons, wouldn't it? Or is there something else that would produce the observed signature? --MJ}*** Jack writes: A myriad of particles are produced. All sorts of interactions are possible. The "ruling out" standards that are applied to cold fusion experiments are needed here. Mitchell Jones wrote: {The more I think about it, the more convincing it seems to me. I would note, though, that this experiment does not really refute the skinny neutron theory, since the protons may be producing neutrons that vary somewhat in mass ... Jack Smith writes: Doesn't the "skinny neutron theory" reinforce the possibilty that Reines' observations were just noise. After all, "skinny" comes in many sizes. (Randall Mills' experiments come to mind.) A spectrum of particles might have been produced with, perhaps, just enough at a tail to give 3 hits per hour in that particular setup. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 20:59:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA22403; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:58:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:58:11 -0800 Message-ID: <19991207045810.9687.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:58:10 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"r4rqt3.0.zT5.ZF9Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31980 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Thank you Michael. I thought muon creation in the lab was a rather high > energy event. How does one go about getting slow muons? > (Or determining their energy for that matter). > I am not up to date on modern diagnostics at high energy accelerators. The energy determined a couple of ways. One old was is to look at the bending of tracks in a cloud or spark chamber when a magnetic field is applied. Energy loss through a known medium is another old technique, but it's crude. Yes, muon creation in an accelerator is a rather high energy event. I think the muons come off with several hundred MeV. I think that muons are slowed simply by collisions through a sufficient mass of material. I don't know if there is another way. I know that slowed muons are available at a few accelerators (or used to be; maybe there is no interest any longer). ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 21:02:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA24359; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 21:00:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 21:00:53 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 23:02:05 -0600 X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991129130919.01b83240 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas Malloy Subject: Re: press release on Cook Inertial Drive in IE#27 Resent-Message-ID: <"DJv3D.0.Wy5.5I9Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31981 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I was reluctant to quote either Robert Cook or Norman Baker in my last posting regarding the CIP. However the press release in IE #27 on page 61 repeats what they have been telling me. The machine was tested by Boeing Aerospace. The engineers were amazed by the results. The law of the conservation on angular momentum is now a general rule. Mr. Cook believes that when his drive is perfected it will result in a conversion of energy into motion that is much more efficient than the present methods. He has two other patents, a nonpolluting energy source and a water purification system. His book, God's Demonstrations is soon to be published. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 22:11:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA14839; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:10:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:10:38 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991123001057.006bd07c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 00:10:57 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: press release on Cook Inertial Drive in IE#27 In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991129130919.01b83240 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"xZX0s3.0.jd3.TJAJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31982 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:02 PM 12/6/99 -0600, thomas Malloy wrote: >I was reluctant to quote either Robert Cook or Norman Baker in my last >posting regarding the CIP. However the press release in IE #27 on page 61 >repeats what they have been telling me. The machine was tested by Boeing >Aerospace. The engineers were amazed by the results. The article states that Cook's device has yet to pass the "pendulum test". This test is intended to eliminate any possibility that the machine's apparent performance is due to inertial stick-slip scooting, much as you or I could "scoot" across the floor in a chair without touching the floor with our feet. Do you know if that vital test has now been passed? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 22:33:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA16641; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:32:43 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:32:43 -0800 (PST) X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C@ca-ois.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 00:29:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"_uj7a.0.p34.6eAJu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31983 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > I think what many religious people find so abhorrent about Darwin's > theory is that it substitutes a concept called Nature for God, and > thereafter posits that "Nature-God" operates on principles that have > nothing to do with love, justice, mercy, kindness or any of the > qualities that would elevate us above the levels of violent self serving > "animals" (although I believe there are some animals more in possession > of such qualities than many humans.). Actually, there seems to be a large genetic investment in emotions, so to say that evolutionists discount their existence is a misstatement of what many evolutionists really believe. > Therefore looking to Darwin for guidance about moral principles by which > to establish laws to control the behavior of our fellow human beings is > like asking a fox how best to design a chicken coop. Darwin merely observed chance mutation and natural selection -- good and true observations. That's hardly exhaustive of the properties that humans possess, and I'd hazard to say that most evolutionists don't claim that the observation of chance mutation and natural selection is the beginning and the end of attainable knowledge about human nature. In fact, long before Darwin, humans had classified the foundations of causality -- and humans were genetically capable of reasoning long before they bothered to carefully classify the rules by which their minds and brains naturally functioned. Causality and human reason are linked, one is not independent of the other (as the basis of scientific observation shows.) So therefore moral thought, as a subset of reason, has its basis in the very causal nature of reality. It is cannot therefore be arbitrary, but in fact, must be universal and unvarying. We can actually make some major discoveries about moral limits with just a few observations. The first is a negative observation, that is, absence of evidence. Whereas many have claimed to have inherent superior moral authority over others, none have demonstrated the existence of such innate superiority. Therefore, by absence of even the barest shred of evidence in support of such a notion, we may just as easily conclude that either no one has any innate moral authority at all, or all humans have equal innate moral authority. This leaves governments and other authoritarians up the crick without a paddle. In order to impose a morality, one has to have a superior moral authority -- which is not in evidence, and therefore may be presumed not to exist. Equal moral authorizes do not allow their imposition over the other, since by definition to do so would require one superior and one inferior -- a contradiction to the negative evidence. Similarly, the criminal, bent upon assault, regardless of his moral contentions, justifies the self-defense brought against him in necessary reciprocity of moral equals. Should the aggressor bother to claim a moral justification for the assault, the victim, being a moral equal, can clearly mount the same justification in defending against the assault. This pattern can be extended to all areas of human interaction. The actions we initiate justify their equivalent responses. Actions initiated against us, justify our reciprocal answers. People who initiate voluntary exchanges between consenting adults justify reciprocal acts. People who initiate threats and violence justify the return volley. Governments who threaten force (to regulate or confiscate through taxation) justify defensive violence. We can actually have a very profound and encompassing moral knowledge, i.e. how we may act in a given situation, by very simple observations of nature and causality indeed. > As to which moral guidance mechanism we should use to try and find our > way out of the present dicey situation, it is alleged by some that > something called "prayer" works. If something "works", at least in this world, you can test it. One test would be to see if soldiers in war, say GI's, who happen to be atheists have a higher KIA rate than believers. It is presumed that believers pray not to be KIA, while atheists don't pray at all. Of course, on the one hand, there is the old saying that there aren't any atheists in the foxholes, but on the other hand, there are a lot of dead GI's, and so therefore a lot of prayers went unanswered. Which returns to the question -- then how well did prayer work? -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 23:12:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA32362; Mon, 6 Dec 1999 23:12:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 23:12:05 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 18:11:57 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <19991207045810.9687.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <19991207045810.9687.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 XAA32340 Resent-Message-ID: <"3VN-g1.0.Wv7.3DBJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31984 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:58:10 -0800 (PST), Michael Schaffer wrote: [snip] >Yes, muon creation in an accelerator is a rather high energy event. I think >the muons come off with several hundred MeV. I think that muons are slowed >simply by collisions through a sufficient mass of material. I don't know if Wouldn't this method of slowing them down, complicate measuring the half-life? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 10:05:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA23999; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 10:03:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 10:03:16 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 12:00:39 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"TFIHd2.0.Ws5.XlKJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31985 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 18:37:38 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>>At "three reactions per hour", was it possible that there was >>>an instrument coupling with the operating reactor that >>>introduced a noise of 3 per hour (I guess this was an average value)? >>>(e.g. something in the electrical circuitry of the complex, or a >>>"seimic" vibratory effect -- pumps, "water-hammer", etc.) >> >>***{I would say that such an interpretation is precluded by the signature: >>two .51 MeV gammas, followed a few thousandths of a second later by a quick >>series of gamma shots totalling 9 MeV. An artifact resulting from noise in >>the system would be very unlikely to produce such a signature, I would >>think. --MJ}*** >> > >Consider the possibility that stray neutrons from the reactor itself could >easily account for the 9 MeV gammas independently, and also beta+ emitters >created as fission products could independently provide positrons. >The selection criterion itself ensures that only those incidences are >considered where both correspond. Note also that when the reactor is shut >down, the flow of neutrons drops off almost to zero. ***{These are excellent points, Robin--as usual. If I understand your scenario, it goes like this: (1) The reactor supplies lots of neutrons, some of which make their way into the CdCl2 solution. (2) Once there, they absorb into available nuclei (e.g.,48Cd106 + n --> 48Cd107*) and induce a constant pitter-patter of beta decays, some of which involve the release of positrons (e.g., 48Cd107* --> 47Ag107 + e+). (3) The positrons quickly meet up with electrons, releasing two .51 MeV gammas, thereby providing the first portion of the signature. (4) In a small percentage of cases, the pair of .51 MeV gammas, purely by coincidence, is followed a few thousandths of a second later by a neutron *from the reactor* being absorbed, not by 48Cd106 as above, but by 48Cd110. Result: 48Cd110 + n --> 48Cd111* --> 48Cd111 + gammas (9 MeV) Which provides the last portion of the signature. Bottom line: as a result of the four steps listed above, we achieve the neutrino signature, without the neutrino! Looking through the Ne'eman and Kirsch book, I found the following comments, which were apparently aimed at your objection: "The planners of the experiment had to surround the entire set-up with a thick layer of earth and metal in order to shield it from penetration by other particles emitted from the reactor and from cosmic rays. (Veteran World War II battleships, sold off for scrap, saw further action in experiments on neutrino research.) As for the neutrino, it passes through all the protective layers as if they were not there at all, because its interactions with matter are so rare. In order to stop a beam of neutrino particles completely, we would need a wall more than 3x10^16 kilometers, or about 3500 light years, thick!" However, I am not satisfied by the above comments. The reason: the neutron, like the supposed neutrino, is a neutral particle. Result: it would be impossible to reduce the neutron flux in the vicinity of a reactor identically to zero. It simply can't be done. Thus your argument needed to be addressed separately--e.g., by noting that there were no instances (or, at any rate, much fewer than 3 per hour) in which pairs of .51 MeV gammas were seen alone, or in which a series of gamma shots totaling 9 MeV were seen alone. Since no such statement was made on the subject, I am forced to remain open to the possibility that these sorts of singular events *were* observed, and that the supposed "neutrino signatures" were, in fact, just cases where such singular events, by pure chance, occurred in the correct order and with the correct timing relationships. It would appear, then, that we need more detail about this experiment. Anybody? If nobody on vortex has this information, then I will port this entire thread over to sci.physics.fusion, where the conformists who post there will be eager to beat back this hideous attack on orthodoxy, and will dig out the details which we are presently missing. (Conformists may be stupid, but they aren't worthless! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 10:17:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA28616; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 10:13:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 10:13:38 -0800 Message-ID: <384D5594.38D5 ca-ois.com> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 10:44:36 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C@ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"t4Sez.0.2_6.HvKJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31986 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > > I think what many religious people find so abhorrent about Darwin's > > theory is that it substitutes a concept called Nature for God, and > > thereafter posits that "Nature-God" operates on principles that have > > nothing to do with love, justice, mercy, kindness or any of the > > qualities that would elevate us above the levels of violent self serving > > "animals" (although I believe there are some animals more in possession > > of such qualities than many humans.). > > Actually, there seems to be a large genetic investment in emotions, > so to say that evolutionists discount their existence is a misstatement > of what many evolutionists really believe. I was speaking of the theory of natural selection as described by Darwin, specifically. There may be other evolutionists who believe there is a large genetic investment in emotions. > > > Therefore looking to Darwin for guidance about moral principles by which > > to establish laws to control the behavior of our fellow human beings is > > like asking a fox how best to design a chicken coop. > > Darwin merely observed chance mutation and natural selection -- good > and true observations. That's hardly exhaustive of the properties that > humans possess, and I'd hazard to say that most evolutionists don't > claim that the observation of chance mutation and natural selection is > the beginning and the end of attainable knowledge about human > nature. OK > > In fact, long before Darwin, humans had classified the foundations > of causality -- and humans were genetically capable of reasoning > long before they bothered to carefully classify the rules by which > their minds and brains naturally functioned. Yes. > > Causality and human reason are linked, one is not independent of > the other (as the basis of scientific observation shows.) > > So therefore moral thought, as a subset of reason, has its basis > in the very causal nature of reality. It is cannot therefore be arbitrary, > but in fact, must be universal and unvarying. > > We can actually make some major discoveries about moral limits > with just a few observations. > > The first is a negative observation, that is, absence of evidence. > Whereas many have claimed to have inherent superior moral authority > over others, none have demonstrated the existence of such innate > superiority. > Therefore, by absence of even the barest shred of evidence in support > of such a notion, we may just as easily conclude that either no one has > any innate moral authority at all, or all humans have equal innate moral > authority. > You might want to take a look at the theory of moral authority as is said to be possessed by judges. This is the concept of "honor" that is a quality of "character" that is attributed to them, and is the reason they have become accustomed to being called "your Honor". The concept of honor has a basis in reason and causality, as you describe, above. There is a judicial code of ethics that they are supposed to adhere to, which through their faithfull adhernce to such ethics gives judges the authority to subject persons convicted of "crimes" to involuntary servitude (jail terms) or the requirement to pay fines, taxes and etc which represents the wages resulting from previously performed voluntary labor. > This leaves governments and other authoritarians up the crick without > a paddle. In order to impose a morality, one has to have a superior > moral authority -- which is not in evidence, and therefore may be > presumed not to exist. Sorry, it does exist and has existed for millenia. In the old days, this moral authority was manifested in what is called the common law. The esscence of the common law was embodied in three simple rules: 1. You can't hurt anyone 2. You can't deprive people of thier property 3. You can't deprive people of thier liberty. Anyone found in violation of these rules was by definition "Guilty" of causing "damages", for which a person could be subjected to involuntary servitude (by judges) in order to compensate the offended party for said damages. The Common law does not apply however in certain circumstances created by the terms of mutually agreed to contracts. In such circumstances "equity law" applies which has to to with the "honoring" the terms of contracts. Voluntary Contracts usually involve an exchange of labor for substance, or substance for substance, or "money" in exhange for either. If the specified exchange in reneged on or defaulted by one party with respect to the other, a judge may impose "equitable" remedies to correct the "inequity". So if one "volunteers" his servitude in exhange for money, let's say, he cannot use the common law to protect him from the imposition of involuntary servitude in the case where the voluntary servitude was not fulfilled but the money obtained somehow anyway. > Equal moral authorizes do not allow their > imposition over the other, since by definition to do so would require > one superior and one inferior -- a contradiction to the negative > evidence. No. Your premise assumes there are no unequal moral authorities, which is incorrect. > > Similarly, the criminal, bent upon assault, regardless of his > moral contentions, justifies the self-defense brought against > him in necessary reciprocity of moral equals. Should the > aggressor bother to claim a moral justification for the assault, > the victim, being a moral equal, can clearly mount the same > justification in defending against the assault. Physical assaults are within the scope of the common law in terms of remedies. You hit somebody, you go to jail and suffer "involuntary servitude". The right to mitigate the damage caused by such assaults, by self defense, is assumed in the common law. But whether or not the self defense is succesfull has no bearing on the right of judges to impose their moral authority and jail someone, or make them pay restitution from the results of their previously performed voluntary labor. > This pattern can be extended to all areas of human interaction. > > The actions we initiate justify their equivalent responses. > Actions initiated against us, justify our reciprocal answers. If a strong person assaults a weak one, a reciprocal answer may be "justified" , however the success or failure of this reciprocal action is not a factor in the idea that non self defense related physical attacks are WRONG and should be punished. This is not so in the theory of natural selection, where it is assumed that the "law of the jungle" (survival of the fittest) applies. > > People who initiate voluntary exchanges between consenting adults > justify reciprocal acts. > > People who initiate threats and violence justify the return volley. Yes, but what if the strong attack the weak and the return volley does not remedy the attack? This is why we need judges (moral authorities) to impose involuntary servitude or restitution in such cases. > > Governments who threaten force (to regulate or confiscate through > taxation) justify defensive violence. The government assumes you have entered into a volunatary contract with it when you signed your W4 IRS form. When the gov't subsequently withholds money from your paycheck, you are not justified in using violence to try and recover such money, whether you consider it defensive or not. IRS rules try to promote VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE. Your participation with the taxation system IS VOLUNTARY, as evidenced by your VOLUNTARY signature on the W4 IRS form. > > We can actually have a very profound and encompassing moral knowledge, > i.e. how we may act in a given situation, by very simple observations > of nature and causality indeed. If you think that you can use violence to get your money back from the IRS, your observations must be the result of delusions, and a judge will quickly remedy such delusions by throwing you in jail. > > > As to which moral guidance mechanism we should use to try and find our > > way out of the present dicey situation, it is alleged by some that > > something called "prayer" works. > > If something "works", at least in this world, you can test it. One test > would be to see if soldiers in war, say GI's, who happen to be atheists > have a higher KIA rate than believers. It is presumed that believers > pray not to be KIA, while atheists don't pray at all. That presumption is false. I almost died by drowning once (caught in a surf riptide). My prayers at that time were for my family, (mom and dad) who would probably have missed me grieviously. Out of the blue somebody came along and helped me get out of the current. > > Of course, on the one hand, there is the old saying that there aren't > any atheists in the foxholes, but on the other hand, there are a lot > of dead GI's, and so therefore a lot of prayers went unanswered. > Which returns to the question -- then how well did prayer work? Well, that depends on exactly what it was they were praying for. For those who died in their foxholes, that cannot be known. For those who survived, you would need to ask them that question. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 11:50:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA00874; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 11:48:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 11:48:18 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 13:43:43 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Geminid Meteor Shower Resent-Message-ID: <"3nqfg3.0.aD.2IMJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31987 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{I pulled this off of http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast06dec99_1.htm., which is where you will have to go if you want to check out the associated photo and diagram. --MJ}*** Great Geminids! On December 13 and 14, 1999, fragments of the mysterious asteroid 3200 Phaethon will strike Earth's atmosphere and produce a beautiful sky show. December 7, 1999: The 1999 Leonid meteor storm was a rare treat for many skywatchers in Europe and the Middle East, but a bit disappointing in other parts of the world. If you missed the Leonid display because of poor weather, or perhaps because you live in the wrong place, there's still one more chance in 1999 to see a good meteor shower: the Geminids. Right: This video clip of two meteors in Orion was obtained by Tony Phillips in Aspendell, CA at approximately 1110 UT on December 13, 1998, the night before the maximum of the 1998 Geminid meteor shower. The 30 frame sequence spans 2 seconds of actual time. The dimmer of the two shooting stars, which travels straight down from the top of the image, is a Geminid. The brighter, which zooms in from the left is probably a sporadic meteor. The shower officially begins on December 7th, but it doesn't peak until the morning of the 14th around 3 a.m. PST (1100 UT). Unlike the Leonids, the Geminid's broad maximum lasts nearly a full day, so observers around the globe have a good chance to see the show. At its peak the Geminids could produce as many as one shooting star every 30 seconds. For observing tips see www.Geminids.com Most well known meteor showers, like the Perseids and Leonids, are old. They've been observed for hundreds or even thousands of years. The earliest record of a modern-day meteor shower is probably a notation in Chinese annals dated 36 AD, regarding the Perseids, where it is said that "more than 100 meteors flew thither in the morning." [ref.] The Geminids are a different story. The first Geminid meteors suddenly appeared in the mid-1800's. Those early showers were unimpressive, boasting a mere 10-20 shooting stars per hour. Since then, however, the Geminids have grown in intensity until today it is one of the most spectacular annual showers. In 1998 observers counted as many as 140 per hour (zenithal hourly rate). Sky-watchers with clear skies should see at least that many this year if the Geminids continue to intensify. After the discovery of the Geminids in 1862 astronomers began searching for the parent comet. Most meteor showers result from debris that that boils off a comet's nucleus when it passes close to the sun. This debris orbits the sun along with the comet, forming a thin, elongated stream of meteoroids that become shooting stars when they hit Earth's atmosphere. Years of searching proved to no avail until finally, in 1983, NASA's Infrared Astronomical Satellite discovered a curious object moving in the same orbit as the Geminid meteoroid stream. The orbital match was so good that it had to be the source of the debris, but to the surprise of many it wasn't a comet. The source of the Geminids was apparently a rocky asteroid. 3200 Phaethon, as the asteroid is now known, is in a highly elliptical 1.4 year orbit that brings it within 0.15 AU (astronomical units) of the Sun. It made its closest recent approach to Earth in December 1997 when it passed within 0.31 AU of our planet. Left: Click on the image to take a virtual tour of the solar system, complete with the curious asteroid 3200 Phaethon, the source of the Geminid meteors. But how does an asteroid produce a meteoroid debris stream? Comets do it easily whenever they pass close enough to the sun to heat their frozen nucleus. Tiny bits of ice and dust naturally bubble away into interplanetary space. Rocky asteroids are made of tougher stuff, however, so it is unclear how bits of 3200 Phaethon would break or boil off to form a meteoroid stream. One of the earliest ideas was that Phaethon might occasionally collide with other asteroids. Collisions would create a stream of pulverized rocks that would account for the Geminids meteor shower. Phaethon's orbit passes through the asteroid belt just beyond Mars, so at first this hypothesis seemed likely, but more detailed studies disagree. The orbits of individual Geminid meteoroids are not consistent with the idea that they broke free while in the asteroid belt. Instead, they appear to have crumbled away when Phaethon was closer to the Sun. In this respect Phaethon is behaving like a comet From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 11:51:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA00946; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 11:48:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 11:48:26 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <384C9B8B.6FE750EE mail.pc.centuryinter.net> References: Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 13:25:45 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"RaFhy1.0.SE.9IMJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31988 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Jack wrote: > >At "three reactions per hour", was it possible that there was >an instrument coupling with the operating reactor that >introduced a noise of 3 per hour (I guess this was an average value)? >(e.g. something in the electrical circuitry of the complex, or a >"seimic" vibratory effect -- pumps, "water-hammer", etc.) > >Mitchell wrote: > >{I would say that such an interpretation is precluded by the signature: > >Jack writes: > >One way to test this is to run all the apparatus of the reactor >with no fuel rods inserted. > >Jack wrote: > >Is it possible that the Reines detector was seeing something else >from the reactor? At such a small fraction of the neutrino flux, >other fluxes should be considered that could trigger the apparatus >at correspondingly small fractions. > >Mitchell wrote: > >***{It would have to be a particle that changed protons into neutrons, >wouldn't it? Or is there something else that would produce the observed >signature? --MJ}*** > >Jack writes: > >A myriad of particles are produced. All sorts of interactions >are possible. The "ruling out" standards that are applied to >cold fusion experiments are needed here. ***{Um, it depends on which ones you mean. If you are referring to the standards applied over on sci.physics.fusion, I wouldn't do that to my worst enemy. Scientific progress would grind to a halt if all experiments were nit-picked to the same extent that "cold fusion" experiments have been in that group. --MJ}*** > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >{The more I think about it, the more convincing it seems to me. I would >note, though, that this experiment does not really refute the skinny >neutron theory, since the protons may be producing neutrons that vary >somewhat in mass ... > >Jack Smith writes: > >Doesn't the "skinny neutron theory" reinforce the possibilty >that Reines' observations were just noise. After all, "skinny" comes >in many sizes. (Randall Mills' experiments come to mind.) A spectrum >of particles might have been produced with, perhaps, just enough at >a tail to give 3 hits per hour in that particular setup. > >Jack Smith ***{Yes, I now see that you were thinking along the same lines as Robin, albeit in more general terms. (See my response to him.) As a result of such considerations, it appears that more detail is needed about the Cowan-Reines experiment, if we are to decide whether it was "bulletproof" or not. While I suspect that they did address the possibility of coincidence of neutron induced reactions, there is no way to know that for sure without more detail. --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 12:47:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24056; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 12:44:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 12:44:38 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991207154307.007ad990 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 15:43:07 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Fundamental distance and time quanta Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WrJNE1.0.lt5.q6NJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31989 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fundamental distance and time quanta The New York Times science section today the latest string theories in an article by George Johnson: "How Is the Universe Built? Grain by Grain." The article says that the smallest possible distance in the universe is the Planck length: 10^-35 meters. The time it takes light to cross that distance is the shortest interval, or what has been called elsewhere a chronon: Planck time: 10^-43 seconds. In other news, I am finally reconnected to the Internet during the day. Thank you BellSouth. It only took two weeks. Who said snail-mail is slow? - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 14:54:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA02704; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 14:51:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 14:51:37 -0800 Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 15:51:23 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta In-reply-to: <3.0.6.32.19991207154307.007ad990 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912072249.PAA08756 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"a46UF3.0.1g.uzOJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31990 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:43 PM 12/7/99 -0500, you wrote: >Fundamental distance and time quanta > >The New York Times science section today the latest string theories in an >article by George Johnson: "How Is the Universe Built? Grain by Grain." The >article says that the smallest possible distance in the universe is the >Planck length: 10^-35 meters. The time it takes light to cross that >distance is the shortest interval, or what has been called elsewhere a >chronon: Planck time: 10^-43 seconds. > But..., but..., that can't be!! It violates {** Mitch Jones' **} principle of continuity. :-) --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 15:11:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA09635; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:09:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:09:44 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991207180819.007985e0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 18:08:19 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta In-Reply-To: <199912072249.PAA08756 smtp.asu.edu> References: <3.0.6.32.19991207154307.007ad990 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"J-siW3.0.TM2.tEPJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31991 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lynn Kurtz wrote: >But..., but..., that can't be!! It violates {** Mitch Jones' **} principle >of continuity. The Times and U. Pittsburgh will have to retract, I suppose. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 15:20:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA12953; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:18:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:18:11 -0800 Message-ID: <384D963E.D77563AE bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 18:20:30 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Contact? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"suaUK3.0.FA3.pMPJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31992 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: More on the transient signal at: http://www.sightings.com/ufo5/correct.htm Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 15:32:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA16741; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:30:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:30:26 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991207172656.01b97108 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 17:26:56 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta In-Reply-To: <199912072249.PAA08756 smtp.asu.edu> References: <3.0.6.32.19991207154307.007ad990 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"tuVtd.0.B54.CYPJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31993 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:51 PM 12/7/99 -0700, Lynn Kurtz wrote: >But..., but..., that can't be!! It violates {** Mitch Jones' **} principle >of continuity. Let's see some respect, Lynn! It is *** Mitchell Jones ***. Scott "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." - Albert Einstein, 1921 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 17:31:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA26574; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 17:29:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 17:29:27 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199912072249.PAA08756 smtp.asu.edu> References: <3.0.6.32.19991207154307.007ad990 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 19:25:33 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta Resent-Message-ID: <"9mieb3.0.4V6.tHRJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31994 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 03:43 PM 12/7/99 -0500, you wrote: >>Fundamental distance and time quanta >> >>The New York Times science section today the latest string theories in an >>article by George Johnson: "How Is the Universe Built? Grain by Grain." The >>article says that the smallest possible distance in the universe is the >>Planck length: 10^-35 meters. The time it takes light to cross that >>distance is the shortest interval, or what has been called elsewhere a >>chronon: Planck time: 10^-43 seconds. >> > >But..., but..., that can't be!! It violates {** Mitch Jones' **} principle >of continuity. > >:-) > >--Lynn ***{Yup. But it's what they believe, nonetheless. They are not disturbed that such a premise rips the foundations from under the structure of human knowledge, because they are products of the "trust-and-parrot" school: they believe whatever those in authority tell them to believe, in order to fit in. Reason-based belief--i.e., knowledge--is not what they sought to acquire during their years in the "educational" system, and it is not, in fact, what they did acquire. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 17:33:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA28428; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 17:31:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 17:31:57 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991207180819.007985e0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <199912072249.PAA08756 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991207154307.007ad990 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 19:27:32 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta Resent-Message-ID: <"vjYMl1.0.6y6.DKRJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31995 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Lynn Kurtz wrote: > >>But..., but..., that can't be!! It violates {** Mitch Jones' **} principle >>of continuity. > >The Times and U. Pittsburgh will have to retract, I suppose. > >- Jed ***{No, Jed, they will follow your example: when the facts are fully in, and the position which they asserted for years is obviously in ruins, they will behave as if they knew it all along and the errors were made by others. (See, for example, your recent comments about your botched measurements at the Power Gen Demo.) --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 17:35:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA29443; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 17:33:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 17:33:36 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991207172656.01b97108 mail.eden.com> References: <199912072249.PAA08756 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991207154307.007ad990 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 19:29:56 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta Resent-Message-ID: <"5axAn.0.zB7.mLRJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31996 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 03:51 PM 12/7/99 -0700, Lynn Kurtz wrote: > >>But..., but..., that can't be!! It violates {** Mitch Jones' **} principle >>of continuity. > >Let's see some respect, Lynn! It is *** Mitchell Jones ***. ***{My, my! Do I, amid the pungent aroma of singed tail feathers, detect the sounds of resentful cackling? Who woulda thought it! :-) --MJ}*** > >Scott [snip] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 17:43:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA01900; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 17:42:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 17:42:03 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <384D963E.D77563AE bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 19:37:57 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Contact? Resent-Message-ID: <"yV7Ta.0.YT.hTRJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31997 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >More on the transient signal at: > >http://www.sightings.com/ufo5/correct.htm > >Terry ***{And, of course, if the signal faded away, then it never happened! Duh! That's SETI logic, all right. In my opinion, they will never get a hit, because the people at the top in that organization do not *want* to get a hit. --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 21:15:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA04555; Tue, 7 Dec 1999 21:13:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 21:13:46 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 23:10:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Mathematics and Reality Resent-Message-ID: <"iTKIF2.0.071.AaUJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31998 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [snip] > >Scott > >"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; >and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." - Albert >Einstein, 1921 ***{If I have a carton containing a dozen eggs and remove two, ten will remain. That is a fact of reality which even the supposed authority of Albert Einstein cannot alter. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 00:10:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA16947; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:09:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:09:07 -0800 Message-ID: <19991208080906.23045.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:09:06 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"wiTb42.0.j84.Z8XJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/31999 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:58:10 -0800 (PST), Michael Schaffer wrote: > [snip] > >Yes, muon creation in an accelerator is a rather high energy event. I > think > >the muons come off with several hundred MeV. I think that muons are slowed > >simply by collisions through a sufficient mass of material. I don't know > if > > Wouldn't this method of slowing them down, complicate measuring the > half-life? Decay is exponential. It makes no difference when you start measuring the decay to determine the halving or e-folding time, just so long as there are enough decays to give good statistics. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 00:39:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA22243; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:38:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:38:06 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:38:01 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <384C502F.59EB8578@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 AAA22223 Resent-Message-ID: <"GEVFv2.0.TR5.kZXJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32000 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 12:00:39 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >(1) The reactor supplies lots of neutrons, some of which make their way >into the CdCl2 solution. Yup. > >(2) Once there, they absorb into available nuclei (e.g.,48Cd106 + n --> >48Cd107*) and induce a constant pitter-patter of beta decays, some of which >involve the release of positrons (e.g., 48Cd107* --> 47Ag107 + e+). Actually I had been thinking of positrons making their way from the reactor, along with the neutrons, but I like the option you present here better. etc. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 00:49:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA26301; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:49:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:49:07 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mathematics and Reality Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:49:03 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 AAA26279 Resent-Message-ID: <"1dB552.0.tQ6.2kXJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32003 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 23:10:26 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >***{If I have a carton containing a dozen eggs and remove two, ten will >remain. That is a fact of reality which even the supposed authority of >Albert Einstein cannot alter. --Mitchell Jones}*** Ah, but if one of those eggs contains a chicken, is it still an egg? ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 00:49:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA25547; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:47:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:47:54 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Contact? Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:47:50 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <6m6s4scgq84fp7skoiopiiq9bqa5c02re3 4ax.com> References: <384D963E.D77563AE bellsouth.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 AAA25525 Resent-Message-ID: <"77Gv6.0.1F6.wiXJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32002 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 19:37:57 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>More on the transient signal at: >> >>http://www.sightings.com/ufo5/correct.htm >> >>Terry > >***{And, of course, if the signal faded away, then it never happened! Duh! >That's SETI logic, all right. In my opinion, they will never get a hit, >because the people at the top in that organization do not *want* to get a >hit. --MJ}*** As I suggested in private email a little while ago, it ought to be renamed SAETI (Society for the Avoidance of Extra Terrestrial Intelligence). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 00:52:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA28650; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:52:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:52:19 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:52:15 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <19991208080906.23045.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <19991208080906.23045.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 AAA28627 Resent-Message-ID: <"IORyQ1.0.W_6.3nXJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32004 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:09:06 -0800 (PST), Michael Schaffer wrote: [snip] >Decay is exponential. It makes no difference when you start measuring the >decay to determine the halving or e-folding time, just so long as there are >enough decays to give good statistics. [snip] To be honest, I expected that answer. Perhaps I should have asked how one goes about detecting the presence of a muon without affecting it's chances of decaying. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 00:56:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA24586; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:45:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:45:43 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Contact? Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:45:40 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5j6s4skf8d1jlh60m2qqfqss9i775fcdma 4ax.com> References: <384D963E.D77563AE bellsouth.net> In-Reply-To: <384D963E.D77563AE bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 AAA24564 Resent-Message-ID: <"CJ90s.0.406.tgXJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32001 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 07 Dec 1999 18:20:30 -0500, Terry Blanton wrote: >More on the transient signal at: > >http://www.sightings.com/ufo5/correct.htm > >Terry Small quote from the site: >As the 21st century approaches, pioneering researchers are uncovering signs that suggest primitive life may be abundant in the universe. Well it's certainly abundant on Earth ;). >But Tarter and her colleagues are after much bigger game: proof that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the cosmos. > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 04:50:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA05723; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 04:48:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 04:48:57 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <384E6218.133A0CE5 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 13:50:16 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"AZqPv3.0.LP1.vEbJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32005 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{These are excellent points, Robin--as usual. If I understand your scenario, it goes like this: (1) The reactor supplies lots of neutrons, some of which make their way into the CdCl2 solution. (2) Once there, they absorb into available nuclei (e.g.,48Cd106 + n --> 48Cd107*) and induce a constant pitter-patter of beta decays, some of which involve the release of positrons (e.g., 48Cd107* --> 47Ag107 + e+). (3) The positrons quickly meet up with electrons, releasing two .51 MeV gammas, thereby providing the first portion of the signature. (4) In a small percentage of cases, the pair of .51 MeV gammas, purely by coincidence, is followed a few thousandths of a second later by a neutron *from the reactor* being absorbed, not by 48Cd106 as above, but by 48Cd110. Result: 48Cd110 + n --> 48Cd111* --> 48Cd111 + gammas (9 MeV) Which provides the last portion of the signature. Bottom line: as a result of the four steps listed above, we achieve the neutrino signature, without the neutrino! Robin van Spaandonk wrote: Actually I had been thinking of positrons making their way from the reactor, along with the neutrons, but I like the option you present here better. Mitchell Jones wrote: It would appear, then, that we need more detail about this experiment. Anybody? If nobody on vortex has this information, then I will port this entire thread over to sci.physics.fusion, where the conformists who post there will be eager to beat back this hideous attack on orthodoxy, and will dig out the details which we are presently missing. Hi Mitchell and Robin, Your analysis is brilliant! It will probably be harder than pulling hens' teeth to get actual data from the Reines experiments. If by some bit of good fortune we can get some results, I would bet dollars to -- I guess not doughnuts, how about M&Ms? -- that the really interesting data will have been edited out. There were possibly other fluxes from the reactor which, with a small but effective probability, could create "signatures" at a rate of 3 per hour. Perhaps others on vortex who are good at particle physics could speculate on some more scenarios. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 08:41:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA06630; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 08:39:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 08:39:35 -0800 Message-ID: <00b101bf41a3$2700c5e0$5d441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Infrared Photon Catalysis of OU/Cold Fusion/Fission Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 09:38:25 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"3TED_.0.Wd1.7deJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32006 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Making the Wild Assumption that Infrared photons are converted to Neutrino-Antineutrino Pairs during Electron/Proton or Electron/Deuteron collisions thus resulting in a Quasineutron, a look at the atom species that are present during CF/OU events and their Micron-Wavelength spectra is interesting: Atom Wavelengtth (microns) Energy (ev) No. of Lines Argon 1.24 to 2.39 0.52 - 1.0 38 Potassium 1.24 to 4.02 0.31 - 1.0 7 Oxygen 1.24 to 2.61 0.47 - 1.0 16 Nitrogen 1.24 to 1.78 0.69 - 1.0 15 Carbon 1.24 to 1.97 0.62 - 1.0 13 Hydrogen 1.24 to 7.45 0.16 - 1.0 8 Helium 1.24 to 4.04 0.3 - 1.0 20 Lithium 1.24 to 4.04 0.3 - 1.0 7 All of these can be found in water in the free state or various compounds. Since Argon makes up close to 1.0% of the atmosphere and is more soluble in water than N2 or O2, it could be as good a Catalyst as Potassium. And, since the above spectra can be initiated by heat at temperatures from 400 to 2,000 deg Kelvin, thermal initiation of OU/Cold Fusion/Fission should be possible. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 09:18:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA20670; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 09:14:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 09:14:47 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 11:11:10 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"M4dyg2.0.u25.78fJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32007 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 12:00:39 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>(1) The reactor supplies lots of neutrons, some of which make their way >>into the CdCl2 solution. > >Yup. >> >>(2) Once there, they absorb into available nuclei (e.g.,48Cd106 + n --> >>48Cd107*) and induce a constant pitter-patter of beta decays, some of which >>involve the release of positrons (e.g., 48Cd107* --> 47Ag107 + e+). > >Actually I had been thinking of positrons making their way from the reactor, >along with the neutrons, but I like the option you present here better. >etc. ***{The reason for discounting the positron-from-the-reactor theory is simply that the range of betas+ particles (positrons) in solid matter is negligible: they quickly encounter electrons and undergo mutual annihilation. Hence they could never escape from the reactor. Incidentally, even beta - particles (electrons) wouldn't be able to go very far, because their energies would be quickly dissipated in a series of collisions. For example, it is beta- particles that light up the screen of your computer monitor, yet it is quite safe for you to sit there and read this post, or even to place your hand on the screen. The reason is that beta- particles quickly deliver their energy to the matter through which they are passing, via a series of collisions, and produce nothing but heat in virtually all cases. Indeed, even in the situation where the energies are large enough to knock out the inner shell electrons of heavy elements, about 99% of the energy is still released as heat, because the probabilities are overwhelmingly greater that they will hit outer shell electrons than inner. Only a tiny portion of the incident energy produces x-rays, because such events occur only on the rare occasions where a beta- makes a center-hit on an inner-shell electron of a heavy element and gives up its energy all at once. (As for extremely high energy betas, well, they just take longer to slow down. If, for example, a radioactive decay produced a 24 MeV beta within a heavy element lattice, we would find that the occasions where it made a perfect center hit on a single target and gave off all of its energy in a single collision, producing a huge gamma, would be identically zero. The reason: a beta cannot induce a nuclear reaction, and even if a high energy beta knocks a k-shell electron of a heavy element out of its orbit, the worst you can get when that slot is refilled would be an x-ray.) For present purposes, what matters is that there is a range limit to the beta absorption process: after progressing a certain distance through solid matter, a beam of beta particles is *entirely* absorbed. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 09:45:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA30130; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 09:44:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 09:44:18 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 11:17:24 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mathematics and Reality Resent-Message-ID: <"kTJBs3.0.eM7.oZfJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32008 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 23:10:26 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>***{If I have a carton containing a dozen eggs and remove two, ten will >>remain. That is a fact of reality which even the supposed authority of >>Albert Einstein cannot alter. --Mitchell Jones}*** >Ah, but if one of those eggs contains a chicken, is it still an egg? ;) ***{It either is or it isn't. If it isn't, then the carton did not contain a dozen eggs, and my original statement did not apply to it. --MJ}*** >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 09:47:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA30176; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 09:44:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 09:44:26 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19991204181822.3340.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 11:36:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Resent-Message-ID: <"HulT4.0.NN7.uZfJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32009 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >>In that case, how can you be sure that the lifetime is extended, rather >>than >>the possibility that you just happen to detect only those muon which happen >>to take a particularly long time to decay? (Naturally selected by your >>distance from the source). >> >>What I am really trying to say is, what measures have you taken to ensure >>that your measurements support your contention, rather than the alternate >>possibility presented here? > >This kind of measurement was performed many times and at different >altitudes---high mountain and very high altitude balloons, as well as near >sea level. The full data set yields the exponential decay history of the >muons as seen in our reference frame, fixed to the earth. We can also make >muons in the lab and measure the decay of slow moving muons for comparison. >There is no contradiction between SR and the full set of experiments. ***{There is also no contradiction between the full set of experiments and the notion that, as lightspeed is approached, most ordinary causal processes, including those controlling muon decay and the motion of clocks, slow down in accordance with the Lorentz transform. The Einstein theory, with its bizarre and blatantly circular notion that velocity alters distance and time, is *not* required. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >===== >Michael J. Schaffer > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. >Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 09:50:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA32509; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 09:48:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 09:48:03 -0800 Message-ID: <384E9934.1B804325 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:45:24 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Harald Reiss experiments with SC on gravity Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wdYiV2.0.tx7.JdfJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32010 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A possible interaction between gravity and high temperature superconductivity - by a materials property? Harald Reiss ABB Forschungszentrum Speyerer Strasse 4, D-69115 Heidelberg, Germany Tel.: +49 6221 59 64 59, fax: +49 6221 59 61 63, e-mail: harald.reiss decrc.mail.abb.com Abstract The weight of a pile of BiSrCaCuO-superconductor pellets of the 2212 type was studied when cooling it in liquid nitrogen, and the results compared to normal or non-conductors, in a standard volume and under the same temperature and heat transfer condition s. Superconductor and normal or non-conductor sample weights were between 7 and 23 or between 4 and 28 g, respectively, at room temperature. Differences in buoyancy at 77 K between samples of the two materials groups up to 115 mg have been identified. T his is the consequence of a relative increase of the superconductor sample weights by on the order 0.5%, which tentatively can be interpreted as a gravity shielding effect. Application of an external magnetic field eliminated the observed effect, which i ndicates a possible correlation of superconductivity with gravity. Prof. Reiss, sent me a hardcopy of it pre-release paper. I scanned it and put in word document format. Prof. Reiss put no restriction on distribution of this paper. Obviously, this document I prepared not approved by the author, and it is not the official publishing version. (Author told the publishing version would be different and more details and additional supporting measurements probably will have to be added. I did care to avoid errors on preparing it. But there is no guarantee that it is error free. The document is about 120 KB. Please write me for obtaining this copy. I did not prefer to put in WEB directly, because it is not yet published yet, is not official and it a prepared from an pre-release copy. Online reference to this work is found at http://www.iitap.iastate.edu/htcu/backissues/99jun1em.html "To test for the possibility of a gravity shielding effect in the superconducting state, H. Reiss (ABB, Heidelberg) measured the weight of a pile of Bi-2212 pellets inside a sample holder submerged in liquid nitrogen as the sample cooled to 77 K. The apparent weight increased with time (as the sample cooled) when the sample holder contained superconductors, normal conductors, or nonconductors. This was a consequence of the continuously reduced convective liquid motion and bubble lift-off. The author reports that the superconductor samples, however, gained slightly more weight than the normal or nonconductors, giving rise to a relative increase of the superconductor sample weights by about 0.5%, which the author tentatively interprets as a gravity shielding effect. Application of an external magnetic field, produced by permanent magnets placed on the top and bottom of the stack of superconducting pellets inside the sample holder, eliminated the observed effect. The author welcomes comments from colleagues who would be able to confirm or reject the observations." Harald Reiss, "A Possible Interaction Between Gravity and High Temperature Superconductivity--By a Materials Property?" Submitted to the 15th. European Conf. Thermophys. Properties, Wuerzburg, Germany, Sept. 5-9, 1999. Asea Brown Boveri Forschungszentrum, Postfach 10 13 32, Speyerer Strasse 4, D-69115 Heidelberg, GERMANY; telephone +49 6221 59 6459; telefax +49 6221 59 6163; e-mail harald.reiss decrc.mail.abb.com. Key words: high-temperature superconductivity, BiSrCaCuO (2212) pellets, magnetic field, Meissner state, gravity. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 16:39:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA21249; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 16:36:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 16:36:12 -0800 Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 17:39:54 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Mathematics and Reality In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912090037.RAA04929 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"7n3fn3.0.xB5.yblJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32011 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:10 PM 12/7/99 -0600, you wrote: > >***{If I have a carton containing a dozen eggs and remove two, ten will >remain. That is a fact of reality which even the supposed authority of >Albert Einstein cannot alter. --Mitchell Jones}*** > Its probably true that the only mathematical formulas that exactly model reality are the ones that only involve counting in some form or other. It brings to mind one of my favorite poems, written by the late mathematics professor C. R. Wylie, which I am typing from memory - I hope it is accurate: PARADOX Not truth nor certainty, these I forswore in my novitiate like men called to holy orders must abjure the world. If... then..., this only I assert and my success are but pretty chains linking twin doubts for it is vain to ask if what I postulate be justified or what I prove possess the stamp of "fact" Yet bridges stand and men no longer crawl in two dimensions and such marvels stem in no small measure from the power this game, played with thrice attenuated shades of things, has over the originals. How frail the wand, but how profound the spell. C. R. Wylie --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 17:33:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA10082; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 17:31:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 17:31:55 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.22db6817.25806085 aol.com> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 20:31:49 EST Subject: Re: press release on Cook Inertial Drive in IE#27 To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 56 Resent-Message-ID: <"F5C9W1.0.PT2.9QmJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32012 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 12/7/99 2:11:34 AM, Scott Little wrote: <> No chance. Shades of the Dean Drive and similar devices. Is the test of hanging the device by long ropes to see if it will deflect off center a definitive test? I think so, but then I once thought that putting a device like Dean's or Cook's in a tub in a swimming pool would be definitive, and that turned out to be wrong. In the discussion two years ago, Rick Monteverde pointed out that one could oomph one's way across a pond by catching the waves one was making at just the right moment. Rick said the following: <> Hal Puthoff said that a fellow named Cook had propelled a boat across a swimming pool with an inertial device. Could it have been the same Robert Cook of this press release re Boeing? John Logajan pointed out that even the rope (pendulum) test can be deceptive if one forgets that the device has to deflect past its own true center of gravity in order to pass the test. Nevertheless, I think it's quite credible that people at Boeing were impressed by Cook's device. Cook may have come up with some potentially useful ways to handle sharp and sudden mechanical changes in velocity smoothly. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 20:22:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA04555; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 20:19:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 20:19:35 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C@ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0@john> <384D5594.38D5@ca-ois.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 22:12:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"uDGnb.0.571.NtoJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32013 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > You might want to take a look at the theory of moral authority as is > said to be possessed by judges. A moral code based on things that are "said to be" has insufficient guarantee of non-arbitrariness. If judges possess moral authority over their fellow men, that grant of authority can be traced by rational inspection. Nazi Germany, after all, was filled with judges who upheld the Nazi code of conduct. The US Supreme Court upheld slavery in all states and territories in the 1857 Dred Scott decision. FDR sent Japanese-Americans to internment camps under the watchful eyes of the entire US legal system. Sorry, but a judge possesses no more inherent moral authority than the majority that empowered those immoral acts in the first place. Again, the search for the source of moral authority must lead elsewhere. > Your premise assumes there are no unequal moral authorities, which > is incorrect. It's state of incorrectness is dependent upon a showing of the existence of moral superiority. Mere proclamation of superiority is insufficient. Logic and causality give us the tools by which we can weigh such claims. So far, no claim of moral superiority has shown any proof whatsoever. Normally they don't bother -- they just grab for the guns and assert authority. > The government assumes you have entered into a volunatary contract with > it when you signed your W4 IRS form. That's a misstatement of the law. The IRS comes after your income whether you have ever signed any form or not. And certainly no aspect of IRS required paperwork could be considered non-coercive in nature. The mere fact that a slave eats the food his master allows him to eat, or sleeps in the building the master allows him to sleep in, does not make the interaction a voluntary one. If coercion is present, the voluntary nature is lost. The interaction becomes master to slave. > > > As to which moral guidance mechanism we should use to try and find our > > > way out of the present dicey situation, it is alleged by some that > > > something called "prayer" works. > > > > If something "works", at least in this world, you can test it. One test > > would be to see if soldiers in war, say GI's, who happen to be atheists > > have a higher KIA rate than believers. It is presumed that believers > > pray not to be KIA, while atheists don't pray at all. > > That presumption is false. I almost died by drowning once (caught in a > surf riptide). My prayers at that time were for my family, (mom and dad) > who would probably have missed me grieviously. Out of the blue somebody > came along and helped me get out of the current. Again, you are claiming a change in outcome based upon your offering of prayers. Changes in outcome based upon inputs can be tested statistically. This is fairly straight forward logic, and the correlation confidence can be quite high. Do patients with fatal diseases who are religious and pray have a statistically better chance at remission than those patients who are athiests and don't bother to pray? If yes, then prayer works. If no, then prayer doesn't do anything in this lifetime (beyond psychological satisfaction, which may be its own reward, of course.) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 21:18:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA00492; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 21:17:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 21:17:15 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199912090037.RAA04929 smtp.asu.edu> References: Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 19:16:06 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mathematics and Reality Resent-Message-ID: <"a_UEE3.0.X7.QjpJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32014 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 11:10 PM 12/7/99 -0600, you wrote: >> >>***{If I have a carton containing a dozen eggs and remove two, ten will >>remain. That is a fact of reality which even the supposed authority of >>Albert Einstein cannot alter. --Mitchell Jones}*** >> > >Its probably true that the only mathematical formulas that exactly model >reality are the ones that only involve counting in some form or other. ***{What mathematical model doesn't involve counting, in some form or other? :-) --MJ}*** [snip] > >--Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 22:12:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA17257; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 22:11:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 22:11:18 -0800 Message-ID: <384F50D0.4225 ca-ois.com> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 22:48:48 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C@ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0@john> <384D5594.38D5@ca-ois.com> <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3Wgpk1.0.XD4.6WqJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32015 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > You might want to take a look at the theory of moral authority as is > > said to be possessed by judges. > > A moral code based on things that are "said to be" has insufficient > guarantee of non-arbitrariness. If judges possess moral authority > over their fellow men, that grant of authority can be traced by > rational inspection. Nazi Germany, after all, was filled with judges > who upheld the Nazi code of conduct. The US Supreme Court > upheld slavery in all states and territories in the 1857 Dred Scott > decision. FDR sent Japanese-Americans to internment camps > under the watchful eyes of the entire US legal system. True. The rational basis for this was the idea that the gov't could prevent such Japanese - Americans from suffering non state sponsored physical violence from theoretically possible angry mobs, theoretically upset over the attack on Pearl Harbor. Do you think the governmant can prevent bad things like that from happening? For example, even though it is possible to drive while intoxicated and not become involved in an auto accident, drunk driving laws attempt to prevent such accidents by prohibiting such DWI. Does the government successfully prevent DWI accidents then, in your opinion? And if you think that the government successfully prevents bad things from happening, why should it not regulate every aspect of your life, in order to prevent you from hurting yourself or other people? > > Sorry, but a judge possesses no more inherent moral authority > than the majority that empowered those immoral acts in the first > place. Again, the search for the source of moral authority must > lead elsewhere. Like where, for example? > > > Your premise assumes there are no unequal moral authorities, which > > is incorrect. > > It's state of incorrectness is dependent upon a showing of the existence > of moral superiority. Mere proclamation of superiority is insufficient. > Logic and causality give us the tools by which we can weigh such > claims. So far, no claim of moral superiority has shown any > proof whatsoever. Normally they don't bother -- they just grab > for the guns and assert authority. Are you disputing the idea that moral authority derives from forces of arms? (people with guns) If so, where do YOU think moral authority comes from? > > > The government assumes you have entered into a volunatary contract with > > it when you signed your W4 IRS form. > > That's a misstatement of the law. The IRS comes after your income whether > you have ever signed any form or not. The IRS form W4 authorizes your employer to withhold money from your paycheck and give the withheld money to the IRS. If you and your employer proceed on some other arrangement, how would the IRS even know about it in order to "come after" it? > And certainly no aspect of IRS > required paperwork could be considered non-coercive in nature. Are people's signatures on their W4 forms typically coerced at gunpoint? > The mere fact that a slave eats the food his master allows him to eat, > or sleeps in the building the master allows him to sleep in, does > not make the interaction a voluntary one. If coercion is present, > the voluntary nature is lost. The interaction becomes master to slave. Are you saying you think you are a slave? If so, how did that condition come about for you? (snip) > > Do patients with fatal diseases who are religious and pray > have a statistically better chance at remission than those > patients who are athiests and don't bother to pray? All patients die of something or other eventually. No amount of prayer prevents death from occurring, sooner or later. Religious people who are in IMMINENT danger of death probably do not pray for their own recovery, but rather pray for their family or friends who will be left behind. I say this based on my own subjective experience of course. In any event, I have no interest in trying to prove to you that prayer works. You will have to decide that issue out of your own subjective experience, just like I did. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 00:02:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA10672; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 23:59:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 23:59:03 -0800 Message-ID: <19991209075901.4344.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 23:59:01 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"Vsw6l3.0.gc2.75sJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32016 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Michael Schaffer wrote: > [snip] > >Decay is exponential. It makes no difference when you start measuring the > >decay to determine the halving or e-folding time, just so long as there > >are enough decays to give good statistics. > [snip] > To be honest, I expected that answer. Perhaps I should have asked how one > goes about detecting the presence of a muon without affecting it's chances > of decaying. One looks for decay products of muons. (I don't remember what they are.)This can be done in different media. I am not expert in experimental particle physics, and I don't know what has actually been done to verify the muon lifetime. I do know that muons can be slowed and experiments performed with them (until too few of them are left), so that suggests to me that muon lifetime can be measured by more than one method. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 02:06:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA32159; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 02:05:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 02:05:34 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:05:29 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <19991209075901.4344.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <19991209075901.4344.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 CAA32134 Resent-Message-ID: <"E0JT71.0.Os7.kxtJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32017 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 23:59:01 -0800 (PST), Michael Schaffer wrote: [snip] >One looks for decay products of muons. (I don't remember what they are.)This [snip] Thanks Michael, I should have thought of that. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 04:06:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA18211; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 04:05:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 04:05:59 -0800 Message-ID: <012d01bf4246$19070e60$5d441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: N Particles, Pions, Muons, Electrons (+/-) and Neutrinos Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 05:04:16 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"G4WsO1.0.NS4.divJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32018 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The Charge-Neutral "N" Particle (548 Mev) decays in ~1.0E-17 sec to Pions (+/-) (~ 137 Mev each)then to the Muons each with a mass of ~105 Mev and a lifetime of ~ 2.2E-6 seconds, that decay to an electron, electron antineutrino, and a muon neutrino. The 548 Mev "N", 4* Electron Mass/Alpha (The Fine Structure Constant,Alpha = 0.00729729) or it's reciprocal 137, that decays to a Pion pair each with a mass 2* Electron Mass/Alpha shows that resonances relating to the Fine Structure Constant apply up through the heavy particle spectrum. The Pion then decays to Muons. The FACT that the muon (-) can "Catalyze" several Fusion/Fission reactions by creating a neutral entity (Quasineutron?)during it's 2.2 microsecond existence is well established. Going by this cue, the OU/Cold Fusion/Cold Fission effects should be "catalyzed" by Electron-Proton-Neutrino or Electron-Deuteron-Neutrino interaction, IF the field interactions create a Quasi-Muon/Quasineutron entity at temperatures in the range of 300 to >2,000 K. I don't think that anyone (in their right mind) would question the existence of neutrinos. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 06:32:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA22998; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 06:29:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 06:29:33 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991209082650.0177c7f4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 08:26:50 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine In-Reply-To: <19991209075901.4344.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"CcATf2.0.Gd5.DpxJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32019 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:59 PM 12/8/99 -0800, Michael Schaffer wrote: >One looks for decay products of muons. (I don't remember what they are.) I'm no expert on this subject, I just happen to have a book handy. It says a muon decays into an electrons plus a neutrino plus an antineutrino. The electron energy ranges from 9 to 55 MeV (Leighton, Anderson, & Seriff 1949). 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 Dec 9 06:41:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA28573; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 06:39:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 06:39:33 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209093754.0079a7f0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 09:37:54 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Prayer, attitude and disease In-Reply-To: <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0 john> References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0 john> <384D5594.38D5 ca-ois.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"IXJTx2.0.N-6.byxJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32020 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is way off topic, but it is social science, one of my favorite topics. John Logajan wonders: >Do patients with fatal diseases who are religious and pray >have a statistically better chance at remission than those >patients who are atheists and don't bother to pray? > >If yes, then prayer works. If no, then prayer doesn't >do anything in this lifetime (beyond psychological >satisfaction, which may be its own reward, of course.) I have not seen any research on this particular question, but I do recall an extensive study on a related issue: Do patients with fatal diseases enhance their chances of survival by generally maintaining a positive outlook? I do not remember the authors, but I read about this in the NY Times and elsewhere. The researchers tracked cancer patients who survived at least six months after the initial questionnaire. (It would not be fair to include people who died a week into the study, because anyone that sick is likely to be depressed, even if he is usually positive.) Attitude cannot be measured precisely, but social science researchers have developed a battery of questions and observations to form a rough but reliable metric. It is easy to identify the extremes: people who are severely depressed, and people who are strongly confident that they will survive. The study results surprised the researchers and most doctors. They found no correlation between attitude and survival. They began the study expecting to find a correlation, which makes the results more convincing, because the unconscious bias would be toward the initial expectation. I was pleased with this. I do not like the modern trend of blaming the patient for the disease. Many people say prayer enhances one's metal attitude, and this in turn helps cure disease. This study indicates that on that basis it cannot help. If prayer does help, you have to postulate another, hidden effect. It would have to enhance attitude and also by some other (presumably supernatural) mechanism help cure the disease. I do not know whether prayer enhances attitude or not, but many people think it does. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 06:56:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA01686; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 06:54:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 06:54:41 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209095309.0079f100 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 09:53:09 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-Reply-To: <384F50D0.4225 ca-ois.com> References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0 john> <384D5594.38D5 ca-ois.com> <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0 john> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4zVNS2.0.GQ.nAyJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32021 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski writes: >In any event, I have no interest in trying to prove to you that prayer >works. You will have to decide that issue out of your own subjective >experience, just like I did. I do not see how anyone can "decide" a matter of fact based on subjective experience. Either prayer works, or it does not. The only way to find out would be conduct research, observe many patients and their behavior, and measure their survival rates. I am not saying this study should be done, but unless it is done, you have no basis to "decide" anything. You might as well try to decide what the weather is like without looking outside. It could be anything, especially in Ithaca, New York. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 06:58:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA02844; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 06:56:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 06:56:41 -0800 Message-ID: <384FC2FF.3FFB lafn.org> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 06:58:32 -0800 From: Jim Day X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.03 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta References: <199912090612.WAA18463 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"88xDD3.0.Hi.cCyJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32022 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Back in 1952 I asked one of the physicists at Cal Tech whether time and space were quantized. He replied that they were not. He went on to explain that there is no known limit on the amount energy that a particle can have. Therefore, there is no lower limit on wavelength and no upper limit on frequency of oscillation. If his argument was valid, time and space aren't quantized and the hypothetical chronon and hodon do not exist. Of course, he might have been mistaken. :-) Regards, Jim Day From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 07:04:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA06291; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 07:03:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 07:03:24 -0800 Message-ID: <384FC49A.1D77 lafn.org> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 07:05:26 -0800 From: Jim Day X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.03 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"laOR42.0.DY1.yIyJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32023 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Back in 1952 I asked one of the physicists at Cal Tech whether time and space were quantized. He replied that they were not. He went on to explain that there is no known limit on the amount energy that a particle can have. Therefore, there is no lower limit on wavelength and no upper limit on frequency of oscillation. If his argument was valid, time and space aren't quantized and the hypothetical chronon and hodon do not exist. Of course, he might have been mistaken. :-) Regards, Jim Day From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 08:31:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA06228; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 08:29:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 08:29:12 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209112612.007ce100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 11:26:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Prayer, attitude and disease In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991209093754.0079a7f0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0 john> <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0 john> <384D5594.38D5 ca-ois.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lgxU92.0.9X1.OZzJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32024 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:37 AM 12/9/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >This is way off topic, but it is social science, one of my favorite topics. >John Logajan wonders: > >>Do patients with fatal diseases who are religious and pray >>have a statistically better chance at remission than those >>patients who are atheists and don't bother to pray? >> >>If yes, then prayer works. If no, then prayer doesn't >>do anything in this lifetime (beyond psychological >>satisfaction, which may be its own reward, of course.) > >I have not seen any research on this particular question, but I do recall >an extensive study on a related issue: Do patients with fatal diseases >enhance their chances of survival by generally maintaining a positive >outlook? I do not remember the authors, but I read about this in the NY >Times and elsewhere. The researchers tracked cancer patients who survived >at least six months after the initial questionnaire. (It would not be fair >to include people who died a week into the study, because anyone that sick >is likely to be depressed, even if he is usually positive.) Attitude cannot >be measured precisely, but social science researchers have developed a >battery of questions and observations to form a rough but reliable metric. >It is easy to identify the extremes: people who are severely depressed, and >people who are strongly confident that they will survive. The study results >surprised the researchers and most doctors. They found no correlation >between attitude and survival. They began the study expecting to find a >correlation, which makes the results more convincing, because the >unconscious bias would be toward the initial expectation. Stress is well known to decreases the ability of the body to fight and withstand disease, and stress can induce its own medical problems, just as the stress hormones have a major impact on surgery [which is why surgery begins at 7 AM]. There may be diminished stress through faith and prayer in those who believe, and thus, there actually may be a clinical impact. It is doubtful that a single study which tracks a small number of patients for a limited time would be of any use in resolving this. How many pts? Why were some pts removed? How could anyone normalize for differences in treatment, stage of disease, time to initiation of treatment, etc., which has a much greater impact on disease-free survival? Should the endpoint be survival? or disease-free survival? And, most importantly, such a study would probably require thousands of patients to be statistically significant anyway. It is more likely, that as with breast cancer treatment, clinical significance will be apparent much much earlier than statistical significance. >I was pleased with this. I do not like the modern trend of blaming the >patient for the disease. Surgery, oncology, and medicine in general, unlike some cold fusion reporters who blame researchers, do NOT blame patients for their disease. There is no trend such as Mr. Rothwell purports. Mitchell Swartz, MD, ScD >Many people say prayer enhances one's metal attitude, and this in turn >helps cure disease. This study indicates that on that basis it cannot help. >If prayer does help, you have to postulate another, hidden effect. It would >have to enhance attitude and also by some other (presumably supernatural) >mechanism help cure the disease. I do not know whether prayer enhances >attitude or not, but many people think it does. > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 08:49:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14227; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 08:47:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 08:47:47 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:57:08 -0500 Message-ID: <19991209165708781.AAA233 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"SMd253.0.CU3.pqzJu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32025 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed writes: >I do not see how anyone can "decide" a matter of fact based on subjective >experience. Either prayer works, or it does not. The only way to find out >would be conduct research, observe many patients and their behavior, and >measure their survival rates. I am not saying this study should be done, >but unless it is done, you have no basis to "decide" anything. You might as >well try to decide what the weather is like without looking outside. It >could be anything, especially in Ithaca, New York. > >- Jed I was talking to a medical doctor in Seattle about 6 months ago who said that there actually had been studies that showed that prayer had a beneficial result. I don't know which journals she was quoting, but the main ones are available to search. She summarized the journal reports as saying that it may just be another form of the "placebo effect", but that if it seemed to help, then it really didn't matter. The placebo effect does "cure" people in some cases. Separating the placebo effect from the effect of the actual treatment has always been an issue in determining the efficacy of various treatments and therapies. This doctor worked for Group Health, a health care cooperative, and the hospital administrators were telling their physicians to allow more time for patients to spend with their clergy and family, and to not openly poo-poo the idea that prayer might work. The idea being that doctors are considered to be authority figures, and that if a doctor discounts the prayer option, then the patient may accept a scientifically reasonable, but negative prognosis, and give up on the healing process. Knuke - Da Voodoo Chile Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 09:21:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA26467; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:18:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:18:37 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209121700.007a3ad0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:17:00 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-Reply-To: <19991209165708781.AAA233 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"onte8.0.TT6.iH-Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32026 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Knuke wrote: >I was talking to a medical doctor in Seattle about 6 months ago who said >that there actually had been studies that showed that prayer had a >beneficial result. I don't know which journals she was quoting, but the >main ones are available to search. That is entirely possible. I have not researched the subject. The only study I know about, as I said, was an attempt to correlate attitude and mortality. There was no mention of prayer per se. I think previous, preliminary studies did show some correlation, and most doctors apparently take it for granted there is a link. This study was an attempt to provide rigorous proof. It was described as the largest and most careful study to date. I would expect, and predict, no link. They should poll the cancerous cells, or the DNA, and ask it whether it has a strong will to survive and a positive attitude. Let's look at this thing from the other point of view. When people die of food poisoning, it is joyous triumph of positively-oriented, healthy, happy life forms . . . the salmonellae are having a glorious time reproducing like crazy, at the patient's expense. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 09:24:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28342; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:22:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:22:18 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:12:45 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:21:27 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 10:53:40 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-reply-to: <384F50D0.4225 ca-ois.com> To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:13:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2337ZYFQHGW5S X400-MTS-identifier: [;54212190219991/4312655 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"m0K-D1.0.Ww6.9L-Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32027 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Prayer is always answered, it's just that the answer is usually no. -Gasp- How could that be, how could a caring, all powerful God let someone die. The worst possible thing that could happen to someone, and God would just standby and let them DIE ??? Why that's just as bad as a mother pushing an infant out of her nice safe familiar womb into a world entirely out side of the infants frame of reference and knowledge. How could she be so cruel and uncaring ??? It all depends on your frame of reference. If you really believe that your entire existence is this short span of years on earth, then death is a big deal. If you accept an eternal frame of reference, then this life on earth is hardly even the first day in kindergarten. But there's no proof that God exists, how could you believe in anything without proof. Ah, but that is intentional, we are supposed to believe based on faith, not proof. If there was proof it would interfere with that freewill thing. Without freewill we would just be a bunch of robots. It may be cute to have a robot tell you it loved you, but it wouldn't mean anything to you, it didn't have a choice. The same with moral authority. If you can't except that there is an ultimate authority then what can you base your decisions on? Conflicting world & local authority? Or the anarchy of every man for himself? Way off topic. Bill (stepping off the soapbox) webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com >> Do patients with fatal diseases who are religious and pray >> have a statistically better chance at remission than those >> patients who are athiests and don't bother to pray? >All patients die of something or other eventually. No amount of prayer >prevents death from occurring, sooner or later. >Religious people who are in IMMINENT danger of death probably do not >pray for their own recovery, but rather pray for their family or friends >who will be left behind. I say this based on my own subjective >experience of course. >In any event, I have no interest in trying to prove to you that prayer >works. You will have to decide that issue out of your own subjective >experience, just like I did. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 09:41:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA00367; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:36:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:36:13 -0800 Message-ID: <003601bf4274$36ddac40$74441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Fw: Those pesky martians Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 10:35:41 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0033_01BF4231.23C7F180" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"XC8Kp.0.b5.DY-Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32028 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_0033_01BF4231.23C7F180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > http://www.skiesare.demon.co.uk/phob-3.htm > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > PHOBOS: MALFUNCTION OR EARLY "STAR WARS" INCIDENT?PHOBOS: MALFUNCTION OR EARLY "STAR WARS" INCIDENT? > Phobos, one of the two moons of Mars, has itself always been considered a rather mysterious object, as has its smaller twin, Deimos. Joseph Shklovskii noted member of the Soviet Academy of science and co-writer with Dr Carl Sagan of 'Intelligent life in the universe', once calculated from the estimated density of the Martian atmosphere and the peculiar "acceleration" of Phobos, that the satellite must be hollow. Could Phobos be a hollowed-out space station of huge proportions? > > In July 1988, the Russians launched two unmanned satellite probes - Phobos 1 and Phobos 2 - in the direction of Mars, and with the primary intention of investigating the planet's mysterious moon, Phobos. Phobos 1 was unfortunately lost en route two months later, reportedly because of a radio command error. Phobos 2 was also ultimately lost in the most intriguing circumstances, but not before it had beamed back certain images and information from the planet Mars itself. > > Phobos 2 arrived safely at Mars in January 1989 and entered into an orbit around Mars as the first step at its destination towards its ultimate goal: to transfer to an orbit that the would make it fly almost in tandem with the Martian moonlet called Phobos (hence the spacecrafts name) and explore the moonlet with highly sophisticated equipment that included two packages of instruments to be placed on the moonlet's surface. > > All went well until Phobos 2 aligned itself with Phobos, the Martian moonlet. Then, on 28th March, the Soviet mission control center acknowledged sudden communication "problems" with the spacecraft; and Tass, the official Soviet news agency, reported that "Phobos 2 had failed to communicate with Earth as scheduled after completing an operation yesterday around the Martian moon Phobos. Scientists at mission control have been unable to establish stable radio contact." > > What had caused the Phobos 2 spacecraft to be lost? The answer came about three months later. Pressed by the international participants in the Phobos mission to provide definitive data, the Soviet authorities released a taped television transmission Phobos 2 sent in its last moments except for the last frames, taken just seconds before the spacecraft fell silent. The television clip was shown by some TV stations in Europe and Canada as part of weekly 'diary' programs, as a curiosity and not as a hot news item. > > The television sequence thus released focused on two anomalies. The first was a network of straight lines in the area of the Martian equator; some of the lines were short, some were longer, some were thin, some were wide enough to look like rectangular shapes 'embossed' in the Martian surface. Arranged in rows parallel to each other, the pattern covered an area of some six hundred square kilometers (more than two hundred and thirty square miles). The anomaly appeared to be far from a natural phenomenon. > > The television clip was accompanied by a live comment by Dr. John Becklake of the London Science Museum. He described the phenomenon as very puzzling, because the pattern seen on the surface of Mars was photographed not with the spacecraft's optical camera but with its infrared camera- a camera that takes pictures of objects using the heat that they radiate, and not by the play of light and shadow on them. In other words, the pattern of parallel lines and rectangles covering an area of almost two hundred and fifty square miles was a source of heat radiation. It is so highly unlikely that a natural source of heat radiation (a geyser or a concentration of radioactive minerals under the surface, for example) would create such a perfect geometric pattern. When viewed over and over again, the pattern definitely looks artificial; but as for what it was, the scientist said "I certainly don't know." > > According to Boris Bolitsky, science correspondent for Radio Moscow, just before radio contact was lost with Phobos 2, several unusual images were radioed back to Earth, described by the Russian as "Quite remarkable features". A report taken from New Scientist of 8 April 1989, described the following: "The features are either on the Martian surface or in the lower atmosphere. The features are between 20 and 25 kilometers wide and do not resemble any known geological formation. They are spindle - shaped and proving to be intriguing and puzzling." > > Since no coordinates for the precise location of this "anomalous feature" have been released publicly, it is impossible to judge its relationship to another puzzling feature on the surface of Mars that can be seen in Mariner 9 frame 4209-75. It is also located in the equatorial area (at longitude 186.4) and has been described as "unusual indentations with radial arms protruding from a central hub" , caused (according to NASA scientists) by the melting and collapse of permafrost layers. The design of the features, bringing to mind the structure of a modern airport with a circular hub from which long structures housing the airplane gates radiate, can be better visualized when the photograph is reversed (showing depressions and protrusions). > > A SHADOW ACROSS THE SURFACE OF MARS > > > > An unusual photo of a thin shadow across mars was shown on the Russian television segment. Seen on the surface of Mars was a clearly defined dark shape that could indeed be described, as it was in he initial dispatch from Moscow, as a "thin ellipse" (this photo is a still from the Soviet television clip). It was certainly different from the shadow of Phobos recorded eighteen years earlier by Mariner 9. The latter cast a shadow that was a rounded ellipse and fuzzy at the edges, as would be cast by the uneven surface of the moonlet. The 'anomaly' seen in the Phobos 2 transmission was a thin ellipse with very sharp rather than rounded points (the shape is known in the diamond trade as a "marquise") and the edges, rather than being fuzzy, stood out sharply against a kind of halo on the Martian surface. Dr. Becklake described it as "something that is between the spacecraft and Mars, because we can see the Martian surface below it," and stressed that the object was seen by both the optical and the infrared (heat seeking) camera. > > All these reasons explain why the Soviets have not suggested that the dark, "thin ellipse" might have been a shadow of the moonlet. While the image was held on the screen, Dr. Becklake explained that it was taken as the spacecraft was aligning itself with Phobos (the moonlet). "As the last picture was halfway through," he said, "they [Soviets] saw something that should not be there." The Soviets, he went on to state, have not yet released this last picture, and we wont speculate on what it shows. > > So what was it that collided or crashed into Phobos 2? Was the space probe shot out of space for "seeing too much"? What does the last secret frame show? In his careful words to 'Aviation Week and Space Technology', the chairman of the Soviet equivalent of NASA, referred to the last frame, saying, "One image appears to include an odd-shaped object between the spacecraft and Mars." > > This "highly secret" photo was later given to the Western press by Colonel Dr. Marina Popovich, a Russian astronaut and pilot who has long been interested in UFO's. At a UFO conference in 1991, Popovich gave to certain investigators some interesting information that she "smuggled" out of the now ex-Soviet Union. Part of the information was what has been called "the first ever leaked accounts of an alien mother ship in the solar system". > > The last transmission from Phobos 2 was a photograph of a gigantic cylindrical spaceship - a huge, approx, 20km long, 1.5km diameter cigar-shaped 'mother ship', that was photographed on 25 March 1989 hanging or parked next to the Martian moon Phobos by the Soviet unmanned probe Phobos 2. After that last frame was radio-transmitted back to Earth, the probe mysteriously disappeared; according to the Russians it was destroyed - possibly knocked out with an energy pulse beam. > > The cigar shaped craft in the penultimate frame taken by Phobos 2 is apparently the object casting the oblong shadow on the surface of Mars in the earlier photo. > > Australian science writer Brian Crowley says that because of the convex cats eye shadow - which, because the overhead solar inclination prevented shadow- casting by Martian surface features, implies a shadow thrown on the surface from something in orbit - beyond the orbit of Phobos 2 itself. The shadow - spindle- or cigar shaped - is inconsistent with any possible shadow cast by the moon Phobos, which is an irregular potato shape. One needs little imagination to postulate a giant, hovering cigar- shaped mother craft similar to those documented down the years by UFO investigators. > > INFRARED PHOTOS OF AN UNDERGROUND CITY > > Another Phobos picture, released on Canadian TV, presents an infrared scan radiometer image of the Martian surface that showed clearly defined rectangular areas. These are interconnected with a latticework of perfectly straight channels, much resembling a city block. There were no corresponding surface features taken by regular cameras. This suggests the heat signature of what may be a set of underground cavern or channels that are just too geometrically regular to be formed naturally. According to Dr. John Becklake of the London Science Museum, "The city-like pattern is 60 kilometers wide and could be easily be mistaken for an aerial view of Los Angeles." > > The final picture taken by Phobos 2 before it was "shot out of orbit" has never been publicly released. One report indicated that it was presented at a closed meeting with US and British officials. > > In the 19 October 1989 issue of "Nature', Soviet scientists published a series of technical reports on the experiments Phobos 2 did manage to conduct: of the thirty seven pages, a mere paragraph deal with the spacecrafts loss. The report confirms that the spacecraft was spinning, either because of a computer malfunction or because Phobos 2 was "impacted" by an unknown object. > > And so we see that it is not only NASA that is apparently involved in suppressing photographs and knowledge of other planets, but the Russian space program as well. > > CHAIN CRATERS OF PHOBOS > > In an interesting article in the January 1977 issue of 'Astronomy', entitled "Chain Craters of Phobos", the anonymous author discusses the strange grooves and craters of Phobos: > > "Viking has discovered another mystery in the most unexpected place - one of the two small Martian moons. Mariner 9's mapping of Phobos (12x14x17 miles or 20x23x28 kilometers) and Deimos (6x7x10 miles, or 10x12x16 kilometers) showed many craters, and left most investigators that they were merely rocky chunks that bore the scars of meteorite impacts. There was a puzzling feature on Phobos that a few analysts noticed but, without better data, could say little about. > > "A the limit of resolution were a few small crater pits that seemed to align in one or two chains. This was unusual, because crater chains on the moon were traditionally explained as volcanic pits - small eruption sites string along fracture lines. Yet Phobos apparently is too small to generate heat and conventional volcanic activity. > > "Vikings high resolution photos have revealed that the crater chains are real and part of an extensive system of parallel grooves, a few hundred yards wide (shown in Viking orbiter photo number 39B84). There may be a tendency for the grooves to lie parallel to the direction of the satellites orbital motion, although there appears to be several swarms with somewhat different orientations. Scientists are at a loss to explain them. Theories being discussed include: grooves left by much smaller satellite debris also orbiting Mars (though the grooves seem to follow contours of Phobos' surface to closely for this to be tenable); fractures radiating from an impact crater not yet recognized (perhaps on the side of Phobos still poorly photographed); or fractures created in the body of the Martian satellite when it was part of a hypothetical larger body and that it spawned both Martian moons, perhaps during a catastrophic impact." > > In the latest effort to photograph Mars and its moons, the NASA 'Mars Observer' was launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Base in Florida in late 1992, on a 337 day voyage to Mars. The Mars Observer initially was expected to arrive at Mars by 19 August 1993, and enter a long, elliptical orbit over the poles. In mid November 1993 it was to begin its two year mapping of the surface of Mars. Then suddenly, on 22nd August 1993, it was announced that NASA had lost contact with the spacecraft. > > Americans and the world mourned the loss of a valuable scientific tool for understanding Mars. Taxpayers wondered if there was a better way to spend their money than on expensive space probes that didn't work. A dark shield was going up on new information about Mars to the public at large... > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ------=_NextPart_000_0033_01BF4231.23C7F180 Content-Type: text/html; name="phob-3.htm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="phob-3.htm" PHOBOS: MALFUNCTION OR EARLY "STAR WARS" INCIDENT? PHOBOS: MALFUNCTION OR EARLY "STAR WARS" INCIDENT?

Phobos, one of the two moons of Mars, has itself always been considered a rather mysterious object, as has its smaller twin, Deimos. Joseph Shklovskii noted member of the Soviet Academy of science and co-writer with Dr Carl Sagan of 'Intelligent life in the universe', once calculated from the estimated density of the Martian atmosphere and the peculiar "acceleration" of Phobos, that the satellite must be hollow. Could Phobos be a hollowed-out space station of huge proportions?

In July 1988, the Russians launched two unmanned satellite probes - Phobos 1 and Phobos 2 - in the direction of Mars, and with the primary intention of investigating the planet's mysterious moon, Phobos. Phobos 1 was unfortunately lost en route two months later, reportedly because of a radio command error. Phobos 2 was also ultimately lost in the most intriguing circumstances, but not before it had beamed back certain images and information from the planet Mars itself.

Phobos 2 arrived safely at Mars in January 1989 and entered into an orbit around Mars as the first step at its destination towards its ultimate goal: to transfer to an orbit that the would make it fly almost in tandem with the Martian moonlet called Phobos (hence the spacecrafts name) and explore the moonlet with highly sophisticated equipment that included two packages of instruments to be placed on the moonlet's surface.

All went well until Phobos 2 aligned itself with Phobos, the Martian moonlet. Then, on 28th March, the Soviet mission control center acknowledged sudden communication "problems" with the spacecraft; and Tass, the official Soviet news agency, reported that "Phobos 2 had failed to communicate with Earth as scheduled after completing an operation yesterday around the Martian moon Phobos. Scientists at mission control have been unable to establish stable radio contact."

What had caused the Phobos 2 spacecraft to be lost? The answer came about three months later. Pressed by the international participants in the Phobos mission to provide definitive data, the Soviet authorities released a taped television transmission Phobos 2 sent in its last moments except for the last frames, taken just seconds before the spacecraft fell silent. The television clip was shown by some TV stations in Europe and Canada as part of weekly 'diary' programs, as a curiosity and not as a hot news item.

The television sequence thus released focused on two anomalies. The first was a network of straight lines in the area of the Martian equator; some of the lines were short, some were longer, some were thin, some were wide enough to look like rectangular shapes 'embossed' in the Martian surface. Arranged in rows parallel to each other, the pattern covered an area of some six hundred square kilometers (more than two hundred and thirty square miles). The anomaly appeared to be far from a natural phenomenon.

The television clip was accompanied by a live comment by Dr. John Becklake of the London Science Museum. He described the phenomenon as very puzzling, because the pattern seen on the surface of Mars was photographed not with the spacecraft's optical camera but with its infrared camera- a camera that takes pictures of objects using the heat that they radiate, and not by the play of light and shadow on them. In other words, the pattern of parallel lines and rectangles covering an area of almost two hundred and fifty square miles was a source of heat radiation. It is so highly unlikely that a natural source of heat radiation (a geyser or a concentration of radioactive minerals under the surface, for example) would create such a perfect geometric pattern. When viewed over and over again, the pattern definitely looks artificial; but as for what it was, the scientist said "I certainly don't know."

According to Boris Bolitsky, science correspondent for Radio Moscow, just before radio contact was lost with Phobos 2, several unusual images were radioed back to Earth, described by the Russian as "Quite remarkable features". A report taken from New Scientist of 8 April 1989, described the following: "The features are either on the Martian surface or in the lower atmosphere. The features are between 20 and 25 kilometers wide and do not resemble any known geological formation. They are spindle - shaped and proving to be intriguing and puzzling."

Since no coordinates for the precise location of this "anomalous feature" have been released publicly, it is impossible to judge its relationship to another puzzling feature on the surface of Mars that can be seen in Mariner 9 frame 4209-75. It is also located in the equatorial area (at longitude 186.4) and has been described as "unusual indentations with radial arms protruding from a central hub" , caused (according to NASA scientists) by the melting and collapse of permafrost layers. The design of the features, bringing to mind the structure of a modern airport with a circular hub from which long structures housing the airplane gates radiate, can be better visualized when the photograph is reversed (showing depressions and protrusions).

A SHADOW ACROSS THE SURFACE OF MARS

An unusual photo of a thin shadow across mars was shown on the Russian television segment. Seen on the surface of Mars was a clearly defined dark shape that could indeed be described, as it was in he initial dispatch from Moscow, as a "thin ellipse" (this photo is a still from the Soviet television clip). It was certainly different from the shadow of Phobos recorded eighteen years earlier by Mariner 9. The latter cast a shadow that was a rounded ellipse and fuzzy at the edges, as would be cast by the uneven surface of the moonlet. The 'anomaly' seen in the Phobos 2 transmission was a thin ellipse with very sharp rather than rounded points (the shape is known in the diamond trade as a "marquise") and the edges, rather than being fuzzy, stood out sharply against a kind of halo on the Martian surface. Dr. Becklake described it as "something that is between the spacecraft and Mars, because we can see the Martian surface below it," and stressed that the object was seen by both the optical and the infrared (heat seeking) camera.

All these reasons explain why the Soviets have not suggested that the dark, "thin ellipse" might have been a shadow of the moonlet. While the image was held on the screen, Dr. Becklake explained that it was taken as the spacecraft was aligning itself with Phobos (the moonlet). "As the last picture was halfway through," he said, "they [Soviets] saw something that should not be there." The Soviets, he went on to state, have not yet released this last picture, and we wont speculate on what it shows.

So what was it that collided or crashed into Phobos 2? Was the space probe shot out of space for "seeing too much"? What does the last secret frame show? In his careful words to 'Aviation Week and Space Technology', the chairman of the Soviet equivalent of NASA, referred to the last frame, saying, "One image appears to include an odd-shaped object between the spacecraft and Mars."

This "highly secret" photo was later given to the Western press by Colonel Dr. Marina Popovich, a Russian astronaut and pilot who has long been interested in UFO's. At a UFO conference in 1991, Popovich gave to certain investigators some interesting information that she "smuggled" out of the now ex-Soviet Union. Part of the information was what has been called "the first ever leaked accounts of an alien mother ship in the solar system".

The last transmission from Phobos 2 was a photograph of a gigantic cylindrical spaceship - a huge, approx, 20km long, 1.5km diameter cigar-shaped 'mother ship', that was photographed on 25 March 1989 hanging or parked next to the Martian moon Phobos by the Soviet unmanned probe Phobos 2. After that last frame was radio-transmitted back to Earth, the probe mysteriously disappeared; according to the Russians it was destroyed - possibly knocked out with an energy pulse beam.

The cigar shaped craft in the penultimate frame taken by Phobos 2 is apparently the object casting the oblong shadow on the surface of Mars in the earlier photo.

Australian science writer Brian Crowley says that because of the convex cats eye shadow - which, because the overhead solar inclination prevented shadow- casting by Martian surface features, implies a shadow thrown on the surface from something in orbit - beyond the orbit of Phobos 2 itself. The shadow - spindle- or cigar shaped - is inconsistent with any possible shadow cast by the moon Phobos, which is an irregular potato shape. One needs little imagination to postulate a giant, hovering cigar- shaped mother craft similar to those documented down the years by UFO investigators.

INFRARED PHOTOS OF AN UNDERGROUND CITY

Another Phobos picture, released on Canadian TV, presents an infrared scan radiometer image of the Martian surface that showed clearly defined rectangular areas. These are interconnected with a latticework of perfectly straight channels, much resembling a city block. There were no corresponding surface features taken by regular cameras. This suggests the heat signature of what may be a set of underground cavern or channels that are just too geometrically regular to be formed naturally. According to Dr. John Becklake of the London Science Museum, "The city-like pattern is 60 kilometers wide and could be easily be mistaken for an aerial view of Los Angeles."

The final picture taken by Phobos 2 before it was "shot out of orbit" has never been publicly released. One report indicated that it was presented at a closed meeting with US and British officials.

In the 19 October 1989 issue of "Nature', Soviet scientists published a series of technical reports on the experiments Phobos 2 did manage to conduct: of the thirty seven pages, a mere paragraph deal with the spacecrafts loss. The report confirms that the spacecraft was spinning, either because of a computer malfunction or because Phobos 2 was "impacted" by an unknown object.

And so we see that it is not only NASA that is apparently involved in suppressing photographs and knowledge of other planets, but the Russian space program as well.

CHAIN CRATERS OF PHOBOS

In an interesting article in the January 1977 issue of 'Astronomy', entitled "Chain Craters of Phobos", the anonymous author discusses the strange grooves and craters of Phobos:

"Viking has discovered another mystery in the most unexpected place - one of the two small Martian moons. Mariner 9's mapping of Phobos (12x14x17 miles or 20x23x28 kilometers) and Deimos (6x7x10 miles, or 10x12x16 kilometers) showed many craters, and left most investigators that they were merely rocky chunks that bore the scars of meteorite impacts. There was a puzzling feature on Phobos that a few analysts noticed but, without better data, could say little about.

"A the limit of resolution were a few small crater pits that seemed to align in one or two chains. This was unusual, because crater chains on the moon were traditionally explained as volcanic pits - small eruption sites string along fracture lines. Yet Phobos apparently is too small to generate heat and conventional volcanic activity.

"Vikings high resolution photos have revealed that the crater chains are real and part of an extensive system of parallel grooves, a few hundred yards wide (shown in Viking orbiter photo number 39B84). There may be a tendency for the grooves to lie parallel to the direction of the satellites orbital motion, although there appears to be several swarms with somewhat different orientations. Scientists are at a loss to explain them. Theories being discussed include: grooves left by much smaller satellite debris also orbiting Mars (though the grooves seem to follow contours of Phobos' surface to closely for this to be tenable); fractures radiating from an impact crater not yet recognized (perhaps on the side of Phobos still poorly photographed); or fractures created in the body of the Martian satellite when it was part of a hypothetical larger body and that it spawned both Martian moons, perhaps during a catastrophic impact."

In the latest effort to photograph Mars and its moons, the NASA 'Mars Observer' was launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Base in Florida in late 1992, on a 337 day voyage to Mars. The Mars Observer initially was expected to arrive at Mars by 19 August 1993, and enter a long, elliptical orbit over the poles. In mid November 1993 it was to begin its two year mapping of the surface of Mars. Then suddenly, on 22nd August 1993, it was announced that NASA had lost contact with the spacecraft.

Americans and the world mourned the loss of a valuable scientific tool for understanding Mars. Taxpayers wondered if there was a better way to spend their money than on expensive space probes that didn't work. A dark shield was going up on new information about Mars to the public at large...

------=_NextPart_000_0033_01BF4231.23C7F180-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 09:49:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA04853; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:47:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:47:09 -0800 Message-ID: <384FF410.5E03 ca-ois.com> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 10:25:20 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0 john> <384D5594.38D5 ca-ois.com> <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0 john> <3.0.6.32.19991209095309.0079f100@pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Ln9Kp.0.iB1.Si-Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32029 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Jim Ostrowski writes: > > >In any event, I have no interest in trying to prove to you that prayer > >works. You will have to decide that issue out of your own subjective > >experience, just like I did. > > I do not see how anyone can "decide" a matter of fact based on subjective > experience. People do this all the time. They buy products based on a purely subjective claimed benefit or quality, presented as a matter of fact. They may be given the opportunity to try the product first, and if they "like" the product, they buy it without the benefit of measured studies, as you describe, below. For example, lets say some stereo systems are advertized to sound "great". The quality "great" is subjective, what sounds great to some may not sound so great to others. So the idea is you TRY the stereo system and IF YOU LIKE it, you buy it. The same with prayer. Try it, then if it doesn't work out in a way that you subjectively think is "great" just keep on being a non praying atheist. Or don't try it at all, because you will feel silly talking to some entity that you do not even believe exists! I really don't care. You have as much right NOT to try praying as people have NOT to try stereo systems. > Either prayer works, or it does not. This is like saying that talking to Jed Rothwell either works or it does not. Does talking to Jed work, Jed? > The only way to find out > would be conduct research, observe many patients and their behavior, and > measure their survival rates. I am not saying this study should be done, > but unless it is done, you have no basis to "decide" anything. You and I decide things all the time based on subjective feelings or subjective experiences resulting from personally demonstrated effects. If you decide not to subject yourself to a demonstration, that's your business. Likewise, others can "decide" things on the basis of demos they have "decided" to try. > You might as > well try to decide what the weather is like without looking outside. The idea of trying prayer is just like the idea of turning one's head to look out the window. You can choose to turn your head and look outside, or not. If you choose not to look, and subsequently decide what the weather is like, in that case it is YOU who does not have a basis for argument. > It > could be anything, especially in Ithaca, New York. No, it couldn't be "anything". It could only be what it is. Jim Ostrowski > > - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 09:54:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA07728; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:52:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 09:52:45 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209125115.007a43e0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:51:15 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Prayer, attitude and disease In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991209112612.007ce100 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991209093754.0079a7f0 pop.mindspring.com> <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0 john> <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0 john> <384D5594.38D5 ca-ois.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"1m4LZ2.0.fu1.jn-Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32030 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > It is doubtful that a single study which tracks a small number of >patients for a limited time would be of any use in resolving this. > How many pts? Assuming pts are patients, the answer is I don't recall. You would have to track down the study. I recommend you spell out abbreviations and professional jargon when addressing a non-professional audience, or we wn't knw wht yr talkg abt. > Why were some pts removed? They died too soon, as I said. Those pts were burd in their grvs, and not avlble to rnswr qstions. > How could anyone normalize for differences in treatment, stage of >disease, time to initiation of treatment, etc., which has a much greater >impact on disease-free survival? You have to read the paper to learn that kind of detail. > It is more likely, that as with breast cancer treatment, >clinical significance will be apparent much earlier than >statistical significance. It is very unlikely that anyone could draw a meaningful conclusion about a complex study based on a few paragraphs written by me, which were based on a newspaper article I read years ago. Swartz is jumping to conclusions about a research paper he has not read, about which he knows nothing. How unprofessional! How like the anti-CF skeptics. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 10:35:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25501; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 10:34:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 10:34:06 -0800 Message-ID: <384FF5FA.7D8B lafn.org> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 10:33:34 -0800 From: Jim Day X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.03 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XPwkw1.0.KE6.UO_Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32031 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: For an argument supporting the reality of chronons and hodons see Section 4 of-- http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~zcapn39/tut-grqt.html Regards, Jim Day From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 10:38:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA26450; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 10:37:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 10:37:44 -0800 Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 11:26:26 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Mathematics and Reality In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912091824.LAA15201 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <199912090037.RAA04929 smtp.asu.edu> Resent-Message-ID: <"FrqYu1.0.6T6.uR_Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32032 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:16 PM 12/8/99 -0600, you wrote: >>At 11:10 PM 12/7/99 -0600, you wrote: >>> >>>***{If I have a carton containing a dozen eggs and remove two, ten will >>>remain. That is a fact of reality which even the supposed authority of >>>Albert Einstein cannot alter. --Mitchell Jones}*** >>> >> >>Its probably true that the only mathematical formulas that exactly model >>reality are the ones that only involve counting in some form or other. > >***{What mathematical model doesn't involve counting, in some form or >other? :-) --MJ}*** > I don't usually respond to trolls, and I'm not sure what your smiley is for. But just in case you're being serious, Newton's law F=ma for example, and most any differential equations modeling most any physical phenomena have solutions that are not generally considered "counting" processes, and also do not exactly model reality. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 10:53:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA01242; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 10:51:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 10:51:30 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209134837.007ed100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 13:48:37 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Prayer, attitude and disease In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991209125115.007a43e0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991209112612.007ce100 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209093754.0079a7f0 pop.mindspring.com> <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0 john> <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0 john> <384D5594.38D5 ca-ois.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NcLuo3.0.IJ.oe_Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32033 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:51 PM 12/9/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >> It is doubtful that a single study which tracks a small number of >>patients for a limited time would be of any use in resolving this. >> How many pts? > >Assuming pts are patients, the answer is I don't recall. You would have to >track down the study. I recommend you spell out abbreviations and >professional jargon when addressing a non-professional audience, or we wn't >knw wht yr talkg abt. > > >> Why were some pts removed? > >They died too soon, as I said. Those pts were burd in their grvs, and not >avlble to rnswr qstions. > > >> How could anyone normalize for differences in treatment, stage of >>disease, time to initiation of treatment, etc., which has a much greater >>impact on disease-free survival? > >You have to read the paper to learn that kind of detail. They were rhetorical questions, which matter to scientists, but apparently not to barkers. =============================================== >> It is more likely, that as with breast cancer treatment, >>clinical significance will be apparent much earlier than >>statistical significance. > >It is very unlikely that anyone could draw a meaningful conclusion about a >complex study based on a few paragraphs written by me, which were based on >a newspaper article I read years ago. Swartz is jumping to conclusions >about a research paper he has not read, about which he knows nothing. How >unprofessional! How like the anti-CF skeptics. > >- Jed Agree with the first sentence. I was correcting errors in Mr. Rothwell's comments. Rothwell simply again avoids the issues, just as when his errors about CF are also corrected. The comments I made apply to any clinical/statistical study. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 11:06:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07264; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:05:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:05:53 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991209112612.007ce100 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991209093754.0079a7f0 pop.mindspring.com> <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0 john> <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0@john> <384D5594.38D5 ca-ois.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:55:12 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Prayer, attitude and disease Resent-Message-ID: <"C3buG1.0.Qn1.Fs_Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32036 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [snip] Attitude cannot >>be measured precisely, but social science researchers have developed a >>battery of questions and observations to form a rough but reliable metric. >>It is easy to identify the extremes: people who are severely depressed, and >>people who are strongly confident that they will survive. The study results >>surprised the researchers and most doctors. They found no correlation >>between attitude and survival. They began the study expecting to find a >>correlation, which makes the results more convincing, because the >>unconscious bias would be toward the initial expectation. > > > Stress is well known to decreases the ability of the body to >fight and withstand disease, and stress can induce its own medical problems, >just as the stress hormones have a major impact on surgery >[which is why surgery begins at 7 AM]. > > There may be diminished stress through faith and prayer in those >who believe, and thus, there actually may be a clinical impact. ***{Indeed, it is virtually certain there is a positive clinical impact in some patients, for precisely the reasons you cited. However, focusing one's mind on the problem--e.g., by studying alternative medicine and identifying nutrients, herbs, and behavioral regimes that seemed to help others who had the same condition--also has a positive clinical impact for some patients. Which impact will be the larger depends on the intelligence of the patient, and, thus, on his ability to, amid the complexities of the alternative health movement, separate the wheat from the chaff. My guess would be that people who are too dumb to navigate the complexities of the alternative health movement would gain, in the net, from prayer, while those who are adept at dealing with complexities would benefit more from trying to solve their problem themselves. --Mitchell Jones}*** [snip] > >>I was pleased with this. I do not like the modern trend of blaming the >>patient for the disease. > > > Surgery, oncology, and medicine in general, unlike some cold fusion >reporters who blame researchers, do NOT blame patients for their disease. > > There is no trend such as Mr. Rothwell purports. > > > Mitchell Swartz, MD, ScD > [snip] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 11:06:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07125; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:05:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:05:36 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991209093754.0079a7f0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0 john> <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0@john> <384D5594.38D5 ca-ois.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:29:17 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Prayer, attitude and disease Resent-Message-ID: <"eVRW01.0.wk1.-r_Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32034 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [snip] > >Many people say prayer enhances one's metal attitude, and this in turn >helps cure disease. This study indicates that on that basis it cannot help. >If prayer does help, you have to postulate another, hidden effect. It would >have to enhance attitude and also by some other (presumably supernatural) >mechanism help cure the disease. I do not know whether prayer enhances >attitude or not, but many people think it does. ***{If a person who believes that he is always accompanied by an invisible, omnipotent friend who responds to prayer finds himself in a dangerous jungle, surrounded by hungry predators, then prayer seems likely to make him feel better--i.e., to "enhance attitude." However, devoting his thoughts to finding weapons and to avoiding vulnerable situations, rather than to prayer, seems more likely to enhance survival. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 11:07:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07227; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:05:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:05:42 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <012d01bf4246$19070e60$5d441d26 fjsparber> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:02:55 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: N Particles, Pions, Muons, Electrons (+/-) and Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"o62Mv.0.rm1.6s_Ju" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32035 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >The Charge-Neutral "N" Particle (548 Mev) decays in ~1.0E-17 sec to Pions >(+/-) >(~ 137 Mev each)then to the Muons each with a mass of ~105 Mev and a lifetime >of ~ 2.2E-6 seconds, that decay to an electron, electron antineutrino, and >a muon neutrino. > >The 548 Mev "N", 4* Electron Mass/Alpha (The Fine Structure Constant,Alpha >= 0.00729729) >or it's reciprocal 137, that decays to a Pion pair each with a mass 2* >Electron Mass/Alpha >shows that resonances relating to the Fine Structure Constant apply >up through the heavy particle spectrum. The Pion then decays to Muons. > >The FACT that the muon (-) can "Catalyze" several Fusion/Fission reactions by >creating a neutral entity (Quasineutron?)during it's 2.2 microsecond >existence is well >established. > >Going by this cue, the OU/Cold Fusion/Cold Fission effects should be >"catalyzed" by >Electron-Proton-Neutrino or Electron-Deuteron-Neutrino interaction, IF the >field interactions >create a Quasi-Muon/Quasineutron entity at temperatures in the range of >300 to >2,000 K. > >I don't think that anyone (in their right mind) would question the >existence of neutrinos. :-) ***{I take it, then, that you are an advocate of the "trust-and-parrot" school of learning? I have a different view: question all potentially significant opinions that are put forth by supposed "authorities", attack them with the best arguments you can come up with, and accept only those which survive as the truth. I call this approach *survival of the fittest in the mind*. Those who claim practitioners of such a method are not in their right minds are suckers. They fill their skulls with trendy crap in order to fit in, are invariably apologists for the worst depredations of whatever government they are subject to, and never notice an emerging dictatorship until the shackles have been fastened securely about their ankles. They are, of course, "in their right minds" from the perspective of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung and others of their ilk, who appreciate the meek submissiveness which such a mode of thought represents. However, from the perspective of America's founding fathers, who correctly noted that "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance," such people are quite insane. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 11:48:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA24862; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:44:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:44:11 -0800 Message-ID: <008601bf4286$192a0ba0$74441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: N Particles, Pions, Muons, Electrons (+/-) and Neutrinos Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:43:44 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"Hxim6.0.E46.AQ0Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32037 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Mitchell Jones To: Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 11:02 AM Subject: Re: N Particles, Pions, Muons, Electrons (+/-) and Neutrinos M as in Mad Jones wrote: > > ***{I take it, then, that you are an advocate of the "trust-and-parrot" > school of learning? I have a different view: question all potentially > significant opinions that are put forth by supposed "authorities", attack > them with the best arguments you can come up with, and accept only those > which survive as the truth. I call this approach *survival of the fittest > in the mind*. Those who claim practitioners of such a method are not in > their right minds are suckers. They fill their skulls with trendy crap in > order to fit in, are invariably apologists for the worst depredations of > whatever government they are subject to, and never notice an emerging > dictatorship until the shackles have been fastened securely about their > ankles. They are, of course, "in their right minds" from the perspective of > Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung and others of their ilk, > who appreciate the meek submissiveness which such a mode of thought > represents. However, from the perspective of America's founding fathers, > who correctly noted that "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance," such > people are quite insane. --Mitchell Jones}*** LOL! Got to you didn't I? :-) I don't subscribe to following the beaten path either, but some things can be accepted as fundamental. Staid and Parochial thinking doesn't break new ground, but neither does nonconformity for it's own sake. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 11:48:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA25949; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:46:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:46:02 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199912091824.LAA15201 smtp.asu.edu> References: <199912090037.RAA04929 smtp.asu.edu> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:43:15 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mathematics and Reality Resent-Message-ID: <"_kn212.0.CL6.wR0Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32038 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 07:16 PM 12/8/99 -0600, you wrote: >>>At 11:10 PM 12/7/99 -0600, you wrote: >>>> >>>>***{If I have a carton containing a dozen eggs and remove two, ten will >>>>remain. That is a fact of reality which even the supposed authority of >>>>Albert Einstein cannot alter. --Mitchell Jones}*** >>>> >>> >>>Its probably true that the only mathematical formulas that exactly model >>>reality are the ones that only involve counting in some form or other. >> >>***{What mathematical model doesn't involve counting, in some form or >>other? :-) --MJ}*** >> > >I don't usually respond to trolls, and I'm not sure what your smiley is >for. ***{The smiley is there because, obviously, every "mathematical model" involves counting "in some form or other," and I wanted to convey that truth as gently as possible. --MJ}*** But just in case you're being serious, Newton's law F=ma for example ***{Every measurement of force is a form of counting, as is every measurement of mass and acceleration. That's because measurement itself, at root, is a form of counting. --MJ}*** , >and most any differential equations modeling most any physical phenomena >have solutions that are not generally considered "counting" processes, and >also do not exactly model reality. ***{You are correct in thinking that most mathematical models do not exactly model reality, and I did not disagree with that. My point was that *all* mathematical models involve measurement, hence counting, "in some form or other," and *some* mathematical models *do* exactly model reality. Hence the Einstein quote, cited by Scott in one of his signatures, is nonsense--like many of Einstein's opinions, in fact. --MJ}*** > >--Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 12:03:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA02255; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:02:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:02:39 -0800 Message-ID: <385013CB.1ADC ca-ois.com> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:40:43 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: the "emerging dictatorship" ; was pions, neutrinos, etc. References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mirpi3.0.6Z.Vh0Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32039 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >The Charge-Neutral "N" Particle (548 Mev) decays in ~1.0E-17 sec to Pions > >(+/-) > >(~ 137 Mev each)then to the Muons each with a mass of ~105 Mev and a lifetime > >of ~ 2.2E-6 seconds, that decay to an electron, electron antineutrino, and > >a muon neutrino. > > > >The 548 Mev "N", 4* Electron Mass/Alpha (The Fine Structure Constant,Alpha > >= 0.00729729) > >or it's reciprocal 137, that decays to a Pion pair each with a mass 2* > >Electron Mass/Alpha > >shows that resonances relating to the Fine Structure Constant apply > >up through the heavy particle spectrum. The Pion then decays to Muons. > > > >The FACT that the muon (-) can "Catalyze" several Fusion/Fission reactions by > >creating a neutral entity (Quasineutron?)during it's 2.2 microsecond > >existence is well > >established. > > > >Going by this cue, the OU/Cold Fusion/Cold Fission effects should be > >"catalyzed" by > >Electron-Proton-Neutrino or Electron-Deuteron-Neutrino interaction, IF the > >field interactions > >create a Quasi-Muon/Quasineutron entity at temperatures in the range of > >300 to >2,000 K. > > > >I don't think that anyone (in their right mind) would question the > >existence of neutrinos. :-) > > ***{I take it, then, that you are an advocate of the "trust-and-parrot" > school of learning? I have a different view: question all potentially > significant opinions that are put forth by supposed "authorities", attack > them with the best arguments you can come up with, and accept only those > which survive as the truth. I call this approach *survival of the fittest > in the mind*. Those who claim practitioners of such a method are not in > their right minds are suckers. They fill their skulls with trendy crap in > order to fit in, are invariably apologists for the worst depredations of > whatever government they are subject to, and never notice an emerging > dictatorship until the shackles have been fastened securely about their > ankles. They are, of course, "in their right minds" from the perspective of > Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung and others of their ilk, > who appreciate the meek submissiveness which such a mode of thought > represents. However, from the perspective of America's founding fathers, > who correctly noted that "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance," such > people are quite insane. --Mitchell Jones}*** > Gee, Mitchell, you sure have a way of steering one subject into a completely different one. But I agree with the above assessment, in any case. The fact, however is that my original question on this point was never answered. What good does it do to be "vigilant" if one is not prepared to DO ANYTHING once it becomes evident that such shackles are being readied to be put around your ankles? The problem is that even though you appear to be "vigilant", when you notice such evil trends of government, what should you DO? What do you propose others DO? The framers in this case cited, got together and wrote the Declaration of Independence, and subsequently presented that by means of Public Notice to King George, and his representatives, the various "swarms of officers" he had sent hither to "eat out our substance". In keeping with this idea, how much of a stretch would it be for each of us to write out our own personal "declaration of independence" and present that to the next officer the gov't sends our way with the intention of extracting our substance and feeding it to the "system"? I have a few "sample declarations" lying around that might prove effective, in case anyone is interested. Be advised however that the assumptions embodied by these documents are that ONE IS, actually, independent of the parental attentions of government, and owes it nothing. How many people can honestly say THAT? Jim Ostrowski > >Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 12:46:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA22338; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:45:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:45:17 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: They thought they were free of bugs Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 15:53:18 -0500 Message-ID: <19991209205318750.AAA290 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"NyoGH2.0.yS5.TJ1Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32040 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed writes: >That is entirely possible. I have not researched the subject. The only >study I know about, as I said, was an attempt to correlate attitude and >mortality. There was no mention of prayer per se. I think previous, >preliminary studies did show some correlation, and most doctors apparently >take it for granted there is a link. This study was an attempt to provide >rigorous proof. It was described as the largest and most careful study to >date. The doctor that I talked to is quite strict about keeping her practice of medicine well within the accepted confines of what is considered to be broadly accepted scientific methods. I know that her main reading sources are JAMA and The New England Journal of Medicine. Her only objections to what she had read dealt with the lack of data presented in the journal articles, and she was asking me if I had any specific reports so that she could study the protocols, etc. before she made any judgements. I have read through a number of medical studies, not related to prayer, and been quite surprised to find that the quality of the studies can vary quite a bit. After having my own technology subjected to the rigorous analysis of the physics and inorganic chemistry community, I was able to point out flaws in nearly all of the studies that I read. Some of the flaws in the protocols were incredible. I saw some pretty sloppy work. Like Mitchell S. pointed out, very low data sets, poor controls, too many unquantifiable variables, and on and on. Not all the studies that I saw were terribly bad, but there were some that I thought had been conducted by high school students instead of medical researchers. The origin of funding, as we all know, can have an enormous impact on the conclusions drawn, and even what protocols are used on any given study. >I would expect, and predict, no link. They should poll the cancerous cells, >or the DNA, and ask it whether it has a strong will to survive and a >positive attitude. Let's look at this thing from the other point of view. >When people die of food poisoning, it is joyous triumph of >positively-oriented, healthy, happy life forms . . . the salmonellae are >having a glorious time reproducing like crazy, at the patient's expense. Well, so-far I haven't heard that Gallup has developed a poll for DNA and cancer cells to determine their attitudes, but I'm sure they are working on it. I did attend a lecture by a Nobel laureate whose name slips my mind who was an expert on micro-organisms. I think he also won a Pulitzer for a book called Living Planet (again, this is off the top of my head), which pointed out that the earth's crust in its healthy state is literally teeming with micro-organisms. His public speaking abilities were poor, as he had a tendency to mumble and stop in the middle of sentences, never to complete them, and so forth. After showing some slides of these organisms which had the body structures of some very bizarre insects, he quite clearly announced that every human had approximately 40,000 of these critters living in each square inch of their skin. This was at a Seattle Arts and Lectures meeting which is fairly expensive to attend, and nearly all of the attendees were obviously of above average wealth. I noticed a lot of squirming in seats by these well dressed patrons, and if I've ever had an experience where I thought I could read peoples' minds, I thought for sure I could distinctly hear the phrase "Not in MY skin, they're not!!!" Knuke - I got bugs in my brain Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 13:07:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA29641; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:49:25 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:49:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 13:41:11 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Mathematics and Reality In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912092039.NAA23658 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <199912091824.LAA15201 smtp.asu.edu> <199912090037.RAA04929@smtp.asu.edu> Resent-Message-ID: <"C75P13.0.vE7.FN1Ku" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32041 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:43 PM 12/9/99 -0600, you wrote: > But just in case you're being serious, Newton's law F=ma for example > >***{Every measurement of force is a form of counting, as is every >measurement of mass and acceleration. That's because measurement itself, at >root, is a form of counting. --MJ}*** > >, >>and most any differential equations modeling most any physical phenomena >>have solutions that are not generally considered "counting" processes, and >>also do not exactly model reality. > F=ma is not an exact model of reality. The equation F=ma does not involve counting, nor do the solutions of differential equations involve counting. They are not counting principles. If you wish to declare measurement as a form of counting then you are using the term in a broader sense than is usually used. Furthermore, although measurements might be used to help you decide the accuracy of a mathematical model, they have nothing to do with the equation itself. An example of a mathematical model that is exact because it is a counting principle would be: 24 atoms of H combined with 12 atoms of O to form water will yield exactly 12 molecules of water. (It has been years since I took any chemistry; I hope I'm not saying anything stupid here, but you get the idea.) Counting models are exact, others generally are not. Go ahead and take the last word. I'm done. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 13:13:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA02390; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:10:21 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:10:21 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <384E6218.133A0CE5 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 15:03:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"yJZPW3.0.7b.vg1Ku" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32042 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >***{These are excellent points, Robin--as usual. If I understand your >scenario, it goes like this: > >(1) The reactor supplies lots of neutrons, some of which make their way >into the CdCl2 solution. > >(2) Once there, they absorb into available nuclei >(e.g.,48Cd106 + n --> 48Cd107*) >and induce a constant pitter-patter of beta decays, some of which >involve the release of positrons (e.g., 48Cd107* --> 47Ag107 + e+). > >(3) The positrons quickly meet up with electrons, releasing two .51 MeV >gammas, thereby providing the first portion of the signature. > >(4) In a small percentage of cases, the pair of .51 MeV gammas, >purely by coincidence, is followed a few thousandths of a second >later by a neutron *from the reactor* being absorbed, not by >48Cd106 as above, but by 48Cd110. Result: > >48Cd110 + n --> 48Cd111* --> 48Cd111 + gammas (9 MeV) > >Which provides the last portion of the signature. > >Bottom line: as a result of the four steps listed above, we achieve the >neutrino signature, without the neutrino! > >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >Actually I had been thinking of positrons making their >way from the reactor, along with the neutrons, but I >like the option you present here better. > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >It would appear, then, that we need more detail about this experiment. >Anybody? If nobody on vortex has this information, then I will >port this entire thread over to sci.physics.fusion, where the >conformists who post there will be eager to beat back this hideous >attack on orthodoxy, and will dig out the details which we are >presently missing. > >Hi Mitchell and Robin, > >Your analysis is brilliant! It will probably be harder than pulling >hens' teeth to get actual data from the Reines experiments. If >by some bit of good fortune we can get some results, I would bet >dollars to -- I guess not doughnuts, how about M&Ms? -- that the >really interesting data will have been edited out. > >There were possibly other fluxes from the reactor which, with a >small but effective probability, could create "signatures" at a >rate of 3 per hour. Perhaps others on vortex who are good at >particle physics could speculate on some more scenarios. > >Jack Smith ***{The analysis which you applaud, above, is in fact merely an instance of *moral* thinking. What it requires is a distrust of authority, a desire to find the truth, and a willingness to do the mental work necessary to identify, in a concrete way, the weaknesses of the prevailing view. Most people do not fail to produce such analysis due to lack of brain power, but due to immorality: they do not, in fact, *want* the truth. What they want, instead, is a set of beliefs which will grease their social relationships, particularly with persons who are in positions of authority and, thus, are able to assist them in achieving their career objectives. Result: they employ selective thinking to acquire the beliefs which persons in positions of authority want them to hold, irrespective of whether those beliefs are true or false. I should emphasize, however, that the above analysis does not demonstrate that the prevailing view (i.e., that neutrinos exist) is wrong. It is hard for me to imagine that Cowan and Reines would not have noticed, if neutrons from the reactor were finding their way into their apparatus. After all, in many such cases the result would have been either a quick series of gammas totaling 9 MeV with no accompanying pair of .51 MeV gammas, or vice versa. Result: it should have been obvious to them that they had not yet employed enough shielding to get the neutron flux down to acceptable levels, and the logical response to that state of affairs would have been to place more shielding between their experiment and the reactor. Since neutrons are larger, more massive, and hence slower moving than neutrinos, it should be possible by such a process to accumulate enough shielding so that the neutron induced reactions were reduced to negligible levels. Here are some further comments from the Ne'eman and Kirsh book which suggest that this has been done: "[At the fermilab synchrotron] a barrier of earth one kilometre thick in the end of the decay tube absorbs all the incident particles, except for the neutrinos, which pass through it as if it was not there. The beam emerging from the other side of the barrier is therefore a pure neutrino beam." [pg. 98] "[In 1962 in the Brookhaven proton synchrotron] a proton beam, accelerated to an energy of 15 GeV, struck a target of beryllium. A powerful beam of pions (as well as other particles) subsequently emanated from the beryllium. After the beram had travelled a distance of about 20 metres, during which a number of pions decayed into muons and neutrinos, it met an iron wall 13 metres thick. This wall stopped all the particles in the beam, with the exception of the neutrinos." [pg 103] Bottom line: I think the existence of the neutrino has been pretty solidly established, despite our present inability to come up with further detail about the Cowan-Reines experiment. I am, of course, still open to arguments to the contrary. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 13:19:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA03471; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:16:08 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:16:08 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209161144.007a3d80 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:11:44 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"XaRP81.0.4s.Lm1Ku" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32043 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [This message did not seem to go through . . .] The short New York Times article about this subject can be found at: http://search.nytimes.com/search/daily/bin/fastweb?getdoc+site+site+28216+13 +wAAA+george%7Ejohnson%7Euniverse%7Ebuilt - JR From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 13:30:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10731; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:28:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:28:23 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <008601bf4286$192a0ba0$74441d26 fjsparber> References: Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 15:21:17 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: N Particles, Pions, Muons, Electrons (+/-) and Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"DDRLf2.0.Xd2.sx1Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32044 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >----- Original Message ----- >From: Mitchell Jones >To: >Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 11:02 AM >Subject: Re: N Particles, Pions, Muons, Electrons (+/-) and Neutrinos > > >M as in Mad Jones wrote: >> >> ***{I take it, then, that you are an advocate of the "trust-and-parrot" >> school of learning? I have a different view: question all potentially >> significant opinions that are put forth by supposed "authorities", attack >> them with the best arguments you can come up with, and accept only those >> which survive as the truth. I call this approach *survival of the fittest >> in the mind*. Those who claim practitioners of such a method are not in >> their right minds are suckers. They fill their skulls with trendy crap in >> order to fit in, are invariably apologists for the worst depredations of >> whatever government they are subject to, and never notice an emerging >> dictatorship until the shackles have been fastened securely about their >> ankles. They are, of course, "in their right minds" from the perspective of >> Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung and others of their ilk, >> who appreciate the meek submissiveness which such a mode of thought >> represents. However, from the perspective of America's founding fathers, >> who correctly noted that "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance," such >> people are quite insane. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >LOL! Got to you didn't I? :-) ***{You provided me with an opportunity to say something that needed to be said, and I didn't choose to pass it up. I was not angry, as you incorrectly surmised, above, but I was very, very serious. --MJ}*** > >I don't subscribe to following the beaten path either, but some things can >be accepted as >fundamental. ***{Only after they have been questioned, thoroughly and persistently argued with, and, finally, have remained standing. Your original comment very explicitly stated that people in their right minds did not question the existence of neutrinos. That is wrong: people who are in their right minds question every potentially significant statement of authority, and only accept as true those statements which withstand intense scrutiny. The people who twist themselves into pretzels to find reasons for accepting authoritative pronouncements are the one's who are crazy, because they will not become aware that the yoke of slavery is being fastened on their backs until it is too late to escape from it. --MJ}*** Staid and Parochial thinking doesn't break new ground, but neither does >nonconformity for it's own sake. ***{If you think I have exhibited nonconformity for its own sake, what is your evidence? --MJ}*** > >Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 13:41:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA13791; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:36:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:36:48 -0800 Message-ID: <38502183.BC3C8023 bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:39:15 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fw: Those pesky martians References: <003601bf4274$36ddac40$74441d26 fjsparber> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"koFPl1.0.MN3.m32Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32045 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber wrote: > > > http://www.skiesare.demon.co.uk/phob-3.htm > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > PHOBOS: MALFUNCTION OR EARLY "STAR WARS" INCIDENT?PHOBOS: MALFUNCTION OR EARLY "STAR WARS" > INCIDENT? See: http://www.cseti.org/position/addition/phobos.htm for picture of the "shadow on Mars" and a .ram video of the last image from Phobos II probe. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 14:11:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09136; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 14:06:56 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 14:06:56 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199912092039.NAA23658 smtp.asu.edu> References: <199912091824.LAA15201 smtp.asu.edu> <199912090037.RAA04929 smtp.asu.edu> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 16:00:37 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mathematics and Reality Resent-Message-ID: <"3oeN51.0.eE2.yV2Ku" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32046 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 01:43 PM 12/9/99 -0600, you wrote: > >> But just in case you're being serious, Newton's law F=ma for example >> >>***{Every measurement of force is a form of counting, as is every >>measurement of mass and acceleration. That's because measurement itself, at >>root, is a form of counting. --MJ}*** >> >>, >>>and most any differential equations modeling most any physical phenomena >>>have solutions that are not generally considered "counting" processes, and >>>also do not exactly model reality. >> > >F=ma is not an exact model of reality. The equation F=ma does not involve >counting, nor do the solutions of differential equations involve counting. >They are not counting principles. ***{Let's not stray from the issue here. I took no position one way or the other concerning the question of whether F = ma is an exact model of reality. Your original statement referred to a supposed subset of the class of "mathematical models"--to wit: those that involve counting *in some form or other*. [Emphasis mine.] I responded by suggesting that *all* mathematical models involve counting in some form or other, because they contain quantitative variables--variables which, by their nature, require measurement--and because measurement is a form of counting.--MJ}*** > >If you wish to declare measurement as a form of counting then you are using >the term in a broader sense than is usually used. ***{You opened the door to such a usage when you referred to "counting in some form or other." To me, that is a notion which is easily broad enough to include measurement. --MJ}*** Furthermore, although >measurements might be used to help you decide the accuracy of a >mathematical model, they have nothing to do with the equation itself. ***{Yes they do. The concept of a variable quantity implies the notion of some form of measurement, in order to track the changes in the variable. Even the act of watching a balloon expand as you blow it up is a form of measurement, within the context of the loose constraints which you applied to counting but refuse to permit me to apply to measurement. :-) --MJ}*** > >An example of a mathematical model that is exact because it is a counting >principle would be: > >24 atoms of H combined with 12 atoms of O to form water will yield exactly >12 molecules of water. (It has been years since I took any chemistry; I >hope I'm not saying anything stupid here, but you get the idea.) ***{We all say stupid stuff now and then, if we open our mouths. But, no, the above comment is fine. --MJ}*** > >Counting models are exact, others generally are not. ***{Counting models are not the same as models that involve counting "in some form or other." Thus you have either shifted away from your original position, or else you did not intend "in some form or other" as loosely as I originally thought. Either way, we seem to be pretty much in agreement at this point. --MJ}*** > >Go ahead and take the last word. I'm done. > >--Lynn ***{Why commit yourself to saying nothing further? How do you know I will not say something that merits further discussion? :-) --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 14:16:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA31802; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 14:13:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 14:13:19 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209171138.007a5d30 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:11:38 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <19991209205318750.AAA290 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"yJRf5.0.qm7.-b2Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32047 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael T Huffman wrote: >I have read through a number of medical studies, not related to prayer, and >been quite surprised to find that the quality of the studies can vary quite >a bit. Yes, I have noticed the same thing, coming from a social science background. The techniques for selecting respondents and measuring a large enough pool are long established, but they seemed to be overlooked in some medical research. Well, there is substandard research in every field . . . I think medicine in general is behind the times, and ripe for reform. Last week there was a lot of press coverage of the report calling for tighter control over safety and error reporting. They need more common sense & idiot-proof procedures. A doctor interviewed in the newspaper told how the anesthesia cart had two medicines in red labeled vials, one a suppressant and the other a stimulant. He accidentally administered the wrong one. The labels should have different colors! Aviation and most manufacturing are years ahead of medicine. When I was in the hospital years ago, I was appalled at the backwardness of their record-keeping, procedures for distributing medicine and so on. It was wasteful, labor-intensive and open to error. The other thing medicine needs is a large dose of public exposure, public record-keeping and consumer protection. Studies show that some operations are performed mainly in some geographical areas and not others, and a few doctors and hospitals account for a large fraction of the serious errors. Before you go to a hospital, you should be able to look it up on the Internet to find their batting average -- how many patients they have killed lately. Nothing would drive the incompetents out of business faster! I can find out easily enough how many airplanes Delta crashed & smashed lately, or which car is most likely to kill me. I should be able to find the same kind of information about doctors. They will resist that kind of exposure, but the market and the Congress will push them into it. Respectable hospitals which have nothing to hide will go public and the others will be forced to follow. Years ago, respectable grocery stores began putting expiration dates on food, the others had to follow, and eventually it became a law. >This was at a Seattle Arts and Lectures meeting which is fairly expensive to >attend, and nearly all of the attendees were obviously of above average >wealth. I noticed a lot of squirming in seats by these well dressed >patrons, and if I've ever had an experience where I thought I could read >peoples' minds, I thought for sure I could distinctly hear the phrase "Not >in MY skin, they're not!!!" They were rich but dumb. I thought everyone knew that the body is covered with microorganisms. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 14:33:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA10104; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 14:32:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 14:32:54 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 16:29:22 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Mars Polar Lander Resent-Message-ID: <"oUT_R1.0.iT2.Lu2Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32048 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: PASADENA, Calif. (Reuters) - The loss of the Mars Polar Lander spacecraft has dealt a crushing blow to NASA's Mars exploration program and could result in the postponement or cancellation of the next planned trip to the red planet, a top space agency official said Tuesday. "This has been a wake up call and we are going to respond to it. We are not going to sit back and blandly go forward," Ed Weiler, deputy director of NASA's Office of Space Sciences, told reporters from the agency's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena. The lander mission's fate was sealed at 12:30 a.m. PST (3:30 a.m. EST) on Tuesday when the craft failed to get in touch with the Mars Global Surveyor satellite circling the planet. It was the seventh attempt to get the spindly, three-legged craft to call home following its arrival on Mars on Friday. Two microprobes sent to the surface by the lander also failed to communicate with Earth. ***{According to Howard McCurdy of American University: "Mars really eats spacecraft. Of 12 attempts, 3 (two Vikings and Pathfinder) have made it." [AP newswire, 12-8-99] These are very interesting numbers. If we do not count Mars probes, NASA's success rate with deep space probes has easily been in excess of 90%. Assuming conservatively that the probability of success is .9, then the probability of failure is .1, and the probability that, out of the last 12 probes, 9 would fail due to chance alone, is about (10)(11)(12)/(10^12) = 1.32(10^-9) = .00000000132 The strong implication is that these failures are not due to chance, and the numbers get even worse if we treat the most recent failure as 3 failures (there were 3 probes), rather than 1. Moreover, the hypothesis that this is all due to cost cutting efforts on the part of NASA is equally absurd. --Mitchell Jones}*** Weiler described the loss of the $165 million spacecraft and its two microprobes, which cost $29 million, as "a crushing blow for the Mars program," that could cause the next Mars launch, scheduled for 2001, to be postponed or canceled. [snip] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 15:21:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA27129; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 15:19:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 15:19:50 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209143916.0079a750 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 14:39:16 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta In-Reply-To: <384FF5FA.7D8B lafn.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"sI9xb2.0.pd6.Ma3Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32049 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The short New York Times article about this subject can be found at: http://search.nytimes.com/search/daily/bin/fastweb?getdoc+site+site+28216+13 +wAAA+george%7Ejohnson%7Euniverse%7Ebuilt - JR From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 15:28:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA15040; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 15:25:08 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 15:25:08 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 17:18:29 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Mars Polar Lander Resent-Message-ID: <"JZaYh2.0.tg3.Hf3Ku" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32050 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [snip] ***{I seem to have screwed up the probability calculation. (Drat!) Try again: assuming conservatively that the probability of success is .9, then the probability of failure is .1, and the probability that, out of the last 12 probes, 9 would fail due to chance alone, is about (12!-3!)/(10^12) = .000479 The conclusion, however, remains the same: the strong implication is that these failures are not due to chance. --Mitchell Jones}*** [snip] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 15:57:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA10612; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 15:54:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 15:54:38 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209185223.007b7100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 18:52:23 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991209171138.007a5d30 pop.mindspring.com> References: <19991209205318750.AAA290 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"luJPO2.0.kb2.z44Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32051 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:11 PM 12/9/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Michael T Huffman wrote: > >>I have read through a number of medical studies, not related to prayer, and >>been quite surprised to find that the quality of the studies can vary quite >>a bit. > >Yes, I have noticed the same thing, coming from a social science >background. The techniques for selecting respondents and measuring a large >enough pool are long established, but they seemed to be overlooked in some >medical research. Well, there is substandard research in every field . . . > >I think medicine in general is behind the times, and ripe for reform. Last >week there was a lot of press coverage of the report calling for tighter >control over safety and error reporting. They need more common sense & >idiot-proof procedures. A doctor interviewed in the newspaper told how the >anesthesia cart had two medicines in red labeled vials, one a suppressant >and the other a stimulant. He accidentally administered the wrong one. The >labels should have different colors! Actually, this demonstrates the importance of READING. Not only the literature but also the medical chart and the labels!!!! ==================================================== > Aviation and most manufacturing are >years ahead of medicine. When I was in the hospital years ago, I was >appalled at the backwardness of their record-keeping, procedures for >distributing medicine and so on. It was wasteful, labor-intensive and open >to error. > >The other thing medicine needs is a large dose of public exposure, public >record-keeping and consumer protection. Studies show that some operations >are performed mainly in some geographical areas and not others, and a few >doctors and hospitals account for a large fraction of the serious errors. >Before you go to a hospital, you should be able to look it up on the >Internet to find their batting average -- how many patients they have >killed lately. Nothing would drive the incompetents out of business faster! >I can find out easily enough how many airplanes Delta crashed & smashed >lately, or which car is most likely to kill me. I should be able to find >the same kind of information about doctors. They will resist that kind of >exposure, but the market and the Congress will push them into it. Perhaps this should be done for those who attempt to reproduce LENR/CF systems, too. ;-)X Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 18:25:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA01615; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:22:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:22:17 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991209212046.007ae1b0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:20:46 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991209185223.007b7100 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991209171138.007a5d30 pop.mindspring.com> <19991209205318750.AAA290 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"oxwlp.0.vO.NF6Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32052 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>A doctor interviewed in the newspaper told how the >>anesthesia cart had two medicines in red labeled vials, one a suppressant >>and the other a stimulant. He accidentally administered the wrong one. The >>labels should have different colors! > > > Actually, this demonstrates the importance of READING. > > Not only the literature but also the medical chart and the labels!!!! Any doctor or nurse can read. Accidents occur because doctors must sometimes work quickly, and they might misread a label. Even the most careful person can make a mistake. The labeling, colors, shape of the container and layout of the equipment should all be designed to prevent this kind of mistake. Color can be perceived much more rapidly than writing. That should be done not because doctors are careless, illiterate, or foolish, but because they are human beings, and because these simple design changes cost nothing and they will save tens of thousands of lives every year. We use visual and tactile aids and layout design to prevent accidents in factories and airplane cockpits. Pilots generally have superb coordination and excellent vision, and they are used to working under pressure, but we do everything we can to make their job easier, faster, more intuitive. If we do the same for doctors there is no doubt the accident rate will be reduced. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 19:29:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA25709; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 19:27:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 19:27:02 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991209212702.006bb484 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:27:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"kAtyC3.0.dH6.6C7Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32053 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:18 PM 12/9/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{I seem to have screwed up the probability calculation. (Drat!) Try >again: assuming conservatively that the probability of success is .9, then >the probability of failure is .1.... You must not have any real engineering experience...I mean really designing stuff from scratch, building it, and then testing it. Those guys are doing pretty good at 3/12 considering that every time they launch its a "smoke test"...i.e. it's the first time they've actually tried all the hardware together for the intended purpose. Hell, the last one was apparently in good health up until about 15 minutes before it landed...er, crashed. That alone is an amazing accomplishment. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 20:13:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA06772; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:11:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:11:29 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <004401bf42c4$9a775bc0$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard><384C18BD.357C@ca-ois.com><00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0@john><384D5594.38D5@ca-ois.com><000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0@john> <3.0.6.32.19991209095309.0079f100@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:11:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"J3tJr3.0.hf1.nr7Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32054 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > Jim Ostrowski writes: > > >In any event, I have no interest in trying to prove to you that prayer > >works. You will have to decide that issue out of your own subjective > >experience, just like I did. > > I do not see how anyone can "decide" a matter of fact based on subjective > experience. Either prayer works, or it does not. The only way to find out > would be conduct research, observe many patients and their behavior, and > measure their survival rates. Actually, the subjective nature of a thing does not make its correlation to an input unmeasureable. One only needs a consistency between measurements, not an external consistency. Ostrowski used the word "works" and as long as that word has a consistent meaning to him, no matter how subjective it may be, then a correlation can be discovered (if there is one) between the inputs and the alleged outcome. The two essential ingredients are present -- a variable input, and a outcome that is claimed to be influenced in some degree by the input. Of course, if the word "works" doesn't have a consistent meaning, then Ostrowski's claim is meaningless, for a word that means anything means nothing. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 20:24:08 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA11768; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:22:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:22:46 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <004c01bf42c6$2e313d80$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:22:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"uJSIa3.0.nt2.M08Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32055 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bill Briggs wrote: > The same with moral authority. If you can't except that there is an > ultimate authority then what can you base your decisions on? Conflicting > world & local authority? Or the anarchy of every man for himself? Answering your questions in reverse order, we re-learned from the trials at Nuremberg that everyone is responsible for their own actions. So yes, every man himself has to determine which of his actions are moral, even if the majority or any other self-proclaimed master authority is urging us otherwise. There never is a moment in your life when you can leave such questions up to someone else. Each individual is ultimately his own Supreme Court of moral decision making. The buck stops here. There is no one higher to appeal to. The individual himself is that final arbiter. All responsibility rests with the self. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 20:40:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA19183; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:39:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:39:15 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <009101bf42c8$7a7f03a0$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:39:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"VHaII.0.fh4.oF8Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32056 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > Assuming conservatively that the probability of success is .9, then the > probability of failure is .1, and the probability that, out of the last 12 > probes, 9 would fail due to chance alone, is about (10)(11)(12)/(10^12) = > 1.32(10^-9) = .00000000132 > > The strong implication is that these failures are not due to chance... Your observation is correct ... the difference in success rates cannot merely be attributed to random chance. The explanation, however, is extremely mundane. Craft sent to Mars are vastly more complex in their mission profiles than most other interplanetary craft. Orbital insertion is vastly more complex than fly-by. Soft landing is yet again vastly more difficult. Comparing the success rates of soft landing attempts versus the success of fly-bys is mathematical gerrymandering. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 20:53:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA24965; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:51:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:51:31 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:46:12 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander Resent-Message-ID: <"OfP5Q2.0._56.IR8Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32057 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >[snip] > >***{I seem to have screwed up the probability calculation. (Drat!) Try >again: assuming conservatively that the probability of success is .9, then >the probability of failure is .1, and the probability that, out of the last >12 probes, 9 would fail due to chance alone, is about (12!-3!)/(10^12) = >.000479 > >The conclusion, however, remains the same: the strong implication is that >these failures are not due to chance. > >--Mitchell Jones}*** ***{Several years ago I posted a calculation, on sci.engr, as I recall, and then posted a correction--and then posted a correction to that! Here we go again: I keep thinking about this stupid calculation, and I continue to be dissatisfied with it. This time, I am going to slog through it very carefully, and see if I can't do it properly. (1) My basic idea here is that, since the probability of failure is about .1, I can treat this as if a 10-sided die has been rolled 12 times, and has come up with a one on 9 of those trials. In other words, what is the probability of getting nine ones if you roll a 10-sided die 12 times? (2) The probability of the occurrence of an event is the number of ways it can happen, divided by the number of ways it can and cannot happen. (3) The number of distinct ways you can get 9 ones in 12 trials should equal the number of permutations of 9 objects on 12 positions--that is: 12!/3!--divided by the number of permutations in a combination of 9 objects--that is: 9! Thus the number of distinct ways to get 9 ones in 12 trials is (12!/3!)/9! = 220. (4) The total number of possible outcomes on a given trial is 10, and so the total number of possible outcomes for all 12 trials should be 10^12. (5) Therefore, the chance probability of getting 9 mission failures in 12 attempts, when the probability of success based on an independent measure is about .9, is 220/10^12 = 2.2(10^-10) = .00000000022--which means: this string of failures is not due to chance. I think I have it right this time, but if not then hopefully I have supplied enough detail about my approach so that any remaining errors will be obvious. If the above number is correct, then something is going on here which is far beyond anything that could be reasonably explained by NASA cost cutting. These numbers simply bear no resemblance to the numbers that NASA put up in similar missions to other destinations. --Mitchell Jones}*** --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 21:18:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA02714; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:17:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:17:39 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <009101bf42c8$7a7f03a0$0101a8c0 john> References: Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 23:08:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander Resent-Message-ID: <"2VU9K3.0.Gg.op8Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32059 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> Assuming conservatively that the probability of success is .9, then the >> probability of failure is .1, and the probability that, out of the last 12 >> probes, 9 would fail due to chance alone, is about (10)(11)(12)/(10^12) = >> 1.32(10^-9) = .00000000132 >> >> The strong implication is that these failures are not due to chance... > >Your observation is correct ... the difference in success rates cannot >merely be attributed to random chance. The explanation, however, >is extremely mundane. Craft sent to Mars are vastly more complex >in their mission profiles than most other interplanetary craft. > >Orbital insertion is vastly more complex than fly-by. Soft landing >is yet again vastly more difficult. > >Comparing the success rates of soft landing attempts versus >the success of fly-bys is mathematical gerrymandering. ***{That's a good point, as far as it goes. But there were a number of Mars missions that aborted before the soft landing was attempted, and there have been soft landing attempts on other bodies--e.g., the moon and Venus--that were successful. Moreover, the deep space flybys have hazards of their own--passage through the asteroid belt, the micrometeorite and charged particle storms encountered when approaching the giant planets, etc. All in all, it is not clear to me that these differences in results are due to the greater difficulty of these missions. While you may be right, I find myself entertaining growing suspicions that something very odd is going on here. When I try to put my finger on the source of those suspicions, the answer seems to be this: the theory that these events are not accidents is predictive. I *expected* these failures, based on the very sort of probabilistic reasoning that you are discounting. If there is nothing to these views, then how is it that those who hold them can be better at predicting the success of NASA missions than NASA is? --MJ}*** > >-- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - > - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - > - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. >Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 21:19:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA02635; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:17:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:17:32 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991209212702.006bb484 mail.eden.com> References: Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:53:58 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander Resent-Message-ID: <"UXBp-3.0.ve.gp8Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32058 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 05:18 PM 12/9/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>***{I seem to have screwed up the probability calculation. (Drat!) Try >>again: assuming conservatively that the probability of success is .9, then >>the probability of failure is .1.... > >You must not have any real engineering experience...I mean really designing >stuff from scratch, building it, and then testing it. Those guys are doing >pretty good at 3/12 considering that every time they launch its a "smoke >test"...i.e. it's the first time they've actually tried all the hardware >together for the intended purpose. Hell, the last one was apparently in >good health up until about 15 minutes before it landed...er, crashed. That >alone is an amazing accomplishment. ***{My problem is that they seem to be batting at more than 90% in their other deep space, unmanned missions. If I treat those successes as a measure of the chance probability of their success on a Mars mission, I get numbers that indicate that the Mars failures cannot be due to chance. Granted, my 90% success rate for the other missions is a subjective impression rather than a hard number, but I'll bet that, if anything, it is conservative. If so, then something *very weird* is going on with these Mars missions. --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 21:34:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA07413; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:29:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:29:59 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <00b701bf42cf$928338c0$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C@ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0@john> <384D5594.38D5@ca-ois.com> <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0@john> <384F50D0.4225@ca-ois.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 23:29:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"gBrYd2.0.lp1.N_8Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32060 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > The rational basis for this was the idea that the gov't could > prevent such Japanese - Americans from suffering non state sponsored > physical violence from theoretically possible angry mobs, theoretically > upset over the attack on Pearl Harbor. Similar rationalizations have been offerred for the continuation of slavery -- the uneducated slaves, unable to fend for themselves in the competitive world were really better off having their decisions made for them by their intellectual betters. etc etc In fact, the government simply could have offered them a choice -- "here, we'll provide you with a safehouse, if you feel your lives are threatend." The mere fact that the government instead rounded these people up and forced them into internment camps, losing houses and businesses, and other properties, suggests not an intent to treat these people as moral equals, but as morally inferior, not capable of making their own choices. > Are you disputing the idea that moral authority derives from forces of > arms? There may be some confusion as to the meaning of that phrase. Even if we simply define "authority" as anyone who has the bigger gun, "moral authority" usually implies guidance of one's actions on the basis of being the right or wrong thing to do. We would say a potential rape victim has the moral authority to resist (whether or not she chooses to, or whether or not the resistance is successful.) By virtue of some superior strength, the rapist may rule the day, he may even have "authority" as perhaps you are defining it, but he doesn't have "moral authority" in that situation, because there is no moral guidance he can point to that justifies his actions as the "right" thing to do. > If so, where do YOU think moral authority comes from? It is, as I've said, a consequence of our ability to ask the question, the causal nature of the universe, the logical ability we naturally possess to attempt to answer the question, and the lack of evidence of an innate superior authority held by any other individual or group. We don't need to convince a criminal not to assault us (though it would be nice if we could, of course.) We merely have to ask what our own moral authority is in responding to his attack -- what options are morally open to us. Obviously, if no one is the moral superior of anyone else, we immediately know that anyone who initiates aggression against us has justified aggression in defense (reciprocity.) Since governments likewise have no moral superiority, then any aggressions they initiate against peaceful people may likewise be met with reciprocal violence. Morality is symmetrical in that way. He who initates, justifies equal response. Equal response to a good deed is a good deed in return. Equal response to an attack is self-defence -- deadly force in response to initial deadly force. > If you and your employer proceed on some other arrangement, > how would the IRS even know about it in order to "come after" it? "Employer" again has specific legal meaning. Prostitutes, for instance, may call their john's employers, but I believe the IRS considers them self-employed. Therefore they don't pay withholding in the same manner, but are required to pay estimated taxes on a quarterly basis. Of course, many prostitutes take only cash and don't report those earnings. But if the IRS finds out about it (often through arrest records) they will estimate an income rate based upon whatever evidence they feel makes the income rate the highest. That then becomes the amount demanded, and it is up to the taxpayer to prove the income was lower. At the IRS discretion, they can also charge them with tax evasion, and in any event they will be hit with fines at least doubling the already inflated demand -- not to mention possible prison time. A form need never have been filled out authorizing this "voluntary" agreement with the IRS. If that is all it took to be rid of the IRS, virtually no one would fill out withholding forms. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 21:43:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA12471; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:42:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:42:00 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:41:50 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <1g415son9j9vjfe0ti5ejrhalp693vlgij 4ax.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991209212702.006bb484@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 VAA12452 Resent-Message-ID: <"G7o_8.0.m23.eA9Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32061 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:53:58 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >***{My problem is that they seem to be batting at more than 90% in their >other deep space, unmanned missions. If I treat those successes as a >measure of the chance probability of their success on a Mars mission, I get >numbers that indicate that the Mars failures cannot be due to chance. >Granted, my 90% success rate for the other missions is a subjective >impression rather than a hard number, but I'll bet that, if anything, it is >conservative. If so, then something *very weird* is going on with these >Mars missions. --MJ}*** [snip] Of course it is. They know it, we know it, they know we know, yet everyone goes on pretending.....It's reaching the point where one doesn't know whether to laugh or cry, it's so pathetic. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 23:46:08 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA03958; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 23:45:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 23:45:19 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 01:46:25 -0600 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <384FC2FF.3FFB lafn.org> References: <199912090612.WAA18463 mx1.eskimo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas Malloy Subject: Re: Fundamental distance and time quanta Resent-Message-ID: <"uSxVX3.0.lz.E-AKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32062 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Day wrote >Back in 1952 I asked one of the physicists at Cal Tech whether time >and space were quantized. He replied that they were not. He went on >to explain that there is no known limit on the amount energy that a >particle can have. Therefore, there is no lower limit on wavelength >and no upper limit on frequency of oscillation. If his argument was >valid, time and space aren't quantized and the hypothetical chronon >and hodon do not exist. Of course, he might have been mistaken. :-) > Frank Meyer told me that time is a progression and not a dimention. For this reason, he also believes that time is not quantized. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 00:14:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA10758; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:13:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:13:34 -0800 Message-ID: <3850BE04.7B63 ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:47:01 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991206132209156.AAA228 mail.lcia.com@lizard> <384C18BD.357C@ca-ois.com> <00d401bf407c$774b2900$0101a8c0@john> <384D5594.38D5@ca-ois.com> <000b01bf41fb$a54013e0$0101a8c0@john> <384F50D0.4225@ca-ois.com> <00b701bf42cf$928338c0$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6HcM-3.0.0e2.kOBKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32063 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > The rational basis for this was the idea that the gov't could > > prevent such Japanese - Americans from suffering non state sponsored > > physical violence from theoretically possible angry mobs, theoretically > > upset over the attack on Pearl Harbor. > > Similar rationalizations have been offerred for the continuation of > slavery -- the uneducated slaves, unable to fend for themselves in > the competitive world were really better off having their decisions > made for them by their intellectual betters. etc etc > > In fact, the government simply could have offered them a choice -- "here, > we'll provide you with a safehouse, if you feel your lives are threatend." > The mere fact that the government instead rounded these people > up and forced them into internment camps, losing houses and > businesses, and other properties, suggests not an intent to > treat these people as moral equals, but as morally inferior, > not capable of making their own choices. > You make it sound like if you had been president or something at the time, none of the inequities you outline would have occurred. Well, the fact is you weren't president, and were not in all probability even born yet, and who's fault is THAT? You are trying to separate youself from your own resposibility for the way things are, and the way that the government behaves. The fact is, if you do not want to take responsibility for the way the government behaves, I'll have to do that. As the conmic strip character Pogo once said, "We have met the enemy, and he is US!" So for the moment I will be the judge: Who do you think YOU are, judging your parent's or your grandparent's actions of supporting the government, in hindsight, which is always so conveniently 20/20. In those days, FDR enjoyed the whole hearted support of practically every non Japanese American alive. There was even a Nesei regiment that was anxious to prove the loyalty of those interred. As well they should have been so anxious, in view of the dastardly sneak attack members of their race/religion perpetrated on Pearl Harbor. Make no mistake. The Japanese militaristic Karate Jujitsu Ninja warrior religion mentality existed then and still exists to this day. Your politically correct indignation at the temporary interrment of the Nesei makes me want to barf. The Japanese left 8 million dead in their conquest of Manchuria, prior to Pearl Harbor. They damn well got no less than they deserved at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As far as the rest of your ideas go that there are no moral authorities etc, that is a load of crap. You vote them into office and then when they go about robbing you blind you willingly feed them out the vague apprehension that the IRS might do something "coercive" like freeze your bank account. I'll bet if you were ever approached by a REAL IRS agent you'd pee in your pants. Face him or her in open court with someone like me presiding? ...forget it. There's your damn moral authority. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 00:15:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA11152; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:13:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:13:44 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 03:21:50 -0500 Message-ID: <19991210082150875.AAA277 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"iQWcK1.0.2k2.tOBKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32064 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitch and Robin write: >>Granted, my 90% success rate for the other missions is a subjective >>impression rather than a hard number, but I'll bet that, if anything, it is >>conservative. If so, then something *very weird* is going on with these >>Mars missions. --MJ}*** >[snip] >Of course it is. They know it, we know it, they know we know, yet everyone >goes on pretending.....It's reaching the point where one doesn't know >whether to laugh or cry, it's so pathetic. > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk There are a huge number of unaccountable variables that go into a deep space mission, and you have elaborated a number of them, however, there are many plausible explanations that still need to be examined before we blame it on the Martians. While this may sound like a joke, the fact that many of the calculations made by both NASA and the contractors that they hire to do their work are done on Microsoft operating systems, and with programs that may or may not be able to handle the necessary precision may play a role. All these guys buy and use the latest hardware and software, most of which is actually beta tested by the first consumers that buy it. The first consumers are often the government agencies. Patches may not always be distributed to everyone properly, and perhaps some of the actual engineering may be already finished by the time any bugs may surface. Time and budget constraints do create an atmosphere of stress, and if profit is the main consideration for a contractor, then re-engineering may take less of a priority, especially for unmanned missions. CAD/CAM programs and spreadsheets may differ in outcome because of the differences in the math used to perform operations. From what I understand, Quaternion math is being used more often in animation computing, and may be used in CAD/CAM programs. This form of math is not always well understood, especially by the programmers that are responsible for the coding, and there may be mistakes that just haven't been discovered yet. I don't think that the number of people that are intimately familiar with Quaternion math is that large. I'm with Scott and John on this one, the number of deep space flights is too low and the complexity of a soft landing is too great for you to single out Mars on a mathematical basis. There may indeed be something *interesting* about Mars, but not necessarily extremely weird. I think the Russians threw 9 space craft at the Moon before figuring out the gravitational errors. Perhaps what is necessary is something that gets close, and then fires down some probes at a potential landing site before actually attempting a landing with the main craft. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 00:50:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA19740; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:49:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:49:17 -0800 Message-ID: <000d01bf42ea$a6b4a3e0$ab01fea9 hal-9000> Reply-To: "dwenbert" From: "dwenbert" To: Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 03:43:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"do-mD1.0.Mq4.DwBKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32065 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > If so, then something *very weird* is going on with these >>Mars missions. --MJ}*** >[snip] >Of course it is. They know it, we know it, they know we know, yet everyone >goes on pretending.....It's reaching the point where one doesn't know >whether to laugh or cry, it's so pathetic. Yes, it is. I believe its time we started to expect real answers. Perhaps its time to begin a "Mars-Is-Ours" campaign, or a larger "Solisours" Movement, directed at the defense of heliocentric space against any unwelcome 'visitors'. The next probe sent to Mars should be heavily armed with both the Mid-Infrared Advanced Chemical Laser Experiment ('MIRACLE') deuterium flouride eximer laser technology, *and* kinetic kill vehicles equipped with strong thermonuclear proximity charges, optimized for ElectroMagneticPulse disruption. From the photographs cited in the earlier post, the Soviet Phobos 2 probe certainly got close enough to pose a threat to that 25km long cylindrical object, that's probably why they fired first. Next time, we should have a go at them. All this nonsense about it all being coincidence about 22 out of 33 Mars probes being lost, or the wildly improbable strings of boost phase launch failures [intercepts?] here on Earth (both in '86 and more recently) being "suddenly faulty" engineering (in otherwise proven systems), is really getting annoyingly niaeve.... Its obvious from our space policy & deployment history that we've been under 'quarantine' since the early '70s. Only the collapse of the cover-up will generate sufficient popular support for the effective military space forces that are necessary for the defense of our System. I'm sure the Spooks think they're doing the right thing by keeping it all under wraps, but the real question is: Will the undefended Billions (of People that is, not to mention dollars...) look back at them as 'traitors', 'collaborators' and 'sabotuers', or as simply 'well meaning public servants who thought they were giving people a sense of comfort" by keeping everyone misled and in the dark? (until its too late??)? I think there will be mass lynchings of anyone even remotely connected with the cover-up; there will be 'inquisitions' and 'war-crimes trials', and convictions for 'crimes against humanity', once the general public understands what's probably actually going on. That probably explains why dozens of high ranking retired intelligence types are now suddenly defecting and coming forward to discretely verify UFOlogists findings with respect to Roswell, and other events. Like the Colonel who received the bodies from the Roswell crash, at Wright Patterson. None of them want to be caught in the scandal when it erupts. They have to ask themselves: "Would *I* want to be implicated in a deception which sold my people out to some alien power?" In a few years, that could be worse than being a camp guard during the Holocaust, or a draft dodger during Vietnam. I'd hate to be an NSA ground pounder right now, trying to sort that one out in my all-too-human soul. What do you tell Grandma the day after THEY decide to become known? What do you tell your Grandchildren you did in the war, years later (if they make it), or worse, what do you tell them you did to PREVENT it? I doubt that "I helped keep everyone 'Fat, Dumb & Happy' for 50 years" will seem so courageous, disciplined, and patriotic come The Morning After. Patriotic? Get Real: *Nobody* will see the cover-up as 'patriotic', in retrospect. The most common thought on Earth that day will be "If ONLY We'd Have Known....." ....we could have supported those space defenses we thought were only meant for the Soviets; We Didn't Know...... Followed closely by, "Why'd they sell us out?" .... by keeping us in the dark for so long that it became too late to do anything to defend ourselves and our world; At Least We Could Have Had a Fighting Chance..... And then the ever-popular, "They Killed Kenny!........Those Bastards!!" ;-) There is no joy In Mudville........and no "ed" in South Park.... One wonders how they sleep nights. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 06:14:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA23018; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 06:13:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 06:13:10 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991210091039.007bca50 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:10:39 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991209212046.007ae1b0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991209185223.007b7100 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209171138.007a5d30 pop.mindspring.com> <19991209205318750.AAA290 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Oo7VE1.0.Zd5.sfGKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32066 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:20 PM 12/9/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >>>A doctor interviewed in the newspaper told how the >>>anesthesia cart had two medicines in red labeled vials, one a suppressant >>>and the other a stimulant. He accidentally administered the wrong one. The >>>labels should have different colors! >> >> >> Actually, this demonstrates the importance of READING. >> >> Not only the literature but also the medical chart and the labels!!!! > >Any doctor or nurse can read. Accidents occur because doctors must >sometimes work quickly, and they might misread a label. Even the most >careful person can make a mistake. The labeling, colors, shape of the >container and layout of the equipment should all be designed to prevent >this kind of mistake. Color can be perceived much more rapidly than >writing. That should be done not because doctors are careless, illiterate, >or foolish, but because they are human beings, and because these simple >design changes cost nothing and they will save tens of thousands of lives >every year. With all due respect to your idea, there are not enough colors, & there are color-blind individuals, colors change depending upon the type of lighting, and there is much more important and relevant information (pt name, dr. name, rx name, dose, etc.) in a well written label. Carelessness increases as MD/nursing staff is overworked secondary to cost-cutting. Decades ago we examined color issues, shape issues, etc. It is the wrong crutch. Q/A and Q/C (which we have used and applied to LENR/CF BTW http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html#q/c ) has taught that misstakes are minimized by clear, well-written labels, which are checked (and re-checked) by individuals who are NOT pushed to the edge of exhaustion by administrators who use them for their own profit. =============================================================== >We use visual and tactile aids and layout design to prevent accidents in >factories and airplane cockpits. Pilots generally have superb coordination >and excellent vision, and they are used to working under pressure, but we >do everything we can to make their job easier, faster, more intuitive. If >we do the same for doctors there is no doubt the accident rate will be >reduced. > >- Jed [Easier, faster, (and cheaper) .... Didnt we hear that from NASA?] Although aviation fuel is colored to allow pilots to check the grade from the cockpit, better medical care will increase when nursing and physician staffs rise from their seats, visit and talk to their patients, and look carefully, and read, and reread the orders, labels, etc. IMO, intuition does have a role in arriving at a differential diagnosis, but does not have a role in delivering treatment, which requires planning, replanning, rechecking, follow-up and rechecking. Have a good day. Mitchell Sartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 07:24:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20287; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:22:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:22:35 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991210101952.0079d1b0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:19:52 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991210091039.007bca50 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991209212046.007ae1b0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209185223.007b7100 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209171138.007a5d30 pop.mindspring.com> <19991209205318750.AAA290 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"TBj7c.0.vy4.xgHKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32067 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > With all due respect to your idea, there are not enough colors, & there >are color-blind individuals, colors change depending upon the type >of lighting . . . It was not my idea. The use of colors in human factors engineering (HFE) is standard operating procedure. The doctor interviewed in the N.Y. Times who made this particular mistake immediately revised the hospital procedures to use different colored labels. He is the head of anesthesiology, and as he admitted he should have known better in the first place. As I said, there are many other ways to distinguish objects: size, shape, feel, position and they can be employed at the same time. Again, this is S.O.P. in HFE, described in the textbooks back in the 1930s. Obviously, designers know how to deal with colorblindness. Color has to be combined with another marker, such as position and size. That is why severely colorblind people have no trouble with traffic signals. >Decades ago we examined color issues, shape issues, >etc. It is the wrong crutch. Nonsense. The effectiveness of these techniques was established decades ago. It works in every other industry, and it is mandated by law in many. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 07:30:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA23900; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:29:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:29:29 -0800 Message-ID: <38511C38.2D968E62 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:28:56 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KoALu1.0.Ir5.PnHKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32068 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > ***{That's a good point, as far as it goes. But there were a number of Mars > missions that aborted before the soft landing was attempted, and there have > been soft landing attempts on other bodies--e.g., the moon and Venus--that > were successful. I recall there is no touchdown to venus soil, only a slow descent trough the dense and hot atmosphere using parachutes. This is radically different from the Polar Lander. I hope NASA going to give up from conventional technology for planetary missions, and enter to active research on antigravity and on other new area of physics by then. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 07:44:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30784; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:43:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:43:27 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:44:56 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"yx7we1.0.wW7.V-HKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32069 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: ... 48Cd110 + n --> 48Cd111* --> 48Cd111 + gammas (9 MeV) Which provides the last portion of the signature. Bottom line: as a result of the four steps listed above, we achieve the neutrino signature, without the neutrino! Jack wrote: Hi Mitchell and Robin, Your analysis is brilliant! Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{The analysis which you applaud, above, is in fact merely an instance of *moral* thinking. What it requires is a distrust of authority, a desire to find the truth, and a willingness to do the mental work necessary to identify, in a concrete way, the weaknesses of the prevailing view ... I should emphasize, however, that the above analysis does not demonstrate that the prevailing view (i.e., that neutrinos exist) is wrong. It is hard for me to imagine that Cowan and Reines would not have noticed, if neutrons from the reactor were finding their way into their apparatus ... Jack writes in review: Jack wrote: Why would ZERO neutrinos be detected when the reactor was turned off? Surely there would be some neutrinos from elsewhere on the celestial sphere, for example, from the sun. Mitchell wrote: {Yes, that is true. My assumption is that the solar neutrino flux is so low that there isn't a reasonable probability of getting a hit from that source during the time their experiment was in operation ... To settle this, of course, we need to find out what the solar neutrino flux really is. (As well as other fluxes--from Earth, from cosmic rays, etc.) Anybody? --Mitchell Jones}*** Mitchell wrote: The neutron, like the supposed neutrino, is a neutral particle. Result: it would be IMPOSSIBLE to reduce the neutron flux in the vicinity of a reactor identically to zero. It simply can't be done. Robin wrote: Note also that when the reactor is shut down, the flow of neutrons drops off almost to zero. Hi Mitchell, The Reines experiment is a classic exmaple of confounding: When the reactor is running, neutrons as well as supposed neutrinos can find their way into the Reines apparatus; therefore, effects which Reines ascribes to neutrinos could also be caused by neutrons. To help clarify this issue, the following experiment could be conducted: A source of neutrons that does not generate neutrinos is introduced into the Reines apparatus. Are there any neutrino signatures generated? Reines should have done this. Returning to the issue of ZERO neutrinos when the reactor is turned off, I find it implausible that, in 3 years, not one neutrino was detected from elsewhere on the celestial shpere. Consider all the jawboning that was done about Supernova 1987A. Robin notes that when the reactor is shut down, the flow of neutrons drops off almost to zero. What is plausible is that the Reines apparatus detected neutrons, not neutrinos. As I said before, I do not deny the existence of neutrinos (nor do I deny the existence of angels: do I pass the sanity test? imprimatur? nihil obstat?), but what I know of the Reines experiment does not convince me that neutrinos do exist. On the Mars lander subject, Mitchell wrote: ***{My problem is that they seem to be batting at more than 90% in their other deep space, unmanned missions. If I treat those successes as a measure of the chance probability of their success on a Mars mission, I get numbers that indicate that the Mars failures cannot be due to chance. Granted, my 90% success rate for the other missions is a subjective impression rather than a hard number, but I'll bet that, if anything, it is conservative. If so, then something *very weird* is going on with these Mars missions. --MJ}*** Jack writes: It's hard to believe that NASA engineers did not check all the calculations, and that a previous lander crashed because the contractor used English units. What a lame excuse! Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 08:53:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA22757; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 08:51:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 08:51:05 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991210114931.0079e6b0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 11:49:31 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Six-foot Mills CF cell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ecWqq2.0.VZ5.uzIKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32070 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I am not sure how well it works, but R. Mills shows an impressive looking six-foot tall CF cell in this document: http://www.blacklightpower.com/Retro1.pdf It is the biggest CF experiment I ever saw! He hates the term CF, but I note this document ends with several references and graphs from conventional Pd-D CF experiments, so he is paying some attention to the field. I do not like Mills. His egomania bothers me. He gives me the willies, and I feel I cannot trust him. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 09:22:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA32566; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:19:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:19:26 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 11:15:55 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"AbILA.0.jy7.TOJKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32071 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >... > >48Cd110 + n --> 48Cd111* --> 48Cd111 + gammas (9 MeV) > >Which provides the last portion of the signature. > >Bottom line: as a result of the four steps listed above, we achieve the >neutrino signature, without the neutrino! > >Jack wrote: > >Hi Mitchell and Robin, > >Your analysis is brilliant! > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >***{The analysis which you applaud, above, is in fact >merely an instance of *moral* thinking. What it requires >is a distrust of authority, a desire to find the truth, >and a willingness to do the mental work necessary >to identify, in a concrete way, the weaknesses of the >prevailing view ... > >I should emphasize, however, that the above analysis >does not demonstrate that the prevailing view (i.e., >that neutrinos exist) is wrong. It is hard for me to >imagine that Cowan and Reines would not have noticed, if >neutrons from the reactor were finding their way into their >apparatus ... > >Jack writes in review: > >Jack wrote: > >Why would ZERO neutrinos be detected when the reactor was >turned off? Surely there would be some neutrinos from elsewhere >on the celestial sphere, for example, from the sun. > >Mitchell wrote: > >{Yes, that is true. My assumption is that the solar neutrino flux is so >low that there isn't a reasonable probability of getting a hit from that >source during the time their experiment was in operation ... > >To settle this, of course, we need to find out what the solar neutrino >flux really is. (As well as other fluxes--from >Earth, from cosmic rays, etc.) Anybody? --Mitchell Jones}*** ***{I finally found this info. See below. --MJ}*** > >Mitchell wrote: > >The neutron, like the supposed neutrino, is a neutral particle. >Result: it would be IMPOSSIBLE to reduce the neutron flux in the >vicinity of a reactor identically to zero. It simply can't be done. > >Robin wrote: > >Note also that when the reactor is shut down, >the flow of neutrons drops off almost to zero. > >Hi Mitchell, > >The Reines experiment is a classic exmaple of confounding: >When the reactor is running, neutrons as well as supposed >neutrinos can find their way into the Reines apparatus; >therefore, effects which Reines ascribes to neutrinos could >also be caused by neutrons. ***{Yes, but we must not lose perspective here. The neutrino signature in the Cowan-Reines experiment was a pair of .51 MeV gammas followed, a few thousandths of a second later, by a series of gammas totalling 9 MeV. If we suppose that these two events were caused, not by one neutrino from the reactor, but by two neutrons from the reactor, then there will be far more instances in which a pair of .51 MeV gammas is *not* followed by a series of gammas totalling 9 MeV, than there will be cases where the two types of events co-occur in the right order. Surely Cowan and Reines would have noticed these types of independent events, if they happened, and would have recognized what they implied: that neutrons were getting through the shielding. In that case, they would simply have increased the shielding until the neutron signature disappeared. And, as I indicated via several quotes yesterday, some of these neutrino sources employ steel shielding that is about 40 feet thick, while others employ a kilometer of earth, to ensure that only neutrinos could possibly be present in the beam in significant quantities. Don't you think that amount of shielding ought to be sufficient to reduce the neutron flux to negligible levels? --MJ}*** > >To help clarify this issue, the following experiment could >be conducted: A source of neutrons that does not generate >neutrinos is introduced into the Reines apparatus. Are there >any neutrino signatures generated? Reines should have done this. ***{The laws of probability indicate that, due purely to coincidence, some neutrino signatures would result under these conditions. What is more important, however, is that there would be far larger numbers of cases where only one half or the other of the signature was present. Such occurrences would provide the experimenters with the feedback which they needed, telling them that they needed to increase the amount of neutron shielding that they were using. --MJ}*** > >Returning to the issue of ZERO neutrinos when the reactor is >turned off, I find it implausible that, in 3 years, not one >neutrino was detected from elsewhere on the celestial shpere. >Consider all the jawboning that was done about Supernova 1987A. ***{As I indicated earlier, the neutrino flux from the reactor was 10^13 per cm^2 per sec and resulted in 3 hits per hour. If we assume that the neutrino flux from other sources was 10^6, then when the reactor was turned off, the number of hits would drop to (10^6/10^13)(3) = 3(10^-7) per hour. That means it would take, on the average, 380 years to get one hit when the reactor was turned off. Practically speaking, in other words, Cowan and Reines would expect zero hits in their lifetimes. Of course, I was merely guessing when I set the background neutrino flux at 10^6. We needed to know the actual number, in order to properly evaluate these results. Fortunately, I have now found that information, in a discussion of--as you suggested above--the particle emissions from supernova 1987A, which reached Earth on 23 February 1987. [See *The Particle Hunters, pg. 264.] In that discussion, the neutrino flux from space is given as 1 per cm^2 per day, which means that Cowan and Reines would expect 3(10^-13) per hour, or 1 hit in their apparatus every 3.33 trillion years. (Supernova 1987A produced 11 neutrinos in 13 seconds at the detector in Kamioke, Japan, and 8 neutrinos in 6 seconds at the detector in Cleveland, Ohio.) Bottom line: the hits in the Cowan-Reines experiment did not come from space. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Robin notes that when the reactor is shut down, >the flow of neutrons drops off almost to zero. What is plausible >is that the Reines apparatus detected neutrons, not neutrinos. > >As I said before, I do not deny the existence of neutrinos >(nor do I deny the existence of angels: do I pass the sanity test? ***{No, denial is not required. You, I, and Robin all flunk the Fred Sparber sanity test, not because we denied that neutrinos exist, but because we all were willing to *question* their existence. (It's real sad! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** >imprimatur? nihil obstat?), but what I know of the Reines experiment >does not convince me that neutrinos do exist. ***{Your position is not unreasonable, but at the moment I am inclined to give Cowan and Reines the benefit of the doubt. The reason for that, as I have said, is that it would have been easy for them to address the objections which we have been discussing. Because of that, the odds are good that they did so. --MJ}*** > >On the Mars lander subject, Mitchell wrote: > >***{My problem is that they seem to be batting at more than 90% in their >other deep space, unmanned missions. If I treat those successes as a >measure of the chance probability of their success on a Mars mission, >I get numbers that indicate that the Mars failures cannot be >due to chance. > >Granted, my 90% success rate for the other missions is a subjective >impression rather than a hard number, but I'll bet that, if anything, >it is conservative. If so, then something *very weird* is going on >with these Mars missions. --MJ}*** > >Jack writes: > >It's hard to believe that NASA engineers did not check all >the calculations, and that a previous lander crashed because the >contractor used English units. What a lame excuse! ***{Yes. Every failure seems to have its own excuse, unrelated to the excuses that were used for the previous ones. I am reminded of the excuses neo-Nazis use to deny the Holocaust: each and every piece of damning evidence is examined until some apparent discrepancy, however trivial, is found, after which the piece of evidence is summarily dismissed, and with it the conclusion that it supports. What the Holocaust deniers ignore is precisely the same thing that the Alien deniers ignore: the fact that uncertainties multiply, and, thus, that the quantity of evidence matters. The same type of multiplication of probabilities that, when applied across tens of thousands of pieces of evidence, demonstrates that the Holocaust happened, will when applied across the multitudes of pieces of ET evidence, demonstrate that Earth is being visited by intelligent beings from other worlds. --MJ}*** > >Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 09:25:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA01837; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:23:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:23:06 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991210122021.007b9570 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:20:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991210101952.0079d1b0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991210091039.007bca50 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209212046.007ae1b0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209185223.007b7100 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209171138.007a5d30 pop.mindspring.com> <19991209205318750.AAA290 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gpp9M1.0.YS.wRJKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32072 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:19 AM 12/10/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Mitchell Swartz wrote: "With all due respect to your idea, there are not enough colors, & there are color-blind individuals, colors change depending upon the type of lighting, and there is much more important and relevant information (pt name, dr. name, rx name, dose, etc.) in a well written label. Carelessness increases as MD/nursing staff is overworked secondary to cost-cutting." >It was not my idea. The use of colors in human factors engineering (HFE) is >standard operating procedure. The doctor interviewed in the N.Y. Times who >made this particular mistake immediately revised the hospital procedures to >use different colored labels. He is the head of anesthesiology, and as he >admitted he should have known better in the first place. As I said, there >are many other ways to distinguish objects: size, shape, feel, position and >they can be employed at the same time. Again, this is S.O.P. in HFE, >described in the textbooks back in the 1930s. Obviously, designers know how >to deal with colorblindness. Color has to be combined with another marker, >such as position and size. That is why severely colorblind people have no >trouble with traffic signals. "Decades ago we examined color issues, shape issues, etc. It is the wrong crutch. Q/A and Q/C (which we have used and applied to LENR/CF BTW http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html#q/c ) has taught that misstakes are minimized by clear, well-written labels, which are checked (and re-checked) by individuals who are NOT pushed to the edge of exhaustion by administrators who use them for their own profit. Although aviation fuel is colored to allow pilots to check the grade from the cockpit, better medical care will increase when nursing and physician staffs rise from their seats, visit and talk to their patients, and look carefully, and read, and reread the orders, labels, etc. IMO, intuition does have a role in arriving at a differential diagnosis, but does not have a role in delivering treatment, which requires planning, replanning, rechecking, follow-up and rechecking." >Nonsense. The effectiveness of these techniques was established decades >ago. It works in every other industry, and it is mandated by law in many. > >- Jed Jed's comment, "He is the head of anesthesiology, and as he admitted he should have known better in the first place." confirms the importance of checking and rechecking. There is no substitute or color to take its place. There is NO substitute for a label in clear language which states the material, the dose, the patient's name, the physician that prescribed the material, and the pharmacy that prepared it. The addition of color, etc. is a fine supplemental point, but it is no substitute for accuracy, or the precision of explicit identification. Gather that understanding must only come from experience and not necessarily from the Encyclopedia Britannica. ;-)X Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 09:42:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA21294; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:38:13 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:38:13 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991210114931.0079e6b0 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 11:32:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell Resent-Message-ID: <"uMo3X2.0.eC5.3gJKu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32073 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >I am not sure how well it works, but R. Mills shows an impressive looking >six-foot tall CF cell in this document: > >http://www.blacklightpower.com/Retro1.pdf > >It is the biggest CF experiment I ever saw! > >He hates the term CF, but I note this document ends with several references >and graphs from conventional Pd-D CF experiments, so he is paying some >attention to the field. > >I do not like Mills. His egomania bothers me. He gives me the willies, and >I feel I cannot trust him. ***{You need to re-examine your premises. Every person who is exceptionally bright *knows* he is exceptionally bright, and as a consequence such people tend to exude intellectual self confidence, which resentful mediocrities then label as "egomania." Bottom line: if such people give you "the willies" and evoke feelings of distrust, the problem is yours, not theirs. --MJ}*** > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 10:17:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA24853; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:15:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:15:29 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991210131356.007a9440 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 13:13:56 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991210122021.007b9570 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991210101952.0079d1b0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991210091039.007bca50 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209212046.007ae1b0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209185223.007b7100 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209171138.007a5d30 pop.mindspring.com> <19991209205318750.AAA290 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"41zE81.0.F46.0DKKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32075 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > There is NO substitute for a label in clear language >which states the material, the dose, the patient's name, >the physician that prescribed the material, and the pharmacy >that prepared it. This statement is preposterous. Nobody ever suggested that color should be SUBSTITUTED for written instructions! >Gather that understanding must >only come from experience and not necessarily from the >Encyclopedia Britannica. ;-)X Swartz's statements about colorblindness and his suggestion that color markers are substituted for text in critical HFE applications prove that he does not have the slightest idea what is talking about. He is making the kind of beginners' assumptions and mistakes that anyone familiar with the field would avoid, such as suggesting that HFE engineers have never thought about colorblindness! I derived my information about HFE from textbooks and articles and in discussions with experts. There may also be useful information in Encyclopedia Britannica . . . Yes, it looks like a pretty good introduction to the field, written by two professors from Johns Hopkins and SUNY. Swartz should at least read Britannica. Perhaps he will then stop guessing, floundering around, shooting in the dark, and making up preposterous statements about HFE. I think Swartz's only real purpose here is to pick a fight with me, and to demonstrate his erudition. In this case, he has demonstrated complete & total ignorance of a field which he, as a doctor, has an important responsibility to know about. He has an arrogant, blind, know-it-all attitude which is typical of many doctors, unfortunately. This arrogance is one of the main causes of 50,000 to 80,000 accidental caused by U.S. doctors and nurses every year. Pilot arrogance and the typical pilot's unwillingness to listen to advice from subordinates is one of the main causes of airplane accidents. The FAA and the airlines are now conducting socialization and group training exercises for pilots to reduce these problems. I expect this kind of training in medical school will be needed for doctors as well, before we can reduce the accident rate. Okay, I'll put Swartz back in the kill file. I will not respond to his trolls. But here some advice for other readers. Before you go in for surgery, ask your doctor how he feels about the recent revelations in the newspaper about medical accidents. If he displays arrogance, defensiveness, and a know-nothing attitude, the way many doctors do when their customers demand accountability, you should get up and leave. Find another doctor who is anxious to improve his profession, to become more accountable, and to learn from mistakes. Actually, I should say "her profession" and "her mistakes" because in my experience with young doctors, the women tend to be better about these issues. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 10:17:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA23616; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:13:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:13:10 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:13:08 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Design for a Time Machine In-Reply-To: <19991209075901.4344.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"PQPPb2.0.sm5.sAKKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32074 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A good place to start looking for this stuff is the book by Segre, Nuclei and Particles - An Introduction to Nuclear and Subnuclear Physics. ISBN 0-8053-8600-9, Published by W.A. Benjamin, Inc. 1965 In particular, Chapter XIII is about Muons. Good Luck Hank On Wed, 8 Dec 1999, Michael Schaffer wrote: > Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > Michael Schaffer wrote: > > [snip] > > >Decay is exponential. It makes no difference when you start measuring the > > >decay to determine the halving or e-folding time, just so long as there > > >are enough decays to give good statistics. > > [snip] > > To be honest, I expected that answer. Perhaps I should have asked how one > > goes about detecting the presence of a muon without affecting it's chances > > of decaying. > > One looks for decay products of muons. (I don't remember what they are.)This > can be done in different media. I am not expert in experimental particle > physics, and I don't know what has actually been done to verify the muon > lifetime. I do know that muons can be slowed and experiments performed with > them (until too few of them are left), so that suggests to me that muon > lifetime can be measured by more than one method. > > ===== > Michael J. Schaffer > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. > Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 11:18:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA16098; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 11:15:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 11:15:45 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991210141412.007999f0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:14:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991210114931.0079e6b0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"awUXI2.0.Sx3.X5LKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32076 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones writes: ***{You need to re-examine your premises. Every person who is exceptionally bright *knows* he is exceptionally bright, and as a consequence such people tend to exude intellectual self confidence, which resentful mediocrities then label as "egomania." Bottom line: if such people give you "the willies" and evoke feelings of distrust, the problem is yours, not theirs. __MJ}*** That is an interesting notion which never would've occurred to me. I have always assumed that arrogance and resentfulness is a sign of poor socialization, an inferiority complex, or low intelligence. When you go around exuding and resenting, people take you for an ass, and you lose many opportunities. You alienate customers and coworkers. It is a stupid, self-destructive way to act, and most truly smart people do not act stupid. I do not know much about egomania so I don't know if you can generalize . . . But here is what I conclude based on my own experience. I have had the privilege of meeting, knowing and working with some extraordinarily intelligent and accomplished people: the Soyer brothers, Eleanor H. Jordan, Martin Fleischmann, Arthur C. Clarke, George Miley, John Bockris, Dennis Cravens, Ed Storms and others. Many of them have (or had) towering egos -- especially Clarke -- but none of them ever acted "resentful" or arrogant in my presence. They are always willing to acknowledge other people's contributions, and to listen to suggestions. They are modest about their own achievements because they know the history of their fields and they have worked with other geniuses. In my experience, people with ego problems are often antisocial loners who have no idea what other people have contributed or are capable of. They develop the illusion that all of their ideas come from within, forgetting how much they have learned from books and other people. They do not publish papers or attend ICCF conferences. They never face peer-review or enlightened critiques. I myself am in no danger of falling into the tar pit of egomania. After I write a paper or a translation, I circulate it via e-mail to smart people who shoot it full of holes and teach me another lesson in humility. It is a sure cure for egomania, like marriage, managing a business and dealing with customers, or having children. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 12:40:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07359; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:36:19 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:36:19 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991210153040.007bb860 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:30:40 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991210131356.007a9440 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991210122021.007b9570 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991210101952.0079d1b0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991210091039.007bca50 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209212046.007ae1b0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209185223.007b7100 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991209171138.007a5d30 pop.mindspring.com> <19991209205318750.AAA290 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"hlI9D2.0.vo1.1HMKu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32077 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:13 PM 12/10/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >> There is NO substitute for a label in clear language >>which states the material, the dose, the patient's name, >>the physician that prescribed the material, and the pharmacy >>that prepared it. > >This statement is preposterous. Nobody ever suggested that color should be >SUBSTITUTED for written instructions! Here is what Rothwell posted: >>A doctor interviewed in the newspaper told how the >>anesthesia cart had two medicines in red labeled vials, one a suppressant >>and the other a stimulant. He accidentally administered the wrong one. The >>labels should have different colors! [jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:20:46 -0500 Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs] To which was responded the importance of a "well written label". >This poster wrote: "With all due respect to your idea, there are not enough colors, & there are color-blind individuals, colors change depending upon the type of lighting, and there is much more important and relevant information (pt name, dr. name, rx name, dose, etc.) in a well written label." Color change is a joke compared to the issues of accurate labelling, reading of those labels, rechecking, and other quality assurance matters. ============================================================== >>Gather that understanding must >>only come from experience and not necessarily from the >>Encyclopedia Britannica. ;-)X > >Swartz's statements about colorblindness and his suggestion that color >markers are substituted for text in critical HFE applications prove that he >does not have the slightest idea what is talking about. He is making the >kind of beginners' assumptions and mistakes that anyone familiar with the >field would avoid, such as suggesting that HFE engineers have never thought >about colorblindness! > >I derived my information about HFE from textbooks and articles and in >discussions with experts. There may also be useful information in >Encyclopedia Britannica . . . Yes, it looks like a pretty good introduction >to the field, written by two professors from Johns Hopkins and SUNY. Swartz >should at least read Britannica. Perhaps he will then stop guessing, >floundering around, shooting in the dark, and making up preposterous >statements about HFE. More low-wattage information from Mr. Rothwell, who has no experience in this field apparently. Having been to Q/A meetings and complication rounds for more than two decades, my impression is that Rothwell ought actually go into the field, attend this complications rounds (if they will let him in), and think about the problems, their frequency, and their etiology, rather than think he mastered it all by reading a book and an encyclopedia. IMHO, the solutions involve improved communications, written accuracy, redundant rechecking, and not the pabulum of a color change [or two]. ============================================================== >I think Swartz's only real purpose here is to pick a fight with me, and to >demonstrate his erudition. In this case, he has demonstrated complete & >total ignorance of a field which he, as a doctor, has an important >responsibility to know about. He has an arrogant, blind, know-it-all >attitude which is typical of many doctors, unfortunately. Thank you for the ad hominem, Mr. Rothwell. [More projection on Rothwell's part, apparently, rather than deal with any of the issues scientifically (again). ;-)X ============================================================== >This arrogance is >one of the main causes of 50,000 to 80,000 accidental caused by U.S. >doctors and nurses every year. Pilot arrogance and the typical pilot's >unwillingness to listen to advice from subordinates is one of the main >causes of airplane accidents. The FAA and the airlines are now conducting >socialization and group training exercises for pilots to reduce these >problems. I expect this kind of training in medical school will be needed >for doctors as well, before we can reduce the accident rate. Nonsense. Scientific considerations of problems and their avoidance is NOT arrogance. Corrections, or discussions, of Rothwell's comments are NOT arrogance. The goal was to improve accuracy. That ONLY occurs by detailed scientific analysis of what actually caused the problem, and by consideration of routes to avoid it happening again. Mr. Rothwell seems as uninterested in corrections in this matter as he was about calibrations, or first order corrections, to his "pseudokilowatt" which could have been corrected by several techniques (*) (#) http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html#q/c e.g. Swartz, M, "Noise Measurement in cold fusion systems, Journal of New Energy, 2, 2, 56-61 (1997) Swartz, M, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221 (1996) or Swartz, M, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130 (1996) ============================================================== >Okay, I'll put Swartz back in the kill file. Thank you, Mr. Rothwell. "In a free and republican government, you cannot restrain the voice of the multitude. Every man will speak as he thinks" [Patriot George Washington to Lafayette, 9/1/1778] ============================================================== > I will not respond to his >trolls. But here some advice for other readers. Before you go in for >surgery, ask your doctor how he feels about the recent revelations in the >newspaper about medical accidents. If he displays arrogance, defensiveness, >and a know-nothing attitude, the way many doctors do when their customers >demand accountability, you should get up and leave. Find another doctor who >is anxious to improve his profession, to become more accountable, and to >learn from mistakes. First, the above holds true for "investigators" of LENR/CF such as Rothwell. Second, despite the pompous attitude of Rothwell against doctors, pilots, those critical of his comments, and LENR/CF researchers, these are mostly ALL good people doing difficult work (especially the first, second and fourth categories ;-)X Third, patients should investigate if their physicians know anything about their illness and problem which is a fundamentally more important matter. For example, in the case of cancer, they should see a surgeon, chemotherapist AND radiation oncologist as early as possible. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 12:54:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA09491; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:51:10 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:51:10 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991210141412.007999f0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991210114931.0079e6b0 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:44:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell Resent-Message-ID: <"pJGaf.0.BK2.zUMKu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32078 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones writes: > >***{You need to re-examine your premises. Every person who is exceptionally >bright *knows* he is exceptionally bright, and as a consequence such people >tend to exude intellectual self confidence, which resentful mediocrities >then label as "egomania." Bottom line: if such people give you "the >willies" and evoke feelings of distrust, the problem is yours, not theirs. >__MJ}*** > >That is an interesting notion which never would've occurred to me. I have >always assumed that arrogance and resentfulness is a sign of poor >socialization, an inferiority complex, or low intelligence. When you go >around exuding and resenting, people take you for an ass, and you lose many >opportunities. You alienate customers and coworkers. It is a stupid, >self-destructive way to act, and most truly smart people do not act stupid. ***{I was responding to what you said, which you conveniently deleted. To refresh your memory, here it is again: > >I do not like Mills. His egomania bothers me. He gives me the willies, and >I feel I cannot trust him. Needless to say, your original comments about Mills bear little resemblance to the words you are using now. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >I do not know much about egomania so I don't know if you can generalize . . >. But here is what I conclude based on my own experience. I have had the >privilege of meeting, knowing and working with some extraordinarily >intelligent and accomplished people: the Soyer brothers, Eleanor H. Jordan, >Martin Fleischmann, Arthur C. Clarke, George Miley, John Bockris, Dennis >Cravens, Ed Storms and others. Many of them have (or had) towering egos -- >especially Clarke -- but none of them ever acted "resentful" or arrogant in >my presence. They are always willing to acknowledge other people's >contributions, and to listen to suggestions. They are modest about their >own achievements because they know the history of their fields and they >have worked with other geniuses. In my experience, people with ego problems >are often antisocial loners who have no idea what other people have >contributed or are capable of. They develop the illusion that all of their >ideas come from within, forgetting how much they have learned from books >and other people. They do not publish papers or attend ICCF conferences. >They never face peer-review or enlightened critiques. ***{Let me see if I've got this straight--you are saying that Mills is "arrogant" and "resentful," by which you mean: (1) He doesn't acknowledge other people's contributions. (2) He doesn't listen to suggestions. (3) He isn't modest about his own achievements. (4) He doesn't know the history of his field. (5) He hasn't worked with equally bright and creative people. (6) He is an antisocial loner. (7) He has no idea what other people have contributed or are capable of. (8) He thinks all of his ideas have come from within. (9) He doesn't know how much he has learned from books and other people. (10) He doesn't publish papers. (11) He doesn't attend ICCF conferences. (12) He never faces peer review or enlightened critiques. Looking over the items on the above list, I find myself aghast. Regarding (1), (2), (4), (5), (7), (8), (9), and (12), how in hell would you know? To base such statements on facts, you would either have to have a "thought probe" planted in his brain, or else would have to monitor him constantly during his day-to-day activities. Since you obviously do neither, eight of your twelve items are transparent rubbish. Regarding (3), his alleged "lack of modesty about his achievements," I would suggest that if he is right about "hydrinos," then he is a genius of the first magnitude, and is entitled to be proud of what he has done. Regarding (6), the notion that he is an "antisocial loner," my reaction is that this is transparently false: an antisocial loner does not raise millions of dollars in investment capital and oversee a company with hundreds of employees. Regarding (10), his failure to publish papers, my reaction is that this is substantively false: he has a huge book in print detailing his theories, and a huge website discussing many of the current investigations by himself and others at his company. If, of course, you refer to publications in mainstream journals--e.g., *Science* or *Nature*--then you are being disingenuous, because you know full well that such publications do not accept papers in the "new energy" area. Regarding (11), that he doesn't attend ICCF conferences, so what? Regarding (12), that he doesn't face peer review or enlightened critiques, this is utterly false. As I said above, he has a ton of written material out, and critics of that material are legion. On the other hand, if you merely mean that he chooses to devote his time to doing experiments rather than arguing about his theories on vortex or spf, again, so what? Bottom line: to allege in a public forum that Mills is "arrogant and resentful" on the basis of a laundry list of rubbish such as the above is beneath contempt. Your mother should drag you to the bathroom sink and wash your mouth out with soap. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >I myself am in no danger of falling into the tar pit of egomania. After I >write a paper or a translation, I circulate it via e-mail to smart people >who shoot it full of holes and teach me another lesson in humility. It is a >sure cure for egomania, like marriage, managing a business and dealing with >customers, or having children. > >- Jed ***{Yup: any fool can see that you are *vastly superior* to these uncooperative, egomaniacal inventors. --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 13:23:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA28080; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 13:20:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 13:20:44 -0800 Message-ID: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:11:04 -0800 (PST) From: John Logajan Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"raf2h.0.gs6.iwMKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32079 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > You are trying to separate youself from your own resposibility for the > way things are, and the way that the government behaves. That's true, I do seperate myself from guilt for other people's actions. I don't subscribe to the notion of collectivization of guilt. Such collectivization of guilt flows from the notion of inherent "duties.vbYou illustrate the notion of such "duties" below when you assert that people born with Japanese genetic characteristics, for instance, inheret duties and responsibilites for all other Japanese. Of course, this again gets right to the question of how these duties arise, how they are knowable with logical certainty, how they can be shown to be non-arbitrary, universal, etc. Mere assertion is insufficient. A robust proof is required. > Who do you think YOU are, judging your parent's or your grandparent's > actions of supporting the government, in hindsight, which is always so > conveniently 20/20. > The Japanese left 8 million dead in their conquest of Manchuria, prior > to Pearl Harbor. They damn well got no less than they deserved at > Hiroshima and Nagasaki. You seem to be quite willing to pass historical judgements when it seems convenient. That makes your first question above hypocritical. In fact, since every individual is ultimately responsible for his own moral conduct, it is inevitable that we must question the historical record. We re-learn moral lessons from things like the Nuremberg trials. > Your politically correct indignation at the temporary interrment > of the Nesei makes me want to barf. "Politically correct" has apparently come to mean anything trendy. It used to apply to essentially hypocritical positions (for instance, censorship bad, campus speech codes good, etc.) I'll pass on judging whether Libertarianism has reached the "trendy" stage or not, but I clearly reject any suggestion that my opposition to internment of peacful citizens purely on the basis of their genetic inheritence is inconsistent (hence hypocritical) with any other personal or Libertarian tenet. My interest is not "political correctness" my interest is "moral correctness." > I'll bet if you were ever approached by a REAL IRS agent > you'd pee in your pants. The point of this ad hominem is lost on me. Are you saying that people who fear their aggressors justify the aggression? ===== -- - John Logajan 4234 Hamline Ave, Arden Hills, MN 55112 - jlogajan yahoo.com 651-633-8918 - I don't endorse any commercial message that may appear below. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 14:50:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26083; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:45:30 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:45:30 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991210174111.0079a990 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:41:11 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991210141412.007999f0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991210114931.0079e6b0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"t-Zl62.0.RN6.7AOKu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32080 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{Let me see if I've got this straight--you are saying that Mills is >"arrogant" and "resentful," by which you mean: > >(1) He doesn't acknowledge other people's contributions. > >(2) He doesn't listen to suggestions. etc, etc. Nope, I did not mean any of that. I don't know Mills. I have never met him and I have no idea whether he works well with people. He does seem to have an ego problem, and like I said he gives me the heebi-jeevies, but perhaps I misjudge him. I was just commenting on your hypothesis that egomaniacs who go around "exuding intellectual self confidence" are smart folks. The ones I've met seem more like pathetic losers. I haven't met Mills and I know little about his work. He does strike me as a man with an oversized ego, which I regard as a character fault, but I can't judge how he came by it or whether he has other personal qualities that mitigate it. Clarke has a huge ego, and he admits it. His nickname used be "ego." But he is so charming, pleasant, witty and knowledgeable that you overlook it. It becomes part of his charm, as it would in a small child. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 14:50:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA32111; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:48:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:48:55 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991210164608.0102d288 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:46:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Mizuno300 - Run 1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"r45Jq3.0.Zr7.MDOKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32081 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have completed the first run of the Mizuno-style incandescent cathode experiment using our new 300 volt DC power supply. An introduction to the 3rd series of experiments, results of the first run, and discussion thereof can be found at: http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run1.html Executive summary: no excess heat. This was pretty much a shake-down cruise for the new setup and we uncovered a few problems that need to be resolved for future runs. Troublesome EM noise increases significantly as the voltage increases. 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 Dec 10 16:14:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA27308; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:11:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:11:44 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:11:40 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991210153040.007bb860 world.std.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"PmhY02.0.Zg6._QPKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32082 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed, Mitchell You two guys are sure good at pushing each other's buttons, But it gets tiring after a while. Hank On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > > > > At 01:13 PM 12/10/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >Mitchell Swartz wrote: > > > >> There is NO substitute for a label in clear language > >>which states the material, the dose, the patient's name, > >>the physician that prescribed the material, and the pharmacy > >>that prepared it. > > > >This statement is preposterous. Nobody ever suggested that color should be > >SUBSTITUTED for written instructions! > > Here is what Rothwell posted: > >>A doctor interviewed in the newspaper told how the > >>anesthesia cart had two medicines in red labeled vials, one a suppressant > >>and the other a stimulant. He accidentally administered the wrong one. The > >>labels should have different colors! > [jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com > Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:20:46 -0500 > Jed Rothwell > Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs] > > To which was responded the importance of a "well written label". > >This poster wrote: > "With all due respect to your idea, there are not enough colors, & there > are color-blind individuals, colors change depending upon the type > of lighting, and there is much more important and relevant information > (pt name, dr. name, rx name, dose, etc.) in a well written label." > > Color change is a joke compared to the issues of accurate labelling, > reading of those labels, rechecking, and other quality assurance matters. > > > ============================================================== > > >>Gather that understanding must > >>only come from experience and not necessarily from the > >>Encyclopedia Britannica. ;-)X > > > >Swartz's statements about colorblindness and his suggestion that color > >markers are substituted for text in critical HFE applications prove that he > >does not have the slightest idea what is talking about. He is making the > >kind of beginners' assumptions and mistakes that anyone familiar with the > >field would avoid, such as suggesting that HFE engineers have never thought > >about colorblindness! > > > >I derived my information about HFE from textbooks and articles and in > >discussions with experts. There may also be useful information in > >Encyclopedia Britannica . . . Yes, it looks like a pretty good introduction > >to the field, written by two professors from Johns Hopkins and SUNY. Swartz > >should at least read Britannica. Perhaps he will then stop guessing, > >floundering around, shooting in the dark, and making up preposterous > >statements about HFE. > > More low-wattage information from Mr. Rothwell, who has no experience > in this field apparently. > Having been to Q/A meetings and complication rounds for > more than two decades, my impression is that Rothwell ought actually > go into the field, attend this complications rounds (if they will let him > in), and think about the problems, their frequency, and their etiology, > rather than think he mastered it all by reading a book and an encyclopedia. > > IMHO, the solutions involve improved communications, written accuracy, > redundant rechecking, and not the pabulum of a color change [or two]. > > > > ============================================================== > > > >I think Swartz's only real purpose here is to pick a fight with me, and to > >demonstrate his erudition. In this case, he has demonstrated complete & > >total ignorance of a field which he, as a doctor, has an important > >responsibility to know about. He has an arrogant, blind, know-it-all > >attitude which is typical of many doctors, unfortunately. > > Thank you for the ad hominem, Mr. Rothwell. > [More projection on Rothwell's part, apparently, rather than > deal with any of the issues scientifically (again). ;-)X > > > ============================================================== > > > >This arrogance is > >one of the main causes of 50,000 to 80,000 accidental caused by U.S. > >doctors and nurses every year. Pilot arrogance and the typical pilot's > >unwillingness to listen to advice from subordinates is one of the main > >causes of airplane accidents. The FAA and the airlines are now conducting > >socialization and group training exercises for pilots to reduce these > >problems. I expect this kind of training in medical school will be needed > >for doctors as well, before we can reduce the accident rate. > > > Nonsense. Scientific considerations of problems and their > avoidance is NOT arrogance. Corrections, or discussions, of Rothwell's > comments are NOT arrogance. The goal was to improve accuracy. > That ONLY occurs by detailed scientific analysis of what actually caused > the problem, and by consideration of routes to avoid it happening > again. > > Mr. Rothwell seems as uninterested in corrections in > this matter as he was about calibrations, or first order corrections, > to his "pseudokilowatt" which could have been corrected by > several techniques (*) > (#) http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html#q/c > > e.g. > Swartz, M, "Noise Measurement in cold fusion systems, Journal of New > Energy, > 2, 2, 56-61 (1997) > > Swartz, M, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy > Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221 (1996) > > or > Swartz, M, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric > Systems", > Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130 (1996) > > > > ============================================================== > > > >Okay, I'll put Swartz back in the kill file. > > > Thank you, Mr. Rothwell. > > > "In a free and republican government, you cannot restrain > the voice of the multitude. Every man will speak as he thinks" > [Patriot George Washington to Lafayette, 9/1/1778] > > > ============================================================== > > > I will not respond to his > >trolls. But here some advice for other readers. Before you go in for > >surgery, ask your doctor how he feels about the recent revelations in the > >newspaper about medical accidents. If he displays arrogance, defensiveness, > >and a know-nothing attitude, the way many doctors do when their customers > >demand accountability, you should get up and leave. Find another doctor who > >is anxious to improve his profession, to become more accountable, and to > >learn from mistakes. > > > First, the above holds true for "investigators" of LENR/CF such as Rothwell. > > Second, despite the pompous attitude of Rothwell against doctors, pilots, > those critical of his comments, and LENR/CF researchers, these are mostly > ALL good people doing difficult work (especially the first, second and fourth > categories ;-)X > > Third, patients should investigate if their physicians know anything > about their illness and problem which is a fundamentally more important > matter. For example, in the case of cancer, they should see a surgeon, > chemotherapist AND radiation oncologist as early as possible. > > Hope that helps. > Mitchell Swartz > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 17:57:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA27708; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:55:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:55:55 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991210205414.007ae5f0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 20:54:14 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991210153040.007bb860 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lnk2L.0.sm6.hyQKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32083 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: hank scudder wrote: >Jed, Mitchell >You two guys are sure good at pushing each other's buttons, But it gets >tiring after a while. Not to worry on my side! I'm through. Aside from the arguements I hope you appreciated (understood) my point of view about the recent news. That Federal study of medical accident mortality has been underway for some time, and I have been following the story. As I said, corrective action and tighter industry standards are long overdue. Conservatives may disagree, but I think this is a good example of effective government. The government does waste a lot of money, goodness knows, but when it comes to tightly defined, complex, apolitical, mainstream technical tasks, government agencies and reserachers often do a superb job. You do not want them meddling in advanced energy, but they are good at vaccinating millions of people, tracking diseases at the WHO, or inventing the Internet. (The Internet is staid, unexciting, ho-hum technology, superbly carried executed.) I have to admit a bias: my mother was a top Federal researcher in operations at the Bureau of Census. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 18:30:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA06427; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:28:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:28:30 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991210174111.0079a990 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991210141412.007999f0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991210114931.0079e6b0 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 20:25:37 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell Resent-Message-ID: <"gdNxA3.0.Ha1.ERRKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32084 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>***{Let me see if I've got this straight--you are saying that Mills is >>"arrogant" and "resentful," by which you mean: >> >>(1) He doesn't acknowledge other people's contributions. >> >>(2) He doesn't listen to suggestions. > >etc, etc. > >Nope, I did not mean any of that. I don't know Mills. I have never met him >and I have no idea whether he works well with people. He does seem to have >an ego problem, and like I said he gives me the heebi-jeevies, but perhaps >I misjudge him. > >I was just commenting on your hypothesis that egomaniacs who go around >"exuding intellectual self confidence" are smart folks. ***{No you weren't. My hypothesis was that exceptionally bright people tend to exude intellectual self-confidence, not that people who exude intellectual self-confidence tend to be exceptionally bright. Here, between the lines of asterisks, is the relevant text: ********************************************** > >I do not like Mills. His egomania bothers me. He gives me the willies, and >I feel I cannot trust him. ***{You need to re-examine your premises. Every person who is exceptionally bright *knows* he is exceptionally bright, and as a consequence such people tend to exude intellectual self confidence, which resentful mediocrities then label as "egomania." Bottom line: if such people give you "the willies" and evoke feelings of distrust, the problem is yours, not theirs. --MJ}*** ********************************************** Bottom line: my statement clearly referred to exceptionally bright people who feel, and exhibit, authentic intellectual self-confidence, not to mediocre people who feign a confidence which they do not feel. --Mitchell Jones}*** The ones I've met >seem more like pathetic losers. ***{How would you characterize people who can't tell the difference between a statement and its converse? :-) --MJ}*** I haven't met Mills and I know little about >his work. ***{So you are now telling me that the laundry list of bad traits which you reeled off in your last post was just intended to describe people who go around feigning a confidence that they do not really feel? In other words, you are now saying that you totally failed to comprehend what I was saying to you--that you missed my point altogether? Frankly, I find such a claim to be highly implausible, but if it is in fact what happened, then here is some advice: in the future, before replying to one of my posts, get your emotions in check, and make an effort to respond to the actual thrust of my remarks, rather than to some fantasy that exists only in your own mind. --MJ}*** He does strike me as a man with an oversized ego, which I regard >as a character fault, but I can't judge how he came by it or whether he has >other personal qualities that mitigate it. > >Clarke has a huge ego, and he admits it. His nickname used be "ego." But he >is so charming, pleasant, witty and knowledgeable that you overlook it. It >becomes part of his charm, as it would in a small child. > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 21:32:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA22278; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 21:31:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 21:31:04 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 16:31:00 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <38511C38.2D968E62@verisoft.com.tr> In-Reply-To: <38511C38.2D968E62 verisoft.com.tr> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 VAA22261 Resent-Message-ID: <"ehp5e3.0.0S5.N6UKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32085 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:28:56 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: [snip] >I hope NASA going to give up from conventional technology for planetary missions, and enter to active research on antigravity and on other new area of physics by then. > >Regards, > >hamdi ucar This is also in part what I was referring to with my previous comment. "Black ops" already has *at least* partial anti-gravity. Which means that NASA is basically "bread and circuses" to prevent the masses from wising up. Billions spent on technology that is long out of date. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 22:21:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA01273; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:20:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:20:55 -0800 Message-ID: <008701bf43a0$4d6116a0$41b57ed8 mrand> From: "mrand" To: Subject: Re: Mars Polar Lander Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:23:54 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: 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: <"j9NSJ1.0.oJ.7rUKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32086 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >>> >Billions spent on technology that is long out of date. > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk Yes, 2000 years of the same basic rocket design, maybe it is a good time to advance to a new and improved space flight technology. Regards, Michael Randall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 22:30:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA04270; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:29:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:29:27 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 17:29:22 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <384C502F.59EB8578@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 WAA04248 Resent-Message-ID: <"lxy_X.0.e21.7zUKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32087 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 11:15:55 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >Fortunately, I have now found that information, in a discussion of--as you >suggested above--the particle emissions from supernova 1987A, which reached >Earth on 23 February 1987. [See *The Particle Hunters, pg. 264.] In that >discussion, the neutrino flux from space is given as 1 per cm^2 per day, >which means that Cowan and Reines would expect 3(10^-13) per hour, or 1 hit >in their apparatus every 3.33 trillion years. (Supernova 1987A produced 11 >neutrinos in 13 seconds at the detector in Kamioke, Japan, and 8 neutrinos >in 6 seconds at the detector in Cleveland, Ohio.) > >Bottom line: the hits in the Cowan-Reines experiment did not come from space. A couple of points need to be made here. First, the particle required for P + e- + -> n is an anti-neutrino if I'm not mistaken. Second the Solar reaction H + H -> D + e+ produces a neutrino (wrong brand!). So Solar neutrino aren't relevant to the experiment anyway (unless the neutrino also happens to be it's own anti-particle). As for the Solar neutrino flux, it can be roughly calculated by assuming that solar energy derives from the reaction 4 H -> He4 + energy + 2 neutrinos. Some of the energy will be carried by the neutrinos, and thus will not contribute to the measured solar energy flux. I think that for most beta decay reactions, about 80% of the theoretical energy release is carried by the neutrinos on average. That means that the reaction above only yields about 24.4 MeV in solar flux. Given also that the total solar flux is 1 kW / m^2 at the Earth's orbit, 0.1 watt/cm^2, we can see that this requires 2.5E10 reactions/sec/cm^2, so that the neutrino flux should be 5E10 neutrinos / sec-cm^2. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 05:06:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA05003; Sat, 11 Dec 1999 05:03:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 05:03:45 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 1 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 08:11:53 -0500 Message-ID: <19991211131153531.AAA294 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"00o2k2.0.1E1.nkaKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32088 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott writes: >I have completed the first run of the Mizuno-style incandescent cathode >experiment using our new 300 volt DC power supply. An introduction to the >3rd series of experiments, results of the first run, and discussion thereof >can be found at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run1.html Hi Scott, Were you able to look into the cell to see if there was any visible electrical activity on the anode? Just curious, with all the sharp edges, etc.. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 08:02:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA13358; Sat, 11 Dec 1999 08:01:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 08:01:36 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <385283C6.22257C1E mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 17:03:02 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"qoLLf3.0.eG3.WLdKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32089 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jack wrote: The Reines experiment is a classic exmaple of confounding: When the reactor is running, neutrons as well as supposed neutrinos can find their way into the Reines apparatus; therefore, effects which Reines ascribes to neutrinos could also be caused by neutrons. Mitchell wrote: ... If we suppose that these two events were caused, not by one neutrino from the reactor, but by two neutrons from the reactor, then there will be far more instances in which a pair of .51 MeV gammas is *not* followed by a series of gammas totalling 9 MeV, than there will be cases where the two types of events co-occur in the right order. Surely Cowan and Reines would have noticed these types of independent events ... Don't you think that amount of shielding ought to be sufficient to reduce the neutron flux to negligible levels? --MJ}*** Jack writes: We need to see the data. Jack wrote: Returning to the issue of ZERO neutrinos when the reactor is turned off, I find it implausible that, in 3 years, not one neutrino was detected from elsewhere on the celestial shpere. Consider all the jawboning that was done about Supernova 1987A. Mitchell wrote: ***{As I indicated earlier, the neutrino flux from the reactor was 10^13 per cm^2 per sec and resulted in 3 hits per hour ... I was merely guessing when I set the background neutrino flux at 10^6. We needed to know the actual number, in order to properly evaluate these results. Fortunately, I have now found that information, in a discussion of--as you suggested above--the particle emissions from supernova 1987A, which reached Earth on 23 February 1987. [See *The Particle Hunters, pg. 264.] In that discussion, the neutrino flux from space is given as 1 per cm^2 per day, which means that Cowan and Reines would expect 3(10^-13) per hour, or 1 hit in their apparatus every 3.33 trillion years. (Supernova 1987A produced 11 neutrinos in 13 seconds at the detector in Kamioke, Japan, and 8 neutrinos in 6 seconds at the detector in Cleveland, Ohio.) Robin van Spaandonk wrote: As for the Solar neutrino flux, it can be roughly calculated by assuming that solar energy derives from the reaction 4 H -> He4 + energy + 2 neutrinos. ... Given also that the total solar flux is 1 kW / m^2 at the Earth's orbit, 0.1 watt/cm^2, we can see that this requires 2.5E10 reactions/sec/cm^2, so that the neutrino flux should be 5E10 neutrinos / sec-cm^2. Hi Mitchell and Robin, Please tell me where my assumptions (and/or math) are wrong: Consider the Cleveland data (I live near there): (8 hits / 6 sec)(3.6x10^3 sec/hr) = 4.8x10^3 hits/hr (4.8x10^3 hits/hr) is to X = 3 hits/hr is to 10^13 neutrinos/sec-cm^2 X = 1.6x10^16 neutrinos/sec-cm^2 from that dimple on the celestial golf ball (sphere) where supernova 1987A resided. Surely with this kind of flux from various dimples on the celestial sphere, Reines and Cowan would have seen SOME neutrinos in 3 years when the reactor was off. As you have probably already surmised, I also question what was actually detected from supernova 1987A. In that regard, I'm enclosing excerpts from an article from the Autodynamics web site, http://autodynamics.org/new99/newindex.html which discusses supernova 1987A. The "Carezanians" have re-derived Special Relativity "correcting" an error by Einsten, which set Pauli in motion, proving from theory that neutrinos can not exist. Unfortunately, from my perspective, it's still Special Relativity; and the theoretical debate over neutrinos is like Swift's description of the bitter conflict between those who believe eggs should be cracked on the big end and those who want to crack eggs on the small end. To the credit of the Carezanians, they accept superluminal velocities; and they publish on their web site that gravity propagates at 27c. Have you seen the article in Infinite Energy, volume 5, issue 27, 1999, "The speed of gravity: What the experiments say" by Tom Van Flandern? (starts on p. 50) Jack Smith "Supernova 1987A, by Ricardo L. Carezani ... The Supernova's light was registered on a photographic plate took on the night of January 24, starting at 24.06 Universal Time (UT) (1 h 26 m 24 s) and finishing its routine exposure at 4 h 12 m. A similar photograph was taken 25 hours earlier at exactly the same place. On it, the supernova was no brighter than 12th magnitude. There is no trace of light from a stellar explosion on this plate. This is day 23 at minute, 0 h (UT) more or less. I don't have the exact duration but normal exposure time for this type of photographic plate is more or less 3 hours. That is, the supernova's light didn't arrive at Earth until around 3 o'clock. The fact is that we really don't know exactly at what time the supernova light arrived on Earth. The first supposed neutrino burst registered at Mont Blanc was at 2 h 52 m 36.8 s. If neutrinos arrived before the supernova's light, then they traveled *faster* than the light speed. If neutrinos arrived after the Supernova's light, they traveled *slower* than the light speed. But whether they were "faster" or "slower" doesn't change the fact that they should arrive simultaneously at each device. If the supernova light arrived precisely at the last minute registered on the photographic plate, there is the following fact which needs explanation: Neutrinos arriving at Mont Blanc were not detected at IMB, KAMIOKANDE II, and at SOUTH DAKOTA. The neutrinos were detected by 1 of 4 devices, or by 25% ... Neutrinos arrived at IMB 6 seconds later than at Kamiokande II, but, as the experimenter says, "within the uncertainty of the latter's timing", even though this is not accepted by many physicists as we will see. Accepting this doubtful simultaneity of arrival time, we still have the fact that neutrinos were not detected at MONT BLANC and SOUTH DAKOTA. Thus: Accepting that there *is* simultaneity between Mont Blanc and FACT 2 Kamiokande II, the evidence is only 50% ... It is assumed that 10 billion neutrinos per square centimeter pass through the earth per second. Given that SN 1987A is around 180,000 light years from the earth, an equivalent solar mass of 10 to 15 percent must be converted in the supernova to neutrinos in order to receive the *assumed* number of neutrinos. Where is the fantastic new mechanism needed to create the incredibly large amount of 10 billion neutrinos per square centimeter from such an incredible distance? This mechanism, besides having no explanation, produces results that are dissimilar to known solar mechanisms ... To explain the neutrinos detected at Kamiokande II 12 seconds later than the first burst, "a neutrino sphere, which is only some tens of kilometers in radius" trapped the neutrinos and then released them several (12) seconds after the initial burst. This is not totally true because there are other neutrinos bursts detected at Kamiokande II and at IMB, with different arrival times. In all, there are a total of 19 bursts: 11 at Kamiokande and 8 at IMB. This simply means that the "neutrino sphere" blow out neutrinos at many different times. No one could explain the fantastic hypothesis of how the sphere trapped particles without mass, or what is worst, without electric charge, and release them at different times ... The uncertainty concept of arrival time between IMB and Kamiokande II is irrelevant. Each device controls time independently, meaning time is independent between devices. Yet, somehow "Universal Time" is claimed to be known to extreme accuracy between each device. Supposing we adjust the arrival time of IMB to be that of Kamiokande II. This would eliminate the uncertainty of arrival time. If we place the IMB burst at 41.3 s and the Kamiokande II burst at 35 s, then, superpose the line and two dots, we can see that there are coincidence in the first, second and fifth burst(more or less). That is, from 8 bursts there is coincidence in three bursts. But remembering that there are a total of 19 bursts, then there are only three coincidences out of a total of 19 bursts. The uncertainty argument is not valid because using it makes the coincidence argument very weak. And remember: no phenomena was recorded in the other two devices ... The importance given to this phenomenon - the sequential time of neutrinos arrival - is an hypothesis by itself. But this hypothesis destroys arrival time uncertainty, and as consequence we get the most convincing fact: NO NEUTRINOS ARRIVED SIMULTANEOUSLY AT ANY OF THE 4 DEVICES. Finally, the most damning evidence we have found for the solar neutrino and SN1987A is the following: It is accepted that around 20 (19) neutrinos (11 at Kamiokande and 9 at IMB) were detected from the supernova, and it is accepted that 10 billion neutrinos per square centimeter per second pass through the Earth coming from the Sun. (all calculations being based on the Sun). I will accept that the phenomenon took 12 seconds and that the events were detected by only two devices. Now we will use logic and arithmetic: If 10 billion neutrinos per square centimeter per second yield 20 neutrino reactions in two devices (especially designed for neutrino detection) in 12 seconds, the number of neutrino reactions in 24 hours in two devices is: (60 * 60 * 24 * 20) / 12 = 144,000 neutrinos events per DAY ... this means that we should detect 144,000 events EVERY DAY. I am aware of the argument describing the energy relation between neutrinos from the Supernova and the Sun. The devices are designed to detect neutrinos from the Sun and the argument might seem irrelevant. But, even accepting an extreme difference, the quantity can be reduced, at maximum, by a factor of 10, thus yielding 14,400 events EVERY DAY ..." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 09:12:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA31069; Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:10:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:10:38 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991211111102.006bb980 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 11:11:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 1 In-Reply-To: <19991211131153531.AAA294 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"kkExV.0.Nb7.DMeKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32090 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:11 AM 12/11/99 -0500, Michael T Huffman wrote: >Were you able to look into the cell to see if there was any visible >electrical activity on the anode? Just curious, with all the sharp edges, etc.. Not this time, because the viewport is so small but previously I observed an even smaller anode...about the same size as the W cathode and there was never any sign of sparking there. Some conditions that I don't understand apparently favor the cathode as the site of the plasma action. However, it is interesting to note that it IS possible to get the plasma action to occur at the anode. In fact, most of the literature I found on CGDE (Contact Glow Discharge Electrolysis) pertains to experiments in which the anode is the site of the plasma action. They typically just insert a single short piece of small dia Pt wire into the electrolyte for the anode. I guess if you get the anode area small enough w.r.t the cathode, the plasma will occur at the anode. Anyway, my present anode is about 50 times larger in area than the cathode so I'm certain that there'll never be any sparking there. Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 12:21:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA16989; Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:19:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:19:26 -0800 Message-ID: <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:50:02 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UuxHG2.0.N94.E7hKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32091 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > > You are trying to separate youself from your own > resposibility for the > > way things are, and the way that the government > behaves. > > That's true, I do seperate myself from guilt for other > people's actions. > I don't subscribe to the notion of collectivization of > guilt. You don't have to. If you voluntarily participate in and benefit from the systematic theft of other people's assets, YOU are responsible for that, along with all the others participating. In order for you to show that your participation was NOT voluntary, the nature of the circumstance where your participation was solicited would have to be such where your life or someone's else's life was under immediate threat, such as an IRS agent holding a gun to your head, or someone else's head in your immediate vicinity, and telling you that if you did not send in a tax return, or pay the sums demanded, they would pull the trigger. Of course, the way the system really works rests on the examples the IRS makes of a relatively small number of people, such as Leona Helmsley, Willie Nelson, or others, who all had the opportunity to make whatever case they could in court. People's fear of going to court is therefore equated with the same kind of fear that is supposed for the circumstance of having a gun held to one's head. But there is no such equation, and the two circumstances are not the same. In court, one has the opportunity to assert one's moral authority in a matter. If you don't avail yourself of that opportunity, then the moral authority of your adversaries prevails as a direct result of your failure to DO SOMETHING, when the opportunity to DO SOMETHING came your way. This was all that was required of most Germans or Japanese during WW2. When the opportunity to do something came their way, they failed to act, and thereafter suffered the consequences of such inaction. The remedy of nuclear obliteration for the problem presented by the Japanese who failed to take responsibility for the actions of their gov't applied mostly to "non combatant" citizens living in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Their status as non combatants did not detract one bit from the justification for such nuclear obliteration. The fact that they did nothing about their gov't, and benefitted from the gov'ts rapacious behaviour was sufficient to satisfy the moral authority required to use those weapons. > Such collectivization of guilt flows from the notion > of inherent > "duties.vbYou illustrate the notion of such "duties" > below when > you assert that people born with Japanese genetic > characteristics, > for instance, inheret duties and responsibilites for > all other > Japanese. Particularly when such Japanese retain certain "religious" principles which condone or encourage aggressive and warlike behaviour. Most of the Japanese held onto their Bushi-do, Samurai, Ninja etc religious culture after their arrival in this country. > > Of course, this again gets right to the question of > how these > duties arise, how they are knowable with logical > certainty, > how they can be shown to be non-arbitrary, universal, > etc. > > Mere assertion is insufficient. A robust proof is > required. > In time of war, the mere observation the enemy's behaviour is "justified" by a prevailing martial arts oriented philosophy that IS culturally pervasive of the enemy, and that such a culture is present in one's midst, this then represents infiltration by enemy forces, and such infiltration must be dealt with by military countermeasure. This observation provided all the "robust proof" that was required during the emergency of war, when there is NO time to go on a case by case basis. > > Who do you think YOU are, judging your parent's or > your grandparent's > > actions of supporting the government, in hindsight, > which is always so > > conveniently 20/20. > > > The Japanese left 8 million dead in their conquest > of Manchuria, prior > > to Pearl Harbor. They damn well got no less than > they deserved at > > Hiroshima and Nagasaki. > > You seem to be quite willing to pass historical > judgements when it > seems convenient. That makes your first question > above hypocritical. You missed the point. I was being judgmental precicely because YOU were. I appears you do not like being judged as a participant in the system you like to criticize, but will not lift a finger to do anything about. > > In fact, since every individual is ultimately > responsible for his own > moral conduct, it is inevitable that we must question > the historical > record. We re-learn moral lessons from things like > the Nuremberg trials. > The Nuremburg trials aptly show how blindly obeying orders, following rules, doing as one is told, etc makes one responsible, even if one is not active in the formulation of the atrocious policies condemned. > > Your politically correct indignation at the > temporary interrment > > of the Nesei makes me want to barf. > > "Politically correct" has apparently come to mean > anything trendy. > It used to apply to essentially hypocritical positions > (for instance, > censorship bad, campus speech codes good, etc.) > > I'll pass on judging whether Libertarianism has > reached the "trendy" > stage or not, but I clearly reject any suggestion that > my opposition > to internment of peacful citizens purely on the basis > of their > genetic inheritence is inconsistent (hence > hypocritical) with any > other personal or Libertarian tenet. So you're a libertarian. The issues of personal liberty become secondary to considerations of national survival during wartime. Bringing up instances where libertarian ideals may have been swept aside in favor of military expediency, necessary during war, sometimes, is what constitutes "PC" "BS", in my book. > > My interest is not "political correctness" my interest > is > "moral correctness." > > > I'll bet if you were ever approached by a REAL IRS > agent > > you'd pee in your pants. > > The point of this ad hominem is lost on me. Let me spell it out for you then. The ad hominem resulted from my judgement of your character (in my temporary "role" as "judge") based on what you had written, wherein you complain about the system, but demonstrate an abject fear of doing anything about it, due to rather vague apprehensions you have about various ways the IRS might "get" you or something. You probably file tax returns out of just such fears that are founded in things you only hear about, but have never really experienced as in intimidation by an actual, real IRS agent. If you participate in the taxation system as a result of fear instilled in you by what you have heard the IRS does to other people, then you are allowing yourself to be controlled by such fears, and these fears do not even have a basis in an actual incident that you can say occurred to you personally, do they? The big thing about fear is, we all occasionally entertain it. But once we recognize fear for what it is and what effect it has on our character, which constitutes the basis of our PERSONAL moral authority, if we do nothing to overcome it, we are not progressing in life. Life is about building one's character, and overcoming one's fears. So in my case I used to be afraid of going to court. Judges (moral "authority" figures) intimidated me. I recognized this fear as a problem for my character. So I practiced overcoming such fears by going to court over relatively inconsequential traffic tickets. I soon found out the basis of judge's Moral Authority is nothing more than their _percieved_ power to intimidate. The "mystique" created by their always wearing black robes turns them into quasireligious voodoo "priests" and "priestesses". Once I started seeing through this, I started noticing certain "moral" weaknesses. Judges have a profound problem in that the cannot have a "normal" converstion as in a dialog between assumed equals. This results in a mode of operation where they always have to be "in control" by always being the one asking questions. When I would start asking questions, I noticed a certain "fear" or nervousness overcome them, which would sometimes result in stilted and obtuse evasions on their part. I was eroding thier moral authority by merely asking the right questions! After a while I began very much enjoying going to court and would drive around without a license plate on my pickup truck, just so cops would pull me over, and I could serve them with already prepared discovery demands which I would have them sign reciepts for as I in turn signed their ticket agreeing to appear in court. So the fear of going to court is now totally absent in my own character, as a result of the above exercizes. > Are you > saying that > people who fear their aggressors justify the > aggression? I'm saying that if you allow yourself to be controled by fear you will invite aggression. Moral authority is a personal thing and exists within you. You must take moral authority over the agressors, by means of questioning individual agressors directly, when they come to visit you, or when they "invite" you to visit them by means of various summonses. This, after all is what they do in order to assert their claims over you. IRS 1040 is nothing more than a list of questions for you to answer, composed with the intent to intimidate. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 15:03:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA21645; Sat, 11 Dec 1999 15:01:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 15:01:59 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 10:01:52 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <384C502F.59EB8578@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <385283C6.22257C1E mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: <385283C6.22257C1E mail.pc.centuryinter.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA21623 Resent-Message-ID: <"QICaW3.0.2I5.cVjKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32092 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 11 Dec 1999 17:03:02 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: [snip] >I am aware of the argument describing the energy relation >between neutrinos from the Supernova and the Sun. The >devices are designed to detect neutrinos from the Sun and >the argument might seem irrelevant. But, even accepting >an extreme difference, the quantity can be reduced, at maximum, >by a factor of 10, thus yielding 14,400 events EVERY DAY ..." [snip] You appear to have skipped the fact that the sun produces neutrinos, while the Reines experiment needs anti-neutrinos. I believe also, that not all of the four experiments you mention, operate on the same principle, i.e. they rely on different reactions. (Some are not designed to detect electron neutrinos?) Perhaps if you take this into account, the results might make a bit more sense (though burst behaviour may still be a problem). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 20:25:08 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA03536; Sat, 11 Dec 1999 20:22:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 20:22:25 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 22:22:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"-5Uo91.0.9t.1CoKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32093 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > Are you saying that people who fear their aggressors justify the > > aggression? > > I'm saying that if you allow yourself to be controlled by fear you will > invite aggression. Having money invites robbery. Again, I am not interested at all in what twisted reasoning criminals and overstepping governments use to self-justify their aggressions. My only interest is in what are the victim's morally proper responses to aggression. In some societies, survival of a rape is sufficient evidence that the victim didn't defend her honor to the death, and therefore justified the rape. This is known as the fallacy of the sanction of the victim. You have merely asserted an arbitrary variation in your "requirements", or "duties" of the victim. Of course, just as an aggressor has no moral authority to initiate aggression, he has no innate prerogative to impose any responsive duty of any shape or form on his victim. The aggressor has no moral authority to define the terms of the interaction. The victim alone retains the sole moral authority to determine the proper response, if any. A rape victim may rightly choose to resist, may rightly choose not to resist, may rightly seek restitution, may rightly attempt to forget all about it, may rightly testify against the assailant, may rightly refuse to testify against the assailant. The victim alone retains the prerogative of defining the response. Never the aggressor, never his apologists. The failure of a rape victim to die resisting does not justify the rape. The failure of the Japanese-Americans forced into internment camps to die in a war of open revolt does not justify their internment. The failure of black slaves to die by the lash rather than work in the field does not justify their slavery. The failure of Jews to resist to the death their transport to the ovens does not justify their individual or wholesale extermination. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 20:25:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA04820; Sat, 11 Dec 1999 20:23:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 20:23:42 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <000b01bf4458$a4472500$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991210153040.007bb860 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991210205414.007ae5f0@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 22:23:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"0LRgd1.0.6B1.DDoKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32094 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > Conservatives may disagree, but I think this is a good example of effective > government. There are plenty of examples of "effective government." For instance, Il Duce Bentio Mussolini is often credited with getting the trains to run on time. If you are one to favor, say, train departure timetables over basic individual liberty, then you will always find the convenience of state coercion to be your "effective" ally. Libertarians face a more difficult intellectual task -- starting from the basis of the non-initiation of coercion tenet, how do you work within a voluntary society to enhance the materialistic lifestyle of free and diverse sovereign individuals. It gets a lot less intellectually demanding if you simply say, "Well, I really really like outcome X a lot, so I think I will stick guns in peoples' faces and make them comply." -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 23:58:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA15432; Sat, 11 Dec 1999 23:56:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 23:56:33 -0800 Message-ID: <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 00:32:47 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vhGEq1.0.2n3.mKrKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32095 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > > Are you saying that people who fear their aggressors justify the > > > aggression? > > > > I'm saying that if you allow yourself to be controlled by fear you will > > invite aggression. > > Having money invites robbery. Again, I am not interested at all > in what twisted reasoning criminals and overstepping governments > use to self-justify their aggressions. My only interest is in what > are the victim's morally proper responses to aggression. (snip) > > A rape victim may rightly choose to resist, may rightly > choose not to resist, may rightly seek restitution, may > rightly attempt to forget all about it, may rightly testify > against the assailant, may rightly refuse to testify against > the assailant. > The victim alone retains the prerogative of defining > the response. Never the aggressor, never his apologists. > I really don't have a problem with that. The problem is, you are not a victim. You are a willing participant with the aggression you complain about. Here's how it works, John: The classic legal text "Corbin on Contract" explains that from legal antiquity the term "VOLUNTARY" has denoted that when a person insists that you do a thing, and his insistence is of a nature of form that a brave man could resist, it is considered a voluntary act if you do the thing, notwithstanding the person's insistence. Accordingly, all acts are considered voluntary unless they are induced by coercion or fraud. Therefore, if you surrender your assets to and support the IRS (giving it aid and comfort) due to mere stories you have heard about how powerfull or ruthless the IRS is, and not as a result of direct threat or intimidation, you are doing so VOLUNTARILY. You participate with it then in the furtherance of it's agenda to intimidate others, whenever you give it _moral_ support and validity, by means of answering form questionaires, and financial support, by means of handing over money to it. The only "victims" are those who truly are "victims" and have had their property seized by force. You have presented no evidence that you personally fall into this category. You present no evidence that you do anything other than talk, nor have you ever attempted to assert any moral authority in direct conflict with the alleged authority of the administrators of the system you complain about (judges). Therefore you have no basis in fact or deed to assert any kind of moral authority over the extant tyranny whatsoever. Of course, one can always correct such deficiencies, by resolving to DO SOMETHING. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 03:21:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA03594; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 03:19:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 03:19:18 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 06:37:58 -0500 (EST) From: steve John ekwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were freed.... In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991204113925.0079a730 pop.mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"IBbmB3.0.4u.sIuKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32096 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 4 Dec 1999, Jed Rothwell wrote: snip... > government. As Lincoln said, "while the people retain their virtue and > vigilance no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can very > seriously injure the Government in the short space of four years." > > - Jed > > Jed (sir Jed) I aplogized to you 2 year ago when I came on this list, but I do know 1+1 AND 2+2 (as "dumb as i am") but, if clinton has 8 years AND the democrates have have HAD 40+ years in congress (even IN japanese translation) how is this (above) comment relevant? s_l_o_w_l_y we turn the screws (are "Screws" of individual freedom LOST nonetheless).... OPEN YOUR "EYES" MAN (please? & thank you) that is all -=se=- p.s. happy Holidays to all We wish you a merry christmas we do From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 07:23:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA05211; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 07:22:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 07:22:24 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1@ca-ois.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:22:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"Wo2it2.0.LH1.msxKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32097 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > acts are considered voluntary unless they are induced > by coercion or fraud. Exactly. > "...that a brave man could resist..." The fallacy of sanction of the victim. That's the logic of the school yard bully -- his victims, by your logic, are volunteers. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 07:53:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA13434; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 07:52:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 07:52:25 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <3853D321.1C146BE7 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 16:53:53 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"FWR603.0.mH3.vIyKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32098 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: There are plenty of examples of "effective government." For instance, Il Duce Bentio Mussolini is often credited with getting the trains to run on time. If you are one to favor, say, train departure timetables over basic individual liberty, then you will always find the convenience of state coercion to be your "effective" ally ... Jack Smith writes: Thomas Hobbes, in "Leviathan", presents the classic argument for the above position in order to save us from "short, nasty, and brutish lives." This position was the distillation of the wisdom of Athens, at the height of its glory under Pericles. (One of my sons borrowed my last copy of Thucydides' Peloponnesian War, so the following is rough.) The Athenian ambassdor to the island of Melos told the Melians that if they resisted Athenian rule, the men would be slaughtered and the women and children sold into slavery. The Athenian ambassador addressed the Melians as follows: "Our opinion of the gods and our knowledge of men lead us to conclude that it is a general and necessary law of nature that men will rule wherever they can ... The strong [the majority] will do what they have the power to do, and the weak will accept what they have to." This "scientific" theory of society is shown to be wrong by the results of our great American experiment as discussed below. John Logajan wrote: Having money invites robbery. Again, I am not interested at all in what twisted reasoning criminals and overstepping governments use to self-justify their aggressions. My only interest is in what are the victim's morally proper responses to aggression ... The aggressor has no moral authority to define the terms of the interaction. The victim alone retains the sole moral authority to determine the proper response, if any. Jim Ostrowski wrote: I really don't have a problem with that ... Here's how it works, John: The classic legal text "Corbin on Contract" explains that from legal antiquity the term "VOLUNTARY" has denoted that when a person insists that you do a thing, and his insistence is of a nature of form that a brave man could resist, it is considered a voluntary act if you do the thing, notwithstanding the person's insistence. Accordingly, all acts are considered voluntary unless they are induced by coercion or fraud. Repeating, John Logajan wrote: The victim alone retains the sole moral authority to determine the proper response, if any. Hi John and Jim, By retaining U.S. citizenship, we voluntarily agree to uphold the fundamental American social contract which is to defend personal liberty and to resist arbitrary and oppressive government. Therefore, the victim alone DOES NOT retain the sole moral authority to determine the proper response. We have an obligation to resist tyranny. Although we have not yet achieved the duration of Rome, which was organized on the Athenian position, our material progress denies the position of those who argue that liberty stifles prosperity and condemns us to short, nasty, and brutish lives. We can have trains that run on time; and we must object when they block highway crossings, posing an obstacle to ambulances and fire engines. In meeting our obligation to resist tyranny, we must be willing to expend money and personal effort. Although we may think globally, we must be prepared act locally. As an example, I'm enclosing excerpts from a letter which I recently sent to my attorney: "Date: November 22, 1999 Please recommend a course of action we can take now (taxpayer's suit in Common Pleas Court?) to compel the Lorain County Auditor to raise the real estate taxes on parcels in Avon owned or optioned by Richard E. Jacobs entities for the Vista Project. Jacobs taxes must be raised to the levels imposed on us in 1998 by the Lorain County Auditor ... We have given this matter a lot of thought, and we have no choice but to oppose the injustice which has been done to us. Americans are called upon to defend liberty around the world; but the most important battles are here. Every person has an obligation to protect his rights and liberties because, in so doing, the the rights and liberties of all of us are protected. The power to tax is the power to destroy. We have a moral obligation to insist on tax justice and to resist oppressive and arbitrary government ..." Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 07:54:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA14811; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 07:54:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 07:54:03 -0800 Message-ID: <19991212155403.34708.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.132] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Whirlpower News Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 07:54:02 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"wDr-u2.0.Ld3.RKyKu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32099 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi folks, Been out and about on other lists still trying to find data on whirlpools and help in building one. No whirlpools found so far. We have build a small one on the Whirlpower List in England that demonstrated a wide whirlpool with a small vortex in the center, (similar in appearance to a hurricane with its small eye wall in the center or similar in appearance to the spiral galaxy), does in fact with very little water going through my feedback loop design concept move the water in the entire tank. For those of you that know my set up this is in the area I call the torus donut, not to be confused with torid flow of the vortex itself. A small but important step forward for Whirlpower. I have also begun to introduce another form of Whirlpower in search of any prior work or data. That is how my research on Whirlpower started. I saw a whirlpool in my dream so I began to look for whirlpools. Found many a vortex but no whirlpool and now several vortex experts have joined the Whirlpower Team because they too know of no such data. My next search I will combine with my old from now on and I am looking for what I think should be a simple and most common physics experiment. I have search and asked many time without results. If any of you know of something please let me know, here or join my list. I am looking for data of a top being spun on a turntable. I have found a few about a ball being spun but still no top. I picture the wobble that occurs at the bottom of the top being able to turn the turntable. We know people have tried to tap the top wobble of a gyro. Has anyone tried to tap the bottom wobble of a top? I am putting together a press release to announce my research discoveries and lack of data found curiousities and asking for any and all interested to build a whirlpool and test it scientifically if still do data can be found. Same for the top. I will pass this release through this list as it goes out in case any may wish to add a brief positive comment. Not expecting a whole lot of support since this list has had well over a year to consider Whirlpower and has shown virtually no interest. Can't really understand why anyone would not be interested in seeing the first whirlpool ever built by man but it seems very few have any curiousity in this area. Maybe some will be curious about a top on a turntable. It seems it should be the most common physics experiment; not one with no data found. And I think the same about the whirlpool. David Dennard http://www.whirlpower.cc ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 11:50:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA06113; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 11:45:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 11:45:59 -0800 Message-ID: <3854044F.2ED6 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 12:23:43 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1@ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"CBRis.0.RV1.tj_Ku" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32100 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > acts are considered voluntary unless they are induced > > by coercion or fraud. > > Exactly. > > > "...that a brave man could resist..." > > The fallacy of sanction of the victim. That's the logic > of the school yard bully -- his victims, by your logic, > are volunteers. No. You can ignore or edit out my clarifications but that doesn't mean I didn't make them. School yard bully recruits a few people to be members of his gang. He announces that if everyone pays him through his agent gang members 50 cents pey day, no one will get beat up. Nearly everyone antes up, except for a few reluctant stragglers. The few reluctant stragglers get beat up. These are "victims". They did NOT volunteer, like everyone else. Everyone else, however, submitted VOLUNTARILY. They are not victims. They are willing participants in the tyranny of the School Yard Bully. The reluctant stragglers have the right and justification to accuse the bully, his gang members, AND ALL OTHER VOLUNTEERS of participating in the tyranny. Jim Ostrowski -- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - > - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - > - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. > Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 12:56:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24127; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 12:55:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 12:55:18 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991212155354.007b3b80 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 15:53:54 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <000b01bf4458$a4472500$0101a8c0 john> References: <3.0.6.32.19991210153040.007bb860 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991210205414.007ae5f0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"7fxod3.0.vu5.rk0Lu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32101 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: >There are plenty of examples of "effective government." For instance, >Il Duce Bentio Mussolini is often credited with getting the trains to >run on time. But he didn't. That is a myth. I once read an essay by a fellow who worked as a conductor on the Italian national railways in which he said the trains were just as bad under El Duce as they had been before. Anyway, governments are supposed to do things like monitor health care accidents. Who else can, or will? No other institution has the authority to demand the data from the doctors. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 13:54:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09023; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 13:53:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 13:53:49 -0800 Message-ID: <385421D1.4315 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 14:29:38 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <3853D321.1C146BE7@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Y4E6a3.0.rC2.jb1Lu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32102 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Taylor J. Smith wrote: > > Hi John and Jim, > > By retaining U.S. citizenship, we voluntarily agree to uphold > the fundamental American social contract which is to defend > personal liberty and to resist arbitrary and oppressive government. The idea that there is a fundamental social contract based on the document of one's citizenship is somewhat dubious. Where on the document of your citizenship does it say you are required to defend personal liberty or to resist arbitrary or oppressive government? > Therefore, the victim alone DOES NOT retain the sole moral authority to > determine the proper response. We have an obligation to resist tyranny. I think you are right about that. This obligation is spelled out in the Declaration of Independence. > > Although we have not yet achieved the duration of Rome, which was > organized on the Athenian position, our material progress denies > the position of those who argue that liberty stifles prosperity and > condemns us to short, nasty, and brutish lives. We can have trains > that run on time; and we must object when they block highway crossings, > posing an obstacle to ambulances and fire engines. > > In meeting our obligation to resist tyranny, we must be willing > to expend money and personal effort. Although we may think globally, > we must be prepared act locally. As an example, I'm enclosing excerpts > from a letter which I recently sent to my attorney: Be very carefull. It is not generally in the best interest of attorneys to present your case in a way that will necessarily be most effective. All attorneys are "officers of the court" and as such cannot bring up such issues as the general integrity or fitness of the judge assigned to hear your case. There probably are no such judges in the first place. Where taxes or money is at issue, the most important question which should be number one on your list of things to be settled, is the continuing judicial furtherance of of a banking fraud (counterfeiting scheme) on the people of your community. There is no reason to suspect that if you paid your taxes with money printed by Parker Brothers ("Monopoly") that the taxes would be any less paid than if you used Federal Reserve Notes. Neither has any intrinsic value other than the cost of the paper they are printed on. The Federal Reserve System is nothing more that a counterfeiter's dream come true. If a counterfeiter can get everyone to use his bogus notes for money, the counterfeiter then becomes a banker. Such "Bankers" can therafter dictate the economy of a community, by deciding to lend money to those who agree to further the interests of the continuation of the fraud. In the old days, counterfeiters were hanged. Now, they are bankers who generally benefit the most from the manufacture of their "product". Your attorney will NEVER, EVER bring up this problem in court. WE, THE PEOPLE have to do it. Until this fraud is prosecuted and the perpetrators convicted, the abject tyrrany will continue unabated. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 13:55:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09047; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 13:53:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 13:53:51 -0800 Message-ID: <001501bf44f3$b52b03a0$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Particle Pairs and Lines Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 14:52:32 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"8iGUb2.0.HD2.lb1Lu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32103 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: An excercise: Suppose that a short duration pulse is traveling along an infinite lossless transmission line at c, determined by c = 1/(eo*uo)^1/2 where eo is the intrinsic capacitance (permittivity)of the line, 8.84E-12 farard/meter and and uo is the Inductance (permeability) of the line 4(pi)E-7 henry/meter, with characteristic impedance, Z = 377 = (uo/eo)^1/2 (ohms). Now then the line is cut ahead of and behind the pulse location, which causes the pulse to shuttle back and forth indefinitely. A second line undergoing the same pulse acrobatics, but with opposite "phase" is placed along side the first line. 1, Will the lines attract each other, and will they exhibit "Mass" Charge, and Spin? 2, Likewise, if the lines are formed into a closed circle? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 15:06:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA31450; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 15:04:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 15:04:59 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991212180312.007b6cb0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 18:03:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991212155354.007b3b80 pop.mindspring.com> References: <000b01bf4458$a4472500$0101a8c0 john> <3.0.6.32.19991210153040.007bb860 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991210205414.007ae5f0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"eNEys1.0.Fh7.Re2Lu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32104 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:53 PM 12/12/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Anyway, governments are supposed to do things like monitor health care >accidents. Who else can, or will? No other institution has the authority to >demand the data from the doctors. > >- Jed Balderdash. Ignores fact, substitutes flawed opinion, based upon an illogical claim. There are both federal and state Boards of Medicine, as well as AMA and other regulation, in addition to weekly Complication rounds in each hospital group each week. The data has obviously been available already considering the findings recently, including those to which Rothwell cited. Therefore, IF the information has been obtained, then the data was OBVIOUSLY made available. Q.E.D. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 16:21:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA21130; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 16:18:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 16:18:43 -0800 Message-ID: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 17:17:15 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"3KY861.0.4A5.Yj3Lu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32105 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: While perusing the literature on open-ended transmission lines, scope pictures of the the first "echo" pulse, occuring two microseconds after the initial pulse on a clean 300 meter long line is about 43% greater in amplitude than the initial pulse. Subsequent echo pulses are of lessor amplitude due to line losses. Strange. Isn't Power equal to V^2/Z? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 17:01:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA08046; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 17:00:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 17:00:40 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 18:49:52 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"ySHwL3.0.ez1.tK4Lu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32106 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 11:15:55 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>Fortunately, I have now found that information, in a discussion of--as you >>suggested above--the particle emissions from supernova 1987A, which reached >>Earth on 23 February 1987. [See *The Particle Hunters, pg. 264.] In that >>discussion, the neutrino flux from space is given as 1 per cm^2 per day, >>which means that Cowan and Reines would expect 3(10^-13) per hour, or 1 hit >>in their apparatus every 3.33 trillion years. (Supernova 1987A produced 11 >>neutrinos in 13 seconds at the detector in Kamioke, Japan, and 8 neutrinos >>in 6 seconds at the detector in Cleveland, Ohio.) >> >>Bottom line: the hits in the Cowan-Reines experiment did not come from space. > >A couple of points need to be made here. First, the particle required for > >P + e- + -> n is an anti-neutrino if I'm not mistaken. ***{Yes. --MJ}*** > >Second the Solar reaction H + H -> D + e+ produces a neutrino (wrong >brand!). ***{Yup. --MJ}*** > >So Solar neutrinos aren't relevant to the experiment anyway (unless the >neutrino also happens to be it's own anti-particle). ***{Agreed. --MJ}*** > >As for the Solar neutrino flux, it can be roughly calculated by assuming >that solar energy derives from the reaction 4 H -> He4 + energy + 2 >neutrinos. ***{Actually, I think the summary reaction for the so called "carbon cycle" is 4(1H1) --> 2He4 + 2(e+) + 2(v~) + 24.7 MeV, with the subsequent annihilation of the positrons adding 2.04 MeV. --MJ}*** Some of the energy will be carried by the neutrinos, and thus >will not contribute to the measured solar energy flux. I think that for most >beta decay reactions, about 80% of the theoretical energy release is carried >by the neutrinos on average. ***{I haven't seen such a figure, but I would note that the rest mass of the beta is .511 MeV, so it would carry that much even it it had no kinetic energy at all. In any case, the carbon cycle is not primarily a beta decay. --MJ}*** That means that the reaction above only yields >about 24.4 MeV in solar flux. Given also that the total solar flux is 1 kW / >m^2 at the Earth's orbit, 0.1 watt/cm^2, we can see that this requires >2.5E10 reactions/sec/cm^2, so that the neutrino flux should be 5E10 >neutrinos / sec-cm^2. ***{I have no idea how you arrived at that number, so I am going to calculate it myself, and see if I get a similar answer. The solar "carbon cycle" is broken down into steps below, with the corresponding mass balance equations solved to verify that the energies given are correct: (1) 6C12 + 1H1 -->7N13 + 1.94 MeV 12 + 1.007825 = 13.00574 + Q, and so Q = .002086 amu = 1.94 MeV. (2) 7N13 --> 6C13 + (e+) + v + 1.71 MeV 13.005739 = 13.003355 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and so Q = .0018354 amu = 1.71 MeV. (3) 6C13 + 1H1 --> 7N14 +7.55 MeV 13.003355 + 1.007825 = 14.0030744 + Q, and so Q = .00811 amu = 7.55 MeV (4) 7N14 + 1H1 -->8O15 + 7.29 MeV 14.0030744 + 1.007825 = 15.00307 + Q, and so Q = .0078286 amu = 7.29 MeV (5) 8O15 --> 7N15 + (e+) + v + 2.25 MeV 15.00307 = 15.0001084 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and so Q = .0024134 amu = 2.25 MeV (6) 7N15 + 1H1 --> 6C12 + 2He4 + 4.96 MeV 15.0001084 + 1.007825 = 12 + 4.0026033 + Q, and so Q = .0053297 amu = 4.96 MeV Going through the above list and cancelling out entries that appear on both sides, we have the following summary reaction: 4(1H1) --> 2He4 + 2(e+) + 2(v) + 25.7 MeV, which does not take into account the energy that will subsequently be released when the positrons are annihilated--i.e., 4(.511) = 2.044 MeV. The total energy release, therefore, is 27.744 MeV. Taking just the energy production of the neutrino-producing portions of the carbon cycle--that is: steps (2) and (5), above--we find that total energy release is 1.71 + 2.25 = 3.96 MeV. Of this, you say that 80%, on average, is carried away by the neutrinos, so, based on that assumption--which, by the way, seems wrong to me--it follows that we will have in the average case two neutrinos, each carrying .8(3.96)/2 = 1.584 MeV, for each solar output of 24.58 MeV of usable energy. That is one neutrino for each 12.29 MeV of incident solar energy. Since the solar constant (the rate at which solar radiation falls on a perpendicular surface positioned at the top of the Earth's atmosphere) is 1372 watts per square meter, which is .1372 joules/sec-cm^2, which is (.1372)(6.25x10^12) = 8.58x10^11 MeV/sec-cm^2. Since we expect one neutrino for each 12.29 MeV, that means we expect 6.98x10^10 neutrinos/sec-cm^2. Comparing back, I see that your number is very close: 5x10^10 neutrinos/sec-cm^2. The difference, apparently, is mainly due to your using 1000 watts/m^2--the average value incident at the Earth's surface--rather than the solar constant. Another problem with this type of estimate lies in the fact that, for stars with core temperatures less than 18 million degrees, the carbon cycle does not predominate. In our own sun, the core temperature is about 12 million degrees, and the proton-proton cycle predominates, producing about 99.9% of the total energy. Let us therefore run the numbers based on that assumption: (1) 1H1 + 1H1 --> 1D2 + e+ + v + .93 MeV 1.0078252 + 1.0078252 = 2.0141022 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and so Q = .0009996 amu = .93 MeV (2) 1H1 + 1H1 --> 1D2 + e+ + v + .93 MeV 1.0078252 + 1.0078252 = 2.0141022 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and so Q = .0009996 amu = .93 MeV (2) 2(1D2) + 2(1H1) --> 2(2He3) + 10.99 MeV 2(2.0141022) + 2(1.0078252) = 2(3.0160297) + Q, and so Q = .0117954 amu = 10.99 MeV (3) 2He3 + 2He3 --> 2He4 + 2(1H1) + 12.86 MeV 3.0160297 + 3.0160297 = 4.0026033 + 2(1.0078252) + Q, and so Q = .0138057 amu = 12.86 MeV The summary reaction for the proton-proton cycle is the same as for the carbon cycle: 4(1H1) --> 2He4 + 2(e+) + 2(v) + 25.7 MeV. Again, this does not take into account the energy that will subsequently be released when the positrons are annihilated--i.e., 4(.511) = 2.044 MeV. The total energy release, therefore, is 27.744 MeV. This time, however, the neutrino releasing portions of the cycle are less energetic: 1.86 MeV, as compared to 3.96 MeV for the carbon cycle. Result: .8(1.86) = 1.49 MeV to the two neutrinos, or .744 MeV each. Thus for each contribution to solar energy of (27.744 - 1.49)/2 = 13.13 MeV, we get 1 neutrino. Dividing into 8.58x10^11 MeV/sec-cm^2, as earlier, we get 6.54x10^10 neutrinos/sec-cm^2, which is only trivially different than the number obtained by assuming that the carbon cycle was the main reaction. To make a long story short, it would seem that your estimate was pretty much on the money. One implication would be that the neutrino flux from space, given to be 1 per cm^2 per day on pg. 264 of *The Particle Hunters* must be an antineutrino flux, or else that comment was a sloppy attempt to say that those detectors normally get 1 hit per day. (They didn't actually specify the "per cm^2" part in that case. I assumed it, since that had been their frame of reference everywhere else in the book.) Bottom line: I now have no idea what they were trying to say at that point. Given that the method of estimation which you used gives fairly solid predictions, consider this: "Raymond Davis and his group from Brookhaven have monitored the flux of the solar neutrinos since the mid-sixties. Their detector is a huge container full of dry-cleaning fluid (C2Cl4) which is located in an old deep gold mine in South Dakota. The neutrino is detected by its capture in a Cl37 nucleus which consequently turns into Ar37. Since Ar37 is radioactive, its amount in the container can be periodically checked quite easily. Davis's solar neutrino observatory has yielded puzzling results: while models of the 'nuclear pile' in the sun provide estimates for the expected flux of solar neutrinos, the measured values are persistently about one third of the theoretical predictions." [*The Particle Hunters*, pg. 73] It would seem that either the prevailing model of how the sun works is wrong, or else Davis's solar neutrino detector is only picking up about a third as many neutrinos as he thinks. --Mitchell Jones}*** >[snip] > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 17:56:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA20183; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 17:53:36 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 17:53:36 -0800 (PST) From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.3b8795bf.2585aace aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 20:50:06 EST Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 56 Resent-Message-ID: <"H-buR2.0.Hx4.T65Lu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32107 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 12/10/99 12:52:41 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: <> In a message dated 12/10/99 3:18:14 PM, Jed added: <> Mills has circulated versions of his written works among various people for years and met many of their criticisms, to the benefit of his published articles and to the benefit of his book, which has grown from the 140 pages of the 1990 Mills & Farrell version to the 1,040 pages of Mills' January 1999 edition. Mills has managed a growing business for eight years now. He is married and has two children. I don't think that he has a commercial product or customers yet, but it's evident from the material on the BLP website that Mills has been dealing successfully with a lot of different people. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 19:28:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA20116; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 19:27:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 19:27:05 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:26:51 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <384C502F.59EB8578@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA20095 Resent-Message-ID: <"vkxVY3.0.Aw4.8U6Lu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32108 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 12 Dec 1999 18:49:52 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >(1) 1H1 + 1H1 --> 1D2 + e+ + v + .93 MeV > >1.0078252 + 1.0078252 = 2.0141022 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and so Q = .0009996 >amu = .93 MeV I believe there is also an electron capture reaction possible which yields 1.44 MeV, and no positron, hence more energy is available for the neutrino in this case. Therefore the average total percentage carried by the neutrino is probably raised by this reaction. I have no idea of the relative frequencies of the two reactions. I do however note that the conversion of Cl37 to Ar37 requires a neutrino with an energy of .8139 MeV, which is a large percentage of the .93 MeV available from the reaction you give above. If we assume that the positron reaction dominates, then the shortage of sufficiently energetic neutrinos may go some way to explaining the solar shortfall? (I have no idea what was taken into consideration when calculating the expected number of solar neutrinos - I'm probably being very naive here :). I also wonder whether or not neutrinos can lose energy through collision without undergoing a reaction? If so, then neutrinos may lose energy on their way out of the sun, so that even less of them have sufficient energy to trigger the Cl37 conversion reaction. [snip] >"Raymond Davis and his group from Brookhaven have monitored the flux of the >solar neutrinos since the mid-sixties. Their detector is a huge container >full of dry-cleaning fluid (C2Cl4) which is located in an old deep gold >mine in South Dakota. The neutrino is detected by its capture in a Cl37 >nucleus which consequently turns into Ar37. Since Ar37 is radioactive, its >amount in the container can be periodically checked quite easily. Davis's >solar neutrino observatory has yielded puzzling results: while models of >the 'nuclear pile' in the sun provide estimates for the expected flux of >solar neutrinos, the measured values are persistently about one third of >the theoretical predictions." [*The Particle Hunters*, pg. 73] > >It would seem that either the prevailing model of how the sun works is >wrong, or else Davis's solar neutrino detector is only picking up about a >third as many neutrinos as he thinks. (I.e. the neutrino absorption cross-section is wrong.) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 19:34:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22720; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 19:34:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 19:34:02 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <38547782.3EDAD4AA mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 04:35:14 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"CAJEe2.0.wY5.fa6Lu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32109 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: It would seem that either the prevailing model of how the sun works is wrong, or else Davis's solar neutrino detector is only picking up about a third as many neutrinos as he thinks. Hi Mitchell, A third possibility is that Davis' detector is seeing something other than neutrinos. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 00:34:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA00879; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 00:33:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 00:33:02 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 02:34:04 -0600 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991210114931.0079e6b0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas Malloy Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell Resent-Message-ID: <"M9mh01.0.fD.-yALu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32110 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote > >I do not like Mills. His egomania bothers me. He gives me the willies, and >I feel I cannot trust him. > I'm suspicious of Dr. Mills. I assume you know that he is a MD? There's something else that I've been wanting to talk to you about Jed. As I recall, one of Art Bell's guests talked about the power of prayer. There was a double blind study in which the health of patients who were prayed for improved more than the control group. I'm wondering about the study that you sighted. I'll see what I can do about finding evidence on the other side of this controvercy. I'm pleased to see subjects like the efficacy of prayer discussed on this forum. I think that it is highly germain to a discussion of how the universe works. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 00:35:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA01813; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 00:35:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 00:35:03 -0800 Message-ID: <006901bf454d$497584a0$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 01:33:18 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01BF450A.0869BC80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"3gLHw3.0.FS.t-ALu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32111 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_0005_01BF450A.0869BC80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Part of the "Solar Neutrino Problem". http://ewiserver.npl.washington.edu/sno/e-nu.html ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BF450A.0869BC80 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="EWI Research Group at UW.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="EWI Research Group at UW.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://ewiserver.npl.washington.edu/sno/e-nu.html [InternetShortcut] URL=http://ewiserver.npl.washington.edu/sno/e-nu.html Modified=E01D19E64C45BF014D ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BF450A.0869BC80-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 02:42:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA28636; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 02:42:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 02:42:04 -0800 Message-ID: <3854CC91.A735B72E verisoft.com.tr> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 12:38:09 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sS_XX.0.I_6.xrCLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32112 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber wrote: > > While perusing the literature on open-ended transmission lines, scope > pictures of the the first "echo" pulse, occuring two microseconds after the initial pulse > on a clean 300 meter long line is about 43% greater in amplitude than the initial pulse. > > Subsequent echo pulses are of lessor amplitude due to line losses. > > Strange. Isn't Power equal to V^2/Z? :-) > > Regards, Frederick Yes, but on the open end of an transmission line, impedance would be greater than its characteristic impedance, if not infinite. I had written a good HP-41C routine for playing this stuff. BTW, I have an experiment setup on my bench, still running, is a simple one xistor oscillator driving an long single layered coil from one end, as an antenna. What is interesting here when tuned fine, the oscillator running at 92 MHz, approx. sinusoidal o utput, but on the other end of the coil there is a clean 46 MHz, driving a single 3 turns terminated by a LED. Oscillator consume 200mW, and it appear some tens of miliwats are received by the LED at 1/2 harmonic!, not the 2'nd harmonic :). Isn't it unusu al? Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 05:39:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA24431; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 05:38:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 05:38:36 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991213083837.007bb4d0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 08:38:37 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell In-Reply-To: <0.3b8795bf.2585aace aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"zu14Y2.0.fz5.SRFLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32113 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Tom Stolper wrote: >Mills has circulated versions of his written works among various people for >years and met many of their criticisms, to the benefit of his published >articles . . . Yes, he has been much more open than most eccentric o-u inventors, although he refuses to show the machines to most outsiders or sell demonstration kits. Honestly, I cannot put my finger on what bothers me about him . . . His attitude bothers me. I have not specific reason to doubt his claims because I do not understand enough about his work to judge it. >I don't think that he has a commercial product or customers > yet, but it's evident from the material on the BLP website that Mills has >been dealing successfully with a lot of different people. That's true. But, I have talked to some of those people from California, and they did not give me much confidence either. They have not done some basic in-house testing to be absolutely sure the thing is producing excess heat. They more or less accepted his results at face value, which I would never do. Very rarely, a large group of people who should know better are misled by brilliant, charismatic experts. There was an example this year with this huge investment firm led by Nobel economists, which dealt in futures or currency trading or some darn thing I would not understand. The arrangement turned out to be house of cards which collapsed when the Yen or the Ruble moved the wrong way, and a billion dollars were lost overnight. I have no idea how it was supposed to work, but I guess anyone with an ounce of sense would know that schemes like that never do work, or they only work until other people catch on and start doing the same thing. I wonder if Mills is anything like that. If he would talk about excess heat and calorimetry instead of a Theory of Everything I might be able to judge. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 06:20:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA04010; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:19:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:19:43 -0800 Sender: jack mail3.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <38550EA1.635D6DCB mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 15:20:01 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"iClGy3.0.X-._1GLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32114 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Mitchell, Robin, Robert, and Kyle, I found the following in my archives (when looking for something else): Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Light Pulse experiment re-post Robert I. Eachus wrote: By the way, to clarify a few things: one of the Nimtz papers used FM, several others use amplitude modulation. Next there are some papers at the site on tunneling of single photons--interesting reading. Finally, there is an abstract for the June conference on more recent analysis of the 1987A supernova nuetrino data that looks very interesting. It implies that not only were neutrinos detected minutes before the light wavefront, but hours before. So neutrinos may be tachyons... Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: Neutrinos as tachyons; I've always wondered about the neutrino's arriving before the light front. Also interesting was the recent mass check of a neutrino: they got an imaginary number, consistent with tachyons. Naturally, it was called an experimental error. Is there any experiment that shows the true speed of a neutrino, or is it just assumed to be nearly the speed of light? Jack writes: I wonder if Kyle and Robert would care to add to the above. Basically I'm into the neutrino discussion because of my interest in ftl. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 06:23:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA05650; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:23:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:23:12 -0800 Message-ID: <008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3854CC91.A735B72E@verisoft.com.tr> Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:22:12 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"F6lw1.0.BO1.G5GLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32115 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: hamdi ucar To: Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 2:38 AM Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Hamdi wrote: > > > Frederick Sparber wrote: > > > > While perusing the literature on open-ended transmission lines, scope > > pictures of the the first "echo" pulse, occuring two microseconds after the initial pulse > > on a clean 300 meter long line is about 43% greater in amplitude than the initial pulse. > > > > Subsequent echo pulses are of lessor amplitude due to line losses. > > > > Strange. Isn't Power equal to V^2/Z? :-) > > > > Regards, Frederick > > Yes, but on the open end of an transmission line, impedance would be greater than its characteristic impedance, if not infinite. I had written a good HP-41C routine for playing this stuff. I don't think the impedance (Z) would exceed the 377 ohms of space, Hamdi. The least change in Z on the transmission line can cause total reflection of a fast pulse. Total Reflection at a Boundary Created by the slight difference in Z is what I theorize is what localizes a Photon to create a Particle with Mass, Charge, and Spin. Circular, or to-and-fro waves without wires. :-) I use my Hp-41C every day and the batteries have lasted since I bought it in 1986. :-) > > BTW, I have an experiment setup on my bench, still running, is a simple one xistor oscillator driving an long single layered coil from one end, as an antenna. What is interesting here when tuned fine, the oscillator running at 92 MHz, approx. sinusoidal output, but on the other end of the coil there is a clean 46 MHz, driving a single 3 turns terminated by a LED. Oscillator consume 200mW, and it appear some tens of miliwats are received by the LED at 1/2 harmonic!, not the 2'nd harmonic :). Isn't it unusual? At 92 MHz with coils, nothing surprises me. Regards, Frederick > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 06:26:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA06688; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:24:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:24:30 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991213092430.0079bd30 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:24:30 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991210114931.0079e6b0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"aNS1o2.0.Qe1.U6GLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32116 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thomas Malloy wrote: >I'm suspicious of Dr. Mills. I assume you know that he is a MD? Yes, but not all doctors are suspicious. one of Art Bell's guests talked about the power of prayer. There >was a double blind study in which the health of patients who were prayed >for improved more than the control group. I'm wondering about the study >that you sighted. No, never, and I wouldn't discuss it here if I had seen it. It is way off topic. >I'm pleased to see subjects like the efficacy of prayer discussed on this >forum. I think that it is highly germain to a discussion of how the >universe works. I am not pleased. If prayer contributes to the operation of the universe, I suppose it works in a way that cannot be measured with the tools of science. Therefore it is off-topic in this forum. Ostrowski says the efficacy of prayer in curing disease can only be judged "subjectively," based on personal experience. I have always thought that subjective judgements apply to questions that cannot be measured statistically or by other objective means, such as the difference between true love and carnal desire, the meaning of life, or the ideal birthday present. I assume that mortality rates and behavior are matters of fact that can be measured objectively with some precision, but perhaps I am wrong. I understand very little about theology, and I do not care to comment on it. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 06:54:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA15572; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:53:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:53:02 -0800 Message-ID: <38550807.12476C5D verisoft.com.tr> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 16:51:51 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex , freenrg Subject: Instruction for the making of the perpetuum mobile is enclosed. (physics/9912022) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vtOig.0.Ap3.DXGLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32117 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, This is not the title of the paper of released today on LANL archive. I tried a "journalist style". But I am not lying. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/9912022 From: Nikulov Alexey Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 04:51:44 GMT (15kb) About Perpetuum Mobile without Emotions Authors: A.V.Nikulov One of the oldest science problems - possibility of the perpetuum mobile is discussed. The interest to this problem was provoke a result, published in J. Low Temp.Phys. 112, 227 (1998); cond-mat/9811148, which contradicts to the second law of thermodynamics. According to this result, the thermal fluctuations can induce a voltage with direct component in a inhomogeneous superconducting ring at an unaltered temperature corresponded to the resistive transition of the ring segment with the lowest critical temperature. This result arises from obvious statements: 1) the switching of a ring segment $l_{b}$ into and out of the normal state, while the rest of the ring (segment $l_{a}$) remains superconducting, can induced a voltage with dc component (It is shown that, in spite of the wide spread opinion, this statement is correct because the superconductivity is a macroscopic quantum phenomena); 2) the thermal fluctuations switch the mesoscopic ring segment $l_{b}$ with lowest critical temperature $T_{sb}$ into and out of the normal state at $T \simeq T_{sb}$, while the rest of the ring remains superconducting if $T_{sa} > T \simeq T_{sb}$. In order to resolve the contradiction between these obvious statements and the second law of thermodynamics a possibility of the second order perpetuum mobile is considered theoretically. It is shown that from two type of the perpetuum mobile, only type "b" and only in quantum systems is possible. According to the presented interpretation, the total entropy, as the measure of the chaos, may be systematically reduced in some quantum system because a "switching" between the classical and quantum mechanics is possible. Instruction for the making of the perpetuum mobile is enclosed. Paper: Source (15kb), PostScript, or Other formats Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 06:56:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA16854; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:55:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:55:06 -0800 Message-ID: <00a501bf4582$631eef60$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3854CC91.A735B72E@verisoft.com.tr> <008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26@fjsparber> Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:54:43 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"o6Too1.0.C74.AZGLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32118 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: hamdi ucar To: Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 2:38 AM Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Hamdi wrote: > > BTW, I have an experiment setup on my bench, still running, is a simple one xistor oscillator > driving an long single layered coil from one end, as an antenna. What is interesting here when > tuned fine, the oscillator running at 92 MHz, approx. sinusoidal output, but on the other end of > the coil there is a clean 46 MHz, driving a single 3 turns terminated by a LED. Oscillator > consume 200mW, and it appear some tens of miliwats are received by the LED at 1/2 harmonic!, not > the 2'nd harmonic :). Isn't it unusual? Not if the LED (a diode) is rectifying the wave. Regards, Frederick > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 07:41:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA15857; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:40:09 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:40:09 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <48129F10B08ED3119DB00000F831E85F3CA6F8 mailsrv1.itu.ch> From: "Dishy-Peiris, Elise" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Whirlpower News Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 16:27:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <"pIDxa2.0.gt3.NDHLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32119 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: David Dennard saying "I saw a whirlpool in my dream so I began to look for whirlpools" has given me a strong enough push to come out, albeit self-consciously. I'm not a scientist or doing any research, but the insights I have been getting are in line with what your experiments, David. Your work with water seems so simple and yet so right. The stillness at the center of any thing is somehow consciousness or immortality -- as long as it is there, the form exists; as long as the form exists, it is there. The spin creates the form and is the form. And the vortex is also associated with death (or life?) in the sense of beckoning and inducing transformation. Something else which I vaguely feel should have some association with all of this (only because it arose in my mind at about the same time as the other thoughts) is this series which always resolves to completion, and gives the idea of cycles or wholes forming more cycles or wholes, etc. * 2(2n -1) + (2n) + 2(2n +1) = 10n And this figure *** which, someone told me, is the most efficient energy path in a rectangular form ..... Regards Elise Dishy Peiris > -----Original Message----- > From: David Dennard [SMTP:daviddennard hotmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, December 12, 1999 4:54 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Whirlpower News > > Hi folks, > > Been out and about on other lists still trying to find data on whirlpools > and help in building one. No whirlpools found so far. We have build a > small one on the Whirlpower List in England that demonstrated a wide > whirlpool with a small vortex in the center, (similar in appearance to a > hurricane with its small eye wall in the center or similar in appearance > to > the spiral galaxy), does in fact with very little water going through my > feedback loop design concept move the water in the entire tank. For those > > of you that know my set up this is in the area I call the torus donut, not > > to be confused with torid flow of the vortex itself. > > A small but important step forward for Whirlpower. > > I have also begun to introduce another form of Whirlpower in search of any > > prior work or data. That is how my research on Whirlpower started. I saw > a > whirlpool in my dream so I began to look for whirlpools. Found many a > vortex but no whirlpool and now several vortex experts have joined the > Whirlpower Team because they too know of no such data. > > My next search I will combine with my old from now on and I am looking for > > what I think should be a simple and most common physics experiment. I > have > search and asked many time without results. If any of you know of > something > please let me know, here or join my list. > > I am looking for data of a top being spun on a turntable. I have found a > few about a ball being spun but still no top. I picture the wobble that > occurs at the bottom of the top being able to turn the turntable. We know > > people have tried to tap the top wobble of a gyro. Has anyone tried to > tap > the bottom wobble of a top? > > I am putting together a press release to announce my research discoveries > and lack of data found curiousities and asking for any and all interested > to > build a whirlpool and test it scientifically if still do data can be > found. > Same for the top. I will pass this release through this list as it goes > out > in case any may wish to add a brief positive comment. Not expecting a > whole > lot of support since this list has had well over a year to consider > Whirlpower and has shown virtually no interest. Can't really understand > why > anyone would not be interested in seeing the first whirlpool ever built by > > man but it seems very few have any curiousity in this area. Maybe some > will > be curious about a top on a turntable. It seems it should be the most > common physics experiment; not one with no data found. And I think the > same > about the whirlpool. > > David Dennard > http://www.whirlpower.cc > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 07:43:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA05692; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:42:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:42:23 -0800 Message-ID: <3855127D.4CDBFD4C verisoft.com.tr> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:36:29 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3854CC91.A735B72E@verisoft.com.tr> <008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26@fjsparber> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FAIUw1.0.sO1.UFHLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32120 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: hamdi ucar > To: > Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 2:38 AM > Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? > > Hamdi wrote: > > > > > > > Frederick Sparber wrote: > > > > > > While perusing the literature on open-ended transmission lines, scope > > > pictures of the the first "echo" pulse, occuring two microseconds after the initial pulse > > > on a clean 300 meter long line is about 43% greater in amplitude than the initial pulse. > > > > > > Subsequent echo pulses are of lessor amplitude due to line losses. > > > > > > Strange. Isn't Power equal to V^2/Z? :-) > > > > > > Regards, Frederick > > > > Yes, but on the open end of an transmission line, impedance would be greater than its > characteristic impedance, if not infinite. I had written a good HP-41C routine for playing this > stuff. > > I don't think the impedance (Z) would exceed the 377 ohms of space, Hamdi. The least > change in Z on the transmission line can cause total reflection of a fast pulse. Why, space impedance is a limit? No antenna like configuration here. I need to look source source for more precise answers. > I use my Hp-41C every day and the batteries have lasted since I bought it in 1986. :-) Ones of my mine are died. I need to bought some new rechargebles. > > BTW, I have an experiment setup on my bench, still running, is a simple one xistor oscillator > driving an long single layered coil from one end, as an antenna. What is interesting here when > tuned fine, the oscillator running at 92 MHz, approx. sinusoidal output, but on the other end of > the coil there is a clean 46 MHz, driving a single 3 turns terminated by a LED. Oscillator > consume 200mW, and it appear some tens of miliwats are received by the LED at 1/2 harmonic!, not > the 2'nd harmonic :). Isn't it unusual? > > At 92 MHz with coils, nothing surprises me. Yes, this appears as a rule, but it might be worth to take some camera shots from scope of (49 MHz, nearly perfect sinusoidal) and post here just for a memory. Note that I retuned the oscillator and it run at 98 MHz now, drawing 9 mA at 13.6V. The long coil behave as a transmission line. It develops standing waves (magnetic and electrical nodes) along, phase change 180 degrees with 5 cm distance. Length of the coil is about 33 cm (not 33 mm's:) ) It is sad that I need to disassemble this setup some time in following days, and may never to reproduce it again, although it appears really simple setup. > > Regards, Frederick > > Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 07:50:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08864; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:48:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:48:31 -0800 Message-ID: <38551537.30B09918 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:48:07 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3854CC91.A735B72E@verisoft.com.tr> <008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26@fjsparber> <00a501bf4582$631eef60$e6441d26@fjsparber> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fucjL2.0.QA2.ELHLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32121 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yes, Frederick you are right. It appears rectifying. No 1/2 freq without LED. Coil at resonance perfectly reshape the half wave signal to perfect sinus. Thanks. Frederick Sparber wrote: > > > Hamdi wrote: > > > > BTW, I have an experiment setup on my bench, still running, is a simple one xistor oscillator > > driving an long single layered coil from one end, as an antenna. What is interesting here when > > tuned fine, the oscillator running at 92 MHz, approx. sinusoidal output, but on the other end > > of the coil there is a clean 46 MHz, driving a single 3 turns terminated by a LED. Oscillator > > consume 200mW, and it appear some tens of miliwats are received by the LED at 1/2 harmonic!, > > not the 2'nd harmonic :). Isn't it unusual? > > Not if the LED (a diode) is rectifying the wave. > > Regards, Frederick Regards, hamdi From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 07:59:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA12688; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:58:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:58:16 -0800 Message-ID: <00c301bf458b$361e7680$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3854CC91.A735B72E@verisoft.com.tr> <008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26@fjsparber> <3855127D.4CDBFD4C@verisoft.com.tr> Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 08:57:54 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"XCWrR1.0.663.OUHLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32122 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: hamdi ucar To: Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 7:36 AM Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Hamdi wrote: > > Why, space impedance is a limit? No antenna like configuration here. I need to look source source for more precise answers. The impedance of space is (uo/eo)^1/2 = 377 ohms, except near a mass (Black Hole, Star, Planet or Particle/Particle Field) or "in" an EM wave. Regards, Frederick > > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 09:03:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA04519; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:01:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:01:45 -0800 Message-ID: <00db01bf4594$13090da0$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 10:00:02 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"2kto91.0.V61.vPILu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32123 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A quote from an authoritative source: "When the field waves strike an open circuit the magnetic field Must Become Zero because the current is zero. The energy that was conveyed by the magnetic field cannot be dissipated, so it will appear as additional energy in the electric field, causing an INCREASED VOLTAGE to appear." Going by this the reflected pulse should have a greater voltage than the initial pulse. However, on a totally lossless line where the pulse returns to an open circuit at the input end, the voltage should increase too. Thus once started the pulse shuttling back and forth on a lossless line open at both ends should increase in voltage indefinitely. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 09:19:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12227; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:16:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:16:13 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:17:15 -0600 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991213092430.0079bd30 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991210114931.0079e6b0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas Malloy Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell Resent-Message-ID: <"fdbp2.0.y-2.TdILu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32124 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Thomas Malloy wrote: > >>I'm suspicious of Dr. Mills. I assume you know that he is a MD? > >Yes, but not all doctors are suspicious. I agree, I never discriminate based on what a person studied in graduate school. However, not all MD's have develped a new theory of matter. What makes me suspicious of Randall Mills is that the first time I heard him interviewed he was going on about how he was going to eliminate all the fossil fuel powered electrical generating plants. This interview was distributed on the McProtest emailing list. There are lots of environmentalist types who subscribe to that list. Any time someone starts telling a group of people: that they have developed a new source of energy, and slants it a way that appeals to the particular crowd that they are talking to, it raises red flags. I believe I have mentioned Stan Meyers' on this forum. God had helped him discovere a new source of energy, with which to save America, and we (the crowd) could help him by investing $5000 in a distributorship. Now Randall has moved on to developing a new class of chemicals that are going to revloutionize the battery industry. As far as i know, Randall has never demonstrated excess energy production. If his operation is a house of cards, it has reached the point where we won't have to wait much longer. > > >>I'm pleased to see subjects like the efficacy of prayer discussed on this >>forum. I think that it is highly germain to a discussion of how the >>universe works. > >I am not pleased. Thats because in conflicts with your paradigm of how the universe works. If prayer contributes to the operation of the universe, I >suppose it works in a way that cannot be measured with the tools of >science. Unless prayer produces results which can be measured by double blind studies. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 09:26:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17048; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:24:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:24:44 -0800 Message-ID: <00e501bf4597$48d414e0$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Jed's Suspicion of Doctors Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 10:23:33 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"AOxKA1.0.IA4.SlILu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32125 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: FWIW, Jed, There's a Chiropractor up the road; "Dr. L. Bender" is the name on his shingle. If you want I can get you an appointment. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 09:42:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA23531; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:41:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:41:42 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 10:45:12 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Jed's Suspicion of Doctors In-reply-to: <00e501bf4597$48d414e0$e6441d26 fjsparber> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912131742.KAA20225 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"7oupr1.0.bl5.M_ILu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32126 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:23 AM 12/13/99 -0800, you wrote: >FWIW, Jed, > > There's a Chiropractor up the road; > >"Dr. L. Bender" is the name on his shingle. > >If you want I can get you an appointment. :-) > >Regards, Frederick > And in case of the worst case scenario when you go, there is always the Jolley funeral home in Sturgis, SD. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 10:29:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA07810; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 10:27:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 10:27:35 -0800 Message-ID: <010501bf45a0$0be1e220$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <199912131742.KAA20225 smtp.asu.edu> Subject: Re: Jed's Suspicion of Doctors Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:26:59 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"4EwRS3.0.xv1.NgJLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32127 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Lynn Kurtz To: Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 9:45 AM Subject: Re: Jed's Suspicion of Doctors Lynn wrote: > At 10:23 AM 12/13/99 -0800, you wrote: > >FWIW, Jed, > > > > There's a Chiropractor up the road; > > > >"Dr. L. Bender" is the name on his shingle. > > > >If you want I can get you an appointment. :-) > > > >Regards, Frederick > > > > And in case of the worst case scenario when you go, there is always the > Jolley funeral home in Sturgis, SD. It's not that bad, Lynn. eL Bender can straighten Jed out and put him in Shape (so to speak) in nothing Flat. Regards, Frederick > > --Lynn > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 10:34:08 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA10281; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 10:32:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 10:32:57 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991213122929.01e30744 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 12:29:29 -0600 To: Mizuno Tadahiko From: Scott Little Subject: high voltage effects Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"u6Rka2.0.UW2.PlJLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32128 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Tadahiko, I have been experimenting with voltages greater than 200. I have discovered a problem with the teflon coating on the cathode lead wire. At the higher power levels associated with high voltages, the teflon burns away rapidly exposing more of the lead wire. The exposed wire then gets incandescent and more of the teflon burns away, etc, etc. At 250 volts, I can only operate the cell for a few minutes before the teflon coating burns away dangerously close to the surface of the electrolyte. As you probably know, if the plasma discharge reaches the surface of the electrolyte the H2 and O2 gas above the electrolyte will be ingited and the cell explodes! I would like to find a more heat resistant material for the lead wire. I have ordered some ceramic tubing for this purpose. It will be here in a few days. Do you have any suggestions? Best Regards, 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 Dec 13 11:21:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA28005; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:19:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:19:19 -0800 Message-Id: <4.1.19991213111105.00a784a0 pop3.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:13:54 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Ross Tessien Subject: Re: high voltage effects Cc: little eden.com In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991213122929.01e30744 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"RwFpx2.0.Ur6.tQKLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32129 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott: I copied you directly in addition to vortex so that you would read this. Be careful with teflon burning, the gases evolved are hazardous. Some sort of nerve gas as I recall (I used to manufacture sintered teflon cables, and now and then the production line would stop and some teflon could overheat and give off fumes. It was definitely to be avoided. I doubt you have very much, so it probably isn't a very big deal. But all the same, have a fan or something outside of the cell to disipate any fumes you might form and release. rt At 12:29 PM 12/13/99 -0600, you wrote: >Dear Tadahiko, > >I have been experimenting with voltages greater than 200. I have >discovered a problem with the teflon coating on the cathode lead wire. At >the higher power levels associated with high voltages, the teflon burns >away rapidly exposing more of the lead wire. The exposed wire then gets >incandescent and more of the teflon burns away, etc, etc. > >At 250 volts, I can only operate the cell for a few minutes before the >teflon coating burns away dangerously close to the surface of the >electrolyte. As you probably know, if the plasma discharge reaches the >surface of the electrolyte the H2 and O2 gas above the electrolyte will be >ingited and the cell explodes! > >I would like to find a more heat resistant material for the lead wire. I >have ordered some ceramic tubing for this purpose. It will be here in a >few days. > >Do you have any suggestions? > >Best Regards, > > > >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 Dec 13 11:50:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA05912; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:49:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:49:18 -0800 Message-ID: <012601bf45ab$78161320$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: high voltage effects Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 12:48:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"QueXz3.0.GS1.zsKLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32130 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, With 300 volts 9.0 amperes you should be able to instantly Hard Anodize Aluminum wire or tubing, merely by making it the positive anode and slowly dipping it into dilute H2SO4 or possibly even the electrolyte you're using for the experiments. I recommend one hand in your pocket and a rubber glove on the other and Safety Goggles if you try this. The ~1.5 mill anodize will stand off kilovolts at high temperatures. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 12:45:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA23626; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 12:42:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 12:42:06 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991213143853.01895aa0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:38:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Scott Little Subject: Re: high voltage effects In-Reply-To: <012601bf45ab$78161320$e6441d26 fjsparber> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"fKU4N.0.2n5.TeLLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32131 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks for the caution, Ross. Never hurts to tell me to be careful. At 12:48 PM 12/13/99 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: >Scott, > >With 300 volts 9.0 amperes you should be able to instantly >Hard Anodize Aluminum wire or tubing, merely by making it >the positive anode and slowly dipping it into dilute H2SO4 or >possibly even the electrolyte you're using for the experiments. I would then put the anodized aluminum wire into service as the cathode lead in this experiment and it seems like the oxide coating might be quickly reduced away by the cathodic conditions.... >I recommend one hand in your pocket and a rubber glove on the other >and Safety Goggles if you try this. No kidding. This new power supply is ominous. 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 Dec 13 13:16:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA27476; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 13:13:24 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 13:13:24 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991213161030.0079e510 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 16:10:30 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: high voltage effects In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991213122929.01e30744 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"r1vli1.0.5j6.m5MLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32132 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Wall had the same problem. I don't know where Mizuno got his Teflon, but as I mentioned, he shrink wrapped it with a blowtorch! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 13:23:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA29246; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 13:21:44 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 13:21:44 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <013a01bf45b7$ffff0ce0$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991213143853.01895aa0 mail.eden.com> Subject: Re: high voltage effects Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:18:27 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"IBFee.0.u87.bDMLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32133 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott Little To: ; Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 12:38 PM Subject: Re: high voltage effects Scott wrote: > Thanks for the caution, Ross. Never hurts to tell me to be careful. > > At 12:48 PM 12/13/99 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > >Scott, > > > >With 300 volts 9.0 amperes you should be able to instantly > >Hard Anodize Aluminum wire or tubing, merely by making it > >the positive anode and slowly dipping it into dilute H2SO4 or > >possibly even the electrolyte you're using for the experiments. > > I would then put the anodized aluminum wire into service as the cathode > lead in this experiment and it seems like the oxide coating might be > quickly reduced away by the cathodic conditions.... I was thinking more in terms of Anodizing an Aluminum tube that could be used as a bushing in place of ceramic tubing. this way you could crimp the unanodized portion to the Tungsten wire. Should be good up to near the melting point of the Aluminum. > > >I recommend one hand in your pocket and a rubber glove on the other > >and Safety Goggles if you try this. > > No kidding. This new power supply is ominous. > Regards, Frederick > > 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 Dec 13 13:44:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12554; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 13:35:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 13:35:15 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991213163028.00850500 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 16:30:28 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: high voltage effects + FUOs In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991213161030.0079e510 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991213122929.01e30744 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"u_MBz3.0._33.JQMLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32134 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:10 PM 12/13/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Ed Wall had the same problem. I don't know where Mizuno got his Teflon, but >as I mentioned, he shrink wrapped it with a blowtorch! > >- Jed There are various temperature grades of Teflon. BTW, more importantly, the fever that results from its gaseous state inhaled by people is called "toxic fume fever" but appears as a fever, usually, of (so-called) unknown origin (a "FUO"). Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 14:01:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20417; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:00:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:00:02 -0800 Message-ID: <19991213220000.99417.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.131] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Whirlpower News Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:00:00 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"-oAYf2.0.w-4.YnMLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32135 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Elise writes: > David Dennard saying "I saw a whirlpool in my dream so I began to >look for whirlpools" has given me a strong enough push to come out, albeit >self-consciously. Good for you Elise!! Most men dream of things that are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask, why not? > > I'm not a scientist or doing any research, but the insights I have >been getting are in line with what your experiments, David. Your work with >water seems so simple and yet so right. Yes , but that simplicity and rightness has gotten my butt kicked all over the www. Many list have enjoyed laughing, putting me down, cat calls, even down right dirty curses; why? Because I ask the questions no one can answer. Do we see any report of a whirlpool being built and tested scientifically or of a top being spun on a turntable on this list? Not yet. But we also see no interest in testing. That is the strange part. More than likely almost everyone on this list has the means and ability to do it, but don't because they can't accept it could be so simple. The answer to them has to be some sort of high tech extremely complicated thing that involves toxic chemicals or fancy magnetic arrays. It just can't be as simple as a whirlpool. If it was someone would have already figured it out. But how could they if a whirlpool has never been built or drawn or theorized before? So I am announcing the Whirlpower Team has built the first whirlpool ever built by man. How long long it takes before man even understands what that means? History will show a very interesting story about it all I have a feeling. The stillness at the center of any >thing is somehow consciousness or immortality -- as long as it is there, >the >form exists; as long as the form exists, it is there. The spin creates the >form and is the form. And the vortex is also associated with death (or >life?) in the sense of beckoning and inducing transformation. And the pattern runs throughout everything in nature. And that pattern in the whirlpool, the hurricane, the spiral galaxy is said in everything I can find scientifically stated as most mysterious. I seems only simple common sense to build a whirlpool and test it. Why it hasn't been done before I cannot understand. It has got to be the largest gap in scientific exploration of all time. Something else >which I vaguely feel should have some association with all of this (only >because it arose in my mind at about the same time as the other thoughts) >is >this series which always resolves to completion, and gives the idea of >cycles or wholes forming more cycles or wholes, etc. > > * 2(2n -1) + (2n) + 2(2n +1) = 10n > > And this figure *** which, someone told me, is the most efficient >energy path in a rectangular form ..... I think this pattern will be found to relate to what is called the "cosmic chord". A pattern in the precession of the wobble, within the wobble, within the wobble, wheels, within wheels, within wheels. Thank you Elise, for these thoughtful comments. David Dennard http://www.whirlpower.cc > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Dennard [SMTP:daviddennard hotmail.com] > > Sent: Sunday, December 12, 1999 4:54 PM > > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > > Subject: Whirlpower News > > > > Hi folks, > > > > Been out and about on other lists still trying to find data on >whirlpools > > and help in building one. No whirlpools found so far. We have build a > > small one on the Whirlpower List in England that demonstrated a wide > > whirlpool with a small vortex in the center, (similar in appearance to a > > hurricane with its small eye wall in the center or similar in appearance > > to > > the spiral galaxy), does in fact with very little water going through my > > feedback loop design concept move the water in the entire tank. For >those > > > > of you that know my set up this is in the area I call the torus donut, >not > > > > to be confused with torid flow of the vortex itself. > > > > A small but important step forward for Whirlpower. > > > > I have also begun to introduce another form of Whirlpower in search of >any > > > > prior work or data. That is how my research on Whirlpower started. I >saw > > a > > whirlpool in my dream so I began to look for whirlpools. Found many a > > vortex but no whirlpool and now several vortex experts have joined the > > Whirlpower Team because they too know of no such data. > > > > My next search I will combine with my old from now on and I am looking >for > > > > what I think should be a simple and most common physics experiment. I > > have > > search and asked many time without results. If any of you know of > > something > > please let me know, here or join my list. > > > > I am looking for data of a top being spun on a turntable. I have found >a > > few about a ball being spun but still no top. I picture the wobble that > > occurs at the bottom of the top being able to turn the turntable. We >know > > > > people have tried to tap the top wobble of a gyro. Has anyone tried to > > tap > > the bottom wobble of a top? > > > > I am putting together a press release to announce my research >discoveries > > and lack of data found curiousities and asking for any and all >interested > > to > > build a whirlpool and test it scientifically if still do data can be > > found. > > Same for the top. I will pass this release through this list as it goes > > out > > in case any may wish to add a brief positive comment. Not expecting a > > whole > > lot of support since this list has had well over a year to consider > > Whirlpower and has shown virtually no interest. Can't really understand > > why > > anyone would not be interested in seeing the first whirlpool ever built >by > > > > man but it seems very few have any curiousity in this area. Maybe some > > will > > be curious about a top on a turntable. It seems it should be the most > > common physics experiment; not one with no data found. And I think the > > same > > about the whirlpool. > > > > David Dennard > > http://www.whirlpower.cc > > > > ______________________________________________________ > > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 14:12:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA23879; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:10:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:10:07 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991213160701.0103aa14 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 16:07:01 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: high voltage effects In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991213161030.0079e510 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991213122929.01e30744 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"wazRl2.0.1r5._wMLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32136 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:10 PM 12/13/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Ed Wall had the same problem. I don't know where Mizuno got his Teflon, but >as I mentioned, he shrink wrapped it with a blowtorch! I saw that on the video! Following his lead, I tried the same method on my tubing and it works great! Previously, I had to really dwell FOREVER on each cm of length to get the electric heat gun to shrink this stuff. With a propane torch you can actually keep the TFE-FEP tubing in the far flame and just run along the wire shrinking as you go. So I think my shrink tubing is quite similar to Mizuno's. Yet it still dies when the white-hot W gets to it. It's a little odd that, at lower voltages, the shrink tubing seems to last nearly forever. However, above about 200v, it is burned/melted away rapidly. Indeed the W sheet is noticeably hotter at the 200+ voltages. The cell power exceeds 300 watts, too! Mizuno has mentioned using more dilute electrolytes at higher voltages. Today, I tried a 1/4th strength solution (i.e. 0.05M) and the cell still drew about 300 watts at 250 volts. Maybe I should try a smaller sheet of W. Fred: The Al tube would still be connected to the W cathode and immersed in the electrolyte (the anode in this cell is all Pt). Thus the anodized Al would see cathodic conditions. Wouldn't that "eat off" the oxide coating? 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 Dec 13 14:21:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26929; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:18:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:18:53 -0800 Message-ID: <015c01bf45c0$5fd20520$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991213122929.01e30744 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991213160701.0103aa14@mail.eden.com> Subject: Re: high voltage effects Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 15:18:23 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"LRJC_1.0.ga6.C3NLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32137 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott Little To: ; Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 2:07 PM Subject: Re: high voltage effects Scott wrote: > Fred: > > The Al tube would still be connected to the W cathode and immersed in the > electrolyte (the anode in this cell is all Pt). Thus the anodized Al > would see cathodic conditions. Wouldn't that "eat off" the oxide coating? > Yes, I see that now. I wasn't watching close enough to see that you need insulation down through the electrolyte. In that case the ceramic tubes would be a better choice. I have had some success "painting" on Dental Cement and heating it. Regards, Frederick > > > 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 Dec 13 17:33:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA07772; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:32:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:32:25 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <004b01bf45d2$1d902d60$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991210153040.007bb860 world.std.com><3.0.6.32.19991210205414.007ae5f0@pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991212155354.007b3b80@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free of bugs Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:25:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"4MKMt1.0.5v1.euPLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32139 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > That is a myth. [Re: Mussolini getting the trains to run on time.] I'm sure there are plenty of revisionist historians who would take either side of that claim. From a moral perspective, however, the only relevence is whether Mussolini getting the trains to run on time *would* have justified the loss of liberty associated with his facsist rule. The question being, does mere "effectiveness" of government to accomplish certain ends justify the infringement of liberties in the process. Advocates of brutarian power always answer in the affirmative. The more refined and modern social engineers have to really really like the outcome before they will throw liberties willynilly to the wayside. I suppose that is progress. > Anyway, governments are supposed to do things like monitor health care > accidents. Who else can, or will? No other institution has the authority to > demand the data from the doctors. "Governments are suppose to..." statements remain arbitrary assertions unless a fundamental moral authority can be demonstrated. In the specific question, insurance companies have a long history of providing exactly that kind of service, and they have a powerful economic interest to minimize accidents, monitor behavior, collect and publish data, and advise and inform clients. There isn't a drop of initial coercion required. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 17:35:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA07072; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:32:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:32:10 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <003b01bf45cf$49d1db60$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1@ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> <3854044F.2ED6@ca-ois.com> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:05:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"ugFwJ2.0.Ik1.PuPLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32138 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > Nearly everyone antes up, except for a few reluctant stragglers. The few > reluctant stragglers get beat up. These are "victims". They did NOT > volunteer, like everyone else. > > Everyone else, however, submitted VOLUNTARILY. They are not victims. > They are willing participants in the tyranny of the School Yard Bully. Actually, the ones beaten up weren't victims either, by your logic, since they didn't fight to the death, which was clearly a choice, but they submitted, instead, at some incremental but clearly not unbearable pain. But I think we get the general idea of your morality. I say that the action justifies the reaction -- that which is imposed upon you may be rightly returned in kind. You say that the reaction justifies the action -- anything may be done to anyone, retroactively justified if there is a failure to forfeit one's life in response. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 17:36:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA11356; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:35:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:35:24 -0800 Message-ID: <3855A0A7.6FE1 ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:43:04 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News References: <19991213220000.99417.qmail hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dLnVr2.0.Mn2.SxPLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32140 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David Dennard wrote: > > Do we see any report of a whirlpool being built and tested scientifically or > of a top being spun on a turntable on this list? Not yet. But we also see > no interest in testing. That is the strange part. More than likely almost > everyone on this list has the means and ability to do it, but don't because > they can't accept it could be so simple. Can't accept that *what*, specifically, is so simple? Naturally occurring whirlpools, such as hurricanes, are solar powered. Other whirlpools, such as those found in bathtub drains, are gravity powered. I do not understand how any O/U power could be obtained by creating a whirlpool by means of either of these methods. I would be interested in building a whirlpool, perhaps, if you could explain what the point of such an exercise would be. Are you alleging that there is some configuration of a whirlpool that would result in more power output than is input in order to keep it running? Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 17:54:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12337; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:52:05 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:52:05 -0800 (PST) X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <005701bf45d5$6a3d0e00$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <3853D321.1C146BE7@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:49:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"PeYnc3.0.Z03.0BQLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32141 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Taylor (Jack) J. Smith wrote: > By retaining U.S. citizenship, we voluntarily agree to uphold > the fundamental American social contract The arbitrariness of "social contract" advocacy is manifest in the cross political spectrum of those invoking it to justify their own arbitrary values. "Social contract" is regularly invoked by socialists and communists in their calls for the individual to submit to the will of the collective. And of course, how could it be other than arbitrary. In contrast to my moral assertion that the action justifies the reaction, we have previously seen a claimant assert that the reaction justifies the action. Now we have the "social contract" assertion that claims that geographical location justifies the action and defines and limits the reaction. But invoking the geographical proximity requirement of "social contract" doesn't begin to specify in a non-arbitrary way who the social contract is actually between and what the terms of the contract could possibly be, or for that matter how anyone could be bound to a life-and-death contractual outcome that is nowhere defined, nor ever explicitly agreed to. Everyone, instead, simply fills in the blanks as is convenient for their particular philosophy. Almost invariably, advocates of "social contract" invoke the "majority" as ultimate arbiter. And thus once again we are faced with the same historical attrocities of the majority against the minority. The Mormon were driven out of state after state under threat of extermination -- clearly right and proper under social contract majoritarianism. The history of the world is filled with minorites being expelled or exterminated if they stayed -- after all, under social contract majoritarianism, by staying, they "volunteered" to be put to death (suicided) -- as that was the will of the majority if they did not vacate the geographic vicinity when the majority whimmed it. They had a contractual obligation to die or leave. Purely voluntary -- or so goes the social contract theory. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 17:52:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA19334; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:51:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:51:33 -0800 Message-Id: <4.1.19991213170422.00a707c0 pop3.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:05:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Ross Tessien Subject: Re: high voltage effects In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991213143853.01895aa0 mail.eden.com> References: <012601bf45ab$78161320$e6441d26 fjsparber> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"0_b801.0.sj4.aAQLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32142 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kapton is another high temp insulation with higher temp than teflon as I recall. Just be careful because I guess it cracks (recent show on problems with airplane wiring brought this out, and with exposure to the electrolyte that might not be such a great thing. Good luck. rt At 02:38 PM 12/13/99 -0600, you wrote: >Thanks for the caution, Ross. Never hurts to tell me to be careful. > >At 12:48 PM 12/13/99 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: >>Scott, >> >>With 300 volts 9.0 amperes you should be able to instantly >>Hard Anodize Aluminum wire or tubing, merely by making it >>the positive anode and slowly dipping it into dilute H2SO4 or >>possibly even the electrolyte you're using for the experiments. > >I would then put the anodized aluminum wire into service as the cathode >lead in this experiment and it seems like the oxide coating might be >quickly reduced away by the cathodic conditions.... > >>I recommend one hand in your pocket and a rubber glove on the other >>and Safety Goggles if you try this. > >No kidding. This new power supply is ominous. > > > >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 Dec 13 18:11:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA16072; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 18:09:16 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 18:09:16 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991214095912.008d3430 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 09:59:12 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? In-Reply-To: <38551537.30B09918 verisoft.com.tr> References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3854CC91.A735B72E verisoft.com.tr> <008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <00a501bf4582$631eef60$e6441d26 fjsparber> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ktuCI1.0.2x3.ARQLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32143 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hamdi wrote: > >Frederick Sparber wrote: >> >>Hamdi wrote: >>> >>>BTW, I have an experiment setup on my bench, still running, is a simple >>>one xistor oscillator driving an long single layered coil from one end, >>>as an antenna. What is interesting here when tuned fine, the oscillator >>>running at 92 MHz, approx. sinusoidal output, but on the other end of >>>the coil there is a clean 46 MHz, driving a single 3 turns terminated >>>by a LED. Oscillator consume 200mW, and it appear some tens of miliwats >>>are received by the LED at 1/2 harmonic!, not the 2'nd harmonic :). >>>Isn't it unusual? >> >> Not if the LED (a diode) is rectifying the wave. > >Yes, Frederick you are right. It appears rectifying. No 1/2 freq without >LED. Coil at resonance perfectly reshape the half wave signal to perfect >sinus. Thanks. It still seems strange to me to obtain 1/2 freq - even with a rectifying or non-linear element present. Maybe Fredrick could explain how it works? I would understand frequency doubling in this situation. I might also understand period doubling (= frequency halving) if a system is close to chaos, but it is hard to see how that applies here ? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 18:55:08 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA14949; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 18:53:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 18:53:14 -0800 Message-ID: <3855B926.BED ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:27:34 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1@ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> <3854044F.2ED6@ca-ois.com> <003b01bf45cf$49d1db60$0101a8c0@joh n> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"oO0Nz3.0.Qf3.Q4RLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32144 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ohn Logajan wrote: > > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > Nearly everyone antes up, except for a few reluctant stragglers. The few > > reluctant stragglers get beat up. These are "victims". They did NOT > > volunteer, like everyone else. > > > > Everyone else, however, submitted VOLUNTARILY. They are not victims. > > They are willing participants in the tyranny of the School Yard Bully. > > Actually, the ones beaten up weren't victims either, by your logic, > since they didn't fight to the death, which was clearly a choice, but they > submitted, instead, at some incremental but clearly not unbearable pain. > To the contrary. Whether or not they submitted was not specified, and need not be. They are victims because they resisted and got beat up. All the others submitted and supported the bully voluntarily, offering no resistance whatsoever. Therefore, those who resisted have moral authority over those who submitted and suffered nothing, and advanced the bully's agenda. > But I think we get the general idea of your morality. Do you? I doubt it. I don't think you have a clue about my morality. > > I say that the action justifies the reaction -- that which is imposed > upon you may be rightly returned in kind. I don't know about this. If someone accidentally gets hit by a car, is the accident victim then justified in hitting the offender with a car? This isn't justice, it's revenge. I'm glad we don't live under a system designed by you. > > You say that the reaction justifies the action -- anything may be > done to anyone, retroactively justified if there is a failure to > forfeit one's life in response. I never said anything of the sort. I tried to explain the basics of the common law, the first precept of which is: You can't hurt anyone. Those who suffer from the actions of the unjust have moral authority over those who suffer nothing, but rather voluntarily support the actions of the unjust. Those so suffering have what is called "Honor". Those who forfeit their lives in resistence to tyrrany have the greater Honor. Those who submit having suffered nothing do not demonstrate anything honorable at all. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 18:57:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA16538; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 18:55:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 18:55:11 -0800 Message-ID: <018001bf45e6$f810abe0$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber><3854CC91.A735B72E@verisoft.com.tr><008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26@fjsparber><00a501bf4582$631eef60$e6441d26@fjsparber> <3.0.6.32.19991214095912.008d3430@cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:54:41 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"gB4d02.0.K24.F6RLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32145 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: John Winterflood To: Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 5:59 PM Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? John Winterflood wrote: > > It still seems strange to me to obtain 1/2 freq - even with a rectifying > or non-linear element present. Maybe Fredrick could explain how it > works? I would understand frequency doubling in this situation. I might > also understand period doubling (= frequency halving) if a system is close > to chaos, but it is hard to see how that applies here ? > > Any half wave rectifier will halve the number of pulses thus "frequency", right? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 19:13:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24737; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:12:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:12:23 -0800 Message-ID: <3855B577.904E4AB3 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 05:11:51 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3854CC91.A735B72E verisoft.com.tr> <008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <00a501bf4582$631eef60$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3.0.6.32.19991214095912.008d3430@cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"k7Xbi2.0.R26.NMRLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32146 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yes, You are also right. If I had drew a diagram before, I had to see it. The period of the half cut signal does not change. A diode could not pass one full wave and block the subsequent. Half wave rectifying could not produce 1/2 harmonics and possibly any no n linear component on a circuit. Frederick, what is your suggestion? Do you need some more figures? hamdi ucar John Winterflood wrote: > > Hamdi wrote: > > > >Frederick Sparber wrote: > >> > >>Hamdi wrote: > >>> > >>>BTW, I have an experiment setup on my bench, still running, is a simple > >>>one xistor oscillator driving an long single layered coil from one end, > >>>as an antenna. What is interesting here when tuned fine, the oscillator > >>>running at 92 MHz, approx. sinusoidal output, but on the other end of > >>>the coil there is a clean 46 MHz, driving a single 3 turns terminated > >>>by a LED. Oscillator consume 200mW, and it appear some tens of miliwats > >>>are received by the LED at 1/2 harmonic!, not the 2'nd harmonic :). > >>>Isn't it unusual? > >> > >> Not if the LED (a diode) is rectifying the wave. > > > >Yes, Frederick you are right. It appears rectifying. No 1/2 freq without > >LED. Coil at resonance perfectly reshape the half wave signal to perfect > >sinus. Thanks. > > It still seems strange to me to obtain 1/2 freq - even with a rectifying > or non-linear element present. Maybe Fredrick could explain how it > works? I would understand frequency doubling in this situation. I might > also understand period doubling (= frequency halving) if a system is close > to chaos, but it is hard to see how that applies here ? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 19:18:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA23874; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:16:31 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:16:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <19991214031307.18088.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.139] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:13:07 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"yvg5O1.0.rq5.7QRLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32147 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim writes: >Can't accept that *what*, specifically, is so simple? That a whirlpool is a gravity driven system that can be built in such a way as to generate electricity. > >Naturally occurring whirlpools, such as hurricanes, are solar powered. PBS just announced this year, "that almost everything thought to be true about the vortex has been shown to be false and that science needed to back to the drawing board and start all over". Part of the thermodynamic falacy is that heat causes evaporation or that heat is driving the hurricane or that heat is driving the spin of the galaxies. The ABC NEWS Transcript posted at my website explains the work done by noted Astrophysicists Vera Rubin showing the old way of seeing things is %90 wrong. Joe Frimage has just come out on record saying the Big Bang Theory is "unintended science fiction". The thermodynamic paradigm is on the way out. In the latest PBS science series, "Life Beyond Earth" they state Einstein was wrong and the galaxies are spinning due to "density waves". The hurricane is said to be the most mysterious event in nature. It has the power of an atomic bomb going off every second. There not enough heat in the entire ocean to explain the power of the hurricane. >Other whirlpools, such as those found in bathtub drains, are gravity >powered. The bathtub drain is not a whirlpool. It is a simple vortex. A whirlpool happens in a river bend or in the ocean when conditions are right. In my setup I combine the river eddy and the bathtub drain vortex to make the compound vortex. There is no data anywhere that this has ever been done before by man. I do not understand how any O/U power could be obtained by >creating a whirlpool by means of either of these methods. Not o/u, gravitational ZPE. Overunity is a more effecient use of energy. ZPE is energy by gravity in the absense of heat at absolute zero. >I would be interested in building a whirlpool, perhaps, if you could >explain what the point of such an exercise would be. Are you alleging >that there is some configuration of a whirlpool that would result in >more power output than is input in order to keep it running? Yes, and I would appreciate your help. We have a lot of new data up on my list and you can see the test of principle models by Curt Hallberg of Viktor Schauberger's Vortex World in Sweden and Jean-Louis Naudin of JLN Labs in France, both members of the Whirlpower Team. The point is to harness the "cosmic chord" of the whirlpool, which comes from "The Force" of gravity causing the torid flow of compound vortex to wobble. This wobble action drags the area around the vortex causing current in the torus donut. You can see Dutch Physicist Edward Maesen's explaination linked from my website and easily read my list or join. But really it just takes the common sense to see that a whirlpool should and needs to be built by science to provide data on the pattern that science calls most mysterious, that of the hurricane and the spiral galaxy. Not to mention being able to supply science with full data on the whirlpool. The the real point is this will provide our planet with an infinite amount of clean energy in a very simple and easy system that almost anyone will be able to use with no high tech gizmos or high tech expense. Tesla said, "one day man will connect his machinery to the very wheelwork of nature". I believe Whirlpower is the "wheelwork of nature". You can put it down with science dogma if you want but untill whirlpool is built and tested, dogma just won't do. Same with the top on a turntable. It should be the most common physics experiment. Where is it? Show me the data? David Dennard The Gravity Paradigm http://www.whirlpower.cc ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 19:22:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA28071; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:19:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:19:58 -0800 Message-ID: <3855B73E.A3072B3D verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 05:19:26 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber><3854CC91.A735B72E@verisoft.com.tr><008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26@fjsparber><00a501bf4582$631eef60$e6441d26@fjsparber> <3.0.6.32.19991214095912.008d3430@cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <018001bf45e6$f810abe0$e644 1d26 fjsparber> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Zlz4S3.0.Ss6.UTRLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32148 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber wrote: > > John Winterflood wrote: > > > > It still seems strange to me to obtain 1/2 freq - even with a rectifying > > or non-linear element present. Maybe Fredrick could explain how it > > works? I would understand frequency doubling in this situation. I might > > also understand period doubling (= frequency halving) if a system is close > > to chaos, but it is hard to see how that applies here ? > > > > > Any half wave rectifier will halve the number of pulses thus "frequency", right? Tricky ! It "halve the number of pulses" *relative* to full wave rectifying. Full wave rectifying double the frequency, but half way left same. > > Regards, Frederick Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 19:27:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA30314; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:26:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:26:46 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.65f7bcf3.258712e9 aol.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 22:26:33 EST Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell To: vortex-L eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 56 Resent-Message-ID: <"-GJeK3.0.UP7.sZRLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32149 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:44:08 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote, re Mills: <<...I would suggest that if he is right about "hydrinos," then he is a genius of the first magnitude, and is entitled to be proud of what he has done.>> Yes. MJ continued: <> Just dozens of employees so far. According to the BLP website, the plan is to raise that number to about 125 over the next two years. So, Mitchell, what do you think of Mills' work? Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 19:32:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA32289; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:31:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:31:05 -0800 Message-ID: <3855C2D0.4557 ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 20:08:49 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169@ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <3853D321.1C146BE7@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <005701bf45d5$6a3d0e00$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"uPdlN3.0.Ru7.udRLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32150 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > Taylor (Jack) J. Smith wrote: > > By retaining U.S. citizenship, we voluntarily agree to uphold > > the fundamental American social contract > > The arbitrariness of "social contract" advocacy is manifest > in the cross political spectrum of those invoking it to justify > their own arbitrary values. "Social contract" is regularly invoked > by socialists and communists in their calls for the individual > to submit to the will of the collective. > Yes. Good observation, John. > And of course, how could it be other than arbitrary. In contrast > to my moral assertion that the action justifies the reaction, we > have previously seen a claimant assert that the reaction justifies > the action. This claimant asserted no such thing. See my previous message where you made this argument.. (snip) > The history of the world is filled with minorites being > expelled or exterminated if they stayed -- after all, under > social contract majoritarianism, by staying, they "volunteered" > to be put to death (suicided) -- as that was the will of the > majority if they did not vacate the geographic vicinity when the > majority whimmed it. They had a contractual obligation to > die or leave. Purely voluntary -- or so goes the social > contract theory. > Good knockdown of the social contract theory, John. However, being forcibly evicted from one's rightfull home does not mean that the evictee surrendered his property voluntarily. Such evictions as were suffered by Mormons were forced at gunpoint or so I understand. There is no dishonor in leaving in such a situation. In the present situation, it does not appear that leaving is an option, however. The tyranny resulting from a global conspiracy would appear to leave the options of confrontation vs death. We may have to be confrontational. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 19:40:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA03152; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:40:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:40:09 -0800 Message-ID: <01BF45A2.248CA9C0 istf-1-48.ucdavis.edu> From: Dan Quickert To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:42:03 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BF45A2.248CA9C0" Resent-Message-ID: <"iblI43.0.An.PmRLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32151 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BF45A2.248CA9C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Frederick Sparber wrote: >Any half wave rectifier will halve the number of pulses thus = "frequency", right? Wait a minute - while I hesitate to dispute the word of Regular Posters, = this looks incorrect to me. I believe that a full-wave bridge rectifier will double frequency, and a = half-wave will leave frequency alone. In the half-wave, one side of the waveform is clipped off (speaking = graphically). That half of the waveform becomes flat - it does not = contain a rising-to-falling transition.=20 In ascii, original waveform (2 cycles represented): /\ /\ \/ \/ half-wave rectification: /\__/\__ The original waveform goes from positive-negative-positive-negative; = with half-wave rectification it becomes positive-zero-positive-zero. = That's not a frequency change, by my count. A full-wave bridge rectifier *inverts* one half of the wave. So = positive-negative-positive-negative becomes = positive-zero-positive-zero-positive-zero-positive-zero, like this: original: /\ /\ \/ \/ full-wave: /\/\/\/\ Dan Quickert ------ =_NextPart_000_01BF45A2.248CA9C0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IggDAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAqAEAAAEAAAARAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAADAHE6AAAAAB4A9l8BAAAAFAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AAgH3XwEAAABFAAAAAAAAAIErH6S+oxAZnW4A3QEPVAIAAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1v LmNvbQBTTVRQAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20AAAAAAwD9XwEAAAADAP9fAAAAAAIB9g8BAAAA BAAAAAAAAAK4VgEEgAEAJQAAAFJFOiBUcmFuc21pc3Npb24gTGluZSBaUEUgRXh0cmFjdG9yPwDN DAEFgAMADgAAAM8HDAANABMAKgADAAEAMAEBIIADAA4AAADPBwwADQATABgAIAABADsBAQmAAQAh AAAAMEU2MjE2MUJEMkIxRDMxMTk5MTE1QUZCMEEwMDAwMDAA3AYBA5AGAFgGAAAiAAAACwACAAEA AAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5ADDCjS/lRb8BHgBw AAEAAAAlAAAAUkU6IFRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBMaW5lIFpQRSBFeHRyYWN0b3I/AAAAAAIBcQABAAAA FgAAAAG/ReUvgxsWYhOx0hHTmRFa+woAAAAAAB4AHgwBAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAfDAEAAAAX AAAAZGVxdWlja2VydEB1Y2RhdmlzLmVkdQAAAwAGEBfCTacDAAcQRwMAAB4ACBABAAAAZQAAAEZS RURFUklDS1NQQVJCRVJXUk9URTpBTllIQUxGV0FWRVJFQ1RJRklFUldJTExIQUxWRVRIRU5VTUJF Uk9GUFVMU0VTVEhVUyJGUkVRVUVOQ1kiLFJJR0hUP1dBSVRBTUlOVVQAAAAAAgEJEAEAAAAXAwAA EwMAAHkFAABMWkZ1pjLLm3cACgEDAfcgAqQD4wIAY4JoCsBzZXQwIAcTvwKDAFAEVQ9ZCFUCgH0K gIkIyCA7CW8yNTUCgNkKgXVjAFALA2MAQQtgQG5nMTAzMwumIGZGCXEGcWNrBgAKsWKJBJAgdwNg dGU6CqIHCoQVYg/gPkFueSAJD4BsZhfgYXZlIPkJcGN0BpAIkRfgAxADIJMZoRoRdGgaIG51BtDF F8FvGdBwdWwPsAQglRuQdQQgIgNQZXEKUCBuY3kiLBowaWe4aHQ/GFwVEwqAVwtwUQVAYSBtC4B1 GCAg2i0X4GgDEBogSRmQB5CFH9BhIGF0byBkBABXHHAhkhuhdwWwZBwyUoxlZxyACsFQb3MYIC8P oB3gG5AEACAJAG9rvwQgC4AFoRpCIbIHgC4YVHshEBewbAiQG2MhgB/xZikcgGwtGfNiBRBkZ/0a L2QIYAJgKFAdRx3gAHD/IuAgABmiJ6Qa4yDgGgIdR/sf8AkAbiXWJfUDoBuSKuf7HeAs8SAAkAEA HDIicxoBWQIQcm0k4AQgYyaQcG5wCYAcMRnQKCIQK+BrSQuAZyAJwGFwIMBjgQdAbHkpLiBUJwLf GaMvrhewBaAHgmYLYAVA7yCQH9EpYAeRbhgQMMACIV8LcR/xBRAAkBXgLSHALfZmMqEx8nQyQACB GnACIMsy8C2XYQTwaWku8R4BpwuAB0AwCCgyMMB5MNB7B5EJcHAJcA+wAjAJgCmDGEsAQCAvXFwg PVL3GFQ9kD1wLz5DLToq6BpFzzKQOIIYRT1hX19Bgy063zzVD+AzEC+BOf9nNeIDUq8cYCPAOHEa EC0tAGdAwftF0UV/OxrRG5Aq2UBLNZJ7NLZGl3oEkDeASksy9Ce/NgQnQSxHD3EV4C7hYhmAvm1N YQhgAjAtKxhUQSdfnRo5KguAGhAAIHMqLwP7M24y8FMh0EafRo9QgUnf30rvV39YiR3gJpBrG3IE AP88bkO2QRg9mQrzPZA+XxhyT1AHQRhgV07PCkQDkVF+dRcxUfEYVQExLUkScQABZIAAAwAQEAAA AAADABEQAAAAAB4AQhABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAADAIAQ/////0AABzDg/Sq94kW/AUAACDDg/Sq94kW/ AQsAAIAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAOFAAAAAAAAAwABgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAA EIUAAAAAAAADAAKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAABShQAA8xUAAB4AA4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAA AABGAAAAAFSFAAABAAAABQAAADguMDQAAAAAAwAEgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAAYUAAAAA AAALAAWACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAOhQAAAAAAAAMABoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAA ABGFAAAAAAAAAwAHgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAGIUAAAAAAAAeAAiACCAGAAAAAADAAAAA AAAARgAAAAA2hQAAAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAHgAJgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAN4UAAAEAAAAB AAAAAAAAAB4ACoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAADiFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAeAD0AAQAAAAUA AABSRTogAAAAAAMADTT9NwAAZHI= ------ =_NextPart_000_01BF45A2.248CA9C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 20:42:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA23542; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 20:41:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 20:41:15 -0800 Message-ID: <01bd01bf45f5$c75677a0$e6441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <01BF45A2.248CA9C0 istf-1-48.ucdavis.edu> Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 21:40:29 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"7LaxZ2.0.Wl5.ffSLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32152 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Dan Quickert To: Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 7:42 PM Subject: RE: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? Dan wrote: Frederick Sparber wrote: >Any half wave rectifier will halve the number of pulses thus "frequency", right? Wait a minute - while I hesitate to dispute the word of Regular Posters, this looks incorrect to me. I believe that a full-wave bridge rectifier will double frequency, and a half-wave will leave frequency alone. Dern, Dan, I goofed on that one. :-) In the half-wave, one side of the waveform is clipped off (speaking graphically). That half of the waveform becomes flat - it does not contain a rising-to-falling transition. In ascii, original waveform (2 cycles represented): /\ /\ \/ \/ half-wave rectification: /\__/\__ The original waveform goes from positive-negative-positive-negative; with half-wave rectification it becomes positive-zero-positive-zero. That's not a frequency change, by my count. A full-wave bridge rectifier *inverts* one half of the wave. So positive-negative-positive-negative becomes positive-zero-positive-zero-positive-zero-positive-zero, like this: original: /\ /\ \/ \/ full-wave: /\/\/\/\ Back to the drawing board, Hamdi. :-) Regards, Frederick Dan Quickert From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 21:13:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA04468; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 21:10:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 21:10:38 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:10:32 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <97jb5s417jb4p98jd9kat8pi8529toi9a7 4ax.com> References: <19991214031307.18088.qmail hotmail.com> In-Reply-To: <19991214031307.18088.qmail hotmail.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--=_8akb5soqkppe2rf328ajrfth61rqppapoi.MFSBCHJLHS" Resent-Message-ID: <"omy6k1.0.b51.D5TLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32153 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----=_8akb5soqkppe2rf328ajrfth61rqppapoi.MFSBCHJLHS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:13:07 PST, David Dennard wrote: [snip] >In the latest PBS science series, "Life Beyond Earth" they state = Einstein=20 >was wrong and the galaxies are spinning due to "density waves". The=20 >hurricane is said to be the most mysterious event in nature. It has the= =20 >power of an atomic bomb going off every second. There not enough heat = in=20 >the entire ocean to explain the power of the hurricane. I have attached a small Mathcad document, wherein I calculate that a Hurricane that has a power of 34 Ktons of TNT /sec (i.e. about 1.5 times the power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, every second) would extract=20 heat from *the water under the eye of the hurricane* at a rate such that = the temperature of the water would drop about 3.8 =B0C / hour (1 =B0K =3D 1 = =B0C). And this is only if all the energy is actually extracted from the wind, which of course doesn't happen, hence the temperature need not even drop that fast. (If you have Mathcad, you can play with the size of the Hurricane to your hearts delight ;). (I'm not really very happy with the power calculation, but it yields a figure roughly as quoted above, so I'll leave it for the moment). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk ----=_8akb5soqkppe2rf328ajrfth61rqppapoi.MFSBCHJLHS Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=Hurricane.mcd Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=Hurricane.mcd Lk1DQUQgMzA2MDAwMDAwDAAAAAEAAABaAAAACgAAAAEAAgAAAAtkb2NEb2N1bWVudAQAAAAAADwA AAAIbWNPYmplY3QAAAAAAABJAAAA/////woAAAAKAAAAYQAAAGEAAAAJKAMHAwACAAAAD2QyX2dy YXBoX2Zvcm1hdAAAAAAAABEAAAAJZ3JhcGhEYXRhAAAAAAAAFgAAAAAAAAACAwAAAAEAAAAVAAAA DwAAAAAAAAABAAEAAAAKYXhpc0Zvcm1hdAAAAAAAABoAAABMAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAEaTAEAAAAB AAAAAAAAAAAAAQABAAAAB3RyYWNlMkQAAAAAAAAXAAAAAQAfDwEBFwIBHwIBFwMCHwMBFwQDHwQB FwEEHwUBFwIFHwYBFwMGHwcBFwQAHwgBFwEBHwkBFwICHwoBFwMDHwsBFwQEHwwBFwEFHw0BFwIG Hw4BFwMAHw8BFwQBHwAEAAEAAAAKZGltX2Zvcm1hdAAAAAAAAEMAAAAIAAAABG1hc3MGbGVuZ3Ro BHRpbWUGY2hhcmdlC3RlbXBlcmF0dXJlCmx1bWlub3NpdHkJc3Vic3RhbmNlAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAB AAAAD051bWVyaWNhbEZvcm1hdAAAAAAAAEAAAABkaWkDAAAAMwEAAAYAAAADAAAAAAAAAAEBAAEA AAAHc2hwUmVjdAAAAAAAAEUAAABUAQAA8wAAAP0BAAAnAQAAAQABAAAAFW1jRG9jdW1lbnRPYmpl Y3RTdGF0ZQAAAAAAAEoAAADwAAAAtAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABf////8GAAABAAAAAAEAAAALbWNQYWdl TW9kZWwAAAAAAAA6AAAAAJqZmT8AAIA+AAAAAJqZmT0BAAEAAAAObWNIZWFkZXJGb290ZXIAAAAA AAA5AAAAAAAAAAMAAAACAAE5AAAAAAEAAAACAAEAAQAAAA1Db21wdXRlRW5naW5lAAAAAAAAPQAA AAEAAQAAAAhCdWlsdElucwIAAAAAAEIAAAABAAAAHQEAAAEAAQAAAAxTZXJpYWxBbnl2YWwAAAAA AABIAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAABBAHgEAAAFASAEAAAAAAAAAAAAgQB8BAAABQEgBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAg AQAAAUBIAQAAAPyp8dJNYlA/IQEAAAFASAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAQAAAAt1bml0c19jbGFzcwAA AAAAAEEAAAAEAAAAAQABAAAACVRleHRTdGF0ZQAAAAAAADAAAAAGAAEAAAAJVGV4dFN0eWxlAAAA AAAALwAAAAJACgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABUFyaWFsAAcAAAAADk5vcm1hbAAAAAAA AAAAAAEAAAAA//////////+AAQABAAAAD2ZvbnRfc3R5bGVfbGlzdAAAAAAAAD4AAAARAAAAAQAB AAAACmZvbnRfc3R5bGUAAAAAAAA/AAAA8P////P///8KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAA/////wAAAAABCVZhcmlhYmxlcw9UaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4BP/D////z////CgAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP////8AAAAAAQlDb25zdGFudHMPVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuAT/w ////8////woAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/////AAAAAAEEVGV4dAVBcmlhbAE/ 8P////P///8KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAAAA/////wAAAAABD0dyZWVrIFZhcmlh YmxlcwZTeW1ib2wBP/D////z////CgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP////8AAAAA AQZVc2VyXjEFQXJpYWwBP/D////z////CgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP////8A AAAAAQZVc2VyXjILQ291cmllciBOZXcBP/D////w////CgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAP////8AAAAAAQZVc2VyXjMGU3lzdGVtAT/w////8////woAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAP8AAAD/////AAAAAAEGVXNlcl40BlNjcmlwdAE/8P////P///8KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAD/AAAA/////wAAAAABBlVzZXJeNQVSb21hbgE/8P////P///8KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/AAAA/////wAAAAABBlVzZXJeNgZNb2Rlcm4BP/D////z////CgAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP////8AAAAAAQZVc2VyXjcPVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuAT/w//// 8////woAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIAAAD/////AAAAAAEHU3ltYm9scwZTeW1ib2wB P/D////w////CgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP////8AAAAAARZDdXJyZW50IFNl bGVjdGlvbiBGb250BUFyaWFsAT/f////3////xQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/ ////AAAAAAEOVW5kZWZpbmVkIEZvbnQAAT/w////8P///woAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAD/////AAAAAAEGSGVhZGVyBUFyaWFsAT/w////8P///woAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAD/////AAAAAAEGRm9vdGVyBUFyaWFsAT/w////8////woAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/////AQAAAAERUm90YXRlZCBNYXRoIEZvbnQPVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuOAAA AAcAAgAAAAhlcVJlZ2lvbgIAAAAAADMAAAAJZG9jUmVnaW9uAQAAAAAANwAAAAEAAQAAAAZzaHBC b3gAAAAAAABEAAAAygMAAAgAAAAhBAAAIwAAAOkDAAAeAAAAAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAACAABAAAA BHRyZWUFAAAAAAAxAAAADXAAAAAAAAkxC8EAAIAICjECDwAAZAkAAAQDQmFyCzEGygAAgAkMMQX8 AABACw0xAg8AAHQMAAADAQIxMA4xAg8AALQMAAACAQE1DzECDwAApAsAAAMCUGEAAAAAAAAAABAz AUBEOAQAAAMAAAC3BAAAMQAAAG0EAAAeAAAAAAAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAETENcAAAAAAAEjELwQAA gBETMQIPAABkEgAABgVjbV9IZxQxBsoAAIASFTECDwAAZBQAAAYFaW5fSGcWMQf7AACAFBcxAg8A AGQWAAADAmNtGDECDwAApBYAAAMCaW4AAAAAAAAAABkzAUBEVAYAAAgAAAC+BgAAIwAAAHMGAAAe AAAAAAAAAC4AAAAAAAAAAAAAGjENcAAAAAAAGzELwQAAgBocMQIPAABkGwAAAwJBVR0xBsoAAIAb HjEGygAAQB0fMQIPAAB0HgAAAwECOTMgMQX8AACAHiExAg8AAHQgAAADAQIxMCIxAg8AALQgAAAC AQE2IzECDwAApB0AAAMCbWkAAAAAAAAAACQzAUBECgAAAA0AAACKAAAAOwAAABoAAAAoAAAAAAAA AAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAJTENcAAAAAAAJjELwQAAgCUnMQIPAABkJgAAAgFjKDEGygAAgCYpMQIPAAB0 KAAACgEJMjk5NzkyNDU4KjEH+wAAgCgrMQIPAABkKgAAAgFtLDECDwAApCoAAAQDc2VjAAAAAAAA AAAtMwFARJYAAAASAAAASwEAAC0AAACtAAAAKAAAAAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAC4xDXAAAAAAAC8x C8EAAIAuMDECDwAAZC8AAAMCY2UxMQbKAACALzIxBsoAAEAxMzECDwAAdDIAAAsBCjEuNjAyMTc3 MzM0MQX8AACAMjUxAg8AAHQ0AAADAQIxMDYxlUsAAIA0ADcxAg8AALQ2AAADAQIxOTgxAg8AAKQx AAAFBGNvdWwAAAAAAAAAADkzAUBE4AEAABIAAACHAgAALQAAAPsBAAAoAAAAAAAAAAUAAAAAAAAA AAAAOjENcAAAAAAAOzELwQAAgDo8MQIPAABkOwAAAwJtZT0xBsoAAIA7PjEGygAAQD0/MQIPAAB0 PgAACgEJOS4xMDkzODk3QEAxBfwAAIA+QEExAg8AAHRAQAAAAwECMTBAQjGVSwAAgEBAAEBDMQIP AAC0QEIAAAMBAjMxQEQxAg8AAKQ9AAADAmtnAAAAAAAAAABARTMBQESUAgAAEgAAACMDAAAtAAAA qQIAACgAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAAAABARjENcAAAAAAAQEcxC8EAAIBARkBIMQIPAABkQEcAAAMC XGFASTEGygAAgEBHQEoxAg8AAHRASQAACwEKNy4yOTczNTMwOEBLMQX8AACAQElATDECDwAAdEBL AAADAQIxMEBNMZVLAACAQEsAQE4xAg8AALRATQAAAgEBMwAAAAAAAAAAQE8zAUBEKgMAABIAAACk AwAALQAAAFMDAAAoAAAAAAAAAAcAAAAAAAAAAAAAQFAxDXAAAAAAAEBRMQvBAACAQFBAUjECDwAA ZEBRAAAEA01lVkBTMQbKAACAQFFAVDEGygAAQEBTQFUxBfwAAEBAVEBWMQIPAAB0QFUAAAMBAjEw QFcxAg8AALRAVQAAAgEBNkBYMQIPAACkQFQAAAMCY2VAWTECDwAApEBTAAAFBHZvbHQAAAAAAAAA AEBaMwFAROwEAAASAAAAXwUAAC0AAAATBQAAKAAAAAAAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAEBbMQ1wAAAAAABA XDELwQAAgEBbQF0xAg8AAGRAXAAABQRxdWFkQF4xBsoAAIBAXEBfMQX8AABAQF5AYDECDwAAdEBf AAADAQIxMEBhMQIPAAC0QF8AAAMBAjE1QGIxAg8AAKRAXgAABANCVFUAAAAAAAAAAEBjMwFARO4C AAAsAAAAPwMAAEEAAAAJAwAAPAAAAAAAAAAKAAAAAAAAAAAAAEBkMQ1wAAAAAABAZTELwQAAgEBk QGYxAg8AAGRAZQAAAwJlVkBnMQbKAACAQGVAaDECDwAAZEBnAAADAmNlQGkxAg8AAKRAZwAABQR2 b2x0AAAAAAAAAABAajMBQERIAwAALAAAAKQDAABBAAAAbwMAADwAAAAAAAAACwAAAAAAAAAAAABA azENcAAAAAAAQGwxC8EAAIBAa0BtMQIPAABkQGwAAAQDa1doQG4xBsoAAIBAbEBvMQIPAABkQG4A AAMCa1dAcDECDwAApEBuAAADAmhyAAAAAAAAAABAcTMBQETKAwAAIQAAABcEAABPAAAA6AMAADwA AAAAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAAAABAcjENcAAAAAAAQHMxC8EAAIBAckB0MQIPAABkQHMAAAMCbUJAdTEH +wAAgEBzQHYxAg8AAGRAdQAABANCYXJAdzECDwAAtEB1AAAFAQQxMDAwAAAAAAAAAABAeDMBQEQ4 BAAAJgAAAJ4EAABBAAAAUQQAADwAAAAAAAAADQAAAAAAAAAAAABAeTENcAAAAAAAQHoxC8EAAIBA eUB7MQIPAABkQHoAAAMCbkZAfDEGygAAgEB6QH0xAg8AAGRAfAAABgVmYXJhZEB+MQX8AACAQHxA fzECDwAAdEB+AAADAQIxMECAMZVLAACAQH4AQIExAg8AALRAgAAAAgEBOQAAAAAAAAAAQIIzAUBE CgAAADoAAADNAAAAVQAAABoAAABQAAAAAAAAAA4AAAAAAAAAAAAAQIMxDXAAAAAAAECEMQvBAACA QINAhTECDwAAZECEAAACAWhAhjEGygAAgECEQIcxBsoAAEBAhkCIMQbKAABAQIdAiTECDwAAdECI AAAKAQk2LjYyNjA3NTVAijEF/AAAgECIQIsxAg8AAHRAigAAAwECMTBAjDGVSwAAgECKAECNMQIP AAC0QIwAAAMBAjM0QI4xAg8AAKRAhwAABgVqb3VsZUCPMQIPAACkQIYAAAQDc2VjAAAAAAAAAABA kDMBQETcAAAAOgAAAIoBAABVAAAA/gAAAFAAAAAAAAAADwAAAAAAAAAAAABAkTENcAAAAAAAQJIx C8EAAIBAkUCTMQIPAABkQJIAAAQDYW11QJQxBsoAAIBAkkCVMQbKAABAQJRAljECDwAAdECVAAAK AQkxLjY2MDU0MDJAlzEF/AAAgECVQJgxAg8AAHRAlwAAAwECMTBAmTGVSwAAgECXAECaMQIPAAC0 QJkAAAMBAjI3QJsxAg8AAKRAlAAAAwJrZwAAAAAAAAAAQJwzAUBERAIAADUAAADpAgAAYwAAAFUC AABQAAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQJ0xDXAAAAAAAECeMQvBAACAQJ1AnzECDwAAZECeAAACAWtA oDEGygAAgECeQKExBsoAAEBAoECiMQIPAAB0QKEAAAkBCDEuMzgwNjU4QKMxBfwAAIBAoUCkMQIP AAB0QKMAAAMBAjEwQKUxlUsAAIBAowBApjECDwAAtEClAAADAQIyM0CnMQf7AACAQKBAqDECDwAA ZECnAAAGBWpvdWxlQKkxAg8AAKRApwAAAgFLAAAAAAAAAABAqjMBQEQoBQAAOgAAAMAFAABVAAAA TgUAAFAAAAAAAAAAPQAAAAAAAAAAAABAqzENcAAAAAAAQKwxC8EAAIBAq0CtMQIPAABkQKwAAAUE bW9sZUCuMQbKAACAQKxArzECDwAAdECuAAAKAQk2LjAyMjEzNjdAsDEF/AAAgECuQLExAg8AAHRA sAAAAwECMTBAsjECDwAAtECwAAADAQIyMwAAAAAAAAAAQLMzAUBEkAEAAEQAAAA4AgAAXwAAAKwB AABaAAAAAAAAABEAAAAAAAAAAAAAQLQxDXAAAAAAAEC1MQvBAACAQLRAtjECDwAAZEC1AAADAm1w QLcxBsoAAIBAtUC4MQbKAABAQLdAuTECDwAAdEC4AAAKAQkxLjY3MjYyMzFAujEF/AAAgEC4QLsx Ag8AAHRAugAAAwECMTBAvDGVSwAAgEC6AEC9MQIPAAC0QLwAAAMBAjI3QL4xAg8AAKRAtwAAAwJr ZwAAAAAAAAAAQL8zAUBE7gIAAEQAAABBAwAAXwAAAAIDAABaAAAAAAAAABIAAAAAAAAAAAAAQMAx DXAAAAAAAEDBMQvBAACAQMBAwjECDwAAZEDBAAACAcVAwzEGygAAgEDBQMQxBfwAAEBAw0DFMQIP AAB0QMQAAAMBAjEwQMYxlUsAAIBAxABAxzECDwAAtEDGAAADAQIxMEDIMQIPAACkQMMAAAIBbQAA AAAAAAAAQMkzAUBEUgMAAEQAAACjAwAAXwAAAGQDAABaAAAAAAAAABMAAAAAAAAAAAAAQMoxDXAA AAAAAEDLMQvBAACAQMpAzDECDwAAZEDLAAACAUZAzTEGygAAgEDLQM4xBfwAAEBAzUDPMQIPAAB0 QM4AAAMBAjEwQNAxlUsAAIBAzgBA0TECDwAAtEDQAAADAQIxNUDSMQIPAACkQM0AAAIBbQAAAAAA AAAAQNMzAUBEfgQAAEQAAAD5BAAAXwAAAJoEAABaAAAAAAAAABQAAAAAAAAAAAAAQNQxDXAAAAAA AEDVMQvBAACAQNRA1jECDwAAZEDVAAAEA2JibEDXMQbKAACAQNVA2DECDwAAdEDXAAAJAQgwLjE1 ODk4N0DZMQX8AACAQNdA2jECDwAAZEDZAAACAW1A2zECDwAAtEDZAAACAQEzAAAAAAAAAABA3DMB QES2AwAATgAAAGwEAABpAAAA4AMAAGQAAAAAAAAAFQAAAAAAAAAAAABA3TENcAAAAAAAQN4xC8EA AIBA3UDfMQIPAABkQN4AAAUETXRvbkDgMQbKAACAQN5A4TEGygAAQEDgQOIxAg8AAHRA4QAACQEI NC4xNzMwNTBA4zEF/AAAgEDhQOQxAg8AAHRA4wAAAwECMTBA5TECDwAAtEDjAAADAQIxNUDmMQIP AACkQOAAAAYFam91bGUAAAAAAAAAAEDnMwFARAoAAABiAAAAsQAAAH0AAAAlAAAAeAAAAAAAAAAW AAAAAAAAAAAAAEDoMQ1wAAAAAABA6TELwQAAgEDoQOoxAg8AAGRA6QAAAwJtbkDrMQbKAACAQOlA 7DEGygAAQEDrQO0xAg8AAHRA7AAACgEJMS42NzQ5Mjg2QO4xBfwAAIBA7EDvMQIPAAB0QO4AAAMB AjEwQPAxlUsAAIBA7gBA8TECDwAAtEDwAAADAQIyN0DyMQIPAACkQOsAAAMCa2cAAAAAAAAAAEDz MwFARL4AAABdAAAAfgEAAIsAAADQAAAAeAAAAAAAAAAXAAAAAAAAAAAAAED0MQ1wAAAAAABA9TEL wQAAgED0QPYxAg8AAGRA9QAAAwJcZUD3MQbKAACAQPVA+DEGygAAQED3QPkxAg8AAHRA+AAADAEL OC44NTQxODc4MTdA+jEF/AAAgED4QPsxAg8AAHRA+gAAAwECMTBA/DGVSwAAgED6AED9MQIPAAC0 QPwAAAMBAjEyQP4xB/sAAIBA90D/MQIPAABkQP4AAAYFZmFyYWRBADECDwAApED+AAACAW0AAAAA AAAAAEEBMwFAROQCAABiAAAATAMAAH0AAAAKAwAAeAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAEECMQ1wAAAA AABBAzELwQAAgEECQQQxAg8AAGRBAwAAAwJNV0EFMQbKAACAQQNBBjEF/AAAQEEFQQcxAg8AAHRB BgAAAwECMTBBCDECDwAAtEEGAAACAQE2QQkxAg8AAKRBBQAABQR3YXR0AAAAAAAAAABBCjMBQERc AwAAaAAAAMIDAAB9AAAAcwMAAHgAAAAAAAAAGQAAAAAAAAAAAABBCzENcAAAAAAAQQwxC8EAAIBB C0ENMQIPAABkQQwAAAMCa0pBDjEGygAAgEEMQQ8xAg8AAHRBDgAABQEEMTAwMEEQMQIPAACkQQ4A AAYFam91bGUAAAAAAAAAAEERMwFARFAFAABoAAAAwgUAAH0AAABzBQAAeAAAAAAAAAAaAAAAAAAA AAAAAEESMQ1wAAAAAABBEzELwQAAgEESQRQxAg8AAGRBEwAAAwJHV0EVMQbKAACAQRNBFjECDwAA dEEVAAAFAQQxMDAwQRcxAg8AAKRBFQAAAwJNVwAAAAAAAAAAQRgzAUBE3AUAAGgAAABJBgAAfQAA AP0FAAB4AAAAAAAAABsAAAAAAAAAAAAAQRkxDXAAAAAAAEEaMQvBAACAQRlBGzECDwAAZEEaAAAD AlRXQRwxBsoAAIBBGkEdMQIPAAB0QRwAAAUBBDEwMDBBHjECDwAApEEcAAADAkdXAAAAAAAAAABB HzMBQESQAQAAZwAAACgCAACbAAAArwEAAIIAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAABBIDENcAAAAAAAQSEx C8EAAIBBIEEiMQIPAABkQSEAAAUEXG0ub0EjMQbKAACAQSFBJDEGygAAQEEjQSUxBsoAAEBBJEEm MQIPAAB0QSUAAAIBATRBJzECDwAApEElAAADAlxwQSgxBfwAAIBBJEEpMQIPAAB0QSgAAAMBAjEw QSoxlUsAAIBBKABBKzECDwAAtEEqAAACAQE3QSwxB/sAAIBBI0EtMQIPAABkQSwAAAcGbmV3dG9u QS4xBfwAAIBBLEEvMQIPAABkQS4AAAQDYW1wQTAxAg8AALRBLgAAAgEBMgAAAAAAAAAAQTEzAUBE MAIAAGEAAADeAgAAmwAAAEECAACCAAAAAAAAAB0AAAAAAAAAAAAAQTIxDXAAAAAAAEEzMQvBAACA QTJBNDECDwAAZEEzAAADAlxnQTUxBsoAAIBBM0E2MQbKAABAQTVBNzECDwAAdEE2AAAIAQc2LjY3 MjU5QTgxBfwAAIBBNkE5MQIPAAB0QTgAAAMBAjEwQToxlUsAAIBBOABBOzECDwAAtEE6AAADAQIx MUE8MQf7AACAQTVBPTEF/AAAQEE8QT4xAg8AAGRBPQAAAgFtQT8xAg8AALRBPQAAAgEBM0FAMQbK AACAQTxBQTECDwAAZEFAAAADAmtnQUIxBfwAAIBBQEFDMQIPAABkQUIAAAQDc2VjQUQxAg8AALRB QgAAAgEBMgAAAAAAAAAAQUUzAUBE6AMAAGcAAABMBAAAmwAAAA8EAACCAAAAAAAAAB4AAAAAAAAA AAAAQUYxDXAAAAAAAEFHMQvBAACAQUZBSDECDwAAZEFHAAAEA1ROVEFJMQf7AACAQUdBSjECDwAA ZEFJAAAFBE10b25BSzEGygAAgEFJQUwxAg8AAGRBSwAABAN0b25BTTEF/AAAgEFLQU4xAg8AAHRB TQAAAwECMTBBTzECDwAAtEFNAAACAQE2AAAAAAAAAABBUDMBQERWBAAAawAAAKcEAACfAAAAbQQA AIwAAAAAAAAAHwAAAAAAAAAAAABBUTENcAAAAAAAQVIxC8EAAIBBUUFTMQIPAABkQVIAAAMCQ2lB VDEH+wAAgEFSQVUxBsoAAEBBVEFWMQIPAAB0QVUAAAMBAjM3QVcxBfwAAIBBVUFYMQIPAAB0QVcA AAMBAjEwQVkxAg8AALRBVwAAAgEBOUFaMQIPAACkQVQAAAQDc2VjAAAAAAAAAABBWzMBQESwBAAA cQAAAP4EAACfAAAAzwQAAIwAAAAAAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAABBXDENcAAAAAAAQV0xC8EAAIBBXEFe MQIPAABkQV0AAAMCbUFBXzEH+wAAgEFdQWAxAg8AAGRBXwAABANhbXBBYTECDwAAtEFfAAAFAQQx MDAwAAAAAAAAAABBYjMBQEQABQAAcQAAAEwFAACfAAAAHQUAAIwAAAAAAAAAIQAAAAAAAAAAAABB YzENcAAAAAAAQWQxC8EAAIBBY0FlMQIPAABkQWQAAAQDXG1BQWYxB/sAAIBBZEFnMQIPAABkQWYA AAMCbUFBaDECDwAAtEFmAAAFAQQxMDAwAAAAAAAAAABBaTMBQEQKAAAAgAAAAFYAAACbAAAAHQAA AJYAAAAAAAAAIgAAAAAAAAAAAABBajENcAAAAAAAQWsxC8EAAIBBakFsMQIPAABkQWsAAAMCXG1B bTEGygAAgEFrQW4xBfwAAEBBbUFvMQIPAAB0QW4AAAMBAjEwQXAxlUsAAIBBbgBBcTECDwAAtEFw AAACAQE2QXIxAg8AAKRBbQAAAgFtAAAAAAAAAABBczMBQETcAAAAgAAAACMBAACbAAAA9gAAAJYA AAAAAAAAIwAAAAAAAAAAAABBdDENcAAAAAAAQXUxC8EAAIBBdEF2MQIPAABkQXUAAAMCSHpBdzEF /AAAgEF1QXgxAg8AAGRBdwAABANzZWNBeTGVSwAAgEF3AEF6MQIPAAC0QXkAAAIBATEAAAAAAAAA AEF7MwFARO4CAACAAAAATwMAAJsAAAAWAwAAlgAAAAAAAAAkAAAAAAAAAAAAAEF8MQ1wAAAAAABB fTELwQAAgEF8QX4xAg8AAGRBfQAABANNSHpBfzEGygAAgEF9QYAxBfwAAEBBf0GBMQIPAAB0QYAA AAMBAjEwQYIxAg8AALRBgAAAAgEBNkGDMQIPAACkQX8AAAMCSHoAAAAAAAAAAEGEMwFARFAFAACA AAAAswUAAJsAAABrBQAAlgAAAAAAAAAlAAAAAAAAAAAAAEGFMQ1wAAAAAABBhjELwQAAgEGFQYcx Ag8AAGRBhgAAAwJuQUGIMQbKAACAQYZBiTEF/AAAQEGIQYoxAg8AAHRBiQAAAwECMTBBizGVSwAA gEGJAEGMMQIPAAC0QYsAAAIBATlBjTECDwAApEGIAAAEA2FtcAAAAAAAAAAAQY4zAUBELAEAAIoA AACKAQAApQAAAFEBAACgAAAAAAAAACYAAAAAAAAAAAAAQY8xDXAAAAAAAEGQMQvBAACAQY9BkTEC DwAAZEGQAAAEA0dIekGSMQbKAACAQZBBkzEF/AAAQEGSQZQxAg8AAHRBkwAAAwECMTBBlTECDwAA tEGTAAACAQE5QZYxAg8AAKRBkgAAAwJIegAAAAAAAAAAQZczAUBEZgMAAIUAAACnAwAAswAAAIcD AACgAAAAAAAAACcAAAAAAAAAAAAAQZgxDXAAAAAAAEGZMQvBAACAQZhBmjECDwAAZEGZAAAEA3Jw bUGbMQf7AACAQZlBnDECDwAAZEGbAAADAkh6QZ0xAg8AALRBmwAAAwECNjAAAAAAAAAAAEGeMwFA RFoAAACPAAAA0wAAAOUAAACEAAAAqgAAAAAAAAAoAAAAAAAAAAAAAEGfMQ1wAAAAAABBoDELwQAA gEGfQaExEs4AAEBBoEGiMQIPAABkQaEAAAMCXGJBozGOcAAAgEGhAEGkMQIPAACkQaMAAAIBdkGl MQf7AACAQaBBpjECDwAAdEGlAAACAQExQacxmnsAAIBBpQBBqDGIxwAAgEGnQakxAg8AAHRBqAAA AgEBMUGqMQX8AACAQahBqzGOcAAAQEGqAEGsMQf7AACAQatBrTECDwAAZEGsAAACAXZBrjECDwAA pEGsAAACAWNBrzECDwAAtEGqAAACAQEyAAAAAAAAAABBsDMBQESkAQAAjwAAAPYBAAC9AAAAxwEA AKoAAAAAAAAAKQAAAAAAAAAAAABBsTENcAAAAAAAQbIxC8EAAIBBsUGzMQIPAABkQbIAAAMCbVdB tDEH+wAAgEGyQbUxAg8AAGRBtAAABQR3YXR0QbYxAg8AALRBtAAABQEEMTAwMAAAAAAAAAAAQbcz AUBEJgIAAJoAAACeAgAArwAAAEwCAACqAAAAAAAAACoAAAAAAAAAAAAAQbgxDXAAAAAAAEG5MQvB AACAQbhBujECDwAAZEG5AAAEA0dlVkG7MQbKAACAQblBvDECDwAAdEG7AAAFAQQxMDAwQb0xAg8A AKRBuwAABANNZVYAAAAAAAAAAEG+MwFARKgCAACeAAAA/AIAALkAAADDAgAAtAAAAAAAAAArAAAA AAAAAAAAAEG/MQ1wAAAAAABBwDELwQAAgEG/QcExAg8AAGRBwAAAAwJubUHCMQbKAACAQcBBwzEF /AAAQEHCQcQxAg8AAHRBwwAAAwECMTBBxTGVSwAAgEHDAEHGMQIPAAC0QcUAAAIBATlBxzECDwAA pEHCAAACAW0AAAAAAAAAAEHIMwFARBQAAAARAQAA6wAAAD8BAAAoAAAALAEAAAAAAABLAAAAAAAA AAAAAEHJMQ1wAAAAAABByjELwQAAgEHJQcsxAg8AAGRBygAAAgFEQcwxBsoAAIBBykHNMQbKAABA QcxBzjGOcAAAQEHNAEHPMYnHAACAQc5B0DEGygAAQEHPQdExAg8AAHRB0AAAAwECLjhB0jECDwAA tEHQAAADAQIyOEHTMQbKAACAQc9B1DECDwAAdEHTAAADAQIuMkHVMQIPAAC0QdMAAAMBAjMyQdYx B/sAAIBBzUHXMQIPAABkQdYAAAMCZ21B2DECDwAApEHWAAAFBG1vbGVB2TEH+wAAgEHMQdoxAg8A AGRB2QAABQRtb2xlQdsxBsoAAIBB2UHcMQIPAAB0QdsAAAUBBDIyLjRB3TECDwAApEHbAAACAUwA AAAAAAAAAEHeAAEAAAAKVGV4dFJlZ2lvbgEAAAAAABsAAAABQEQiAQAAHQEAALsBAAAvAQAAIgEA ACwBAAAAAAAATwAAAAAAAAAAAAAKAAAACgAAAAAAAAAsAgAAmQAAABIAAACZAAAAEgAAAAEAAgAA AAxDaGFyYWN0ZXJNYXAAAAAAAAAeAAAACFJhbmdlTWFwAAAAAAAALAAAABdEZW5zaXR5IG9mIGFp ciAoYXBwcm94KQEAAQAAAApDaHJQcm9wTWFwAAAAAAAAKAAAAAEXAAAAAQABAAAAClBhclByb3BN YXABAAAAAAAqAAAAAQAAAAAXAAAAQd8AAQAAAAlSYW5nZUVsZW0AAAAAAAAtAAAAFwAAAEHgAAIA AAALUGFyUHJvcERhdGEAAAAAAAArAAAACVJhbmdlRGF0YQAAAAAAAC4AAAAA//////////////// AAAAAAAAAQABAAAACEVtYmVkTWFwAAAAAAAAIgAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAEHhLQAAAAAAAAABAAEAAAAH TGlua01hcAAAAAAAACAAAAABAAAAABcAAABB4i0XAAAAQeMAAQAAAAhMaW5rRGF0YQAAAAAAACEA AAD/////AABABwEAAAAAAAAABk5vcm1hbAVBcmlhbP///woAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AEHkMwFARBQAAABhAQAAaQAAAI8BAAAvAAAAfAEAAAAAAABKAAAAAAAAAAAAAEHlMQ1wAAAAAABB 5jELwQAAgEHlQecxAg8AAGRB5gAAAwJWZUHoMQbKAACAQeZB6TECDwAAdEHoAAAEAQMyMDBB6jEH +wAAgEHoQesxAg8AAGRB6gAAAwJtaUHsMQIPAACkQeoAAAMCaHIAAAAAAAAAAEHtGwFARCIBAABt AQAAEwIAAH8BAAAiAQAAfAEAAAAAAABQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAoAAAAKAAAAAAAAACwCAADxAAAAEgAA APEAAAASAAAAAR4iQXNzdW1lZCB3aW5kIHZlbG9jaXR5IGluIGh1cnJpY2FuZQEoASIAAAABKgEA AAAAIgAAAEHuLSIAAABB7ysA////////////////AAAAAAAAASIBAAAAAAAAAABB8C0AAAAAAAAA ASABAAAAACIAAABB8S0iAAAAQfIh/////wAAQAcBAAAAAAAAAAZOb3JtYWwFQXJpYWz///8KAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABB8zMBQEQUAAAAngEAAJwAAACzAQAALQAAAK4BAAAAAAAATAAA AAAAAAAAAABB9DENcAAAAAAAQfUxC8EAAIBB9EH2MQIPAABkQfUAAAMCQXJB9zEGygAAgEH1Qfgx BsoAAEBB90H5MQbKAABAQfhB+jECDwAAdEH5AAAEAQMyMDBB+zECDwAApEH5AAADAmttQfwxAg8A ALRB+AAABQEENTAwMEH9MQIPAACkQfcAAAMCZnQAAAAAAAAAAEH+GwFARCIBAACfAQAAoQIAALEB AAAiAQAArgEAAAAAAABSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAoAAAAKAAAAAAAAACwCAAB/AQAAEgAAAH8BAAASAAAA AR45QXJlYSBvZiB2ZXJ0aWNhbCBjcm9zcyBzZWN0aW9uIHRocm91Z2ggd2hpY2ggd2luZCB0cmF2 ZWxzASgBOQAAAAEqAQAAAAA5AAAAQf8tOQAAAEIAKwD///////////////8AAAAAAAABIgEAAAAA AAAAAEIBLQAAAAAAAAABIAEAAAAAOQAAAEICLTkAAABCAyH/////AABABwEAAAAAAAAABk5vcm1h bAVBcmlhbP///woAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEIEMwFARB4AAADFAQAA4wAAAPMBAACJ AAAA4AEAAAAAAABVAAAAAAAAAAAAAEIFMQ1wAAAAAABCBjGMwQAAgEIFQgcxBsoAAEBCBkIIMQbK AABAQgdCCTEGygAAQEIIQgoxBsoAAEBCCUILMQf7AABAQgpCDDECDwAAdEILAAACAQExQg0xAg8A ALRCCwAAAgEBMkIOMQX8AACAQgpCDzECDwAAZEIOAAADAlZlQhAxAg8AALRCDgAAAgEBMkIRMQIP AACkQgkAAAIBREISMQIPAACkQggAAAMCQXJCEzECDwAApEIHAAADAlZlQhQxlvQAAIBCBkIVMSsP AABAQhQAAAEAAQAAABJTZXJpYWxfRGlzcGxheU5vZGUAAAAAAABGAAAAAEIWMQf7AACAQhRCFzEC DwAAZEIWAAAFBE10b25CGDECDwAApEIWAAAEA3NlYwAAAAAAAAAAQhkbAUBEIgEAANEBAAAKAgAA 4wEAACIBAADgAQAAAAAAAFYAAAAAAAAAAAAACgAAAAoAAAAAAAAALAIAAOgAAAASAAAA6AAAABIA AAABHh9IdXJyaWNhbmUgcG93ZXIgaW4gbWVnYXRvbnMvc2VjASgBHwAAAAEqAQAAAAAfAAAAQhot HwAAAEIbKwD///////////////8AAAAAAAABIgEAAAAAAAAAAEIcLQAAAAAAAAABIAEAAAAAHwAA AEIdLR8AAABCHiH/////AABABwEAAAAAAAAABk5vcm1hbAVBcmlhbP///woAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAEIfMwFARB4AAAABAgAAvQAAAC8CAACRAAAAHAIAAAAAAABaAAAAAAAAAAAAAEIg MQ1wAAAAAABCITEGygAAgEIgQiIxBsoAAEBCIUIjMQbKAABAQiJCJDEGygAAQEIjQiUxAg8AAGRC JAAAAwJccEImMQX8AACAQiRCJzGOcAAAQEImAEIoMQbKAACAQidCKTECDwAAdEIoAAAEAQMxMDBC KjECDwAApEIoAAADAmttQisxAg8AALRCJgAAAgEBMkIsMQIPAAC0QiMAAAIBATFCLTECDwAApEIi AAACAW1CLjEH+wAAgEIhQi8xAg8AAGRCLgAABANjYWxCMDEGygAAgEIuQjExAg8AAGRCMAAAAwJt TEIyMQIPAACkQjAAAAIBSwAAAAAAAAAAQjMbAUBEIgEAAA0CAADfAgAAMQIAACIBAAAcAgAAAAAA AF0AAAAAAAAAAAAACgAAAAoAAAAAAAAAvQEAAL0BAAAkAAAAvQEAACQAAAABHkBKRW5lcmd5IGF2 YWlsYWJsZSBmcm9tIDEgbWV0ZXIgdGhpY2sgbGF5ZXIgb2Ygc2VhIHdhdGVyIHVuZGVyIGV5ZSBv ZiBzdG9ybS4BKAFKAAAAASoBAAAAAEoAAABCNC1KAAAAQjUrAP///////////////wAAAAAAAAEi AQAAAAAAAAAAQjYtAAAAAAAAAAEgAQAAAABKAAAAQjctSgAAAEI4If////8AAEAHAQAAAAAAAAAG Tm9ybWFsBUFyaWFs////CgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQjkzAUBEHgAAAFYCAAAKAQAA tgIAAMUAAACKAgAAAAAAAF4AAAAAAAAAAAAAQjoxDXAAAAAAAEI7MYzBAACAQjpCPDEH+wAAQEI7 Qj0xBsoAAEBCPEI+MQbKAABAQj1CPzEGygAAQEI+QkAxBsoAAEBCP0JBMQf7AABAQkBCQjECDwAA dEJBAAACAQExQkMxAg8AALRCQQAAAgEBMkJEMQX8AACAQkBCRTECDwAAZEJEAAADAlZlQkYxAg8A ALRCRAAAAgEBMkJHMQIPAACkQj8AAAIBREJIMQIPAACkQj4AAAMCQXJCSTECDwAApEI9AAADAlZl QkoxBsoAAIBCPEJLMQbKAABAQkpCTDEGygAAQEJLQk0xBsoAAEBCTEJOMQIPAABkQk0AAAMCXHBC TzEF/AAAgEJNQlAxjnAAAEBCTwBCUTEGygAAgEJQQlIxAg8AAHRCUQAABAEDMTAwQlMxAg8AAKRC UQAAAwJrbUJUMQIPAAC0Qk8AAAIBATJCVTECDwAAtEJMAAACAQExQlYxAg8AAKRCSwAAAgFtQlcx B/sAAIBCSkJYMQIPAABkQlcAAAQDY2FsQlkxBsoAAIBCV0JaMQIPAABkQlkAAAMCbUxCWzECDwAA pEJZAAACAUtCXDGW9AAAgEI7Ql0xKw8AAEBCXAAAAUBGAEJeMQf7AACAQlxCXzECDwAAZEJeAAAC AUtCYDECDwAApEJeAAADAmhyAAAAAAAAAABCYRsBQERoAQAAewIAAPICAACNAgAAaAEAAIoCAAAA AAAAYQAAAAAAAAAAAAAKAAAACgAAAAAAAADmAQAAigEAABIAAACKAQAAEgAAAAEeOFJhdGUgb2Yg dGVtcGVyYXR1cmUgZHJvcCBpbiBzZWEgd2F0ZXIgdW5kZXIgZXllIG9mIHN0b3JtASgBOAAAAAEq AQAAAAA4AAAAQmItOAAAAEJjKwD///////////////8AAAAAAAABIgEAAAAAAAAAAEJkLQAAAAAA AAABIAEAAAAAOAAAAEJlLTgAAABCZiH/////AABABwEAAAAAAAAABk5vcm1hbAVBcmlhbP///woA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA== ----=_8akb5soqkppe2rf328ajrfth61rqppapoi.MFSBCHJLHS-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 21:21:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA08967; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 21:18:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 21:18:14 -0800 Message-ID: <48129F10B08ED3119DB00000F831E85F3CA6FB mailsrv1.itu.ch> From: "Dishy-Peiris, Elise" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Whirlpower News Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 19:05:30 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <"ZyNqC1.0.yB2.MCTLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32154 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Some things didn't come out quite right in the message below -- * is the sigma summation sign, *** is supposed to be >--< . Elise > -----Original Message----- > From: Dishy-Peiris, Elise [SMTP:elise.dishy-peiris itu.int] > Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 4:28 PM > To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' > Subject: RE: Whirlpower News > > David Dennard saying "I saw a whirlpool in my dream so I began to > look for whirlpools" has given me a strong enough push to come out, albeit > self-consciously. > > I'm not a scientist or doing any research, but the insights I have > been getting are in line with what your experiments, David. Your work with > water seems so simple and yet so right. The stillness at the center of any > thing is somehow consciousness or immortality -- as long as it is there, > the > form exists; as long as the form exists, it is there. The spin creates the > form and is the form. And the vortex is also associated with death (or > life?) in the sense of beckoning and inducing transformation. Something > else > which I vaguely feel should have some association with all of this (only > because it arose in my mind at about the same time as the other thoughts) > is > this series which always resolves to completion, and gives the idea of > cycles or wholes forming more cycles or wholes, etc. > > * 2(2n -1) + (2n) + 2(2n +1) = 10n > > And this figure *** which, someone told me, is the most efficient > energy path in a rectangular form ..... > > Regards > > Elise Dishy Peiris > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Dennard [SMTP:daviddennard hotmail.com] > > Sent: Sunday, December 12, 1999 4:54 PM > > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > > Subject: Whirlpower News > > > > Hi folks, > > > > Been out and about on other lists still trying to find data on > whirlpools > > and help in building one. No whirlpools found so far. We have build a > > small one on the Whirlpower List in England that demonstrated a wide > > whirlpool with a small vortex in the center, (similar in appearance to a > > > hurricane with its small eye wall in the center or similar in appearance > > to > > the spiral galaxy), does in fact with very little water going through my > > > feedback loop design concept move the water in the entire tank. For > those > > > > of you that know my set up this is in the area I call the torus donut, > not > > > > to be confused with torid flow of the vortex itself. > > > > A small but important step forward for Whirlpower. > > > > I have also begun to introduce another form of Whirlpower in search of > any > > > > prior work or data. That is how my research on Whirlpower started. I > saw > > a > > whirlpool in my dream so I began to look for whirlpools. Found many a > > vortex but no whirlpool and now several vortex experts have joined the > > Whirlpower Team because they too know of no such data. > > > > My next search I will combine with my old from now on and I am looking > for > > > > what I think should be a simple and most common physics experiment. I > > have > > search and asked many time without results. If any of you know of > > something > > please let me know, here or join my list. > > > > I am looking for data of a top being spun on a turntable. I have found > a > > few about a ball being spun but still no top. I picture the wobble that > > > occurs at the bottom of the top being able to turn the turntable. We > know > > > > people have tried to tap the top wobble of a gyro. Has anyone tried to > > tap > > the bottom wobble of a top? > > > > I am putting together a press release to announce my research > discoveries > > and lack of data found curiousities and asking for any and all > interested > > to > > build a whirlpool and test it scientifically if still do data can be > > found. > > Same for the top. I will pass this release through this list as it goes > > out > > in case any may wish to add a brief positive comment. Not expecting a > > whole > > lot of support since this list has had well over a year to consider > > Whirlpower and has shown virtually no interest. Can't really understand > > why > > anyone would not be interested in seeing the first whirlpool ever built > by > > > > man but it seems very few have any curiousity in this area. Maybe some > > will > > be curious about a top on a turntable. It seems it should be the most > > common physics experiment; not one with no data found. And I think the > > same > > about the whirlpool. > > > > David Dennard > > http://www.whirlpower.cc > > > > ______________________________________________________ > > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 21:35:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA12242; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 21:26:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 21:26:09 -0800 Message-ID: <19991214052605.11273.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 21:26:05 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: high voltage effects To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"D4LfT3.0.C_2.nJTLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32155 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Quartz tubing might be more resistant to the electrochemical environment. However, it is quite fragile. I am sure you already thought of quartz and reejected it. > I would like to find a more heat resistant material for the lead wire. I > have ordered some ceramic tubing for this purpose. It will be here in a > few days. > > Do you have any suggestions? ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 23:19:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA11356; Mon, 13 Dec 1999 23:16:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 23:16:59 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 01:13:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"t7I-m3.0.Mn2.hxULu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32156 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Sun, 12 Dec 1999 18:49:52 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>(1) 1H1 + 1H1 --> 1D2 + e+ + v + .93 MeV >> >>1.0078252 + 1.0078252 = 2.0141022 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and so Q = .0009996 >>amu = .93 MeV > >I believe there is also an electron capture reaction possible which yields >1.44 MeV, and no positron, hence more energy is available for the neutrino >in this case. ***{There you go again, being totally cryptic, and forcing me to guess what you are talking about. Why not simply state the reaction you have in mind? Anyway, electron capture (K-capture) is defined by p + e- --> n + v, which refers to the transformation of a nucleus of mass M into a nucleus of mass M' by converting a proton into a neutron. Using Me to denote the mass of the electron, we can say that the reaction is energetically possible only when M + Me > M'. Therefore, since we are talking about producing 2He4 in the role of M', I assume you have in mind 3Li4 for the role of M, which gives 3Li4 + e- --> 2He4 + v. Let's see: the mass balance equation is 4.0269785 + .0005486 = 4.0026033 + 0 + Q, and Q = .0249238 = 23.22 MeV. The reaction is energetically possible, but does not produce 1.44 MeV. Conclusion: you aren't talking about the lithium reaction, and, since it is the only way to produce 2He34 by electron capture, you aren't talking about producing 2He4. Further, you can't be talking about producing 1D2 by K-capture from 2He2, because 2He2 has no bound states, and thus does not exist. This time it looks like you got me, Robin: I can't crack the code. :-) --MJ}*** >is probably raised by this reaction. I have no idea of the relative >frequencies of the two reactions. >I do however note that the conversion of Cl37 to Ar37 requires a neutrino >with an energy of .8139 MeV, which is a large percentage of the .93 MeV >available from the reaction you give above. ***{Um, it would be a pretty crappy neutrino detector, if that were true. Let's see, the reaction is 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37 + e-, and the corresponding mass balance equation is 37.034097 + 0 = 37.033223 + .0005486 + Q, so Q = .0003254 amu = .303 MeV. Thus the reaction is exothermic, and the neutrino is only required to conserve beta lepton number, rather than to supply energy. Result: it has no minimum energy requirement. --MJ}*** >If we assume that the positron reaction dominates, then the shortage of >sufficiently energetic neutrinos may go some way to explaining the solar >shortfall? (I have no idea what was taken into consideration when >calculating the expected number of solar neutrinos - I'm probably being very >naive here :). ***{No, I'll lay odds that your method of calculating the solar neutrino flux was basically correct. (After all, I got basically the same answer as you. :-) As noted above, you went off the tracks when you concluded that Davis' neutrino detector could not detect neutrinos with less than .8139 MeV of energy. --MJ}*** I also wonder whether or not neutrinos can lose energy >through collision without undergoing a reaction? If so, then neutrinos may >lose energy on their way out of the sun, so that even less of them have >sufficient energy to trigger the Cl37 conversion reaction. ***{If I calculated correctly, the reaction is exothermic, and the neutrinos are only needed to conserve beta lepton number. Thus if they lose some energy while exiting the sun, it wouldn't matter. --MJ}*** >[snip] >>"Raymond Davis and his group from Brookhaven have monitored the flux of the >>solar neutrinos since the mid-sixties. Their detector is a huge container >>full of dry-cleaning fluid (C2Cl4) which is located in an old deep gold >>mine in South Dakota. The neutrino is detected by its capture in a Cl37 >>nucleus which consequently turns into Ar37. Since Ar37 is radioactive, its >>amount in the container can be periodically checked quite easily. Davis's >>solar neutrino observatory has yielded puzzling results: while models of >>the 'nuclear pile' in the sun provide estimates for the expected flux of >>solar neutrinos, the measured values are persistently about one third of >>the theoretical predictions." [*The Particle Hunters*, pg. 73] >> >>It would seem that either the prevailing model of how the sun works is >>wrong, or else Davis's solar neutrino detector is only picking up about a >>third as many neutrinos as he thinks. >(I.e. the neutrino absorption cross-section is wrong.) ***{Yes. But I doubt that it could be wrong. Logically, these guys know what the cross section is for C2Cl4 because they have placed a tank of the stuff next to a reactor with a known neutrino flux, and logged the number of hits. Once the cross section is known, it is a simple matter to calculate how many hits the detector ought to get from the predicted solar neutrino flux, and thus when these guys say they are only getting about a third of what theory predicts, I tend to believe them. The implication: the prevailing model of how the sun works must be wrong. --MJ}*** >[snip] >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 00:23:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA26753; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 00:22:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 00:22:17 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:21:23 -0500 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199912140321_MC2-9100-E008 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id AAA26737 Resent-Message-ID: <"93czG1.0.xX6.vuVLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32157 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: David Dennard wrote: >> I have attached a small Mathcad document << My version of Mathcad can't read your file. What version do you use? Norman, Surrey, England From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 03:10:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA22603; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:06:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:06:50 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 22:06:33 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <384C502F.59EB8578@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B@mail.pc.century inter.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 DAA22575 Resent-Message-ID: <"v9df91.0.2X5.AJYLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32158 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 01:13:08 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>On Sun, 12 Dec 1999 18:49:52 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >>>(1) 1H1 + 1H1 --> 1D2 + e+ + v + .93 MeV >>> >>>1.0078252 + 1.0078252 = 2.0141022 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and so Q = .0009996 >>>amu = .93 MeV >> >>I believe there is also an electron capture reaction possible which yields >>1.44 MeV, and no positron, hence more energy is available for the neutrino >>in this case. > >***{There you go again, being totally cryptic, and forcing me to guess what >you are talking about. Why not simply state the reaction you have in mind? What I had in mind was an alternative reaction to the one you presented just above what I wrote. I.e. the reaction 2 p + e -> D + v + 1.44 MeV. (Actually H + H -> D + v + 1.44 MeV, which takes proper accounting of the electrons) This probably implies a short term He2 nucleus followed by electron capture. [snip] >Further, you can't be talking about producing 1D2 by K-capture from 2He2, >because 2He2 has no bound states, and thus does not exist. It doesn't need to have a long term bound state. It just needs to hang together for long enough to capture an electron. It might even just be a close approach, where an electron happens to be momentarily providing Coulomb shielding. Yes, I know that sounds pretty unlikely, but if it weren't, the sun would be go up in a puff of smoke, as it were :). [snip] >***{Um, it would be a pretty crappy neutrino detector, if that were true. >Let's see, the reaction is 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37 + e-, and the >corresponding mass balance equation is 37.034097 + 0 = 37.033223 + .0005486 >+ Q, so Q = .0003254 amu = .303 MeV. Thus the reaction is exothermic, and >the neutrino is only required to conserve beta lepton number, rather than >to supply energy. Result: it has no minimum energy requirement. --MJ}*** >From http://necs01.dne.bnl.gov/cgi-bin/CoNquery?nuc=Ar37 I get a mass for Ar37 of 36.9667759 amu, and from http://necs01.dne.bnl.gov/cgi-bin/CoNquery?nuc=Cl37, a mass for Cl37 of 36.9659026 amu. This shows Ar37 as being heavier, and in fact on the Ar37 page it even says that Ar37 naturally decays to Cl37 by electron capture, with an energy release of .813 MeV. Furthermore, Cl37 is a stable isotope comprising about 24% of chlorine. If Ar37 were in fact the lighter of the two, as you suggest, then Cl37 would naturally beta decay to Ar37, and hence would likely either not occur naturally, or only is much smaller quantities. I therefore conclude that it is indeed a pretty crappy neutrino detector. (Or given that I'm doing this in the evening my brain has stopped functioning again, a not uncommon occurrence at this hour ;). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 03:17:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA23772; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:14:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:14:53 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 22:14:49 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <079c5sogcclvq9ao8i71980t69748iilrk 4ax.com> References: <199912140321_MC2-9100-E008 compuserve.com> In-Reply-To: <199912140321_MC2-9100-E008 compuserve.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 DAA23755 Resent-Message-ID: <"Ki613.0.Mp5.jQYLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32159 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:21:23 -0500, Norman Horwood wrote: >David Dennard wrote: > >>> I have attached a small Mathcad document << > >My version of Mathcad can't read your file. What version do you use? > >Norman, Surrey, England I use Mathcad 7, but no fancy features are used in the document, so if you edit it with a text editor, and change the version number at the beginning of the document, to what you find in your own documents, you will probably be OK. (I notice when doing this myself, that it comes up with "306" - curious). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 03:18:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA24511; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:16:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:16:20 -0800 Message-ID: <19991214111619.96422.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.164] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:16:19 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"KEzt73.0.v-5.3SYLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32160 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin writes: > >I have attached a small Mathcad document, wherein I calculate that a >Hurricane that has a power of 34 Ktons of TNT /sec (i.e. about 1.5 times >the power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, every second) What catogory of hurricane are you using? would extract >heat from *the water under the eye of the hurricane* at a rate such that >the >temperature of the water would drop about 3.8 °C / hour (1 °K = 1 °C). >And this is only if all the energy is actually extracted from the wind, >which of course doesn't happen, hence the temperature need not even drop >that fast. Science tries to use the "latent heat theory" to bolster the thermodynamic paradigm but the fallacy is that evaporation itself is gravity driven. As shown in "The Pearl of Wisdom" all energy of motion comes from gravity. Heat only sets the relative density off balance. Gravity balances the scales of density. It all works just like a bubble. We were led astray by Einstein's divergance from the gravity constant and his thinking space was a total void. But in fluid space light is less dense than space and light speed is gravity driven. This is why Einstein stated the measurement of refraction had to be exactly 1.75 if his theory was to be correct. Since it is not exactly his theory is not correct. Gravity repels light by pulling the more dense space beneath the less dense photon. The "fizz in the physics". And just like the galaxy spins due to "density waves", the whirlpool spins by gravity causing the "cosmic chord", causing the torid flow in the compound vortex to wobble and drag and accelerate the torus donut. The hurricane does the same thing. Gravity causes the eye wall to wobble and drag the bulk of the hurricane. Of course this machine, much like our cars, only works once it gets cranked up. Even the explosion in the piston only opens the void, but gravity slams it shut causing the energy of motion, KA-BOOM!! Ka opens, Boom slams it shut. Same thing with lightning. And everything gets started long before heat comes into the picture as it takes the pressuse of gravity to ignite a star in the first place. Gravity is the Origin of Energy. David Dennard The Gravity Paradigm http://www.whirlpower.cc ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 04:04:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA31583; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 04:02:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 04:02:26 -0800 Message-ID: <19991214120223.72357.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.119] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Whirlpower News Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 04:02:23 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"Cyi4z2.0.Pj7.H7ZLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32161 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Elise writes: >and gives the idea of >cycles or wholes forming more cycles or wholes, etc. > > * 2(2n -1) + (2n) + 2(2n +1) = 10n If you can elaborate on this it might be of great help. I am not a scientist either but my intiution tells me this and the "cosmic chord" found in the frame dragging studies all relate to the formula for Whirlpower. Since this list still has posted no data on a top on a turntable may I assume no one here, like every other list I have asked, has ever seen or heard or thought of a top being spun on a turntable before? Isn't that amazing? No whirlpool ever built, no top ever spun on a turntable. Some men dream of things that are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask, why not? David Dennard "the hardest working man in dreamland" http://www.whirlpower.cc ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 06:14:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA32719; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 06:13:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 06:13:12 -0800 Sender: jack pop.centurytel.net Message-ID: <38565ED8.30EA64B6 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:14:32 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: <384C502F.59EB8578@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B@mail.pc.century inter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"xbRRl3.0.5_7.t1bLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32162 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: Raymond Davis and his group from Brookhaven have monitored the flux of the solar neutrinos since the mid-sixties. Their detector is a huge container full of dry-cleaning fluid (C2Cl4) which is located in an old deep gold mine in South Dakota. The neutrino is detected by its capture in a Cl37 nucleus which consequently turns into Ar37. Since Ar37 is radioactive, its amount in the container can be periodically checked quite easily. Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >From http://necs01.dne.bnl.gov/cgi-bin/CoNquery?nuc=Ar37 I get a mass for Ar37 of 36.9667759 amu, and from http://necs01.dne.bnl.gov/cgi-bin/CoNquery?nuc=Cl37, a mass for Cl37 of 36.9659026 amu. This shows Ar37 as being heavier, and in fact on the Ar37 page it even says that Ar37 naturally decays to Cl37 by electron capture, with an energy release of .813 MeV ... I therefore conclude that it is indeed a pretty crappy neutrino detector ... Hi Mitchell and Robin, Although the Davis detector may not be much good for neutrinos, is it possible that it may be good for detecting something else? Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 06:45:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA16023; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 06:44:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 06:44:58 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991214094458.0079f6d0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 09:44:58 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Italian trains will not run on time! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"HGQZw1.0.Hw3.gVbLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32163 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This morning on NPR I heard a report from Italy about the Y2K problem. The Italian railway system plans to stop all trains at 11:30 PM on December 31, for one hour, just in case there is a Y2K glitch. Passengers will be compensated for the delay with free champagne. They discussed the reservoir and water supply for Rome. Some of the aqueducts and other infrastructure was built in ancient Roman times and is still in use. A sanguine spokesman reportedly said, "we survived the transition from B.C. to A.D. nicely, we do not anticipate any trouble going from 1K to 2K." A computer expert said, "we Italians hate to plan," but he added they do not use computers much anyway. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 06:57:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA19906; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 06:54:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 06:54:40 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991214225216.008d94e0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 22:52:16 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? In-Reply-To: <3855B577.904E4AB3 verisoft.com.tr> References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3854CC91.A735B72E verisoft.com.tr> <008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <00a501bf4582$631eef60$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3.0.6.32.19991214095912.008d3430 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"08SOL1.0.xs4.lebLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32164 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Hamdi wrote: > >BTW, I have an experiment setup on my bench, still running, is a simple >one xistor oscillator driving an long single layered coil from one end, >as an antenna. What is interesting here when tuned fine, the oscillator >running at 92 MHz, approx. sinusoidal output, but on the other end of >the coil there is a clean 46 MHz, driving a single 3 turns terminated >by a LED. Oscillator consume 200mW, and it appear some tens of miliwats >are received by the LED at 1/2 harmonic!, not the 2'nd harmonic :). >Isn't it unusual? This is pretty interesting Hamdi. It is usually difficult to halve frequency without quite a lot of electronics. Maybe there is some parametric effect occuring. Maybe you could provide some sort of circuit diagram for us to think about? One can consider the analogy of a swing being pumped by standing up and down on the seat, or pumping a pendulum by raising and lowering the suspension point at *twice* the frequency of the pendulum. This is one way that frequency halving can occur. Maybe the LED is acting as a varactor and its capacitance is close to resonant with the coil at 46MHz so that when its capacitance is varied at 92MHz it serves to pump power into the 46Mhz resonance. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 06:59:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA21589; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 06:58:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 06:58:04 -0800 Message-ID: <38565B95.8FC676A6 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 10:00:37 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Italian trains will not run on time! References: <3.0.6.32.19991214094458.0079f6d0 pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"stBm-3.0.FH5.yhbLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32165 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > This morning on NPR I heard a report from Italy about the Y2K problem. The > Italian railway system plans to stop all trains at 11:30 PM on December 31, > for one hour, just in case there is a Y2K glitch. Passengers will be > compensated for the delay with free champagne. They discussed the reservoir > and water supply for Rome. Some of the aqueducts and other infrastructure > was built in ancient Roman times and is still in use. A sanguine spokesman > reportedly said, "we survived the transition from B.C. to A.D. nicely, we > do not anticipate any trouble going from 1K to 2K." A computer expert said, > "we Italians hate to plan," but he added they do not use computers much > anyway. > > - Jed MARTA has the same plans, as do most transit organizations in the US. BTW, the new chairman of MARTA has called for a revised name to reflect the impending expanded geographic coverage of the transit Authority. Since MARTA rights-of-way play a big part in the Information Technology with hundreds of fiber strands supplying various communications carriers, it is said that MARTA carries "bits and butts". In light of the above, I have proposed the new name, Georgia Regional Information and Transportation System. With its unique local flavor, GRITS will shine the way into the next millennium. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 07:08:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA26570; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 07:06:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 07:06:50 -0800 Message-ID: <38565DA0.AD796644 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 10:09:20 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Italian trains will not run on time! References: <3.0.6.32.19991214094458.0079f6d0 pop.mindspring.com> <38565B95.8FC676A6@bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"M1okE2.0._U6.9qbLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32166 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > MARTA has the same plans, as do most transit organizations in the US. Er, sans champagne. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 07:19:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA29910; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 07:13:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 07:13:40 -0800 Message-ID: <38565F3E.15688A0C bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 10:16:14 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Transmission Line ZPE Extractor? References: <003901bf4507$f3a61a20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3854CC91.A735B72E verisoft.com.tr> <008d01bf457d$ee52de20$e6441d26 fjsparber> <00a501bf4582$631eef60$e6441d26 fjsparber> <3.0.6.32.19991214095912.008d3430 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <3.0.6.32.19991214225216.008d94e0@cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"83LW22.0.CJ7.awbLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32167 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Winterflood wrote: > > >Hamdi wrote: > > > >BTW, I have an experiment setup on my bench, still running, is a simple > >one xistor oscillator driving an long single layered coil from one end, > >as an antenna. What is interesting here when tuned fine, the oscillator > >running at 92 MHz, approx. sinusoidal output, but on the other end of > >the coil there is a clean 46 MHz, driving a single 3 turns terminated > >by a LED. Oscillator consume 200mW, and it appear some tens of miliwats > >are received by the LED at 1/2 harmonic!, not the 2'nd harmonic :). > >Isn't it unusual? > > This is pretty interesting Hamdi. It is usually difficult to halve > frequency without quite a lot of electronics. Maybe there is some > parametric effect occuring. Maybe you could provide some sort of > circuit diagram for us to think about? > > One can consider the analogy of a swing being pumped by standing > up and down on the seat, or pumping a pendulum by raising and > lowering the suspension point at *twice* the frequency of the > pendulum. This is one way that frequency halving can occur. > > Maybe the LED is acting as a varactor and its capacitance is close > to resonant with the coil at 46MHz so that when its capacitance is > varied at 92MHz it serves to pump power into the 46Mhz resonance. Or, it could be an artifact of the measuring device. If Hamdi is using a spectrum analyzer he should try changing the IF mixing frequency. If a frequency counter, try changing the sensitivity. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 08:18:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA21934; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 08:17:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 08:17:14 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 10:18:10 -0600 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <004b01bf45d2$1d902d60$0101a8c0 john> References: <3.0.6.32.19991210153040.007bb860 world.std.com><3.0.6.32.19991210205414.0 07ae5f0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991212155354.007b3b80 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas Malloy Subject: Re: Dirac-Majorana Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"cYqaP3.0.YM5.AscLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32168 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I came across the following URL in a search. http://kh-biotech.com/journals/ijmpa/1329/sito.html The synoposis raises several questions. It talks about light neutrinos in a super dense medium. Apparently we know more about neutrinos than I thought that we did if we can tell the difference between the regular ones and light ones. I am also interested in what is ment by flavor conserving, and a superdense media. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 09:04:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA06150; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 09:01:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 09:01:56 -0800 Message-ID: <19991214170150.40235.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.163] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 09:01:50 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"0Wddz2.0._V1.4WdLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32169 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Ron, Thank you for this info. I hope you don't mind my on board reply. This is a typical misunderstanding of what a whirlpool is. A whirlpool is much wider than deep. It displays the pattern seen in the hurricane and the spiral galaxy, not the tornado or bathtub drain simple vortex. I have found several different types of vortexes in my research but no whirlpools. The most common misunderstanding of the whirlpool is called the multiplied input vortex. This was tested in great length and showed great promise because it even ripped a few machines apart it was so powerful, but attempts to tap it were unsuccesful. But it is not a whirlpool either, just a high speed simple vortex. High velocity is not what Whirlpower is about. There is no energy in the vortex itself. High speed only decreases the wobble and actually snuffs out the power, much like too much wind on a flame. The vortex is a lot like a fire and much like our ancestors had to learn to build and sustain a fire without snuffing it our we are learning how to build a fire, the "Fire of the Kundalini". David Dennard The Phoenix http://www.whirlpower.cc >From: Ron Peterson >To: daviddennard hotmail.com >Subject: Re: Whirlpower News >Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 10:44:31 -0500 > > >The Exploratorium in San Francisco has a large whirlpool generator, >about ten feet high and five feet in diameter. It starts up and runs >every several minutes creating very impressive whirlpools. >Perhaps you could get more info from them. They also sell a book >describing how to build some of their devices which might include >a description of how to build the whirlpool device. > > Ron ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 11:09:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18794; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 11:04:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 11:04:46 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:00:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"Qjsgc.0.Zb4.EJfLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32170 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 01:13:08 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>>On Sun, 12 Dec 1999 18:49:52 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>> >>>>(1) 1H1 + 1H1 --> 1D2 + e+ + v + .93 MeV >>>> >>>>1.0078252 + 1.0078252 = 2.0141022 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and so Q = .0009996 >>>>amu = .93 MeV >>> >>>I believe there is also an electron capture reaction possible which yields >>>1.44 MeV, and no positron, hence more energy is available for the neutrino >>>in this case. >> >>***{There you go again, being totally cryptic, and forcing me to guess what >>you are talking about. Why not simply state the reaction you have in mind? > >What I had in mind was an alternative reaction to the one you presented just >above what I wrote. I.e. the reaction > >2 p + e -> D + v + 1.44 MeV. (Actually H + H -> D + v + 1.44 MeV, which >takes proper accounting of the electrons) > >This probably implies a short term >He2 nucleus followed by electron capture. >[snip] >>Further, you can't be talking about producing 1D2 by K-capture from 2He2, >>because 2He2 has no bound states, and thus does not exist. > >It doesn't need to have a long term bound state. It just needs to hang >together for long enough to capture an electron. It might even just be a >close approach, where an electron happens to be momentarily providing >Coulomb shielding. Yes, I know that sounds pretty unlikely, but if it >weren't, the sun would be go up in a puff of smoke, as it were :). >[snip] >>***{Um, it would be a pretty crappy neutrino detector, if that were true. >>Let's see, the reaction is 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37 + e-, and the >>corresponding mass balance equation is 37.034097 + 0 = 37.033223 + .0005486 >>+ Q, so Q = .0003254 amu = .303 MeV. Thus the reaction is exothermic, and >>the neutrino is only required to conserve beta lepton number, rather than >>to supply energy. Result: it has no minimum energy requirement. --MJ}*** > >>From http://necs01.dne.bnl.gov/cgi-bin/CoNquery?nuc=Ar37 I get a mass for > >Ar37 of 36.9667759 amu, and from > >http://necs01.dne.bnl.gov/cgi-bin/CoNquery?nuc=Cl37, a mass for Cl37 of > >36.9659026 amu. ***{Here, between the lines of asterisks, are the relevant entries, taken from the URL which you cited: ***************************************** 17-Cl-37 Atomic Mass: 36.9659026 +- 0.0000001 amu Excess Mass: -31761.519 +- 0.048 keV Binding Energy: 317100.455 +- 0.067 keV Beta Decay Energy: B- -813.485 +- 0.303 keV "The 1995 update to the atomic mass evaluation" by G.Audi and A.H.Wapsta, Nuclear Physics A595 vol. 4 p.409-480, December 25, 1995. Atomic Percent Abundance: 24.23% Spin: 3/2+ Stable Isotope Possible parent nuclides: Beta from S-37 Electron capture from 18-Ar-37 18-Ar-37 Atomic Mass: 36.9667759 +- 0.0000003 amu Excess Mass: -30948.034 +- 0.305 keV Binding Energy: 315504.616 +- 0.309 keV Beta Decay Energy: B- -6148.793 +- 0.374 keV "The 1995 update to the atomic mass evaluation" by G.Audi and A.H.Wapsta, Nuclear Physics A595 vol. 4 p.409-480, December 25, 1995. Spin: 3/2+ Half life: 35.04 D Mode of decay: Electron capture to Cl-37 Decay energy: 0.813 MeV Possible parent nuclides: Electron capture from K-37 ***************************************** OK, the reaction is 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37 + e-. Based on the masses given above, the corresponding mass balance equation would be 36.9659026 + 0 = 36.9667759 + .0005486 + Q, so Q = -.0014219 amu = -1.32 MeV. By these numbers, the reaction is endothermic, and the neutrino must supply 1.32 Mev to the nucleus of 17Cl37 to make it go. Since in the proton-proton cycle, the beta+ and the neutrino must share a meager .93 MeV between them, *none* of the neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle would be capable of triggering a hit in this *really pathetic* neutrino detector. Something is wrong somewhere, but what? Note first the *implausibility* of the numbers given on the government website: (1) The implication of those numbers is that the conversion of a neutron into a proton and an electron requires that energy be supplied. Yet we know from other sources that a neutron which is outside a nucleus will spontaneously decay into a proton and an electron, and emit .78 MeV in the process! How believable, then, is it that when a neutron within a nucleus of 17Cl37 decays into a proton and an electron, 1.32 MeV must be supplied? (The skinny neutron theory then becomes the super-skinny neutron theory! :-) (2) The given numbers also imply that Dr. Davis' "solar neutrino detector" cannot detect solar neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle, since those neutrinos come in with a maximum of .93 MeV, and 1.32 MeV is required to trigger a hit on the detector! We know that the U.S. authorities are on a crusade to suppress nuclear development programs throughout the world, and that they are obsessed with nuclear secrecy as an instrument to that end. Why, therefore, would we believe their published numbers when they have absurd implications, as above? Is there an alternative interpretation? Well, if we suppose that roughly half of the sun's energy comes from the carbon cycle, and the rest from the proton-proton cycle, then the government numbers could be accurate. The reason: neutrinos from the carbon cycle come in with up to 1.94 MeV. If, as you suggested earlier, the neutrino gets 80% of the energy on average, then we have (.8)(1.94) = 1.55 MeV, and we squeak in just under the wire. By this interpretation, of course, prevailing notions about how the sun works must be wrong, because by those ideas the carbon cycle contributes less than one tenth of one percent of the sun's energy. --MJ}*** This shows Ar37 as being heavier, and in fact on the Ar37 >page it even says that Ar37 naturally decays to Cl37 by electron capture, >with an energy release of .813 MeV. > >Furthermore, Cl37 is a stable isotope comprising about 24% of chlorine. >If Ar37 were in fact the lighter of the two, as you suggest, then Cl37 would >naturally beta decay to Ar37, and hence would likely either not occur >naturally, or only is much smaller quantities. > >I therefore conclude that it is indeed a pretty crappy neutrino detector. >(Or given that I'm doing this in the evening my brain has stopped >functioning again, a not uncommon occurrence at this hour ;). ***{No, based on the government supplied numbers, you are correct: it turns out that I dropped the signs when I did my calculation. The way I obtained the masses for my mass balance equation was by looking up the excess masses in a table at the back of Bernie Cohen's book, *Concepts of Nuclear Physics*, and converting them. The excess mass is obtained by subtracting the nucleon count (A = 37, in this case) from the mass of the nucleus, and multiplying the result by 931481 (the number of kev per amu). If we denote the mass of the nucleus by Mn, and excess mass by Em, then Em = (Mn - A)931481, and so Mn = Em/931482 + A. Applying the latter to the above given excess mass of -30948.034 for 18Ar37, we have Mn = -30948.034/931481+ 37 = 36.966775 amu, which is virtually identical to the figure given on the government website. Why did I drop the signs? Because I am using an old TI calculator, and some of the keys are getting unresponsive--particularly the zero and the sign key. Thus if I am not very careful to punch them hard, I drop zeroes out of numbers and, when the numbers are negative, I drop the signs. Time to get a new calculator, I guess. :-( Anyway, it turns out that my dropping of the signs may have been a bit of good luck: the results make more sense when the signs are dropped. There is no way in hell that this alleged "solar neutrino detector" can work, unless the government numbers are bogus--which, of course, would not be the least bit surprising. --MJ}*** >[snip] > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 12:29:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA13054; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:28:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:28:03 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:24:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Solar Protoneutrons Resent-Message-ID: <"NiwWh3.0.tB3.JXgLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32171 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{I became so focused on the latter part of your previous message that I forgot to respond to the first part. The following comments are intended to eliminate that discrepancy. --MJ}*** >On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 01:13:08 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>>On Sun, 12 Dec 1999 18:49:52 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>> >>>>(1) 1H1 + 1H1 --> 1D2 + e+ + v + .93 MeV >>>> >>>>1.0078252 + 1.0078252 = 2.0141022 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and so Q = .0009996 >>>>amu = .93 MeV >>> >>>I believe there is also an electron capture reaction possible which yields >>>1.44 MeV, and no positron, hence more energy is available for the neutrino >>>in this case. >> >>***{There you go again, being totally cryptic, and forcing me to guess what >>you are talking about. Why not simply state the reaction you have in mind? > >What I had in mind was an alternative reaction to the one you presented just >above what I wrote. I.e. the reaction > >2 p + e -> D + v + 1.44 MeV. (Actually H + H -> D + v + 1.44 MeV, which >takes proper accounting of the electrons) ***{You left out the electron on the left side: H + H + e- --> D + v. The electron has to be shown on the left side because it is required to turn one of the H nuclei into a neutron. Breaking the reaction down into steps, we begin with p + e- --> n + v, where the mass balance equation is 1.0078252 + .0005486 --> 1.0086653 + 0 + Q, and Q = -.0002915 amu = -.271 MeV. Thus the first reaction is endothermic and requires that an electron with .271 MeV of kinetic energy be supplied. If that occurs, then we have p + n --> d, with a mass balance of 1.0078252 + 1.0086653 --> 2.0141022 + Q, and Q = .0023883 amu = 2.22 MeV. The net for the two reactions, if we debit .511 MeV for the electron mass and .271 MeV for its kinetic energy, is 1.44 Mev, as you said. Note, however, that the neutrino comes off in the first portion of the two-step reaction, and carries away essentially zero energy. It is only present to conserve beta lepton numbers. What this reaction produces is 2.22 MeV gammas, not 1.44 MeV neutrinos. --MJ}*** followed by p + n --> D. > >This probably implies a short term >He2 nucleus followed by electron capture. ***{I don't think so: the Coulomb repulsion prohibits the existence of this nucleus. You have to stick a neutron between the two protons, to obtain a bound state. This occurs because >[snip] >>Further, you can't be talking about producing 1D2 by K-capture from 2He2, >>because 2He2 has no bound states, and thus does not exist. > >It doesn't need to have a long term bound state. It just needs to hang >together for long enough to capture an electron. It might even just be a >close approach, where an electron happens to be momentarily providing >Coulomb shielding. Yes, I know that sounds pretty unlikely ***{It isn't unlikely at all, given the vast number of collisions in the solar plasma. The pairing of a proton with an electron at grazing altitude produces the wildly unstable, neutral particle which I call a protoneutron. My usual symbol for it is pn, but I sometimes use p/e- when I want to be very clear about the structure of the thing. The only situation where protoneutrons endure is inside a cramped crystal lattice at relatively ordinary temperatures. In the sun, they would be will-o'-the-wisps, winking into and out of existence randomly, due to near collisions within the plasma. If you want to introduce such a concept into this analysis, you would then have three reactions: (1) p + e- --> p/e- (2) p/e- + .271 MeV --> n + v (3) p + n --> 1D2 + 2.22 MeV Note, however, that analyzing it this way doesn't alter the result: the neutrino still doesn't get any energy to speak of out of the process. Thus to the extent that this reaction goes on in the sun, it will not produce neutrinos that the Davis' detector will notice. --MJ}*** , but if it >weren't, the sun would be go up in a puff of smoke, as it were :). [snip] > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 12:41:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA15952; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:37:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:37:33 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991214153725.0079e9f0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:37:25 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Internet security issues Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WD2qB1.0.4v3.DggLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32172 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It is surprisingly easy to hack into most Windows 95 and 98 computers attached to the Internet, especially those with permanent DSL and cable modem connections. An article about this in PC World, December 1999, page 51 references a good test and a set of documents describing the problems at: grc.com Click on the icon, and on the next page select "Shields Up! Click Here" Be sure to select the second test to "Probe of My Ports!" You'll probably find that your NetBIOS port number 139 is open. This site includes a complex set of instructions for fixing this problem, but you can sidestep the whole business with a $40 utility program from: http://www.networkice.com/ It seems to be effective. It blocks the test at grc.com. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 13:56:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA08264; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:52:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:52:52 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991214154935.01bac828 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:49:35 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: J-hook didn't work Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"yuQOz3.0.212.qmhLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32173 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Today I tried a J-hook in the cathode: | | | | | W | | \__/ The idea was to get the teflon jacket UNDER the incandescent W part so the rising plasma and steam wouldn't strike it directly. It didn't work any better than the straight-wire cathode. Above 200 volts, the teflon jacket starts burning back like a sparkler on July 4th. Next I'll try the quartz/glass tubing idea and/or some ceramic tubes I've got coming from Omega. Mizuno says he's already tried these materials and that teflon works better....:( Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 14:06:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA13348; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:04:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:04:25 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991214170421.007a1100 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 17:04:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: J-hook didn't work In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991214154935.01bac828 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"6caXW.0.PG3.fxhLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32174 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >It didn't work any better than the straight-wire cathode. Above 200 volts, >the teflon jacket starts burning back like a sparkler on July 4th. You are probably contaminating the works with that. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 14:15:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA16778; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:12:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:12:08 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <0.65f7bcf3.258712e9 aol.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:08:04 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: "Hydrinos," or "Protoneutrons?" Resent-Message-ID: <"NZPJ-.0.364.t2iLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32175 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:44:08 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote, re Mills: > ><<...I would suggest that if he is right about "hydrinos," then he is a >genius of >the first magnitude, and is entitled to be proud of what he has done.>> > >Yes. > >MJ continued: > ><millions of dollars in investment capital and oversee a company with >hundreds of employees.>> > >Just dozens of employees so far. According to the BLP website, the plan is >to raise that number to about 125 over the next two years. > >So, Mitchell, what do you think of Mills' work? > >Tom Stolper ***{Well, my main area of doubt concerning the Mills' theory has to do with his claim that there are stable orbits of hydrogen below the n = 1 level. In his view, hydrogen orbits are not merely stable when n is an integer, but also when n = 1/m and m is an integer. In my view, the electron can exist between the n = 1 level and the nucleus, when the conditions are right--i.e., when the constraints of a solid-state lattice do not provide enough space for the electron to orbit at the n = 1 level--but all orbits in that region are wildly unstable, and as soon as space constraints are lifted, one of the Bohr orbits will quickly be occupied. Thus the difference between his view and mine boils down to a disagreement about stability: he claims the classical orbits between n = 1 and the nucleus contain some stable orbits, while I consider all of those orbits to be extremely unstable. He dubs the various allegedly stable atomic variants "hydrinos." I, on the other hand, dub the unstable variant where the electron is at grazing altitude above a 1H1 nucleus to be a "protoneutron," and dub the variant where the electron is at grazing altitude above a 1H2 nucleus to be a "deuteroneutron." Thus we both dispute the "quantum mechanical" claim that the electron cannot exist between the n = 1 level and the nucleus, but disagree about the stability of those orbits. My main reason for considering such orbits to be unstable is the obvious one: if some of them were stable, we would be up to our eyeballs in "hydrinos", and could not have failed to notice. The universe, after all, is 75% hydrogen. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 14:20:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09973; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:16:52 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:16:52 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: J-hook didn't work Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 09:13:25 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.1.32.19991214154935.01bac828 mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991214154935.01bac828 mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id OAA09878 Resent-Message-ID: <"npeNo2.0.gR2.F7iLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32176 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:49:35 -0600, Scott Little wrote: [snip] >Next I'll try the quartz/glass tubing idea and/or some ceramic tubes I've >got coming from Omega. Mizuno says he's already tried these materials and >that teflon works better....:( [snip] Scott, how does your current compare with Mizuno's? (If his is less, at the same voltage, it may be less destructive). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 14:18:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA18370; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:17:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:17:11 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991214154935.01bac828 mail.eden.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:14:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: J-hook didn't work Resent-Message-ID: <"zNZWF2.0.yU4.c7iLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32177 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Today I tried a J-hook in the cathode: > > | > | > | > | > | W > | | > \__/ > >The idea was to get the teflon jacket UNDER the incandescent W part so the >rising plasma and steam wouldn't strike it directly. > >It didn't work any better than the straight-wire cathode. Above 200 volts, >the teflon jacket starts burning back like a sparkler on July 4th. > >Next I'll try the quartz/glass tubing idea and/or some ceramic tubes I've >got coming from Omega. Mizuno says he's already tried these materials and >that teflon works better....:( ***{Mitchell Swartz stated yesterday in a post that there are various grades of Teflon, and that some of them are more heat resistant than others. Perhaps Mizuno is using a more heat resistant grade of the stuff. If I were you, I would consult with the manufacturer to see if that is the case. If it is, a switch to a different grade should solve your problem. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >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 Dec 14 14:26:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA21009; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:24:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:24:19 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "Hydrinos," or "Protoneutrons?" Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 09:24:11 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <0.65f7bcf3.258712e9 aol.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 OAA20970 Resent-Message-ID: <"6o-Pp1.0.585.IEiLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32178 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:08:04 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >and the nucleus, but disagree about the stability of those orbits. My main >reason for considering such orbits to be unstable is the obvious one: if >some of them were stable, we would be up to our eyeballs in "hydrinos", and >could not have failed to notice. The universe, after all, is 75% hydrogen. >--Mitchell Jones}*** According to Mills we have noticed, we just don't believe our eyes. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 14:35:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA24036; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:33:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:33:44 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 09:33:39 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <6vgd5s4jhqe55ruhlc4faa57h6c3292uej 4ax.com> References: <38512E08.242F930B@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38565ED8.30EA64B6@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: <38565ED8.30EA64B6 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 OAA24018 Resent-Message-ID: <"Yff1o3.0.St5.8NiLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32179 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:14:32 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: [snip] >Although the Davis detector may not be much good for >neutrinos, is it possible that it may be good for >detecting something else? > >Jack Smith > If their detector contained some dissolved argon, then it's possible that they are just detecting decays from neutron capture of Ar36, with the neutrons supplied by the surrounding rock (through neutrons produced by alpha particles from alpha decay in the rocks). Alternatively, if they are just checking for "flashes", then almost any nuclear reaction could be responsible. (I don't know their setup, as you can plainly see). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 14:44:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA27842; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:43:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:43:13 -0800 Message-ID: <3856C7D3.F4E8D441 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 00:42:27 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Internet security issues References: <3.0.6.32.19991214153725.0079e9f0 pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"VmP_M3.0.so6._ViLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32180 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > It is surprisingly easy to hack into most Windows 95 and 98 computers > attached to the Internet, especially those with permanent DSL and cable > modem connections. An article about this in PC World, December 1999, page > 51 references a good test and a set of documents describing the problems at: > > grc.com > Although latest vulnerability on browser may give access your data to the web, but this test at grc.com is BULL SH#T!. I have any protection on my computer while doing these tests (some time I open my firewall when somebody trying extensively my ports), plus I am using ICQ, which is known a security hole, as MIRC, these test did not found anything vulnerable on my PC. This is nothing than selling trick. At worst I strongly suspect that this "shield" or sh#t does not protect you when a real attack comes. > Click on the icon, and on the next page select "Shields Up! Click Here" Be > sure to select the second test to "Probe of My Ports!" You'll probably find > that your NetBIOS port number 139 is open. This site includes a complex set > of instructions for fixing this problem, but you can sidestep the whole > business with a $40 utility program from: > Port 139 fix made years ago. W98 is not vulnerable, and most of W95 PC's with dialup connection. > http://www.networkice.com/ > > It seems to be effective. It blocks the test at grc.com. > > - Jed Now if you are online connected by a modem tel me your IP, and I will shut down your connection immediately. this is only prevented by firewalls and some modems are not vulnerable. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 15:09:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA01887; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:06:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:06:30 -0800 Message-ID: <3856BE42.E49CC254 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 17:01:38 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Y2K Readiness Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9Wg872.0.PT.sriLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32181 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It's already the year 2000 in Georgia. See: http://www.southernco.com/site/about/lightson.asp The Southern Company has been running many of their facilities for some time with their clocks advanced to ensure power system reliability. Our IT department just sent a request that I work over the New Year holiday to ensure our computer systems work after 1/1/00. I informed them that I will gladly run the Y2K testing prior to the holiday; however, I have plans for that weekend. I guess the idiots don't realize that *we* set the dates on the computer systems, not God. My secretary just returned from visiting her In-Laws in France where she learned that the US is the laughing stock of Europe over our Y2K panic. You might want to buy 2 weeks worth of groceries next week because there will probably be a run on the markets after Christmas. Market shelves are stripped of bread and milk in Atlanta at the mere hint of impending snowfall. Shelves should be restocked by 1/3/00. This is getting absurd. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 15:32:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA09242; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:30:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:30:01 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:21:43 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3fhd5s05sf3l04ephpfah8ib61ssldhebo 4ax.com> References: <38512E08.242F930B@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA09012 Resent-Message-ID: <"ahyQG3.0.rF2.vBjLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32182 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:00:08 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >***{Here, between the lines of asterisks, are the relevant entries, taken >from the URL which you cited: > >***************************************** >17-Cl-37 > > Atomic Mass: 36.9659026 +- 0.0000001 amu > Excess Mass: -31761.519 +- 0.048 keV > Binding Energy: 317100.455 +- 0.067 keV > Beta Decay Energy: B- -813.485 +- 0.303 keV > >"The 1995 update to the atomic mass evaluation" by G.Audi and A.H.Wapsta, >Nuclear Physics A595 vol. 4 p.409-480, December 25, 1995. > > > Atomic Percent Abundance: 24.23% > Spin: 3/2+ > Stable Isotope > > Possible parent nuclides: > Beta from S-37 > Electron capture from 18-Ar-37 > >18-Ar-37 > >Atomic Mass: 36.9667759 +- 0.0000003 amu > Excess Mass: -30948.034 +- 0.305 keV > Binding Energy: 315504.616 +- 0.309 keV > Beta Decay Energy: B- -6148.793 +- 0.374 keV > >"The 1995 update to the atomic mass evaluation" by G.Audi and A.H.Wapsta, >Nuclear Physics A595 vol. 4 p.409-480, December 25, 1995. > > > Spin: 3/2+ > Half life: 35.04 D > Mode of decay: Electron capture to Cl-37 > Decay energy: 0.813 MeV > > Possible parent nuclides: > Electron capture from K-37 >***************************************** > >OK, the reaction is 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37 + e-. Based on the masses given >above, the corresponding mass balance equation would be 36.9659026 + 0 = >36.9667759 + .0005486 + Q, so Q = -.0014219 amu = -1.32 MeV. By these The masses as given are atomic masses, i.e. they include all the electrons from the atoms. Hence the Ar37 already includes 1 shell electron more than the Cl37. When Cl37 converts to Ar37, it does indeed emit a beta which escapes, however the resulting Ar37 inherits the shell electrons from the Cl37, and is thus 1 short, so is in fact Ar37+. After the ion once again becomes neutral by capturing an electron from the environment, the mass is restored to the full value given in the table. For mass accounting purposes, the net result is as if the beta decay electron ended up in the shell of the Ar37. Hence for mass accounting purposes the reaction is: Cl37 + v +.813 MeV -> Ar37 (i.e. the exact opposite of electron capture). [snip] >(1) The implication of those numbers is that the conversion of a neutron >into a proton and an electron requires that energy be supplied. Yet we know >from other sources that a neutron which is outside a nucleus will >spontaneously decay into a proton and an electron, and emit .78 MeV in the >process! How believable, then, is it that when a neutron within a nucleus >of 17Cl37 decays into a proton and an electron, 1.32 MeV must be supplied? >(The skinny neutron theory then becomes the super-skinny neutron theory! :-) I agree that nucleons within the compound nuclei have less mass than lone protons or neutrons. This follows from my discussion with Scott on the electron closely approaching the proton in a different thread. [snip] >Is there an alternative interpretation? Well, if we suppose that roughly >half of the sun's energy comes from the carbon cycle, and the rest from the >proton-proton cycle, then the government numbers could be accurate. The >reason: neutrinos from the carbon cycle come in with up to 1.94 MeV. If, as >you suggested earlier, the neutrino gets 80% of the energy on average, then >we have (.8)(1.94) = 1.55 MeV, and we squeak in just under the wire. By Note, that the 80% figure I gave earlier is not from the literature. It's just a sort of mental average that I have been "running" in my mind while looking at various beta decay reactions. Furthermore it doesn't mean that no neutrino can have more than the 80% figure, but rather that all neutrinos together (spread across all decays) will carry about 80% of the total energy (This was only useful for calculating the solar thermal flux). For an individual decay, the neutrino produced could carry anything from 0 energy to the full amount, hence there will always be some neutrinos that are energetic enough. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 16:08:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24266; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:06:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:06:58 -0800 Message-ID: <009801bf4698$a166b7a0$0a441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Crown Engineering Corp. manufactures of, electrodes, flame rods, igniters and t Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 17:06:16 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01BF4655.88443880" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"q30qc1.0.4x5.XkjLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32183 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_0005_01BF4655.88443880 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I used the Industrial Igniter (Ceramic over a Center Wire) for the Discharge to a pool saturated with Lithium Hydroxide ca. 1976, and got what seemed to be OU results. The rods are up to 12 inches long and about 1/2 inch diameter the conductor is about 1/16 inches diameter. http://www.crownengineering.com/ With the sealing Gland they can be used for higher pressures and are adjustable. I got the one I had from a boiler repair scrap yard. :-) Regards, Frederick ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BF4655.88443880 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Crown Engineering Corp. manufactures of, electrodes, flame rods, igniters and terminal connectors.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Crown Engineering Corp. manufactures of, electrodes, flame rods, igniters and terminal connectors.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.crownengineering.com/ [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.crownengineering.com/ Modified=A0918AA99746BF0101 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BF4655.88443880-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 16:22:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA29814; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:20:04 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:20:04 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Solar Protoneutrons Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 11:16:37 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <38512E08.242F930B@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id QAA29756 Resent-Message-ID: <"ECzv2.0.UH7.lwjLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32184 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:24:05 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >>2 p + e -> D + v + 1.44 MeV. (Actually H + H -> D + v + 1.44 MeV, which >>takes proper accounting of the electrons) > >***{You left out the electron on the left side: H + H + e- --> D + v. The No, it was already included in the "H". The "D" however is a deuterium nucleus in the first reaction, and a deuterium atom in the second). [snip] >plasma. If you want to introduce such a concept into this analysis, you >would then have three reactions: > >(1) p + e- --> p/e- > >(2) p/e- + .271 MeV --> n + v This step doesn't mass balance, p/e- presumably has the same mass as a hydrogen atom, which is .78 MeV short of that of a neutron, not .271 MeV. > >(3) p + n --> 1D2 + 2.22 MeV This reaction is not applicable, as not free neutron exists. The reaction I had in mind was: p/e- + p -> 1D2 + v + 1.44 MeV (where the 1D2 represents a bare nucleus). Here, no free neutron takes place in the reaction, the neutron (not free, i.e. "skinny") comes into existence during the beta decay process which occurs simultaneously with the fusion reaction. As a consequence of this simultaneity, the neutrino can sometimes get the full 1.44 MeV. The reaction p + p -> D + e+ +v + 0.42 MeV (D is a bare nucleus). produces at most a 0.42 MeV neutrino, which isn't going to be sufficient for the Cl37 -> Ar37 reaction, so these neutrinos won't play a role at all. (Later the e+ will annihilate an e- producing a pair of .511 MeV gammas, yielding a total energy release of .42 + 1.02 = 1.44 MeV). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 16:29:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA01514; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:28:07 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:28:07 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Y2K Readiness Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 11:24:48 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3856BE42.E49CC254 bellsouth.net> In-Reply-To: <3856BE42.E49CC254 bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id QAA01436 Resent-Message-ID: <"YlN7X.0.EN.F2kLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32185 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 17:01:38 -0500, Terry Blanton wrote: [snip] >Our IT department just sent a request that I work over the New Year holiday to >ensure our computer systems work after 1/1/00. I informed them that I will >gladly run the Y2K testing prior to the holiday; however, I have plans for that >weekend. I guess the idiots don't realize that *we* set the dates on the >computer systems, not God. [snip] Your own clocks may not be the only problem. If you get data from outside the organisation, it may be corrupted by someone else's system, and you may be involved in finding the source of the problem. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 18:18:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA10766; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 18:16:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 18:16:52 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991214201533.007b2930 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 20:15:33 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Y2K Readiness In-Reply-To: <3856BE42.E49CC254 bellsouth.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"D-2Gi3.0.6e2.KelLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32186 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: >My secretary just returned from visiting her In-Laws in France where she learned >that the US is the laughing stock of Europe over our Y2K panic. I agree the panic is silly. On the other hand, as pointed out on the NPR story this morning, the U.S. is more dependent upon computers than any other country, so we have more at stake. Also, I expect the Europeans are in for a lot of nasty trouble in the coming months. I do not expect disasters such as power failures or banks losing records, but I do expect endless confusion with invoicing, inventory, insurance payments and so on, especially in small companies. A friend of mine in the U.S. insurance data processing business joked that it might be easier just to burn all the 20th century paperwork the does not get processed, because it'll never go through after Jan. 1. On Saturday at Hartfield Int. Airport all of the lights in the parking garage were out, and a cop was directing traffic. I asked her what's up. She said, "it's that 2YK (sic) preparation. They are changing the emergency generators circuits one floor at a time." Maybe true? Many of the Y2K changes have been advantageous. For example, New York City now has faster, more convenient, decentrialized driver licensing because they had to toss out the old mainframe system. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 19:04:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA27424; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 19:02:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 19:02:50 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 13:37:23 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <14vd5sgu4sqltf3k9p6n2rtdofj69okfoe 4ax.com> References: <19991214111619.96422.qmail hotmail.com> In-Reply-To: <19991214111619.96422.qmail hotmail.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA27393 Resent-Message-ID: <"jyjZO3.0.Pi6.PJmLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32187 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:16:19 PST, David Dennard wrote: >Robin writes: > >> >>I have attached a small Mathcad document, wherein I calculate that a >>Hurricane that has a power of 34 Ktons of TNT /sec (i.e. about 1.5 times >>the power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, every second) > >What catogory of hurricane are you using? I don't know what the hurricane categories are. I just took a guess at some approximate numbers, and they came out at about the power you gave. [snip] >Science tries to use the "latent heat theory" to bolster the thermodynamic >paradigm but the fallacy is that evaporation itself is gravity driven. As >shown in "The Pearl of Wisdom" all energy of motion comes from gravity. >Heat only sets the relative density off balance. Gravity balances the >scales of density. It all works just like a bubble. Correct, but incomplete. While it's true that hot moist air is pushed up by cold air falling, the cold air supply would "run out" if it weren't for the fact that the hot air cools off again at the top, replacing it, and closing the cycle. Note also, that in order to become lighter than the cold air, the hot moist air must first become less dense. It does this by expanding against the pressure of the cold air mass, pushing the cold air away, and also increasing the pressure of the cold air. It is as if the hot air is loading a spring, which gives it's energy back when it pushes the hot moist air up. Indeed, just like a bubble forming under water, then rising to the surface. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 19:42:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA21625; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 19:40:42 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 19:40:42 -0800 (PST) From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.a31ff884.258866e5 aol.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 22:37:09 EST Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell To: vortex-L eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 56 Resent-Message-ID: <"DBhKv.0.lH5.usmLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32188 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 13 Dec 1999 08:38:37 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: <<...I have talked to some of those people from California, and they did not give me much confidence either. They have not done some basic in-house testing to be absolutely sure the thing is producing excess heat. They more or less accepted his results at face value, which I would never do.>> A question for Ed Wall as well as Jed: what testing of Mills' work has NERL done? If none, why? Jed also wrote: <> Mills has written a lot about calorimetry and excess heat. Years ago, you said of his FUSION TECHNOLOGY articles (which had a lot of solid calorimetry and excess heat in them, especially the 1994 and 1995 articles): say what you like about Mills, but he knows how to write a good scientific article. Have you changed your mind about that? Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 19:50:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA21640; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 19:40:50 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 19:40:50 -0800 (PST) From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.20285703.258866ec aol.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 22:37:16 EST Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell To: vortex-L eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 56 Resent-Message-ID: <"YPaIn.0.1I5._smLu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32189 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Dec. 13, in Message-Id: > People sure do have trouble with Mills' first name: it's Randell, not Randall. And the other guy's last name was Meyer, not Meyers. Seven years ago, I wasted thirty or forty bucks on getting copies of Stanley Meyer's patents from the Patent Office. I didn't see anything in them that made any sense to me and dropped the matter. Thanks to the reporting of Norman Horwood and other Vortexians, and to the reporting of Jed Rothwell and Gene Mallove in INFINITE ENERGY, I eventually learned why Meyer's work didn't make any sense. Stanley Meyer was a conman. According to reports, his investors sued him for fraud and won; and his last words were, "I've been poisoned!" The same reports said that the coroner found that Meyer suffered a stroke. Stanley Meyer died as he lived, a bullshitter to the end. Tom Malloy continued: <> Mills has demonstrated excess energy over and over again, and it has been confirmed even by people who considered him a rival. The level of disbelief re excess heat was so high that he moved on to chemical compounds. But Mills keeps raising the bar himself: now that he's mentioned a battery, people will want to see a battery. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 21:31:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA10201; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 21:21:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 21:21:34 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991214232145.009f8100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 23:21:45 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: J-hook didn't work In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991214154935.01bac828 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991214154935.01bac828 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"EVdBF1.0.JV2.ULoLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32190 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:13 AM 12/15/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Scott, how does your current compare with Mizuno's? (If his is less, at the >same voltage, it may be less destructive). It's similar....about .8 to 1 amp regardless of voltage. He tells me that he has also seen this teflon damage at high voltages. Mitchells: AFAIK, there is only TFE, FEP, and PFA all of which are loosely called "teflon" but are really different fluorocarbon polymers. The stuff I'm using has an outer jacket of TFE around an inner sleeve of FEP which melts onto the wire when shrunk. It's pretty thick when shrunk down onto the 1 mm W wire, about 0.025" thick. 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 Dec 14 21:33:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA14611; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 21:32:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 21:32:14 -0800 Message-ID: <19991215053213.69481.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.145] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 21:32:13 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"oIz4A2.0.Da3.UVoLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32191 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin writes: >Correct, but incomplete. While it's true that hot moist air is pushed up by >cold air falling, the cold air supply would "run out" if it weren't for the >fact that the hot air cools off again at the top, replacing it, and closing >the cycle. Correct but misleading, since the "full circle system" is gravity driven both up and down. >Note also, that in order to become lighter than the cold air, the hot moist >air must first become less dense. It does this by expanding against the >pressure of the cold air mass, pushing the cold air away, and also >increasing the pressure of the cold air. I see it as the heat makes the moist air less dense, not that it has to be less dense first. Heat excites the H20 molecule increasing the vibration of the atoms within the molecule. It only becomes less dense when this happens, not becomes less dense to make it happen. >It is as if the hot air is loading >a spring, which gives it's energy back when it pushes the hot moist air up. >Indeed, just like a bubble forming under water, then rising to the surface. Hold on to that thermodynamic paradigm as long as you can Robin, it won't be around much longer. Your critical error has been exposed. Because gravity pulls the more dense beneath the less dense. Steam on the shuttle just sits there. No gravity, no energy of motion. And even in steam itself, like that toy of suspended steel balls, the vibration works like and explosion to lower the density. What is the sound of one hand clapping? The sound of nothing at all. And no energy of motion. That is why the best of thermodynamic science can't explain %90 of the energy of motion in the Universe. (see ABC News Transcript posted at my website) Science has been clapping with one hand for decades all because Einstein diverged from the gravity constant. But Bachall from Princeton and Perlmutter from Berkeley have changed the course of human history with The Cosmic Triangle and the gravity constant. (see press release on my list) David Dennard The Gravity Paradigm http://www.whirlpower.cc ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 01:47:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA32689; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 01:46:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 01:46:19 -0800 Message-ID: <002301bf46e9$903240c0$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Speculation on Pair Production and the Quasineutron Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 02:45:10 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"yW1RQ2.0.d-7.hDsLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32192 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It is accepted that collision of a 1.02 Mev photon with the high EM field of a nucleus can result in the production of the Electron-Positron Pair. Apparently the Spin 1 photon is divided into a charge-conjugate pair of Spin 1/2 particles each with 1/2 the momentum E/c of the progenitor ~1.02 Mev photon. By the same token, photons with a fraction of an ev energy (Infrared) can form particle pairs when in the ~5.0E11 volt/meter field of the ground state proton-electron "dipole field" of the Hydrogen atom. IOW, the photon is converted ie.,"circularly polarized" into a a pair of Spin 1/2 neutrinos that can exchange angular momentum or Spin m*c*r = n* hbar with the quarks in the proton and thus gain mass from the three quarks in the proton and "shrink" to a radius, R = k/E' with angular momentum/spin and mass being conserved. Ie., what the quarks lose the neutrinos and electron gain, so the mass/energy of the group remains constant. (Electromagnetic Flywheel Effect) Concurrently, this allows the the electron to "shrink" to a radius, R = k/Ee' with mass/spin/ momentum conservation also, thus forming a Quasineutron that can Tunnel into any nucleus and effect Cold Fusion-Fission/OU reactions. With a fraction of an ev rest mass, the neutrinos can travel very close to c; Mrel = Mo[(E'/Eo) + 1] = Mo/[1-(v^2/c^2)]^1/2 even if "spun up/shrunk" to Mev masses. Small wonder that "Neutrino Oscillation" (mass/energy change) occurs with these fickle little Leptons as they pass through matter. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 05:23:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA01793; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 05:21:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 05:21:17 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991215081808.00e62270 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:18:08 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: J-hook didn't work In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19991214232145.009f8100 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991214154935.01bac828 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991214154935.01bac828 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"EKxd3.0.xR.CNvLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32193 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:21 PM 12/14/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 09:13 AM 12/15/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >>Scott, how does your current compare with Mizuno's? (If his is less, at the >>same voltage, it may be less destructive). > >It's similar....about .8 to 1 amp regardless of voltage. He tells me that >he has also seen this teflon damage at high voltages. > >Mitchells: AFAIK, there is only TFE, FEP, and PFA all of which are loosely >called "teflon" but are really different fluorocarbon polymers. The stuff >I'm using has an outer jacket of TFE around an inner sleeve of FEP which >melts onto the wire when shrunk. It's pretty thick when shrunk down onto >the 1 mm W wire, about 0.025" thick. In addition to the composite arrangements and compositions as you suggest, Scott, there are a variety of methods which can coat, crosslink, etc. the polymer (which itself might have varying degrees of polymerization). Good luck. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 05:48:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA09313; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 05:47:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 05:47:00 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991215084651.007a0260 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:46:51 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell In-Reply-To: <0.a31ff884.258866e5 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"LhzUb3.0.NH2.KlvLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32194 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Tom Stolper wrote: >A question for Ed Wall as well as Jed: what testing of Mills' work has NERL >done? If none, why? As a rule, we do not test things without full cooperation from the inventor. Mills will not communicate with us or assign anyone in his company to communicate. As far as I know, only Thermacore has successfully replicated Mills, and they refuse to talk about their work now. Early on, many other people claimed they did, but most of the claims faded away as far as I know. >Mills has written a lot about calorimetry and excess heat. Years ago, you >said of his FUSION TECHNOLOGY articles (which had a lot of solid calorimetry >and excess heat in them . . . Yes, that is true, and the Thermacore work was impressive. But I need to see more replications before I believe it. I guess I have a sense of distrust because I find his strategy and behavior so peculiar. Mills claims remarkable success with a robust phenomenon. You would think others would be able to replicate him, or that he would help others replicate. Is supposedly a lot easier than Pd-D CF. He seems anxious to cooperate with academic researchers who are trying to find shrunken hydrogen and astronomical proof of his theories. Why doesn't he outfit people with heat generating devices? Why is he so secretive about excess heat? Why is he chasing after these new strategies with hydron chemistry, when he already has an invention in hand worth $1 trillion? He said recently he "does not have time to deal with excess heat," as if the energy sector is a minor industry compared to chemistry! Why does he raise money from investors when he could make a fortune overnight by selling what he has? I don't get it. I do not get any of it. I think the man must have a screw loose, but I have not met him and I know little about his work, so I really cannot judge what is going on. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 07:51:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA17477; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 07:49:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 07:49:11 -0800 Message-ID: <007101bf4713$ff6f53e0$83637dc7 computer> From: "Ed Wall" To: References: <0.a31ff884.258866e5 aol.com> Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:49:38 -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 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"GYWXe1.0.wG4.sXxLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32195 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Tom Stolper wrote: > A question for Ed Wall as well as Jed: what testing of Mills' work has NERL > done? If none, why? Good question. We are interested in any experiment that we believe we have a reasonable chance of success to achieve. I tried a Mills cell over a year ago before starting work here with no excess heat seen. It was hardly an exemplary effort, so it means little, but was an excellent first calorimeter for me. There are remnants of a Mills cell experiment conducted before I got here by somebody. Apparently, it was also insignificant. We believe that Ni in K2CO3 / light water is a viable candidate for a demo cell and are looking into a good approach for this experiment at present. While it is generally wise to report failed attempts, some attempts are not worth reporting for obvious reasons. The best efforts (excess heat or not) from the most qualified individuals are what warrant attention. The water is muddy enough. Edward Wall New Energy Research Laboratory Cold Fusion Technology, P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302-2816 (603) 226-4822 fax (603) 224-5975 ewall infinite-energy.com www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 08:06:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA23373; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:04:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:04:56 -0800 Message-ID: <003901bf471e$69f4b8e0$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Self-Healing Aqueous Pools vs The Mizuno Apparatus Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 09:02:18 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"phnM11.0.7j5.dmxLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32196 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Self-Healing aqueous pool containing Potassium and Water-Soluble Tungsten Salts (or other metal salts)in a cylindrical metal pressure vessel, with the vessel serving as the cathode and an insulated anode would be much less of a chore than the Mizuno setup. In this way since the anode is in the vapor space, it only sees electrons and can be something less expensive than Platinum. Also, the vesssel can be pressurized depending on the calorimeter heat-sink rate and the rate of recombination in the vapor space. Chewing up Tungsten, as in the present experiment doesn't seem to promise too much in the way of a commercialization future, does it Scott? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 08:21:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27972; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:19:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:19:42 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991215111938.0079ce50 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 11:19:38 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Good article on A.I. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"mvbTP2.0.-q6.U-xLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32197 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: There was a marvelous short article about artificial intelligence: H. Moravec, "Rise of the Robots," Scientific American, Dec. 1999 Abstract: By 2050 robotic "brains" based on computers that execute 100 trillion instructions per second will rival human intelligence. I have never seen the A.I. problem so skillfully analyzed, in such practical, nuts-and-bolts, quantitative terms. Moravec is an expert in robot vision systems. He compares the performance of the fastest computer pattern recognition to the performance of the neural cells at the back of the eye. He makes a convincing case that even small animal brains are hundreds of thousands times faster and more capable than the best computer yet devised. Of course computers are faster in some ways, but not in the kinds of tasks we associate with intelligence such as vision, balance, and the general ability to move around in and cope with the physical world. Moravec predicts that computers will gradually reach the intelligence levels of lizards, birds, mice, cats, dogs and finally people. He does not predict any sudden breakthroughs, only gradual improvement recapitulating evolution on a much shorter timescale. People like Minsky and Clarke who predicted artificial intelligence might appear by now did not realize how fantastically capable the brain is. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 08:33:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA01189; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:32:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:32:05 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <6vgd5s4jhqe55ruhlc4faa57h6c3292uej 4ax.com> References: <38565ED8.30EA64B6 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38565ED8.30EA64B6 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:27:24 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"fL_FX2.0.PI.5AyLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32199 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:14:32 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: >[snip] >>Although the Davis detector may not be much good for >>neutrinos, is it possible that it may be good for >>detecting something else? >> >>Jack Smith >> >If their detector contained some dissolved argon, then it's possible that >they are just detecting decays from neutron capture of Ar36, with the >neutrons supplied by the surrounding rock (through neutrons produced by >alpha particles from alpha decay in the rocks). ***{So we are back to the neutron contamination theory again? Well, it seems to work here just as it did with the Cowan-Reines experiment. The isotope 18Ar36 has a natural abundance of .34%, and, being an inert gas, would be almost impossible to remove from the C2Cl4 solution. Since the detector is located deep in a gold mine in South Dakota, there should be lots of radon to spit out alphas, and lots of light elements around (e.g., beryllium, boron) to absorb the alphas, become excited, and then drop back to ground state by emitting neutrons. Hell, there might even be some uranium around, undergoing spontaneous fission and spitting out neutrons. To keep the neutrons out of the neutrino detector, therefore, very heavy shielding would be required. Is it present? I have no idea. Bottom line: we seem to be back to square one: either the shielding isn't thick enough to screen out all the neutrons, or it is thick enough. If the former, then neutrinos may not exist; if they latter, then they do exist. One way to choose between these two possibilities would be to find out more about the shielding that was used around these detectors. Another way would be to simply assume that the need to screen out neutrons has been obvious to those who designed these various neutrino detectors and, thus, that they have provided adequate shielding. The first approach is going to require a lot of work on somebody's part, because these kind of details are not going to be easy to find. The second one is the norm for most of mankind: trust the "experts," and parrot whatever they say. --MJ*** >Alternatively, if they are just checking for "flashes", then almost any >nuclear reaction could be responsible. >(I don't know their setup, as you can plainly see). ***{It is becoming increasingly clear that more information is needed, unless we simply assume that all the i's were dotted and all the t's were crossed by the experimenters. And if we opt for the latter, then what are we doing here on vortex? (If it were possible to trust the scientific consensus, then there would be no reason for looking at "cold fusion" results, now would there?) The problem is that it is difficult to conclude that Davis would not have been dumb enough to use insufficient shielding around his detector, down in the mine shaft in South Dakota. The reasons are as follows: (1) If the government's published tables of atomic masses are accurate, then Davis' "solar neutrino detector" is a piece of junk that obviously will not detect most solar neutrinos. (2) Based on what I have read about his detector, he regarded the placement of the detector deep underground *as his method of shielding*. I have seen nothing thus far addressing the possibility that the "shielding" he was using--the geological formations around the detector--might be neutron sources. And I have seen no reference to any additional shielding which was placed around the detector, down in the mine itself. Bottom line: I find this to be a frustrating situation. I want to declare that the case for neutrinos has been proven, brush my hands together, and move on, but I can't. What a pain. --MJ}*** > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 08:33:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA01131; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:32:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:32:01 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <0.65f7bcf3.258712e9 aol.com> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:02:33 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: "Hydrinos," or "Protoneutrons?" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA01108 Resent-Message-ID: <"dMP5C2.0.ZH.0AyLu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32198 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:08:04 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>and the nucleus, but disagree about the stability of those orbits. My main >>reason for considering such orbits to be unstable is the obvious one: if >>some of them were stable, we would be up to our eyeballs in "hydrinos", and >>could not have failed to notice. The universe, after all, is 75% hydrogen. >>--Mitchell Jones}*** >According to Mills we have noticed, we just don't believe our eyes. ***{I haven't read his book, but how could we fail to believe something was a bit odd when, for example, we encountered a supply of "hydrinos" in which n = 1/4? The atomic radius would be r = (1/16)(.53 Å) = .033 Å, and the density, other things equal, would increase by a factor of 4096. I doubt that it would react in the manner of ordinary hydrogen, and I have no idea whether it would take the form of a solid, liquid, or gas at ordinary temperatures, but in any case the enormous density of such material should prevent its escaping the atmosphere. Result: whatever form it took, we should be literally up to our armpits in the stuff. Since the density of ordinary hydrogen under standard conditions is .08988 gms per liter, the density of n = 1/4 hydrino hydrogen in gaseous form would be 4096(.08988) = 368 g/l, and it would displace the rest of the atmosphere upward and cause all life on Earth to suffocate. Therefore we can safely conclude that it takes either the form of a solid or a liquid at ordinary temperatures. But, in that case, we should be able to *literally* see the stuff. So where is it? Does Mills argue, for example, that it sinks to the center of the Earth where, due to heating, it becomes ordinary hydrogen again? --MJ}*** > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 11:12:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA25200; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 11:04:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 11:04:54 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3854044F.2ED6 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:45:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"TQG9n2.0.g96.LP-Lu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32200 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >John Logajan wrote: >> >> Jim Ostrowski wrote: >> > acts are considered voluntary unless they are induced >> > by coercion or fraud. >> >> Exactly. >> >> > "...that a brave man could resist..." >> >> The fallacy of sanction of the victim. That's the logic >> of the school yard bully -- his victims, by your logic, >> are volunteers. > >No. You can ignore or edit out my clarifications but that doesn't mean I >didn't make them. > >School yard bully recruits a few people to be members of his gang. He >announces that if everyone pays him through his agent gang members 50 >cents pey day, no one will get beat up. > >Nearly everyone antes up, except for a few reluctant stragglers. The few >reluctant stragglers get beat up. These are "victims". They did NOT >volunteer, like everyone else. > >Everyone else, however, submitted VOLUNTARILY. They are not victims. >They are willing participants in the tyranny of the School Yard Bully. > >The reluctant stragglers have the right and justification to accuse the >bully, his gang members, AND ALL OTHER VOLUNTEERS of participating in >the tyranny. > >Jim Ostrowski ***{OK, Jim, consider this: Sam is walking down the sidewalk, minding his own business, when a footpad steps out of an alley, aims a large pistol at him, and says: "Your money or your life." Sam antes up, the footpad disappears back into the alley, and Sam goes on his way. Next, Bill comes down the same sidewalk, and, as he passes the same alley, the same footpad steps out, levels the same gun at him, and makes the same offer. Bill, having just attended a lecture by Jim Ostrovski on the subject of moral culpability and not wanting to *voluntarily* support a robber, refuses, and is then killed very dead by a large bullet from the large pistol. Result: by your theory Bill is a victim of murder, the footpad is the murderer, and Sam not merely gave up his money voluntarily, but is an accessory before the fact in the murder of Bill, right? *Surely you can see how ridiculous that is!* Naturally, you will come back with the notion that, of course, Bill was not obligated to *die*. He was only obligated to resist lesser threats--threats that did not involve immediate death. But where do you draw the line? If the threat enunciated by the robber is that he will shoot you in the kneecaps, must you resist? No? Then what if the threat is merely to beat you unconscious? By what logic do you decide where the line ought to be drawn, and who applies that logic? Are we to turn to Jim Ostrovski to answer such questions for us? Or are we permited to make such judgments ourselves? The answer, like it or not, is that each individual is on perfectly solid ground when he makes such decisions himself. We are not all obligated to draw the line in exactly the same place, despite your implication to the contrary. There is, of course, some truth in what you say: most Americans condone, endorse, and encourage the depredations of the goons in Washington. And, to the extent that they do so, they must be considered morally culpable. However, it is absurd for you to argue that a person who not merely did not support the depredations, but who was outspoken in disagreement with them throughout his life, is culpable merely because he regarded your courtroom crusade to be a silly waste of time. Bottom line: People get to decide such matters for themselves. Failure to subscribe to Jim Ostrovski's program of social activism is *not* the standard by which moral culpability is or ought to be judged. John is right: the victim gets to decide how he is to respond to aggression, and, so long as he does not respond by joining the aggressor in his depredations, he is not morally tainted by them, and he cannot reasonably be said to be a "volunteer" rather than a victim. --MJ}*** > >> - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - >> - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - >> - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. >> Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 13:32:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12799; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 13:28:00 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 13:28:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <38580EF3.6A19 ca-ois.com> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 13:58:11 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"R32_L2.0.Z73.QV0Mu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32201 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >John Logajan wrote: > >> > >> Jim Ostrowski wrote: > >> > acts are considered voluntary unless they are induced > >> > by coercion or fraud. > >> > >> Exactly. > >> > >> > "...that a brave man could resist..." > >> > >> The fallacy of sanction of the victim. That's the logic > >> of the school yard bully -- his victims, by your logic, > >> are volunteers. > > > >No. You can ignore or edit out my clarifications but that doesn't mean I > >didn't make them. > > > >School yard bully recruits a few people to be members of his gang. He > >announces that if everyone pays him through his agent gang members 50 > >cents pey day, no one will get beat up. > > > >Nearly everyone antes up, except for a few reluctant stragglers. The few > >reluctant stragglers get beat up. These are "victims". They did NOT > >volunteer, like everyone else. > > > >Everyone else, however, submitted VOLUNTARILY. They are not victims. > >They are willing participants in the tyranny of the School Yard Bully. > > > >The reluctant stragglers have the right and justification to accuse the > >bully, his gang members, AND ALL OTHER VOLUNTEERS of participating in > >the tyranny. > > > >Jim Ostrowski > > ***{OK, Jim, consider this: Sam is walking down the sidewalk, minding his > own business, when a footpad steps out of an alley, aims a large pistol at > him, and says: "Your money or your life." Sam antes up, the footpad > disappears back into the alley, and Sam goes on his way. The above situation is in no way analogous to the way gov't goes about getting money from anyone, at least nowadays. As I posited earlier, the situation is more like the thug posting a general announcement that everyone is obliged to pay him or his agents so much per day, week, year (etc.) and if they do, no one will suffer any physical harm or loss of thier liberty. Sam, upon reading the announcement decides this is pretty reasoanble "insurance" and drops by the thug's office in a nearby wrecking yard and antes up. Thug uses the money to expand his wrecking yard business and to hire more thugs to help him out. > Next, Bill comes > down the same sidewalk, and, as he passes the same alley, the same footpad > steps out, levels the same gun at him, and makes the same offer. Bill, > having just attended a lecture by Jim Ostrovski on the subject of moral > culpability and not wanting to *voluntarily* support a robber, refuses, and > is then killed very dead by a large bullet from the large pistol. No, it doesn't work like that either. Bill ignores the thug's announcement and goes about his business. One day, one of thug's new henchmen approaches Bill while he is walking down the street and tells him Vito (the boss thug) wants to have a little talk with him, at his wrecking yard office. Bill, having recently attended one of my lectures obligingly shows up at Vito's office where Vito is present along with 5 of his newly hired goons. No guns are drawn but Vito begins explaining to Bill how it would be to Bill's advantage to cough up some dough. "Call it `insurance', Bill.", says Vito, " You don't have a problem with getting a little `insurance', do you? What some unfortunate `accident' happens to you? With my `insurance' such accidents are a lot less likely to happen, don't you agree?" Bill asserts moral authority in the matter and explains to Vito how what he is doing is wrong. The five henchmen are listening to all of this. When Bill is through delivering a fine summation about honor, the advantages of "doing the right thing" and so on Vito is visibly shaken but says nothing. "Think about what I've said, all of you." Bill says as he leaves. "If you have any more questions about, honor, integrity and why doing the right thing is a good deal, don't hesitate to call on me again. Bye now!" After Bill leaves, Vito and his henchmen have a conference about different ways to "convince" Bill to buy some "insurance". Some, including Vito, argue that an immediate "accident" should be arranged to "happen" to Bill. But some of what Bill has said has rubbed off on a couple of the newly hired thugs. They say nothing, but these two later on get together and decide to warn Bill about what Vito and the others are up to. So they do that and Bill now has two new friends. With these two new friends he has adventures including narrow escapes from the clutches of Vito, death defying stunts and romantic interludes with beautiful young ladies who he meets during the course of these adventures. He has a LIFE! He sells the rights to the story of these adventures to a Hollywood movie studio and Andy Garcia plays Bill. Bill has fun with plenty of money and lots of girlfriends. Sam on the other hand, well he has his ho-hum job and Vito's "insurance". Nothing out of the ordinary happens to him at all, at least nothing worth making a movie about. > Result: > by your theory Bill is a victim of murder, the footpad is the murderer, and > Sam not merely gave up his money voluntarily, but is an accessory before > the fact in the murder of Bill, right? *Surely you can see how ridiculous > that is!* No. Since I am still alive, Bill is still theoretically alive according to the analogy. I do not anticipate becoming a murder victim. And if I do, WTF, at least I really lived. Guys like Sam just EXIST...which is not the same as really being alive, now is it? > > Naturally, you will come back with the notion that, of course, Bill was not > obligated to *die*. He was only obligated to resist lesser threats--threats > that did not involve immediate death. But where do you draw the line? I have never really found it necessary to draw any line. I did have a cop's gun pointed at me once after "resisting arrest". He subdued me that way and made me sit on the curb handcuffed while he radioed his superiors. His superiors told him to let me go. Another time I was surrounded near my home by six young gang members. After they threatened to beat me up they told me to go back in my home and stay there. I went back inside my home but emerged immediately thereafter with my 12 guage pistol grip pump shotgun. Bullies disappeared. THEY called the cops. Cops backed THEM up, because the gang, after all were actually being sponsored in their activities by the same cops, it turned out. My shotgun was siezed by the cops, but I got it back after impressing Judge "Vito" with my integrity. He wanted no part of what I might have to say if that case ever got so far as an actual trial. He actually had to use his Marshalls to go in to the Sheriffs and physically get my gun back from them. Now this may not yet at this point be Hollywood movie material but it's a dam sight further along in that direction than YOUR life, I'll bet, Mitchell. > If > the threat enunciated by the robber is that he will shoot you in the > kneecaps, must you resist? No? No. > Then what if the threat is merely to beat > you unconscious? It was, but I was given a choice to suffer that or go back into my home and "stay there", depriving me of my liberty. I saw no need to put up with that for any longer than it took to get my shotgun. > By what logic do you decide where the line ought to be > drawn, and who applies that logic? It's easy. If someone threatens you, go along with what they want, if you don't think you can overcome it physically at that moment. But when you get the chance, DO SOMETHING THEN! Are we to turn to Jim Ostrovski to > answer such questions for us? The name's OstroWski, with a dubblyou. And, no you shouldn't need to ask me anything. Look inside yourself and see if anything is there, first. If not, then ask me, if you want. If you don't want to that, fine, but since you seem to be asking here, I say again - "When you get the chance - DO SOMETHING!" > Or are we permited to make such judgments > ourselves? Why certainly Mitchell. That's called free will. > The answer, like it or not, is that each individual is on > perfectly solid ground when he makes such decisions himself. Yeah. the choice is yours, by all means. > We are not all > obligated to draw the line in exactly the same place, despite your > implication to the contrary. My implication was not that you are OBLIGATED to do anything. You can choose to be like Sam, or you can choose to be like Bill. I don't care. I'm just saying that for me, it's more fun to try to be like Bill. > > There is, of course, some truth in what you say: most Americans condone, > endorse, and encourage the depredations of the goons in Washington. And, to > the extent that they do so, they must be considered morally culpable. > However, it is absurd for you to argue that a person who not merely did not > support the depredations, but who was outspoken in disagreement with them > throughout his life, is culpable merely because he regarded your courtroom > crusade to be a silly waste of time. I can appreciate that you like to disagree with Vito, but not to his face. To me, doing that is not exactly an honorable thing, but that's just me. Go ahead and talk behind Vito's back all you want and see what that gets you. > Bottom line: People get to decide such matters for themselves. Yes. > Failure to > subscribe to Jim Ostrovski's program of social activism is *not* the > standard by which moral culpability is or ought to be judged. Guess what? Since I regard this as a free country I'll make any judgements I care to, thank you, whether YOU think I "ought to" or not. If you don't like it, come over here, pull a gun on me or something and see what happens, ya little twerp. > John is > right: the victim gets to decide how he is to respond to aggression, and, > so long as he does not respond by joining the aggressor in his > depredations, he is not morally tainted by them, and he cannot reasonably > be said to be a "volunteer" rather than a victim. Bullshit. Go rent the movie "Tombstone" and get a clue about what honor is. Doc Holiday knew. You are clueless. Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 15:46:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA01313; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 15:42:22 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 15:42:22 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 13:38:56 -1000 Subject: PLUG power off-grid From: Rick Monteverde To: vortex-l Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UxYbT1.0.QK.ST2Mu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32202 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Don't know the economics of this one yet as compared to electricity for the long haul, but it's interesting. You can get off the grid and know that your household electricity needs are not contributing to the current environmental problems. Runs on natural gas or propane. http://www.plugpower.com/about/ PLUG is traded on the NASDAQ: http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=PLUG&d=3m Sales to begin in 2001. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 15:50:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA16399; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 15:48:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 15:48:27 -0800 Message-ID: <02c301bf4756$ea5baf60$f68280d8 btech> From: "Bill Wallace`" To: References: Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 18:48:37 -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 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Resent-Message-ID: <"5KyGW.0.504.9Z2Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32203 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yes I have made a fortune on the stock - please take notice (hehe) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Monteverde" To: "vortex-l" Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 1999 6:38 PM Subject: PLUG power off-grid > Don't know the economics of this one yet as compared to electricity for the > long haul, but it's interesting. You can get off the grid and know that your > household electricity needs are not contributing to the current > environmental problems. Runs on natural gas or propane. > > http://www.plugpower.com/about/ > > PLUG is traded on the NASDAQ: > > http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=PLUG&d=3m > > Sales to begin in 2001. > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 16:10:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24235; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 16:09:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 16:09:19 -0800 Message-ID: <01BF4717.096BE8B0 istf-1-47.ucdavis.edu> From: Dan Quickert To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: PLUG power off-grid Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 16:11:22 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BF4717.096BE8B0" Resent-Message-ID: <"1IlLy.0.Ww5.ks2Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32204 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BF4717.096BE8B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Rick - >... your household electricity needs are not contributing to the > current environmental problems. > Runs on natural gas or propane. Not to start another controversial discussion, but... those two sentences seem to be conflicting. Dan Quickert ------ =_NextPart_000_01BF4717.096BE8B0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhkAAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAqAEAAAEAAAARAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAADAHE6AAAAAB4A9l8BAAAAFAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AAgH3XwEAAABFAAAAAAAAAIErH6S+oxAZnW4A3QEPVAIAAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1v LmNvbQBTTVRQAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20AAAAAAwD9XwEAAAADAP9fAAAAAAIB9g8BAAAA BAAAAAAAAAK4VgEEgAEAGAAAAFJFOiBQTFVHIHBvd2VyIG9mZi1ncmlkAKQHAQWAAwAOAAAAzwcM AA8AEAALABYAAwAlAQEggAMADgAAAM8HDAAPABAABwASAAMAHQEBCYABACEAAAAyRTgwQkZCOTQw QjNEMzExOTkxNTFBMDAxQTAwMDAwMADQBgEDkAYAlAQAACIAAAALAAIAAQAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAm AAAAAAALACkAAAAAAAMALgAAAAAAAwA2AAAAAABAADkAIKaKFVpHvwEeAHAAAQAAABgAAABSRTog UExVRyBwb3dlciBvZmYtZ3JpZAACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABv0daFX+5v4Avs0AR05kVGgAaAAAAAAAe AB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AHwwBAAAAFwAAAGRlcXVpY2tlcnRAdWNkYXZpcy5lZHUAAAMA BhCckLUZAwAHEMkAAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAABSSUNLLVlPVVJIT1VTRUhPTERFTEVDVFJJQ0lUWU5F RURTQVJFTk9UQ09OVFJJQlVUSU5HVE9USEVDVVJSRU5URU5WSVJPTk1FTlRBTFBST0JMRU1TUlVO U09OTkFUVVJBTEdBAAAAAAIBCRABAAAAYQEAAF0BAADEAQAATFpGdbENGr93AAoBAwH3IAKkA+MC AGOCaArAc2V0MCAHE00CgH0KgAjIIDsJbzLMNTUCgAqBdWMAUAsDBmMAQQtgbmcxMDMGMwumB/Bp Y2sgLccK4wqECoRkID4TcQ/gki4WwCB5CGEgaAhgSw+wF1BsFkBlbAWQdIEFEGNpdHkgbgng1mQE IArAZRigbwVABaAjAjAFEGJ1dAuAZyCkdG8aUGhlFUQ+GYCPCHAJcAIwF+BudmkDYM5uB4ACMAdA IHADYAJgkGVtcy4axlJ1BjEzAiAYoGF0CHAccWdh/x3hBcAcoQqwGLAdJRWpE3L3B7AZYRphcwGQ ACAZABlR5xqgBcAZk292BJAAkBxxLmQEABtABBBpAiAsILcZ8RbCGpBvD7AaUHchUXsbgQnwYweR D7Ac8BpSYnMZMBmRZmwU4BoSH5tE2QORUXUU4QSQdB+kEHECACkwAAAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAA AB4AQhABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAADAIAQ/////0AABzBgf2eEWUe/AUAACDBgf2eEWUe/AQsAAIAIIAYA AAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAOFAAAAAAAAAwABgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAEIUAAAAAAAAD AAKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAABShQAA8xUAAB4AA4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFSF AAABAAAABQAAADguMDQAAAAAAwAEgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAAYUAAAAAAAALAAWACCAG AAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAOhQAAAAAAAAMABoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAABGFAAAAAAAA AwAHgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAGIUAAAAAAAAeAAiACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAA2 hQAAAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAHgAJgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAN4UAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAB4A CoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAADiFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAeAD0AAQAAAAUAAABSRTogAAAA AAMADTT9NwAA6dc= ------ =_NextPart_000_01BF4717.096BE8B0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 17:39:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA16912; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:38:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:38:08 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991215193739.007a1140 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 19:37:39 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"6iXNC2.0.A84.0A4Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32205 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: >Don't know the economics of this one yet as compared to electricity for the >long haul, but it's interesting. You can get off the grid and know that your >household electricity needs are not contributing to the current >environmental problems. Runs on natural gas or propane. Sorry, no. Your electricity would contribute as much to environmental problems as power from a central gas-fired turbine, and it would contribute more than hydro or fission based electricity. The global warming carbon impact would be the same. However, gas is the cleanest combustion fuel, and a fuel cell is a very clean way to use it. This does reduce the need for ugly power lines, which add a lot to your power bill. The natural gas distribution pipe network is more robust. I would recommend this to people who live in the country far from the main power lines. Maintaining a power line right-of-way is a pain in the butt. (Been there, done that.) The only better method, it seems to me, is a co-generator in a cold climate. In Georgia the fuel cell approach has a lot going for it. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 23:15:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA02763; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:14:28 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:14:28 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 18:11:06 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <19991215053213.69481.qmail hotmail.com> In-Reply-To: <19991215053213.69481.qmail hotmail.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id XAA02709 Resent-Message-ID: <"etarS3.0.3h.I59Mu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32206 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 21:32:13 PST, David Dennard wrote: [snip] >Correct but misleading, since the "full circle system" is gravity driven >both up and down. No, only down (last I checked gravity doesn't normally work "up"). > >>Note also, that in order to become lighter than the cold air, the hot moist >>air must first become less dense. It does this by expanding against the >>pressure of the cold air mass, pushing the cold air away, and also >>increasing the pressure of the cold air. > >I see it as the heat makes the moist air less dense, not that it has to be >less dense first. That isn't what I said (I took it as obvious that the expansion was caused by heating). In order to become less dense, the same amount of air needs to take up more volume. To do this, it needs to push cold air aside (while being heated). >Heat excites the H20 molecule increasing the vibration of >the atoms within the molecule. The heat energy is spread over all the degrees of freedom that the molecules have. So some of it goes to internal degrees of freedom, some to external, i.e. toward increasing the velocity of the molecules. >It only becomes less dense when this >happens, not becomes less dense to make it happen. This is a misinterpretation of my intent. > >>It is as if the hot air is loading >>a spring, which gives it's energy back when it pushes the hot moist air up. >>Indeed, just like a bubble forming under water, then rising to the surface. > >Hold on to that thermodynamic paradigm as long as you can Robin, it won't be >around much longer. Your critical error has been exposed. Because gravity >pulls the more dense beneath the less dense. This also happens to be the essence of the standard paradigm. Far from being at odds with one another, we actually agree on this point. >Steam on the shuttle just sits >there. No gravity, no energy of motion. While this is true, it's also true that air that doesn't get heated also just sits there, despite the continuous presence of gravity. >And even in steam itself, like >that toy of suspended steel balls, the vibration works like and explosion to >lower the density. And the expansion is driven by the heat. > >What is the sound of one hand clapping? A paradox, and they don't exist. > >The sound of nothing at all. And no energy of motion. Just like cold air doesn't rise. > >That is why the best of thermodynamic science can't explain %90 of the >energy of motion in the Universe. (see ABC News Transcript posted at my >website) I'm afraid I couldn't find this. >Science has been clapping with one hand for decades all because >Einstein diverged from the gravity constant. But Bachall from Princeton and >Perlmutter from Berkeley have changed the course of human history with The >Cosmic Triangle and the gravity constant. (see press release on my list) I'm afraid I couldn't find this either. (Perhaps you could post a complete URL?) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 23:17:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA02793; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:14:39 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:14:39 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <385899A5.6153 ca-ois.com> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:49:57 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> <38580EF3.6A19@ca-ois.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; name="MAGGIE.TXT" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="MAGGIE.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id XAA02768 Resent-Message-ID: <"P4bw13.0.Yh.U59Mu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32207 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hey Mitchell, Sorry I called you a little twerp. That was a cheap shot. And you are really not clueless either. You are probably hipper than most everyone on vortex about what is happening to what we used to call "America". Speaking of hip, here's the words to one of my favorite Dylan tunes. All Dylan did was complain, too, but he was cool. Wouldn't let MTV shoot him out of any cannons. You could kick as much ass as Bob Dylan, I bet, if you could figure out a way to put your sentiments to music, like he did. Cheers :) Jim O. Maggie`s Farm Well I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more ... No, I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more ... I get up in the mornin' ,fold my hands and pray for rain Got a head full of ideas, drivin me insane It's a shame the way she makes me scrub the floor Well I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more ... Well , I ain't gonna work for Maggie's brother no more Well , I ain't gonna work for Maggie's brother no more He hands you a nickle and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin "are you havin' a good time?" and he fines you every time you slam the door... Nah, I ain't gonna work for Maggie's brother no more.. Well, I ain't gonna work for Maggie's Pa no more.. Nah, I ain't gonna work for Maggie's Pa no more.. He puts his cigarrette out in your face just for kicks, an' he stares out of a window that's made out of bricks and the National Guard stands outside his door.. Naw, I ain't gonna work for Maggie's Pa no more.. Well,I ain't gonna work for Maggie's Ma no more.. Nah, I ain't gonna work for Maggie's Ma no more.. She talks to all her servants about Man and God and Law Everybody says she's the brains behind Pa She's sixty but she says she's twenty-four Nah, I ain't gonna work for Maggie's Ma no more.. Nah, I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more.. Nah, I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more.. I try my best to be like I am But everybody wants ya to be just like them they say "sing while you sow" but I get bored.. Nah, I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more..  From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 23:22:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA21296; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:21:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:21:17 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <38580EF3.6A19 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 01:17:39 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"hyYXl2.0.YC5.jB9Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32208 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >> >John Logajan wrote: >> >> >> >> Jim Ostrowski wrote: >> >> > acts are considered voluntary unless they are induced >> >> > by coercion or fraud. >> >> >> >> Exactly. >> >> >> >> > "...that a brave man could resist..." >> >> >> >> The fallacy of sanction of the victim. That's the logic >> >> of the school yard bully -- his victims, by your logic, >> >> are volunteers. >> > >> >No. You can ignore or edit out my clarifications but that doesn't mean I >> >didn't make them. >> > >> >School yard bully recruits a few people to be members of his gang. He >> >announces that if everyone pays him through his agent gang members 50 >> >cents pey day, no one will get beat up. >> > >> >Nearly everyone antes up, except for a few reluctant stragglers. The few >> >reluctant stragglers get beat up. These are "victims". They did NOT >> >volunteer, like everyone else. >> > >> >Everyone else, however, submitted VOLUNTARILY. They are not victims. >> >They are willing participants in the tyranny of the School Yard Bully. >> > >> >The reluctant stragglers have the right and justification to accuse the >> >bully, his gang members, AND ALL OTHER VOLUNTEERS of participating in >> >the tyranny. >> > >> >Jim Ostrowski >> >> ***{OK, Jim, consider this: Sam is walking down the sidewalk, minding his >> own business, when a footpad steps out of an alley, aims a large pistol at >> him, and says: "Your money or your life." Sam antes up, the footpad >> disappears back into the alley, and Sam goes on his way. > >The above situation is in no way analogous to the way gov't goes about >getting money from anyone, at least nowadays. ***{I didn't claim it was analogous. My purpose in setting up the example as I did was to raise the question of where the line ought to be drawn between submission and confrontation, and on the matter of how and by whom that decision ought to be made. --MJ}*** As I posited earlier, the >situation is more like the thug posting a general announcement that >everyone is obliged to pay him or his agents >so much per day, week, year (etc.) and if they do, no one will suffer >any physical harm or loss of thier liberty. > >Sam, upon reading the announcement decides this is pretty reasoanble >"insurance" and drops by the thug's office in a nearby wrecking yard and >antes up. Thug uses the money to expand his wrecking yard business and >to hire more thugs to help him out. > >> Next, Bill comes >> down the same sidewalk, and, as he passes the same alley, the same footpad >> steps out, levels the same gun at him, and makes the same offer. Bill, >> having just attended a lecture by Jim Ostrovski on the subject of moral >> culpability and not wanting to *voluntarily* support a robber, refuses, and >> is then killed very dead by a large bullet from the large pistol. > >No, it doesn't work like that either. ***{I repeat: I made no claim that my example represented the normal way the government works. My intent was to raise a very specific issue--to wit: what are the criteria by which a proper response to coercion ought to be determined. Thus far, you seem to have missed the point. --MJ}*** Bill ignores the thug's >announcement and goes about his business. One day, one of thug's new >henchmen approaches Bill while he is walking down the street and tells >him Vito (the boss thug) wants to have a little talk with him, at his >wrecking yard office. > >Bill, having recently attended one of my lectures obligingly shows up at >Vito's office where Vito is present along with 5 of his newly hired >goons. No guns are drawn but Vito >begins explaining to Bill how it would be to Bill's advantage to cough >up some dough. > >"Call it `insurance', Bill.", says Vito, " You don't have a problem with >getting a little `insurance', do you? What some unfortunate `accident' >happens to you? With my `insurance' such accidents are a lot less likely >to happen, don't you agree?" > >Bill asserts moral authority in the matter and explains to Vito how what >he is doing is wrong. The five henchmen are listening to all of this. >When Bill is through delivering >a fine summation about honor, the advantages of "doing the right thing" >and so on Vito is visibly shaken but says nothing. ***{If "Vito" is like any of the mob guys I have known, he will most assuredly *not* be shaken, whether visibly or otherwise. Indeed, the question of whether you will get your skull cracked then and there will depend on two things: (a) whether you are polite when you argue with him, and (b) whether anyone knows you are there. If you are polite, he may argue with you in a good-natured way for awhile, out of curiosity. (Some of these guys are very bright--not at all like the Hollywood stereotypical flat-nosed thugs.) At the end of the conversation, however, he will make it clear that he does not consider himself bound by the moral principles you have enunciated, and that you have a choice between giving him what he wants, or experiencing some alternative outcome that is far less pleasant. And that will, in fact, be the case: no bluff, just fact. --MJ}*** > >"Think about what I've said, all of you." Bill says as he leaves. "If >you have any more questions about, honor, integrity and why doing the >right thing is a good deal, don't hesitate to call on me again. Bye >now!" > >After Bill leaves, Vito and his henchmen have a conference about >different ways to "convince" Bill to buy some "insurance". ***{Perhaps, but the conference will not begin until they stop rolling around on the floor laughing. --MJ}*** Some, >including Vito, argue that an immediate "accident" should be arranged to >"happen" to Bill. But some of what Bill has said has rubbed off on a >couple of the newly hired thugs. They say nothing, but these two later >on get together and decide to warn Bill about what Vito and the others >are up to. ***{A pure fantasy, ludicrous beyond belief. You are living in a dream world if you think you can deflect mobsters from their purpose by means of moral arguments. Such people would have no more concern about maiming or killing you than they would have about stepping on a cockroach. Their sole concern would be to calculate the amount of force you could bring to bear against them in the event they moved against you, and moral arguments would not be represented in that equation. --MJ}*** > >So they do that and Bill now has two new friends. With these two new >friends he has adventures including narrow escapes from the clutches of >Vito, death defying stunts and romantic interludes with beautiful young >ladies who he meets during the course of these adventures. He has a >LIFE! He sells the rights to the story of these adventures to a >Hollywood movie studio and Andy Garcia plays Bill. Bill has fun with >plenty of money and lots of girlfriends. ***{Nope. Bill provokes uproarious laughter, and, after Vito and the boys wipe the tears from their eyes, they crack his skull and dump his body in a landfill somewhere. End of story. --MJ}*** > >Sam on the other hand, well he has his ho-hum job and Vito's >"insurance". Nothing out of the ordinary happens to him at all, at least >nothing worth making a movie about. ***{Maybe, and maybe not. It is true that the plodders pay their taxes and, if required, pay tribute to the local mob; but the same is true, in the vast majority of cases, of the creative people who, in the long run, move the world. The reason for this state of affairs is clear: people who have the intellectual wherewithal to make significant creative contributions have better things to do with their time than argue with traffic cops, or with the IRS, or with the local Mafia Don. You don't see them out in the woods driving spikes in trees that are about to be logged, or sitting on the curb in handcuffs while a cop whom they have pissed off tries to think of an excuse to railroad them into prison. Their feelings of self-worth come from creative activities, not from ineffectual, pointless, and foolish confrontationalism. --MJ}*** > >> Result: >> by your theory Bill is a victim of murder, the footpad is the murderer, and >> Sam not merely gave up his money voluntarily, but is an accessory before >> the fact in the murder of Bill, right? *Surely you can see how ridiculous >> that is!* > >No. Since I am still alive, Bill is still theoretically alive according >to the analogy. ***{No, as I noted repeatedly above, my purpose in constructing the analogy was to focus the discussion on the question of when confrontation is and is not justified, and how that is to be determined. Thus your insertion of these various comments, while interesting, is quite beside the point I was making. --Mitchell Jones}*** >I do not anticipate becoming a murder victim. And if I do, WTF, at least >I really lived. ***{You did? When? When you were sitting on the curb with your hands cuffed behind your back? Or when you were gumming up the works in traffic court by asserting a distorted variant of "common law" which neither the judge nor the prosecutor had likely ever heard of? That's not my view of life, I can tell you that. In my view, I can say I "really lived" because of the creative things I have done in my life: the good sex I have had, the good books I have read, the difficult problems I have solved, the poetry I have written and read. To me, life is not about fighting, but about creating, and the less time I spend in traffic court, or arguing with cops, or fighting with the IRS, the more time I have left for the things that really matter. My time is a limited resource, and I try not to fritter it away fighting battles that lack a rational purpose. --MJ}*** >Guys like Sam just EXIST...which is not the same as really being alive, >now is it? ***{It is false to say that people who avoid pointless battles "just exist." However much you may want to believe that, it demonstrably isn't so. The vast majority of the creative people in human history were able to live productive and fruitful lives precisely *because* they did not do battle with foes they could not defeat. It is to them that we owe the great novels, the great music, poetry, science, and the advancement of technology. Without them, we would still be knuckle-walking on the fringes of the African savanna. --MJ}*** > >> >> Naturally, you will come back with the notion that, of course, Bill was not >> obligated to *die*. He was only obligated to resist lesser threats--threats >> that did not involve immediate death. But where do you draw the line? > >I have never really found it necessary to draw any line. ***{Which means, apparently, that you have never paused to reflect on the implications of your social activism. In particular, you have not asked yourself whether the battles you are fighting with the authorities are having any beneficial effects on the society you claim to be defending. So let me ask you: what, precisely, to you think will result from your confrontational activities that would not have occurred if you had invested the time in other pursuits? What good, if any, do you think you are doing? --MJ}*** I did have a >cop's gun pointed at me once after "resisting arrest". He subdued me >that way and made me sit on the curb handcuffed while he radioed his >superiors. His superiors told him to let me go. ***{And the benefit to society was? --MJ}*** > >Another time I was surrounded near my home by six young gang members. >After they threatened to beat me up they told me to go back in my home >and stay there. I went back inside my home but emerged immediately >thereafter with my 12 guage pistol grip pump shotgun. Bullies >disappeared. THEY called the cops. Cops backed THEM up, because the >gang, after all were actually being sponsored in their activities by the >same cops, it turned out. My shotgun was siezed by the cops, but I got >it back after impressing Judge "Vito" with my integrity. He wanted no >part of what I might have to say if that case ever got so far as an >actual trial. He actually had to use his Marshalls to go in to the >Sheriffs and physically get my gun back from them. ***{And the benefit to society was? --MJ}*** > >Now this may not yet at this point be Hollywood movie material but it's >a dam sight further along in that direction than YOUR life, I'll bet, >Mitchell. ***{I seldom confront, it's true, but there are exceptions. A few years ago, for example, I happened to glance out my bedroom window and noticed a rather large and surly looking individual in his twenties fiddling with the lock on my tool shed door. My line of sight was through the foliage of a tree and, despite his glancing furtively about, he was unable to see the window or to recognize that he was being watched from it. It was obvious to me that if I watched him for very long, he would do something in an attempt to break into my shed, and so I strolled out my front door and walked up to him, stopping about 3 feet away, and asked him if there was anything I could do for him. He said: "My dog escaped from my back yard, and I have been walking the neighborhood, trying to find him." I said: "Bullshit. I have been watching you play with the lock on my tool shed for the last 5 minutes, and if you think I am too dumb to figure out what you had in mind, you are mistaken. I suggest that you get your ass off of my property while you are still able, and that you will stay far away from me in the future if you know what's good for you." Result: he turned white as a sheet, turned quickly away from me, and left my premises much more rapidly than he had entered them. I never saw the guy again. What did I accomplish by the action that I took? Simple: I prevented my tools from being stolen. Benefit to society: none. I didn't call the cops because I had better things to do than stand around while they filled out forms and came up with lame excuses for why they could do nothing. Why didn't *he* call the cops? Because I hadn't provided him with any excuse to do so. If he had messed with me, he would have had a very unpleasant experience, and he saw that fact plainly in my eyes. But there was nothing tangible that he could cite to a cop. I displayed no weapon, and issued no specific threats. All I did was scare the living shit out of him, and then offer him an opportunity to exit from the situation, which he rightly took. Do I consider this episode to be one of the high points of my life? Not at all. Every few years, something similar happens, and when it does, I do what is required. Afterwards, I scarcely think about it. Why? Because violence and confrontation does not define the quality of a man. Fighting is like taking a crap: sometimes you have to do it, but it isn't anything to waste time thinking about, or to be proud of. The quality of your life, whether you recognize it or not, is defined by what you create, not by the time you spend in confrontations with vermin. --MJ}*** > >> If >> the threat enunciated by the robber is that he will shoot you in the >> kneecaps, must you resist? No? > >No. > >> Then what if the threat is merely to beat >> you unconscious? > >It was, but I was given a choice to suffer that or go back into my home >and "stay there", depriving me of my liberty. I saw no need to put up >with that for any longer than it took to get my shotgun. ***{An emotional decision, obviously. Better would have been to reflect on the potential consequences of displaying a weapon, given the prevailing political climate, and to deal with the problem in a different way. What way? My first thought would be that if there are criminal gangs loitering in front of your home, you need to relocate to a different neighborhood. The action you took, in short, did not really address the problem. All it did was enable you to emerge the winner in a put-down contest with a group of retards, thereby proving one thing only: that you care what retards think. --MJ}*** > >> By what logic do you decide where the line ought to be >> drawn, and who applies that logic? > >It's easy. If someone threatens you, go along with what they want, if >you don't think you can overcome it physically at that moment. But when >you get the chance, DO SOMETHING THEN! ***{Do what? Display a weapon, in order to demonstrate bravado to a bunch of scum? Or avoid dealing with scum by relocating to a neighborhood where they are not present? What is more important, impressing scum, or placing yourself in a situation where you don't have to deal with them, so that you will be free to create and, hence, to live? --Mitchell Jones}*** > > Are we to turn to Jim Ostrovski to >> answer such questions for us? > >The name's OstroWski, with a dubblyou. ***{Sorry. My guess is that your name originated in Russia, where the form was "Ostrovski," and that the "w" was inserted when one of your ancestors left the Cyrillic bloc, probably by emigrating to Poland, where the "v" sound is spelled with a "w." Anyway, the Russian variant keeps intruding itself into my head. I will try to stop. --MJ}*** And, no you shouldn't need to ask >me anything. Look inside yourself and see if anything is there, first. >If not, then ask me, if you want. If you don't want to that, fine, but >since you seem to be asking here, I say again - "When you get the chance >- DO SOMETHING!" ***{For what purpose? So that you can feel that you have impressed scum? I do not seek to impress scum, but to avoid dealing with them. Thus, in my view, confrontation is not justified unless it accomplishes something concrete, above and beyond demonstrating "bravery," "toughness," "big balls," or any of the other labels which weak people lay on themselves to justify their incessant struggles to impress others. --MJ}*** > >> Or are we permited to make such judgments >> ourselves? > >Why certainly Mitchell. That's called free will. > >> The answer, like it or not, is that each individual is on >> perfectly solid ground when he makes such decisions himself. > >Yeah. the choice is yours, by all means. > >> We are not all >> obligated to draw the line in exactly the same place, despite your >> implication to the contrary. > >My implication was not that you are OBLIGATED to do anything. You can >choose to be like Sam, or you can choose to be like Bill. I don't care. >I'm just saying that for me, it's more fun to try to be like Bill. ***{I'm not trying to be like anyone, or to impress anyone. Instead, my focus is on responding in a rational manner to the problems which I encounter in my day-to-day activities. Any time I feel that I have made the best decision with the available information, I am satisfied. --MJ}*** > >> >> There is, of course, some truth in what you say: most Americans condone, >> endorse, and encourage the depredations of the goons in Washington. And, to >> the extent that they do so, they must be considered morally culpable. >> However, it is absurd for you to argue that a person who not merely did not >> support the depredations, but who was outspoken in disagreement with them >> throughout his life, is culpable merely because he regarded your courtroom >> crusade to be a silly waste of time. > >I can appreciate that you like to disagree with Vito, but not to his >face. To me, doing that is not exactly an honorable thing, but that's >just me. ***{Where is the honor in pissing away the years of your life, fighting pointless battles with scum? I would think you would have better things to do with your time. --MJ}*** Go ahead and talk behind Vito's back all you want and see what >that gets you. ***{I neither confront mobsters nor talk about them behind their backs, in the type of personal, gossip-oriented sense that you imply. Confronting them is a game for losers, and gossiping about them--or anyone--is simply boring. When I deal with such matters, it is from an analytical perspective--that is, with the aim to understand the causal processes which enable mafias to arise and to control societies. My thinking about mobsters, in short, aims at the same goal as my thinking about physics--the goal of understanding how the world works. --MJ}*** > >> Bottom line: People get to decide such matters for themselves. > >Yes. > >> Failure to >> subscribe to Jim Ostrovski's program of social activism is *not* the >> standard by which moral culpability is or ought to be judged. > >Guess what? Since I regard this as a free country I'll make any >judgements I care to, thank you, whether YOU think I "ought to" or not. ***{You missed the point, which was that others are not obligated to live their lives by your standards. Obviously, there was no implication that *you* shouldn't live your life by your standards! --MJ)*** >If you don't like it, come over here, pull a gun on me or something and >see what happens, ya little twerp. ***{Pathetic. --MJ}*** > >> John is >> right: the victim gets to decide how he is to respond to aggression, and, >> so long as he does not respond by joining the aggressor in his >> depredations, he is not morally tainted by them, and he cannot reasonably >> be said to be a "volunteer" rather than a victim. > >Bullshit. Go rent the movie "Tombstone" and get a clue about what honor >is. Doc Holiday knew. You are clueless. ***{No, I know what it is. "Honor", in the vast majority of cases, is merely a label shallow thinkers slap on themselves, in an attempt to justify their desperate and frequently dangerous attempts to conform to standards set by others. Since I pursue my own purposes, rather than purposes set by others, I seldom think in such terms. When I do, I apply terms such as "honorable," "brave," etc. to people who have successfully freed their minds from the desire to impress others, and have achieved the ability to think objectively--which means: to see the world as it is, rather than as others want them to see it. --MJ}*** > >Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 23:36:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA25771; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:35:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:35:50 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 21:35:44 -1000 Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <02c301bf4756$ea5baf60$f68280d8 btech> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7lP_X1.0.QI6.LP9Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32209 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bill - > Yes I have made a fortune on the stock - please take notice (hehe) Yeah wow, me too! Up 51% since just mid November when I put a big chunk of PLUG ... on my *watch list*. Bwa ha ha ha... On a vaguely related off-topic note, when hydroelectric dams are built, sometimes forests are flooded, like the Tucurui reservoir in Brazil. Ancient nut trees and other exotic hardwoods sit on the bottom water-curing down there (not a joke, it's the best wood), some on the endangered species list - illegal as lumber unless you have documented proof of legal harvesting. I actually have a tiny little real money position in Aquatic Cellulose - AQCI. They have patented technology for a robot underwater harvester to grab these logs off the bottom. They're at work now on Tucurui reservoir, their first real run for the money - half a billion dollars of it in that reservoir alone. Contracts in the works worldwide, and more harvester barges on the way to work 'em. Just got re-listed on the OTCBB after an SEC filing fiasco, but things are looking up. I like these "green" plays if you can find 'em, especially when they might actually *make* some green. Got any more for us? P.S. If this is too off topic, I'd be glad to see a thread on new-energy or similar new technology stocks on vortex-B, but my subscription there seems to have fallen through somehow, or else nobody is posting. Is vortex-B active? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 23:40:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA05253; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:39:18 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:39:18 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3fhd5s05sf3l04ephpfah8ib61ssldhebo 4ax.com> References: <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 01:33:01 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"XlGQm2.0._H1.aS9Mu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32210 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:00:08 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>***{Here, between the lines of asterisks, are the relevant entries, taken >>from the URL which you cited: >> >>***************************************** >>17-Cl-37 >> >> Atomic Mass: 36.9659026 +- 0.0000001 amu >> Excess Mass: -31761.519 +- 0.048 keV >> Binding Energy: 317100.455 +- 0.067 keV >> Beta Decay Energy: B- -813.485 +- 0.303 keV >> >>"The 1995 update to the atomic mass evaluation" by G.Audi and A.H.Wapsta, >>Nuclear Physics A595 vol. 4 p.409-480, December 25, 1995. >> >> >> Atomic Percent Abundance: 24.23% >> Spin: 3/2+ >> Stable Isotope >> >> Possible parent nuclides: >> Beta from S-37 >> Electron capture from 18-Ar-37 >> >>18-Ar-37 >> >>Atomic Mass: 36.9667759 +- 0.0000003 amu >> Excess Mass: -30948.034 +- 0.305 keV >> Binding Energy: 315504.616 +- 0.309 keV >> Beta Decay Energy: B- -6148.793 +- 0.374 keV >> >>"The 1995 update to the atomic mass evaluation" by G.Audi and A.H.Wapsta, >>Nuclear Physics A595 vol. 4 p.409-480, December 25, 1995. >> >> >> Spin: 3/2+ >> Half life: 35.04 D >> Mode of decay: Electron capture to Cl-37 >> Decay energy: 0.813 MeV >> >> Possible parent nuclides: >> Electron capture from K-37 >>***************************************** >> >>OK, the reaction is 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37 + e-. Based on the masses given >>above, the corresponding mass balance equation would be 36.9659026 + 0 = >>36.9667759 + .0005486 + Q, so Q = -.0014219 amu = -1.32 MeV. By these > >The masses as given are atomic masses, i.e. they include all the electrons >from the atoms. ***{I took the above masses from Table A-2 at the back of *Concepts of Nuclear Physics*, by Bernard Cohen [McGraw-Hill, 1971, pg. 418-423]. The title of that table is: "Masses of Various Nuclei." Thus at the time I did the above calculation, I was under the impression that I was working with nuclear masses, not atomic masses. However, since you posted the government URL where atomic masses can be found, I have noticed, by a simple process of comparison, that the masses of the nuclei as given by Cohen are virtually identical to the masses of the atoms as given in the government table. Thus at the moment I am not sure which description is the correct one. --MJ}*** Hence the Ar37 already includes 1 shell electron more than >the Cl37. When Cl37 converts to Ar37, it does indeed emit a beta which >escapes, however the resulting Ar37 inherits the shell electrons from the >Cl37, and is thus 1 short, so is in fact Ar37+. After the ion once again >becomes neutral by capturing an electron from the environment, the mass is >restored to the full value given in the table. For mass accounting purposes, >the net result is as if the beta decay electron ended up in the shell of the >Ar37. Hence for mass accounting purposes the reaction is: > >Cl37 + v +.813 MeV -> Ar37 (i.e. the exact opposite of electron capture). ***{I don't like writing it that way, because it violates conservation of beta lepton number. You have a neutrino on the left (beta lepton number: +1) and no beta lepton on the right (beta lepton number: 0). Thus if we assume we are working with atomic masses, the reaction should be as follows: 17Cl37 + v --> [18Ar37+] + e- 36.9659026 + 0 = [36.9667759 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, so Q = -.0008733 amu = -0.813 MeV. In the above, I debit the rest mass of the missing electron from the atomic mass of the 18Ar37 to obtain an estimate of the mass of 18Ar37+, with the assumption that the kinetic and potential energy of the missing electron can be ignored. (Your method of calculation makes the same implicit assumption.) By writing the reaction this way, we find that the beta lepton number on the left is 1 and that on the right is also 1. Since 1 = 1, beta lepton number is conserved in the reaction. --MJ}*** >[snip] >>(1) The implication of those numbers is that the conversion of a neutron >>into a proton and an electron requires that energy be supplied. Yet we know >>from other sources that a neutron which is outside a nucleus will >>spontaneously decay into a proton and an electron, and emit .78 MeV in the >>process! How believable, then, is it that when a neutron within a nucleus >>of 17Cl37 decays into a proton and an electron, 1.32 MeV must be supplied? >>(The skinny neutron theory then becomes the super-skinny neutron theory! :-) > >I agree that nucleons within the compound nuclei have less mass than lone >protons or neutrons. This follows from my discussion with Scott on the >electron closely approaching the proton in a different thread. ***{When you compress a spring, you transfer energy into it. That energy has mass. Thus a compressed spring weighs more than a relaxed spring. Thus potential energy has mass. Since a neutron at a distance from a proton has potential energy with respect to it, due to the so called strong force attraction between them, it follows that if the neutron free-falls toward the proton, nudged by the "strong force," its potential energy will be converted into kinetic energy. The sum of kinetic and potential energy, however, will not change: the neutron, once in the nucleus--that is, once in an orbit determined by the "strong force"--will have less potential energy and more kinetic energy, but the same amount of total energy, and hence the same mass. (Of course, by convention potential energy is taken to be zero at infinity, and is thus treated as negative at any finite distance of separation. Where you place the zero, however, does not change the relationship: as potential energy decreases, whether from positive values toward zero or from zero toward the negative, kinetic energy increases, and total energy remains constant.) Result: when a neutron is captured by a nucleus, it either retains its total energy, or a particle emission from the nucleus carries some of that energy out of the system. Result: the only way its subsequent decay into a proton within the nucleus can require an energy input is if the earlier particle emission carried away too much energy, and some of it must be replaced. While it is possible that is what is going on here, it strikes me as implausible. The worst absurdity that we obtain if we assume that these government-supplied mass numbers are accurate, however, is simply that Davis' "solar neutrino detector" obviously would not work. --MJ}*** >[snip] >>Is there an alternative interpretation? Well, if we suppose that roughly >>half of the sun's energy comes from the carbon cycle, and the rest from the >>proton-proton cycle, then the government numbers could be accurate. The >>reason: neutrinos from the carbon cycle come in with up to 1.94 MeV. If, as >>you suggested earlier, the neutrino gets 80% of the energy on average, then >>we have (.8)(1.94) = 1.55 MeV, and we squeak in just under the wire. By > >Note, that the 80% figure I gave earlier is not from the literature. It's >just a sort of mental average that I have been "running" in my mind while >looking at various beta decay reactions. Furthermore it doesn't mean that no >neutrino can have more than the 80% figure, but rather that all neutrinos >together (spread across all decays) will carry about 80% of the total energy >(This was only useful for calculating the solar thermal flux). For an >individual decay, the neutrino produced could carry anything from 0 energy >to the full amount, hence there will always be some neutrinos that are >energetic enough. ***{I was just working within your framework, for the sake of argument. As I mentioned in another post, there are reasons to doubt the 80% theory. In *Applied Nuclear Physics*, by Pollard and Davidson, pg. 141, referring to frequency distribution curves of betas plotted against emission energy, we read the following: "A roughly symmetrical curve is found, which agrees with the Fermi theory, indicating that the electron and neutrino, on the average, share the energy equally." In either case, Davis' "solar neutrino detector" cannot detect solar neutrinos, based on current theories about how the sun generates energy, if the numbers in the government table of atomic masses are accurate. Thus we must consider the possibility that Davis', as an elite nuclear physicist with a high security clearance and access to the real numbers, may have designed a *real* neutrino detector. All that would require would be that the rest mass of 17Cl37 be greater than that of 18Ar37+, so that the neutrino is needed for beta lepton conservation only, and will be detected *regardless* of how much energy it is carrying. --MJ}*** >[snip] > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 23:46:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA28580; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:46:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:46:01 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 21:45:56 -1000 Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991215193739.007a1140 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lVjn32.0.U-6.uY9Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32211 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: on 12/15/99 2:37 PM, Jed Rothwell at JedRothwell infinite-energy.com wrote: > Sorry, no. Your electricity would contribute as much to environmental > problems as power from a central gas-fired turbine, and it would contribute > more than hydro or fission based electricity. Would it? I thought that over time, widespread use of propane & NG would net out cleaner over time, wellhead to consumed electricity from fuel cells, than the current basket of oil fuels, hydro, coal, and nuke that we have. You have to add in the effects of accidents, mining, and reservoir creation to those environmental effects. And it doesn't take too many nuke boo-boos to do quite a bit of damage to the 'environment'. Now an LNG ship accident is certainly capable of demolishing a waterfront now and then, but in most cities they're ugly and in need of remodeling anyway. No fallout afterwards, either. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 02:54:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA25393; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 02:53:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 02:53:34 -0800 Message-ID: <009d01bf47bc$1c37b5a0$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Mizuno vs The OU Coffee Cup Heater Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 03:52:12 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"c9HIo1.0.dC6.kICMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32212 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The 200-250 volts 1.0 - 0.8 amps (~ 200 watts) in Scott's Mizuno experiments with the vessel about the same size as a coffee cup indicates that the 200 watt Coffee Cup Heater (~ 3.5-4.0 watts/cm^2) is about par on OU results without all of the fuss. Last I heard, Mitchell Jones was running at least 10% OU with "careful" calorimetry/heat balance measurements on his Coffee Cup OU experiments. At Mitchell Jones' suggestion, I switched to a standard electric heater element used in hot water heaters that ran ~ 3.8 watts/cm^2 on 120 volts A.C. with K2CO3 in the water and still got up to 40% (or better) OU results. Mitchell Swartz's Optimum Operating Point (OOP) seems to be involved here somehow, when the water-heater interface starts to produce the boiling sound at a delta T of about 10 deg C or so. It would be interesting to see what the heater units would do in the Mizuno vessel using Scott's D.C. power supply and calorimeter setup. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 04:25:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA12079; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 04:15:35 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 04:15:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <19991216121218.18618.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.123] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 04:12:18 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"DTakM1.0.fy2.aVDMu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32213 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin writes in reply to my saying: > >Correct but misleading, since the "full circle system" is gravity driven > >both up and down. > >No, only down (last I checked gravity doesn't normally work "up"). It works up like a centrifuge. It pulls the more dense down thus pushes the less dense up. We normally equate the upward motion to heat, and in no way am I trying to say that water will evaporate unless its relative density is less than its surrounding atmosphere, but the actual energy of motion is coming from gravity, not heat. Heat only sets the relative the density off balance but gravity balances the scales of density. And I know many do not understand this concept but some do under the term solvation in a chemical sense of how ions move up and down. For some reason the concept of relative density displacement is in the blind spot of science as to how it relates to evaporation and lightspeed in our new understanding of the fluid nature of space. This is critical to undertanding any form of energy. Even in the explosion in the pistons of our cars, the thunder from a lightning strike, the fire ball of a rocket, a hot air balloon, a bubble, all forms of energy of motion come from gravity resetting the the relative density displacement. Einstein's void space is being replaced with a fluid space concept, ether, aether, neutrinoes, mysterious dark matter, whatever it is, it is not void. We are learning to feel space much like our ancestor felt the wind even though there was no way to actually see what it was. Since all of modern physics is based on a void space we really need to take another look at the basics if space is really fluid, especially as it relates to lightspeed, evaporation, and energy of motion in general. Light itself is gravity driven as gravity pulls the more dense space beneath the less dense light. This is what causes the condensed light in the gravity telescope and the halo of the Einstein rings. Fluid space and repulsion of light due to gravity. The reason there has never been a complete unification theory is because of our misunderstanding of the nature of fluid space and how gravity gives the energy of motion to light through fluid space. The photon is not using its little package of energy for propulsion. It is actually surfing the relatitive density displacement gravity wave. Surf's UP!! My work is all about "The Gravity Paradigm" and how gravity gives the energy of motion to all things. Einstien actually started out with this concept, as I'm sure you all know, but diverged from the gravity constant and began what we know as the thermodynamic paradigm. Recent studies in ZPE and Whirlpower show a new story starting to emerge from the ashes of the fire. Vera Rubin's work showing an unexplained %90 energy of motion in the spiral galaxy. Bachall and Perlmutter's work showing space is flat, not curved, and the gravity constant. Joe Firmage's announcement that the big bang is science fiction. And my work is getting closer to proof of Whirlpower as the Whirlpower Team has built the first whirlpool ever built by man and it shows the action of my concept. I will post the articles and references for your convience and others over the next few days but they can be found through my website and I hope those who want to know more about the gravity paradigm will visit. Don't expect a lot of science jargon, just plain old common sense and don't expect to understand if you think science already knows it all. All the arguments against my work when it began on the internet several years ago were that science already knew all there was to know so I must be wrong and there was no reason to build a whirlpool. It won't work, that would be perpetual motion, it breaks the laws of thermodynamics. HA! Well, the discovery of ZPE, frame dragging, mystrerious dark matter, the gravity constant, have all come along since and were predicted by my theory. Scientists in general have refused to acknowledge my work as a layperson outsider but now with thousands of archived pages and the endorsement of vortex experts in Sweden, France and Holland, and new test of principle models, and new reports just over the past few days of others saying they will consider building a whirlpool, scientists are not ignoring me any longer. And my press releasese on all this is just about ready to go out announcing my research and calling on science to build a whirlpool and test is scientifically as my Whirlpower Declaration, and that this information and that Whirlpower should be allowed to be freely used by any that want to. David Dennard The Phoenix http://whirlpower.cc ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 05:43:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA27065; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 05:42:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 05:42:08 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991216073921.01bb7d9c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:39:21 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno vs The OU Coffee Cup Heater In-Reply-To: <009d01bf47bc$1c37b5a0$e4441d26 fjsparber> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"FMzn22.0.lc6.mmEMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32214 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:52 AM 12/16/99 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: >It would be interesting to see what the heater units would do in the Mizuno vessel >using Scott's D.C. power supply and calorimeter setup. :-) Take a look at the first plot presented in: C:\ET\CF\Inc-W\300volt\run1.html It is a calibration run performed with a nichrome heating element in the cell...filled with oil. Does that count? 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 Dec 16 06:08:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA01697; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:07:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:07:24 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991216080436.01bb7e68 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 08:04:36 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Good article on A.I. In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991215111938.0079ce50 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"exik03.0.QQ.R8FMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32215 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:19 AM 12/15/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Of course computers are faster in some ways, but not in the >kinds of tasks we associate with intelligence such as vision, balance, and >the general ability to move around in and cope with the physical world. Is is interesting to consider the algorithms that provide us with vision, balance, locomotion, etc. Computer scientists are barely imitating these functions with Mhz speed CPU's and yet animals do it beautifully with organic computers that have maybe a 10 Hz clock speed. I guess that means our brains are massively parallel? 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 Dec 16 06:11:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA03375; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:10:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:10:29 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991216080736.0072b0a8 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 08:07:36 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Mizuno300 - Run2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gYs663.0.fq.KBFMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32216 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I succeeded in improving the cathode lead wire's insulation durability using ceramic "fish spine". I nursed it up to 250 volts and things were running fine until something really weird (sorry, not "good weird") happened! If it weren't for the hard evidence in my hand, I would NEVER believe this could happen. Photos of the "mysterious conglomeration" are presented. Read all about it at: http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run2/run2.html Apparently I am venturing into a region of voltage space that Mizuno doesn't frequent. I'll probably drop back and try a replication of Ohmori's calorimetry technique next. At least I believe it's Ohmori's. Anyway, it's the technique described in IE #27. 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 Dec 16 07:24:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA29998; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:23:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:23:26 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991216100433.0079f1a0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:04:33 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run2 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991216080736.0072b0a8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"EQ1Dn1.0.NK7.iFGMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32217 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >Photos of the "mysterious conglomeration" are >presented. That is remarkable. Clearly, you are working in a high temperature domain. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 07:24:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30017; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:23:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:23:26 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991216100711.007a1e10 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:07:11 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid In-Reply-To: References: <02c301bf4756$ea5baf60$f68280d8 btech> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lyEr3.0.eK7.iFGMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32218 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: >Ancient >nut trees and other exotic hardwoods sit on the bottom water-curing down >there (not a joke, it's the best wood), some on the endangered species list >- illegal as lumber unless you have documented proof of legal harvesting. I >actually have a tiny little real money position in Aquatic Cellulose - AQCI. >They have patented technology for a robot underwater harvester to grab these >logs off the bottom. Similar techniques are in use in the U.S. Great Lakes, where huge numbers of trees sank when North American forests were logged from 1860 to 1920, and the logs were floated to sawmills. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 07:25:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30038; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:23:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:23:28 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991216102314.007a3e80 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:23:14 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Good article on A.I. In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991216080436.01bb7e68 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991215111938.0079ce50 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"zWL9K.0.-K7.jFGMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32219 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >Computer scientists are barely imitating these >functions with Mhz speed CPU's and yet animals do it beautifully with >organic computers that have maybe a 10 Hz clock speed. I guess that means >our brains are massively parallel? Yup! Massively parallel and non-centralized. There is no "CPU" in the brain. All segments of it work simultaneously and independently on a million separate tasks. In computer-speak, most tasks would be called "background housekeeping" operations, such as breathing. You might think you have a single conscious "train of thought" which means the whole organ is concentrated on one task, but it does not work that way. People can literally hold two opposite ideas in mind at the same time, like the Red Queen. Not only is the speed better, but presumably the recognition algorithms are superior, just as the flight control algorithms insects and birds are superior to the best robotic flying machines. I read a comment somewhere that some insects can hover, eat, and even mate in flight, which is "way beyond the flight capabilities of a cruise missile." Most human machines have a long way to go before they can rival nature. Take data storage. The best RAM and disk storage is still many orders of magnitude larger, slower and less reliable than DNA. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 07:53:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA09993; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:52:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:52:43 -0800 Sender: jack pop.centurytel.net Message-ID: <38591926.717AEA01 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:53:58 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"_yO5p1.0.3S2.BhGMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32220 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Mitchell and Robin, I'm becoming (more?) confused. I would appreciate it very much if you would clarify things for me. I've included several {stupid?) questions below. But I'm sure I'm not even asking the right questions. Thanks, Jack Smith Mitchell Jones wrote: 17-Cl-37 Atomic Mass: 36.9659026 +- 0.0000001 amu 18-Ar-37 Atomic Mass: 36.9667759 +- 0.0000003 amu ..."The 1995 update to the atomic mass evaluation" by G.Audi and A.H. Wapsta, Nuclear Physics A595 vol. 4 p.409-480, December 25, 1995. Mitchell Jones wrote: ... OK, the reaction is 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37 + e-. Based on the masses given above, the corresponding mass balance equation would be 36.9659026 + 0 = 6.9667759 + .0005486 + Q, {Jack writes, Question 1: " + 0 = [36.9667759 ?] + ...} {Jack writes, Question 2: " + [why write the 0 ?] = ...} {Jack writes, Question 3: Just to make sure, ?we are talking about the spontaneous decay of Chlorine 37 into Argon 37 ? i.e., n -> p+ + e- + energy ?} so Q = -.0014219 amu = -1.32 MeV. Robin wrote: Cl37 + v +.813 MeV -> Ar37 {Jack writes, Question 4: Cl37 + [What ?] -> Ar37 } (i.e. the exact opposite of electron capture). {Jack writes, Question 5: What does the "opposite of electron caputure" mean? I can't quite mentally connect to 'electron emission', although it seems obvious} Mitchell wrote: ***{I don't like writing it that way, because it violates conservation of beta lepton number. You have a neutrino on the left (beta lepton number: +1) and no beta lepton on the right (beta lepton number: 0). Thus if we assume we are working with atomic masses, the reaction should be as follows: 17Cl37 + v --> [18Ar37+] + e- 36.9659026 + 0 = [36.9667759 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, so Q = -.0008733 amu = -0.813 MeV. {Jack writes: Please explain again the source of the numbers to obtain these results: so Q = -.0014219 amu = -1.32 MeV. so Q = -.0008733 amu = -0.813 MeV. } Mitchell wrote: ... the only way its subsequent decay into a proton within the nucleus can require an energy input is if the earlier particle emission carried away too much energy, and some of it must be replaced. While it is possible that is what is going on here, it strikes me as implausible. The worst absurdity that we obtain if we assume that these government-supplied mass numbers are accurate, however, is simply that Davis' "solar neutrino detector" obviously would not work. --MJ}*** Mitchell wrote: Is there an alternative interpretation? Well, if we suppose that roughly half of the sun's energy comes from the carbon cycle, and the rest from the proton-proton cycle, then the government numbers could be accurate. The reason: neutrinos from the carbon cycle come in with up to 1.94 MeV. If, as you suggested earlier, the neutrino gets 80% of the energy on average, then we have (.8)(1.94) = 1.55 MeV, and we squeak in just under the wire. ... In either case, Davis' "solar neutrino detector" cannot detect solar neutrinos, based on current theories about how the sun generates energy, if the numbers in the government table of atomic masses are accurate. Thus we must consider the possibility that Davis', as an elite nuclear physicist with a high security clearance and access to the real numbers, may have designed a *real* neutrino detector. All that would require would be that the rest mass of 17Cl37 be greater than that of 18Ar37+, so that the neutrino is needed for beta lepton conservation only, and will be detected *regardless* of how much energy it is carrying. --MJ}*** {Jack writes: If the energy of the neutrino was important above, ("If, as you [Robin] suggested earlier, the neutrino gets 80% of the energy on average, then we have (.8)(1.94) = 1.55 MeV, and we squeak in just under the wire. ...") why is the energy of the neutrino irrelevant here?} From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 08:41:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA00753; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 08:39:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 08:39:40 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991216113929.007b0c20 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 11:39:29 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991215193739.007a1140 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5ZYFZ2.0.hB.CNHMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32221 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: >Would it? I thought that over time, widespread use of propane & NG would net >out cleaner over time, wellhead to consumed electricity from fuel cells, >than the current basket of oil fuels, hydro, coal, and nuke that we have. Yes, but I was comparing centralized natural gas turbines to small fuel cell. Natural gas turbines are presently the most efficient and fastest growing combustion technology for large power generators, I believe. (At least, that's what industry shills claim.) They are particularly good for rapid on-off auxiliary power, for peak loads or to supplement things like wind farms when the wind dies down. Gas turbines plants are very clean. Pollution from a centralized power plant is usually easier to control than pollution from small, decentralized machines. For example, the other day during routine maintenance the man found out that my home furnace gas pressure was too low. This cause is incomplete combustion (smoke). It was easy to adjust the gas flow to fix the problem, but there are thousands of other poorly adjusted furnaces in Atlanta, and it would take lots of manpower to keep them all up to the standards of a central plant. One person can check the flow at a central plant. A power plant is point source pollution. A million furnaces are dispersed pollution, which is the most difficult kind to control. Of course fuel cells are not combustion technology, and a pure hydrogen gas fuel cell produces only water, but with a natural gas fuel cell, the carbon is separated from the hydrogen at the reformer. The carbon has to go somewhere, and it ends up in the atmosphere. If they can find a way capture the stuff and bury it that would make fuel cells cleaner than combustion. For that matter, Sci Am described schemes to sequester combustion plant CO2 underground or in the ocean, but I expect this would be hideously expensive and impractical. Here, let's look this up . . . Why speculate? According to the DoE "Hydrogen Program Plan (FY 1993)" handbook, p. A-16, natural gas to DC electricity conversion using a reformer & fuel cell is 43% efficient. That's good. It produces two kinds of pollution, CO2: at 358 g/kWh delivered; NOx: 0.13 g/kWh. Compare that to current combustion technology with "averaged fossil fuels:" 36% efficiency, CO2: 1,505 g/kWh, NOx: 4.2 g/kWh, SO2: 11.3 g/kWh. This does not show the numbers for natural gas combustion power; natural gas is averaged in with other fossil fuels. However, under Transportation on p. A-7 it shows Natural Gas / ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) which is 17% efficient and produces CO2: 1,300 g/kWh, NOx: 4.0 g/kWh. A large, stationary, advanced gas turbine is about 48% efficient (PG&E installation; Johansson, p. 743), so you can extrapolate the CO2 is roughly 460 g/kWh, in the same ballpark as the fuel cell. Logically, it should be a little less, since the efficiency is better. Modern gas turbines generators are a spin-off from large aircraft jet engines. Airplanes engines generate a lot of pollution, because they are optimized for high performance and light weight. The efficiency and pollution control on a stationary gas turbine is better, because weight does not matter and you can add equipment to boost performance. "There are many untapped opportunities for improving the performance of stationary turbines that are not relevant for jet engines," such as steam cooling. (Johansson) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 10:45:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13744; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:43:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:43:38 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <009d01bf47bc$1c37b5a0$e4441d26 fjsparber> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:58:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno vs The OU Coffee Cup Heater Resent-Message-ID: <"Plyva.0.dM3.PBJMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32222 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >The 200-250 volts 1.0 - 0.8 amps (~ 200 watts) in Scott's Mizuno >experiments with the vessel about the same size as a coffee cup indicates >that the 200 watt Coffee Cup Heater (~ 3.5-4.0 watts/cm^2) is about par >on OU results without all of the fuss. > >Last I heard, Mitchell Jones was running at least 10% OU with "careful" >calorimetry/heat balance measurements on his Coffee Cup OU experiments. ***{Wrong. As the calorimetry became less sloppy, the "OU" number declined, and I have every expectation that, if I had continued, it would have disappeared. As I pointed out to you at the time, if these types of standard heating elements were "over unity," then *all* standard calorimetry is meaningless, because electrical resistance heaters are used as controls, and calorimeters are "tweaked" until a cell containing an electrical resistance heater shows a C.O.P. of 1.0. If, for example, Scott's calorimeter told him that a standard electrical resistance heater had a C.O.P. of 1.10, I'll lay long odds that, after checking his sensors to make sure they were still behaving properly, he would simply adjust his baseline to make the extra 10% go away. I seriously doubt that he would actually open his mind to the possibility that a standard electrical resistance heater is "over unity." --MJ}*** > >At Mitchell Jones' suggestion, I switched to a standard electric heater >element used in hot >water heaters that ran ~ 3.8 watts/cm^2 on 120 volts A.C. with K2CO3 in >the water >and still got up to 40% (or better) OU results. ***{Yup: as I demonstrated with my own "quick and dirty" calorimeter, it is *very easy* to get these types of numbers. But, as I also demonstrated, the more effort you put into identifying and eliminating error sources, the more those numbers converge back toward a C.O.P. of 1.0. Granted, I didn't prove that I could eliminate all of the excess, because I got diverted onto other things, but I am nonetheless confident that is what would have happened. --MJ}*** > >Mitchell Swartz's Optimum Operating Point (OOP) seems to be involved here >somehow, >when the water-heater interface starts to produce the boiling sound at a >delta T of >about 10 deg C or so. > >It would be interesting to see what the heater units would do in the >Mizuno vessel >using Scott's D.C. power supply and calorimeter setup. :-) ***{I'm sure Scott has already tested his calorimeter in that way many times. It's a standard benchmark. --MJ}*** > >Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 10:47:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13771; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:43:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:43:39 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <38591926.717AEA01 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> References: <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:34:31 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"4gnNd1.0.5N3.QBJMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32223 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Hi Mitchell and Robin, > >I'm becoming (more?) confused. I would appreciate it very much >if you would clarify things for me. I've included several {stupid?) >questions below. But I'm sure I'm not even asking the right questions. > >Thanks, Jack Smith > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >17-Cl-37 Atomic Mass: 36.9659026 +- 0.0000001 amu >18-Ar-37 Atomic Mass: 36.9667759 +- 0.0000003 amu > ..."The 1995 update to the atomic mass evaluation" by G.Audi and A.H. >Wapsta, Nuclear Physics A595 vol. 4 p.409-480, December 25, 1995. > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > > ... OK, the reaction is > >17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37 + e-. > >Based on the masses given above, the corresponding mass >balance equation would be > >36.9659026 + 0 = 6.9667759 + .0005486 + Q, > >{Jack writes, Question 1: > " + 0 = [36.9667759 ?] + ...} ***{If you are asking if the mass of 18Ar37 was intended to be 36.9667759 rather than 6.9667759, the answer is yes. But, as far as I can see, the 3 was always present in front of the 6 in my posts, so I don't know what gave you the impression it had been omitted. --MJ}*** >{Jack writes, Question 2: > " + [why write the 0 ?] = ...} ***{For clarity. The neutrino mass is very, very low, so I'm calling it zero. I was afraid that if I didn't include it in the equations, someone would be confused, so I included it. Result: someone was confused. :-( --MJ}*** >{Jack writes, Question 3: >Just to make sure, ?we are talking about the spontaneous >decay of Chlorine 37 into Argon 37 ? i.e., n -> p+ + e- + energy ?} ***{Not spontaneous. If it were a "spontaneous" decay, there would be no identifiable trigger. Here we are trying to detect neutrinos, and so the neutrino is presumed to trigger the reaction. But, yes, we are talking about the decay of 17Cl37 into 18Ar37. The idea is that a solar neutrino hits the 17Cl37 nucleus, causing an electron to be ejected from one of the neutrons, thereby turning it into a proton. Thus the proton count goes up by one, while the nucleon count (protons plus neutrons) stays the same. Result: 17Cl37 becomes 18Ar37. [Note: the format here is ZXA, where Z is the proton count, X is the symbol for the element, and A is the nucleon count. Thus 17Cl37 tells us that we are talking about chlorine, and element with 17 protons, and that the specific isotope we are discussing has 37 nucleons.] --MJ}*** > >so Q = -.0014219 amu = -1.32 MeV. > >Robin wrote: > >Cl37 + v +.813 MeV -> Ar37 > >{Jack writes, Question 4: >Cl37 + [What ?] -> Ar37 } ***{I'm not sure whether your [What?] is aimed at the v, or at the .813 MeV. If at the v, then note that v is the symbol generally used for the neutrino. (In this discussion, we have been using v~ for the antineutrino.) If you were wondering what the .813 MeV represents in Robin's equation, I think he intends it to refer to the energy carried by the neutrino. Better, in my view, would be to put it in parentheses next to the v, and eliminate the +, in order to make it clear that there are *not* 3 particles on the left side of the equation. --MJ}*** > >(i.e. the exact opposite of electron capture). > >{Jack writes, Question 5: >What does the "opposite of electron caputure" mean? >I can't quite mentally connect to 'electron emission', >although it seems obvious} ***{There is a process in nuclear physics called "K-capture," wherein an electron from the innermost orbit (the K-shell) plunges into the nucleus, is absorbed into a proton, and turns it into a neutron. If symbols of the form ZXA are used to denote *nuclei*, that reaction would be: 18Ar37 + e- --> 17Cl37 + v. If, on the other hand, symbols of the form ZXA denote entire atoms (including Z orbital electrons), then the reaction would be: 18Ar37 --> [17Cl37-] + v, and the beta lepton numbers seem to be out of balance. (Of course, they really aren't: there is one more electron on the left side than on the right. Nevertheless, the situation is less clear, in my opinion.) --MJ}*** > >Mitchell wrote: > >***{I don't like writing it that way, because it violates >conservation of beta lepton number. You have a neutrino >on the left (beta lepton number: +1) and no beta lepton >on the right (beta lepton number: 0). Thus if we assume >we are working with atomic masses, the reaction should be >as follows: > >17Cl37 + v --> [18Ar37+] + e- > >36.9659026 + 0 = [36.9667759 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, >so Q = -.0008733 amu = -0.813 MeV. > >{Jack writes: Please explain again the source of the numbers >to obtain these results: >so Q = -.0014219 amu = -1.32 MeV. ***{If the masses given in the table are the masses of *nuclei*--that is, if they do not include the masses of the orbital electrons--and if the symbols of the form ZXA refer solely to *nuclei*, then -1.32 MeV is the correct answer. --MJ}*** >so Q = -.0008733 amu = -0.813 MeV. } ***{If the masses given in the table are *atomic masses*--that is, if they include the masses of Z orbital electrons--and if the symbols of the form ZXA are used to refer *to entire atoms*, then -0.813 MeV is the correct answer. I should add that, since the symbols of the form ZXA can obviously be used any way we want, the only factual question here is whether the masses given in the table are intended to be the masses of nuclei, or of whole atoms. On this point, I admit to a bit of confusion, because the table of masses in the back of Bernard Cohen's book is entitled "Masses of Various Nuclei," whereas when virtually the same masses appear in other tables, they are described as being the masses of whole atoms. By the weight of numbers, I am now inclined toward the latter view, but am not yet totally convinced. Fortunately, the concepts are what matter in this discussion, and they seem pretty clear: either the masses given in the tables--whether they refer to nuclei or whole atoms--are wrong, or else Davis' "solar neutrino detector" is a crock of garbage. The reason: it can at best only detect neutrinos with energies above 0.813 Mev, and, by current theory, virtually all solar neutrinos would fall below those energy levels. (Or so it appears to me at the moment, at any rate.) --MJ}*** > >Mitchell wrote: > > ... the only way its subsequent decay >into a proton within the nucleus can require an energy >input is if the earlier particle emission carried away >too much energy, and some of it must be replaced. While >it is possible that is what is going on here, it strikes >me as implausible. The worst absurdity that we obtain if >we assume that these government-supplied mass numbers are >accurate, however, is simply that Davis' "solar neutrino >detector" obviously would not work. --MJ}*** > >Mitchell wrote: > >Is there an alternative interpretation? Well, if we suppose >that roughly half of the sun's energy comes from the >carbon cycle, and the rest from the proton-proton cycle, >then the government numbers could be accurate. The reason: >neutrinos from the carbon cycle come in with up to 1.94 >MeV. If, as you suggested earlier, the neutrino gets 80% >of the energy on average, then we have (.8)(1.94) = 1.55 >MeV, and we squeak in just under the wire. ... > >In either case, Davis' "solar neutrino detector" cannot >detect solar neutrinos, based on current theories about how >the sun generates energy, if the numbers in the government >table of atomic masses are accurate. Thus we must consider >the possibility that Davis', as an elite nuclear physicist >with a high security clearance and access to the real >numbers, may have designed a *real* neutrino detector. >All that would require would be that the rest mass of >17Cl37 be greater than that of 18Ar37+, so that the >neutrino is needed for beta lepton conservation only, >and will be detected *regardless* of how much energy it >is carrying. --MJ}*** > >{Jack writes: If the energy of the neutrino was important >above, ("If, as you [Robin] suggested earlier, the neutrino >gets 80% of the energy on average, then we have (.8)(1.94) = 1.55 >MeV, and we squeak in just under the wire. ...") why is the >energy of the neutrino irrelevant here?} ***{It isn't irrelevant: it's crucial. If the carbon cycle is significant in the sun, then it is putting out lots of neutrinos that have more than both 1.32 MeV and .813 MeV. Result: those neutrinos are strong enough to trigger the Davis instrument, and will be counted. If, however--as current theory assumes--99.9% of solar energy is from the proton-proton cycle, then the resulting neutrinos will seldom carry enough energy to be detected. Result: unless Davis assumes that he knows the exact shape of the energy distribution curve and, on that basis, *infers* how many neutrinos he missed, his detector cannot work. To see what I am getting at here, assume that each solar neutrino is counted and its energy measured, and the results are plotted on a graph with energy as the horizontal axis and the number counted on the vertical axis. If the result is a curve with predictable characteristics--e.g., a standard "bell shaped curve"--then if we only detect a few high energy solar neutrinos from the upper tail of the distribution, we can use those counts to reconstruct the entire curve, and thereby infer the total number of solar neutrinos that were emitted. The problem with doing that in the present case, however, is that if the calculations which I posted several days ago are correct, then the maximum neutrino energy from the proton-proton cycle would be a mere .93 MeV, which is only marginally above the minimum energy that is capable of triggering the Davis detector. (That is, .813 MeV if the masses in the table are atomic masses.) Result: we are in a position of inferring the entire curve from a few hits near the upper tail of the distribution. In my view, a more doubtful and problematic enterprise could scarcely be imagined. --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 10:56:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA20139; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:55:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:55:11 -0800 Message-ID: <38593E20.4708 ca-ois.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 11:31:44 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; name="TTTWF1.TXT" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="TTTWF1.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id KAA20100 Resent-Message-ID: <"bDXsH1.0.Xw4.EMJMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32224 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> ***{OK, Jim, consider this: Sam is walking down the sidewalk, minding his >> own business, when a footpad steps out of an alley, aims a large pistol at >> him, and says: "Your money or your life." Sam antes up, the footpad >> disappears back into the alley, and Sam goes on his way. > >The above situation is in no way analogous to the way gov't goes about >getting money from anyone, at least nowadays. ***{I didn't claim it was analogous. My purpose in setting up the example as I did was to raise the question of where the line ought to be drawn between submission and confrontation, and on the matter of how and by whom that decision ought to be made. --MJ}*** My point was that your example wasn't analogous to the real situation we were discussing (the way gov't extorts money from people). If your example is not an analog to the real situation, I have to point that out. Otherwise I am allowing you to drag the discussion off point. You won't get an argument from me that if a thug comes out of a dark alley with a gun pointed at you, you should not immediately hand him your wallet. When faced with an immediate and real threat to your life, by all means your priority should be saving your own life. The fact that we agree on this point however does not resolve the issue you are trying to raise, above, as to where the line ought to be drawn between submission and confrontation, or on the matter of how and by whom the decision ought to be made. >As I posited earlier, the >situation is more like the thug posting a general announcement that >everyone is obliged to pay him or his agents >so much per day, week, year (etc.) and if they do, no one will suffer >any physical harm or loss of thier liberty. > >Sam, upon reading the announcement decides this is pretty reasoanble >"insurance" and drops by the thug's office in a nearby wrecking yard and >antes up. Thug uses the money to expand his wrecking yard business and >to hire more thugs to help him out. > >> Next, Bill comes >> down the same sidewalk, and, as he passes the same alley, the same footpad >> steps out, levels the same gun at him, and makes the same offer. Bill, >> having just attended a lecture by Jim Ostrovski on the subject of moral >> culpability and not wanting to *voluntarily* support a robber, refuses, and >> is then killed very dead by a large bullet from the large pistol. > >No, it doesn't work like that either. ***{I repeat: I made no claim that my example represented the normal way the government works. Then you are using a poor example because in the context of this discussion we are trying to figure out the proper response to government sponsored extortion specifically. > My intent was to raise a very specific issue--to wit: what are the > criteria by which a proper response to coercion ought to be determined. You haven't defined "coercion". This discussion is not about what to do when someone points a gun at you. I'm not going to argue about that. The argument is about what exactly "coercion" is. You think that coercion means when the government sends you a 1040 form, you are coerced into filling it out and sending it in along with your money. Similarly, you apparently think that when a cop hands you a traffic ticket, you are "coerced" into pleading guilty to the charge alleged, and handing over your money to the government. I say this is NOT coercion, by any stretch of the imagination. > Thus far, you seem to have missed the point. --MJ}*** No, you missed the point. The point is to define "coercion". Conversely, defining coercion will help us figure out what "voluntary" means. > Bill ignores the thug's >announcement and goes about his business. One day, one of thug's new >henchmen approaches Bill while he is walking down the street and tells >him Vito (the boss thug) wants to have a little talk with him, at his >wrecking yard office. > >Bill, having recently attended one of my lectures obligingly shows up at >Vito's office where Vito is present along with 5 of his newly hired >goons. No guns are drawn but Vito >begins explaining to Bill how it would be to Bill's advantage to cough >up some dough. > >"Call it `insurance', Bill.", says Vito, " You don't have a problem with >getting a little `insurance', do you? What some unfortunate `accident' >happens to you? With my `insurance' such accidents are a lot less likely >to happen, don't you agree?" > >Bill asserts moral authority in the matter and explains to Vito how what >he is doing is wrong. The five henchmen are listening to all of this. >When Bill is through delivering >a fine summation about honor, the advantages of "doing the right thing" >and so on Vito is visibly shaken but says nothing. ***{If "Vito" is like any of the mob guys I have known, he will most assuredly *not* be shaken, whether visibly or otherwise. Now you are trying to assert that this discussion is about how to respond to literal mafia mobsters, when YOU KNOW that I was using mafia mobster organization as an analog of the way government is organized, with "Vito" being the analog of a court judge who is sometimes in a position to force you to do things and pay money to the system. I have noticed that such JUDGES, not mafia dons, get nervous when I speak to them. They would rather not deal with what I might have to say, and so I am allowed to leave with the weapon their "goons" confiscated. By "goons" I mean "sheriffs"...you get that, right? (I'm snipping all of the references to literal mafia dons because YOU KNOW I was just using that as an analogy, and you are trying to dodge the issue of what coercion is). >> Result: >> by your theory Bill is a victim of murder, the footpad is the murderer, and >> Sam not merely gave up his money voluntarily, but is an accessory before >> the fact in the murder of Bill, right? *Surely you can see how ridiculous >> that is!* > >No. Since I am still alive, Bill is still theoretically alive according >to the analogy. ***{No, as I noted repeatedly above, my purpose in constructing the analogy was to focus the discussion on the question of when confrontation is and is not justified, and how that is to be determined. Thus your insertion of these various comments, while interesting, is quite beside the point I was making. --Mitchell Jones}*** No it wasn't, and you know it. You construed that the way government "forces" people to give it money was the same as a thug stepping out of a dark alley and pointing a gun at you. This analogy is WRONG. >I do not anticipate becoming a murder victim. And if I do, WTF, at least >I really lived. ***{You did? When? When you were sitting on the curb with your hands cuffed behind your back? Or when you were gumming up the works in traffic court by asserting a distorted variant of "common law" which neither the judge nor the prosecutor had likely ever heard of? Good, now we are FINALLY back on point. Being alive means dealing with the situations we are faced with in a way that we can continue to live with our own conscience. If being alive and having a clear conscience means to you giving the government whatever it wants so that you can just go about pursuing your various interests without "wasting" your time arguing the issue with people in a position to enforce your giving it what it wants, then you are doing so VOLUNTARILY. You are not being "coerced". That's the point. Everything else you've written is beside the point, so I'm snipping that too. Jim Ostrowski  From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 13:06:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA28284; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:02:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:02:36 -0800 Message-ID: <00e601bf4811$314347c0$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re; PLUG Power on the Grid Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 14:01:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01BF47CE.172CA4A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"lHDu62.0.qv6.hDLMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32225 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_0005_01BF47CE.172CA4A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Here you go Jed. Home built for Co-Generation. http://www.gas-turbines.com/hobby/nye.htm Lots of co-generation web sites. With a 12 volt generator and storage batteries, and heat powered (jet compression) air conditioning, what more do you need? Not as efficient as a fuel cell, but a lot cheaper, and more reliable. Regards, Frederick ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BF47CE.172CA4A0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Small turbojet engine made with a turbocharger..url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Small turbojet engine made with a turbocharger..url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.gas-turbines.com/hobby/nye.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.gas-turbines.com/hobby/nye.htm Modified=A0DE14351048BF01DF ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BF47CE.172CA4A0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 13:13:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA31680; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:12:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:12:05 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <38593E20.4708 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 15:08:36 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"-mjTl1.0.wk7.aMLMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32226 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >>> ***{OK, Jim, consider this: Sam is walking down the sidewalk, minding his >>> own business, when a footpad steps out of an alley, aims a large pistol at >>> him, and says: "Your money or your life." Sam antes up, the footpad >>> disappears back into the alley, and Sam goes on his way. >> >>The above situation is in no way analogous to the way gov't goes about >>getting money from anyone, at least nowadays. > >***{I didn't claim it was analogous. My purpose in setting up the example >as I did was to raise the question of where the line ought to be drawn >between submission and confrontation, and on the matter of how and by whom >that decision ought to be made. --MJ}*** > > My point was that your example wasn't analogous to the real situation we > were discussing (the way gov't extorts money from people). If your > example is not an analog to the real situation, I have to point that out. > Otherwise I am allowing you to drag the discussion off point. ***{It wasn't off point. You merely keep missing the point, that's all. I was trying to get you to focus your mind on the fact that there is a continuum of threats, extending from extreme threats such as death by torture, to severe beatings, to jail, to fines, and so on, all the way down to, and including, merely requiring that you waste inordinate amounts of you precious time haggling with bureaucrats, talking to lawyers, or sitting in court, in order to keep what you have. The IRS doesn't say "Your money or your life," for example. What they really say is this: "Fill out the forms and pay us what we demand, or spend decades of your life thinking about us, talking to our agents, consulting with lawyers, sitting in hearings, etc." I, and most others, prefer to fill out the forms and pay they what they ask, rather than piss away precious years of life fighting with them. The fact that we choose to do that does not mean that we agree with the tax laws or that we "volunteer" to give our money to the government. All it means is that we are not dim-witted enough to place *zero* value on our time. --MJ}*** > > You won't get an argument from me that if a thug comes out of a dark > alley with a gun pointed at you, you should not immediately hand him > your wallet. When faced with an immediate and real threat to your life, > by all means your priority should be saving your own life. > > The fact that we agree on this point however does not resolve the issue > you are trying to raise, above, as to where the line ought to be drawn > between submission and confrontation, or on the matter of how and by whom > the decision ought to be made. ***{True. In your view, apparently, when the IRS says: "Give us your money or spend decades trying to keep us from taking it," we are supposed to opt for the latter, as a matter of "honor." If we opt for the former, in an attempt to fill our lives with things we enjoy rather than things we hate, you conclude that we have "volunteered" to be oppressed, and that we don't know how to "really live." Well, that's baloney. I am like most people in this regard: I pay what I think the law requires, and, when in doubt, I overpay. The reason: I have better things to do with my time than fighting. You may think a person doesn't "really live" except when he his engaged in a confrontation with would-be parasites, but I strongly disagree. --MJ}*** > >>As I posited earlier, the >>situation is more like the thug posting a general announcement that >>everyone is obliged to pay him or his agents >>so much per day, week, year (etc.) and if they do, no one will suffer >>any physical harm or loss of thier liberty. >> >>Sam, upon reading the announcement decides this is pretty reasoanble >>"insurance" and drops by the thug's office in a nearby wrecking yard and >>antes up. Thug uses the money to expand his wrecking yard business and >>to hire more thugs to help him out. >> >>> Next, Bill comes >>> down the same sidewalk, and, as he passes the same alley, the same footpad >>> steps out, levels the same gun at him, and makes the same offer. Bill, >>> having just attended a lecture by Jim Ostrovski on the subject of moral >>> culpability and not wanting to *voluntarily* support a robber, refuses, and >>> is then killed very dead by a large bullet from the large pistol. >> >>No, it doesn't work like that either. > >***{I repeat: I made no claim that my example represented the normal way >the government works. > > Then you are using a poor example because in the context of this > discussion we are trying to figure out the proper response to government > sponsored extortion specifically. ***{Nope. It's just hard to get you to focus on a point, that's all. --MJ}*** > >> My intent was to raise a very specific issue--to wit: what are the >> criteria by which a proper response to coercion ought to be determined. > > You haven't defined "coercion". This discussion is not about what to do > when someone points a gun at you. I'm not going to argue about that. ***{When my property rights are violated, I am coerced. Period. That's all it means. Thus when a would-be parasite says "Your money or your life," I am coerced. And the same is true when he says: "Give me such-and-such amount of money, as defined by these forms, or else spend decades of your life attempting to avoid doing so." The threat is different, but coercion is present in both cases, and in either case, if I choose to "ante up," that does not make me a "volunteer." --MJ}*** > > The argument is about what exactly "coercion" is. You think that > coercion means when the government sends you a 1040 form, you are coerced > into filling it out and sending it in along with your money. ***{No, the coercion arises because if I ignore the form, they will force me into a confrontation, which will steal precious time that I prefer to devote to other matters. --MJ}*** Similarly, > you apparently think that when a cop hands you a traffic ticket, you are > "coerced" into pleading guilty to the charge alleged, and handing over > your money to the government. I say this is NOT coercion, by any stretch > of the imagination. ***{If I were free to toss the ticket into the trash with no adverse consequences, it would not be coercion. In fact, however, if I were to do that, I would be forced into a confrontation with the authorities. Thus, to save the time which that would steal from me, I pay the damn ticket. What is there about this that is so difficult to comprehend? --MJ}*** > > > Thus far, you seem to have missed the point. --MJ}*** > > No, you missed the point. The point is to define "coercion". > > Conversely, defining coercion will help us figure out what "voluntary" > means. ***{Yup. See above. --MJ}*** > >> Bill ignores the thug's >>announcement and goes about his business. One day, one of thug's new >>henchmen approaches Bill while he is walking down the street and tells >>him Vito (the boss thug) wants to have a little talk with him, at his >>wrecking yard office. >> >>Bill, having recently attended one of my lectures obligingly shows up at >>Vito's office where Vito is present along with 5 of his newly hired >>goons. No guns are drawn but Vito >>begins explaining to Bill how it would be to Bill's advantage to cough >>up some dough. >> >>"Call it `insurance', Bill.", says Vito, " You don't have a problem with >>getting a little `insurance', do you? What some unfortunate `accident' >>happens to you? With my `insurance' such accidents are a lot less likely >>to happen, don't you agree?" >> >>Bill asserts moral authority in the matter and explains to Vito how what >>he is doing is wrong. The five henchmen are listening to all of this. >>When Bill is through delivering >>a fine summation about honor, the advantages of "doing the right thing" >>and so on Vito is visibly shaken but says nothing. > >***{If "Vito" is like any of the mob guys I have known, he will most >assuredly *not* be shaken, whether visibly or otherwise. > > Now you are trying to assert that this discussion is about how to respond > to literal mafia mobsters, when YOU KNOW that I was using mafia mobster > organization as an analog of the way government is organized, with > "Vito" being the analog of a court judge who is sometimes in a > position to force you to do things and pay money to the system. ***{First, you divert the discussion away from my example, which did not involve the Mafia, and then, when I respond within the framework which you introduced, you claim that I am going off topic. Amazing. --MJ}*** > > I have noticed that such JUDGES, not mafia dons, get nervous when I speak > to them. They would rather not deal with what I might have to say, and so > I am allowed to leave with the weapon their "goons" confiscated. By > "goons" I mean "sheriffs"...you get that, right? ***{Sure. I got it all along. You, however, did *not* get the obvious point that when you are dragged into court to respond to charges, YOUR TIME IS BEING STOLEN. You get that now, right? --MJ}*** > > (I'm snipping all of the references to literal mafia dons because YOU > KNOW I was just using that as an analogy, and you are trying to dodge the > issue of what coercion is). ***{You are the dodger here, not me. --MJ}*** > >>> Result: >>> by your theory Bill is a victim of murder, the footpad is the murderer, and >>> Sam not merely gave up his money voluntarily, but is an accessory before >>> the fact in the murder of Bill, right? *Surely you can see how ridiculous >>> that is!* >> >>No. Since I am still alive, Bill is still theoretically alive according >>to the analogy. > >***{No, as I noted repeatedly above, my purpose in constructing the analogy >was to focus the discussion on the question of when confrontation is and is >not justified, and how that is to be determined. Thus your insertion of >these various comments, while interesting, is quite beside the point I was >making. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > No it wasn't, and you know it. You construed that the way government > "forces" people to give it money was the same as a thug stepping out of a > dark alley and pointing a gun at you. This analogy is WRONG. ***{Nope. In the first case, you give up your money or your life; in the second, you give up your money or your time. Coercion is present in both cases, because in both cases you are not free to simply ignore the would-be parasite and live your life the way you want to live it. --MJ}*** > >>I do not anticipate becoming a murder victim. And if I do, WTF, at least >>I really lived. > >***{You did? When? When you were sitting on the curb with your hands cuffed >behind your back? Or when you were gumming up the works in traffic court by >asserting a distorted variant of "common law" which neither the judge nor >the prosecutor had likely ever heard of? > > Good, now we are FINALLY back on point. Being alive means dealing with > the situations we are faced with in a way that we can continue to live > with our own conscience. If being alive and having a clear conscience > means to you giving the government whatever it wants so that you can just > go about pursuing your various interests without "wasting" your time > arguing the issue with people in a position to enforce your giving it > what it wants, then you are doing so VOLUNTARILY. You are not being > "coerced". > > That's the point. ***{Nope. If I had the choice of keeping my money and my time, I would do it. But I don't. That doesn't make me a volunteer. I simply view my time as having more value than the money, that's all. --MJ}*** > > Everything else you've written is beside the point ***{Wrong again. --MJ}*** , so I'm snipping that > too. ***{On this, we can finally agree. :-) --MJ}*** > > Jim Ostrowski > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 14:00:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10570; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:47:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:47:32 -0800 Message-ID: <008001bf480f$398e4e40$9f637dc7 computer> From: "Ed Wall" To: Subject: Gooey ceramic Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:48:00 -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 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"GnJcG1.0.0b2.ptLMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32227 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, Those pictures do not reveal if any W melted. If you suspect that might have happened, please get some light microscope photos. Ken Rauen and I suspect that the long run gradually melted the ceramic piece and softened it, but left it intact. The pressure from the superheated steam pushed it away and above the W. When you killed power, it settled onto the hot cathode and bonded. At the same time, cooler water was able to get close to the molten ceramic, it solidified and cracked. Does that match your observations? Edward Wall New Energy Research Laboratory Cold Fusion Technology, P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302-2816 (603) 226-4822 fax (603) 224-5975 ewall infinite-energy.com www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 14:15:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20725; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 14:13:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 14:13:39 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:12:15 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:13:27 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:40:18 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid In-reply-to: <3.0.6.32.19991216113929.007b0c20 pop.mindspring.com> To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:12:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2338ZYFXOL3X7 X400-MTS-identifier: [;51217161219991/4331954 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"uVAFD3.0.h35.IGMMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32228 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed, In all your calculations I don't see an adjustment for line losses. I think I've heard figures of 50% or more of the generated power is lost to transmission losses. Does someone have better figures? Even if you just go with 50%, that doubles the comparative efficiency & cleanliness. Plus, the CO2 production would be spread out over a wider area. Allowing it to be more easily used up by the local plant life, before it can get up into the higher atmosphere. The effect of what's left depends on whether you even believe in global warming, which I don't, as well as most climatologists. Flame war? Please no. :^( Bill webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com >Here, let's look this up . . . Why speculate? According to the DoE >"Hydrogen Program Plan (FY 1993)" handbook, p. A-16, natural gas to DC >electricity conversion using a reformer & fuel cell is 43% efficient. >That's good. It produces two kinds of pollution, CO2: at 358 g/kWh >delivered; NOx: 0.13 g/kWh. Compare that to current combustion technology >with "averaged fossil fuels:" 36% efficiency, CO2: 1,505 g/kWh, NOx: 4.2 >g/kWh, SO2: 11.3 g/kWh. >This does not show the numbers for natural gas combustion power; natural >gas is averaged in with other fossil fuels. However, under Transportation >on p. A-7 it shows Natural Gas / ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) which is >17% efficient and produces CO2: 1,300 g/kWh, NOx: 4.0 g/kWh. A large, >stationary, advanced gas turbine is about 48% efficient (PG&E >installation; Johansson, p. 743), so you can extrapolate the CO2 is >roughly 460 g/kWh, in the same ballpark as the fuel cell. Logically, it >should be a little less, since the efficiency is better. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 14:46:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA27778; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 14:34:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 14:34:23 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:33:00 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:34:12 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:17:06 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-reply-to: To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:33:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2333ZYFXP3481 X400-MTS-identifier: [;00337161219991/4331994 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"XLPz9.0.xn6.kZMMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32229 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell, Come on, like your Vito is going to hire thugs that can put two sentences together, let alone understand your logical explanation of the evils of Vito's proposal. Having to many neurons would count against them in the job interview. The same would go for jurors in any kind of trial, they weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty. Or voters in any election, why do you think union teachers have spent so much effort dumbing down, and PC indoctrinating our youth, to get them to be good little liberals just like them. Hey, and take this to VortexB as in BS. (Barbara Striesand) What was the original science subject anyways? Bill (stepping off soap box) webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com >Some, >including Vito, argue that an immediate "accident" should be arranged to >"happen" to Bill. But some of what Bill has said has rubbed off on a >couple of the newly hired thugs. They say nothing, but these two later >on get together and decide to warn Bill about what Vito and the others >are up to. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 16:16:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA32628; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:15:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:15:00 -0800 Message-ID: <011401bf482c$0f944780$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Do it Yourself, Gas Tubines from Engine Turbo-Chargers Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:14:14 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01BF47E8.FA80E800" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"wNd7r1.0.kz7.42OMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32230 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BF47E8.FA80E800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.reality.demon.co.uk/gasturb.htm ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BF47E8.FA80E800 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="gas turbines menu.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="gas turbines menu.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.reality.demon.co.uk/gasturb.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.reality.demon.co.uk/gasturb.htm Modified=0083F5B62B48BF0161 ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BF47E8.FA80E800-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 16:45:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA10128; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:44:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:44:28 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 18:30:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"3Z4Nk1.0.9U2.iTOMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32231 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell, > >Come on, like your Vito is going to hire thugs that can put two sentences >together, let alone understand your logical explanation of the evils of >Vito's proposal. Having to many neurons would count against them in the >job interview. ***{Why send this to me? Ostrowski is the one who set up the "Vito" example, and he is the one who seemed to think that such people can be moved by moral arguments. For the record, though, you are wrong about all mob guys being dumb. I have known a few, and, while I don't claim that they were sophisticated or erudite, some were extremely bright. --MJ}*** > >The same would go for jurors in any kind of trial, they weren't smart >enough to get out of jury duty. Or voters in any election, why do you >think union teachers have spent so much effort dumbing down, and PC >indoctrinating our youth, to get them to be good little liberals just like >them. ***{With this, I agree. --MJ}*** [snip] > >Bill (stepping off soap box) >webriggs concentric.net >briggs XLNsystems.com > >>Some, >>including Vito, argue that an immediate "accident" should be arranged to >>"happen" to Bill. But some of what Bill has said has rubbed off on a >>couple of the newly hired thugs. They say nothing, but these two later >>on get together and decide to warn Bill about what Vito and the others >>are up to. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 16:47:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA11255; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:46:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:46:02 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "Hydrinos," or "Protoneutrons?" Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:45:49 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <410j5sst16jf5cki4v9fvo68esklksett6 4ax.com> References: <0.65f7bcf3.258712e9@aol.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAA11153 Resent-Message-ID: <"RPTB83.0.Yl2.9VOMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32232 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:02:33 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 16:08:04 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>[snip] >>>and the nucleus, but disagree about the stability of those orbits. My main >>>reason for considering such orbits to be unstable is the obvious one: if >>>some of them were stable, we would be up to our eyeballs in "hydrinos", and >>>could not have failed to notice. The universe, after all, is 75% hydrogen. >>>--Mitchell Jones}*** > >>According to Mills we have noticed, we just don't believe our eyes. > >***{I haven't read his book, but how could we fail to believe something was >a bit odd when, for example, we encountered a supply of "hydrinos" in which >n = 1/4? The atomic radius would be r = (1/16)(.53 Å) = .033 Å, and the According to Mills, the radius goes as the number, thus 1/4 has 1/4 the radius, not 1/16. >density, other things equal, would increase by a factor of 4096. I doubt >that it would react in the manner of ordinary hydrogen, and I have no idea >whether it would take the form of a solid, liquid, or gas at ordinary >temperatures, but in any case the enormous density of such material should >prevent its escaping the atmosphere. Result: whatever form it took, we >should be literally up to our armpits in the stuff. To some extent I agree. My original comment was directed to Mills' astronomical evidence. Hydrino's are apparently strong oxidisers, so if present on Earth, would mostly appear as negative ions, which in turn means that they would likely be solids, probably mixed in with other salts in the crust of the Earth (hydrates are fairly common minerals, perhaps some of them aren't really hydrates?). Reading between the lines, I get the feeling that they are not nearly as easy to produce as Mills would like us to believe. Hence the fact that we are not up to our armpits in the things, though this doesn't necessarily mean that they can't be seen. This would also explain why he is concentrating on the chemicals rather than the energy. If the quantity is small, the energy isn't worth much, however small quantities of very rare chemicals could still be worth a fortune, in the right application (coatings, drugs, and catalysts spring immediately to mind). Personal observation: Perhaps some of the "new elements" resulting from some of the transmutation experiments are actually tightly bonded hydrino-hidride based molecules? These may well "fool" MS detection, though should show up with NAA. Another point that I think is worth mentioning, though I get the impression Mills would rather not, is that once hydrinos shrink to somewhere beyond level 10, the chances of tunnelling and fusion begin to increase dramatically, which IMO implies that hydrinos that are shrunken to that degree probably don't hang around very long. This puts another limit on their availability in the environment. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 16:58:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA15953; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:57:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:57:13 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:57:07 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.6.32.19991215193739.007a1140@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991215193739.007a1140 pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 QAA15932 Resent-Message-ID: <"pUEpE2.0.Av3.efOMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32233 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 19:37:39 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: [snip] >The only better method, it seems to me, is a co-generator in a cold >climate. In Georgia the fuel cell approach has a lot going for it. > >- Jed Given that the reformer produces CO2, and the fuel cell itself would also produce some waste heat, between them, they should be able to supply a useful proportion of the heat required in an average home (e.g. hot water heater), so that would make quite a difference in the overall efficiency. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 17:04:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA18622; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:03:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:03:19 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:03:16 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <6q2j5sc5t8m6001vv2m74lvjtu7slec1la 4ax.com> References: <19991216121218.18618.qmail hotmail.com> In-Reply-To: <19991216121218.18618.qmail hotmail.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 RAA18602 Resent-Message-ID: <"BXaTO3.0.qY4.NlOMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32234 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 16 Dec 1999 04:12:18 PST, David Dennard wrote: >Robin writes in reply to my saying: > >> >Correct but misleading, since the "full circle system" is gravity driven >> >both up and down. >> >>No, only down (last I checked gravity doesn't normally work "up"). > >It works up like a centrifuge. It pulls the more dense down thus pushes the >less dense up. We normally equate the upward motion to heat, and in no way >am I trying to say that water will evaporate unless its relative density is >less than its surrounding atmosphere, but the actual energy of motion is >coming from gravity, not heat. Heat only sets the relative the density off >balance but gravity balances the scales of density. I'm not going to bother going any further with this thread, because I feel as if I'm banging my head against a brick wall, so I'll just wait until you get the results from your experiment. If you are proven to be correct, then I'll take another look at that time. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 17:50:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA31377; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:41:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:41:39 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:41:34 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38591926.717AEA01@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 RAA31347 Resent-Message-ID: <"hQhvU2.0.9g7.IJPMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32235 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:34:31 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >>{Jack writes, Question 4: >>Cl37 + [What ?] -> Ar37 } > >***{I'm not sure whether your [What?] is aimed at the v, or at the .813 >MeV. If at the v, then note that v is the symbol generally used for the >neutrino. (In this discussion, we have been using v~ for the antineutrino.) >If you were wondering what the .813 MeV represents in Robin's equation, I >think he intends it to refer to the energy carried by the neutrino. More or less, see below. >Better, >in my view, would be to put it in parentheses next to the v, and eliminate >the +, in order to make it clear that there are *not* 3 particles on the >left side of the equation. --MJ}*** Commonly, the energy produced or consumed by a process isn't specifically associated with a particular particle, primarily because it can be contributed by, or distributed over, several particles. Though in this particular case, it may have been more appropriate to specify it as you suggested. [snip] >***{There is a process in nuclear physics called "K-capture," wherein an >electron from the innermost orbit (the K-shell) plunges into the nucleus, >is absorbed into a proton, and turns it into a neutron. If symbols of the >form ZXA are used to denote *nuclei*, that reaction would be: 18Ar37 + e- >--> 17Cl37 + v. If, on the other hand, symbols of the form ZXA denote >entire atoms (including Z orbital electrons), then the reaction would be: >18Ar37 --> [17Cl37-] + v, and the beta lepton numbers seem to be out of Note that if 18Ar37, and 17Cl37 are referring to entire atoms, then these are individually already charge neutral, so the reaction as given is not charge balanced, and should be 18Ar37 --> 17Cl37 + v. (lepton number is conserved, because there is an extra shell electron present on the left, and a neutrino to balance it on the right). >balance. (Of course, they really aren't: there is one more electron on the >left side than on the right. Nevertheless, the situation is less clear, in >my opinion.) --MJ}*** [snip] >I should add that, since the symbols of the form ZXA can obviously be used >any way we want, the only factual question here is whether the masses given >in the table are intended to be the masses of nuclei, or of whole atoms. On >this point, I admit to a bit of confusion, because the table of masses in >the back of Bernard Cohen's book is entitled "Masses of Various Nuclei," >whereas when virtually the same masses appear in other tables, they are >described as being the masses of whole atoms. By the weight of numbers, I >am now inclined toward the latter view, but am not yet totally convinced. I believe that accurate masses are determined through MS measurements which involve determining the charge:mass ratio of ions with a single positive charge, then adding the mass of an electron to produce the mass of a neutral atom. [snip] >thereby infer the total number of solar neutrinos that were emitted. The >problem with doing that in the present case, however, is that if the >calculations which I posted several days ago are correct, then the maximum >neutrino energy from the proton-proton cycle would be a mere .93 MeV, which >is only marginally above the minimum energy that is capable of triggering >the Davis detector. (That is, .813 MeV if the masses in the table are >atomic masses.) Result: we are in a position of inferring the entire curve >from a few hits near the upper tail of the distribution. In my view, a more >doubtful and problematic enterprise could scarcely be imagined. --MJ}*** There are two possible proton reactions: p + p + e -> D (nucleus) + v + 1.44 MeV (electron capture reaction), and p + p -> D (nucleus) + e+ + v + 0.42 MeV (beta+ decay reaction). Note that the difference is that for the second reaction, not only does it not get an electron mass thrown into the mix at the beginning, but it actually needs to come up with a positron mass at the end. Therefore the difference in energy between the two reactions is two electron masses, or 1.02 MeV. A very enlightening graph pertaining to neutrino energies, and various neutrino detection experiments can be found at: http://almime.mi.infn.it/html/borexinof.html . Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 17:58:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA03989; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:57:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:57:36 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 15:57:22 -1000 Subject: Re: Re; PLUG Power on the Grid From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <00e601bf4811$314347c0$e4441d26 fjsparber> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"rhNGw3.0.E-.EYPMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32236 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick - It's him! It's that dead guy from the car stuck in the side of the mountain! ;) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI > Here you go Jed. Home built for Co-Generation. > > http://www.gas-turbines.com/hobby/nye.htm > > Lots of co-generation web sites. > > With a 12 volt generator and storage batteries, and heat powered (jet > compression) air > conditioning, what more do you need? Not as efficient as a fuel cell, but a > lot cheaper, and > more reliable. > > Regards, Frederick > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 19:09:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA27014; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:01:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:01:30 -0800 Message-ID: <014a01bf4843$59b05400$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: PLUG Power on the Grid Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 20:00:50 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01BF4800.400F2F00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"8apAG.0.0c6.AUQMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32237 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_001A_01BF4800.400F2F00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit LOL, Rick. :-) Here's another one for you. 20 UKP and some sweat. http://www.reality.demon.co.uk/gasturb.htm Regards, Frederick ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01BF4800.400F2F00 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="gas turbines menu.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="gas turbines menu.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.reality.demon.co.uk/gasturb.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.reality.demon.co.uk/gasturb.htm Modified=40ADDCDA4248BF01ED ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01BF4800.400F2F00-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 19:16:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA01750; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:14:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:14:54 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mizuno vs The OU Coffee Cup Heater Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:14:48 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <6kaj5ss1n3oqmfubob7ado9irfc9o9bml2 4ax.com> References: <009d01bf47bc$1c37b5a0$e4441d26 fjsparber> <3.0.1.32.19991216073921.01bb7d9c@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991216073921.01bb7d9c mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA01711 Resent-Message-ID: <"m8FVg2.0.CR.jgQMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32238 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 16 Dec 1999 07:39:21 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 03:52 AM 12/16/99 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > >>It would be interesting to see what the heater units would do in the >Mizuno vessel >>using Scott's D.C. power supply and calorimeter setup. :-) > >Take a look at the first plot presented in: > >C:\ET\CF\Inc-W\300volt\run1.html Funny, I can't find this on my C drive ;) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 22:40:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA09206; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:39:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:39:47 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991217003604.00a00850 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 00:36:04 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Gooey ceramic In-Reply-To: <008001bf480f$398e4e40$9f637dc7 computer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NSsOf3.0.mF2.ogTMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32239 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:48 PM 12/16/99 -0500, Ed Wall wrote: >Those pictures do not reveal if any W melted. If you suspect that might >have happened, >please get some light microscope photos. I've sent the think to a friend with an SEM for examination. >Ken Rauen and I suspect that the long run gradually melted the ceramic piece and >softened it, but left it intact. The pressure from the superheated steam pushed >it away and above the W. When you killed power, it settled onto the hot cathode >and bonded. At the same time, cooler water was able to get close to the molten >ceramic, it solidified and cracked. Does that match your observations? Maybe... Something happened that made the cell resistance drop suddenly after I'd been at 250 volts for 5-6 minutes. That is very unusual for this experiment. Usually the cell resistance steadily increases during the run as the W cathode erodes away (reducing its surface area). It could be that the ceramic section cracked, slid down and somehow bonded to the W and thus the ceramic pieces became incandescent. Many ceramics, when incandescent, are decent conductors of electricity (e.g. the Nerst Glower) so the attached ceramic pieces then suddenly increased the area of the cathode, which would explain the sudden reduction in cell resistance. It's just a theory... Upon close inspection, I see no sign of melting in the attached ceramic pieces. They are bonded to the remains of the heavily etched W sheet with a _glassy_ gray material. It doesn't look all that fantastic until you consider what was going on when it formed. The turbulence in the cell alone should have flung the cracked ceramic pieces all around the cell. Instead they just "gravitated" onto the W and the glassy stuff somehow grew around them...at least that's what it looks like. 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 Dec 16 22:43:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA09230; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:39:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:39:49 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991217003948.009f5e90 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 00:39:48 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno vs The OU Coffee Cup Heater In-Reply-To: <6kaj5ss1n3oqmfubob7ado9irfc9o9bml2 4ax.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991216073921.01bb7d9c mail.eden.com> <009d01bf47bc$1c37b5a0$e4441d26 fjsparber> <3.0.1.32.19991216073921.01bb7d9c mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"3h1po1.0.6G2.rgTMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32240 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:14 PM 12/17/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >>Take a look at the first plot presented in: >> >>C:\ET\CF\Inc-W\300volt\run1.html > >Funny, I can't find this on my C drive ;) Haw! Obviously, I copied the local link rather than the web address: http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run1.html Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 23:40:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA24009; Thu, 16 Dec 1999 23:39:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 23:39:24 -0800 Message-ID: <19991217073922.29439.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.161] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Can't Stand It Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 23:39:22 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"s63BP.0._s5.hYUMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32241 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Robin and all, Yeah, don't blame you, no use banging you head. :) Who ever it was who said they would build a whirlpool on this list if they saw some reason to; I hope you now see the reason behind why I think one would be built and why I am interested enough to do all this. Sorry I don't remember your name to call it out but now there are just too many names and too many lists to have total recall, but you know who you are. I don't see why anyone would not be interested in building a whirlpool. It has the pattern of a hurricane and a spiral galaxy, two things said to be the most mysterious. There is no evidence I can find that one has ever been built before. It may really be true that David Dennard and the Whirlpower Team built the first whirlpool ever build by man. HA!! Pretty funny. And the honor could have gone to any of you. I gave it to all you you freely almost two years ago. Again. HA! Okay, I've had my laugh. Any of you can still be the first to supply the scientific data. But you better hurry. More and more are saying they are going to build. >If any are starting to grasp the Gravity Paradigm consider this. > >Mother Nature may abhor a vacuum but she really can't stand a void. And >she >will bring everything within her power to close it or move it. She brings >the gravity, The Force of Nature, of the entire Infinite Universe to bere >upon it. > >If is is a lightning strike she slams it shut. If it is an explosion she >quickly shuts the door. If it is a fire she pushes it every which way but >loose. If it is a vortex she does everytning in her power to close it. In >a bubble or excited electron, atom, or molecule, she squirts it away as >fast >as the density displacement will allow. She makes the lava flow up. She >is >the "fizz in the physics". > >So you see, all energy of motion comes fromm gravity not being able to >stand >a void. Heat is not dynamic, heat is static. Gravity is the dynamic >"Force" of Nature". Understand it. Don't just take it for granted. > >May "The Force" be with you, > >David Dennard >The Gravity Paradigm >http://www.whirlpower.cc ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 00:38:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA00337; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 00:37:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 00:37:09 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38591926.717AEA01 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 02:32:15 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"QC65g.0.65.rOVMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32242 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:34:31 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>>{Jack writes, Question 4: >>>Cl37 + [What ?] -> Ar37 } >> >>***{I'm not sure whether your [What?] is aimed at the v, or at the .813 >>MeV. If at the v, then note that v is the symbol generally used for the >>neutrino. (In this discussion, we have been using v~ for the antineutrino.) >>If you were wondering what the .813 MeV represents in Robin's equation, I >>think he intends it to refer to the energy carried by the neutrino. > >More or less, see below. > >>Better, >>in my view, would be to put it in parentheses next to the v, and eliminate >>the +, in order to make it clear that there are *not* 3 particles on the >>left side of the equation. --MJ}*** > >Commonly, the energy produced or consumed by a process isn't specifically >associated with a particular particle, primarily because it can be >contributed by, or distributed over, several particles. >Though in this particular case, it may have been more appropriate to specify >it as you suggested. >[snip] >>***{There is a process in nuclear physics called "K-capture," wherein an >>electron from the innermost orbit (the K-shell) plunges into the nucleus, >>is absorbed into a proton, and turns it into a neutron. If symbols of the >>form ZXA are used to denote *nuclei*, that reaction would be: 18Ar37 + e- >>--> 17Cl37 + v. If, on the other hand, symbols of the form ZXA denote >>entire atoms (including Z orbital electrons), then the reaction would be: >>18Ar37 --> [17Cl37-] + v, and the beta lepton numbers seem to be out of > >Note that if 18Ar37, and 17Cl37 are referring to entire atoms, then these >are individually already charge neutral, so the reaction as given is not >charge balanced, and should be 18Ar37 --> 17Cl37 + v. ***{Oops. You are right. When the K-shell electron drops into the nucleus, the number of electrons is reduced by one; but it then meets up with a proton and turns it into a neutron. Result: charge neutrality is maintained. --MJ}*** The reason: (lepton number is >conserved, because there is an extra shell electron present on the left, and >a neutrino to balance it on the right). > >>balance. (Of course, they really aren't: there is one more electron on the >>left side than on the right. Nevertheless, the situation is less clear, in >>my opinion.) --MJ}*** >[snip] >>I should add that, since the symbols of the form ZXA can obviously be used >>any way we want, the only factual question here is whether the masses given >>in the table are intended to be the masses of nuclei, or of whole atoms. On >>this point, I admit to a bit of confusion, because the table of masses in >>the back of Bernard Cohen's book is entitled "Masses of Various Nuclei," >>whereas when virtually the same masses appear in other tables, they are >>described as being the masses of whole atoms. By the weight of numbers, I >>am now inclined toward the latter view, but am not yet totally convinced. > >I believe that accurate masses are determined through MS measurements which >involve determining the charge:mass ratio of ions with a single positive >charge, then adding the mass of an electron to produce the mass of a neutral >atom. ***{Several points: (1) I found a comment by Cohen on pg. 162 which indicates that the masses in table A-3 at the back of his book are atomic masses, despite the fact that the title line of the table itself is "Masses of Various Nuclei." Thus it appears that the table is mislabeled. (Was the preparation of that table delegated to a grad student, perhaps? :-) (2) I wonder how many mass specs there are in private hands that are capable of accurately separating all of the individual isotopes. I would think that task would require an extremely expensive instrument. Thus my question would be whether there has been enough private confirmation of the atomic mass data in conventional isotope tables, so that we can be sure we are not relying on questionable government sources. (Given the desire of the U.S. government to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation, and given their tendency to use secrecy and even outright lying to achieve their ends, I am unwilling to assume that their atomic mass data do not contain deliberately planted disinformation unless there is independent corroboration.) (3) Another method of measuring atomic masses would be to hit them with particles of known mass and velocity, and measure the direction and velocities of the rebounding particles. From such information it would then be possible to calculate the mass of the target atom, by applying the conservation laws. However, these are the kinds of things which governments do, using multi-million dollar particle accelerators, and, once again, I find myself wondering how many instruments of this sort are in private hands, and whether they have been used to independently verify the government supplied numbers. --MJ}*** >[snip] >>thereby infer the total number of solar neutrinos that were emitted. The >>problem with doing that in the present case, however, is that if the >>calculations which I posted several days ago are correct, then the maximum >>neutrino energy from the proton-proton cycle would be a mere .93 MeV, which >>is only marginally above the minimum energy that is capable of triggering >>the Davis detector. (That is, .813 MeV if the masses in the table are >>atomic masses.) Result: we are in a position of inferring the entire curve >>from a few hits near the upper tail of the distribution. In my view, a more >>doubtful and problematic enterprise could scarcely be imagined. --MJ}*** >There are two possible proton reactions: > >p + p + e -> D (nucleus) + v + 1.44 MeV (electron capture reaction), > >and > >p + p -> D (nucleus) + e+ + v + 0.42 MeV (beta+ decay reaction). > >Note that the difference is that for the second reaction, not only does it >not get an electron mass thrown into the mix at the beginning, but it >actually needs to come up with a positron mass at the end. Therefore the >difference in energy between the two reactions is two electron masses, or >1.02 MeV. ***{Yes, but as I noted the other day, the first reaction is a two step process, and the 1.44 MeV is not available to the neutrino. Here is the way it goes: (1) p + e- --> n + v, where the mass balance equation is 1.0072764 + .0005486 = 1.008665 + 0 + Q, and Q = -.00084 amu = -.7824 MeV. The reaction is endothermic, requiring that the electron deliver .7824 MeV to make it go. Result: the neutrino goes off with negligible energy. It is just needed to conserve beta lepton number. (2) 1H1 + n --> 1D2, where the mass balance equation is 1.007825 + 1.008665 = 2.0141 + Q, and Q = .000239 amu = 2.22 MeV. Net for the combined reaction: 2.22 - .7824 = 1.44 MeV, but, as noted above, the 1.44 MeV is not available to the neutrino, and so any neutrinos produced by this reaction will not be detectible by the Davis "solar neutrino detector." As for the second reaction, it would have to resolve into the following steps: (1) p + p --> [2He2++] The mass balance is 1.0072764 + 1.0072764 = 2.0145528 + Q, and Q = 0 MeV. (2) [2He2++] --> 1D2+ + e+ + v. Here the mass balance is 2.0145528 = 2.01355 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and Q = .0004542 amu = .423 MeV The main problem with the above stems from the fact that 2He2 is entirely bogus: two protons have no bound states, and so 2He2 does not exist in any meaningful sense of the term. Because of their mutual Coulomb repulsion, the two protons will linger together for a fantastically brief interval when colliding in the solar plasma at temperatures of 12 million degrees K, and it is during this fantastically brief interval of time that the beta+ decay must take place. That means the beta must be emitted at a fantastic velocity, if it is to get out of the nucleus in the time available--i.e., before the protons have separated. Result: the beta+ will, of necessity, carry away virtually all of the .423 MeV that is available, leaving very little for the neutrino. Unfortunately, the neutrino needs at least .79 MeV to trigger a hit in the Davis detector. [Note: the Davis detector relies on the reaction 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37- + e-, where the mass balance equation is 36.9659 + 0 --> 36.9662 + .0005486 + Q, and Q = -.0008486 amu = -.79 MeV.] To trigger the Davis detector, therefore, a neutrino must come in with at least .79 MeV. Since only .423 MeV is available, and almost none of it will go to the neutrino, this reaction cannot possibly trigger the Davis detector. Bottom line: I see no way in hell that the Davis "solar neutrino detector" can detect a significant proportion of solar neutrinos, assuming that the government atomic mass numbers are correct and that the current theory about the source of solar energy is correct. --MJ}*** > >A very enlightening graph pertaining to neutrino energies, and various >neutrino detection experiments can be found at: > >http://almime.mi.infn.it/html/borexinof.html . ***{Very interesting indeed. The chart presented on that website confirms the conclusion which I reached, above: a neutron detector that relies on absorption by 17Cl37 cannot detect neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle. I therefore continue to scratch my head in amazement as I read, on pg. 73 of *The Particle Hunters*, that "Davis' solar neutrino observatory has yielded puzzling results: while models of the 'nuclear pile' in the sun provide estimates for the expected flux of solar neutrinos, the measured values are persistently about one third of the theoretical predictions." What in the name of Zeus can such a statement possibly mean, given the fact that the Davis detector is *totally blind* to 99.9% of the neutrinos which theory claims are emitted from the sun? --MJ}*** > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 02:33:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA15615; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 02:32:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 02:32:17 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 00:32:12 -1000 Subject: Re: PLUG Power on the Grid From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <014a01bf4843$59b05400$e4441d26 fjsparber> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mLzyd3.0.vp3.n4XMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32243 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: on 12/16/99 6:00 PM, Frederick Sparber at fjsparber earthlink.net wrote: > LOL, Rick. :-) > > Here's another one for you. 20 UKP and some sweat. > > http://www.reality.demon.co.uk/gasturb.htm > > Regards, Frederick And some blood, too. Lowly drill bit got him. There's this thing in a picture next to an engine while it's spewing an enormous ball of flame in one of his afterburner tests. Took me a moment to recognize what the thing was because I so didn't expect it to be there - it was the guy's ***arm*** - he's squirting the fuel into the rig with some sort of syringe. You know what they say - mad dogs... - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 02:36:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA16777; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 02:35:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 02:35:09 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 00:35:04 -1000 Subject: Re: Mizuno vs The OU Coffee Cup Heater From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19991217003948.009f5e90 mail.eden.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DghQt.0._54.S7XMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32244 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oh *now* you tell us - after I spent half the day trying to find the 'C' drive on my Macintosh. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI on 12/16/99 8:39 PM, Scott Little at little eden.com wrote: > At 02:14 PM 12/17/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >>> Take a look at the first plot presented in: >>> >>> C:\ET\CF\Inc-W\300volt\run1.html >> >> Funny, I can't find this on my C drive ;) > > Haw! Obviously, I copied the local link rather than the web address: > > http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run1.html > > > Scott Little > EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 > 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) > little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 03:06:08 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA21933; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 03:05:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 03:05:00 -0800 Message-ID: <017a01bf4886$e467f920$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Mizuno vs The OU Coffee Cup Heater Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 04:03:49 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"BxYr11.0.dM5.RZXMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32245 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, Using 161.x watts of heater (watts/cm^2?) in oil as a "control" doesn't have much meaning wrt using a resistance heater in the H2O-K2CO3 experiment (3-4 watts/cm^2) where you have several ionic species present due to autoionization of the water etc. But, if you like using a sledge hammer to wind your Rolex... :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 03:28:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA25874; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 03:27:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 03:27:31 -0800 Message-ID: <018201bf488a$09dc9140$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: PLUG Power on the Grid Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 04:26:26 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"t6uvq3.0.CK6.ZuXMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32246 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Monteverde To: Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 2:32 AM Subject: Re: PLUG Power on the Grid Rick wrote: > on 12/16/99 6:00 PM, Frederick Sparber at fjsparber earthlink.net wrote: > http://www.reality.demon.co.uk/gasturb.htm . > > There's this thing in a picture next to an engine while it's spewing an > enormous ball of flame in one of his afterburner tests. Took me a moment to > recognize what the thing was because I so didn't expect it to be there - it > was the guy's ***arm*** - he's squirting the fuel into the rig with some > sort of syringe. You know what they say - mad dogs... I'm rather partial to the Link to Mark Nye's Wood-Burning Gas Turbine in the above address. 2 Kwe from from Biomass Waste (Cow Chips etc.) at about 15 % thermal efficiency and lots of "waste heat" is appealing. :-) I've burned feedlot manure in a 3 Megawatt Gas Turbine and it burns like kerosene when finely divided, with NO ODOR, except in the pile, or from the truck that hauled 12 tons from Eastern New Mexico to Roanoke Virginia. :-) Regards, Frederick > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 04:04:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA32503; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 04:03:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 04:03:51 -0800 Sender: jack pop.centurytel.net Message-ID: <385A350A.4907FE81 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:05:14 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38591926.717AEA01 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"8Cshf1.0.jx7.cQYMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32247 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{Several points: ... (Given the desire of the U.S. government to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation, and given their tendency to use secrecy and even outright lying to achieve their ends, I am unwilling to assume that their atomic mass data do not contain deliberately planted disinformation unless there is independent corroboration.) Hi Mitchell and Robin, Would this info be available through the Freedom of Information Act? Would it be worthwile writing to my Congressman about it? I would post the letter here first for your comments. Jack Smith Mitchell Jones wrote: ... if the calculations which I posted several days ago are correct, then the maximum neutrino energy from the proton-proton cycle would be a mere .93 MeV, which is only marginally above the minimum energy that is capable of triggering the Davis detector. (That is, .813 MeV if the masses in the table are atomic masses.) Mitchell previously wrote: 17Cl37 + v --> [18Ar37+] + e- 36.9659026 + 0 = [36.9667759 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, so Q = -.0008733 amu = -0.813 MeV. Mitchell now writes (repeated below): [Note: the Davis detector relies on the reaction 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37- + e-, where the mass balance equation is 36.9659 + 0 --> 36.9662 + .0005486 + Q, and Q = -.0008486 amu = -.79 MeV.] Jack writes: I would very much appreciate you explaining to me how, at one point, the Davis detector requires a minimum of 0.813 Mev to be triggered, and now requires 0.79 Mev. (I'm still confused.) Robin van Spaandonk wrote: There are two possible proton reactions: p + p + e -> D (nucleus) + v + 1.44 MeV (electron capture reaction), and p + p -> D (nucleus) + e+ + v + 0.42 MeV (beta+ decay reaction). ... Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{Yes, but as I noted the other day, the first reaction is a two step process, and the 1.44 MeV is not available to the neutrino. Here is the way it goes: (1) p + e- --> n + v, where the mass balance equation is 1.0072764 + .0005486 = 1.008665 + 0 + Q, and Q = -.00084 amu = -.7824 MeV. The reaction is endothermic, requiring that the electron deliver .7824 MeV to make it go. Result: the neutrino goes off with negligible energy. It is just needed to conserve beta lepton number. (2) 1H1 + n --> 1D2, where the mass balance equation is 1.007825 + 1.008665 = 2.0141 + Q, and Q = .000239 amu = 2.22 MeV. Net for the combined reaction: 2.22 - .7824 = 1.44 MeV, but, as noted above, the 1.44 MeV is not available to the neutrino, and so any neutrinos produced by this reaction will not be detectible by the Davis "solar neutrino detector." As for the second reaction, it would have to resolve into the following steps: (1) p + p --> [2He2++] The mass balance is 1.0072764 + 1.0072764 = 2.0145528 + Q, and Q = 0 MeV. (2) [2He2++] --> 1D2+ + e+ + v. Here the mass balance is 2.0145528 = 2.01355 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, and Q = .0004542 amu = .423 MeV The main problem with the above stems from the fact that 2He2 is entirely bogus: two protons have no bound states ... Result: the beta+ will, of necessity, carry away virtually all of the .423 MeV that is available, leaving very little for the neutrino. Unfortunately, the neutrino needs at least .79 MeV to trigger a hit in the Davis detector. [Note: the Davis detector relies on the reaction 17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37- + e-, where the mass balance equation is 36.9659 + 0 --> 36.9662 + .0005486 + Q, and Q = -.0008486 amu = -.79 MeV.] To trigger the Davis detector, therefore, a neutrino must come in with at least .79 MeV. Since only .423 MeV is available, and almost none of it will go to the neutrino, this reaction cannot possibly trigger the Davis detector. Bottom line: I see no way in hell that the Davis "solar neutrino detector" can detect a significant proportion of solar neutrinos, assuming that the government atomic mass numbers are correct and that the current theory about the source of solar energy is correct. --MJ}*** Robin van Spaandonk wrote: A very enlightening graph pertaining to neutrino energies, and various neutrino detection experiments can be found at: http://almime.mi.infn.it/html/borexinof.html . Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{Very interesting indeed. The chart presented on that website confirms the conclusion which I reached, above: a neutron {Jack writes: Do you mean "neutrino"?} detector that relies on absorption by 17Cl37 cannot detect neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle. I therefore continue to scratch my head in amazement as I read, on pg. 73 of *The Particle Hunters*, that "Davis' solar neutrino observatory has yielded puzzling results: while models of the 'nuclear pile' in the sun provide estimates for the expected flux of solar neutrinos, the measured values are persistently about one third of the theoretical predictions." What in the name of Zeus can such a statement possibly mean, given the fact that the Davis detector is *totally blind* to 99.9% of the neutrinos which theory claims are emitted from the sun? --MJ}*** Marco G. Giammarchi wrote: In Borexino we are mainly interested in the observation of the higher energy 7Be neutrinos, which is a monochromatic line at 863 keV. Jack writes: What do you think about the Borexino effort to go after high-energy neutrinos? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 05:34:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA18350; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 05:33:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 05:33:47 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991217083337.0079ae80 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 08:33:37 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991215193739.007a1140 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991215193739.007a1140 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"8U-l91.0.ZU4.xkZMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32248 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Given that the reformer produces CO2, and the fuel cell itself would also >produce some waste heat, between them, they should be able to supply a >useful proportion of the heat required in an average home (e.g. hot water >heater), so that would make quite a difference in the overall efficiency. Sure, if they used it in a cogeneration configuration, they would recover 95% of the energy as electricity or useful heat, same as a turbine. (Only the proportions would be different. The other 5% goes up the chimney.) However, the photo shows the equipment installed outside a house, like an air conditioner, and it does not mention cogeneration. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 06:42:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA10443; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 06:40:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 06:40:53 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991217094040.00798a90 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 09:40:40 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"E-sTh2.0.4Z2.rjaMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32249 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bill Briggs writes: In all your calculations I don't see an adjustment for line losses. I think I've heard figures of 50% or more of the generated power is lost to transmission losses. Does someone have better figures? It is much better than 50%. According to a PG&E study, transmission is 95% percent efficient over a distance of 500 miles. (See "Hydrogen Program Plan," p. C-3.) Transmission losses are not a major factor in efficiency, but the cost of building and maintaining the transmission infrastructure gives on-site generation a big economic advantage, either with a fuel cell or a small turbine. The real cost and efficiency savings come with cogeneration, because 52% to 65% of the heat used to generate electricity is wasted. (Water and wind turbines are far more efficient.) Automotive ICE are the real joke: they are 20% efficient, and they consume 20% of all energy, and 53% of oil. A circa 1905 gasoline-electric design would double ICE efficiency. Numbers like this make all the gab about an energy crisis ring hollow. If people in the U.S. were seriously interested in conserving energy, they could cut consumption by a huge factor and nearly eliminate oil imports in ten years. Plus, the CO2 production would be spread out over a wider area. It spreads out rapidly anyway, and at low concentration C02 is not a bit toxic. Allowing it to be more easily used up by the local plant life, before it can get up into the higher atmosphere. I doubt it. I think it reaches all parts of the atmosphere very rapidly. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 07:13:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA21590; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 07:12:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 07:12:28 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991217101139.0079c800 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 10:11:39 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Firewall software seems effective Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"QTesT.0.GH5.SBbMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32250 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Since I installed this firewall software a few days ago, I've intercepted four apparent attempts to break into my computer, including two UDP port probes, a TCP Trojan horse probe, and a TELNET probe -- whatever that means. I also saw two UDP probes generated by a New York Times site I was connected to, which probably had some legitimate purpose. According to the firewall software vendor, the TCP probe is: . . . the most common intrusion detected on the Internet. This is so common because hackers do frequent wide-spread scans looking for one specific exploit they can use to break into systems. The typical hacker scans thousands or millions of machines in a typical scan . . . Probes like this result from "script-kiddies," hackers just above the skill level of trained monkeys. They download attack programs (called "scripts") from various sites on the net, then run them against millions of machines. There are thousands of script-kiddies out there, so if you have a always-on connection (cable-modem, DSL), then you can expect about one of these scans per day. - advice.networkice.com/advice/Intrusions/2003102/default.htm In ten years I have seen only one minor computer virus, which I suspect was a false alarm. I conclude that attacks via open Internet ports are more serious and common than viruses. (The TCP Trojan horse is a combination of the two. It breaks into a computer which has been previously infected with a virus.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 08:28:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18845; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 08:26:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 08:26:58 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:25:34 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:26:46 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:19:34 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-reply-to: To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:25:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2332ZYFYGBSPM X400-MTS-identifier: [;43521171219991/4333788 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"uhVsg.0.Mc4.HHcMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32251 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell, My apologies, I got lost in the reply to a reply to a reply to a reply to a reply to a ... reply. >***{Why send this to me? Ostrowski is the one who set up the "Vito" >example, and he is the one who seemed to think that such people can be >moved by moral arguments. For the record, though, you are wrong about all >mob guys being dumb. I have known a few, and, while I don't claim that they >were sophisticated or erudite, some were extremely bright. --MJ}*** Bill (the one with egg on his face) webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 08:45:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA07615; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 08:42:51 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 08:42:51 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991217113953.0079c620 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:39:53 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: First Y2K casualty Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Ef99p.0.rs1.9WcMu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32252 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From the Calgary Herald: Michigan man blown up by fuel he was stockpiling for Y2K BENTON TOWNSHIP, Mich. (AP) - A man who was stockpiling food and fuel to prepare for possible Y2K problems escaped serious injury after some of the propane gas he was storing in his basement exploded. The Friday blast pushed out sections of the cement-block foundation, bowed walls and sprayed shards of glass over Alonzo Anderson's lawn but he had only singed hair and a burn on his cheek. "I don't know how he survived," said Lieut. Ken Doroh of the Benton Township Fire Department. Officials said the explosion was caused by gas leaking from one of several propane tanks Anderson planned to use for heat if utilities failed Jan. 1 . . . Could this be the same guy who squirts fuel by hand into a turbine generator? - JR From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 09:26:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA11194; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 09:24:19 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 09:24:19 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991217094040.00798a90 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:17:57 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid Resent-Message-ID: <"uQ4dc.0.hk2.-6dMu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32254 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Bill Briggs writes: > > In all your calculations I don't see an adjustment for line > losses. > > I think I've heard figures of 50% or more of the generated power > is lost to transmission losses. Does someone have better > figures? > >It is much better than 50%. According to a PG&E study, transmission is 95% >percent efficient over a distance of 500 miles. (See "Hydrogen Program >Plan," p. C-3.) Transmission losses are not a major factor in efficiency, >but the cost of building and maintaining the transmission infrastructure >gives on-site generation a big economic advantage, either with a fuel cell >or a small turbine. > >The real cost and efficiency savings come with cogeneration, because 52% to >65% of the heat used to generate electricity is wasted. (Water and wind >turbines are far more efficient.) Automotive ICE are the real joke: they >are 20% efficient, and they consume 20% of all energy, and 53% of oil. A >circa 1905 gasoline-electric design would double ICE efficiency. Numbers >like this make all the gab about an energy crisis ring hollow. If people in >the U.S. were seriously interested in conserving energy, they could cut >consumption by a huge factor and nearly eliminate oil imports in ten years. ***{How--by giving up their automobiles? Nobody but left-wing numbskulls think they ought to do that. As for the "energy crisis," it doesn't exist and never did exist. The only real crisis in this world is the one produced by people who feel worthless unless they are "solving problems" by ordering other people around. --MJ}*** > > Plus, the CO2 production would be spread out over a wider area. > >It spreads out rapidly anyway, and at low concentration C02 is not a bit >toxic. > > > Allowing it to be more easily used up by the local plant life, > before it can get up into the higher atmosphere. > >I doubt it. I think it reaches all parts of the atmosphere very rapidly. ***{It doesn't matter whether it does or doesn't. CO2 is food for plants. Plants are food for animals. Animals are food for people. That means the burning of fossil fuels is not merely a beneficial source of energy, but also produces a massive increase in global biomass. It is good for us, and good for the environment. "Global warming" is just the latest trendy excuse employed by airheads to justify ordering the rest of us around. --MJ}*** > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 09:26:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA11215; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 09:24:25 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 09:24:25 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <385A350A.4907FE81 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> References: <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38591926.717AEA01 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 10:47:31 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrinos Resent-Message-ID: <"5JqKg2.0.ek2.-6dMu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32253 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >***{Several points: ... > >(Given the desire of the U.S. government to prevent nuclear >weapons proliferation, and given their tendency to use >secrecy and even outright lying to achieve their ends, >I am unwilling to assume that their atomic mass data do >not contain deliberately planted disinformation unless >there is independent corroboration.) > >Hi Mitchell and Robin, > >Would this info be available through the Freedom of Information >Act? Would it be worthwile writing to my Congressman about it? ***{I think it would be a total waste of time. The information is either deliberately mucked up for supposed "national security reasons" or it isn't. If it is, that fact is protected by a "Top Secret" security classification, and they aren't going to tell you about it. Bottom line: the only way we can know if we can trust the information in the government tables is by verifying that mass specs and accelerators in private hands give the same answers. --MJ}*** >I would post the letter here first for your comments. > >Jack Smith > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >... if the calculations which I posted several >days ago are correct, then the maximum neutrino energy >from the proton-proton cycle would be a mere .93 MeV, >which is only marginally above the minimum energy that is >capable of triggering the Davis detector. > >(That is, .813 MeV if the masses in the table are >atomic masses.) > >Mitchell previously wrote: > >17Cl37 + v --> [18Ar37+] + e- > >36.9659026 + 0 = [36.9667759 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, >so Q = -.0008733 amu = -0.813 MeV. > >Mitchell now writes (repeated below): > >[Note: the Davis detector relies on the reaction > >17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37- + e-, > >where the mass balance equation is > >36.9659 + 0 --> 36.9662 + .0005486 + Q, > >and Q = -.0008486 amu = -.79 MeV.] > >Jack writes: > >I would very much appreciate you explaining to me how, >at one point, the Davis detector requires a minimum of >0.813 Mev to be triggered, and now requires 0.79 Mev. >(I'm still confused.) ***{In the first calculation, I just carried the numbers out to more decimal places, that's all. --MJ}*** > >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >There are two possible proton reactions: > >p + p + e -> D (nucleus) + v + 1.44 MeV (electron capture reaction), > >and > >p + p -> D (nucleus) + e+ + v + 0.42 MeV (beta+ decay reaction). ... > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >***{Yes, but as I noted the other day, the first reaction >is a two step process, and the 1.44 MeV is not available >to the neutrino. Here is the way it goes: > >(1) p + e- --> n + v, > >where the mass balance equation is > >1.0072764 + .0005486 = 1.008665 + 0 + Q, > >and Q = -.00084 amu = -.7824 MeV. > >The reaction is endothermic, requiring that the electron >deliver .7824 MeV to make it go. Result: the neutrino goes >off with negligible energy. It is just needed to conserve >beta lepton number. > >(2) 1H1 + n --> 1D2, > >where the mass balance equation is > >1.007825 + 1.008665 = 2.0141 + Q, > >and Q = .000239 amu = 2.22 MeV. > >Net for the combined reaction: 2.22 - .7824 = 1.44 MeV, >but, as noted above, the 1.44 MeV is not available to the >neutrino, and so any neutrinos produced by this reaction >will not be detectible by the Davis "solar neutrino >detector." > >As for the second reaction, it would have to resolve into >the following steps: > >(1) p + p --> [2He2++] > >The mass balance is > >1.0072764 + 1.0072764 = 2.0145528 + Q, and Q = 0 MeV. > >(2) [2He2++] --> 1D2+ + e+ + v. > >Here the mass balance is > >2.0145528 = 2.01355 + .0005486 + 0 + Q, > >and Q = .0004542 amu = .423 MeV > >The main problem with the above stems from the fact that >2He2 is entirely bogus: two protons have no bound states ... >Result: the beta+ will, of necessity, carry >away virtually all of the .423 MeV that is available, >leaving very little for the neutrino. Unfortunately, the >neutrino needs at least .79 MeV to trigger a hit in the >Davis detector. > >[Note: the Davis detector relies on the reaction > >17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37- + e-, > >where the mass balance equation is > >36.9659 + 0 --> 36.9662 + .0005486 + Q, > >and Q = -.0008486 amu = -.79 MeV.] > >To trigger the Davis detector, therefore, a neutrino must >come in with at least .79 MeV. Since only .423 MeV is >available, and almost none of it will go to the neutrino, >this reaction cannot possibly trigger the Davis detector. > >Bottom line: I see no way in hell that the Davis "solar >neutrino detector" can detect a significant proportion of >solar neutrinos, assuming that the government atomic mass >numbers are correct and that the current theory about the >source of solar energy is correct. > >--MJ}*** > >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >A very enlightening graph pertaining to neutrino energies, >and various neutrino detection experiments can be found at: > >http://almime.mi.infn.it/html/borexinof.html . > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >***{Very interesting indeed. The chart presented on that >website confirms the conclusion which I reached, above: >a neutron > >{Jack writes: Do you mean "neutrino"?} ***{Yup. --MJ}*** > >detector that relies on absorption by 17Cl37 >cannot detect neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle. >I therefore continue to scratch my head in amazement as >I read, on pg. 73 of *The Particle Hunters*, that "Davis' >solar neutrino observatory has yielded puzzling results: >while models of the 'nuclear pile' in the sun provide >estimates for the expected flux of solar neutrinos, the >measured values are persistently about one third of the >theoretical predictions." What in the name of Zeus can >such a statement possibly mean, given the fact that the >Davis detector is *totally blind* to 99.9% of the neutrinos >which theory claims are emitted from the sun? --MJ}*** > >Marco G. Giammarchi wrote: > >In Borexino we are mainly interested in the observation of the >higher energy 7Be neutrinos, which is a monochromatic line at 863 keV. > >Jack writes: > >What do you think about the Borexino effort to go after high-energy >neutrinos? ***{Dunno. I'm still trying to understand why these guys think most of the solar neutrinos are missing. Based on the chart presented on the Borexino website, the only detectors which can register neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle are those which use gallium (31Ga71), and indium (49In115). My guess is that the reactions are: (1) 31Ga71 + v --> [32Ge71+] + [e-], where the mass balance equation is 70.9247 + 0 --> [70.924956 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, and Q = -.000256 amu = -.238 MeV. This reaction is endothermic, like all the others so far, and requires that the neutrino deliver at least .238 MeV. Thus while it can register neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle, it misses most of those from the lower-energy part of the distribution. (2) 49In115 + v --> [50Sn115+] + [e-], where the mass balance equation is 114.90388 + 0 --> [114.90335 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, and Q = .0000272 amu = +.025 MeV. This reaction--at last!--is exothermic, and thus does not require that the neutrino deliver any minimum amount of energy. Instead, the neutrino is required only for conservation of beta lepton number. Result: this detector should be sensitive to *all* solar neutrinos, and thus would seem capable of actually providing evidence to support the claim that most of the expected solar neutrinos are not there. Bottom line: if a solid case has been made that most of the expected solar neutrinos are missing, it is from data collected by detectors of these two types, not from the Davis detector. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 11:59:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA25163; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:55:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:55:53 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991217144422.007ba260 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:44:22 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991217094040.00798a90 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"P7cry.0.596.9LfMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32255 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: >>If people in >>the U.S. were seriously interested in conserving energy, they could cut >>consumption by a huge factor and nearly eliminate oil imports in ten years. > >***{How--by giving up their automobiles? Nobody but left-wing numbskulls >think they ought to do that. No, not by giving up automobiles. By re-engineering automobiles, by using electric and hybrid gasoline electric vehicles, and compact fluorescent lights, improved insulation and windows, smart electronic controls for machines, lighting and escalators, telecommunications and telecommuting instead of physical travel in some cases, and so on. Of course this would not be a free lunch. As one expert put it: "this would be a lunch you are paid to eat." It would save trillions of dollars over the long-term, and it would make life more convenient, cleaner, quieter and safer. Most of these innovations would be a win-win proposition. Smart controls on machinery, for example, reduce energy consumption, reduce unnecessary wear and tear, cut noise, and improve production quality. As far as I know, people have not invested more in energy innovations only because they are ignorant. This is the same reason the Internet did not bloom until a few years ago; the potential was there all along. The gadgets were invented and ready, but people did not know about them so the technology languished. > As for the "energy crisis," it doesn't exist >and never did exist. Of course it exists! It causes most air pollution, and it is the main cause of food and water shortages that kill roughly 50,000 people per week in the third world. If people in the first world would cut back their consumption of oil, the price would drop and third world consumers would have an easier time surviving. The air in places like Atlanta would be far cleaner, and the real cost of most goods would drop. In the 1970s, people thought the "energy crisis" meant we were running out of fuel. That's was not it. The problem is we use too much fuel for our own good, and more than we need to accomplish our goals. Why use 300 grams of gasoline to visit a customer when you can travel just as safely, quickly and comfortably with 100 grams? Why use 100 grams when you can visit the customer instantly on Internet video, take the order, answer questions, reduce traffic, save 40 minutes of your time, and use 2 grams of fuel instead? Today's automobiles and highways are 19th-century answers to 21st-century problems. They look streamlined and modern, but to me they reek of obsolescence, like the sailing ships that still crowded the warves of New York City in 1895. >That means the >burning of fossil fuels is not merely a beneficial source of energy, but >also produces a massive increase in global biomass. It is good for us, and >good for the environment. That is very unlikely. Sudden, large-scale changes in the environment, whether man-made or natural, are seldom good for the environment. We are facing an uncontrollable increase in biomass in Georgia in many areas, with the explosive growth of kudzu (Pueraria lobata). It wipes out native species and disrupts agriculture. There is nothing good about it. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 12:38:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA32499; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:31:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:31:29 -0800 From: Chuck Davis To: Mitchell Jones Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:33:54 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"CAJ6V2.0.ix7.WsfMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32256 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 17-Dec-99, Mitchell Jones, wrote: >>Bill Briggs writes: >> >>In all your calculations I don't see an adjustment for line >>losses. >> >>I think I've heard figures of 50% or more of the generated power >>is lost to transmission losses. Does someone have better >>figures? >> >>It is much better than 50%. According to a PG&E study, transmission is 95% >>percent efficient over a distance of 500 miles. (See "Hydrogen Program >>Plan," p. C-3.) Transmission losses are not a major factor in efficiency, >>but the cost of building and maintaining the transmission infrastructure >>gives on-site generation a big economic advantage, either with a fuel cell >>or a small turbine. >> >>The real cost and efficiency savings come with cogeneration, because 52% to >>65% of the heat used to generate electricity is wasted. (Water and wind >>turbines are far more efficient.) Automotive ICE are the real joke: they >>are 20% efficient, and they consume 20% of all energy, and 53% of oil. A >>circa 1905 gasoline-electric design would double ICE efficiency. Numbers >>like this make all the gab about an energy crisis ring hollow. If people in >>the U.S. were seriously interested in conserving energy, they could cut >>consumption by a huge factor and nearly eliminate oil imports in ten years. >***{How--by giving up their automobiles? Nobody but left-wing numbskulls >think they ought to do that. As for the "energy crisis," it doesn't exist >and never did exist. The only real crisis in this world is the one produced >by people who feel worthless unless they are "solving problems" by ordering >other people around. --MJ}*** >> >>Plus, the CO2 production would be spread out over a wider area. >> >>It spreads out rapidly anyway, and at low concentration C02 is not a bit >>toxic. >> >> >>Allowing it to be more easily used up by the local plant life, >>before it can get up into the higher atmosphere. >> >>I doubt it. I think it reaches all parts of the atmosphere very rapidly. >***{It doesn't matter whether it does or doesn't. CO2 is food for plants. >Plants are food for animals. Animals are food for people. That means the >burning of fossil fuels is not merely a beneficial source of energy, but >also produces a massive increase in global biomass. It is good for us, and >good for the environment. "Global warming" is just the latest trendy excuse >employed by airheads to justify ordering the rest of us around. --MJ}*** >> >>- Jed Mitch, my man, for the past several months, I've been unsubscribed. Here, I return to lurk, and you're still trying to "feed pearls to swine", as it were. It's as if I've not been gone! Perhaps I better re-unsubscribe and continue to wait for the "movie" to change. Take care :) -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.futurehealth.org/roshi.htm http://www.post-trauma.com/roshi.html http://www.Starsaga.com/biofeedback.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 12:40:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA02784; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:37:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:37:49 -0800 Message-ID: <385AA4C5.2E57 ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:01:57 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JcH7f1.0.Qh.TyfMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32257 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >>> ***{OK, Jim, consider this: Sam is walking down the sidewalk, minding his > >>> own business, when a footpad steps out of an alley, aims a large pistol at > >>> him, and says: "Your money or your life." Sam antes up, the footpad > >>> disappears back into the alley, and Sam goes on his way. > >> > >>The above situation is in no way analogous to the way gov't goes about > >>getting money from anyone, at least nowadays. > > > >***{I didn't claim it was analogous. My purpose in setting up the example > >as I did was to raise the question of where the line ought to be drawn > >between submission and confrontation, and on the matter of how and by whom > >that decision ought to be made. --MJ}*** > > > > My point was that your example wasn't analogous to the real situation we > > were discussing (the way gov't extorts money from people). If your > > example is not an analog to the real situation, I have to point that out. > > Otherwise I am allowing you to drag the discussion off point. > > ***{It wasn't off point. You merely keep missing the point, that's all. I > was trying to get you to focus your mind on the fact that there is a > continuum of threats, extending from extreme threats such as death by > torture, to severe beatings, to jail, to fines, and so on, all the way down > to, and including, merely requiring that you waste inordinate amounts of > you precious time haggling with bureaucrats, talking to lawyers, or sitting > in court, in order to keep what you have. The IRS doesn't say "Your money > or your life," for example. What they really say is this: "Fill out the > forms and pay us what we demand, or spend decades of your life thinking > about us, talking to our agents, consulting with lawyers, sitting in > hearings, etc." I, and most others, prefer to fill out the forms and pay > they what they ask, rather than piss away precious years of life fighting > with them. The fact that we choose to do that does not mean that we agree > with the tax laws or that we "volunteer" to give our money to the > government. All it means is that we are not dim-witted enough to place > *zero* value on our time. --MJ}*** > I don't know about where you live, but in California, pleading guilty to a charge of failure to fasten your seat belt while driving will cost you about 120 bucks. It goes up from there for other infringements. One woman had to cough up $400 for passing a stopped school bus after the children had safely crossed the street, but before the school bus driver, who was taking his sweet old time had gotten around to turning his flashers off. I estimate that I have saved in the neighborhood of perhaps only $1500 in my accumulated traffic ticket cases, but when I add up the hours spent dealing with each case, including paperwork preparation and court time, that comes out to about $75 per hour spent. In my regular business I only charge my customers $45 per hour. There are a few cases where I was able to turn around and sue various officials for acts resulting in my incarceration for short periods of time. A weekend stint in a Santa Cruz county Jail cost a court baillif $6500. That's about $100 an hour, more than twice what I make now just doing my regular business. Talking to you over the internet on the other hand gets me exactly 0 dollars. Now, what then is more of a waste of my time? I count maybe 30 or so messages I've sent to this forum trying to correct your misrepresentations of the facts on various topics, yet you persist in your erroneous assertions just like you are doing here. Just one of these messages takes more time to compose than any single court document I ever had to run off my printer. As far as the IRS is concerned, they have NEVER bothered me with so much as a phone call or a visit by an agent. Now maybe that's because they are too busy doing other things like collecting the money that you so obligingly overpay them, but that would be your problem, not mine. You asked earlier what benefit to society my activities represented. I don't know. All I know is that any money that I either avoid having to pay or that I am able to extract from the system is then diverted from causing HARM to society from the utilzation by government thugs to expand their influence. As much as you would like to avoid it, you are member of an army of millions of others just like yourself all contributing to the goon squad's paychecks, voluntarily or not. Whether or not this army came about as a result of people being drafted, involuntarily, does not detract from the conclusion that the army exists and is causing harm to society. But, in your case, it IS voluntary. Your idea that there is a "continuum" of "threats" results in the conclusion that there ARE NO VOLUNTARY ACTS; either that or you get to arbitrarily decide where to "draw the line" conveniently just past the point where you would have to stand on the wrong side of it. Coercion means force. Force means immediate threat to your life or physical well being, not your time. You have "stolen" more of my time than any cop ever did. I know that I don't HAVE to respond to your crap, like I do to theirs, but to allow you to promote your BS on vortex without a response is allowing error to overcome truth, and I am not about to let that happen. Voluntarily. One other thing. Your idea that I should move out of my neighborhood in response to the fact that there were, at one time, a bunch of cop sponsored gangs wandering around it, just shows the kind of character you are in possesion of. Instead of making an effort to try to improve the situation in one's neighborhood, your idea is to let the gangs win leaving the other people who maybe can't afford to move out, behind to fend for themselves. How much of my precious TIME would I have to spend moving, were I to follow your suggestions? How much money? Eventually, with this philosophy, I suppose you will find yourself living in one of those expensive security gated and monitored communities, just so you will feel safe from government sponsored gangs. Going outside the limits of your compound then will be DANGEROUS, won't it? Enjoy your stay. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 13:33:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17032; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:30:06 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:30:06 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991217162707.0079d100 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:27:07 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991217094040.00798a90 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ByHie3.0.w94.OjgMu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32258 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I remarked earlier that the natural gas fuel cell used in a cogeneration mode would be ~95% energy efficient. I have no idea whether it could be used in this fashion. It might not be safe to install the machine indoors. The reformer must be at hundreds of degrees at least, and I do not know what carbon compounds it makes. It uses carbon monoxide (CO) and it has a "CO cleanup unit" which is supposed to keep the concentration down to 50 ppm, but you might not want this machine in your bedroom closet. The older reformers ran at thousands of degrees. They used a lot of energy and they rapidly degraded because they were so hot. I think Plug Power has reduced the operating temperature. A turbine has one single outlet path for the burned gases, which can be directed straight up the chimney. The fuel cell has complicated-looking plumbing with a "CO cleanup unit" and whatnot. Another alternative on the horizon, described recently in the Sci. Am., is an improved thermoelectric device, where heat from a gas mantle converts directly into electricity. This makes a good co-gen heater, and it is very compact. It is being used on small boats. I note that Plug Power has reduced the amount of Pt catalytic material: Until recently, large-scale production of fuel cell devices was inhibited by the large amounts of high cost materials they required. For example, as recently as 1980 the amount of platinum (used as a catalyst) needed for a 7 kW fuel cell cost $9,000! However today, due to improved methods of applying platinum, much less is required and the cost is down to approximately $50 for the same size fuel cell. - http://www.plugpower.com/technology/ This is the same challenge we face in CF. We need more active catalyst surface, less material sitting there contributing nothing, taking a free ride. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 14:06:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA23524; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:04:30 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:04:30 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991217170051.00799ae0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:00:51 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Back Orifice ping Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"yNOVn.0.Al5.dDhMu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32259 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I was sitting here dictating a letter to a professor this afternoon, when I chanced to look down at my external modem. The receive light was blinking rapidly even though I was not sending e-mail or doing anything on the Web. The firewall alarm icon on my screen began blinking. I tapped it and learned that someone named "dt021nd7.san.rr.com" was sending me a "Back Orifice ping." The documentation says, "Back Orifice pings are the most frequent attack seen on the Internet." Someone out there is hoping my computer is infected with a Trojan horse virus, and this message will wake it up and hand over control, letting him rifle my hard disk for credit card numbers or what-have-you. This is probably not a mistake. A "ping" (response request) message will have a specific, recognizable format. Oh, Brave New World! Science fiction never predicted a future in which a grimy little twit halfway around world can pick your pocket without your knowing it. I do not know what rr.com is. The other probes I have intercepted came from AOL, or they showed up as numerical IP addresses. I should learn to decode these things so I can send back Seasons Greetings in response. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 14:13:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA16283; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:11:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:11:28 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991217160815.0079f160 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:08:15 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Mitchell Jones From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"mI1Jz3.0.I-3.FKhMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32260 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Chuck Davis wrote: >Mitch, my man, for the past several months, I've been unsubscribed. >Here, I return to lurk, and you're still trying to "feed pearls to swine", >as it were. It's as if I've not been gone! What exactly is your point? Are you and Mitch challenging the PG&E study? Do you know something about transmission losses, gas turbines or ICE efficiency that I overlooked? You quote the biblical analogy about casting pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6). Perhaps you should consider another analogy about hiding your candle under a bushel or a bed. It's a fire hazard, but what they really meant was: don't hold back, tell us what you know, or "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear." In other words, if you have some information to contribute, let's have it. If you are here to insult other people then perhaps you should consider the line before "pearls" (7:5): Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 14:18:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA18653; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:16:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:16:02 -0800 Message-ID: <01e401bf48e4$968f99c0$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991217162707.0079d100 pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:14:10 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"QdfKg.0.LZ4.XOhMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32261 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Jed Rothwell To: Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 1:27 PM Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid > I remarked earlier that the natural gas fuel cell used in a cogeneration > mode would be ~95% energy efficient. I have no idea whether it could be > used in this fashion. It might not be safe to install the machine indoors. > The reformer must be at hundreds of degrees at least, and I do not know > what carbon compounds it makes. Tap water is used to reform the Methane, Methanol, or Propane: 1, CH4 + H2O (steam) ---> CO + 3 H2 the CO is reacted with more H2O in the "Shift Reaction" using a shiftt catalyst: CO + H2O ----> CO2 + H2 Thus the overall Endothermic reaction: CH4 + 2 H2O ---> CO2 + 4 H2 Methanol is a little easier to reform but it is a health hazard if it gets in the water supply: 1, CH3OH + H2O ----> CO2 + 4 H2 Propane, CH3-CH2-CH3 + 6 H2O ----> 3 CO2 + 10 H2 will form lots of CO before it is shift reacted to CO2. It will crack to lighter CxHy + CH4 and H2 during steam reforming, but all are standard petrochemical processes. The selling point for PLUG is the low cost Pt catalyst and Cell Lifetime. The Gas Association initiated the "TARGET" program in the early 70's for an identical system and pumped nearly $100Million into it before giving up. >It uses carbon monoxide (CO) and it has a > "CO cleanup unit" which is supposed to keep the concentration down to 50 > ppm, but you might not want this machine in your bedroom closet. Why not? 50 ppm is the allowable CO concentration because that is the CO Detector-Alarm lower limit, because that is the average concentration of CO in downtown Atlanta from automobile emissions. :-) or :-( >The older > reformers ran at thousands of degrees. They used a lot of energy and they > rapidly degraded because they were so hot. I think Plug Power has reduced > the operating temperature. Not so. Just better less poison sensitive catalysts. I did reasearch on a shift catalyst for reacting the CO in your car exhaust with the H2O in the exhaust CO + H2O ---> CO2 + H2 , but a Danish inventor beat me to the Patent Office. :-) > > A turbine has one single outlet path for the burned gases, which can be > directed straight up the chimney. With a gas-water heat exchanger on the turbine you can cogenerate. >The fuel cell has complicated-looking > plumbing with a "CO cleanup unit" and whatnot. That whatnot might take you 30 years for payback on a unit that will last 10 years. > > Another alternative on the horizon, described recently in the Sci. Am., is > an improved thermoelectric device, where heat from a gas mantle converts > directly into electricity. This makes a good co-gen heater, and it is very > compact. It is being used on small boats. Photo-voltaics are competing for this, where the "lime-light" from an incandescent "mantle" will do the same thing with cells that are looking at 42% efficiency in the near future. > > I note that Plug Power has reduced the amount of Pt catalytic material: > > - http://www.plugpower.com/technology/ Regards, Frederick > . > - Jed > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 14:24:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA22439; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:22:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:22:13 -0800 From: HLafonte aol.com Message-ID: <0.31954930.258c034c aol.com> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:21:16 EST Subject: Help find magnet used in fatal bomb To: energy21 listbot.com, jlnlabs@egroups.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, freenrg-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_0.31954930.258c034c_boundary" X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 45 Resent-Message-ID: <"Vv6Hs.0._T5.JUhMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32262 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_0.31954930.258c034c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, I am helping our local police department in an effort to find what company made the magnet in the attached drawing. Also what type of device it came out of. It was used in a fatal bombing that killed one local man. If it looks familar to you please let me know. All they can tell me about it is that it is very strong. I am trying to get more information now as to exact size ect. There is a reward being offered but don't know details yet. They are using local television also in the search. Thanks, Butch LaFonte --part1_0.31954930.258c034c_boundary Content-Type: image/gif; name="JASPER.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="JASPER.gif" R0lGODlhVAH6APcAAAAAAP////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////////////////////////ywAAAAAVAH6AAAI/gD/CRxIsKDBgwgTKlzIsKHD hxAjSpxIsaLFixgzatzIsaPHjyBDihxJsqTJkyhTqlzJsqXLlzBjypxJs6bNmzhz6tzJs6fP n0CDCh1KtKjRo0iTKl3KtKnTp1CjSp1KtarVq1izat3KtavXr2DDih1LFYDZs2jTql3Ltm1b sg3dygUAV+bcu3jz1s3L925dk30DCx4ruLDcvyINKz7sdbFjxog3Pp58livly28jY8T8OCvn z5k1TwStuCrp05BFx0UdWCrr16lVI4TNFyrt26FlG8Tttynv32t17waeOynx45WFD0QeXCnz 53SVQ0drfDp04dbNHs2eXTb3otzD/keP/H2oePGaywM9z348XPU928t3Lxb+zvnz33ePjz8/ 4f339Yfff9YFKKCAYdlX04EM0reVgjM12OBXEMYkoYSNAUjThRd2VaFLHHJomYYWhiiiVh+q ZOKKDk6VIkossojVi4DFKKNVNJJko404kqjijjyW5SOMQO4oZIEsFVmki0OWpKSSrjWp45NA RolkSlRCaZuUIWX55JZX1uillr5x6dGYWTqVo0ZoellmmIm16eZSa14kJ5p0msnmnXNWB+dH fPbp53QjBZomU3WOZiiZiOpZ0aKMNvqnZJAaCSahIFVq6VOJKqppiFZiGuenGIZ63ZSkMsjk pGfGaNGE/quKWiiolA4Y66lOqjrreaY5uqetRHZKlLCvygeir9shm1F7dskaFbHFhrchrqY+ hyW0qB7XK6tdchuhtkc6my1zPoF7q7XBkvsTcduKuytyQgHXLrW5mmsebvOiexK8yd4WLr3j 4jvoa//qKyZvksJ2rrr7/qYmbQvze7C/nEL8rLKbIXyxwpcC3K3A1ZK2sbuZahyyyBV7y5HD +aL2sMq/UtyjxXnCvCzIV5kcl07YPqTzjDgrpF1OPTMk74O8Eo0xREePiB5ORc/GrodJ3xT1 cE1TLS3US/9TtdZXl2xzQV9nuLVNwpYNdtf1kiz02QnCPe3YBD1dn9zf0r1c/tgJu/1S2nzX rHe6Hi+EN1iHlzh44ogHXqvfBzFOoeMxF56Q5GYPPrHBq7FdMOfNLu55yxLPDTnWp2du+bGi aw606wEz7BDlfYOueOp1j/556XnjvjfsM/tOuO1vA0+6vb2vjrrycRsvtvC0vyn85rIbrfvx U5vOfO7OY5916NBfvzvyt2//+/RId9+q3tHXXn35xEutfsTkw5Ro+4KbP/z7xaOPovgduR8A T1a/v2EMf0hBIEU6pUCjNFAiDBxgyvwXO95Zb34dix/rpvfAYUnwcfoTSAfvhcGVHfCD0gth w1pXQvfxz34nRKFzRuizGLYwfyqkngUNh7n0yTBj/prr4f9+CET0CdEzNKxhEJPIkyP+aIlM VFoUL2hEJ3ovewtamtqcNkUeQrGL2rth5TR4ObutTYxjfKEXwQg/CrYth17bYs7k2MYddo6N GyTizWDHHi7isYx8pCP9yGjAQAoyg3osIhxF2Mc5HhKGwDPWFdUIvkXGkVmDdKMOCzg7SSLy j/2z5CUb+clE7lGTwErhIyGpyVGSEodmlGIr++NCK7akaAgaGCYNNMtcOtCXPLvegX5JS/50 D1br0VUTxYdMYwKTl6I83zNlOU1qErKTyrRmKpc5vxOhrUPrGiCtKplNZ0aTe+BkZanCWcIV 5XGd7Gwl2W60P3iW64Ob/voYPZN5w0jZaUkklOfyqvQoKnlQjKlqE3hkmFA8HVSgkWuoQReK RolO9KHnBKRFg0RRiEZ0oxzF6DULClJ39suj8itpOomJ0pSqdJi6pCQIX+qfmNpxfTT1pE05 GcCc1nSnWHyXT23JzZaucahofKdMcYrUkQYliU3NqNVM+dGofq+WQV2hVYOmyqXqc6sEI2BW tQpW1mSSZUkqq1nP+rMnqvUzk+SqW99KmeBJ9Z90nYwjjbrAvDrmdXztq18Lg8SkCnawePHh XWeKWLb40an1bGxyFAvZyDZWdZW1rF8nZ1hFXpazgWVsXpsXWhNu9m6dFa1VyQJKKoJVP6k1 3G2TYknaxW6yrS7lKWa9OtWxHhW3BCqtUGUWEd8G17ZzXWu0OCaa1pLUZac8DXaoetvOqFav 0qEuWS8jW8woR5qZLWpde+rd7zIytivhLqDGa97zCreQi3leadqLTuT2djBf7Qt9q2rfYNYm v3PZbyjDC1TqDNexAv4tb0fWnFEhOMGuJfAEJwtgCBdXu/HMloU99d4Ne3ie6P2wiEdM4hKb +MQoTrGKV8ziFrv4xTCOsYxnTOMa2/jGOM6xjnfM4x77+MdADrKQh0zkIhv5yEhOspKXzOQm O3kkAQEAOw== --part1_0.31954930.258c034c_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 14:43:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA01408; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:40:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:40:11 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:38:43 -0500 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199912171738_MC2-9194-C2EA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA01373 Resent-Message-ID: <"H9e4L1.0.wL.AlhMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32263 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin, >> I use Mathcad 7, but no fancy features are used in the document, so if you edit it with a text editor, and change the version number at the beginning of the document, to what you find in your own documents, you will probably be OK. (I notice when doing this myself, that it comes up with "306" - curious). << I tried that but got a complete blank. At least there was no error msg, but the file seemed empty, although it was shown as 14k in explorer. My ver of MathCAD is way back in 4.0 and is quite good enough for my purposes, so I won't be spending $200 or so for the latest ver. Thanks anyway. Norman, Surrey, England From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 14:54:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA07310; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:52:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:52:52 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: PLUG Power on the Grid Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 09:52:43 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <4kfl5skbrktph7jimcvvgjkttnehqkuvur 4ax.com> References: <018201bf488a$09dc9140$e4441d26@fjsparber> In-Reply-To: <018201bf488a$09dc9140$e4441d26 fjsparber> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 OAA07270 Resent-Message-ID: <"Cg3pZ3.0.2o1.3xhMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32264 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 17 Dec 1999 04:26:26 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: [snip] >I've burned feedlot manure in a 3 Megawatt Gas Turbine and it burns like >kerosene when finely divided, with NO ODOR, except in the pile, or from the truck that >hauled 12 tons from Eastern New Mexico to Roanoke Virginia. :-) [snip] Hmmm...and how much fuel did the truck use in the process? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 15:08:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA13263; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:07:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:07:16 -0800 Message-ID: <021801bf48eb$be225a20$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <018201bf488a$09dc9140$e4441d26@fjsparber> <4kfl5skbrktph7jimcvvgjkttnehqkuvur@4ax.com> Subject: Re: PLUG Power on the Grid Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:06:17 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"h-8zx3.0.9F3.a8iMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32265 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: Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 2:52 PM Subject: Re: PLUG Power on the Grid Robin wrote: > On Fri, 17 Dec 1999 04:26:26 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > [snip] > >I've burned feedlot manure in a 3 Megawatt Gas Turbine and it burns like > >kerosene when finely divided, with NO ODOR, except in the pile, or from the truck that > >hauled 12 tons from Eastern New Mexico to Roanoke Virginia. :-) > [snip] > Hmmm...and how much fuel did the truck use in the process? Probably about 140 gallons of diesel for the 1400 mile trip, but that was because the driver was breaking the speed limit whilst trying to outrun the odor. Needless to say, no one was "tailgating-slipstreaming" him. Regards, Frederick > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 15:26:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA20879; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:25:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:25:23 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 10:25:17 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.6.32.19991217094040.00798a90 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991217162707.0079d100@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991217162707.0079d100 pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA20767 Resent-Message-ID: <"GQREJ2.0.065.YPiMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32266 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:27:07 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: [snip] >I remarked earlier that the natural gas fuel cell used in a cogeneration >mode would be ~95% energy efficient. I have no idea whether it could be >used in this fashion. It might not be safe to install the machine indoors. I see no reason why it would need to be indoors. What is the problem with having the water heater outdoors (well insulated)? Home hot water systems already have water heated at a single location, then piped to the rest of the house. It would just mean a minor relocation of the heating unit (these are frequently located near outside walls anyway). I once lived in a house with an external, gas heated, combined hot water and heating unit. The heating was accomplished by piping hot water to an indoor heat exchanger, where it was used to heat air that was then ducted through the house. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 15:29:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA22003; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:28:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:28:14 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 18:26:46 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 18:27:59 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 18:24:57 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 18:26:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal Sensitivity: Company-Confidential UA-content-id: E2335ZYFYQD1B7 X400-MTS-identifier: [;64628171219991/4335052 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"CTpPl3.0.iN5.DSiMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32267 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed, Ouch, (8-0) that must have hurt. Stick it in and twist it. ;^) >In other words, if you have some information to contribute, let's have it. If >you are here to insult other people then perhaps you should consider the line >before "pearls" (7:5): >Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; >and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. >- Jed Bill webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 15:35:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA24873; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:34:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:34:48 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Whirlpower News - Hurricane.mcd - hurrican.gif Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 10:34:43 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <199912171738_MC2-9194-C2EA compuserve.com> In-Reply-To: <199912171738_MC2-9194-C2EA compuserve.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--=_j4il5scj17n118bj8cddkjltto4acl3egk.MFSBCHJLHS" Resent-Message-ID: <"faNOm1.0.V46.OYiMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32268 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----=_j4il5scj17n118bj8cddkjltto4acl3egk.MFSBCHJLHS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:38:43 -0500, Norman Horwood wrote: [snip] >I tried that but got a complete blank. At least there was no error msg, >but the file seemed empty, although it was shown as 14k in explorer. My >ver of MathCAD is way back in 4.0 and is quite good enough for my = purposes, >so I won't be spending $200 or so for the latest ver. > >Thanks anyway. > >Norman, Surrey, England Hi Norman, I have attached the relevant part of the document as a GIF, so you can at least see what was in it. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk ----=_j4il5scj17n118bj8cddkjltto4acl3egk.MFSBCHJLHS Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=hurrican.gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=hurrican.gif R0lGODdh4wKqAfcAAAAAAP///xcAAABS+BcAlOVHbgQAMgDuBZcFeABDAfABpPgCAFL4AgCXBdbl Dgw3BKT4lwX///8AAABmIAFbAQD/AAEA////AOTlxwpMKgAADRAHAO8WLOePMb8X////AO4F7xZF AAIABABNaWNyb2dyYWZ4IFBpY3R1cmUgUHVibGlzaGVyIExFIC0gWzEwMCUgdW50aXRsZWQxXQCW AwAkCJgBXQlS+AIAoOYCAOTUAwBo3wMAiJYDAODUAwAkCJgHhAAAAK7fAwCXBX7mmN8DALzUAwCX Barm+2Y3BDAAlwXe5ht+NwSg+JcFBBy3BSAAzAATABUAAAA/AAAAVxUCAN0CAABmIBMAUviXBQAB AAFABl0JUvgCABLnAgDdAgIA8gIVAJLfmNSEAAAAJAngBz8AAABUABMA5gXC+6D4lwUAAGYgAABX FQENMvpS+JcFBAGuBQAAUviXBe4FAgDuBQIAAgAK5yxT7gUmAlL4TU+XBQAARAECAJcFGueYpEIE zxevdpwMAgAAAAAAwIQAADcSNudMEc8XAgAAAAAA8P+orwIAURGA52ig900CAAAAAADw/5wMR26o rwAAaEe/FwIGTXzXF+8WBgACALwKAgCYOdcXAADuBQAANxK8Cu4FnOcBAAAAAADvFgAAAgBOna7n 54LXF4rpR26bEy0AnAwAAAIAhA4CAEIEzxevdpwMAgAAAAAAwIQAADcSwOdMEc8XAgAAAAAA8P+o rwIAUREK6Gig900CAAAAAADw/5wMR26orwAAVACQ6CYSt1IAAAAAAACcDAcAvArMCgEAAAAAAAAA AAAAAE6dKOgBAAAAAABHbgAALQBOnTjo54LXF5rpR264FC0AnAwAAAMAMA0DAK92fgLXFwAAmulH brgULQCorwIAgwKE6JKg900AAO4VCACEAQAAeNpegQwGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH2l6BOOkdgcQ+ 978RAAAAd0L3v+D5+7+Qrfe/4Pn7v55rAQCkTl6BAHBYgfyzesMogCwAAAAA4wKqAQAI/wADCBxI sKDBgwgTKlzIsKHDhxAjSpxIsaLFixgzatzIsaPHjyBDihxJsqTJkyhTqlzJsqXLlzBjypxJs6bN mzhz6tzJs6fPn0CDCh1KtKjRo0iTKl3KtKnTp1CjSp1KtarVq1izat3KtavXr2DDih1LtqzZs2jT ql3Ltq3bt3Djyp1Lt67du3jz6s0KYK/fv4ADwwXQV7Dhw4gTXy2suLHjx5B7Mo5MubJlvYQZ9yUs kHPFzYU9DxQdQDPpy6hTqxZrOnPn0BRdl4bdubZtzatz695dFXfp0cBjB/9N/PZr2byTK18+1Lfv 4hKf0zYOnbn169htIpf+efh04t+zi/8fT77kZNvFz0PkTh388PLw48uPnhm0/dnqG7reL7q/Z+RA 1QegRvl9VqBBBxaUIEoLzoeagKddVGB9CQ1IIUYDKgjghusp6Jd6DXZnUYgRkWiSiQ5SNhmKCk1I UH7soSecjC/WmJ6N+nm4F4wgsYigRz6KFGSKjZ03JI4/vvfed0fK2CCTSC4k4F8ujkbafVb2d9xp MPoXIX7cRWjkdvjVyKGXSoZHZG4gSlhhlAdBudGCVdJYWZ3SOWejnnDGqGN7Xxq5Z57erejdkmvy 1maSDNFpZ5zBJeijpG/CGVmVgkKn5o2aMtpelNPVWV14pDr552Z/JrraoghN6WmrIY7/KWWJLQb6 qoqt0ignj+g9l+ajL/6n5LDH6WpspziiaqmqlrE6kaPIggrstJAum2mqTeZoFqYQmrrlob2+ummZ 7gE7Jm2ZpivtsNky++GtHVY67bXVgZkhvLkSW++l+YrKq6/KplquwKHme6y6e677G73uXsYwghcK jK3BiFLcYrz7Pgrhxhx3DHHHIIccsk68juqtjgDvizDB4VZ7MMow/1rbww3jqm/G+J6MpJwuX3xz y8c6LC64nxYMHJ7Ermi0p0q/VijRQKdcc7PdZkRvxBpGjHXOrd2LddXUOrZxnFcmS2ax1HJINmdL M73fzGWrHayvA0+tartC4e2g3iM2/2qx1XY3zLdkgTs0+Iw+5yxi4XdbdTh8X64EreLPMm75Wyxa GLmlrl7u+eeHbe6ynxDLC/rpqO+Icd0uHvh46rDHvtji1uL8uuy4507ybE4Ha7aJJSf8t+7EF5+U bMICCnTinN98u/HQR38Se4aCt3XPSe+8rPTcd68duNWPi725YEvs/fnov0S98CQGzzzL6ccvv3lE G0239tGOX/H8/Pc/J9sANE2W0AarC1XNfVu6nv8WyMAGOvCBEIygBCdIwQpa8IIYzKAGN8jBDnrw gyAMoQhHSMISmvCEKEyhClfIwha68IUwjKEMZ0jDGtrwhjjMoQ53yMMe+vCHQAyiEP+HSMQiGvGI SEyiEpfIxCY68YlQjKIUp0jFKlrxiljMoha3yMUuevGLYAyjGMdIxjKa8YxoTKMa18jGNrrxjXCM oxznSMc62vGOeMyjHvfIxz768Y+ADKQgezPIQhrykIhMpCIXmULQ9A5njIxkj/4DG9FJ8pIcWR8m NxkSTXLyk5kEHyhHSSBRkvKUsQmgvZ4nHlZiiFari07lYKktN/VQa/cakZhA5MrABex7QuqbMEOZ RZrZElnh898va+LKJmXrcb20oTGHyTqdxW+ZYJqb1LCkOV4us3ozOxqX2AY/cjlpl87Z2rWw5KGz GYec5Jxb1nDTzQ9Os5TI3B73pFb/NG/5p35mm9jRrFQ/hi3NT3yqm8keyctIDYqgJ9tmjKJZPLrl Mki70qf0+Nk8h1ZsZXaqpPI8yi6SUgekpgzp/j4qvIhiL6ManSA/JaXAZLUUkhtdafZMmsyb1kuk A+tpST9VLpRGbaj58+dNwUmn5BGVoroDWE1pmU+o7bN8X3NnNSN1QIkFTFnbNN9Xu7rQkpGOUyrl qc7uh7ZdlW+D3yQmS38WPWP+a6k+lZmZBopWhfKIrX7VGKLM2ie85o+tIBUfB+Oqn5o6i2dZElnq 7FotoVbVpD+9UdtK9SOLPlWwpiIsUrcKzr7KzLI4pSBjVWY4m142fXdVa3ogi1CI/5Zzpra9LUBT aijRphVQtHVt06IF2Ax26Zmd452G+GfWDTkXrPgj4ADdV9vp/k1u5hxgr7Q0usIWCro6fS54zwlV VOqwvOaNJHrTm0hLsneW740vfeRLX6rW976mw69+20nP9e63jsLK5X/Nm9ABy7fABn4vghOc3gUz +JT8meqDJ0zhClv4whjOsIY3zOEOe/jDIA6xiEdM4hKb+MQoTrGKV8ziFrv4xTCOsYxnTOMa2/jG OM6xjnfM4x77+MdABot/3StL+CplcBR1pv5i+j6/Ta8st8vQLvObyis1dLkVIrJhsDkSJL8SKV4O 25yo+ZDyOqsj/t0dkOZK1EfSTv+2qLXqY7gczDEf0yhhTi0+ERfLLlOOzF+hMzVhClpAWxaychab ydA0zyx3TWFnmtK5Gk2+/mo3stos4KSz9q1Nw82bqCITo9caT3auNNTcvbSp16rZcX7zbV7ibHYf zRVB4/PQSy4zdgnNWjELRqquteZR4Ueo5VVXtGUztrCZur/NPu233E12X4udalZHW7ieHaxtix1Q bbe0wGmGSVzFNEtcJwl5ynVvWGWrTQn/+tQxG61CW5bYRBs1eEbFKXULne3SKjupvN5qwtD17Z4t CrzrRqq/7RezcM8kT00V8L/9DdzQKLafr/UtZDj6MCnHW7gfPyunM8u0j9N1373/Ni2ip23NgK8c qITG97mLymZoF5DeDReyTgdtWM2eKtGk7bnIEzM28uJSTfleWGTRvduPtVnmv1Na5I5uwO6+TOE9 x3i928lXoUJ9r+Fk+UKD3Va+rjJUEpdKcvV2NWFnF61PUiq7ya5osouK5Jg1u7/sbfKUj72jlbr7 sOc+8XWh9uU+v+zX9R5Un7Jq4YzXn8NZss5GObbkScW4aStrWIpvXjGVP61X+x72sgYb5WduueRn ZXpG9du7GQ/51VVKT7n7vU21F3vHwxv5vOu5KaHPtUCDzvmmU4zX48p9kYpvfFstT7cuTWm6rR58 c0cXt2LPPtRkzW0BZn7s1l85//ibndt/u7n6bo8K1dNu+ayWbm0JvI+U5/9+363NkXNm/qU7fXPn OX1J8bR/FJJ81SZd2YRp9zdy8lQsnpZ5b5N39SR1AgdpjldtKKd9DyhP5/JL3hR1QeY5k/eBPuR5 InhG7laCKJiCKriCLNiCLviCMBiDMjiDNFiDNniDOJiDOriDPNiDPviDQBiEQjiERFiERniESJiE SriETNiETviEUIgXIbgWF6VlUcgXVugwV3aFaDGFbDFlvsaFWOGFVNgpxSWGW4FkWegWHGg9/yRO aEgVfHOGc1Ew68Z0cQgVr0OGR3ZS2/d8ecgUe0glflh4YRiIebNmhMhQf/h5iP8IZor4LgBFcID4 iEfBfn12F65iHwBkf2WCicwkfE2mdo5TRVTXLx9zgod4igRCU5RmPmeBQK0UiVQ0TckVXaP4PmGG KeHFh2oGi9hxOL44QvfkZCf3e0HzZb91e8gYaPpXSag2Kq7WXw1oJugEb9KFf4fiNeRST5wmdRY3 agtjZdKmTtf4Q8XIevpka0OzZ3j3jkrXFrF1G95HXB81UWRDfocVNc3FLvVYXcoVe9vFbjyDfSOY JlaYemAHh1a3f6vzWMTGhhxje/bYjodnkTlHib6nfazWepjVNsQ3cxhJRAapjv63XZQSfe1mIbCn Kakmi84okprniNp1kRHJPjT/l1fmh40o1YEqR5F8p5M4FHz2YjqP93N6ZWyqiHm4aHaZNYzq84wd mTFMFz5v5ZHv1HVk5XotaZWbeCrJ83rfJVWxhodDtFplxjVf4zfpaJIQ2VlXCZVRKZMTiFiyl1o9 WXrjBYsc1ZF3x1liCVq8KIoo5DFv0pbl1I54+XepqE5dOT40JTKSWXQBIpX7WGhaN3qOp5eBRZU7 V1qAaXIgKX7JN3tnOX61BElEmSurmZae6Xd0NRbz6FSXyToFmTQl2XaVyJG1OVNMcpsU2YbNF5vS BH/tN1Xrp27GmUqgAo7DE4ujU2pNKV51OXVv93YGJW1IuYygeY2PFo4C6IHS/+hq/2eJaSGXdWae a4KednaI6hmMvQGKaCSf71mYxFmf9nmf+KlC7LmfdUUe20GO/vkU/bktI0WHAxoUBWqg7eaeCeoT CxqL9xOhD9pa84F0FdqH+qkaGgmSGRogt2gdz7WAH1qiJnqiKJqiKrqiLNqiLvqiMBqjMjqjNFqj NnqjOJqjOrqjPNqjPvqjQBqkQjqkRFqkRnqkp4mkykShSpocTNqku/GkUKp2azhJEuigU/puWIpm JHVxWbpxc5mPzfiliDF5XTJvZGozLnGUY5qmgRGCfEKbbsovMRGgnCil4jaRREGHglcrJCGXMHmM LVGl6gedXrWFf3YrioWnsv9ZqLkIPOYBTYuDUSaZEug5ZAzqkAHnZq6ZQP0XH4yamksGqX4mqYhD qblIPziBqWSxd4S3pW0aqmFBKd4IN9ZFM1UnntMmatrpNbDWGtYInvoXrAZop8DKkPynVeZkUJkG fnFzXAjYrA55gLhIa0dnjQK1ahk4awFJoutEqBhCmfgCmm43JJNyoX46eOWIlqF1l8eGj/zGbAx1 hhPyj8M5kK4Hbq+aMitTj9v5dRw3fCEJd1D3ktv2bFzpkeilkblGrt8nrPhHbploq93KoZRpk5BH cf06e6GJk7AHebU5qvizsUKZcBr3ka+Fpli5UygLMwzbeCXbeaJpLlzXspb/mjZGmXVdSknJKKo1 6aX5l7NYSbL9N6FO5ZMIs3uqF7LjOrLxlnQmO6z+yHAxq5MXOK0w93+Bma2bubKi91kqgaHz4rST +K/ACI/w2qaAkZL0+JVfqzJH65IdWpNXJ647WZePOrJbWXRI06WQYp1lxyl8azEEWJaMhnt6F5ZL J6c1B5hbOU94GI5LyaWqKbQzqalWlTnygqBBe3w0q1dcVnmB2bEeFXdL67DP6bB927S2d6a9Jrr6 8pdiVpqFlXtEy5cyW7VcQ5PTs6iWO4EEmZQ+a3zxN5nGS59jyDykO34X+FVPa5o5iXVv+32xS7Z+ q7te15BdG49eC73DKmuM/0e6UJu7LSu7nMlklMu9wLh1gzl4Duo6QHcnyku89opvqDt9RWNxTXey AFm5Bnd6+viaAgm8tumUQwd3/+u+zrd9wCnAtNl98cuvdBep5SdW41R/I9ctEbah1/mJqrQqetqd GhuAtrOtGwiz2QSNImwwPjmVIntqApqNN3d4BfitJNzCqqmd0lqs25qUA0hA2PWNpMaBOqyAU8sT UCmrzEGC1yQfsuqLSqwbILtAUdwVSkyGVSzFzsVA4JoaXQygyDmAyDuneyOqWUzGbJiaZ4zG8lhL ayw5b7yjEcvEQok5ncrGncSzvDutckGqeJyeQxdnamGsqfgtMgxPlBTHaP+YtomjyB8hcuG3bfb6 xwn7k0x5nqTHvy7syFfIyOaLyVarvXjLwVO6wSMDuYZsqBupNdN7v5QsNHV8vXNHx69cdxtZcFlH y7W8fJUYyZu8yxZLgtcqw9iotsB8zMiczMq8zMzczM78zNAczdI8zdRczdZ8zdiczdq8zdzczd78 zeAczuI8zuRczuZ8zuiczuq8zuzczu78zvAcz/I8z/Rcz/Z8z/icz/q8z/zcz/78z8jMyQCtHV88 0H1s0LaM0GWaSQWt0ATangLt0EWWvhKtc7RY0V5hqhht0XK10Vbc0Ojr0R8da6gIuVoGPIQs0g+3 vpdHnJob0ip9ImdrjGH/w46JGdPiNtOVWrkogpg4LdO6kpCKM26ra4A//WQqudPwi5KNPMFHfdFk uTkaC7oKo5Rj/NSv5NPy1qCxya5YbSB2W7OkbIvbeZg6/dU9gpo0zba7uZBtjdaPvJy1EqLRGtbw ctVwndd6vdefhNdOLMYgDaScyyxa3aS6TNgwnaYRnamLHYWN3aqwmqWP3aqBfaSTDdnGDKWXjdmZ jaSbzdmdXaSH3TiJraRXOTWb6NfAd9p53KgdDco5Udnz41jUGa11oZBnTdOkjNSdFJM3G9t3/EBT DWelDWWiiDeBmtPpWWuS84u6LVOXzLJ0Yb+JfKyfmlXiyE1aMn+9Za0m/0yxHWxd4xieFyVO9Uqe r1jMBmSn2Oq0EUii412eNjzXtm3Iw2yr2v3ZbRzdsFmH2tvAZsuU/5hOAdyrEyev+Xp+CNuP3NmI yWhuCL7A1lNQFE59z9uQBXt6A77bdrPUCqnfF23J2WZ4ohxcK4tozgZwIwm9bLqM00tyCHfhq0y+ YCu7Nknid93KTVkzemrEWAbfHQziVUbbo7nidGfieUmVcUt4Z4biPcubV2vUWZvBL964LP6516u0 vqfJISvkgyy1mKm+ZXjEQRWXmby4SI4yj9uNhli8Rp7kdpeAbh64CzlWHbrmVl5WeD7n6RSiUOtO W5d+sfOWYpWors17e//cvYCluqSn4roXU4EOtnHuM58cvhybujSusn16vro4u89n4u97vKI+6qRe 6qZ+6qgOahJG6IDXmD2e0QKLwi6+KVuLsXcpy8Db5KermdRbvqNnuzLeZsF55QIcLiNe5TIZ6aMN ggnc6tNdyfi7m5AMwPdY4DtzUNzHwtnOiNBO6AjVvPYX4dqukgY7tu0KdNMevL+MO2tZ17WtidFZ auJYnnBr3Ze5atyaaRArnT4uxD/1rEV9XNX4w4qZwkBcxOK9wleaNhIL5EZ83ta9azsugovt5Uj8 ohW/xBgvh8oh2+izxhbPzR6/piEv8oLI1362FCUPo6r9PwsP8gGpje3/PNi9faCCqML2bKZZFtk3 4WDwrPOlA7Q/4fPuDKcJC/PC/s5Gf1JCD6G3zM5eyN503RwB1PI3mnpgSJiKirMo/6c+vqkVa6Ge KtddH9fNTsDGfK5lvx52jeUDXNyxuvau6bue+6puSLENL/Zwyal8TfdnT5pMHe3vW7RNj9NiazvW i8Dot46Kychw7feXTJpckrn2Re0oz7jbw+g7Je6JvdSbl+qT+fNOmfnuWtLuO6aeT/Mq/YbDozkY vIAa/MGoHyiqZPVfncRyTxNQnPuhKBMrz/sKGsYR9vtPHSu5Dfx4psbIz/HGSPwVPcdMVvjLv6p6 zLm2P/3KjcAJ7PzPJU+8LIz9yX/6iwf+lanAhEv+wS9/INOYqYz+7v/+8B//8s9iAQEAOw== ----=_j4il5scj17n118bj8cddkjltto4acl3egk.MFSBCHJLHS-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 16:40:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA22975; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:38:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:38:52 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:38:40 -1000 Subject: Re: Back Orifice ping From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991217170051.00799ae0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"01Wwy1.0.vc5.SUjMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32269 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed - "rr" is Roadrunner. If that's the real address, you've got him. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI on 12/17/99 12:00 PM, Jed Rothwell at JedRothwell infinite-energy.com wrote: > I was sitting here dictating a letter to a professor this afternoon, when I > chanced to look down at my external modem. The receive light was blinking > rapidly even though I was not sending e-mail or doing anything on the Web. > The firewall alarm icon on my screen began blinking. I tapped it and > learned that someone named "dt021nd7.san.rr.com" was sending me a "Back > Orifice ping." The documentation says, "Back Orifice pings are the most > frequent attack seen on the Internet." Someone out there is hoping my > computer is infected with a Trojan horse virus, and this message will wake > it up and hand over control, letting him rifle my hard disk for credit card > numbers or what-have-you. This is probably not a mistake. A "ping" > (response request) message will have a specific, recognizable format. > > Oh, Brave New World! Science fiction never predicted a future in which a > grimy little twit halfway around world can pick your pocket without your > knowing it. > > I do not know what rr.com is. The other probes I have intercepted came from > AOL, or they showed up as numerical IP addresses. I should learn to decode > these things so I can send back Seasons Greetings in response. > > - Jed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 17:21:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA03644; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:18:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:18:42 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:40:45 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: PLUG power off-grid Resent-Message-ID: <"78gLw.0.su.o3kMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32270 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On 17-Dec-99, Mitchell Jones, wrote: >>>Bill Briggs writes: >>> >>>In all your calculations I don't see an adjustment for line >>>losses. >>> >>>I think I've heard figures of 50% or more of the generated power >>>is lost to transmission losses. Does someone have better >>>figures? >>> >>>It is much better than 50%. According to a PG&E study, transmission is 95% >>>percent efficient over a distance of 500 miles. (See "Hydrogen Program >>>Plan," p. C-3.) Transmission losses are not a major factor in efficiency, >>>but the cost of building and maintaining the transmission infrastructure >>>gives on-site generation a big economic advantage, either with a fuel cell >>>or a small turbine. >>> >>>The real cost and efficiency savings come with cogeneration, because 52% to >>>65% of the heat used to generate electricity is wasted. (Water and wind >>>turbines are far more efficient.) Automotive ICE are the real joke: they >>>are 20% efficient, and they consume 20% of all energy, and 53% of oil. A >>>circa 1905 gasoline-electric design would double ICE efficiency. Numbers >>>like this make all the gab about an energy crisis ring hollow. If people in >>>the U.S. were seriously interested in conserving energy, they could cut >>>consumption by a huge factor and nearly eliminate oil imports in ten years. > >>***{How--by giving up their automobiles? Nobody but left-wing numbskulls >>think they ought to do that. As for the "energy crisis," it doesn't exist >>and never did exist. The only real crisis in this world is the one produced >>by people who feel worthless unless they are "solving problems" by ordering >>other people around. --MJ}*** > >>> >>>Plus, the CO2 production would be spread out over a wider area. >>> >>>It spreads out rapidly anyway, and at low concentration C02 is not a bit >>>toxic. >>> >>> >>>Allowing it to be more easily used up by the local plant life, >>>before it can get up into the higher atmosphere. >>> >>>I doubt it. I think it reaches all parts of the atmosphere very rapidly. > >>***{It doesn't matter whether it does or doesn't. CO2 is food for plants. >>Plants are food for animals. Animals are food for people. That means the >>burning of fossil fuels is not merely a beneficial source of energy, but >>also produces a massive increase in global biomass. It is good for us, and >>good for the environment. "Global warming" is just the latest trendy excuse >>employed by airheads to justify ordering the rest of us around. --MJ}*** > >>> >>>- Jed > >Mitch, my man, for the past several months, I've been unsubscribed. >Here, I return to lurk, and you're still trying to "feed pearls to swine", >as it were. It's as if I've not been gone! > >Perhaps I better re-unsubscribe and continue to wait for the "movie" >to change. Take care :) ***{Hi, Chuck. I realize it is frustrating to see evil, naked and unashamed, sneering in your face. Unfortunately, that's the world we live in. Subscribed or unsubscribed, those who only feel significant when they are ordering others around are going to be in your face, day in and day out, in the newspapers, on radio and television, on billboards, and sitting at the next desk wherever you work. The trendy excuses which they use to justify "solving problems" by taking our rights away are omnipresent and inescapable. Therefore, why not focus your attention on an area where, at least, they are not unopposed? Indeed, why not join in that opposition? (I know: Jed Rothwell is a jerk, and it can be frustrating to argue with a jerk. On the other hand, what can it hurt? :-) --MJ}*** >-- > .-. .-. > / \ .-. .-. / \ > / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ >-/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- > RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / > \ / `-' `-' \ / > `-' `-' >http://www.futurehealth.org/roshi.htm >http://www.post-trauma.com/roshi.html >http://www.Starsaga.com/biofeedback.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 18:55:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA00994; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 18:54:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 18:54:31 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:54:26 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <38591926.717AEA01 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <385A350A.4907FE81@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 SAA00973 Resent-Message-ID: <"DH2K11.0.SF.dTlMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32271 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 17 Dec 1999 10:47:31 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >>***{Yes, but as I noted the other day, the first reaction >>is a two step process, and the 1.44 MeV is not available >>to the neutrino. Here is the way it goes: >> >>(1) p + e- --> n + v, >> >>where the mass balance equation is >> >>1.0072764 + .0005486 = 1.008665 + 0 + Q, >> >>and Q = -.00084 amu = -.7824 MeV. >> >>The reaction is endothermic, requiring that the electron >>deliver .7824 MeV to make it go. Result: the neutrino goes >>off with negligible energy. It is just needed to conserve >>beta lepton number. While some of these reactions may occur, their possible existence doesn't preclude the possibility of concurrent three particle collision reactions, where 1.44 MeV is available to the neutrino (being an electron capture reaction, conservation of momentum results in the neutrino getting virtually all of the energy, which is why there is no "curvy bit" (technical term) on the 1.44 MeV line in the graph at http://almime.mi.infn.it/html/borexinof.html ). The reaction you propose would however serve to muddy the waters where the neutrino energy distribution is concerned. The energetic electrons may get accelerated by gamma rays resulting from positron-electron annihilation. (See laser driven bench top particle accelerators). Furthermore, energetic particles taking part in the pep reaction could produce neutrinos with more than 1.44 MeV. [snip] >>and Q = .0004542 amu = .423 MeV >> >>The main problem with the above stems from the fact that >>2He2 is entirely bogus: two protons have no bound states ... >>Result: the beta+ will, of necessity, carry In a previous post, you suggest that the positron needs to get out of the nucleus before the protons separate. Note however, that after the positron has formed, one of the protons has become a neutron,binding to the proton as a D nucleus, and there is no longer any need for the positron to "hurry". Therefore a distribution of energies over positron and neutrino is to be expected. [snip] >>17Cl37 + v --> 18Ar37- + e-, Two minuses on the same side do not a 0 make. [snip] >>Bottom line: I see no way in hell that the Davis "solar >>neutrino detector" can detect a significant proportion of >>solar neutrinos, assuming that the government atomic mass >>numbers are correct and that the current theory about the >>source of solar energy is correct. >> >>--MJ}*** >> >>Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >> >>A very enlightening graph pertaining to neutrino energies, >>and various neutrino detection experiments can be found at: >> >>http://almime.mi.infn.it/html/borexinof.html . >> >>Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >>***{Very interesting indeed. The chart presented on that >>website confirms the conclusion which I reached, above: >>a neutron >> >>{Jack writes: Do you mean "neutrino"?} > >***{Yup. --MJ}*** > >> >>detector that relies on absorption by 17Cl37 >>cannot detect neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle. The chart on the web site contains 2 red lines, one labelled "pp" (culminating at .42 MeV) and the other labelled "pep", culminating at 1.44 MeV. The 17Cl37 reaction requires a 0.813 MeV neutrino (represented by a vertical yellow line at .8 MeV, for which one of the electron capture neutrinos would suffice. The document at http://almime.mi.infn.it/html/neut.ps recognises thermal broadening, but not apparently the neutron production scenario. There also appears (to me at least), to be a discrepancy between the maximum pp flux in the graph, and the pp flux in the table on page 3 of http://almime.mi.infn.it/html/neut.ps . I.e. in the graph I read a maximum flux 3E11 for the pp reaction (with no units specified), while in the table, the total flux for pp is given as 5.91E10 specified with cm^2 sec^-1 (????). [snip] >(49In115). My guess is that the reactions are: > >(1) 31Ga71 + v --> [32Ge71+] + [e-], where the mass balance equation is >70.9247 + 0 --> [70.924956 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, and Q = -.000256 amu >= -.238 MeV. Good guess. > >This reaction is endothermic, like all the others so far, and requires that >the neutrino deliver at least .238 MeV. Thus while it can register >neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle, it misses most of those from the >lower-energy part of the distribution. > >(2) 49In115 + v --> [50Sn115+] + [e-], where the mass balance equation is >114.90388 + 0 --> [114.90335 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, and Q = .0000272 >amu = +.025 MeV. A more accurate calculation results in an excess of 0.495 MeV. > >This reaction--at last!--is exothermic, and thus does not require that the >neutrino deliver any minimum amount of energy. Instead, the neutrino is >required only for conservation of beta lepton number. Result: this detector >should be sensitive to *all* solar neutrinos, and thus would seem capable >of actually providing evidence to support the claim that most of the >expected solar neutrinos are not there. True, but this detector does have another inherent problem. As you yourself earlier pointed out, reactions that run by themselves, have the annoying habit of running, even when they don't detect any neutrinos. This means that actual neutrino detections need to be looked for as an excess signal on top of the normal decay signature. I haven't done the calculations, but I do wonder whether or not this means looking for a tiny signal buried in the noise of the normal decays. Furthermore, given that In115 has a very long half-life, perhaps the current measurement of that half-life already implicitly includes solar neutrino stimulated decays? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 23:13:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA02605; Fri, 17 Dec 1999 23:11:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 23:11:48 -0800 Message-ID: <022001bf48eb$f2ce8b40$e4441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Fw: PLUG Power on the Grid Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:07:52 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"J4pUq2.0.Ze.pEpMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32272 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 4:06 PM Subject: Re: PLUG Power on the Grid > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robin van Spaandonk > To: > Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 2:52 PM > Subject: Re: PLUG Power on the Grid > > Robin wrote: > > > > On Fri, 17 Dec 1999 04:26:26 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > > [snip] > > >I've burned feedlot manure in a 3 Megawatt Gas Turbine and it burns like > > >kerosene when finely divided, with NO ODOR, except in the pile, or from the truck that > > >hauled 12 tons from Eastern New Mexico to Roanoke Virginia. :-) > > [snip] > > Hmmm...and how much fuel did the truck use in the process? > > Probably about 140 gallons of diesel for the 1400 mile trip, but that was > because the driver was breaking the speed limit whilst trying to outrun the odor. > > Needless to say, no one was "tailgating-slipstreaming" him. > > Regards, Frederick > > > > > Regards, > > > > Robin van Spaandonk > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 01:11:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA24509; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:10:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:10:40 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <385AA4C5.2E57 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:07:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"rYP_D1.0.t-5.F-qMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32273 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >> >>> ***{OK, Jim, consider this: Sam is walking down the sidewalk, >>minding his >> >>> own business, when a footpad steps out of an alley, aims a large >>pistol at >> >>> him, and says: "Your money or your life." Sam antes up, the footpad >> >>> disappears back into the alley, and Sam goes on his way. >> >> >> >>The above situation is in no way analogous to the way gov't goes about >> >>getting money from anyone, at least nowadays. >> > >> >***{I didn't claim it was analogous. My purpose in setting up the example >> >as I did was to raise the question of where the line ought to be drawn >> >between submission and confrontation, and on the matter of how and by whom >> >that decision ought to be made. --MJ}*** >> > >> > My point was that your example wasn't analogous to the real situation we >> > were discussing (the way gov't extorts money from people). If your >> > example is not an analog to the real situation, I have to point that out. >> > Otherwise I am allowing you to drag the discussion off point. >> >> ***{It wasn't off point. You merely keep missing the point, that's all. I >> was trying to get you to focus your mind on the fact that there is a >> continuum of threats, extending from extreme threats such as death by >> torture, to severe beatings, to jail, to fines, and so on, all the way down >> to, and including, merely requiring that you waste inordinate amounts of >> you precious time haggling with bureaucrats, talking to lawyers, or sitting >> in court, in order to keep what you have. The IRS doesn't say "Your money >> or your life," for example. What they really say is this: "Fill out the >> forms and pay us what we demand, or spend decades of your life thinking >> about us, talking to our agents, consulting with lawyers, sitting in >> hearings, etc." I, and most others, prefer to fill out the forms and pay >> they what they ask, rather than piss away precious years of life fighting >> with them. The fact that we choose to do that does not mean that we agree >> with the tax laws or that we "volunteer" to give our money to the >> government. All it means is that we are not dim-witted enough to place >> *zero* value on our time. --MJ}*** >> > >I don't know about where you live, but in California, pleading guilty to >a charge of failure to fasten your seat belt while driving will cost you >about 120 bucks. It goes up from there for other infringements. One >woman had to cough up $400 for passing a stopped school bus after the >children had safely crossed the street, but before the school bus >driver, who was taking his sweet old time had gotten around to turning >his flashers off. >I estimate that I have saved in the neighborhood of perhaps only $1500 >in my accumulated traffic ticket cases, but when I add up the hours >spent dealing with each case, including paperwork preparation and court >time, that comes out to about $75 per hour spent. ***{Let me see if I've got this straight: you admit that you lip-off to cops on routine traffic stops, that you deliberately drive around without a license plate on your car to provoke them into stopping you, that you run out of your house waving a shotgun in order to win a put-down contest with a rat-pack of adolescent punks, and then when in some of the resulting court hearings you manage to get the charges dropped, you count fines not paid as income earned at a rate of $75 per hour? Wow! (Hey, are you the Wall Street guy who cooks the books for the dot-com's? :-) Seriously: I don't pay the kinds of fines you are talking about either, and I do it without having to waste my time in court. The technique is simple: I do my best to avoid confrontations with the authorities. I don't lip-off to cops, or drive around without license plates on my car, or get caught-up in macho exchanges with street punks, or speed past stopped school buses, etc. See how easy it is? --MJ}*** > >In my regular business I only charge my customers $45 per hour. ***{Yup, but the difference is that in those cases you actually get paid, whereas when you avoid a fine via a court appearance, you get exactly diddley squat in return for the time invested--which, by the way, is gone forever. --MJ}*** > >There are a few cases where I was able to turn around and sue various >officials for acts resulting in my incarceration for short periods of >time. A weekend stint in a Santa Cruz county Jail cost a court baillif >$6500. That's about $100 an hour, more than twice what I make now just >doing my regular business. ***{Not if you count the time you spent preparing and arguing your case, filling out documents, arguing with bureaucrats, etc. But, hey, if you do not have anything in your life that you enjoy more than such activities, then by all means engage in them! I am not trying to persuade you to alter your lifestyle, since you know far more about what you enjoy than I do. What I dispute is your claim that I and others who disagree with various laws, are *voluntarily* submitting to them if we do not behave as you do. That is simply not true. I choose to invest my limited time on this earth doing things which I enjoy rather than struggling to avoid paying fines or to stay out of jail, and, despite your repeated statements to the contrary, I see nothing dishonorable in that. As for your supposedly "heroic" activities, I see them as foolish and ineffectual: they do nothing to improve the system, and, thus, the choice of whether or not to engage in them must be based on whether one has anything else to do which he would enjoy more. I, and most others who despise the current regime, do have better ways to spend our time, while you apparently do not. Given that state of affairs, it is perfectly appropriate that you should take the license plates off of your car, burn your driver's license, drop your seat belt down where it can be seen dragging on the pavement, and go downtown and circle police headquarters until a cop pulls you over. Then, when one does so, give him lots of lip, so that he will cuff your hands behind your back and leave you sitting on the curb while he decides how to railroad you into the penitentiary. You can then have oodles of excitement, for months and months, while you gum up the court system and the authorities struggle to wreck your life. What is *not* appropriate, however, is for you to claim that people who loathe this criminal government as much or more than you do, but who have better things than this to do with their time, are somehow dishonored thereby. Here is the crucial fact, which you have so far refused to discuss: there is no heroism in tilting at windmills. It is mere foolishness. If, therefore, you can demonstrate an effective way to fight those who want to enslave us, then I, and many others, will close ranks by your side. But if you cannot--and thus far you haven't even acknowledged that the question of effectiveness is important--then you are simply going to have to stop badgering us and let us go on with our lives. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Talking to you over the internet on the other hand gets me exactly 0 >dollars. Now, what then is more of a waste of my time? I count maybe 30 >or so messages I've sent to this forum trying to correct your >misrepresentations of the facts on various topics, yet you persist in >your erroneous assertions just like you are doing here. Just one of >these messages takes more time to compose than any single court document >I ever had to run off my printer. ***{Talking to me over the internet allows you to test a false opinion which, if not corrected, has the potential to wreck your life. How many dollars do you think your life is worth? --MJ}*** > >As far as the IRS is concerned, they have NEVER bothered me with so much >as a phone call or a visit by an agent. Now maybe that's because they >are too busy doing other things like collecting the money that you so >obligingly overpay them, but that would be your problem, not mine. > > You asked earlier what benefit to society my activities represented. I >don't know. All I know is that any money that I either avoid having to >pay or that I am able to extract from the system is then diverted from >causing HARM to society from the utilzation by government thugs to >expand their influence. As much as you would like to avoid it, you are >member of an army of millions of others just like yourself all >contributing to the goon squad's paychecks, voluntarily or not. ***{Those of us who see the system for what it is and, appropriately, despise it, are simply victims, like you. The difference is that you choose to surrender your time by engaging in confrontation, while we choose to surrender our money, so that we can devote our time to things which we enjoy. But when we make that choice, according to you, we consign ourselves to the status of *morally inferior*. People like you, who confront the government, are better than us: braver, more honorable, etc. We, on the other hand, are just pathetic cowards who haven't the guts to hurl our bodies onto the barricades. The Achilles heel of your position, as noted earlier, lies in the fact that there is no honor in tilting at windmills. If confrontation is not an effective way to further the cause of freedom, or if it actually makes matters worse, then the moral stature which you claim crumbles away into nothing. The crucial question, therefore, is simply this: who furthers the cause of freedom more, the man who spends his time fighting the state, or the man who spends his time doing the things that he enjoys? In my view, confrontation serves the ends of those who want to enslave us, because it provides the authorities with the types of crises they need to justify cracking down. The more nonconformists there are who refuse to pay their income taxes, the more successful the IRS will be in lobbying Congress for increased funding to ferret them out, the more money the FBI and similar federal law enforcement agencies will get so they can monitor the "anti-tax movement," and so on. The same thing applies to any sort of activitist confrontation: it provides the agencies that have been confronted, and the agencies that are charged with supporting them, with excuses to expand their sizes and their powers. That is exactly the opposite of the effect which you claim to desire. On the other hand, the effect of non-confrontation is quite the opposite. Those who give up their money so they can devote their time to activities which they enjoy are the source of the breathtaking rate of progress in science and engineering which has, thus far, averted a total economic collapse. While the state has grown massively, thanks to the unceasing activism of human vermin who have "solved problems" by taking other people's rights away, the economy has also grown massively, thanks to the creations, inventions, and discoveries of people who obeyed unjust laws in order to free up time to do things that they enjoyed. Result: the increasing burden of the proliferating parasites has been accompanied by technological innovations which permitted the host--the economic system--to carry them, and an unstable balance has been maintained. Without those advancements--which would not have occurred if the innovators had devoted their time to confronting the authorities--the economy would long since have collapsed, creating a situation in which the mindless, mentally retarded masses would have clamored for a brutal authoritarianism, to "fix" the problems which the earlier authoritarian measures had created. What this means is that activist confrontationalism, whether of the left or the right, plays into the hands of those who would enslave us. It is no accident that, throughout history, *agents provocateurs* in the employ of would-be dictators have infiltrated protest groups and steered them into policies of violent confrontation. Such actions give authoritarian regimes the excuse they need to crack heads, and move the nation forward into full-blown tyranny. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Whether or not this army came about as a result of people being drafted, >involuntarily, does not detract from the conclusion that the army exists >and is causing harm to society. ***{Nope. This "army" is the only thing that has saved us from collapsing into utter slavery. Activist confrontationalism, whether of the left or the right, is a major force pushing us in the wrong direction. You may think you are different from an environmental whacko who spends his weekends spiking trees that are about to be logged, but you are just a different horse on the same team, and the two of you are pulling the wagon in precisely the same direction. --MJ}*** > >But, in your case, it IS voluntary. Your idea that there is a >"continuum" of "threats" results in the conclusion that there ARE NO >VOLUNTARY ACTS; either that or you get to arbitrarily decide where to >"draw the line" conveniently just past the point where you would have to >stand on the wrong side of it. ***{It is you who draws arbitrary lines, not I. A man is not merely the owner of his money, but also of his time. Logically, therefore, if the government forces you to choose between giving up your money or your time, it is coercion regardless of which one you pick. Since you are the rightful owner of both, you have the right to keep both, and when by means of force or a threat of force they take that right away, you are coerced. --MJ}*** > >Coercion means force. Force means immediate threat to your life or >physical well being, not your time. ***{The use of force or the threat of force to take a value from its rightful owner is coercion, *regardless of the nature of the value taken*. If you claim that people who are forced to spend time doing things they don't want to do are volunteers, then you imply that slaves are volunteers. --MJ}*** You have "stolen" more of my time >than any cop ever did. I know that I don't HAVE to respond to your crap, >like I do to theirs, but to allow you to promote your BS on vortex >without a response is allowing error to overcome truth, and I am not >about to let that happen. Voluntarily. ***{If you think you are duty bound to keep arguing, in order to save innocent vortexians from my corrupt influences, you are mistaken. While I know from e-mail that there are a number of people in this group who agree with most of what I say, I really don't think those numbers change very much from week to week. The truth is that basic philosophical ideas and the habitual modes of thought engendered by them are much more important in shaping political beliefs than is the outcome of a debate about any specific issue. Thus the only reason to post here is to test your ideas. By coming under fire and seeing what you can and cannot defend, you grow, albeit slowly. Self-improvement, therefore, is the only value you can claim here, because what others believe is out of your hands, as it should be. --MJ}*** > >One other thing. Your idea that I should move out of my neighborhood in >response to the fact that there were, at one time, a bunch of cop >sponsored gangs wandering around it, just shows the kind of character >you are in possesion of. Instead of making an effort to try to improve >the situation in one's neighborhood, your idea is to let the gangs win >leaving the other people who maybe can't afford to move out, behind to >fend for themselves. How much of my precious TIME would I have to spend >moving, were I to follow your suggestions? How much money? ***{If you have nothing better to do with your time, then by all means spend it as a neighborhood activist. Set up a neighborhood watch, and ride around at night with other yahoos who have time on their hands, harrassing hookers and winos. If the cops aren't supportive, then by damn go down and make a speech before the city council. Hold those suckers' feet to the fire! Spend thousands of hours struggling to hold the line if you wish. It's your time, not mine, and so it's your call. In my opinion, of course, what you are doing is pure foolishness, because the forces that determine the evolution of conditions in a neighborhood are outside of your influence or control. Your neighborhood will deteriorate or not, irrespective of what you do, just as the same collection of character disorders will move into the White House next year, regardless of how you vote. As for me, well, about 30 years ago, after a careful study, I selected a rural area that had virtually no crime, bought a few acres there, and packed up and moved. The whole process was over in less than a month, and with the exception of a couple of minor incidents that happened before I got my fence and my dogs, I have been worry free ever since. I can leave expensive power tools laying in my front yard without worry that they will be stolen, and the homes out here are so widely dispersed that the formation of street gangs would be logistically impossible. And, of course, the same conditions preclude the presence of hookers, winos, and drug dealers. All in all, I'm glad I did it my way rather than your way, and if I had it all to do over, I wouldn't change a thing. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Eventually, with this philosophy, I suppose you will find yourself >living in one of those expensive security gated and monitored >communities, just so you will feel safe from government sponsored gangs. >Going outside the limits of your compound then will be >DANGEROUS, won't it? Enjoy your stay. ***{Nah. My community isn't gated. It's just widely dispersed, with lot sizes ranging from 3 to 10 acres. It is unincorporated, so there are no city authorities, no zoning laws, no building permits, and there are no deeded restrictions. Result: the lots started off cheap, and there were lots of mobile homes. But then, as the years went by, people used their freedom to improve their situations, and the area went upscale, with increasing numbers of big houses and paved driveways--pretty much as I expected, in fact. Overall, its been a pretty good run. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 03:29:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA08667; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:29:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:29:04 -0800 Message-ID: <008401bf494b$89891320$90a1883e ajatkgaw> From: "Magic Kent" To: "Anne Chu" , References: <3.0.6.32.19991217170051.00799ae0 pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Back Orifice ping Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:30:09 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"IStr52.0.L72.00tMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32275 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have a freind who is being hacked, could you please tell me the name and cost of the firewall program you are using please. It seems like the answer to identifying the perpetrator. Thank you. Subject: Back Orifice ping > I was sitting here dictating a letter to a professor this afternoon, when I > chanced to look down at my external modem. The receive light was blinking > rapidly even though I was not sending e-mail or doing anything on the Web. > The firewall alarm icon on my screen began blinking. I tapped it and > learned that someone ........ > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 03:31:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA08630; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:28:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:28:54 -0800 Message-ID: <008001bf494b$85e649e0$90a1883e ajatkgaw> From: "Magic Kent" To: References: <0.31954930.258c034c aol.com> Subject: Re: Help find magnet used in fatal bomb Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 10:11:25 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"infSo2.0.l62.s_sMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32274 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Looks like the voice coil magnet out of a loudspeaker. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; ; Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 9:21 PM Subject: Help find magnet used in fatal bomb > Hi all, > I am helping our local police department in an effort to find what company > made the magnet in the attached drawing. Also what type of device it came out > of. It was used in a fatal bombing that killed one local man. If it looks > familar to you please let me know. All they can tell me about it is that it > is very strong. I am trying to get more information now as to exact size ect. > There is a reward being offered but don't know details yet. They are using > local television also in the search. > Thanks, Butch LaFonte > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 03:37:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA10385; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:36:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:36:29 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: IE Article Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:36:24 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 DAA10365 Resent-Message-ID: <"EAehv3.0.BY2.z6tMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32276 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In the Editor's Introduction to the article "An Alternate Interpretation of Mass-Gain at Near Light Velocities", by Dr. Paul Brown, in IE No.s 13 & 14 in 1997, Eugene writes: This is the first of a series of three articles by Dr. Paul Brown, which we are told will lead to the explanation of the observed performance of the Brown resonant nuclear generator (U.S. patent #4835433..... Since then Dr. brown has authored three other article in IE (that I could find), all pertaining to photo-fission. So Eugene, what happened to the other two articles on the resonant nuclear generator? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 10:14:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA22250; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 10:13:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 10:13:43 -0800 Message-ID: <385BD76A.8C0 ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 10:50:19 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6gW6G3.0.aR5.MxyMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32277 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >I estimate that I have saved in the neighborhood of perhaps only $1500 > >in my accumulated traffic ticket cases, but when I add up the hours > >spent dealing with each case, including paperwork preparation and court > >time, that comes out to about $75 per hour spent. > > ***{Let me see if I've got this straight: you admit that you lip-off to > cops on routine traffic stops, that you deliberately drive around without a > license plate on your car to provoke them into stopping you, that you run > out of your house waving a shotgun in order to win a put-down contest with > a rat-pack of adolescent punks, and then when in some of the resulting > court hearings you manage to get the charges dropped, you count fines not > paid as income earned at a rate of $75 per hour? Sure. The government places the value for allowing one to perform such acts as you enumerate above, at $1500. I spent 20 hours of my _time_ in order to obtain the value received _without_ charge. Therefore I earned the equivalent $75 an hour. I never said freedom didn't have a cost. Many people had to sacrifice their lives in order to obtain the valuable commodity known as freedom for their posterity. I got a good deal. I have not yet spilled one drop of my blood for the cause of _my own_ freedom, yet I have it, here and now. > Wow! (Hey, are you the > Wall Street guy who cooks the books for the dot-com's? :-) :-) > > Seriously: I don't pay the kinds of fines you are talking about either, and > I do it without having to waste my time in court. The technique is simple: > I do my best to avoid confrontations with the authorities. I don't lip-off > to cops, or drive around without license plates on my car, or get caught-up > in macho exchanges with street punks, or speed past stopped school buses, > etc. Well, Mitchell it just seems that you don't place any value on the commodity known as personal freedom. You CAN'T argue with cops, you CAN'T confront "authorities", You HAVE to put licence plates on your car, and if you were ever in a situation where adolescent street punks ordered you to go back into your home and "stay there" you would have to do exactly that. "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams Re-posted and seconded by Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 11:10:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07055; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:09:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:09:44 -0800 Message-ID: <385BE469.4066 ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:45:45 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> <385BD76A.8C0@ca-ois.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sOLdf1.0.5k1.tlzMu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32278 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > Mitchell Jones wrote: > > > > > >I estimate that I have saved in the neighborhood of perhaps only $1500 > > >in my accumulated traffic ticket cases, but when I add up the hours > > >spent dealing with each case, including paperwork preparation and court > > >time, that comes out to about $75 per hour spent. > > > > ***{Let me see if I've got this straight: you admit that you lip-off to > > cops on routine traffic stops, that you deliberately drive around without a > > license plate on your car to provoke them into stopping you, that you run > > out of your house waving a shotgun in order to win a put-down contest with > > a rat-pack of adolescent punks, and then when in some of the resulting > > court hearings you manage to get the charges dropped, you count fines not > > paid as income earned at a rate of $75 per hour? > > Sure. The government places the value for allowing one to perform such > acts as you enumerate above, at $1500. I spent 20 hours of my _time_ in > order to obtain the value > received _without_ charge. Therefore I earned the equivalent $75 an > hour. Actually, my math is quite incorrect because I included the shotgun incident. The $1500 figure pertains to traffic fines alleged to be due ONLY. In the shotgun incident, The district attorney wanted to charge me with six counts of "Brandishing a weapon" - ONE COUNT FOR EACH OF THE SIX PUNKS I CONFRONTED! Each count represented a possible jail sentence of six months, so if I were found guilty of all six counts, I could have theoretically drawn 3 YEARS in jail! Therefore, since I evaluate my time to be worth $45 dollars an hour, the government placed the value of my freedom to confront 6 punks without the help of police at: $45 * 24h * 365 days * 3yrs = $1,182,600 Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 12:27:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA26675; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:26:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:26:31 -0800 Message-ID: <19991218202630.10175.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:26:30 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Back Orifice ping To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"38UKC.0.jW6.tt-Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32279 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > learned that someone named "dt021nd7.san.rr.com" .. "san.rr.com" is RoadRunner in San Diego. RoadRunner (TV) cable access to the internet is offered here by Time Warner cable. They are my internet provider. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 12:30:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA27788; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:29:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:29:10 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <385BD76A.8C0 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:25:39 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"-ugq42.0.5o6.Mw-Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32280 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> > >> >I estimate that I have saved in the neighborhood of perhaps only $1500 >> >in my accumulated traffic ticket cases, but when I add up the hours >> >spent dealing with each case, including paperwork preparation and court >> >time, that comes out to about $75 per hour spent. >> >> ***{Let me see if I've got this straight: you admit that you lip-off to >> cops on routine traffic stops, that you deliberately drive around without a >> license plate on your car to provoke them into stopping you, that you run >> out of your house waving a shotgun in order to win a put-down contest with >> a rat-pack of adolescent punks, and then when in some of the resulting >> court hearings you manage to get the charges dropped, you count fines not >> paid as income earned at a rate of $75 per hour? > >Sure. The government places the value for allowing one to perform such >acts as you enumerate above, at $1500. I spent 20 hours of my _time_ in >order to obtain the value >received _without_ charge. Therefore I earned the equivalent $75 an >hour. I never said freedom didn't have a cost. Many people had to >sacrifice their lives in order to obtain >the valuable commodity known as freedom for their posterity. I got a >good deal. I have not yet spilled one drop of my blood for the cause of >_my own_ freedom, yet I have it, here and now. > >> Wow! (Hey, are you the >> Wall Street guy who cooks the books for the dot-com's? :-) > >:-) > >> >> Seriously: I don't pay the kinds of fines you are talking about either, and >> I do it without having to waste my time in court. The technique is simple: >> I do my best to avoid confrontations with the authorities. I don't lip-off >> to cops, or drive around without license plates on my car, or get caught-up >> in macho exchanges with street punks, or speed past stopped school buses, >> etc. > > >Well, Mitchell it just seems that you don't place any value on the >commodity known as personal freedom. You CAN'T argue with cops, you >CAN'T confront "authorities", You HAVE >to put licence plates on your car, and if you were ever in a situation >where adolescent street punks ordered you to go back into your home and >"stay there" you would have to do exactly that. > >"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude >better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. >We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands >which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity >forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams > >Re-posted and seconded by > >Jim Ostrowski ***{That's it? That's your best shot? For the record: Sam Adams is one of my heroes. The reason: he was effective. He fought a fight that could be won, and he did win. Why was his fight winable? Because he was living in a new country, populated by large numbers of pioneers--rugged individualists who had come here to escape the slave pens of Europe. The British supply lines were too long for them to be able to support an effective expeditionary force, and Adams had large numbers of people who shared his values, ready to hide behind tree trunks and pick off redcoats. To facilitate such activities, the Sons of Liberty had a rule: if British forces are in your area and you hear shooting, get your gun and ammo, *and go to the sounds of the guns*. Result: the Brits couldn't simply surround a dissenting group's "compound" and, at their leisure, kill them all, like the Feds did at Waco. The reason: whenever they attempted such tactics, an army of ghosts sprang up around them, and began picking them off. It was like shooting fish in a barrel! But that would not have worked if America's pioneers had stayed in England. As long as they were there, they represented a tiny minority, immersed in an ocean of conformists--people who believed whatever the authorities wanted them to believe, and who would have simply handed over unlimited dictatorial powers to the government in response to any attempts to overthrow the system. That's what you don't seem to understand: the conformists are the problem, not the nonconformists who obey unjust laws. A conformist is not merely a person who obeys: he is a person who employs selective thinking to believe what he wants to believe. Such a person is purely evil: he will believe anything, however absurd it may be or horrific its consequences, provided only that doing so will enable him to fit in. Because such people do not base their beliefs on reason, they cannot be persuaded by reason. Result: confrontationalism within the context of a society dominated by them is counterproductive. If you confront the authorities whom they worship, the conformists will close ranks behind those authorities, and grant them whatever powers they need to crush you. Thus confrontation, under such circumstances, leads to immediate deterioration of the system, with consequent loss of freedom. In Sam Adam's time, things were different. The American population in the 18th century was dominated by real people, not by human garbage, and as a consequence Sam Adams had a fight that could be won, and he did win. If I had lived then, I would have stood happily by his side. Today, however, such a course of action will not work. Modern America is not the America of the founders. The population is different. Modern Americans are not pioneers: today we have mindless conforming masses of retards, from sea to shining sea, and the tactics that worked in the 18th century no longer apply. What, then, is the solution? Simple: we need to re-create the frontier, to give today's rugged individualists a place to go, so they can escape the slave pens of Earth. That means we need to open up space to human habitation. If that happens, then today's rugged individualists will pack their bags and leave this pesthole of tyranny and fear, and thrust themselves into the depths of the solar system, prefering the dangers which they will face there to the slavery which is here. In that way, they will be no different than America's pioneers: as soon as the technology came into being which permitted travel, however risky, to America, they opted to take those risks, because they wanted to be free. Once that happens, it's a new ball game. A new population of pioneers will spring up, on Mars or Titan or Europa or Pallas or Ceres--somewhere so remote that a second American revolution will be possible, one that learns from the mistakes of the first, and creates a government based on a Constitution in which the errors of the original American Constitution are corrected. That's the way it's going to work, Jim; and it's the only way. So if you want to fight for liberty, I suggest that you cease your policy of confronting the authorities. Pay the taxes which the law requires and, when in doubt, overpay. And get your driver's license renewed. And put plates on your car. And stop lipping off to cops. And so on. Result: you will free up the time which you had previously been frittering away in confrontations with the authorities. Once you have done that, then start trying to figure out which, if any, of the new energy claims are real. And when you think you have a lead that looks promising, go into the laboratory and test it, and discuss the results here. If you do that, and I do that, and Scott does that, and John Logajan, and J. L. Naudin, and Newman, and Ed Wall, and McKubre, and Russ George, and Ed Storms, and Mizuno, and Ohmori, and Hamdi, and so on, then one day--perhaps soon--one of us may find what we are looking for. If that happens--if an energy source with power densities comparable to nuclear which can be built in a home lab opens up--then the frontier is restored, and the game is up: those who wanted to put us in chains lose, and we win. That's the way to fight for freedom under the conditions which exist now, and it's the only way. If you want to be a hero, then, like it or not, you are going to have to do what the heroes do. And what they do, Jim, is win. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 13:09:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06006; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:08:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:08:40 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:13:35 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Back Orifice ping In-reply-to: <008401bf494b$89891320$90a1883e ajatkgaw> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912182110.OAA14373 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <3.0.6.32.19991217170051.00799ae0 pop.mindspring.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"xANXb3.0.lT1.OV_Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32281 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:30 AM 12/18/99 +0000, you wrote: >I have a freind who is being hacked, could you please tell me the name and >cost of the firewall program you are using please. It seems like the answer >to identifying the perpetrator. Thank you. > I haven't needed it yet, but I have read good things about a program called blackice.exe. It is inexpensive and among other things, it will assist you in identifying the loser. Go to http://www.networkice.com for information. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 13:36:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14208; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:35:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:35:36 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991218163409.007b9670 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 16:34:09 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, "Anne Chu" , From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Back Orifice ping In-Reply-To: <008401bf494b$89891320$90a1883e ajatkgaw> References: <3.0.6.32.19991217170051.00799ae0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"7o6SM.0.rT3.eu_Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32282 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde writes: "rr" is Roadrunner. If that's the real address, you've got him. The documentation says about a tenth of the addresses in these attacks are spoofed. Anyway, I would not bother chasing the fellow. Magic Kent asks: I have a friend who is being hacked, could you please tell me the name and cost of the firewall program you are using please. I got it from http://www.networkice.com/ for $40. I do not know how effective it is. I don't know enough about these things to judge. However, based on my experience with other computer and corporate security, here is an educated guess. This program, or any firewall, will probably lock out most attacks, because according to the magazines most come from uneducated "script-kiddies," who are casual, opportunistic thieves. There is probably not much you can do to stop a determined professional, but there are few professionals and they are busy breaking into computers with valuable assets. Having no firewall is like leaving your car unlocked while you shop in the grocery store. Some two-bit punk may notice and steal whatever he notices lying in the car, or slash your seats for the fun of it. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 13:43:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA16057; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:42:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:42:34 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991218164104.007bec20 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 16:41:04 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com, kurtz@imap2.ASU.EDU From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Back Orifice ping In-Reply-To: <199912182110.OAA14373 smtp.asu.edu> References: <008401bf494b$89891320$90a1883e ajatkgaw> <3.0.6.32.19991217170051.00799ae0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cuns53.0.ow3.A__Mu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32283 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lynn Kurtz wrote: >I haven't needed it yet, but I have read good things about a program called >blackice.exe. It is inexpensive and among other things, it will assist you >in identifying the loser. That's the one I am using. You would not know if you have needed it yet. They may not tell you they have broken in. As I said, blackice seems to keep out the opportunistic punks. I doubt it would stop the CIA. However, this is not a serious problem with dial-up access, because the IP changes every time you connect. You really only need to worry about it with a permanent, always-on DSL or cable modem. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 14:24:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA25953; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:22:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:22:46 -0800 Message-ID: <385C1088.3607 ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:54:00 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-M0WP1.0.ML6.sa0Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32284 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > >"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude > >better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. > >We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands > >which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity > >forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams > > > >Re-posted and seconded by > > > >Jim Ostrowski > > ***{That's it? That's your best shot? It's not the quantity, but the quality of the words chosen that is the deciding factor in discussions of this kind, Mitchell. If you think I'm going to wait for my freedom to say whatever I want to whomever I want, be they cops, judges, IRS agents or mere slaves such as yourself, until someone on vortex builds a giant space ark or something, then you are quite out of your mind. In fact you are quite out of your mind in my opinion for proposing such a ludicrous "solution" to the problem of tyranny, anyway. I'll bet you one thing; no one on vortex is going to come even close to building such a thing. If it ever gets done, the government is going to do it. And guess what, only REALLY GOOD SLAVES are going to get to ride on it. For one thing, leaving planet earth on a permanent basis in order to inhabit some hermetically sealed cave carved out of the mountains of Titan just isn't my cup of tea, thank you. If that's what you want to try to do, go for it, buddy. Let's see how far you get. What I do in court at least has measurable beneficial effects later on. Cops know better than to bother me now, because they know that judges (their bosses) don't want to have anything to do with me. They even made sure street gangs do not operate in the vicinity of my home by closing down their cop sponsored, supported and patronized safe house after the shotgun incident. I come and go as I please. Got a nice little business and somebody else to mind the store for me while I "waste" my time talking to you over the internet. So as far as having freedom goes, I don't know what more anyone could ask for, except maybe freedom for other people, but I can't do that for them. I can't do it for you. If you won't do it for yourself, or lift a finger to even try, that's your business. Stay a slave, see if I care. As far as "winning" goes, I've already won. You on the other hand will have to wait for your "victory", I guess, until the day comes that you can look thru the faceplate of your space helmet, gaze beyond the horizon of whatever planet you are on at the tiny blue dot in the sky known as Earth. When do you anticipate such a thing will be possible for you, Mitchell? Jim From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 17:47:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA16439; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 17:45:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 17:45:23 -0800 Sender: jack pop.centurytel.net Message-ID: <385C470A.B5E074B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 02:46:34 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: IE Article References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"vCnyF3.0.k04.oY3Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32285 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In the Editor's Introduction to the article "An Alternate Interpretation of Mass-Gain at Near Light Velocities", by Dr. Paul Brown, in IE No.s 13 & 14 in 1997, Eugene writes: This is the first of a series of three articles by Dr. Paul Brown, which we are told will lead to the explanation of the observed performance of the Brown resonant nuclear generator (U.S. patent #4835433..... Since then Dr. brown has authored three other article in IE (that I could find), all pertaining to photo-fission. So Eugene, what happened to the other two articles on the resonant nuclear generator? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Jack Smith wrote: 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, proposes that 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. Dr. Brown writes that a 1 GeV electron has a rest mass of 9.107 x 10^-31 kg and a velocity of 2.9999994 x 10^8 m/sec. KE = mc^2 = 1.294 x 10^-10 Joule. KE = q^2v^2k/3r = 1.364 x 10^-10 Joule. Hi Robin and Eugene, I would very much appreciate a detailed derivation of Dr. Brown's equation KE = mv^2/2 + q^2v^2k/3r Thanks, Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 17:50:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA18013; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 17:48:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 17:48:52 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Strange transformer Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:48:45 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 RAA17992 Resent-Message-ID: <"FCE383.0.NP4.3c3Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32286 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, Suppose one had an electrical transformer, with only DC flowing through the primary, and this primary is physically inaccessible. Is there anything one might do at the secondary, to nevertheless extract energy from the transformer? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 18:20:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA27181; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:19:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:19:06 -0800 Sender: jack pop.centurytel.net Message-ID: <385C4EF9.44FCAE43 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 03:20:25 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos References: <38591926.717AEA01 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <385A350A.4907FE81@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"HvSE3.0.ce6.O24Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32287 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: ... The reaction is endothermic, requiring that the electron deliver .7824 MeV to make it go. Result: the neutrino goes off with negligible energy. It is just needed to conserve beta lepton number. Robin van Spaandonk wrote: While some of these reactions may occur, their possible existence doesn't preclude the possibility of concurrent three particle collision reactions, where 1.44 MeV is available to the neutrino ... Robin van Spaandonk wrote: A very enlightening graph pertaining to neutrino energies, and various neutrino detection experiments can be found at: http://almime.mi.infn.it/html/borexinof.html . Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{Very interesting indeed. The chart presented on that website confirms the conclusion which I reached, above: a neutrino detector that relies on absorption by 17Cl37 cannot detect neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle. Robin van Spaandonk wrote: The chart on the web site contains 2 red lines, one labelled "pp" (culminating at .42 MeV) and the other labelled "pep", culminating at 1.44 MeV. The 17Cl37 reaction requires a 0.813 MeV neutrino (represented by a vertical yellow line at .8 MeV, for which one of the electron capture neutrinos would suffice ... {Jack writes: Robin, are you referring to the "concurrent three particle collision reactions, where 1.44 MeV is available to the neutrino" ? What is the probability of these collisions?} Jack Smith wrote: What do you think about the Borexino effort to go after high-energy neutrinos? Mitchell Jones writes: ***{Dunno. I'm still trying to understand why these guys think most of the solar neutrinos are missing. Based on the chart presented on the Borexino website, the only detectors which can register neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle are those which use gallium (31Ga71), and indium (49In115). MY GUESS is that the reactions are: (1) 31Ga71 + v --> [32Ge71+] + [e-], where the mass balance equation is 70.9247 + 0 --> [70.924956 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, and Q = -.000256 amu = -.238 MeV. ... (2) 49In115 + v --> [50Sn115+] + [e-], Robin van Spaandonk wrote: Good guess. Mitchell Jones wrote: (1) 31Ga71 + v --> [32Ge71+] + [e-], ... This reaction is endothermic, like all the others so far, and requires that the neutrino deliver at least .238 MeV. Thus while it can register neutrinos from the proton-proton cycle, it misses most of those from the lower-energy part of the distribution. (2) 49In115 + v --> [50Sn115+] + [e-], where the mass balance equation is 114.90388 + 0 --> [114.90335 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, and Q = .0000272 amu = +.025 MeV. Robin van Spaandonk wrote: A more accurate calculation results in an excess of 0.495 MeV. {Jack writes: Robin, would you lay this out for me?} Mitchell Jones wrote: This reaction--at last!--is exothermic, and thus does not require that the neutrino deliver any minimum amount of energy. Instead, the neutrino is required only for conservation of beta lepton number. Result: this detector should be sensitive to *all* solar neutrinos ... Robin van Spaandonk wrote: True, but this detector does have another inherent problem. As you yourself earlier pointed out, reactions that run by themselves, have the annoying habit of running, even when they don't detect any neutrinos. This means that actual neutrino detections need to be looked for as an excess signal on top of the normal decay signature. I haven't done the calculations, but I do wonder whether or not this means looking for a tiny signal buried in the noise of the normal decays. Furthermore, given that In115 has a very long half-life, perhaps the current measurement of that half-life already implicitly includes solar neutrino stimulated decays? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Hi Mitchell and Robin, Given Robin's rembarks about "concurrent three particle collision reactions, where 1.44 MeV is available to the neutrino", what is your evalutation of the effectiveness of the Davis detector? Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 18:48:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA03200; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:47:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:47:46 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:48:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Mizuno300 - Run 3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"LWOym1.0.wn.HT4Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32288 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: For Run 3 we copied the open-air boiling-cell calorimetry style described by Ohmori and Mizuno in IE #27. The results don't show any sign of excess heat but now we are able to compare usefully with O&M's results. The comparison is somewhat surprising. Read all about it at: http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run3/run3.html Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 18:59:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA06613; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:57:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:57:43 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrinos Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 13:57:39 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <38591926.717AEA01@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <385A350A.4907FE81@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <385C4EF9.44FCAE43@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: <385C4EF9.44FCAE43 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 SAA06595 Resent-Message-ID: <"EbNba3.0.Fd1.dc4Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32290 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 19 Dec 1999 03:20:25 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: [snip] >{Jack writes: Robin, are you referring to the >"concurrent three particle collision reactions, >where 1.44 MeV is available to the neutrino" ? >What is the probability of these collisions?} Yes, and if you look at the graph, you can read off the expected fluxes on the left hand side. Where you have a vertical line, it should IMO just be a single point, as I fail to see how one can possibly have multiple fluxes representing the same energy. I.e. for vertical lines, take the value from the top of the line. Note that the Y-axis is logarithmic. This will let you compare the expected fluxes for the different reactions, and hence the relative likelihood of their occurrence. (but take into consideration my previous expression of concern in this regard). [snip] >Mitchell Jones wrote: >(2) 49In115 + v --> [50Sn115+] + [e-], > >where the mass balance equation is > >114.90388 + 0 --> [114.90335 - .0005486] + .0005486 + Q, > >and Q = .0000272 amu = +.025 MeV. > >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >A more accurate calculation results in an excess of >0.495 MeV. > >{Jack writes: Robin, would you lay this out for me?} In-115 = 114.9038783 amu, Sn-115 = 114.9033460 amu. -------------------- - 000.0005323 amu = 0.4958 MeV (I suspect Mitchell's calculator is playing up again). > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >This reaction--at last!--is exothermic, and thus does >not require that the neutrino deliver any minimum amount >of energy. Instead, the neutrino is required only for >conservation of beta lepton number. Result: this detector >should be sensitive to *all* solar neutrinos ... > >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >True, but this detector does have another inherent >problem. As you yourself earlier pointed out, reactions >that run by themselves, have the annoying habit of running, >even when they don't detect any neutrinos. This means >that actual neutrino detections need to be looked for as >an excess signal on top of the normal decay signature. I >haven't done the calculations, but I do wonder whether >or not this means looking for a tiny signal buried in the >noise of the normal decays. > >Furthermore, given that In115 has a very long half-life, >perhaps the current measurement of that half-life already >implicitly includes solar neutrino stimulated decays? > >Regards, Robin van Spaandonk > >Hi Mitchell and Robin, > >Given Robin's rembarks about >"concurrent three particle collision reactions, >where 1.44 MeV is available to the neutrino", >what is your evalutation of the effectiveness of the Davis >detector? I'm afraid I'm basically too ignorant of what they are really trying to do, for my opinion to be worth much, however I have already said in a previous post that I thought it was a pretty crappy detector. Quite frankly, my general impression is that the whole hunt for neutrinos is fraught with difficulties, and open to large errors as a consequence of tiny effects from possible alternate reactions. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 19:00:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA06582; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:57:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:57:34 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991218205750.006cc4dc mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:57:50 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Strange transformer In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"nHUF81.0.mc1.Tc4Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32289 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:48 PM 12/19/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Suppose one had an electrical transformer, with only DC flowing through the >primary, and this primary is physically inaccessible. Is there anything one >might do at the secondary, to nevertheless extract energy from the >transformer? If there was, then you could replace the DC-energized primary with a permanent magnet and have a free energy device, right? Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 19:04:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA08801; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 19:02:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 19:02:42 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange transformer Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:02:38 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <4lio5s8i6qbqj6e6i1rk8kg0me3bb7cbdj 4ax.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991218205750.006cc4dc@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991218205750.006cc4dc mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA08783 Resent-Message-ID: <"AWT2_1.0.R92.Ih4Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32291 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:57:50 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 12:48 PM 12/19/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >>Suppose one had an electrical transformer, with only DC flowing through the >>primary, and this primary is physically inaccessible. Is there anything one >>might do at the secondary, to nevertheless extract energy from the >>transformer? > >If there was, then you could replace the DC-energized primary with a >permanent magnet and have a free energy device, right? Correct, but you're not supposed to spoil the fun so quickly! ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 19:13:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA11878; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 19:11:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 19:11:51 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: IE Article Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:11:47 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <03jo5s08mh5asljuh7jb4h3pudto0uhjqv 4ax.com> References: <385C470A.B5E074B@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: <385C470A.B5E074B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA11854 Resent-Message-ID: <"vxdAh2.0.Sv2.tp4Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32292 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 19 Dec 1999 02:46:34 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: [snip] >Hi Robin and Eugene, > >I would very much appreciate a detailed derivation of >Dr. Brown's equation > >KE = mv^2/2 + q^2v^2k/3r > >Thanks, Jack Smith I think Dr. Puthoff did something similar for the calculation of inertial forces based on the ZPE. Perhaps he would care to compare/contrast his work with that of Dr. Brown? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 19:59:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22065; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 19:57:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 19:57:00 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <002901bf49d5$19aa0de0$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991218205750.006cc4dc mail.eden.com> Subject: Re: Strange transformer Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 21:56:58 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"dcPYN3.0.gO5.BU5Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32293 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > >Suppose one had an electrical transformer, with only DC flowing through the > >primary, and this primary is physically inaccessible. Is there anything one > >might do at the secondary, to nevertheless extract energy from the > >transformer? > > If there was, then you could replace the DC-energized primary with a > permanent magnet and have a free energy device, right? Not really the same case. A DC source can be tapped for continuous power (ignoring the magnetic isolation for the moment) but a permanent magnet arrangement has only a limited store of energy that can be used "once" before it has to be pumped up again by external inputs. Now addressing whether the transformer could be utilized in some manner to access the DC power... DC current flow induces a magnetic field, the strength of which is influenced by the current, number of turns, magnetic properties of the core, air gap spacing, and so on. I'm thinking that if the core was near saturation, that energy input on the AC side might drive the core in and out of saturation, and thus might effect the DC flow, as sort of transient changing of the magnetic back pressure. This would induce an AC component on the DC side (a varying DC really.) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 20:04:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA23922; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:02:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:02:46 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:00:06 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"wUsdv.0.gr5.cZ5Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32294 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott: Is there a plot of power output as a function of input electrical power? Didnt see a link to it on the page. Mitchell Swartz At 08:48 PM 12/18/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >For Run 3 we copied the open-air boiling-cell calorimetry style described >by Ohmori and Mizuno in IE #27. The results don't show any sign of excess >heat but now we are able to compare usefully with O&M's results. The >comparison is somewhat surprising. Read all about it at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run3/run3.html > > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 20:18:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA27053; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:17:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:17:35 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange transformer Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 15:17:31 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <44mo5sg4qo57294lg378fqd7titp0622j0 4ax.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991218205750.006cc4dc mail.eden.com> <002901bf49d5$19aa0de0$0101a8c0@john> In-Reply-To: <002901bf49d5$19aa0de0$0101a8c0 john> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 UAA27035 Resent-Message-ID: <"bLKJu3.0.dc6.Vn5Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32295 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 18 Dec 1999 21:56:58 -0600, John Logajan wrote: [snip] >Not really the same case. A DC source can be tapped for >continuous power (ignoring the magnetic isolation for the >moment) but a permanent magnet arrangement has only >a limited store of energy that can be used "once" before >it has to be pumped up again by external inputs. > >Now addressing whether the transformer could be utilized >in some manner to access the DC power... > >DC current flow induces a magnetic field, the strength of >which is influenced by the current, number of turns, magnetic >properties of the core, air gap spacing, and so on. > >I'm thinking that if the core was near saturation, that energy >input on the AC side might drive the core in and out of >saturation, and thus might effect the DC flow, as sort of >transient changing of the magnetic back pressure. This >would induce an AC component on the DC side (a varying >DC really.) Ok, now the fun bit: We live on such a transformer. The Earth's field forms the magnetic flux, the incoming solar wind wrapping itself around the field lines provides the DC current. If the Earth daily receives 1E4 quads in solar energy, and the solar wind delivers 1/1000 as much energy, then that is still 10 quads/day (about 10 times current consumption). A ferrite core aligned with the Earth's field should serve to "concentrate the field lines", and a coil wrapped around the core should allow one to interact with it. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 20:35:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA31560; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:33:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:33:54 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <385C1088.3607 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:29:56 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"Q9WJu.0.2j7.n06Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32296 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> >"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude >> >better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. >> >We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands >> >which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity >> >forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams >> > >> >Re-posted and seconded by >> > >> >Jim Ostrowski >> >> ***{That's it? That's your best shot? > >It's not the quantity, but the quality of the words chosen that is the >deciding factor in discussions of this kind, Mitchell. If you think I'm >going to wait for my freedom to >say whatever I want to whomever I want, be they cops, judges, IRS agents >or mere slaves such as yourself, until someone on vortex builds a giant >space ark or something, then you are quite out of your mind. ***{No, I have no doubt that you will continue on your present course, and, believe it or not, I hope you get away with what you are doing just as surely as I would hope that Don Quixote would survive his joust with the windmill. Hope and realism, however, are not the same thing. Realism says that if you continue to confront the authorities by ignoring laws which you regard as unjust, then one day the authorities will come crashing down on you, and wreck your life. --MJ}*** > >In fact you are quite out of your mind in my opinion for proposing such >a ludicrous "solution" to the problem of tyranny, anyway. ***{You call it a ludicrous solution; I call it the way human evolution works. Each leap forward requires a breakthrough discovery, and people--pioneers--who have the courage to use that discovery to move forward into a new world. The discovery of America resulted from improvements in navigation techniques, and the result was a flood of pioneers into the Americas. But America is only one of many new worlds that technology has opened up to mankind, and America's pioneers were not the first human pioneers. Instead, the process has repeated itself endlessly, from the time a chimpanzee-like creature in an African forest, more than 4 million years ago, picked up a massive club, used it to become the alpha male in his troupe by besting the other males in single combat, and then decided to keep it with him always, despite the fact that, if he carried it, he could no longer swing through the trees. Result: a new discovery--the club--led our ancestors from the trees into a new world--life on the ground--and a subsequent process of adaptation to that new life created the first of the upright walking manlike creatures, the hominids, of which we are the current incarnation. Thus began a process destined to repeat itself endlessly, as the descendants of that small troupe of ape-men spread themselves slowly, from their original tiny domain, across Africa, the Middle East, Europe, Asia, America, and thence throughout most of the world. And with each iteration of the cycle of expansion, there was a period during which men looked upon the world which they would occupy in the next cycle as if it were surrounded by impenetrable barriers. Just the troupe of club wielding ape men looked upon the African savanna with fear as they stood at the edge of the forest, and just as Europeans before Columbus looked upon the Atlantic Ocean with fear, so, today, we look upon life in the far north, or Antarctica, or under the oceans, or underground, or in space, with fear. However, that state of affairs will end with a suddenness that most will find hard to believe, on the day that the technology which *individuals* need to cross those barriers becomes available. All it takes is a power plant that a technologically adept individual can build for himself, which produces power densities comparable to nuclear, from some cheap, easily obtainable fuel --e.g., water. As soon as that happens, people who are willing to assume risks in order to achieve freedom--pioneers--will cross those barriers, creating cities under the ice, underground, and under the oceans, right here on Earth, and on other bodies in the solar system as well. When that happens, the barrier which causes you to regard the restoration of the frontier as "a ludicrous solution to the problem of tyranny," will be swept aside in little more time than it took that anonomous ape-man, more than 4 million years ago, to pick up a club and venture into the uncharted waters of life on the ground. --MJ}*** I'll bet you >one thing; no one on vortex is going to come even close to building such >a thing. If it ever gets done, the government is going to do it. ***{Governments and their apologists, it is true, often claim to have been the source of key innovations, but when the claims are closely examined, they disappear like dandelion seeds in the wind. In point of fact, such claims are invariably based on selective thinking. Those who make them ignore massive and absolutely crucial contributions from the private sector, find some trivial accomplishment in the chain of events which came from a government source, and leap willy-nilly to the conclusion that the government was responsible for the whole thing. In any case, *I* think the homebrew "free-energy" power plant is possible, and that's what I am looking for. If you choose to pursue freedom in a different way, that's fine by me. As I have indicated to you repeatedly, my dispute with you has been with your claim that those who choose to obey laws which they regard as unjust are cowards and without honor, that they "volunteer" to be oppressed, and that they support the tyrants who oppress us. And I feel I have demonstrated beyond any doubt that, in fact, all three of those claims are false. Moreover, by failing to respond to my arguments against those positions and choosing, instead, to begin quibbling about my approach to freedom, you have tacitly conceded on all of those points. --Mitchell Jones}*** And >guess what, only REALLY GOOD SLAVES are going to get to ride on it. ***{I have no doubt that if a technology permitting free-energy homebrew power plants is developed, governments will begin to use the technology, and, on vehicles which they control, "only really good slaves" will be permitted to ride. (Plus Jim Ostrowski, of course: they will have to transport you to some hell-hole asteroid prison camp from which you cannot escape, now won't they? :-) However, once the plans for a homebrew free-energy power plant are on the web, the game will be over. I'll build my own, and so will everyone else who has the necessary technical expertise, and we will happily transport ourselves away from the slave camps of Earth. --MJ}*** > >For one thing, leaving planet earth on a permanent basis in order to >inhabit some hermetically sealed cave carved out of the mountains of >Titan just isn't my cup of tea, thank you. If that's what you want to >try to do, go for it, buddy. Let's see how far you get. ***{God, what a glorious adventure that would be! It sends chills down my spine just to think about it! It's the kind of thing I have hungered for all of my life. When I ask myself why, the answer I get back is this: my ancestors were in America before the revolution, when the populated region was just a thin line down the eastern seaboard. And, as the frontier--the boundary between the populated region and the interior--moved inland, my ancestors moved with it. They were in Pennsylvania when it was full of bears and Indians, then in the Indiana territory, then in the Oklahoma territory, and so on. Each generation was drawn to the frontier as if by a powerful magnet, until the frontier, for the first time in four million years of hominid evolution, ceased to exist. And from the time that happened to the present, we have felt lost. Why? Perhaps because my ancestors have been moving with the frontier for four million years, since the day that unknown ape-man, the first pioneer, chose to stand on the ground with a weapon in his hand, rather than hide in the safety of the trees. If that is the case, then the frontier is where I belong, and, since I am not where I belong, I feel lost. --MJ}*** > >What I do in court at least has measurable beneficial effects later on. >Cops know better than to bother me now, because they know that judges >(their bosses) don't want to have anything to do with me. They even made >sure street gangs do not operate in the vicinity of my home by closing >down their cop sponsored, supported and patronized safe house after the >shotgun incident. I come and go as I please. Got a nice little business >and somebody else to mind the store for me while I "waste" my time >talking to you over the internet. ***{I hope that continues. The rational mind, however, says that it will not. If people could simply ignore laws that they felt were unjust without the hammer of the state coming down on their heads, the situation would quickly snowball to the point where the entire parasitic system would collapse. Reason says that our oppressors are going to bust a lot of heads--probably including yours--in an attempt to prevent that from happening, and that if it does happen, the present system will be replaced with a despotism that is far worse than the one confronting us now. --MJ}*** > >So as far as having freedom goes, I don't know what more anyone could >ask for, except maybe freedom for other people, but I can't do that for >them. I can't do it for you. >If you won't do it for yourself, or lift a finger to even try, that's >your business. >Stay a slave, see if I care. ***{Such remarks are unfair. I'm pursuing freedom in my way, and you in yours. While I don't expect you to succeed, I hope you do, and I should think that you would hope that I do. --MJ}*** > >As far as "winning" goes, I've already won. ***{You hope. :-) --MJ}*** You on the other hand will >have to wait for your "victory", I guess, until the day comes that you >can look thru the faceplate of your space helmet, gaze beyond the >horizon of whatever planet you are on at the tiny blue dot in the sky >known as Earth. ***{Damn, when you talk that way, you get me all excited! :-) --MJ}*** > >When do you anticipate such a thing will be possible for you, Mitchell? ***{There is no way to know. I'm 57 years old, and may not have enough years left. On the other hand, maybe I do. Only time will tell. It depends on whether these maverick free-energy researchers deliver on their promises, and do so in time. But even if they don't, studying their experiments, thinking about them, arguing about them, and, when appropriate, doing experiments of my own, will still be a lot more fun than doing what you do--to wit: breaking the law, and then struggling to remain out of jail. --MJ}*** > >Jim From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 21:52:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA11976; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 21:48:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 21:48:35 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:45:59 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 Resent-Message-ID: <"vkoNl2.0.2x2.p67Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32297 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >For Run 3 we copied the open-air boiling-cell calorimetry style described >by Ohmori and Mizuno in IE #27. The results don't show any sign of excess >heat but now we are able to compare usefully with O&M's results. The >comparison is somewhat surprising. Read all about it at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run3/run3.html > > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 ***{Hi, Scott. I read your experimental writeup. Good work, as usual. Here, in summary form, are the indicated calculations: (1) You boiled away 34.6 g of water, which, at 530 cal/gm would give (34.6)(530)(4.185) = 76,745 joules. (2) The initial rate of heat loss from a full flask at boiling, as measured by you, was 23.1 joules per second, which, over the 16 minute duration of the run, would have accumulated to a total of (23.1)(16)(60) = 22,176 joules. (3) You calculated that the heat required to raise the solution from 90C to 100C was 4630 joules and the heat required to raise the glass beaker the same amount was 650 joules. (4) The cell was operated in constant-voltage mode at 160 volts, and drew an average of 115 watts, so the average current was about .719 amps. By Faraday's 2nd law, the passage of each unit of 96,500 coulombs of charge across this electrolysis cell should liberate a mass of hydrogen, in grams, that is equal to the equivalent weight of hydrogen. Equivalent weight is the atomic weight divided by the valence, so, for hydrogen, it is 1/1 = 1. Thus this run should have liberated [(16)(60)(.719)/96500](1) = .715 grams of hydrogen. Since the fuel value (heat of combustion) of hydrogen is 29150 cal/gm, we have (.715)(29150)(4.185) = 87,258 joules. Total energy output for this run, therefore, is 76,745 + 22,176 + 4,630 + 650 + 87,258 = 191,459 joules. The average power consumption of the cell was 115 watts, or 115 joules per sec and the run lasted 16 minutes, so total input energy was (115)(16)(60) = 110,400 joules. Conclusion: unless you failed to mention that you have a built-in recombiner that burns the off-gassed hydrogen and returns its heat value to the cell, the coefficient of performance on this run was 191459/110400 = 1.73. In that case, you are now wildly over unity! Congratulations, Scott! --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 22:35:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA21086; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:33:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:33:35 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 00:33:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"EzI8B1.0.J95._m7Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32298 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: (Reply to Mitchell Jones is below) At 11:00 PM 12/18/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Is there a plot of power output as a function of input >electrical power? Didnt see a link to it on the page. Not on this run, Mitchell S. I was deliberately doing the calorimetry the way they did it...by letting the cell boil out in the open air for most of the run. The heat output power is calculated from the heat of vaporization of the lost water, the heat loss thru the walls of the cell (calibrated via cooling curve experiment performed with the cell nearly full of electrolyte) plus a small correction for the heat capacity of the cell and its contents for the rise from 90C to 100C that occurs within the first minute of the run. As it happens, I did collect the data for an input power curve but it's pretty uninteresting. Here's the raw data obtained in Run 3 (time is in hours since beginning of run, cell voltage is in volts, cell current is in amps, input power is in watts, temperatures are in Centigrade): time Vcell Icell Pin Tcell Troom .047 20.3 1.723 34.9 18.7 18.7 .085 35.1 3.80 133.5 30.4 18.8 .110 35.0 4.38 153.4 50.9 18.8 .139 35.2 3.1 109.3 78.38 18.8 .168 162.1 1.01 163.3 93.56 18.9 .181 162.1 .70 113.5 98.3 19.0 .197 162.1 .693 112.3 98.87 19.1 .222 162.1 .706 114.4 98.99 19.3 .277 162.1 .708 114.8 98.94 19.6 .319 162.1 .715 115.9 99.01 16.7 .368 162.1 .708 114.8 99.08 19.9 .418 162.1 .690 111.9 99.09 20.1 .435 162.1 .696 112.8 99.06 20.1 .428 0 0 0 - - .452 0 0 0 98.40 - .456 0 0 0 97.80 - .460 0 0 0 97.05 - .502 0 0 0 89.24 - .523 0 0 0 85.69 - .552 0 0 0 80.34 - >From .181 to .435 hours the cell was boiling vigorously and steam was blowing visibly from the vent hose. The cooling curve obtained after the run shows a slightly lower heat loss rate (about 21 watts) than the one I did with the cell nearly full (23 watts). Mitchell Jones wrote: >(4) The cell was operated in constant-voltage mode at 160 volts, and drew >an average of 115 watts, so the average current was about .719 amps. By >Faraday's 2nd law, the passage of each unit of 96,500 coulombs of charge >across this electrolysis cell should liberate a mass of hydrogen, in grams, >that is equal to the equivalent weight of hydrogen. Equivalent weight is >the atomic weight divided by the valence, so, for hydrogen, it is 1/1 = 1. >Thus this run should have liberated [(16)(60)(.719)/96500](1) = .715 grams >of hydrogen. I get precisely 1000 times less than you did...0.00715 grams of hydrogen. >Since the fuel value (heat of combustion) of hydrogen is 29150 >cal/gm, That's the wrong value to use. It is based upon leaving the combustion product (water) in the vapor state. Inside the cell, the water is going from the liquid state to separate H2 and O2 so we need to use the heat of formation of liquid water from H2 and O2 in order to determine how much energy we could "get back" if we burned the fuel gas AND condensed it back to water. That value is 68,315 calories per mole of H2O, which yields 34,158 calories per gram of H. > we have (.715)(29150)(4.185) = 87,258 joules. actually it's about 1020 joules...about 1% of the input power, which explains why Ohmori and Mizuno (and I) ignored it for these calculations. Thanks for checking, though! Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 22:46:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA27215; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:45:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:45:13 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 00:41:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 Resent-Message-ID: <"Jde6c3.0.9f6.ux7Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32299 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >>For Run 3 we copied the open-air boiling-cell calorimetry style described >>by Ohmori and Mizuno in IE #27. The results don't show any sign of excess >>heat but now we are able to compare usefully with O&M's results. The >>comparison is somewhat surprising. Read all about it at: >> >>http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run3/run3.html >> >> >>Scott R. Little EarthTech International >> 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 >> Austin Texas USA 78759 >> 512-342-2185 > >***{Hi, Scott. > >I read your experimental writeup. Good work, as usual. Here, in summary >form, are the indicated calculations: > >(1) You boiled away 34.6 g of water, which, at 530 cal/gm would give >(34.6)(530)(4.185) = 76,745 joules. > >(2) The initial rate of heat loss from a full flask at boiling, as measured >by you, was 23.1 joules per second, which, over the 16 minute duration of >the run, would have accumulated to a total of (23.1)(16)(60) = 22,176 >joules. > >(3) You calculated that the heat required to raise the solution from 90C to >100C was 4630 joules and the heat required to raise the glass beaker the >same amount was 650 joules. > >(4) The cell was operated in constant-voltage mode at 160 volts, and drew >an average of 115 watts, so the average current was about .719 amps. By >Faraday's 2nd law, the passage of each unit of 96,500 coulombs of charge >across this electrolysis cell should liberate a mass of hydrogen, in grams, >that is equal to the equivalent weight of hydrogen. Equivalent weight is >the atomic weight divided by the valence, so, for hydrogen, it is 1/1 = 1. >Thus this run should have liberated [(16)(60)(.719)/96500](1) = .715 grams ***{Wrong! My %#$!*&^^ calculator is dropping zeroes on me again! When I punched in 96500, it ignored the zeroes, and so I only divided by 965! I should have gotten .00715 grams, obviously! --MJ}*** >of hydrogen. Since the fuel value (heat of combustion) of hydrogen is 29150 >cal/gm, we have (.715)(29150)(4.185) = 87,258 joules. ***{No, we would have 873 joules. --MJ}*** > >Total energy output for this run, therefore, is 76,745 + 22,176 + 4,630 + >650 + 87,258 = 191,459 joules. ***{No, it is 76,745 + 22,176 + 4,630 + 650 + 873 = 105,074 joules. > >The average power consumption of the cell was 115 watts, or 115 joules per >sec and the run lasted 16 minutes, so total input energy was (115)(16)(60) >= 110,400 joules. > >Conclusion: unless you failed to mention that you have a built-in >recombiner that burns the off-gassed hydrogen and returns its heat value to >the cell, the coefficient of performance on this run was 191459/110400 = >1.73. In that case, you are now wildly over unity! ***{No, the C.O.P. is 105074/110400 = .95, which is *not* over unity. I HATE my %#$!*&^^ calculator!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!! --MJ}*** > >Congratulations, Scott! ***{I take it back. Another mundane non-replication. Sorry. I will purchase a new calculator tomorrow. :-( --MJ}*** > >--Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 04:15:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA30695; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 04:14:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 04:14:01 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 07:12:04 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"EhsO32.0.XV7.9mCNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32300 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:33 AM 12/19/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 11:00 PM 12/18/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> Is there a plot of power output as a function of input >>electrical power? Didnt see a link to it on the page. >Not on this run, Mitchell S. I was deliberately doing the calorimetry the >way they did it...by letting the cell boil out in the open air for most of >the run. The heat output power is calculated from the heat of vaporization >of the lost water, the heat loss thru the walls of the cell (calibrated via >cooling curve experiment performed with the cell nearly full of >electrolyte) plus a small correction for the heat capacity of the cell and >its contents for the rise from 90C to 100C that occurs within the first >minute of the run. > >As it happens, I did collect the data for an input power curve but it's >pretty uninteresting. Here's the raw data obtained in Run 3 (time is in >hours since beginning of run, cell voltage is in volts, cell current is in >amps, input power is in watts, temperatures are in Centigrade): > >time Vcell Icell Pin Tcell Troom >.047 20.3 1.723 34.9 18.7 18.7 >.085 35.1 3.80 133.5 30.4 18.8 >.110 35.0 Scott: These times are much too short to mean anything, as you know. Do you have, given the importance of this matter, the power output as a function of input electrical power for any of the runs? Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 05:36:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA05921; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 05:31:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 05:31:55 -0800 Sender: jack pop.centurytel.net Message-ID: <385CECAD.13E18ED1 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:33:17 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"RvRQN3.0.RS1.BvDNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32301 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: "... May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams Mitchell Jones wrote: ... believe it or not, I hope you get away with what you are doing just as surely as I would hope that Don Quixote would survive his joust with the windmill. Hope and realism, however, are not the same thing. Realism says that if you continue to confront the authorities by ignoring laws which you regard as unjust, then one day the authorities will come crashing down on you, and wreck your life. ... the barrier which causes you to regard the restoration of the frontier as "a ludicrous solution to the problem of tyranny," will be swept aside in little more time than it took that anonomous ape-man, more than 4 million years ago, to pick up a club and venture into the uncharted waters of life on the ground. ... *I* think the homebrew "free-energy" power plant is possible, and that's what I am looking for. If you choose to pursue freedom in a different way, that's fine by me. --Mitchell Jones}*** Jim Ostrowski wrote: guess what, only REALLY GOOD SLAVES are going to get to ride on it. Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{I have no doubt that if a technology permitting free-energy homebrew power plants is developed, governments will begin to use the technology, and, on vehicles which they control, "only really good slaves" will be permitted to ride. (Plus Jim Ostrowski, of course: they will have to transport you to some hell-hole asteroid prison camp from which you cannot escape, now won't they? :-) However, once the plans for a homebrew free-energy power plant are on the web, the game will be over. I'll build my own, and so will everyone else who has the necessary technical expertise, and we will happily transport ourselves away from the slave camps of Earth. --MJ}*** Jim Ostrowski wrote: For one thing, leaving planet earth on a permanent basis in order to inhabit some hermetically sealed cave carved out of the mountains of Titan just isn't my cup of tea, thank you. If that's what you want to try to do, go for it, buddy. Let's see how far you get. Mitchell Jones wrote: *{God, what a glorious adventure that would be! It sends chills down my spine just to think about it! It's the kind of thing I have hungered for all of my life. Jim Ostrowski wrote: You on the other hand will have to wait for your "victory", I guess, until the day comes that you can look thru the faceplate of your space helmet, gaze beyond the horizon of whatever planet you are on at the tiny blue dot in the sky known as Earth. Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{Damn, when you talk that way, you get me all excited! :-) --MJ}*** Hi Jim and Mitchell, As I said before, we Americans have a social contract with each other to resist tryanny. This resistance may be "a la Ghandi", as at the WTO meeting in Seattle; or it may be necessary to take up arms to resist the "powers that be", as in "The Handmaid's Tale". These are extreme measures. It is better to pursue remedies within the system -- legal, electoral, public opinion -- with the thought in mind that one's own views could use correction and improvement, even when dedicated to the cause of liberty. I agree with Mitchell that new frontiers help the cause of liberty, and I share his excitement. On a more theoretical level, the social contract we have with each other as citizens is not the same same as the social contract that we have with family members. And the social contract between Vito and other members of his gang is even more demanding than the contract we are parties to as citizens. It is reported that John Dalton once said the blood was the color of green bottle glass. Perception of the existence of social contracts may also have a strong genetic component. The effect of history is obvious, and social contracts are different in different countries. Even those guys with tails in Arthur Clarke's "Childhood's End" had a social contract, although they recognized the genetic limitation of their vision. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 10:37:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA32245; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 10:36:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 10:36:05 -0800 Message-ID: <385D2552.F69B4723 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 20:34:58 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange transformer References: <3.0.1.32.19991218205750.006cc4dc mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kDisx2.0.ht7.LMINu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32302 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > At 12:48 PM 12/19/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > >Suppose one had an electrical transformer, with only DC flowing through the > >primary, and this primary is physically inaccessible. Is there anything one > >might do at the secondary, to nevertheless extract energy from the > >transformer? > > If there was, then you could replace the DC-energized primary with a > permanent magnet and have a free energy device, right? > Oh! if you have thermally fluctuating material modulating the magnetic flux of permanent magnet you can collect this energy. simple way to convert the heat to electricity. Only needed is tiny coils and good strength magnetic field. BTW, there is continuos feed mainstream physics news about possibilty of violation of 2'nd law of thermodymics on current days. Is this a preparation of kind of realized possibility? :) (in the conspirative point of view) Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 10:50:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA02778; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 10:46:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 10:46:37 -0800 Message-ID: <385D304F.33E3 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:21:51 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xXQPL3.0.Kh.DWINu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32303 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > As I have indicated to you repeatedly, my > dispute with you has been with your claim that those who choose to obey > laws which they regard as unjust are cowards and without honor, I never used the word "coward". However, in my opinion, choosing to remain ignorant is less than honorable, and nothing you have had to say proves anything to the contrary. If you choose to obey unjust laws out of ignorance, thinking that you "have" to obey them, and someone like me comes along and clearly demonstrates the contrary, and you do not display the least bit of curiosity about how this is done, then you, my friend, are choosing to remain ignorant. What I mean is there are certain techniques and facts that are necessary to learn in order to "get away with" not obeying unjust laws. Instead of trying to focus the issue on what these specific techniques are, you want to belittle and denigrate the whole effort itself as a "silly" "waste of time". Using your argumentive, belittling tactics I could turn around and say that your idea of trying to colonize some other planet by launching yourself into outer space with a free energy "homebrew" powerplant designed by our fellow vortexians is a silly waste of time. I would be on more solid ground than you are in doing so because no one here (except me, see below) has a clue about how to build one, yet I have demonstrated that it is possible to free oneself here and now from the unwanted attentions of government. Anyway, here is my suggestion if you are still bent on doing this: First: Find out what the chemical formula is for the space shuttle solid propellant Booster Rocket Engine fuel/oxidizer. Get several 55 gallon drums, cut out the lids and bottoms and line the insides with this stuff. Put the drums together with good "o" rings, and DO NOT CUT CORNERS with this process. Attach the assembled booster rocket engines to a camper shell that you have outfitted for space travel, and you will be ON YOUR WAY OUTTA HERE, my friend. Bon Voyage! > that they > "volunteer" to be oppressed, Once one volunteers, it is not then a matter of oppression, no more than one is being "oppressed" when joining the Marine Corps and then submitting to the commands of the drill instructor. You may "feel" "oppressed" by the drill instructor, but when you volunteered, you surely knew you would have to endure boot camp and perhaps be sent off to engage in combat thereafter. The Marine Corps does not "oppress" it's recruits, it trains and supports them. When one volunteers to join up, one does so for the reason that one thinks such training and support is good for them, and that the deal offered by the recruiter is a good one. > and that they support the tyrants who oppress > us. No, it is the other way around. What the volunteer gets is support and training from the government. When you volunteer, you are NOT being oppressed when you endure the consequences of your volunteering. When you complain about the way government goes about training you, you are biting the hand that feeds you, the same way as if you started whining about how the DI treats you when you join the Marines. > And I feel I have demonstrated beyond any doubt that, in fact, all > three of those claims are false. All you have demonstrated so far is your own willing ignorance about how to get free of the attentions of government, right here and now. Remember what I said about you not being willing to lift a finger to help yourself? Well, now I DARE YOU! Click here (with your finger) and get a clue! http://users.erols.com/scambos/front-pg.htm > Moreover, by failing to respond to my > arguments against those positions and choosing, instead, to begin quibbling > about my approach to freedom, you have tacitly conceded on all of those > points. > I tacitly concede nothing. Jim From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 11:29:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA15741; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:27:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:27:21 -0800 Message-ID: <385D31BA.63941459 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:27:59 -0700 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K System X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 References: <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xqDNw3.0.pr3.P6JNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32304 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, Heat loss through the cell wall will depend strongly on the amount of turbulence within the fluid because of a stagnate fluid layer at the cell wall. In addition, the loss rate will depend on room temperature and on the thickness of the Pyrex wall. I suggest stirring is important during this heat-loss measurement if conditions during the run are to be duplicated. This might explain part of your missing 7% and a bit more, but I doubt you will duplicate the Mizuno loss rate because of other differences. Niece work. Ed Storms Scott Little wrote: > For Run 3 we copied the open-air boiling-cell calorimetry style described > by Ohmori and Mizuno in IE #27. The results don't show any sign of excess > heat but now we are able to compare usefully with O&M's results. The > comparison is somewhat surprising. Read all about it at: > > http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run3/run3.html > > Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 12:35:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA01373; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:32:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:32:51 -0800 Message-ID: <00ad01bf4a60$a5075420$1bb47ed8 mrand> From: "mrand" To: Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:35:52 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: 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: <"kIkG52.0.NL.p3KNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32305 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Jim, >What I mean is there are certain techniques and facts that are necessary >to learn in order to "get away with" not obeying unjust laws. Instead >of trying to focus the issue on what these specific techniques are, you >want to belittle and denigrate the whole effort itself as a "silly" >"waste of time". Do you need a drivers license to drive? If so, how do you enter the SSN field on the DMV form (or any government form)? If not, what kind of information does one needs to do this? Where is there a good place to find these facts? Best Regards, Michael Randall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 12:39:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03064; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:37:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:37:21 -0800 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 15:42:03 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: hamdi ucar cc: Vortex Subject: Hi !!!Re: Strange transformer In-Reply-To: <385D2552.F69B4723 verisoft.com.tr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"CvP_R2.0.nl.08KNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32306 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I was off Vortex for a while... any real good stuff come up... in the last 2 months or so? John From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 12:43:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA04758; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:41:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:41:32 -0800 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 15:46:20 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-Reply-To: <00ad01bf4a60$a5075420$1bb47ed8 mrand> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"HXRwO.0.GA1.xBKNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32307 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: SSAN is optional in Ohio for DMV! On Sun, 19 Dec 1999, mrand wrote: > Hi Jim, > > >What I mean is there are certain techniques and facts that are necessary > >to learn in order to "get away with" not obeying unjust laws. Instead > >of trying to focus the issue on what these specific techniques are, you > >want to belittle and denigrate the whole effort itself as a "silly" > >"waste of time". > > > Do you need a drivers license to drive? If so, how do you enter the SSN > field on the DMV form (or any government form)? If not, what kind of > information does one needs to do this? Where is there a good place to find > these facts? > > Best Regards, Michael Randall > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 12:52:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07690; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:50:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:50:17 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <385D304F.33E3 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:47:37 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"EBsfL3.0.zt1.8KKNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32308 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >> As I have indicated to you repeatedly, my >> dispute with you has been with your claim that those who choose to obey >> laws which they regard as unjust are cowards and without honor, > >I never used the word "coward". However, in my opinion, choosing to >remain ignorant is less than honorable, and nothing you have had to say >proves anything to the contrary. >If you choose to obey unjust laws out of ignorance, thinking that you >"have" to obey them, and someone like me comes along and clearly >demonstrates the contrary, and you do not display the least bit of >curiosity about how this is done, then you, my friend, are choosing to >remain ignorant. ***{Jim, I was aware of the right-wing variant of confrontationalism long before you began to extol its virtues here, and I am as familiar with it as I care to be. My attitude, to sum up, is this: (1) I have better things to do with my time than immerse myself in the arcane mysteries of a mythical interpretation of common law which does not connect to its actual history or its true nature. (If anyone is interested in a history of the common law, they can find it in my book, *The Dogs of Capitalism*.) (2) I have better things to do with my time than spend it provoking the authorities and struggling to fend them off in court. (3) You think you have confronted the state and have won, but you are living in a fool's paradise. You are like a fly perched on the rump of leviathan. The tail hasn't swatted you yet, but your time will come, and when it does the disadvantages of placing yourself at that location will become apparent to you. --MJ}*** > >What I mean is there are certain techniques and facts that are necessary >to learn in order to "get away with" not obeying unjust laws. Instead >of trying to focus the issue on what these specific techniques are, you >want to belittle and denigrate the whole effort itself as a "silly" >"waste of time". ***{This is getting repetitious. One more time: a man who is not free must choose between driving around with a license plate on his car, or spending lots of time arguing with cops, judges, prosecutors, etc. Since I have better uses for my time, driving around without a license plate on my car is a "silly waste of time." If you do *not* have better things to do, then from your perspective it would *not* be a silly waste of time. In which case I say: "Go for it! Have fun!" --MJ}*** > >Using your argumentive, belittling tactics I could turn around and say >that your idea of trying to colonize some other planet by launching >yourself into outer space with a free energy "homebrew" powerplant >designed by our fellow vortexians is a silly waste of time. ***{ One more time: (1) I *enjoy* science. I enjoy reading about it, thinking about it, arguing about it, working out theories, doing experiments--the whole nine yards. (2) I do *not* enjoy arguing with cops, prosecutors, judges, bailiffs, fellow prisoners at the county lockup, etc. Result: I opt for (1), above, rather than for (2). What this means is that even if no such free-energy homebrew powerplant is discovered in my lifetime, my time will have been well spent, because I will have been having fun. --MJ}*** >I would be on more solid ground than you are in doing so because no one >here (except me, see below) has a clue about how to build one, yet I >have demonstrated that it is possible to free oneself here and now from >the unwanted attentions of government. ***{Rubbish. You claim to believe that you can just go around openly breaking laws you consider to be unjust without the hammer of the state eventually coming down on your head, but I challenged you to prove your theory by means of a simple experimental test, months ago, and you came up with lame excuses and declined. Result: you revealed that you do not really believe what you are saying, just as many supposed inventors of "over unity" devices reveal the same thing when they decline similar, reasonable tests. For the record, in case you have forgotten, here is the test I suggested: get yourself a kilo of smack, walk into your local sheriff's office, slam it down on his desk, and inform him that you have a perfect right as a free man to possess with the intent to distribute, and that you do in fact so intend. Do that and if, when they try to lock you up and throw away the key, you are able to get the charges dropped by reciting the words of your mystical "common law" mantra, then I will begin to take you seriously. Until then, I will view you as just another fake messiah who promises salvation and delivers disaster. --MJ}*** > >Anyway, here is my suggestion if you are still bent on doing this: > > First: Find out what the chemical formula is for the space shuttle >solid propellant Booster Rocket Engine fuel/oxidizer. Get several 55 >gallon drums, cut out the lids and bottoms and line the insides with >this stuff. Put the drums together with good "o" rings, and DO NOT CUT >CORNERS with this process. Attach the assembled booster rocket engines >to a camper shell that you have outfitted for space travel, and you will >be ON YOUR WAY OUTTA HERE, my friend. Bon Voyage! ***{Given your belief that you can break the law and use *magic words* to keep yourself out of jail, I suppose you may actually think such a plan would work. Either that, or you have a strange sense of humor. --MJ}*** > >> that they >> "volunteer" to be oppressed, > >Once one volunteers, it is not then a matter of oppression, no more than >one is being "oppressed" when joining the Marine Corps and then >submitting to the commands of the drill instructor. You may "feel" >"oppressed" by the drill instructor, but when you volunteered, you >surely knew you would have to endure boot camp and perhaps be sent off >to engage in combat thereafter. The Marine Corps does not "oppress" it's >recruits, it trains and supports them. When one volunteers to join up, >one does so for the reason that one thinks such training and support is >good for them, and that the deal offered by the recruiter is a good one. ***{Non responsive. I stated extensive arguments demonstrating that those who obey laws which they regard as unjust are *not* volunteers. You continue to ignore those arguments. --MJ}*** > >> and that they support the tyrants who oppress >> us. > >No, it is the other way around. What the volunteer gets is support and >training from the government. When you volunteer, you are NOT being >oppressed when you endure the consequences of your volunteering. When >you complain about the way government goes about training you, you are >biting the hand that feeds you, the same way as if you started whining >about how the DI treats you when you join the Marines. ***{As above, you continue to ignore my extensive arguments demonstrating that people who obey laws they regard as unjust are *not* volunteers. --MJ}*** > >> And I feel I have demonstrated beyond any doubt that, in fact, all >> three of those claims are false. > >All you have demonstrated so far is your own willing ignorance about how >to get free of >the attentions of government, right here and now. ***{When you perform the experiment to test your theories, as described earlier, and escape unscathed, then I will begin to take you seriously. Until then, your claims will have no more significance to me than the sound of the wind blowing. --MJ}*** > >Remember what I said about you not being willing to lift a finger to >help yourself? >Well, now I DARE YOU! Click here (with your finger) and get a clue! > >http://users.erols.com/scambos/front-pg.htm > >> Moreover, by failing to respond to my >> arguments against those positions and choosing, instead, to begin quibbling >> about my approach to freedom, you have tacitly conceded on all of those >> points. >> > >I tacitly concede nothing. ***{Then respond to those arguments. (What you have to decide, punk, is this: did he fire six shots, or only five? :-) --MJ}*** > >Jim From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 16:05:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA22771; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 16:03:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 16:03:34 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 17:57:27 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 Resent-Message-ID: <"ehsUn3.0.jZ5.L9NNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32309 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [snip] > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>(4) The cell was operated in constant-voltage mode at 160 volts, and drew >>an average of 115 watts, so the average current was about .719 amps. By >>Faraday's 2nd law, the passage of each unit of 96,500 coulombs of charge >>across this electrolysis cell should liberate a mass of hydrogen, in grams, >>that is equal to the equivalent weight of hydrogen. Equivalent weight is >>the atomic weight divided by the valence, so, for hydrogen, it is 1/1 = 1. >>Thus this run should have liberated [(16)(60)(.719)/96500](1) = .715 grams >>of hydrogen. > >I get precisely 1000 times less than you did...0.00715 grams of hydrogen. ***{Um, 100 times less, actually. As I noted in another post, the zero key on my calculator (which is old) is becoming flaky. What happened was that when I keyed the numbers in for 96500, the damn thing only registered 965. Result: the answer I got was too large by a factor of 100. I deserve such errors, because this problem has been plaguing me more and more of late, and I haven't done the obvious thing: buy a new calculator. --MJ}*** > >>Since the fuel value (heat of combustion) of hydrogen is 29150 >>cal/gm, > >That's the wrong value to use. It is based upon leaving the combustion >product (water) in the vapor state. Inside the cell, the water is going >from the liquid state to separate H2 and O2 so we need to use the heat of >formation of liquid water from H2 and O2 in order to determine how much >energy we could "get back" if we burned the fuel gas AND condensed it back >to water. That value is 68,315 calories per mole of H2O, which yields >34,158 calories per gram of H. ***{Um, that's very interesting. Two points: (1) Since the cell was running in the non-wetting phase, that means the water was in the form of steam when the hydrogen was split off, and that steam may have had a temperature of several thousand degrees C. For example, if the steam were at 2000 deg. C when it was split, and if it could somehow be siphoned out of the cell before the resulting H2 and O2 gases cooled back to the temperature of the air in the headspace, then the resulting mixture of H2 and O2 would also be at 2000 deg. C. Then, if it were burned in an external recombiner far from the cell, it would not merely be the heat of combustion that was lost to the cell, but also the heat content of the H2 and O2 at 2000 deg. C. However, I see no way, practically speaking, that the H2 and O2 would not cool back to the normal temperature of the gases in the headspace before escaping from it. Result: virtually all of this heat will be accounted for when you determine the cooling curve of the cell. (2) If your idea is to count the calories given off by the cooling of steam after the hydrogen is burned, I would respond that if you do you will be counting the heat of combustion, or part of it, twice. The reason is that, while the steam which results from burning the hydrogen will be superheated, the source of that heat will be the heat of combustion itself. Thus, when you use the number for the heat of combustion, as I did, you are already taking that heat into account; and if you then account for the calories given off when the superheated steam cools, you will be counting some of the same heat twice. --MJ}*** > >> we have (.715)(29150)(4.185) = 87,258 joules. > >actually it's about 1020 joules...about 1% of the input power, which >explains why Ohmori and Mizuno (and I) ignored it for these calculations. ***{In the post in which I corrected my earlier error, I got 873 joules. (That calculation was as follows: (.00715)(29150)(4.185) = 873 joules.) However, using your number of 34,158 cal/gm, it would become: (.00715)(34158)(4.185) = 1022 joules, just as you said. Nevertheless, I don't think you should ignore it. In order to decide whether it is significant, you had to calculate it anyway, right? So you might as well include it in your experimental results as a matter of routine. (Remember: us yahoos out here want to educate ourselves, and so every little detail that you include is appreciated by someone. That's why it is better to go into too much detail, rather than too little. :-) --MJ}*** > >Thanks for checking, though! ***{You are welcome. I enjoy going through these sorts of calculations, actually--especially when my calculator registers all of my keystrokes! :-) --MJ}*** > > > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 19:51:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA15256; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 19:49:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 19:49:54 -0800 Message-ID: <385DAF2C.45AB ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 20:23:08 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5Iol91.0.Ik3.YTQNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32310 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: (snip) > (3) You think you have confronted the state and have won, but you are > living in a fool's paradise. You are like a fly perched on the rump of > leviathan. The tail hasn't swatted you yet, but your time will come, and > when it does the disadvantages of placing yourself at that location will > become apparent to you. In all the time that I have been doing my court activities, no cop, no judge, nor any other other government type has ever threatened me with anything like this. I suppose then, that you know something that I do not know. Whether you do or not, you can stuff this crap up where the sun never shines. You can also tell your mob friends, whoever they are, that THE LAW IS COMING, and hell is coming with it. Almighty God protects me, and I will not fall one microsecond sooner than I am supposed to. You, I believe, are quite outside the influence of such Protection, since you do not believe It exists. > > --MJ}*** > > > > >What I mean is there are certain techniques and facts that are necessary > >to learn in order to "get away with" not obeying unjust laws. Instead > >of trying to focus the issue on what these specific techniques are, you > >want to belittle and denigrate the whole effort itself as a "silly" > >"waste of time". > > ***{This is getting repetitious. One more time: a man who is not free must > choose between driving around with a license plate on his car, or spending > lots of time arguing with cops, judges, prosecutors, etc. Since I have > better uses for my time, driving around without a license plate on my car > is a "silly waste of time." If you do *not* have better things to do, then > from your perspective it would *not* be a silly waste of time. In which > case I say: "Go for it! Have fun!" --MJ}*** 20 or so hours plus a few days in jail well compensated for is NOT "lots" of time. I have spent nearly the same amount of time arguing with you. I have probably just as many, if not more, interests other than this particular subject, than you do. If you were not interested in it as well, you would not be arguing about it, would you? > > >Using your argumentive, belittling tactics I could turn around and say > >that your idea of trying to colonize some other planet by launching > >yourself into outer space with a free energy "homebrew" powerplant > >designed by our fellow vortexians is a silly waste of time. > > ***{ One more time: (1) I *enjoy* science. I enjoy reading about it, > thinking about it, arguing about it, working out theories, doing > experiments--the whole nine yards. (2) I do *not* enjoy arguing with cops, > prosecutors, judges, bailiffs, fellow prisoners at the county lockup, etc. > Result: I opt for (1), above, rather than for (2). What this means is that > even if no such free-energy homebrew powerplant is discovered in my > lifetime, my time will have been well spent, because I will have been > having fun. --MJ}*** If discussing this subject is not fun for you, too, why then are you discussing it? > > >I would be on more solid ground than you are in doing so because no one > >here (except me, see below) has a clue about how to build one, yet I > >have demonstrated that it is possible to free oneself here and now from > >the unwanted attentions of government. > > ***{Rubbish. You claim to believe that you can just go around openly > breaking laws you consider to be unjust without the hammer of the state > eventually coming down on your head, but I challenged you to prove your > theory by means of a simple experimental test, months ago, and you came up > with lame excuses and declined. Result: you revealed that you do not really > believe what you are saying, just as many supposed inventors of "over > unity" devices reveal the same thing when they decline similar, reasonable > tests. For the record, in case you have forgotten, here is the test I > suggested: get yourself a kilo of smack, walk into your local sheriff's > office, slam it down on his desk, and inform him that you have a perfect > right as a free man to possess with the intent to distribute, and that you > do in fact so intend. Do that and if, when they try to lock you up and > throw away the key, you are able to get the charges dropped by reciting the > words of your mystical "common law" mantra, then I will begin to take you > seriously. Until then, I will view you as just another fake messiah who > promises salvation and delivers disaster. --MJ}*** You get me the smack Mitchell, and your on. I have better things to do with my money. > > > >Anyway, here is my suggestion if you are still bent on doing this: > > > > First: Find out what the chemical formula is for the space shuttle > >solid propellant Booster Rocket Engine fuel/oxidizer. Get several 55 > >gallon drums, cut out the lids and bottoms and line the insides with > >this stuff. Put the drums together with good "o" rings, and DO NOT CUT > >CORNERS with this process. Attach the assembled booster rocket engines > >to a camper shell that you have outfitted for space travel, and you will > >be ON YOUR WAY OUTTA HERE, my friend. Bon Voyage! > > ***{Given your belief that you can break the law and use *magic words* to > keep yourself out of jail, I suppose you may actually think such a plan > would work. Either that, or you have a strange sense of humor. --MJ}*** My sense of humor may be strange, but the fact that you are seriously expecting to do some project utilizing as yet unproven, undeveloped technology to accomplish approximatly the same thing as my joke suggests, above, is even stranger. > > > >> that they > >> "volunteer" to be oppressed, > > > >Once one volunteers, it is not then a matter of oppression, no more than > >one is being "oppressed" when joining the Marine Corps and then > >submitting to the commands of the drill instructor. You may "feel" > >"oppressed" by the drill instructor, but when you volunteered, you > >surely knew you would have to endure boot camp and perhaps be sent off > >to engage in combat thereafter. The Marine Corps does not "oppress" it's > >recruits, it trains and supports them. When one volunteers to join up, > >one does so for the reason that one thinks such training and support is > >good for them, and that the deal offered by the recruiter is a good one. > > ***{Non responsive. I stated extensive arguments demonstrating that those > who obey laws which they regard as unjust are *not* volunteers. You > continue to ignore those arguments. --MJ}*** > Alright. Do the math, Mitchell. Either you spend twenty hours worth of time getting a little self respect, or you spend the rest of your life obeying every order from every government twit that comes along. By your reasoning, neither choice is "voluntary" because there is only a "continuum" of threat levels between any two choices where some loss of your time is involved. This then means we should eliminate the word voluntary from the english language, because any bum who stops you on a street corner and asks you to "voluntarily" give him a cigarette is "coercing" you out of some of your time, even if you don't end up giving him a smoke. I'll tell you one thing, when a judge or an IRS agent asks you if that is your signature on whatever document the government "coerced" you into signing, his next question will be whether anyone held a gun to your head and forced you to sign it. If you have to answer "no", then game over, you lose, slave. > > > >> and that they support the tyrants who oppress > >> us. > > > >No, it is the other way around. What the volunteer gets is support and > >training from the government. When you volunteer, you are NOT being > >oppressed when you endure the consequences of your volunteering. When > >you complain about the way government goes about training you, you are > >biting the hand that feeds you, the same way as if you started whining > >about how the DI treats you when you join the Marines. > > ***{As above, you continue to ignore my extensive arguments demonstrating > that people who obey laws they regard as unjust are *not* volunteers. > --MJ}*** > As someone who has not volunteered to give government bums any money, but instead gave up a few hours or days of my time resisting such suggestions, I regard those who offer no resistance whatsoever as willing dupes in the service of government, who assist it in furthering it's evil agenda, whether they "disagree" with what the government does with the money they give them or not. You have a problem with that? What is so difficult for you to understand about such an attitude? You have no business saying that if you had been around in Samuel Adams' day, you would have stood with him. That's crap. You would have given Sam as much moral or armed support as you are giving me now, and it is to the likes of people such as yourself to whom he addressed his comments, posted earlier. Your excuse that you are doing your part for the cause of freedom by fantasizing about trips to outer space just plain bullshit. Go away, we don't need your sorry little fantasies. Go to the next county and rent a porno or something, it will help you feel a lot better than talking to me will, I'm sure. Jim Ostrowski > > > >> And I feel I have demonstrated beyond any doubt that, in fact, all > >> three of those claims are false. > > > >All you have demonstrated so far is your own willing ignorance about how > >to get free of > >the attentions of government, right here and now. > > ***{When you perform the experiment to test your theories, as described > earlier, and escape unscathed, then I will begin to take you seriously. > Until then, your claims will have no more significance to me than the sound > of the wind blowing. --MJ}*** > > > > >Remember what I said about you not being willing to lift a finger to > >help yourself? > >Well, now I DARE YOU! Click here (with your finger) and get a clue! > > > >http://users.erols.com/scambos/front-pg.htm > > > >> Moreover, by failing to respond to my > >> arguments against those positions and choosing, instead, to begin quibbling > >> about my approach to freedom, you have tacitly conceded on all of those > >> points. > >> > > > >I tacitly concede nothing. > > ***{Then respond to those arguments. (What you have to decide, punk, is > this: did he fire six shots, or only five? :-) --MJ}*** > > > > >Jim From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 20:58:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA04076; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 20:56:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 20:56:51 -0800 Message-ID: <385DBFF1.1513 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 21:34:41 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <00ad01bf4a60$a5075420$1bb47ed8 mrand> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RNhnh.0.c_.JSRNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32311 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: mrand wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > >What I mean is there are certain techniques and facts that are necessary > >to learn in order to "get away with" not obeying unjust laws. Instead > >of trying to focus the issue on what these specific techniques are, you > >want to belittle and denigrate the whole effort itself as a "silly" > >"waste of time". > > Do you need a drivers license to drive? If I were you I would keep my driver's license current for a while until you establish other, more fundamental rights. > If so, how do you enter the SSN > field on the DMV form (or any government form)? Write the word "declined" across the spaces provided for the number and see what happens. Depending on what happens, adjust your response accordingly. This means let me know what happens then and we can discuss your next move, if one is necessary. I do not have a license, and drive anyway. Each case is different however depending on where you are at in the process of getting out of the system. > If not, what kind of > information does one needs to do this? You will need information about how to deal with specific court problems. If you have not been charged with anything you do not have a problem. Have you been charged with anything? > Where is there a good place to find > these facts? >From me, I suppose since I have experience. There was another fellow, a "Net Legend" named AJ Teel, who provided me with much of the information I used successfully to make judges eager to dismiss my traffic tickets. However I lost track of AJ after being offline for a few months back in 1994. I'll send you a copy of his basic process and theory offline. Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 21:25:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA12436; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 21:24:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 21:24:19 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 23:24:48 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"XJ0js1.0.923.2sRNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32312 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:12 AM 12/19/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >These times are much too short to mean anything, as you know. hmmmm...those times seem fully meaningful to me. They ARE the times at which I made observations during the 16 minute run. >Do you have, given the importance of this matter, the power output >as a function of input electrical power for any of the runs? That information is available for the runs made in my water-flow calorimeter but not for the last run, because the heat output power was calculated from vaporization losses, etc. However, I do not find a Pout vs Pin plot very useful for describing what happened during such an experiment. The main problem is the lack of time information in such a plot. A plot of both Pout and Pin versus time is more informative and the Pout/Pin ratios can be easily estimated if desired. If I was trying to optimize the performance of a prototype CF cell that always produced excess heat, a Pout vs Pin plot would be quite useful. However, I'm still trying to find a CF cell that produces excess heat. At 05:57 PM 12/19/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{Um, 100 times less, actually. Right...I can slip a decimal point, too! >(1) Since the cell was running in the non-wetting phase.... >(2) If your idea is to count the calories given off by the cooling of steam... Look at it more broadly. The cell converts liquid water into H2 and O2. It does not matter how. Therefore the correct heat of formation to use is the heat released when H2 and O2 recombine to form liquid water (68,315 calories per mole of H2O formed). BTW, if you take 68,315 calories and divide by Loschmidt's number to get the energy per H2O molecule and then divide by 2e where e is the electronic charge, you will get 1.48 volts, which is the well-known dissociation voltage of water. We use 2e because it takes 2 electrons moving thru the cell to dissociate one water molecule. When a normal electrolysis cell is running, you can multiply the cell current by 1.48 volts to determine the power equivalent (in watts) of the H2 and O2 being formed. At 12:27 PM 12/19/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >Heat loss through the cell wall will depend strongly on the amount of >turbulence within the fluid because of a stagnate fluid layer at the cell >wall. In addition, the loss rate will depend on room temperature and on the >thickness of the Pyrex wall. I suggest stirring is important during this >heat-loss measurement if conditions during the run are to be duplicated. >This might explain part of your missing 7% and a bit more, but I doubt you >will duplicate the Mizuno loss rate because of other differences. Thanks...and I agree. I'll post the results of my stirred cooling curve here soon. I've also requested that Mizuno discuss my latest result with Ohmori to see if they can come up with any explanation for the huge difference between my cooling curve and theirs. Does anybody have any hypotheses (other than genuine excess heat) to explain why M&O apparently vaporize water from their cell so much faster than mine does? Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 22:18:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA27508; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 22:17:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 22:17:14 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 01:15:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"jagqy1.0.kj6.gdSNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32313 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:24 PM 12/19/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 07:12 AM 12/19/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >>These times are much too short to mean anything, as you know. > >hmmmm...those times seem fully meaningful to me. They ARE the times at >which I made observations during the 16 minute run. Scott: So you now claim you have achieved equilibrium in hundreds of an hour? It seems unlikely. Last time I examined your data and found the the Optimal operating Point method was applicable you claimed there was INSUFFICIENT time. And those times were longer if memory serves. Which is it? ========================================================= >>Do you have, given the importance of this matter, the power output >>as a function of input electrical power for any of the runs? > >That information is available for the runs made in my water-flow >calorimeter but not for the last run, because the heat output power was >calculated from vaporization losses, etc. However, I do not find a Pout vs >Pin plot very useful for describing what happened during such an >experiment. The main problem is the lack of time information in such a >plot. A plot of both Pout and Pin versus time is more informative and the >Pout/Pin ratios can be easily estimated if desired. Nonsense. A plot of both Pout and Pin versus time is less informative, as we have shown over and over and over in a series of papers. These include this months JNE which will feature the Mizuno data which I shared with you PRIOR to publication, Scott. [also see http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html#r&d ] If you systematically ignore the peaks, than you will probably fail again as you fail to take into account the optimal operating point of the system. [This will probably be similar to your KS-beads experiments and possibly your last Mizuno experiments.] ========================================================= >If I was trying to optimize the performance of a prototype CF cell that >always produced excess heat, a Pout vs Pin plot would be quite useful. >However, I'm still trying to find a CF cell that produces excess heat. It seems you are determined to fail again. Now why would that be? You were uninterested in the peak operating points of any of the above experiments unfortunately. Do you really start your car in fifth gear, Scott? Or do you really switch back to first gear on the highway? Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 01:47:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA25197; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 01:46:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 01:46:22 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <385DAF2C.45AB ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 03:42:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"Nx0UI3.0.Z96.khVNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32314 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >(snip) > >> (3) You think you have confronted the state and have won, but you are >> living in a fool's paradise. You are like a fly perched on the rump of >> leviathan. The tail hasn't swatted you yet, but your time will come, and >> when it does the disadvantages of placing yourself at that location will >> become apparent to you. > > In all the time that I have been doing my court activities, no cop, no >judge, nor any other other government type has ever threatened me with >anything like this. I suppose then, that you know something that I do >not know. Whether you do or not, you can stuff this crap up where the >sun never shines. You can also tell your mob friends, whoever they are, >that THE LAW IS COMING, and hell is coming with it. Almighty God >protects me, and I will not fall one microsecond sooner than I am >supposed to. You, I believe, are quite outside the influence of such >Protection, since you do not believe It exists. ***{"It?" Did some government certified quack botch the Almighty's sex change operation? If he did, he's going to need a *really* good lawyer! :-) --MJ}*** > >> >> --MJ}*** >> >> > >> >What I mean is there are certain techniques and facts that are necessary >> >to learn in order to "get away with" not obeying unjust laws. Instead >> >of trying to focus the issue on what these specific techniques are, you >> >want to belittle and denigrate the whole effort itself as a "silly" >> >"waste of time". >> >> ***{This is getting repetitious. One more time: a man who is not free must >> choose between driving around with a license plate on his car, or spending >> lots of time arguing with cops, judges, prosecutors, etc. Since I have >> better uses for my time, driving around without a license plate on my car >> is a "silly waste of time." If you do *not* have better things to do, then >> from your perspective it would *not* be a silly waste of time. In which >> case I say: "Go for it! Have fun!" --MJ}*** > >20 or so hours plus a few days in jail well compensated for is NOT >"lots" of time. I have spent nearly the same amount of time arguing with >you. I have probably just as many, if not more, interests other than >this particular subject, than you do. If you were not interested in it >as well, you would not be arguing about it, would you? ***{Absolutely correct. This has been a wonderful discussion. I have held the attitudes that I expressed here for many years, but you are the very first person I have encountered who has had the gumption--and I intend that very seriously--to actually take a shot at defending the point of view which you represent. Result: you have given me the opportunity to express some opinions that I probably would never have put in written form otherwise. I thank you for that. --MJ}*** > >> >> >Using your argumentive, belittling tactics I could turn around and say >> >that your idea of trying to colonize some other planet by launching >> >yourself into outer space with a free energy "homebrew" powerplant >> >designed by our fellow vortexians is a silly waste of time. >> >> ***{ One more time: (1) I *enjoy* science. I enjoy reading about it, >> thinking about it, arguing about it, working out theories, doing >> experiments--the whole nine yards. (2) I do *not* enjoy arguing with cops, >> prosecutors, judges, bailiffs, fellow prisoners at the county lockup, etc. >> Result: I opt for (1), above, rather than for (2). What this means is that >> even if no such free-energy homebrew powerplant is discovered in my >> lifetime, my time will have been well spent, because I will have been >> having fun. --MJ}*** > >If discussing this subject is not fun for you, too, why then are you >discussing it? ***{I didn't intend to suggest that I haven't enjoyed this. It is only when you begin to recycle the same old stuff over and over again that I become a bit frustrated. When I express that frustration, please don't take it as a hint that you should cease arguing. What I want you to do is continue developing your thesis. In other words, if you are not satisfied that I have answered a point, don't repeat yourself again exactly the same way as before. Instead, try to figure out why I disputed the point, and express yourself in a way that will either refute my objection, or render it irrelevant. That way, we can move forward, rather than remain stuck on high center. --MJ}*** > >> >> >I would be on more solid ground than you are in doing so because no one >> >here (except me, see below) has a clue about how to build one, yet I >> >have demonstrated that it is possible to free oneself here and now from >> >the unwanted attentions of government. >> >> ***{Rubbish. You claim to believe that you can just go around openly >> breaking laws you consider to be unjust without the hammer of the state >> eventually coming down on your head, but I challenged you to prove your >> theory by means of a simple experimental test, months ago, and you came up >> with lame excuses and declined. Result: you revealed that you do not really >> believe what you are saying, just as many supposed inventors of "over >> unity" devices reveal the same thing when they decline similar, reasonable >> tests. For the record, in case you have forgotten, here is the test I >> suggested: get yourself a kilo of smack, walk into your local sheriff's >> office, slam it down on his desk, and inform him that you have a perfect >> right as a free man to possess with the intent to distribute, and that you >> do in fact so intend. Do that and if, when they try to lock you up and >> throw away the key, you are able to get the charges dropped by reciting the >> words of your mystical "common law" mantra, then I will begin to take you >> seriously. Until then, I will view you as just another fake messiah who >> promises salvation and delivers disaster. --MJ}*** > >You get me the smack Mitchell, and your on. I have better things to do >with my money. ***{If money is a problem, then don't do a kilo. Do maybe an ounce--just enough to put you into felony territory. Take that amount, march into the sheriff's office, slap it down on his desk, and tell him that as a free man you have the right to possess it with the intent to sell, and that you do so intend. Then get back to me, if you can. (I doubt that you will have internet access from the county lockup. :-) --MJ}*** > >> > >> >Anyway, here is my suggestion if you are still bent on doing this: >> > >> > First: Find out what the chemical formula is for the space shuttle >> >solid propellant Booster Rocket Engine fuel/oxidizer. Get several 55 >> >gallon drums, cut out the lids and bottoms and line the insides with >> >this stuff. Put the drums together with good "o" rings, and DO NOT CUT >> >CORNERS with this process. Attach the assembled booster rocket engines >> >to a camper shell that you have outfitted for space travel, and you will >> >be ON YOUR WAY OUTTA HERE, my friend. Bon Voyage! >> >> ***{Given your belief that you can break the law and use *magic words* to >> keep yourself out of jail, I suppose you may actually think such a plan >> would work. Either that, or you have a strange sense of humor. --MJ}*** > >My sense of humor may be strange, but the fact that you are seriously >expecting to do some project utilizing as yet unproven, undeveloped >technology to accomplish approximatly the same thing as my joke >suggests, above, is even stranger. ***{I don't know how "seriously" I expect that one of the free energy devices will turn out to be real. All I can say is (a) that I have a theory of physics which opens my mind to such possibilities, (b) that the search is highly educational and good clean fun, and (c) that if such a device is found, the result will be the restoration of the frontier and, as a consequence, the defeat of the enemies of human freedom. With that kind of benefit package, it is a job that only a fool would pass up! --MJ}*** > >> > >> >> that they >> >> "volunteer" to be oppressed, >> > >> >Once one volunteers, it is not then a matter of oppression, no more than >> >one is being "oppressed" when joining the Marine Corps and then >> >submitting to the commands of the drill instructor. You may "feel" >> >"oppressed" by the drill instructor, but when you volunteered, you >> >surely knew you would have to endure boot camp and perhaps be sent off >> >to engage in combat thereafter. The Marine Corps does not "oppress" it's >> >recruits, it trains and supports them. When one volunteers to join up, >> >one does so for the reason that one thinks such training and support is >> >good for them, and that the deal offered by the recruiter is a good one. >> >> ***{Non responsive. I stated extensive arguments demonstrating that those >> who obey laws which they regard as unjust are *not* volunteers. You >> continue to ignore those arguments. --MJ}*** >> > >Alright. Do the math, Mitchell. Either you spend twenty hours worth of >time getting a little self respect ***{Real self-respect does not come from impressing others, but from what one produces--that is, what one creates, invents, discovers, or explains. As such, you will not get it by winning put-down contests with Mafia Dons, street punks, cops, or district attorneys. Getting caught up in such silliness is a prescription for a wasted life. --MJ}*** , or you spend the rest of your life >obeying every order from every government twit that comes along. By your >reasoning, neither choice is "voluntary" because there is only a >"continuum" of threat levels between any two choices where some loss of >your time is involved. This then means we should eliminate the word >voluntary from the english language, because any bum who stops you on a >street corner and asks you to "voluntarily" give him a cigarette is >"coercing" you out of some of your time, even if you don't end up giving >him a smoke. ***{Incorrect. You are under no obligation to stop or to respond to a request from a bum, and I don't. On the very rare occasions when I receive a solicitation of that sort (I don't shop at malls that permit soliciting), I simply keep walking. I pay no more attention to bums than I devote to any other potential danger that I might encounter, such as open manholes, speeding automobiles, or barking dogs. There is no coercion from a request for a smoke, any more than there is coercion from an open manhole that you will have to be alert enough to step around. Coercion means one thing and one thing only: the use of force or the threat of force to violate someone's rights. If a bum asks you for a smoke and you nod in the negative and keep walking, there is no coercion. Coercion only arises when force or threats enter the picture. If he says: "Give me a smoke, you sonofabitch, or I'll kick the crap out of you," then that is coercion. Or if he grabs you by the shirt and snatches a pack of cigarettes out of your pocket, that is coercion. But a mere request which you can refuse or ignore is of no more significance than the necessity to maneuver around an inanimate object. On the other hand, if the government says, "Pay us half of your annual income in return for government services, or fight us in court for the next ten years," that *is* coercion. The reason: to drag a person into court for declining to make a purchase is a crime--to wit: barratry, the filing of nuisance charges. Stealing a person's time, in reason, is a crime. (Note that if the bum were to say: "Give me a smoke, or spend the next ten years fighting me in court," that, too, would be coercion.) --Mitchell Jones}*** > > I'll tell you one thing, when a judge or an IRS agent asks you if that >is your signature on whatever document the government "coerced" you into >signing, his next question will be whether anyone held a gun to your >head and forced you to sign it. If you have to answer "no", then game >over, you lose, slave. ***{Yes, of course: that is coercion. And, of course, you lose. So what? If you are coerced, you are coerced. That is not a state of affairs that you can change by fighting the government in government courts, no matter what *magic words* you utter, because eventually, if you persist, the hammer is going to come down on your head. (The necessity to battle the government in government courts is just another example of a double standard which conformists twist their minds into pretzels in order to justify. It is obvious that in a dispute between A and B, the person who arbitrates the dispute ought not to be chosen in a biased manner. Thus it would be absurd if B got to pick the arbiter, and picked his wife. Yet few think anything about it when, in disputes between private citizens and the government, matters must be settled in government courts.) --MJ}*** > >> > >> >> and that they support the tyrants who oppress >> >> us. >> > >> >No, it is the other way around. What the volunteer gets is support and >> >training from the government. When you volunteer, you are NOT being >> >oppressed when you endure the consequences of your volunteering. When >> >you complain about the way government goes about training you, you are >> >biting the hand that feeds you, the same way as if you started whining >> >about how the DI treats you when you join the Marines. >> >> ***{As above, you continue to ignore my extensive arguments demonstrating >> that people who obey laws they regard as unjust are *not* volunteers. >> --MJ}*** >> > > As someone who has not volunteered to give government bums any money, >but instead gave up a few hours or days of my time resisting such >suggestions, I regard those who offer no resistance whatsoever as >willing dupes in the service of government, who assist it in furthering >it's evil agenda, whether they "disagree" with what the government does >with the money they give them or not. You have a problem with that? What >is so difficult for you to understand about such an attitude? ***{What is difficult to understand is why, after I responded to those claims by means of extensive arguments, you have ignored those arguments, and are now repeating the same claims. --MJ}*** > >You have no business saying that if you had been around in Samuel Adams' >day, you would have stood with him. That's crap. ***{Nope, it's fact, and the reason, as I explained in considerable detail, is that his fight was winnable, whereas a revolution today is *not* winnable. Did you respond to those extensive arguments by attempting to prove that a revolution today would work? Of course not. The best you can come up with, apparently, is to say "That's crap." --MJ}*** You would have given >Sam as much moral or armed support as you are giving me now ***{Sam Adams was an authentic hero, a man who recognized that, in his world, freedom could be had by armed rebellion, and who took the actions necessary to incite that rebellion. The conditions which permitted freedom to be won by armed rebellion in 18th century America were twofold: (a) the frontier existed, with its concomitant large population of pioneers--nonconformists who valued freedom--and thus provided fertile ground in which to plant the seeds of rebellion; and (b) the frontier had gotten so far from the centers of political control that the logistics of supplying an expeditionary force to put down a rebellion would be extremely difficult. Those conditions do not exist today, and therefore this is not a situation which can be solved by rebellion. Result: those who advocate rebellion, including you, do not get my support. --MJ}*** , and it is >to the likes of people such as yourself to whom he addressed his >comments, posted earlier. ***{You wish. My guess would be that if Sam Adams could be transported through time and dropped down in present-day America, he would be aghast that this country has deteriorated to the extent that it has, and would instantly recognize the hopelessness of armed rebellion under these conditions. After all, unlike you, he actually had the experience of living among a population of men who believed in freedom, and thus knew what such men were like. As such, he could not fail to recognize in short order that such a population is not present in this country today. --MJ}*** Your excuse that you are doing your part for >the cause of freedom by fantasizing about trips to outer space just >plain bullshit. ***{These are impressive arguments, Jim. "Bullshit." Why didn't I think of that? :-) --MJ}*** > >Go away, we don't need your sorry little fantasies. Go to the next >county and rent a porno or something, it will help you feel a lot better >than talking to me will, I'm sure. ***{Actually, arguing with you is lots of fun! You just need to relax a bit, that's all. Remember: this is a forum where you can test your ideas, and find out which ones you can and cannot defend. But it will do you no good if you refuse to adjust your opinions on the basis of what you learn. --MJ}*** > >Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 02:08:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA28592; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 02:07:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 02:07:33 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 04:03:44 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 Resent-Message-ID: <"9Iwcq.0.g-6.b_VNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32315 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 12:27 PM 12/19/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: > >>Heat loss through the cell wall will depend strongly on the amount of >>turbulence within the fluid because of a stagnate fluid layer at the cell >>wall. In addition, the loss rate will depend on room temperature and on the >>thickness of the Pyrex wall. I suggest stirring is important during this >>heat-loss measurement if conditions during the run are to be duplicated. >>This might explain part of your missing 7% and a bit more, but I doubt you >>will duplicate the Mizuno loss rate because of other differences. > >Thanks...and I agree. I'll post the results of my stirred cooling curve >here soon. I've also requested that Mizuno discuss my latest result with >Ohmori to see if they can come up with any explanation for the huge >difference between my cooling curve and theirs. > >Does anybody have any hypotheses (other than genuine excess heat) to >explain why M&O apparently vaporize water from their cell so much faster >than mine does? ***{Sure: in a message from Mizuno, posted by you a couple of weeks ago, he mentioned that he only gets excess heat when there is lots of EM noise in his cell. When I read that, I took it as strong evidence of a tuned-in artifact: his system is generating spikes which fall into the non-sampling intervals of his power meter, causing him to undermeasure his input power. Under those conditions, he vaporizes water faster than you because he is pulling a lot more power than you. He just doesn't know he is, that's all. What that means is that there is something about his system which is causing his load to produce more spikes than yours. Where it is is hard to say. It may be in his cell, or it may be in his power supply, or perhaps in some other device that he has hooked up to his system. To find it, you may have to duplicate everthing about his lab, right down to the cockroaches! Indeed, that may not even work: maybe there is another lab down the hall from him that is operating a really noisy arc welder. Who the hell knows? What seems very likely is that something is causing his system to produce lots of big spikes, at a frequency which causes undermeasurement of input power to the cell. --MJ}*** > > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 04:20:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA16398; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 04:19:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 04:19:58 -0800 Message-ID: <003401bf4aec$d9d1b600$10441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: 300 volt run Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 05:19:24 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"SSsj41.0.804.kxXNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32316 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, You might want to dig up C.G.(Guy) Suits' work published in the Journal of Applied Physics Vol. 10, September 1939, and before. Suits was fighting the same problem (Random Voltage Variations, R.V.V.) in his discharge experiments with Hydrogen. Earlier, Lotz (1934) did similar work with discharges in water vapor arcs. I think Mitchell Jones has a valid point, in that these (Spark Transmitter Effects) in the discharge can give a false indication of actual power input. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 05:40:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA00930; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 05:36:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 05:36:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 07:36:58 -0600 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <0.20285703.258866ec aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas Malloy Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell Resent-Message-ID: <"pJFMt3.0.SE.53ZNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32317 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Tom Stolper wrote Stanley Meyer was a conman. According to reports, his >investors sued him for fraud and won; and his last words were, "I've been >poisoned!" The same reports said that the coroner found that Meyer suffered >a stroke. Stanley Meyer died as he lived, a bullshitter to the end. > It's a sad commentary on the world, I assume that everyone who claims to have produced over unity energy production, and is looking for venture capital is a conman. Randell has raised a number of red flags however. The test that Scott Little did in '97 which produced no surplus energy and his failure to comment on it was a case in point. His refusal to allow an outside expert with a calorimeter to examine his claims just made things worse. >Tom Malloy continued: or > ><never demonstrated excess energy production.>> > >Mills has demonstrated excess energy over and over again, and it has been >confirmed even by people who considered him a rival. This is the first time that I have heard someone outside of BLP make the claim of excess excess energy. If they have done it, they have my highest regards, and I wish them well. The level of disbelief >re excess heat was so high that he moved on to chemical compounds. But Mills >keeps raising the bar himself: now that he's mentioned a battery, people >will want to see a battery. > Given the amount of money that people have invested in BLP, they are going to want to see something of economic consequence. I don't understand why BLP hasn't released a home power unit like Power Plug. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 05:41:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA01339; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 05:36:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 05:36:29 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 07:37:22 -0600 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991217094040.00798a90 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas Malloy Subject: Re: Global Warming or Cooling Resent-Message-ID: <"4lmTf3.0.nK.T3ZNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32318 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It is good for us, and >good for the environment. "Global warming" is just the latest trendy excuse >employed by airheads to justify ordering the rest of us around. --MJ}*** > I have heard about an alternate model to global warming which says that CO2 is cooling off the atmosphere. If this is true, then why is the artic ice melting? Perhaps it is because the sun's energy output is increasing. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 05:53:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA07253; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 05:52:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 05:52:59 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991220075007.01bc1f24 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 07:50:07 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"CTaVu1.0.Fn1.xIZNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32319 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:15 AM 12/20/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > So you now claim you have achieved equilibrium in hundreds of an >hour? In this particular case, yes. The dynamics of this system are vastly different than those of my water-flow calorimeter. I am copying the calorimetric methods of O&M described in IE#27 p. 34. Please read that article. The only purpose of the frequent observations is to obtain the average electrical input power during the period in which the cell boils. The heat output is calculated just as described in the article. >Nonsense. A plot of both Pout and Pin versus time is less >informative, as we have shown over and over and over in a series >of papers. We disagree on this point...but surely it is a small point. Either plot will show whether or not Pout ever exceeds Pin and by how much. Your method emphasizes the ratio. My method emphasizes the difference. >If you systematically ignore the peaks, than you will probably >fail again as you fail to take into account the optimal operating >point of the system. [This will probably be similar to your >KS-beads experiments and possibly your last Mizuno experiments.] There are no peaks, Mitchell. When the various loss mechanisms are taken into account, my experiments ALL look like calibration runs. The only time Pout ever exceeds Pin is just after I shut off the input power. Is that the "peak" you're interested in? >It seems you are determined to fail again. I'm totally confused by this. What is it about the fact that I continue to try this experiment time and time again, employing every scrap of information that can be gleaned from the original investigators to improve my apparatus, that connotes a determination to FAIL!? Is it because I don't plot the data your favorite way? 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 Dec 20 06:14:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA10529; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 06:14:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 06:14:01 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991220091152.007cb2b0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:11:52 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991220075007.01bc1f24 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lCrGq3.0.Ra2.ecZNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32320 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:50 AM 12/20/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 01:15 AM 12/20/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >> So you now claim you have achieved equilibrium in hundreds of an >>hour? > >In this particular case, yes. The dynamics of this system are vastly >different than those of my water-flow calorimeter. I am copying the >calorimetric methods of O&M described in IE#27 p. 34. Please read that >article. The only purpose of the frequent observations is to obtain the >average electrical input power during the period in which the cell boils. >The heat output is calculated just as described in the article. No. There is no possibility of equilibrium internal to the metals in that time scale. It is irrelevant about your flow calorimetry which shuts off the reactions in any case ( is that what you want? ) =============================== > >>Nonsense. A plot of both Pout and Pin versus time is less >>informative, as we have shown over and over and over in a series >>of papers. > >We disagree on this point...but surely it is a small point. Either plot >will show whether or not Pout ever exceeds Pin and by how much. Your >method emphasizes the ratio. My method emphasizes the difference. No. It is a large point. Your method systematically avoids doing this the correct way based upon the data of many labs. =============================== >>If you systematically ignore the peaks, than you will probably >>fail again as you fail to take into account the optimal operating >>point of the system. [This will probably be similar to your >>KS-beads experiments and possibly your last Mizuno experiments.] > >There are no peaks, Mitchell. When the various loss mechanisms are taken >into account, my experiments ALL look like calibration runs. The only time >Pout ever exceeds Pin is just after I shut off the input power. Is that >the "peak" you're interested in? Nonsense. There are peaks in Mizuno's data (which shuts off with increasing flow calorimetry as we predicted at ICCF-4), and in your own previous data. What you mention in your last two sentences are nonsense, too, as you are aware. =============================== >>It seems you are determined to fail again. > >I'm totally confused by this. What is it about the fact that I continue to >try this experiment time and time again, employing every scrap of >information that can be gleaned from the original investigators to improve >my apparatus, that connotes a determination to FAIL!? Is it because I >don't plot the data your favorite way? IMHO, you are not really confused. You have refused to either use information known in the field, so there is no way that you are " employing every scrap of information that can be gleaned". Even Dr. Mizuno may be helped by the OOP analysis, as have others. Sorry that you remain uninterested. =============================== BTW, you clipped my comments about the car gears, and obviously are not interested in success, since that would apparently hurt the silly ZPE (of infintesimally small magnitude) which your company champions. Why dont you answer my questions about the gears? ;-)X or about why you failed to use the data we sent you to do either the Mizuno work correctly, or the KS-beads correctly. ;-)X As stated: "Do you really start your car in fifth gear, Scott? Or do you really switch back to first gear on the highway?" Best wishes, Scott. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 08:03:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA29770; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:02:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:02:16 -0800 Message-ID: <005201bf4b0b$e870e720$10441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Fw: now THIS is science!! Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:01:43 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"R_YhT1.0.4H7.8CbNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32321 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Kids'n'Science > > THE FOLLOWING ARE ALL QUOTES FROM 11 YEAR OLDS' SCIENCE EXAMS: > > "Water is composed of two gins, Oxygin and Hydrogin. Oxygin is pure > gin.Hydrogin is gin and water." > > "When you breathe, you inspire. When you do not breathe, you expire." > > "H20 is hot water, and CO2 is cold water." > > "To collect fumes of sulphur, hold down a deacon over a flame in a test > tube" > > "When you smell an odourless gas, it is probably carbon monoxide" > > "Nitrogen is not found in Ireland because it is not found in a free > state" > > "Three kinds of blood vessels are arteries, vanes, and caterpillars." > > "Blood flows down one leg and up the other." > > "Respiration is composed of two acts, first inspiration, and then > expectoration." > > "The moon is a planet just like the earth, only it is even deader" > > "Dew is formed on leaves when the sun shines down on them and makes them > perspire." > > "A super-saturated solution is one that holds more than it can hold." > > "Mushrooms always grow in damp places and so they look like umbrellas." > > "The body consists of three parts - the brainium, the borax and the > abominable cavity. The brainium contains the brain, > the borax contains the heart and lungs, and the abominable cavity > contains the bowels, of which there are five - A, E, I, > O and U." > > "Momentum: What you give a person when they are going away." > > "Planet: A body of earth surrounded by sky." > > "Rhubarb: a kind of celery gone bloodshot." > > "Vacuum: A large, empty space where the pope lives." > > "Before giving a blood transfusion, find out if the blood is affirmative > or negative." > > "To remove dust from the eye, pull the eye down over the nose." > > "For a nosebleed: put the nose much lower than the body until the heart > stops." > > "For drowning: climb on top of the person and move up and down to make > Artificial Perspiration." > > "For Fainting: Rub the person's chest or, if a lady, rub her arm above > the hand instead. Or put the head between the > knees of the nearest medical doctor." > > "For dog bite: put the dog away for several days. If he has not > recovered, then kill it." > > "For asphyxiation: Apply artificial respiration until the patient is > dead." > > "To prevent contraception: wear a condominium." > > "For head cold: use an agonizer to spray the nose until it drops in your > throat." > > "To keep milk from turning sour: keep it in the cow." > > "The pistol of a flower is its only protection against insects." > > "The alimentary canal is located in the northern part of Indiana." > > "The skeleton is what is left after the insides have been taken out and > the outsides have been taken off. The purpose of > the skeleton is something to hitch meat to." > > "A permanent set of teeth consists of eight canines, eight cuspids, two > molars,and eight cuspidors." > > "The tides are a fight between the Earth and Moon. All water tends > towards the moon, because there is no water in the > moon, and nature abhors a vacuum. I forget where the sun joins in this > fight." > > "A fossil is an extinct animal. The older it is, the more extinct it > is." > > "Equator: A managerie lion running around the Earth through Africa." > > "Germinate: To become a naturalized German." > > "Litre: A nest of young puppies." > > "Magnet: Something you find crawling all over a dead cat." > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 08:49:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15124; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:47:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:47:31 -0800 Message-ID: <19991220164728.28929.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.251.35] From: "David Dennard" To: jlnlabs egroups.com Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: The Cosmic Triangle Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:47:28 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"jiAdP.0.Ai3.ZsbNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32322 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi folks, If any of you are starting to catch on to the gravity paradigm and want scientific backup, here it is. It is really so simple once you understand how space science was formulated under Einstein's void universe concept and his divergance from the gravity constant. > >One of the things about Whirlpower is that it has predicted space science >discoveries before they happen. In my debates going back a few years I >noted how spinning objects would cause objects to orbit around them like >whirlpools. I didn't know about frame dragging. Never heard of it. But >after I describe itin my debates it came out in the news. First Luigi >Stella's frame dragging studies, then Vera Rubin's spiral galaxy and >"mysterious dark matter" studies. Then PBS announces the news about the >vortex, "is not what we thought it was" and now this Princeton/Berkeley, >"Cosmic Triangle" press release. > >Anyone who has been following this story and this theory must surely be >amazed at this point or you just don't believe your own eyes! I hardly can. >It is almost as if I really need to pinch myself and see if I am dreaming! > >This stuff looks like it is really happening! And I know a few other ways >to make Whirlpower if this concept of tappping the gravitational radiation >of the "Fire of Kundalini" is valid. It does seem as if the science as we >know it is changing and scientists "are going to have to give up some of >their most precious beliefs", as Vera Rubin says it in the ABC News >Transcript I have posted at my website. > >David > >******************************************************************************** > > >Date: May 27, 1999 > >Scientists Conclude Anti-Gravity Force Is Accelerating Expansion of the >Universe > >PRINCETON, N.J. -- After reviewing recent astronomical observations, >Princeton scientists have concluded that the evidence strongly supports the >existence of a mysterious anti-gravity force that is causing the expansion >of the universe to accelerate. > >They presented their argument in a review article that will be published in >the May 28 edition of the journal Science. The researchers are Neta Bahcall >and Jeremiah Ostriker of the Department of Astrophysics and Paul Steinhardt >of the Department of Physics, in collaboration with Saul Perlmutter of >Berkeley National Laboratory. > >Scientists have known since the 1920s that the universe is expanding, and >they discovered in the last year that the expansion is likely to go on >forever. In recent months, however, evidence has emerged to suggest that >not only will the expansion continue, it will accelerate. The only way to >account for such acceleration is the existence of a force to counteract the >gravitational forces that would stabilize or shrink the universe. > >The Princeton scientists have now bolstered that idea by reconciling three >independent sets of data and showing that the data have a surprising degree >of agreement. The data, some of which was generated at Princeton, have been >used to answer three questions: How much matter is in the universe? Is the >expansion rate slowing down or speeding up? And, is the universe flat? The >Princeton scientists used a framework they call the "Cosmic Triangle," to >relate the three questions and show for the first time how they merge into >a unified picture of a universe that is flat, lightweight and expanding at >an accelerating rate. > >"It's a very exciting time because we are starting to reveal the status of >the universe and it tells us something very unexpected," says Bahcall. It >is the acceleration idea that is most surprising, she says. Bahcall >cautions, however, that these conjectures must be confirmed by further >improvements in the data, which are expected to come from a variety of >sources over the next few years. > >The expansion of the universe can be described in terms of a car coasting >along a road as a result of a big push (the Big Bang). The mass of the >universe, with the gravitational pull it exerts, is analogous to the >friction and wind resistance that slow the car. In this analogy, there is >so little resistance (gravitational tug) that the car never stops. The only >way it could accelerate is if it were rolling downhill or if someone were >depressing the gas pedal. The new force in the universe is like the >downhill tug or an engine pushing the car. > >"The evidence is now getting stronger that there really is a force in the >universe that competes with gravity and causes repulsion instead of >attraction," says Ostriker. > >To account for this force, referred to as cosmic dark energy, scientists >recently have revived a concept called the cosmological constant. In their >paper, the Princeton scientists describe this cosmic dark energy as "a >vacuum energy assigned to empty space itself, a form of energy with >negative pressure." Einstein first introduced the cosmological constant in >1917, but later withdrew it, calling it the worst mistake of his life. >Understanding the source and nature of this force poses deep new problems >for physicists. "It's of very profound physical significance," says >Ostriker. > >The work to explain the source of this force already has begun. Steinhardt, >a co-author, recently introduced a possible new force called quintessence, >which may account for the dark energy. > >Another implication of this new understanding of the universe is that it >gives scientists a radically new picture of the future of the universe. It >appears that the dark energy could eventually overwhelm the gravitational >forces of matter. The density of matter in the universe would then become >insignificant, so that the universe would approach an essentially uniform >force field of dark energy. The researchers conclude that understanding >dark energy, and hence the future of the universe, will be "one of the >grand challenges of the millennium to come." > >***** > >Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory > >May 25, 1999 > >Dark Energy Fills The Cosmos > >BERKELEY, CA -- In an article titled "The Cosmic Triangle: Revealing the >State of the Universe," which appears in the May 28, 1999, issue of the >journal Science, a group of cosmologists and physicists from Princeton >found in them. These measurements suggest that the expansion of the >universe is accelerating. > >Curvature is estimated from measurements of the anisotropy (temperature >fluctuation) of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), a remnant >of the Big Bang. Although uncertainty is large, current results suggest a >flat universe. > >The Cosmic Triangle eliminates some popular models, such as a high-density >universe that is slowing down and will eventually recollapse, as well as a >nearly empty universe with no dark energy and low mass. While the evidence >from galactic clusters shows that mass density is low, supernova evidence >for acceleration shows that dark energy must be abundant. > >"These two legs of the Cosmic Triangle agree with the evidence from the CMB >that the universe is flat," Perlmutter says, adding that "this is a >remarkable agreement for these early days of empirical cosmology." > >Thus the Cosmic Triangle suggests that the standard inflationary scenario >is on the right track: one of its key predictions is a flat universe. > >Various types of dark energy have been proposed, including a cosmic field >associated with inflation; a different, low-energy field dubbed >"quintessence"; and the cosmological constant, or vacuum energy of empty >space. Unlike Einstein's famous fudge factor, the cosmological constant in >its present incarnation doesn't delicately (and artificially) balance >gravity in order to maintain a static universe; instead, it has "negative >pressure" that causes expansion to accelerate. > >"The term Cosmic Triangle sounds kind of New Agey," says Perlmutter, "but >it's a good way to portray the quantities in these comparisons, and it's >fun for people who like to plot the possibilities" -- an evolving task >that, among other choices, will require finding an answer to "the most >provocative and profound" issue of all, the nature of cosmic dark energy. > >The Berkeley Lab is a U.S. Department of Energy national laboratory located >in Berkeley, California. It conducts unclassified scientific research and >is managed by the University of California. Visit our website at >http://www.lbl.gov . > > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 11:58:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26661; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:56:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:56:40 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1266402847==_ma============" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991217094040.00798a90 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:53:51 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Global Warming or Cooling Resent-Message-ID: <"d-u1T1.0.TW6.udeNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32323 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --============_-1266402847==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > It is good for us, and >>good for the environment. "Global warming" is just the latest trendy excuse >>employed by airheads to justify ordering the rest of us around. --MJ}*** >> >I have heard about an alternate model to global warming which says that CO2 >is cooling off the atmosphere. If this is true, then why is the artic ice >melting? Perhaps it is because the sun's energy output is increasing. ***{Clang! Folks, we have a winner! Give this man 10,000 solid gold attaboys! Seriously: the earth has been in a warming cycle, and the ice sheets have been retreating, since the last ice age. For details, familiarize yourself with the Milankovich theory. Within that long term warming, however, there are shorter term fluctuations about the trendline. For example, temperatures several thousand years ago were a couple of degrees C *above* recent temperatures. Here is a chart which puts the recent warming trend into perspective: Temp. in Degrees C. 26 |- | * 25 |- * * | * * * * 24 |- * * * * * | * * * * * * * 23 |-------*------ *--****- *-*-------*-*---**-*-*---* | * * * * * * * * 22 |- * * * | 21 |- | 20 |-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|------| | 1000 BC 500 BC 0 +1000. +2000 [Source: Keigwin; Science, Vol. 274, 29 Nov. '96, pg. 1507.] The above chart shows sea surface temperatures as determined by boreholes in the bottom of the Sargasso Sea, from 1000 B.C. to the present. What it indicates is that during this period the world has been in the midst of a cooling trend of *at least* 3000 years duration, and that the warming trend of the last few hundred years must be placed within that larger context. (And, within the even larger context, the world has been warming since the last ice age.) Plots are very rough and the scale varies due to the limitations of ASCII charting. Moreover, this chart will not be viewable at all unless you convert it over to a fixed-length font such as Courier. Note that the temp. in 1000 B.C. was about 25.3 degrees C. The mean for the entire 3,000 year period is at about 23 degrees C. The most recent temperatures (far right) are at about 22.8 degrees C, which means: the most recent and much ballyhooed "global warming" is a trivial short term rise in the recent longer-term cooling trend, and has not quite made it back to the mean of that long term trend. Bottom line: "global warming" is just the latest trendy excuse to "solve problems" by taking people's rights away, nothing more and nothing less. If anyone is interested in further information from me on this subject, however, I should note that I have already argued this issue until I am blue in the face, and am not interested in going into it again here. But do not despair: you should be able to find roughly a thousand posts from me, covering every aspect of this subject, in the archives of groups such as sci.engr, sci.environment, sci.energy, and sci.physics.fusion. Have fun! --Mitchell Jones - --============_-1266402847==_ma============ Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii" > It is good for us, and >>good for the environment. "Global warming" is just the latest trendy excuse >>employed by airheads to justify ordering the rest of us around. --MJ}*** >> >I have heard about an alternate model to global warming which says that CO2 >is cooling off the atmosphere. If this is true, then why is the artic ice >melting? Perhaps it is because the sun's energy output is increasing. ***{Clang! Folks, we have a winner! Give this man 10,000 solid gold attaboys! Seriously: the earth has been in a warming cycle, and the ice sheets have been retreating, since the last ice age. For details, familiarize yourself with the Milankovich theory. Within that long term warming, however, there are shorter term fluctuations about the trendline. For example, temperatures several thousand years ago were a couple of degrees C *above* recent temperatures. Here is a chart which puts the recent warming trend into perspective: Temp. in Degrees C. 26 |- | * 25 |- * * | * * * * 24 |- * * * * * | * * * * * * * 23 |-------*------ *--****- *-*-------*-*---**-*-*---* | * * * * * * * * 22 |- * * * | 21 |- | 20 |-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|------| | 1000 BC 500 BC 0 +1000. +2000 [Source: Keigwin; Science, Vol. 274, 29 Nov. '96, pg. 1507.] The above chart shows sea surface temperatures as determined by boreholes in the bottom of the Sargasso Sea, from 1000 B.C. to the present. What it indicates is that during this period the world has been in the midst of a cooling trend of *at least* 3000 years duration, and that the warming trend of the last few hundred years must be placed within that larger context. (And, within the even larger context, the world has been warming since the last ice age.) Plots are very rough and the scale varies due to the limitations of ASCII charting. Moreover, this chart will not be viewable at all unless you convert it over to a fixed-length font such as Courier. Note that the temp. in 1000 B.C. was about 25.3 degrees C. The mean for the entire 3,000 year period is at about 23 degrees C. The most recent temperatures (far right) are at about 22.8 degrees C, which means: the most recent and much ballyhooed "global warming" is a trivial short term rise in the recent longer-term cooling trend, and has not quite made it back to the mean of that long term trend. Bottom line: "global warming" is just the latest trendy excuse to "solve problems" by taking people's rights away, nothing more and nothing less. If anyone is interested in further information from me on this subject, however, I should note that I have already argued this issue until I am blue in the face, and am not interested in going into it again here. But do not despair: you should be able to find roughly a thousand posts from me, covering every aspect of this subject, in the archives of groups such as sci.engr, sci.environment, sci.energy, and sci.physics.fusion. Have fun! --Mitchell Jones - --============_-1266402847==_ma============-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 13:00:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA20820; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:58:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:58:44 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:58:41 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "Hydrinos," or "Protoneutrons?" In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"efDAU3.0.A55.4YfNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32324 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Take a look at an elementary quantum mechanics text in the section on the Hydrogen atom. The electron in a 1S state has a large probability of being at a radius of 0, ie. IN the nucleus. Hank On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:44:08 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote, re Mills: > > > ><<...I would suggest that if he is right about "hydrinos," then he is a > >genius of > >the first magnitude, and is entitled to be proud of what he has done.>> > > > >Yes. > > > >MJ continued: > > > >< >millions of dollars in investment capital and oversee a company with > >hundreds of employees.>> > > > >Just dozens of employees so far. According to the BLP website, the plan is > >to raise that number to about 125 over the next two years. > > > >So, Mitchell, what do you think of Mills' work? > > > >Tom Stolper > > ***{Well, my main area of doubt concerning the Mills' theory has to do with > his claim that there are stable orbits of hydrogen below the n = 1 level. > In his view, hydrogen orbits are not merely stable when n is an integer, > but also when n = 1/m and m is an integer. In my view, the electron can > exist between the n = 1 level and the nucleus, when the conditions are > right--i.e., when the constraints of a solid-state lattice do not provide > enough space for the electron to orbit at the n = 1 level--but all orbits > in that region are wildly unstable, and as soon as space constraints are > lifted, one of the Bohr orbits will quickly be occupied. Thus the > difference between his view and mine boils down to a disagreement about > stability: he claims the classical orbits between n = 1 and the nucleus > contain some stable orbits, while I consider all of those orbits to be > extremely unstable. He dubs the various allegedly stable atomic variants > "hydrinos." I, on the other hand, dub the unstable variant where the > electron is at grazing altitude above a 1H1 nucleus to be a "protoneutron," > and dub the variant where the electron is at grazing altitude above a 1H2 > nucleus to be a "deuteroneutron." Thus we both dispute the "quantum > mechanical" claim that the electron cannot exist between the n = 1 level > and the nucleus, but disagree about the stability of those orbits. My main > reason for considering such orbits to be unstable is the obvious one: if > some of them were stable, we would be up to our eyeballs in "hydrinos", and > could not have failed to notice. The universe, after all, is 75% hydrogen. > --Mitchell Jones}*** > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 13:08:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25956; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:07:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:07:13 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991220150411.01bc21e4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:04:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Mizuno300 - cooling curves Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"B9WzL.0.RL6.1gfNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32326 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Today I ran several cooling curves, including one in a quartz beaker (my other work has been in a Pyrex (borosilicate) vessel). Here are the results: Previous unstirred Pyrex beaker 23.1 watts Today's unstirred Pyrex beaker 24.8 watts Today's stirred Pyrex beaker 25.3 watts Today's stirred quartz beaker 28.4 watts The room temp during the previous run was 20C. Today it was 17C. That explains about half the difference between the two unstirred results. The increase with the quartz is not too surprising. Quartz has about 40% greater thermal conductivity than borosilicate glass. Now I am more puzzled than ever about Ohmori's 99 watt cooling rate . It seems impossible in view of the above. I have communicated these results to Mizuno and await his comments. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 13:09:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25545; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:06:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:06:49 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:11:50 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-reply-to: <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"RMIUc1.0.3F6.fffNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32325 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:15 AM 12/20/99 -0500, you wrote: > > It seems you are determined to fail again. Now why would that be? > > You were uninterested in the peak operating points of any of the >above experiments unfortunately. > Mitchell, why don't you just invite Scott over to your lab with his calorimeter and show him how to succeed? --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 13:16:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA31135; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:14:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:14:48 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991220161440.007a07b0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:14:40 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991220091152.007cb2b0 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991220075007.01bc1f24 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"oLdAq.0.Pc7.8nfNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32327 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Nonsense. There are peaks in Mizuno's data (which shuts off with >increasing flow calorimetry as we predicted at ICCF-4), and in >your own previous data. No, it doesn't. It works fine with flow calorimetry. I am not sure what "increasing flow calorimetry" means, but anyway, it shows excess heat in Mizuno's lab and at KRI, but not in Little's lab, alas. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 13:26:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14415; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:24:14 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:24:14 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:20:57 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> References: <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"W73qp3.0.5X3.yvfNu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32328 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lynn Kurtz wrote: >Mitchell, why don't you just invite Scott over to your lab with his >calorimeter and show him how to succeed? I don't suppose this comment is serious . . . I doubt Swartz has performed this particular experiment, and as far as I know he never shows people how to do things. However, in real life, Scott Little could go over to visit Mizuno after the New Year holiday, and at this point I think it would be a good idea. To put in a bad light, we have run out of ideas. (I have, anyway.) In a good light, Scott is now quite familiar with the experiment and ready to watch with educated eyes. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 13:43:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA08623; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:41:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:41:30 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:36:56 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 Resent-Message-ID: <"0-EsH.0.f62.9AgNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32329 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 05:57 PM 12/19/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>***{Um, 100 times less, actually. > >Right...I can slip a decimal point, too! > >>(1) Since the cell was running in the non-wetting phase.... >>(2) If your idea is to count the calories given off by the cooling of >steam... > > >Look at it more broadly. The cell converts liquid water into H2 and O2. >It does not matter how. Therefore the correct heat of formation to use is >the heat released when H2 and O2 recombine to form liquid water (68,315 >calories per mole of H2O formed). ***{Are you sure that you aren't looking at this a bit too broadly? :-) The heat of combustion is the heat that is released when the hydrogen is burned. It is thus a form of chemical potential energy. When you invest energy, via the current you pass through the cell, some of that energy is stored in the hydrogen which is produced when water molecules are split, and, based on measurement, the amount of that energy--the heat of combustion of hydrogen--is 29150 small calories per gram of hydrogen burned. If you want to use the higher number that you cited--i.e., 34,158 cal/gm--don't you think you should explain in some detail the nature of the process which releases the additional 5008 cal/gm? After all, the only source you mentioned was the cooling of steam back to ambient, and, as I noted previously, if the steam you have in mind is that which results from burning the hydrogen, its energy was supplied from the 29150 cal/gm, and thus has already been counted. And if the source of the extra 5008 cal/gm is the steam cloak which surrounds the cathode, then, as I noted previously, that steam rises into the headspace above the cell and elevates the temperature there. Hence that source of heat is counted when you measure your cooling curve. If, therefore, you allege that the additional 5008 cal/gm comes from some third source, not yet mentioned, don't you think you should specifically identify it for us? (Remember: we are yahoos out here, Scott. You need to move us up to speed in small steps. :-) --MJ}*** > >BTW, if you take 68,315 calories and divide by Loschmidt's number to get >the energy per H2O molecule and then divide by 2e where e is the electronic >charge, you will get 1.48 volts, which is the well-known dissociation >voltage of water. >We use 2e because it takes 2 electrons moving thru the cell to dissociate >one water molecule. When a normal electrolysis cell is running, you can >multiply the cell current by 1.48 volts to determine the power equivalent >(in watts) of the H2 and O2 being formed. ***{This is fine and dandy, but I am still wondering where the extra 5008 cal/gm comes from. --MJ}*** > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 14:08:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA19098; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:07:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:07:08 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:03:19 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: "Hydrinos," or "Protoneutrons?" Resent-Message-ID: <"hESp4.0.Kg4.BYgNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32330 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Take a look at an elementary quantum mechanics text in the >section on the Hydrogen atom. The electron in a 1S state has a large >probability of being at a radius of 0, ie. IN the nucleus. ***{Two points: (1) When we collect data about the microcosm, we are dealing with things so incomprehensibly tiny that our instruments themselves tend to perturb the things being measured. Result: huge numbers of the resulting data points are simply errors. In the case of data purporting to measure the position of a ground state electron vis-a-vis the hydrogen nucleus, the average location of those erroneous data points is, predictably, going to be at the center of the nucleus. That does not, however, mean the electron is *ever* there: it may simply be the predictable result of instrumental error. (2) Even if we assume that the electron *is* sometimes in the center of the nucleus, we are not focusing our minds on the proper questions. Remember: the hydrogen electron in the ground state makes 100 quadrillion revolutions per second around the nucleus. If we make the analogy to the Earth orbiting the sun, that would equate to a time span of 100 quadrillion years. Speaking from such a perspective, we could then say that the Earth spends a significant portion of its time inside the sun, because on merely a scale of billions of years, the sun will swell up into a red supergiant, and swallow the Earth. Note, however, that if we talk in that way, we jettison virtually the entirety of the subject matter that is under discussion. The reason: we are not interested in a conception of "Earth" that is so broadly defined that it becomes an indeterminate blur. We are interested, instead, in developing a specific picture of its nature and of its relationships to other specific bodies near it--e.g., the sun. And, if we stop and think about it, that ought to be the goal of our investigations of the electron, as well. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Hank From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 14:26:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26887; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:25:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:25:53 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991220172236.007d05c0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:22:36 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991220161440.007a07b0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991220091152.007cb2b0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991220075007.01bc1f24 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Ifdyj3.0.0a6.npgNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32331 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:14 PM 12/20/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >> Nonsense. There are peaks in Mizuno's data (which shuts off with >>increasing flow calorimetry as we predicted at ICCF-4), and in >>your own previous data. > >No, it doesn't. It works fine with flow calorimetry. Wrong, Jed. The data demonstrates that flow calorimetry ruins the excess heat. Try reading JNE this month, Jed, or any of several papers. But then if you did, you would give up on vertical flow calorimetry at low flow rates, too. ;-) X ROTFLOL ======================================= >I am not sure what >"increasing flow calorimetry" means, but anyway, it shows excess heat in >Mizuno's lab and at KRI, but not in Little's lab, alas. > >- Jed It means increasing the flow rate of the means to remove the heat from the system. And the data of which I speak is from Mizuno. I would say hope that helps, but it is doubtful you will read the paper, since you have avoided the dozens before it. ;-) X Have a good day. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 14:27:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA27108; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:26:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:26:18 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:23:09 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> References: <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"BD7CP2.0.Qd6.9qgNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32332 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:20 PM 12/20/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Lynn Kurtz wrote: > >>Mitchell, why don't you just invite Scott over to your lab with his >>calorimeter and show him how to succeed? > >I don't suppose this comment is serious . . . > >I doubt Swartz has performed this particular experiment, and as far as I >know he never shows people how to do things. Goofy, and inaccurate, comment; as usual Jed. Your statement shows that you remain one lettuce slice short of a Big Mac. 1) There is our literature out there, and we have shown scientists our running equipment. 2) You are clueless Jed about what I, and we, do. Thanks for the negative comment (again), and have a good day. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 14:34:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA30825; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:33:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:33:10 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991220163016.01bbfbf0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:30:16 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"DNYuI.0.YX7.bwgNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32333 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:36 PM 12/20/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >and, based on measurement, the amount of that energy--the heat of >combustion of hydrogen--is 29150 small calories per gram of hydrogen >burned. Your number is apparently a little off. From the 70th edition of the Hanbook of Chemistry and Physics, its about 28,898 per gram of H burned or 57,796 calories per mole of H2O formed and left in the gaseous state at 25C. The other number, 34,158 cal/gm came from 68,315 calories per mole of H2O formed and left in the liquid state at 25C. The difference is 10,519 calories per mole (i.e. about 5259 calories per gram of H), which, when divided by 18, gives 584 calories per gram of H2O, which matches the heat of vaporization at 25C (you need to consult the Steam Tables to find this one). In other words, the difference between the two numbers is simply the heat released when the water vapor condenses to liquid water. 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 Dec 20 14:57:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA06997; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:56:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:56:16 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:55:56 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:56:01 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:47:12 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: Global Warming or Cooling In-reply-to: To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:55:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2345ZYGBPM4JU X400-MTS-identifier: [;65557102219991/4339410 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"yjgCZ2.0.Aj1.GGhNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32334 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell, Thanks for the chart, do you know where I can find one that goes back much further. I myself don't believe in global warming, but haven't had time to study it in depth. The main points that decided it for me was: 1. I had heard from several sources about our coming off of a mini iceage, so that it would be normal for us to still be warming a little. 2. Better than 95% of the so called green house gases are naturally occurring, our piddly 5% isn't going to tip the scales. 3. The vast majority of climatologists disagree with the global warming crowd. 4. Atmospheric measurements show that there is more CO2 coming into the USA from off the west coast then is leaving our east coast, showing that trees and plants are capable of using up any excess CO2. 5. The global warming crowd could only point to a 1 degree increase in temperatures. As weak as it sounded, when you consider that if they had chosen a sample range a few years earlier or later, it would have shown a decrease in temperature not an increase. Clearly someone was rigging the test to promote an agenda. The one nagging thing that bothered me was about the increased ice cap melting even with only the claimed 1 degree increase. Last week I was watching this documentary about a theory that the creation of the Himalayan mountain range had caused the last major ice age. The theory was that all this newly exposed rock was absorbing massive amounts of CO2. Which removed the stabilizing greenhouse effect thus causing the ice age. They went back and forth with out giving a clear conclusion about the theory. However, one point brought up was that it was common that there be NO ice at the poles between the major ice ages. In fact we are past due to start into another ice age. The normal interglacial period is between 10,000 - 11,500 years. Perhaps that little ice age was the precurser for the real thing. On the other hand perhaps our so called global warming is a good thing, maybe our little ice age was supposed to be the real thing, and our growing CO2 production saved us. :^) Has anyone read "Not by Fire but by Ice" by Robert W. Felix Bill webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com >Seriously: the earth has been in a warming cycle, and the ice sheets have >been retreating, since the last ice age. For details, familiarize yourself >with the Milankovich theory. Within that long term warming, however, there >are shorter term fluctuations about the trendline. For example, >temperatures several thousand years ago were a couple of degrees C *above* >recent temperatures. Here is a chart which puts the recent warming trend >into perspective: > Temp. in >Degrees C. >26 |- > | * >25 |- * * > | * * * * >24 |- * * * * * > | * * * * * * * >23 |-------*------ *--****- *-*-------*-*---**-*-*---* > | * * * * * * * * >22 |- * * * > | >21 |- > | >20 |-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|------| > | >1000 BC 500 BC 0 +1000. +2000 >[Source: Keigwin; Science, Vol. 274, 29 Nov. '96, pg. 1507.] >The above chart shows sea surface temperatures as determined by boreholes >in the bottom of the Sargasso Sea, from 1000 B.C. to the present. What it >indicates is that during this period the world has been in the midst of a >cooling trend of *at least* 3000 years duration, and that the warming >trend of the last few hundred years must be placed within that larger >context. (And, within the even larger context, the world has been warming >since the last ice age.) Plots are very rough and the scale varies due to >the limitations of ASCII charting. Moreover, this chart will not be >viewable at all unless you convert it over to a fixed-length font such as >Courier. Note that the temp. in 1000 B.C. was about 25.3 degrees C. The >mean for the entire 3,000 year period is at about 23 degrees C. The most >recent temperatures (far right) are at about 22.8 degrees C, which means: >the most recent and much ballyhooed "global warming" is a trivial short >term rise in the recent longer-term cooling trend, and has not quite made >it back to the mean of that long term trend. Bottom line: "global warming" >is just the latest trendy excuse to "solve problems" by taking people's >rights away, nothing more and nothing less. If anyone is interested in >further information from me on this subject, however, I should note that I >have already argued this issue until I am blue in the face, and am not >interested in going into it again here. But do not despair: you should be >able to find roughly a thousand posts from me, covering every aspect of >this subject, in the archives of groups such as sci.engr, sci.environment, >sci.energy, and sci.physics.fusion. Have fun! >--Mitchell Jones From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 15:45:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA22168; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:43:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:43:25 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:46:33 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-reply-to: <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912202343.QAA07439 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"ORLsp1.0.DQ5.SyhNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32335 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:23 PM 12/20/99 -0500, you wrote: > > >At 04:20 PM 12/20/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >>Lynn Kurtz wrote: >> >>>Mitchell, why don't you just invite Scott over to your lab with his >>>calorimeter and show him how to succeed? >> >>I don't suppose this comment is serious . . . >> >>I doubt Swartz has performed this particular experiment, and as far as I >>know he never shows people how to do things. > > > Goofy, and inaccurate, comment; as usual Jed. Your >statement shows that you remain one lettuce slice >short of a Big Mac. > Well, my question is serious and I haven't seen any response to it from Mitchell. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 15:59:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA27304; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:58:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:58:25 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 19:03:11 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991220172236.007d05c0 world.std.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"0oRUm2.0.Yg6.WAiNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32336 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ROTFLOL Cool.... what is it? I,m back J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 16:04:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA29764; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:03:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:03:33 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:03:29 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Gooey ceramic In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19991217003604.00a00850 mail.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"25fMS1.0.-G7.KFiNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32337 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Were you monitoring radiation with when all this happened? Did you get anything other then thermal illumination? Hank On Fri, 17 Dec 1999, Scott Little wrote: > At 04:48 PM 12/16/99 -0500, Ed Wall wrote: > > >Those pictures do not reveal if any W melted. If you suspect that might > >have happened, > >please get some light microscope photos. > > I've sent the think to a friend with an SEM for examination. > > >Ken Rauen and I suspect that the long run gradually melted the ceramic > piece and > >softened it, but left it intact. The pressure from the superheated steam > pushed >it away and above the W. When you killed power, it settled onto > the hot cathode >and bonded. At the same time, cooler water was able to > get close to the molten >ceramic, it solidified and cracked. Does that > match your observations? > > Maybe... Something happened that made the cell resistance drop suddenly > after I'd been at 250 volts for 5-6 minutes. That is very unusual for this > experiment. Usually the cell resistance steadily increases during the run > as the W cathode erodes away (reducing its surface area). It could be that > the ceramic section cracked, slid down and somehow bonded to the W and thus > the ceramic pieces became incandescent. Many ceramics, when incandescent, > are decent conductors of electricity (e.g. the Nerst Glower) so the > attached ceramic pieces then suddenly increased the area of the cathode, > which would explain the sudden reduction in cell resistance. It's just a > theory... > > Upon close inspection, I see no sign of melting in the attached ceramic > pieces. They are bonded to the remains of the heavily etched W sheet with > a _glassy_ gray material. It doesn't look all that fantastic until you > consider what was going on when it formed. The turbulence in the cell > alone should have flung the cracked ceramic pieces all around the cell. > Instead they just "gravitated" onto the W and the glassy stuff somehow grew > around them...at least that's what it looks like. > > > > > > Scott Little > EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 > 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) > little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 19:45:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA06582; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 19:39:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 19:39:59 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991220214031.006b0c6c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 21:40:31 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Gooey ceramic In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.5.32.19991217003604.00a00850 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"UHHnS2.0.jc1.EQlNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32338 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:03 PM 12/20/99 -0800, you wrote: >Scott > Were you monitoring radiation with when all this happened? Did you >get anything other then thermal illumination? The only radiation "dosimeter" operating in the room was me...and I still feel fine. I have in the past placed a 2" NaI scintillator (X & gamma detector) next to this experiment (a nearly identical embodiment) and observed no detectable increase above background when the incandescence was on. I haven't tried my fast neutron detector yet... Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 20:38:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA23515; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 20:37:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 20:37:31 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991220163016.01bbfbf0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 22:30:07 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 Resent-Message-ID: <"aby9M.0.Ll5.AGmNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32339 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 03:36 PM 12/20/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>and, based on measurement, the amount of that energy--the heat of >>combustion of hydrogen--is 29150 small calories per gram of hydrogen >>burned. > >Your number is apparently a little off. ***{No surprise. I took my number from the edition that I like best, the 40th. (I have half a dozen of the things, but the later editions are so massive I don't use them unless extreme accuracy is important or the quantity I need isn't in the older, smaller editions. As you probably know, the earlier editions were printed on 5x7" onion skin pages, and were much smaller and lighter than the newer ones. I liked them much better, and wish they would return to the original format, even if they had to go over to two volumes to do it.) --Mitchell Jones}*** >From the 70th edition of the >Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, its about 28,898 per gram of H burned or >57,796 calories per mole of H2O formed and left in the gaseous state at 25C. ***{Yes. For the benefit of lurkers, a "mole" is the molecular weight of a substance expressed in grams. The molecular weight of water (H2O) is the weight of two atoms of hydrogen plus the weight of one atom of oxygen--that is: 2(1) + 16 = 18. Thus there will be 2 grams of hydrogen in a mole of water. Since each of those grams of hydrogen has a heat of combustion of 28,898 cal/gram, we get 2(28898) = 57796 cal/mole of H2O formed. --MJ}*** > >The other number, 34,158 cal/gm came from 68,315 calories per mole of H2O >formed and left in the liquid state at 25C. > >The difference is 10,519 calories per mole (i.e. about 5259 calories per >gram of H), which, when divided by 18, gives 584 calories per gram of H2O, >which matches the heat of vaporization at 25C (you need to consult the >Steam Tables to find this one). > >In other words, the difference between the two numbers is simply the heat >released when the water vapor condenses to liquid water. ***{Here, in exact detail, is my view of the sequence of events, *including* the heat of vaporization this time, and using your number for heat of combustion: (1) The water is raised from room temperature (say 25 deg C) to 100 deg C, absorbing about 75 cal/gm in the process. (2) When it vaporizes and is incorporated into the steam cloak, it absorbs an additional 538.7 cal/gm. (3) Once in the steam cloak, it approaches the cathode surface, and its temperature quickly rises to whatever the temperature the cloak has, say 1000 deg C, near that surface. When that temperature increase occurs, it absorbs roughly another 900 cal/gm. (4) At some point while in contact with the surface, the hydrogen and oxygen are split apart, imparting chemical potential energy of 28,898 cal/gm to the resulting hydrogen gas. (5) The resulting hydrogen and oxygen rise up into the headspace at the top of the cell. Once there, they cool back down to the headspace temperature of, say, 100 deg. C, giving back the 900 cal/gm which they received in step (3). (6) After the cell is turned off, the mixture of hydrogen and oxygen in the headspace cools back down to room temperature, giving back the 75 cal/gm that they received in step (1). (7) The experiment is shut down and the lid is popped off of the cell, allowing the hydrogen and oxygen that remain there to escape into the ambient air. The question is, how many calories per gram did they carry away with them? Going back through the 7 steps listed above, we see that the energy imparted in step (1) was returned in step (6), and that the energy imparted in step (3) was returned in step (5). However, the energy imparted in steps (2) and (4) was never returned, so the amount of heat carried away can be calculated by adding the value imparted in step (2) to the value imparted in step (4). Now, the heat of combustion is per gram *of hydrogen burned*, whereas the specific heat is per gram *of water produced*, so, converting the specific heat to apply per gram of hydrogen burned, we get: (538.7)(18)/2 = 4848.3 cal/gm. Thus we have 4843.3 + 28,898 = 33741.3 cal/gm--which means that the number which you used was pretty damn close. Therefore: point taken. The question is, where did I go off track? The answer: I noted that the roughly 500 cal/gm heat of vaporization was fairly trivial relative to the roughly 29,000 cal/gm heat of combustion--less than 2%--so I elected to ignore it. That was a mistake, because I was comparing apples to oranges. The heat of vaporization, as noted above, is per gram of hydrogen produced, whereas the heat of combustion is per gram of hydrogen burned. When the former number is converted so that it is commensurate with the latter, it becomes significant: 4848.3 is 16.7% of 28,898! Very interesting! --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > >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 Dec 20 20:42:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA24966; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 20:41:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 20:41:30 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:46:18 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: melted ceramic Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"1NUS41.0._56.wJmNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32340 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear vo., Who was doing what when there was melted ceramic? Please. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 21:50:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA07554; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 21:49:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 21:49:25 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Angular protons Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:49:16 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <725u5s4rlgjvklo7tlr7hepj2efh06np0f 4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 VAA07525 Resent-Message-ID: <"DiC8J3.0.yr1.aJnNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32341 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: When the protons of the solar wind enter the Earth's magnetic field they start to spiral around, acquiring angular momentum. Since this is a conserved quantity, they must get it from somewhere. Does it come from the Earth itself? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 23:20:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA25081; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:19:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:19:46 -0800 Message-ID: <385F3138.2CC5 ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:50:16 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4N09P1.0.g76.HeoNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32342 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > > >> ***{Rubbish. You claim to believe that you can just go around openly > >> breaking laws you consider to be unjust without the hammer of the state > >> eventually coming down on your head, but I challenged you to prove your > >> theory by means of a simple experimental test, months ago, and you came up > >> with lame excuses and declined. Result: you revealed that you do not really > >> believe what you are saying, just as many supposed inventors of "over > >> unity" devices reveal the same thing when they decline similar, reasonable > >> tests. For the record, in case you have forgotten, here is the test I > >> suggested: get yourself a kilo of smack, walk into your local sheriff's > >> office, slam it down on his desk, and inform him that you have a perfect > >> right as a free man to possess with the intent to distribute, and that you > >> do in fact so intend. Do that and if, when they try to lock you up and > >> throw away the key, you are able to get the charges dropped by reciting the > >> words of your mystical "common law" mantra, then I will begin to take you > >> seriously. Until then, I will view you as just another fake messiah who > >> promises salvation and delivers disaster. --MJ}*** > > > >You get me the smack Mitchell, and your on. I have better things to do > >with my money. > > ***{If money is a problem, then don't do a kilo. You don't get it. I want a kilo for doing this for you. Yeah, I'll slap enough of that down to put me in felony territory. Nevertheless I want a kilo or it's cash equivalent. It appears to me that perhaps you and your mob buddies want me to figure out how to beat a drug rap for y'all. I can do it but it's gonna cost you. I figure I'll be in jail three days before what I have in mind works. As I told you before when you brought this up, my profession is electronics, not drugs, therefore there is no interest for me in doing this whatsoever. If you and your friends want to see how it's it done then make it worth my while. < Do maybe an ounce--just > enough to put you into felony territory. Take that amount, march into the > sheriff's office, slap it down on his desk, and tell him that as a free man > you have the right to possess it with the intent to sell, and that you do > so intend. Then get back to me, if you can. (I doubt that you will have > internet access from the county lockup. :-) --MJ}*** > Like I said, I'll be in the slammer three days, tops, guaranteed. If it goes over that, whatever overtime is involved will be my problem. My schedule right now would put this proposed op sometime in late January. Now, about my fee. I figure a kilo of really good smack is worth wholesale maybe $30 K bucks, so I want half of that down and half when I get out and give you and your friends complete transcripts of all my court hearings. > > >> > > > > ***{I don't know how "seriously" I expect that one of the free energy > devices will turn out to be real. All I can say is (a) that I have a theory > of physics which opens my mind to such possibilities, (b) that the search > is highly educational and good clean fun, and (c) that if such a device is > found, the result will be the restoration of the frontier and, as a > consequence, the defeat of the enemies of human freedom. With that kind of > benefit package, it is a job that only a fool would pass up! --MJ}*** > > > I just don't see how it follows that you will be any more rid of the "enemies of human freedom" by working up some way to colonize some other planet. If you did come up with the necessary technology to do so, what is there to stop some big corporation from just stealing it from you and your crew of misfits and exploiting it for the sake of greed just like has always occurred in the past, when a really revolutionary technology gets invented? > >> > > >> >> that they > >> >> "volunteer" to be oppressed, > >> > > >> >Once one volunteers, it is not then a matter of oppression, no more than > >> >one is being "oppressed" when joining the Marine Corps and then > >> >submitting to the commands of the drill instructor. You may "feel" > >> >"oppressed" by the drill instructor, but when you volunteered, you > >> >surely knew you would have to endure boot camp and perhaps be sent off > >> >to engage in combat thereafter. The Marine Corps does not "oppress" it's > >> >recruits, it trains and supports them. When one volunteers to join up, > >> >one does so for the reason that one thinks such training and support is > >> >good for them, and that the deal offered by the recruiter is a good one. > >> > >> ***{Non responsive. I stated extensive arguments demonstrating that those > >> who obey laws which they regard as unjust are *not* volunteers. You > >> continue to ignore those arguments. --MJ}*** > >> > > > >Alright. Do the math, Mitchell. Either you spend twenty hours worth of > >time getting a little self respect > > ***{Real self-respect does not come from impressing others, but from what > one produces--that is, what one creates, invents, discovers, or explains. > As such, you will not get it by winning put-down contests with Mafia Dons, > street punks, cops, or district attorneys. Getting caught up in such > silliness is a prescription for a wasted life. --MJ}*** As I've pointed out repeatedly, I have spent more time arguing with you than I have spent typing up all of the court documents I've ever needed, ever. 20 hours court time. 4 days total jail time. In terms of the 50 or so years I've been around on this planet, this is nothing. As far as the definition of self respect, if I were you I would ask one of your mob buddies what this means, because you do not have a clue. Create, invent, discover or explain all you want, if you have to take any man's gaff, you do not have self respect. I don't take crap from anyone, including cops and judges. Mafia Dons don't either I expect, but they pay through the nose for their self respect with years of their lives in prison. Nonetheless, they have it, you do not. (snip) > If a bum asks you for a smoke and you nod in the negative > and keep walking, there is no coercion. Coercion only arises when force or > threats enter the picture. If he says: "Give me a smoke, you sonofabitch, > or I'll kick the crap out of you," then that is coercion. Or if he grabs > you by the shirt and snatches a pack of cigarettes out of your pocket, that > is coercion. But a mere request which you can refuse or ignore is of no > more significance than the necessity to maneuver around an inanimate > object. On the other hand, if the government says, "Pay us half of your > annual income in return for government services, or fight us in court for > the next ten years," that *is* coercion. No government agent, cop, judge or what have you has ever said anything of the kind to me. I have not spent anywhere near ten years of actual time doing any of my activities. > The reason: to drag a person into > court for declining to make a purchase is a crime--to wit: barratry, the > filing of nuisance charges. In order to be a victim of barratry, you would have to be dragged into court several times by the same person. You have never been a victim of barratry. You are obliged under any reasonable legal system to respond to a peace officer's summons if that peace officer believes you have commited a crime, whether you think you have commited a crime or not. If a peace officer did not have the reasonable power to bring you before a magistrate, then you would have every man for himself anarchy. When you sign a traffic ticket, your HONOR in doing so is assumed by that act. What this means is that instead of the peace officer and you immediately proceeding to court over the issue alleged, you agree to appear at a future date to settle the issue, in order to AVOID your immediate inconvenience. If you just pay the fine in order to avoid having to appear, you admit guilt in the matter, and the issue is settled in favor of the peace officer. If you thereby admit guilt, but thereafter go around telling everyone that you really were not guilty, that you were COERCED into paying by the peace officer, you dishonor yourself as well as the officer. He would have the perfect right at that point, to challenge you to a duel and shoot you. This is a NATURAL RIGHT and not a "legal" one, in the present circumstance, understand. > Stealing a person's time, in reason, is a > crime. (Note that if the bum were to say: "Give me a smoke, or spend the > next ten years fighting me in court," that, too, would be coercion.) > --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > > > I'll tell you one thing, when a judge or an IRS agent asks you if that > >is your signature on whatever document the government "coerced" you into > >signing, his next question will be whether anyone held a gun to your > >head and forced you to sign it. If you have to answer "no", then game > >over, you lose, slave. > > ***{Yes, of course: that is coercion. And, of course, you lose. So what? If > you are coerced, you are coerced. If a gun was not held to your head, in order to get your signature you were *not* "coerced". I put the word "coerced" in quotes because it is obvious, to the judge, that no "coercion" was involved. >That is not a state of affairs that you > can change by fighting the government in government courts, no matter what > *magic words* you utter, because eventually, if you persist, the hammer is > going to come down on your head. You know Mitchell, I am getting quite fed up with you threatening me with physical violence in this manner. I do not believe in "psycics" who allege themselves able to predict the future, therefore I regard these kinds of remarks by you as direct threats which you personally plan to carry out. Since you are a voluntary participant in a system that I regard as having questionable ethics, I have to take you seriously. > (The necessity to battle the government in > government courts is just another example of a double standard which > conformists twist their minds into pretzels in order to justify. It is > obvious that in a dispute between A and B, the person who arbitrates the > dispute ought not to be chosen in a biased manner. Thus it would be absurd > if B got to pick the arbiter, and picked his wife. Yet few think anything > about it when, in disputes between private citizens and the government, > matters must be settled in government courts.) --MJ}*** The Constitution models a justice system with an independent Judiciary. If you have reason to believe that it is not independent, you can bring that up as a jurisdictional issue before any facts of your case are heard. Now, you can say that the judge can easily rule against your arguments because it is a government court, but in fact that is not what happens. Lawyers NEVER bring up jurisdictional issues precicely because such issues are EMBARRASSING to judges. Judges do not like to be embarrassed, and will be anxious to get rid of you in whatever way practical, including dismissing your case, if you do not use a lawyer and raise the jurisdictional questions. This, in fact is where I attack most effectively, and is the reason I have been successful in defeating traffic citations. > >> > > >> >> and that they support the tyrants who oppress > >> >> us. > >> > > >> >No, it is the other way around. What the volunteer gets is support and > >> >training from the government. When you volunteer, you are NOT being > >> >oppressed when you endure the consequences of your volunteering. When > >> >you complain about the way government goes about training you, you are > >> >biting the hand that feeds you, the same way as if you started whining > >> >about how the DI treats you when you join the Marines. > >> > >> ***{As above, you continue to ignore my extensive arguments demonstrating > >> that people who obey laws they regard as unjust are *not* volunteers. > >> --MJ}*** It's not a matter of obeying laws. It's a matter of paying the system money (or time) that you feel is not really due, and then complaining about it to people who can do nothing about it and whose business it is none of. It is none of my business if you think the government is "oppressing" or "coercing" you. I'll I can see is someone who apparently does not have enough of a sense of honor to tell a cop to his face that he is dead wrong in his assertion that you are GUILTY OF SOMETHING. You are then VOLUNTARILY admitting guilt when you pay the fine and that's that, pal. The cop was right and you were wrong. This is all I have time for right now Mitchell. I'm not a very fast typist, and I've got to run. Cheers, Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 00:23:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA04078; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:23:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:23:14 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 22:23:09 -1000 Subject: Re: melted ceramic From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mxl3j3.0.e_.nZpNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32343 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little was trying to replicate a underwater arc experiment when some insulator broke up and formed some weird ceramic-looking junk on the wire and electrode where the pieces came to rest. on 12/20/99 6:46 PM, John Schnurer at herman antioch-college.edu wrote: > > > Dear vo., > > Who was doing what when there was melted ceramic? Please. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 01:46:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA14597; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 01:45:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 01:45:12 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <385F3138.2CC5 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 03:41:31 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"ujCIz.0.wZ3.emqNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32344 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >> >> >> ***{Rubbish. You claim to believe that you can just go around openly >> >> breaking laws you consider to be unjust without the hammer of the state >> >> eventually coming down on your head, but I challenged you to prove your >> >> theory by means of a simple experimental test, months ago, and you >>came up >> >> with lame excuses and declined. Result: you revealed that you do not >>really >> >> believe what you are saying, just as many supposed inventors of "over >> >> unity" devices reveal the same thing when they decline similar, >>reasonable >> >> tests. For the record, in case you have forgotten, here is the test I >> >> suggested: get yourself a kilo of smack, walk into your local sheriff's >> >> office, slam it down on his desk, and inform him that you have a perfect >> >> right as a free man to possess with the intent to distribute, and >>that you >> >> do in fact so intend. Do that and if, when they try to lock you up and >> >> throw away the key, you are able to get the charges dropped by >>reciting the >> >> words of your mystical "common law" mantra, then I will begin to take you >> >> seriously. Until then, I will view you as just another fake messiah who >> >> promises salvation and delivers disaster. --MJ}*** >> > >> >You get me the smack Mitchell, and your on. I have better things to do >> >with my money. >> >> ***{If money is a problem, then don't do a kilo. > >You don't get it. I want a kilo for doing this for you. ***{You are doing this for you, Jim--to prove your claims. You claimed to believe that you can break laws that you consider to be unjust, and, by uttering arcane mumbo-jumbo in court, get the authorities to turn you loose. I suggested an experimental test which you could perform to prove (a) that you really believed what you were saying, and (b) that what you are saying is true. The test was to slap a kilo of smak down on the sheriff's desk and challenge him to arrest you for possession with intent. You then came up with the lame excuse that you couldn't afford a kilo, so I pointed out that you didn't need a kilo: just an ounce or so, enough to get you into felony territory, would do. Now you are coming up with more lame excuses. Well, I don't have time to waste with this sort of silliness. If you want to demonstrate that you believe what you are saying and that what you are saying is true, then do it. If not, then don't do it. It's all the same to me. --MJ}*** Yeah, I'll slap >enough of that down to put me in felony territory. Nevertheless I want a >kilo or it's cash equivalent. >It appears to me that perhaps you and your mob buddies want me to figure >out how to beat a drug rap for y'all. I can do it but it's gonna cost >you. I figure I'll be in jail three days before what I have in mind >works. As I told you before when you brought this up, my profession is >electronics, not drugs, therefore there is no interest for me in >doing this whatsoever. If you and your friends want to see how it's it >done then make it worth my while. ***{Jim, I don't know what you have been sniffing, but you really need to do something about your hallucinations. For anyone who may be interested: the only glimmer of truth in the above bizarre paragraph is that I mentioned, a few days ago, that I once knew some mob guys. That happened while I was doing research for my book, *The Dogs of Capitalism*. Dogfighting, an illegal activity, was one of the topics in the book. To research it, I had to get to know some dogfighters. One thing led to another, and I soon found myself making the acquaintance of people who did not limit their illegal activities to dogfighting. While I did reach the point of considering some of them to be friends, I had no interest in their lifestyle, and as soon as my research was done, I ceased contact with them. I haven't seen any of them in many years, and there is no significant likelihood that I will ever see any of them again. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >< Do maybe an ounce--just >> enough to put you into felony territory. Take that amount, march into the >> sheriff's office, slap it down on his desk, and tell him that as a free man >> you have the right to possess it with the intent to sell, and that you do >> so intend. Then get back to me, if you can. (I doubt that you will have >> internet access from the county lockup. :-) --MJ}*** >> > >Like I said, I'll be in the slammer three days, tops, guaranteed. If it >goes over that, whatever overtime is involved will be my problem. My >schedule right now would put this proposed op sometime in late January. > >Now, about my fee. I figure a kilo of really good smack is worth >wholesale maybe $30 K bucks, so I want half of that down and half when I >get out and give you and your friends complete transcripts of all my >court hearings. ***{It's put up or shut up time, Jim. I don't give a hoot in hell which you do, so you will be getting no fee out of me. (Hell, I expected that you would come up with some convoluted excuse for not submitting your claims to an experimental test, though I must admit that I never expected anything this bizarre!) --MJ}*** > >> >> >> > >> > >> ***{I don't know how "seriously" I expect that one of the free energy >> devices will turn out to be real. All I can say is (a) that I have a theory >> of physics which opens my mind to such possibilities, (b) that the search >> is highly educational and good clean fun, and (c) that if such a device is >> found, the result will be the restoration of the frontier and, as a >> consequence, the defeat of the enemies of human freedom. With that kind of >> benefit package, it is a job that only a fool would pass up! --MJ}*** >> >> > > >I just don't see how it follows that you will be any more rid of the >"enemies of human freedom" by working up some way to colonize some other >planet. If you did come up with the necessary technology to do so, what >is there to stop some big corporation from just stealing it from you and >your crew of misfits and exploiting it for the sake of greed just like >has always occurred in the past, when a really revolutionary technology >gets invented? ***{My response: (1) There are lots of people working on this, not just me. (2) If someone succeeds and wants to benefit monetarily by patenting and selling his device, there is a strong likelihood that it will, in fact, be stolen from him. (3) The point I made was that once plans for a free-energy homebrew power plant with near nuclear power densities are available, the frontier will be restored. That plan is unaffected by whether the guy who comes up with the plan gets rich or not. All that matters is that the knowledge becomes publicly available. (4) If that happens, then technically competent individuals who want to be free can build such a power source, and thereafter simply leave the jurisdictions of tyrannical governments--by creating frontier style settlements under the oceans, under the ice caps, underground, or in space. With such a technology, the seemingly insurmountable barriers which have thus far prevented habitation in such areas will fall away. The point of the above is to supply an answer to the question of how freedom can be restored. My answer is simple: restore the frontier. Why? Because if a man has the gumption to be a pioneer, then the frontier is all he needs to be free. And the wonderful thing about this approach is that the restoration of the frontier is always something that one man can do. You don't have to "educate the public," or "get out the vote," or "work efficiently within the system," or "engage in armed rebellion," or "practice massive civil disobedience," etc. Restoring the frontier only requires one man with a breakthrough idea. Each time, in the past, that the frontier has seemed to disappear--i.e., each time human expansion into new territory has temporarily stopped--it has been because the territories that remained unoccupied were surrounded by seemingly impenetrable barriers. And, in each case, when the frontier has been restored--i.e., set in motion again--it has been human inventiveness that has gotten the job done. Such is the case here: the guy who discovers a way for individuals to tap "free energy" will set the frontier into motion again, and, as a consequence, permit pioneers to do what they do best: achieve freedom by living out of sight and out of mind of those unwilling to live and let live. --Mitchell Jones}*** [snip] > >>That is not a state of affairs that you >> can change by fighting the government in government courts, no matter what >> *magic words* you utter, because eventually, if you persist, the hammer is >> going to come down on your head. > >You know Mitchell, I am getting quite fed up with you threatening me >with physical violence in this manner. I do not believe in "psycics" who >allege themselves able to predict the future, therefore I regard these >kinds of remarks by you as direct threats which you personally plan to >carry out. Since you are a voluntary participant in a system that I >regard as having questionable ethics, I have to take you seriously. ***{You are getting bizarre on me again, Jim. A prediction is not the same thing as a threat, and you are old enough to know the difference. Why, therefore, are you wasting my time with this kind of nonsense? --MJ}*** > > >> (The necessity to battle the government in >> government courts is just another example of a double standard which >> conformists twist their minds into pretzels in order to justify. It is >> obvious that in a dispute between A and B, the person who arbitrates the >> dispute ought not to be chosen in a biased manner. Thus it would be absurd >> if B got to pick the arbiter, and picked his wife. Yet few think anything >> about it when, in disputes between private citizens and the government, >> matters must be settled in government courts.) --MJ}*** > >The Constitution models a justice system with an independent Judiciary. >If you have reason to believe that it is not independent, you can bring >that up as a jurisdictional issue before any facts of your case are >heard. Now, you can say that the judge can easily rule against your >arguments because it is a government court, but in fact that is not what >happens. Lawyers NEVER bring up jurisdictional issues precicely because >such issues are EMBARRASSING to judges. Judges do not like to be >embarrassed, and will be anxious to get rid of you in whatever way >practical, including dismissing your case, if you do not use a lawyer >and raise the jurisdictional questions. > > This, in fact is where I attack most effectively, and is the reason I >have been successful in defeating traffic citations. ***{It might work, in traffic court. But it will not work if you are charged with a biggie, such as possession with intent. If you think otherwise, then test your theory in court. --MJ}*** [snip] > >Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 03:10:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA25948; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 03:09:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 03:09:59 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221060800.007c4720 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 06:08:00 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Gooey ceramic In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991220214031.006b0c6c mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19991217003604.00a00850 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"YK4JR1.0.LL6.70sNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32345 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:40 PM 12/20/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 04:03 PM 12/20/99 -0800, you wrote: >>Scott >> Were you monitoring radiation with when all this happened? Did you >>get anything other then thermal illumination? > >The only radiation "dosimeter" operating in the room was me...and I still >feel fine. Insensitive, inaccurate, and not relevant, since you are NOT an ionizing (presumably what is actually being spoken of) radiation dosimeter. Nor would you expect to feel ill unless there was massive lethal dose to the brain (impact immediate if > 2000 rads midplane), or the gut (impact in days if ~LD50 midplane). Issues of penetration, etc. are considerable and important. [This is reviewed in: Swartz, M, G. Verner, "Bremsstrahlung in Hot and Cold Fusion", J New Energy, 3, 4, 90-101 (1999), and any good book on radiation biology.] Like calibrations, allowing time for equilibrium, allowing time for loading, understanding the impact of heat removal, and understanding the optimal operating point, serious understanding of this matter is important. Therefore the probable answer would, more likely it seems, be "no" for the experiment under question where there was a purported "melt". Take care. Mitchell Swartz > I have in the past placed a 2" NaI scintillator (X & gamma >detector) next to this experiment (a nearly identical embodiment) and >observed no detectable increase above background when the incandescence was >on. I haven't tried my fast neutron detector yet... > > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 04:17:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA03757; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 04:15:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 04:15:51 -0800 Message-ID: <00e301bf4bb5$71024080$10441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Getting a Camel Through The Eye of a Needle? Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 05:14:18 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"giKK22.0.dw.szsNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32346 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hank Scudder wrote that "there is a probability of an electron being at the radius of the proton". The radius Rp, of one of the three 312 Mev quarks that make up the proton: Rp = kq^2/Equark = 2.304E-28/(~312E6*1.6E-19 * Alpha)) = ~ 6.66E-16 meters or ~ 0.66 Fermi. Alpha is the "Fine Structure Constant", 0.00729729 or 1/137.03 The radius of a 0.511 Mev Electron: Re = kq/(Ee* Alpha) = 2.304E-28/(0.511E6*1.6E-19 * Alpha) = 3.86E-13 meters or ~ 612 times the radius of the Proton. The potential, V = kq/Re = 1.44E-9/3.86E-13 = 3730 (volts). At the ground state Bohr radius (5.29E-11 meters) the potential is 27.2 (volts) or 3730*alpha. How do you get thee electron into the nucleus, Hank? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 07:57:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA11263; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:52:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:52:04 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 10:51:51 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"LQw2b1.0.vl2.Z8wNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32347 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz writes: The data demonstrates that flow calorimetry ruins the excess heat. Try reading JNE this month, Jed, or any of several papers . . . I am reading Mizuno's own paper here, which I translated. It shows lots of excess heat with flow calorimetry. And the data of which I speak is from Mizuno. Well, since he has not published this data, you must have received it directly from him and translated it yourself. Anyway, you misunderstand it. I wrote, "I doubt Swartz has performed this particular experiment, and as far as I know he never shows people how to do things." He responds: 1) There is our literature out there, and we have shown scientists our running equipment. I do not know the names of these scientists, their e-mail addresses, what they saw, or what they said about it. I have not read any reports by them. 2) You are clueless Jed about what I, and we, do. Yes, that is what I said: "As far as I know . . ." I literally do not have a clue, because you have not provided any clues. No names, dates, phone numbers, publications or anything else that can be independently verified or judged. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 09:26:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA22572; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:24:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:24:31 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <00e301bf4bb5$71024080$10441d26 fjsparber> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 10:33:20 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Getting a Camel Through The Eye of a Needle? Resent-Message-ID: <"vzUs32.0.cW5.FVxNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32348 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Hank Scudder wrote that "there is a probability of an electron being at >the radius of the >proton". > >The radius Rp, of one of the three 312 Mev quarks that make up the proton: > >Rp = kq^2/Equark = 2.304E-28/(~312E6*1.6E-19 * Alpha)) = ~ 6.66E-16 >meters or >~ 0.66 Fermi. > >Alpha is the "Fine Structure Constant", 0.00729729 or 1/137.03 > >The radius of a 0.511 Mev Electron: > >Re = kq/(Ee* Alpha) = 2.304E-28/(0.511E6*1.6E-19 * Alpha) = 3.86E-13 >meters or >~ 612 times the radius of the Proton. > >The potential, V = kq/Re = 1.44E-9/3.86E-13 = 3730 (volts). > >At the ground state Bohr radius (5.29E-11 meters) the potential is 27.2 >(volts) or 3730*alpha. > >How do you get the electron into the nucleus, Hank? :-) > >Regards, Frederick ***{He doesn't, of course! :-) This stuff about the electron loitering about in the nucleus is just blurry statistical thinking, that's all. I remember, many years ago, a chemistry professor who after explaining that the molecules of air in the lecture hall were bouncing about randomly, noted that the probability was of course *not zero* that they might all head in the same direction at the same time! He did not ask himself, of course, how much energy all of those molecules would have, if they were to suddenly head into the same direction at the same time, or where that energy would have come from. Since he was not the sort of guy who encouraged feedback (to put it mildly), I let it slide, and he remained ignorant of the absurdity of what he had said. --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 11:05:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA08607; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:04:06 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:04:06 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221135458.008a4bc0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:54:58 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4q4x12.0.M62.ZyyNu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32349 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:51 AM 12/21/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Mitchell Swartz writes: > Wrong, Jed. > The data demonstrates that flow calorimetry ruins the excess > heat. Try reading JNE this month, Jed, or any of several papers. > But then if you did, you would give up on vertical flow > calorimetry at low flow rates, too. ;-) X ROTFLOL > Rothwell: >I am reading Mizuno's own paper here, which I translated. It shows lots of >excess heat with flow calorimetry. It decreases with flow calorimetry from HIS data. You are ignoring what was said, clipped the rest, and substituted your nonsense (again). Those interested seriously will get the JNE paper this month. OTOH, you Mr. Rothwell, read but do not see. I do not expect you to use any science or math or logic on this. I do not expect you to tell the truth about this. I also do not expect you to learn about what was wrong with your insufficiently calibrated, low flow, vertical calorimetry that generated the Rothwell/CETI-"kilowatt" problem. refs: Swartz, M, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221 (1996) Swartz, M, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130 (1996) =========================================================== > It means increasing the flow rate of the means > to remove the heat from the system. > And the data of which I speak is from Mizuno. > I would say hope that helps, but it is doubtful > you will read the paper, since you have avoided > the dozens before it. > Rothwell: > ".. since he has not published this data, you must have > received it directly from him and translated it yourself. > Anyway, you misunderstand it." ROTFLOL. I am sure I misunderstood his letter thanking me, too. And of course, numbers and math are only known to you, right Jed? And, no one else could possibly understand anything without you, right Jed? [Your background in electrochemistry, chemistry, nuclear physics, electrical engineering metallurgy, and quantum optics always amazes me, Jed. ;-)X ] =========================================================== >I wrote, "I doubt Swartz has performed this particular experiment, and as >far as I know he never shows people how to do things." He responds: > > 1) There is our literature out there, and we have shown > scientists our running equipment. > >I do not know the names of these scientists, their e-mail addresses, what >they saw, or what they said about it. I have not read any reports by them. Who cares what you read or know? Especially given that you are inaccurate in your statements about LENR/CF, hostile to attempts at quality controls, and that you systematically attack almost anyone who works in the LENR/CF field, even those who have helped you. In fact, Mr. Rothwell, unfortunately, you are a supporter of Entrepreneur's Disease and Barker's Disease because of such attacks on inventors and diligent researchers. =========================================================== > 2) You are clueless Jed about what I, and we, do. > >Yes, that is what I said: "As far as I know . . ." I literally do not have >a clue, because you have not provided any clues. No names, dates, phone >numbers, publications or anything else that can be independently verified >or judged. Good luck continuing to avoid the difficult literature, Jed. Eventually, others will go around you and get it for themselves. Have a good day. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 11:50:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA15179; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:49:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:49:08 -0800 Message-ID: <00f901bf4bf4$c19a94e0$10441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: Getting a Camel Through The Eye of a Needle? Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:47:48 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"eQPiP.0.1j3.pczNu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32351 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Mitchell Jones To: Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 8:33 AM Subject: Re: Getting a Camel Through The Eye of a Needle? Mitchell Jones wrote: >>Frederick Sparber wrote: > >Hank Scudder wrote that "there is a probability of an electron being at > >the radius of the > >proton". > > > >The radius Rp, of one of the three 312 Mev quarks that make up the proton: > > > >Rp = kq^2/Equark = 2.304E-28/(~312E6*1.6E-19 * Alpha)) = ~ 6.66E-16 > >meters or > >~ 0.66 Fermi. > > > >Alpha is the "Fine Structure Constant", 0.00729729 or 1/137.03 > > > >The radius of a 0.511 Mev Electron: > > > >Re = kq^2/(Ee* Alpha) = 2.304E-28/(0.511E6*1.6E-19 * Alpha) = 3.86E-13 > >meters or > >~ 612 times the radius of the Proton. > > > >The potential, V = kq/Re = 1.44E-9/3.86E-13 = 3730 (volts). > > > >At the ground state Bohr radius (5.29E-11 meters) the potential is 27.2 > >(volts) or 3730*alpha. > > > >How do you get the electron into the nucleus, Hank? :-) > > > >Regards, Frederick > > ***{He doesn't, of course! :-) This stuff about the electron loitering > about in the nucleus is just blurry statistical thinking, that's all. I > remember, many years ago, a chemistry professor who after explaining that > the molecules of air in the lecture hall were bouncing about randomly, > noted that the probability was of course *not zero* that they might all > head in the same direction at the same time! He did not ask himself, of > course, how much energy all of those molecules would have, if they were to > suddenly head into the same direction at the same time, or where that > energy would have come from. Since he was not the sort of guy who > encouraged feedback (to put it mildly), I let it slide, and he remained > ignorant of the absurdity of what he had said. --MJ}*** However, like a group of interacting flywheels,the three quarks can share part of their 312 Mev (each) mass/energy (50 Mev or more) with the Electron "Hoop" and Shrink it to a smaller radius R' = kq^2/(E'*Alpha), where the angular momentum of the quark group, m*c*r = n*hbar is shared with the electron. But I'm sure that there has to be a Neutrino-Antineutrino pair created for this to happen in Cold Fusion-Fission-OU effects (and Mills' Hydrino) the same as in electron K Capture. Since the Moment of Inertia for a mass-circle is 1/2*M*R^2, the angular momentum is: 1/2 M*R^2*(2*Pi*f) = 1/2 hbar, the quarks, electrons and other particles Must Be wave circles. For the electron (circle) f = 1.23E20 Hz, and each quark is ~ 624* 1.23E20 Hz. Plenty of energy/mass to share. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 11:58:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA12061; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:51:29 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:51:29 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:43:35 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Correction to Rothwell In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"dotLR.0.My2.-ezNu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32350 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:51 AM 12/21/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >Yes, that is what I said: "As far as I know . . ." I literally do not have >a clue, because you have not provided any clues. No names, dates, phone >numbers, publications or anything else that can be independently verified >or judged. >- Jed Golly, Mr. Rothwell, still using your old BS line, ".. no publications ..". How thoughtful of you to continue your tired inaccuracy. Despite that you have been corrected on this matter over and over, you are as quick to post falsely on this repeatedly, as you are to libel Dr. Mills, Dr. Fleischmann, or anyone else who walks across your sights. As you were informed previously, we publish using peer-reviewed journals. You, of course, KINOW that because you published part of the reference list in IE. So now why WOULD you post the false statement above? [It is as tiring as your repeatedly attempting to "blame" the Jews for the Holocaust, or claiming that the Pope did not jail Galileo but actually set him up in business to manufacture telescopes, or your claim that rubies are red from iron.] For those interested in science and engineering of LENR/CF as opposed to the innuendoes, inaccuracy, of Rothwell, here again is the relevant partial list of publications, for those interested. I try to update at http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html remain several articles behind. 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., 1997, "Biphasic Behavior in Thermal Electrolytic Generators Using Nickel Cathodes". lECEC 1997 Proceedings, paper #97009 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, 1997, "Noise Measurement in cold fusion systems, Journal of New Energy, 2, 2, 56-61. Swartz, M, 1996, "Definitions Of Power Amplification Factor", J New Energy, 2, 54-59. Swartz, M, 1998, "Optimal Operating Point Characteristics of Nickel Light Water Experiments", Proceedings of ICCF-7 Swartz, M, 1998, Improved Electrolytic Reactor PerformanceUsing p-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. less important, but relevant: Swartz, M, 1994, "A Method To Improve Algorithms Used To Detect Steady State Excess Enthalpy", Transactions of Fusion Technology, 26, 156-159. Swartz, M,1993, "Some Lessons from Optical Examination of the PFC Phase-II Calormetric Curves", Vol. 2, Proceedings: "Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion", 19-1, op. cit. Swartz, M., 1996, "Relative Impact of Thermal Stratification of the Air Surrounding a Calorimeter", Journal of New Energy, 2, 219-221 (1996) Finally, consider these two - and here is why. Jed attacks me and our publications precisely because these last two papers explain WHY he erroneously measured his "kilowatt" levels of pseudoexcess heat with Ni-beads using an improper vertical flow calorimetric system without adequate joule controls. Swartz, M, 1996, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221. Swartz, M, 1996, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 12:32:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28323; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:30:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:30:47 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221153040.0079e890 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 15:30:40 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Correction to Rothwell In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"DSrXB.0.Rw6.sD-Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32352 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>Yes, that is what I said: "As far as I know . . ." I literally do not have >>a clue, because you have not provided any clues. No names, dates, phone >>numbers, publications or anything else that can be independently verified >>or judged. >>- Jed > > > Golly, Mr. Rothwell, still using your old BS line, >".. no publications ..". > How thoughtful of you to continue your tired inaccuracy. >Despite that you have been corrected on this matter over and over . . . [Followed by a long list of papers by Swartz.] Sorry, I meant papers or reports written by the scientists who have visited the lab and independently confirmed the results. I have not seen any reports by them. I have no idea who they are. Of course I acknowledge that Swartz himself has written loads of papers. Swartz's calorimeter design is unique and his claims about flow calorimetry seem to be radically at odds with the literature, so I cannot believe these claims without independent verification. I never believe ANYTHING without independent replication and verification. That's why I still have strong reservations about Ohmori & Mizuno's glow discharge excess heat, and the Mills Ni-CF effects. I look for 5 or 10 people to report the same thing in quality experiments. What constitutes "the same thing" can be a complicated issue, but in Swartz's case I do not know anyone who has come close. Perhaps there are 10 quality replications lurking out there, but the news and names have not come to me, and Swartz will not reveal them. One thing you can say for Mills is that he introduces others who have done solid work replicating his claims. He sponsored some people at the recent ACS meeting. Unfortunately, I cannot make head or tail of his claims, so I cannot judge the quality of these replications. I wish that someone who understands Mills would watch the tape and tell us what it was about. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 13:12:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA11805; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:11:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:11:06 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 15:08:10 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"1UDpy3.0.Mu2.gp-Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32353 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:43 PM 12/21/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >Finally, consider these two - and here is why. >Jed attacks me and our publications precisely >because these last two papers explain WHY he >erroneously measured his "kilowatt" levels of pseudoexcess heat >with Ni-beads using an improper vertical flow calorimetric >system without adequate joule controls. > >Swartz, M, 1996, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release >Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221. > >Swartz, M, 1996, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow >Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130. Dr. Swartz, As author of the papers listed above, I trust you would be willing to assist me in understanding precisely how these principles would apply to a real experimental situation. Consider the following conceptual flow calorimeter: | | | -----Tout | | | | -----| |----- | | | | | | Pin--------------> | <-- calorimeter enclosure | | | | | | -----| |----- | | | | | -----Tin | | ^ Flow = F Water flows thru the calorimeter enclosure from bottom to top at a constant mass flow rate F. The temperature sensors measure the actual average temperature of the water entering the calorimeter enclosure (Tin) and the water leaving the calorimeter enclosure (Tout). Electrical power (Pin) enters the calorimeter enclosure and is dissipated in a device (not shown) inside the calorimeter enclosure. In this idealized calorimeter, there is no heat leakage from the calorimeter enclosure. All heat leaving the enclosure must do so via the water flow. Initial question: Are the principles discussed in your papers applicable to this calorimeter system? Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 13:16:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19386; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:14:48 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:14:48 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221161146.00799210 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:11:46 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Travel to Hokkaido & Italy on CF errands Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"-kyOn3.0.Yk4.2t-Nu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32354 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The other day I suggested that Scott Little should travel to Sapporo, Hokkaido. I do think the time has come. I have heard Hokkaido is beautiful this time of year and the skiing is great. Most Japanese cities are miserable in wintertime, but the buildings in Hokkaido are built to withstand the cold. You can probably find cheap airfares nowadays on Internet, by I seldom travel so I wouldn't know where to look. I have to find one for ICCF-8, in Italy. Supposedly, Italy will be booked full -- the whole country! -- for the year 2000, and you're supposed to make a hotel reservation soon, but I have not. Is anyone here in touch with the ICCF-8 secretariat, and can you tell us anything about this? The web site appears to be expanded & improved, with a hotel reservation form. See: http://www.frascati.enea.it/ICCF8/ - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 13:18:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14552; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:16:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:16:51 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221161642.007a0eb0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:16:42 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Message from ICCF-8 ENEA about Abstracts Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"RBiE41.0.IZ3.2v-Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32355 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: (Speaking of ICCF-8, I forgot to post this message I received the other day. I have not submitted a Abstract, so I did not pay much attention to it. - JR) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:40:23 +0100 From: ICCF8 ENEA Subject: 8th International Conference on Cold Fusion Dear Sir, We are sorry to inform you that we have had some difficulties with the Abstract form in the Web-site. In case you have sent your abstract by Internet, please be so kind to send it again: we will give you confirm of the receipt. Thank you very much. Sincerely, (Mrs.) M.L. Ciceroni ICCF8 Secretariat ICCF8 Secretary Maria Luisa Ciceroni Tel +39-06-94005854 Fax +39-06-94005855 Conference Web site http://www.frascati.enea.it/ICCF8 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 13:24:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA20844; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:22:54 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:22:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <385FEFA0.A6A8997F bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:22:40 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Travel to Hokkaido & Italy on CF errands References: <3.0.6.32.19991221161146.00799210 pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-4l3b.0.c55.j--Nu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32356 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > The other day I suggested that Scott Little should travel to Sapporo, > Hokkaido. I do think the time has come. I have heard Hokkaido is beautiful > this time of year and the skiing is great. Most Japanese cities are > miserable in wintertime, but the buildings in Hokkaido are built to > withstand the cold. > > You can probably find cheap airfares nowadays on Internet, by I seldom > travel so I wouldn't know where to look. I have to find one for ICCF-8, in > Italy. Supposedly, Italy will be booked full -- the whole country! -- for > the year 2000, and you're supposed to make a hotel reservation soon, but I > have not. Is anyone here in touch with the ICCF-8 secretariat, and can you > tell us anything about this? > > The web site appears to be expanded & improved, with a hotel reservation > form. See: http://www.frascati.enea.it/ICCF8/ > > - Jed Caution: Italy is the least prepared of all Western European countries for Y2k. Fly JAL business class to Japan. I have never seen so many flight attendants per passenger -- all beautiful! Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 14:11:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA30463; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:10:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:10:45 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221165603.007a1120 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:56:03 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Travel to Hokkaido & Italy on CF errands In-Reply-To: <385FEFA0.A6A8997F bellsouth.net> References: <3.0.6.32.19991221161146.00799210 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"XFpqY1.0.uR7.bh_Nu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32357 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: >Caution: Italy is the least prepared of all Western European countries for >Y2k. But as an Italian guy said on NPR, "we are the least prepared but we have the fewest computers, so it will not matter." He said on a scale of 1 to 10, the U.S. and the U.K. are at 10, Germany is 8, and Italy rates 3 in automation. Maybe I imagined this, but I think he went on to say they are preparing for Y2K emergencies in hospitals by going to the biggest hospitals and *removing* computers. "We're making sure they have plenty of pencils and paper." I was driving what I heard this -- not paying much attention. I should have pulled over, I laughed so hard. Another guy said he was confident the reservoirs and water works will be okay because "we made it through the changeover from BC to AD with no trouble." Anyway, I am sure the problems will be fixed by May, when ICCF-8 starts. Italy may be backward in computers but their cold fusion research is second to none. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 14:37:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA08795; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:35:59 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:35:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:21:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"a_6cL2.0.B92.930Ou" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32358 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:08 PM 12/21/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 02:43 PM 12/21/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >>Finally, consider these two - and here is why. >>Jed attacks me and our publications precisely >>because these last two papers explain WHY he >>erroneously measured his "kilowatt" levels of pseudoexcess heat >>with Ni-beads using an improper vertical flow calorimetric >>system without adequate joule controls. >> >>Swartz, M, 1996, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release >>Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, >219-221. >> >>Swartz, M, 1996, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow >>Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130. > >Dr. Swartz, > >As author of the papers listed above, I trust you would be willing to >assist me in understanding precisely how these principles would apply to a >real experimental situation. Consider the following conceptual flow >calorimeter: > > | | > | -----Tout > | | > | | > -----| |----- > | | > | | > | | > Pin--------------> | <-- calorimeter enclosure > | | > | | > | | > -----| |----- > | | > | | > | -----Tin > | | > ^ > Flow = F > >Water flows thru the calorimeter enclosure from bottom to top at a constant >mass flow rate F. The temperature sensors measure the actual average >temperature of the water entering the calorimeter enclosure (Tin) and the >water leaving the calorimeter enclosure (Tout). Electrical power (Pin) >enters the calorimeter enclosure and is dissipated in a device (not shown) >inside the calorimeter enclosure. In this idealized calorimeter, there is >no heat leakage from the calorimeter enclosure. All heat leaving the >enclosure must do so via the water flow. > >Initial question: Are the principles discussed in your papers applicable >to this calorimeter system? Dear Scott: 1) Having taken the time to sit with you at ICCF-7 for nearly an hour and teaching you about this and much more, and having taken the time to have emailed you much discussion about this, and having taken the time to have mailed you the papers, what exactly is the point, Scott? You know the answers are in the papers, along with a discussion of exactly when the corrections are applicable. 2) BTW the flow is a vector, and it is doubtful there is no leakage, and your "geometry" ignores mass effects and actual barrier thicknesses. OTOH it is better than modeling the system as a "sphere". ;-) X 3) Now using vectors and adding Bernard instability, model the system more accurately spatially AND include the gravitational vector. Compare your equations for the horizontal and vertical flow systems under conditions of low flow (where the role of Bernard stability therefore contributes). Are they different? What is the impact of Bernard instability under low flow conditions, and is the impact different for the two systems? Did you evern get the book, James Melcher's "Continuum Electromechanics"? 4) Now, Scott, how about the answers to my questions where you have not supplied a response (as I have done, cf. #1), but just decided to duck into this new thread. ====== regarding Scott's "Mizuno" expts 12/99 ======= So you now claim you have achieved equilibrium in hundreds of an hour? It seems unlikely. Last time I examined your data and found the the Optimal operating Point method was applicable you claimed there was INSUFFICIENT time. And those times were longer if memory serves. Which is it? 5) A plot of both Pout and Pin versus time is less informative than Pout = Pout(Pin), as we have shown over and over and over in a series of papers. These include this months JNE which will feature the Mizuno data which I shared with you PRIOR to publication, Scott. [also see http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html#r&d ] Why are you systematically ignoring determining the location of the peak, which is relevant since optimal operating points have been shown for the system with which you work for a number of flow rates? [Do you really start your car in fifth gear, Scott? Or do you really switch back to first gear on the highway?] Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 14:43:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA10442; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:42:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:42:04 -0800 Message-ID: <386002CC.C0E86202 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:44:28 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Message from ICCF-8 ENEA about Abstracts References: <3.0.6.32.19991221161642.007a0eb0 pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"K0ccI1.0.-Y2.u80Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32359 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > (Speaking of ICCF-8, I forgot to post this message I received the other > day. I have not submitted a Abstract, so I did not pay much attention to > it. - JR) > > Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:40:23 +0100 > From: ICCF8 ENEA > Subject: 8th International Conference on Cold Fusion > > Dear Sir, > > We are sorry to inform you that we have had some difficulties with the > Abstract form in the Web-site. See, I told ya. And 10 days to go yet. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 16:17:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA15312; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:15:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:15:09 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:59 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Correction to Rothwell Resent-Message-ID: <"s8qD8.0.Al3.DW1Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32360 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 10:51 AM 12/21/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >>Yes, that is what I said: "As far as I know . . ." I literally do not have >>a clue, because you have not provided any clues. No names, dates, phone >>numbers, publications or anything else that can be independently verified >>or judged. >>- Jed > > > Golly, Mr. Rothwell, still using your old BS line, >".. no publications ..". > How thoughtful of you to continue your tired inaccuracy. >Despite that you have been corrected on this matter over and over, >you are as quick to post falsely on this repeatedly, as you are to >libel Dr. Mills, Dr. Fleischmann, or anyone else who walks across >your sights. > > As you were informed previously, we publish using peer-reviewed >journals. You, of course, KINOW that because you published part >of the reference list in IE. > So now why WOULD you post the false statement above? [It is as tiring >as your repeatedly attempting to "blame" the Jews for the Holocaust ***{Huh? (He said, as a large explosion jarred him back into consciousness. :-) Jed, as I have noted, can be a royal pain in the butt, but this is so difficult to believe that I was prepared to treat it as hyperbole--until Jed ignored it in his reply. Quotes and sources, please. --MJ}*** , >or claiming that the Pope did not jail Galileo but actually set him >up in business to manufacture telescopes, or your claim that >rubies are red from iron.] > [snip} > > Hope that helps. > > Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 16:34:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA22358; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:32:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:32:21 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991221183256.006cf824 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:32:56 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"fJxSN.0.FT5.Km1Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32361 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: >>As author of the papers listed above, I trust you would be willing to >>assist me in understanding precisely how these principles would apply to a >>real experimental situation. Swartz responded: > 1) Having taken the time to sit with you at ICCF-7 for nearly an hour >and teaching you about this and much more, and having taken the time >to have emailed you much discussion about this, and having taken the >time to have mailed you the papers, what exactly is the point, Scott? > You know the answers are in the papers, along with a discussion of >exactly when the corrections are applicable. My apologies to the group for this waste of bandwidth. Since Dr. Swartz is a member of this list, I mistook him for someone interested and willing to participate in a discussion. Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 17:14:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA28086; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:10:46 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:10:46 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991221200445.007ba790 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:04:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991221183256.006cf824 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Vt7Ov3.0.js6.JK2Ou" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32362 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:32 PM 12/21/99 -0600, Scott Little trolled: >>>As author of the papers listed above, I trust you would be willing to >>>assist me in understanding precisely how these principles would apply to a >>>real experimental situation. to which was reasonably responded: >> 1) Having taken the time to sit with you at ICCF-7 for nearly an hour >>and teaching you about this and much more, and having taken the time >>to have emailed you much discussion about this, and having taken the >>time to have mailed you the papers, what exactly is the point, Scott? >> You know the answers are in the papers, along with a discussion of >>exactly when the corrections are applicable. Little ignoring the scientific questions and beginning his ad hominem: >My apologies to the group for this waste of bandwidth. Since Dr. Swartz is >a member of this list, I mistook him for someone interested and willing to >participate in a discussion. >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 Scott: Your ad hominem and projection are noted. [I apologize for the bandwidth but there are real scientists out there who will read the literature, work out the equations and models for the serious issues and will conduct serious work for themselves.] It seems unreasonably of you to not share what exactly your point was, especially after I sent you the materials AND asked you AND corrected your model to make it physically correct. Certainly there should be no problem with trying to actually model the problem, is there? I apologize if you do not have the background in differential equations, heat and mass transfer, and continuum electromechanics and will therefore simply refer you to those and the many papers thereafter. [ *** BTW, those readers of vortex ON THEIR OWN may elect to get the books, the references, and work out the equations themselves, and if they are lucky add the volumes of Hildebrand, Melcher and von Hippel to their shelves. THEY hopefully will use much more complex models than Scott's, and THEY will address the mass-heat/electrical-chemical/nuclear-lattice issues more seriously. It is also noted for the record that Scott AGAIN avoided a few calibration, loading, and OOP questions and comments that might have helped his experiments. Unfortunately, when he asked for criticism of your experiments and suggestions, I took him seriously, and therefore the apology must be from me in wasting bandwidth and my time. *** ] ==================================================== more trolling from Scott Little ignored the following: >> 2) BTW the flow is a vector, and it is doubtful there is no leakage, >>and your "geometry" ignores mass effects and actual barrier thicknesses. >>OTOH it is better than modeling the system as a "sphere". ;-) X Corrections ignored by Scott Little, consistent with his "question" actually being a troll. ==================================================== .... and the following: >> 3) Now using vectors and adding Bernard instability, model the >>system more accurately spatially AND include the gravitational >>vector. Compare your equations for the horizontal and vertical >>flow systems under conditions of low flow (where the role of Bernard >>stability therefore contributes). Are they different? >>What is the impact of Bernard instability under low flow conditions, >>and is the impact different for the two systems? >> Did you evern get the book, James Melcher's "Continuum Electromechanics"? Corrections and improvements to his zero stage model simply ignored by Little, consistent with his "question" actually having been a troll. ==================================================== The following excerpt are reasonable questions also ignored regarding Scott's "Mizuno" expts 12/99: "4) Now, Scott, how about the answers to my questions where you have not supplied a response (as I have done, cf. #1), but just decided to duck into this new thread. ====== regarding Scott's "Mizuno" expts 12/99 ======= So you now claim you have achieved equilibrium in hundreds of an hour? It seems unlikely. Last time I examined your data and found the the Optimal operating Point method was applicable you claimed there was INSUFFICIENT time. And those times were longer if memory serves. Which is it?" Criticism/suggestions for improvements to the Earthtech experiment is ignored by Little, consistent with a pattern of trolling. ==================================================== The following excerpt are reasonable questions also ignored: "5) A plot of both Pout and Pin versus time is less informative than Pout = Pout(Pin), as we have shown over and over and over in a series of papers. These include this months JNE which will feature the Mizuno data which I shared with you PRIOR to publication, Scott. [also see http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html#r&d ] Why are you systematically ignoring determining the location of the peak, which is relevant since optimal operating points have been shown for the system with which you work for a number of flow rates? [Do you really start your car in fifth gear, Scott? Or do you really switch back to first gear on the highway?]" Criticism/suggestions for improvements to the Earthtech "experiment" is ignored by Little. ==================================================== I certainly did not expect that this was a troll from you, Scott, but will certainly try to include that in my differential list of observations regarding your future comments here and elsewhere. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 17:23:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA05481; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:22:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:22:55 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:32:37 -0500 Message-ID: <19991222013237062.AAA63 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"Eg5FD2.0.YL1.lV2Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32363 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little writes: >Dr. Swartz, > >As author of the papers listed above, I trust you would be willing to >assist me in understanding precisely how these principles would apply to a >real experimental situation. Consider the following conceptual flow >calorimeter: > > | | > | -----Tout > | | > | | > -----| |----- > | | > | | > | | > Pin--------------> | <-- calorimeter enclosure > | | > | | > | | > -----| |----- > | | > | | > | -----Tin > | | > ^ > Flow = F > >Water flows thru the calorimeter enclosure from bottom to top at a constant >mass flow rate F. The temperature sensors measure the actual average >temperature of the water entering the calorimeter enclosure (Tin) and the >water leaving the calorimeter enclosure (Tout). Electrical power (Pin) >enters the calorimeter enclosure and is dissipated in a device (not shown) >inside the calorimeter enclosure. In this idealized calorimeter, there is >no heat leakage from the calorimeter enclosure. All heat leaving the >enclosure must do so via the water flow. > >Initial question: Are the principles discussed in your papers applicable >to this calorimeter system? Not to be answering for Mitch, but it would be quite simple for you to reverse the direction of the flow of water from top to bottom and just see what the differences were. Mitch's principles for the ideas that he presented are sound both in an idealized theoretical situation, and in practice. I don't understand the objections to his ideas. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 18:08:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA19865; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:07:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:07:11 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.b2b59054.25918c46 aol.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:07:02 EST Subject: Re: Six-foot Mills CF cell To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 56 Resent-Message-ID: <"rFnxY2.0.Cs4.E93Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32366 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 12/20/99 9:40:01 AM, Tom Malloy wrote: <> Mills' original investors naturally insisted that an outside expert vet Mills' claims and that was done long ago. Judging by the material on the large BLP website, it's been done several times since, maybe many times. Scott Little's test raised red flags about Scott's test. Here's what I wrote about that in a post to Vortex-L on February 15, 1999: <> In a reply the same day, Scott conceded that he hadn't done a close replication of Mills' electrolytic excess heat work and Scott said that he didn't claim anything for that attempt. Scott took issue with my criticism of his gas-phase attempt, though. (By the way, after reading Mitchell Swartz's paper in FUSION TECHNOLOGY 31 (January 1997), pp. 63-74, I'd say that he did succeed with a closed cell, an impressive feat.) Tom Malloy concluded his post of Dec. 20, 1999: <> BLP isn't aiming at the home heating market anymore. Neither was Thermacore, at least after 1992. As Robert Shaubach said years ago, they would have much rather placed a new product based on a radically new process in an industrial setting to begin with, where a trained technician could have kept an eye on it. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 18:08:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA19753; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:06:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:06:59 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.365eac4b.25918c3d aol.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:06:53 EST Subject: Re: "Hydrinos," or "Protoneutrons?" To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 56 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZNzfz1.0.Wq4.293Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32364 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 12/20/99 5:00:04 PM, Hank Scudder wrote: << Take a look at an elementary quantum mechanics text in the section on the Hydrogen atom. The electron in a 1S state has a large probability of being at a radius of 0, ie. IN the nucleus.>> Hank, about how large is that probability? Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 18:09:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA19848; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:07:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:07:10 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.d83e476d.25918c42 aol.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:06:58 EST Subject: Re: "Hydrinos," or "Protoneutrons?" To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 56 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA19816 Resent-Message-ID: <"84IB41.0.2s4.D93Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32365 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 12/20/99 6:08:54 PM, Mitchell Jones wrote: <<***{Two points: (1) When we collect data about the microcosm, we are dealing with things so incomprehensibly tiny that our instruments themselves tend to perturb the things being measured. Result: huge numbers of the resulting data points are simply errors. In the case of data purporting to measure the position of a ground state electron vis-a-vis the hydrogen nucleus, the average location of those erroneous data points is, predictably, going to be at the center of the nucleus. That does not, however, mean the electron is *ever* there: it may simply be the predictable result of instrumental error. (2) Even if we assume that the electron *is* sometimes in the center of the nucleus, we are not focusing our minds on the proper questions. Remember: the hydrogen electron in the ground state makes 100 quadrillion revolutions per second around the nucleus. If we make the analogy to the Earth orbiting the sun, that would equate to a time span of 100 quadrillion years. Speaking from such a perspective, we could then say that the Earth spends a significant portion of its time inside the sun, because on merely a scale of billions of years, the sun will swell up into a red supergiant, and swallow the Earth. Note, however, that if we talk in that way, we jettison virtually the entirety of the subject matter that is under discussion. The reason: we are not interested in a conception of "Earth" that is so broadly defined that it becomes an indeterminate blur. We are interested, instead, in developing a specific picture of its nature and of its relationships to other specific bodies near it--e.g., the sun. And, if we stop and think about it, that ought to be the goal of our investigations of the electron, as well.>> I think that Mills would agree with both your points. He rejects the Schrödinger-based description of the electron too vague and he rejects the probabilistic interpretation of Born. Mills has developed a new model of the bound electron and a new model of the free electron, starting from first principles. It takes a lot of math and physics to follow the argument, much more than I know, but I do believe that Mills has succeeded in doing what you propose. Mills has also produced or adduced a mountain of evidence for his hydrino hypothesis: see his January 1999 book and the large and growing BLP website. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 20:27:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA00658; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:24:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:24:32 -0800 Message-ID: <19991222042425.4414.qmail web2105.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:24:25 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Travel to Hokkaido & Italy on CF errands To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"jI_bZ3.0.CA._95Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32367 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I flew to Sapporo from San Diego for less than $900 round trip on Korean Air lines, for ICCF6. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 20:40:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA06097; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:38:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:38:33 -0800 Message-ID: <19991222043829.12290.qmail web2106.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:38:29 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling curves To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"qIOfi1.0.7V1.9N5Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32368 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Page 35 of Ohmori and Mizuno's paper in my copy of IE is all scribbled over. I noted that all entries of Wall energy (W_wall) in their Table 1 are equivalent to a time average wall power (P_wall) of 100 watt, give or take 2 watts. This is regardless of the moderate variations of starting volume and of the different final volumes as water boiled away. Moreover, O & M's cooling curve in their Fig. 1 calculates out to a high temperature wall power loss of only 55 watt, about half the value they used in Table 1. I also noted, after backing out some numbers, that O & M's excess power (P_ex) is usually roughly 100 W, too, or about equal to P_wall. A coincidence, or ???? ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 20:49:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09395; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:48:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:48:12 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991221224754.006ccbb0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:47:54 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991221200445.007ba790 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991221183256.006cf824 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"fl-RS2.0.jI2.CW5Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32369 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: OK, we'll get your questions out of the way and then start on mine. At 08:04 PM 12/21/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > So you now claim you have achieved equilibrium in hundreds of an >hour? It seems unlikely. Last time I examined your data and found >the the Optimal operating Point method was applicable you claimed >there was INSUFFICIENT time. And those times were longer if memory >serves. Which is it?" In reaching thermal equilibrium or quasi-equilibrium, the various parts of a system exhibit thermal time constants analogous to the RC time constant of a capacitor charging thru a resistor. In fact, the thermal time constant is given by RC where R is the thermal resistance (degrees/watt) between the element under consideration and the temperature bath with which it will equilibrate and C is the heat capacity of the element (joules/degree). The product of these two quantities has units of time, just as the product of ohms and farads does. In the case at hand (Mizuno300 - Run 3), the cell is operating under boiling conditions and that makes a tremendous difference in the thermal response time. Essentially the R of a boiling cell is ZERO. That is, it doesn't matter how many watts you pour into the cell, the temperature remains the same. Therefore the time constant of a boiling cell is also essentially zero. The "last time" you mentioned above was an earlier Mizuno-style experiment in which the cell was never boiling and was enclosed in a Cu-tubing coil heat exchanger, an integral part of our versatile water-flow calorimeter. In that system, due to deliberately poor coupling that enabled the cell to operate near the boiling point, the RC time constant was about an hour. You tried to use data points acquired only minutes after a significant reduction in input power and I advised you that they did not represent valid power balance values due to the disequilibrium. > "5) A plot of both Pout and Pin versus time is less >informative than Pout = Pout(Pin), as we have shown over >and over and over in a series of papers. >These include this months JNE which will feature the Mizuno >data which I shared with you PRIOR to publication, Scott. > [also see http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html#r&d ] OK, we disagree on this point. A plot of Pin and Pout vs time shows the entire behavior of the run and allows you to recognize portions of the run where quasi-equilibrium exists. Your Pout vs Pin plot conceals the time information and makes it impossible to differentiate between real excess heat and disequilibrium data...as you discovered when analyzing the older Mizuno-style data referenced above. > Why are you systematically ignoring determining the location >of the peak, which is relevant since optimal operating >points have been shown for the system with which you work >for a number of flow rates? I would love to determine the location of a peak! However, all my runs to date have exhibited a dead-level Pout = Pin landscape. No data analysis technique, however creative, will legitimately extract a peak from my data. > [Do you really start your car in fifth gear, Scott? Or >do you really switch back to first gear on the highway?]" No to both. Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 20:50:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09446; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:48:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:48:18 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:48:44 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <19991222013237062.AAA63 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"rMJwU1.0.WJ2.IW5Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32370 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:32 PM 12/21/99 -0500, Michael T Huffman wrote: >Not to be answering for Mitch, but it would be quite simple for you to >reverse the direction of the flow of water from top to bottom and just see >what the differences were. Mitch's principles for the ideas that he >presented are sound both in an idealized theoretical situation, and in >practice. I don't understand the objections to his ideas. I was hoping Dr. S would help us avoid misconception by restating his ideas for us but let's see if we can work them out for ourselves. Here's my take on it: Heat buoyancy and internal convection are proposed as mechanisms by which the water in a vertically-oriented flow calorimetry chamber can achieve a steady-state temperature stratification with warmer water at the top and cooler water at the bottom. Since the exit port is located at the top of the chamber the water exiting is therefore hotter that it should be and a persistent false positive result is obtained. Is that your understanding as well? Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 20:54:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA13737; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:53:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:53:49 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991221225421.006c7990 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:54:21 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling curves In-Reply-To: <19991222043829.12290.qmail web2106.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"f7Qwa.0.ZM3.Sb5Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32371 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:38 PM 12/21/99 -0800, Michael Schaffer wrote: > >Page 35 of Ohmori and Mizuno's paper in my copy of IE is all scribbled over. >I noted that all entries of Wall energy (W_wall) in their Table 1 are >equivalent to a time average wall power (P_wall) of 100 watt, give or take 2 >watts. Right....and mine is 25-30 watts with a similar sized cell! >This is regardless of the moderate variations of starting volume and >of the different final volumes as water boiled away. Moreover, O & M's >cooling curve in their Fig. 1 calculates out to a high temperature wall power >loss of only 55 watt, about half the value they used in Table 1. Wow, I didn't notice that! I'll ask them about it. >I also noted, after backing out some numbers, that O & M's excess power >(P_ex) is usually roughly 100 W, too, or about equal to P_wall. A >coincidence, or ???? hmmmm. Note also that on some of their runs (e.g. the first line) the vaporization heat is about equal to the total electrical input energy, indicating either (1) genuine excess heat since the cell wall losses ARE significant or (2) undermeasurement of the input power (as has been hypothesized here by Jones, et al). The latter possibility cannot be eliminated from afar but I find it unlikely. I've used my fancy Clarke-Hess power analyzer, Fluke 87 DVM's and even Radio-Shack DVM's on this experiment and they all agree within a few percent. Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 21:48:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA31942; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:47:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:47:45 -0800 Message-ID: <19991222054742.19525.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:47:42 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling curves To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"3QEWp.0.zo7.1O6Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32372 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott called attention to the large difference between the heat carried away by vapor in his experiment and Ohmori and Mizuno's experiments. In all cases this power is calculated from the mass loss of the reactor and the heat content of the same mass of saturated steam. Due to the extreme vigor of the boiling in these experiments, the escaping steam is probably wet, i.e. containing entrained small liquid droplets. The liquid does not carry so much heat per unit mass as pure vapor, so in both cases the heat escaping as vapor is probably an overestimate. Droplet entrainment is likely to be geometry sensitive. Unless the geometries of the experiments are identical, unequal steam wetness is a plausible candidate explanation of the differences between the Little and the O & M vapor powers. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 21:59:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA03064; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:58:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:58:31 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991221225421.006c7990 mail.eden.com> References: <19991222043829.12290.qmail web2106.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:55:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling curves Resent-Message-ID: <"ajiDX1.0.ol.6Y6Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32373 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 08:38 PM 12/21/99 -0800, Michael Schaffer wrote: [snip] >>I also noted, after backing out some numbers, that O & M's excess power >>(P_ex) is usually roughly 100 W, too, or about equal to P_wall. A >>coincidence, or ???? > >hmmmm. Note also that on some of their runs (e.g. the first line) the >vaporization heat is about equal to the total electrical input energy, >indicating either (1) genuine excess heat since the cell wall losses ARE >significant or (2) undermeasurement of the input power (as has been >hypothesized here by Jones, et al). > >The latter possibility cannot be eliminated from afar but I find it >unlikely. I've used my fancy Clarke-Hess power analyzer, Fluke 87 DVM's >and even Radio-Shack DVM's on this experiment and they all agree within a >few percent. ***{If that state of affairs continues after you get excess heat, it will be relevant. Right now, however, it is not. --MJ}*** > > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 22:36:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA14178; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:35:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:35:37 -0800 Message-ID: <3860710D.7F59 ca-ois.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:34:53 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"e6Ofr3.0.NT3.v47Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32374 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: >>Jim Ostrowski wrote: > >> >You get me the smack Mitchell, and your on. I have better things to do > >> >with my money. > >> > >> ***{If money is a problem, then don't do a kilo. > > > >You don't get it. I want a kilo for doing this for you. > > ***{You are doing this for you, Jim--to prove your claims. I'm the one who gets to state the reasons why I may or may not be spending MY TIME doing something, not you. My time is my property and know this: If I am going to spend time doing anything it sure won't be doing what you want me to do for nothing in return. > You claimed to > believe that you can break laws that you consider to be unjust, and, by > uttering arcane mumbo-jumbo in court, get the authorities to turn you > loose. I suggested an experimental test which you could perform to prove > (a) that you really believed what you were saying, and (b) that what you > are saying is true. The test was to slap a kilo of smak down on the > sheriff's desk and challenge him to arrest you for possession with intent. > You then came up with the lame excuse that you couldn't afford a kilo, Excuse me? Where did I say THAT? The fact is, it is you who cannot afford the kilo, evidently. > so I > pointed out that you didn't need a kilo: just an ounce or so, enough to get > you into felony territory, would do. The deal proposed was YOU GET THE KILO for me, and is return, I will do the work. If all YOU can afford is an ounce, well then we will have discuss ways to compensate for the fact that I would be getting less substance than originally proposed for the same amount of work. You understand these elemental principles of work/compensation, right, Mitchell? > Now you are coming up with more lame > excuses. If you think refusing to work for nothing is a "lame excuse", then I now understand what Jed was referring to when he mentioned the Mitchell Jones Parallel Universe. > Well, I don't have time to waste with this sort of silliness. I don't have time to waste period. I consider working for nothing a waste of time in the extreme. > If > you want to demonstrate that you believe what you are saying and that what > you are saying is true, then do it. If not, then don't do it. It's all the > same to me. --MJ}*** This is YOUR theory (that I will get "smashed" or something by the system) and YOUR experiment (you proposed it). > > Yeah, I'll slap > >enough of that down to put me in felony territory. Nevertheless I want a > >kilo or it's cash equivalent. > >It appears to me that perhaps you and your mob buddies want me to figure > >out how to beat a drug rap for y'all. I can do it but it's gonna cost > >you. I figure I'll be in jail three days before what I have in mind > >works. As I told you before when you brought this up, my profession is > >electronics, not drugs, therefore there is no interest for me in > >doing this whatsoever. If you and your friends want to see how it's it > >done then make it worth my while. > > ***{Jim, I don't know what you have been sniffing, but you really need to > do something about your hallucinations. What is there about the above paragraph that you believe is the result of a drug induced hallucination? So you don't know any mob people anymore, that doesn't mean anything. You could could only have two possible reasons for wanting me to perform this experiment, if it were it not that the mob was interested in this: (1) You would like to see me hit with a long prison term, or (2) you would like to see how one successfully beats a drug rap. It is you who would be entertained or edified by either outcome, so why should I be the one to provide such amusement for you at no charge? If you were to ever write a book on the subject of capitalism run by dogs or something, THAT WOULD BE THE DRUG INDUCED HALLUCINATION. (snip) > > > >< Do maybe an ounce--just > >> enough to put you into felony territory. Take that amount, march into the > >> sheriff's office, slap it down on his desk, and tell him that as a free man > >> you have the right to possess it with the intent to sell, and that you do > >> so intend. Then get back to me, if you can. (I doubt that you will have > >> internet access from the county lockup. :-) --MJ}*** > >> > > > >Like I said, I'll be in the slammer three days, tops, guaranteed. If it > >goes over that, whatever overtime is involved will be my problem. My > >schedule right now would put this proposed op sometime in late January. > > > >Now, about my fee. I figure a kilo of really good smack is worth > >wholesale maybe $30 K bucks, so I want half of that down and half when I > >get out and give you and your friends complete transcripts of all my > >court hearings. > > ***{It's put up or shut up time, Jim. Right, where's my damn half Kilo? > I don't give a hoot in hell which you > do, so you will be getting no fee out of me. Then I'll be damned if you are going to get any work out of me. (Hell, I expected that you > would come up with some convoluted excuse for not submitting your claims to > an experimental test, though I must admit that I never expected anything > this bizarre!) --MJ}*** You should realize that from the Mitchell Jones Parallel Universe, all kinds of things that seem "bizarre" are actually quite acceptable here on this side of your dimensional gateway. Particularly the idea that when one does work, one expects compensation. > > > >I just don't see how it follows that you will be any more rid of the > >"enemies of human freedom" by working up some way to colonize some other > >planet. If you did come up with the necessary technology to do so, what > >is there to stop some big corporation from just stealing it from you and > >your crew of misfits and exploiting it for the sake of greed just like > >has always occurred in the past, when a really revolutionary technology > >gets invented? > > ***{My response: > > (1) There are lots of people working on this, not just me. Which of these "lots" of people is going to do away with or otherwise eliminate the "enemies of freedom" for you? > (2) If someone succeeds and wants to benefit monetarily by patenting and > selling his device, there is a strong likelihood that it will, in fact, be > stolen from him. That's what I said. > > (3) The point I made was that once plans for a free-energy homebrew power > plant with near nuclear power densities are available, the frontier will be > restored. Non sequituer. You are merely restating your position. The corporation or entity absconding with your technology will then occupy your alleged "frontier". > That plan is unaffected by whether the guy who comes up with the > plan gets rich or not. Irrelevant to the question posed. > All that matters is that the knowledge becomes > publicly available. Not demostrated. > (4) If that happens, then technically competent individuals who want to be > free can build such a power source, and thereafter simply leave the > jurisdictions of tyrannical governments--by creating frontier style > settlements under the oceans, under the ice caps, underground, or in space. "Jurisdictions" huh? Let me inform you of something. When the space shuttle is orbiting the earth, the Admiralty jurisdiction of the United States is right up there with it. If it bumps into your little space colony and blows it up by accident, rest assured that the "tyrrannical" jurisdiction will settle that case in it's own favor. > With such a technology, the seemingly insurmountable barriers which have > thus far prevented habitation in such areas will fall away. It think as long as it pays homage in the form of income taxes, your little colony might avoid getting blown up or something. But then, you wouldn't have exactly "escaped" anything, would you? (snip) > > > >>That is not a state of affairs that you > >> can change by fighting the government in government courts, no matter what > >> *magic words* you utter, because eventually, if you persist, the hammer is > >> going to come down on your head. > > > >You know Mitchell, I am getting quite fed up with you threatening me > >with physical violence in this manner. I do not believe in "psycics" who > >allege themselves able to predict the future, therefore I regard these > >kinds of remarks by you as direct threats which you personally plan to > >carry out. Since you are a voluntary participant in a system that I > >regard as having questionable ethics, I have to take you seriously. > > ***{You are getting bizarre on me again, Jim. A prediction is not the same > thing as a threat, and you are old enough to know the difference. Yes, I know the difference. Nevertheless, since you have not shown how you do not participate in the system that you say is about to pounce on me, if it did pounce on me I could rightly call you to account, along with any other participants. > Why, > therefore, are you wasting my time with this kind of nonsense? --MJ}*** If I am wasting your time, that is your problem. Solution: ignore my messages. > > > >The Constitution models a justice system with an independent Judiciary. > >If you have reason to believe that it is not independent, you can bring > >that up as a jurisdictional issue before any facts of your case are > >heard. Now, you can say that the judge can easily rule against your > >arguments because it is a government court, but in fact that is not what > >happens. Lawyers NEVER bring up jurisdictional issues precicely because > >such issues are EMBARRASSING to judges. Judges do not like to be > >embarrassed, and will be anxious to get rid of you in whatever way > >practical, including dismissing your case, if you do not use a lawyer > >and raise the jurisdictional questions. -(Jim Ostrowski) > > > > This, in fact is where I attack most effectively, and is the reason I > >have been successful in defeating traffic citations. - JO > > ***{It might work, in traffic court. But it will not work if you are > charged with a biggie, such as possession with intent. If you think > otherwise, then test your theory in court. You test your own theories in court, if you have any. I work the court system for my own benefit, not yours. If you want me to test YOUR theory, whatever it is, I charge for that. Especially people who whine about the "tyrrannical" government, and do nothing to confront it themselves. Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 00:15:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA01825; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:14:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:14:24 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 03:19:08 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... In-Reply-To: <3860710D.7F59 ca-ois.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"gEEBW1.0.RS.VX8Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32375 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Go back to science folks, please. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 00:25:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA05135; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:24:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:24:38 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 03:29:28 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: Here is the question that hit the moderators.Limit of subdivision. (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"mRn6C1.0.9G1.6h8Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32376 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Limit of subdivision. In the letter by Qu the statement made was there is a limit of smallness matter can be subdivided. Why is this believed? What is the limit? What are the 'quants' or smallest increments of: a] position, b] velocity, c] acceleration, d] time e] and magnetic and electric and photon effects? f] quant of electromagnetic wave? Please and thank you for the time. If there are quants of the above, then how are they derived, please? JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 01:05:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA10650; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:58:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:58:10 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3860710D.7F59 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 02:54:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"wdX8O.0.Ic2.WA9Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32377 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{Hi, Jim. I have responded to all of your significant points below. Enjoy! --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 03:53:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA02885; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 03:51:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 03:51:04 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222064742.007c3870 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 06:47:42 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991221224754.006ccbb0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991221200445.007ba790 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221183256.006cf824 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Fo6r43.0.xi.eiBOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32378 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:47 PM 12/21/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >OK, we'll get your questions out of the way and then start on mine. > >At 08:04 PM 12/21/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >> So you now claim you have achieved equilibrium in hundreds of an >>hour? It seems unlikely. Last time I examined your data and found >>the the Optimal operating Point method was applicable you claimed >>there was INSUFFICIENT time. And those times were longer if memory >>serves. Which is it?" > >In reaching thermal equilibrium or quasi-equilibrium, the various parts of >a system exhibit thermal time constants analogous to the RC time constant >of a capacitor charging thru a resistor. In fact, the thermal time >constant is given by RC where R is the thermal resistance (degrees/watt) >between the element under consideration and the temperature bath with which >it will equilibrate and C is the heat capacity of the element >(joules/degree). The product of these two quantities has units of time, >just as the product of ohms and farads does. In the case at hand >(Mizuno300 - Run 3), the cell is operating under boiling conditions and >that makes a tremendous difference in the thermal response time. >Essentially the R of a boiling cell is ZERO. That is, it doesn't matter >how many watts you pour into the cell, the temperature remains the same. >Therefore the time constant of a boiling cell is also essentially zero. That does not seem to be physically true. First, the response time is a function of the materials and barriers (like R and C). In a linear time invariant system, such time constants remain constant. Although in real life they change, it is unlikely they go to "zero" for the actual system, even if you can rationalize it by way of your simple model. Second, put another way, one measures the time constant of a system from the system's response to an impulse response of the system. [You can read about convolution, complex space, etc. in any circuit, signals, and systems book]. If you now apply an x = x0 + x(t) which has an x(t) which is very small, so small that you cannot measure the corresponding y(t), where y = y0 + y(t), then do you really believe that that the time constant of the system simply disappears in the limit that the amplitude of y(t) goes to zero? =============================================================== >The "last time" you mentioned above was an earlier Mizuno-style experiment >in which the cell was never boiling and was enclosed in a Cu-tubing coil >heat exchanger, an integral part of our versatile water-flow calorimeter. >In that system, due to deliberately poor coupling that enabled the cell to >operate near the boiling point, the RC time constant was about an hour. >You tried to use data points acquired only minutes after a significant >reduction in input power and I advised you that they did not represent >valid power balance values due to the disequilibrium. The optimal operating point was derived from Mizuno's more carefully obtained data. Your data, Scott, was possibly corroborating as the paper stated at that time. It was removed because your data had other problems (as you were also told through email). You, Scott, were advised to go back and repeat it at the input power which maximized your system, if you were seriously interested. Did you go back do it again? Did you go back and improve the data collection to see if it was true, or to get an improved curve? In contrast, Dr. Mizuno has found the data helpful and informative. Others have found the OOP behavior quite helpful and informative both for their systems and their products. You apparently have not -- even though a maximum trend was noted. ;-)X =============================================================== >> "5) A plot of both Pout and Pin versus time is less >>informative than Pout = Pout(Pin), as we have shown over >>and over and over in a series of papers. >>These include this months JNE which will feature the Mizuno >>data which I shared with you PRIOR to publication, Scott. >> [also see http://world.std.com/~mica/jetrefs.html#r&d ] > >OK, we disagree on this point. A plot of Pin and Pout vs time shows the >entire behavior of the run and allows you to recognize portions of the run >where quasi-equilibrium exists. Your Pout vs Pin plot conceals the time >information and makes it impossible to differentiate between real excess >heat and disequilibrium data...as you discovered when analyzing the older >Mizuno-style data referenced above. Having done it both ways for several systems, you are incorrect. When done correctly the method demonstrated WHERE you should have driven your KS-bead system, and your Mizuno-type system. When presented with the data, you (as usual) seem singularly uninterested -- from the KS-beads through the past Mizuno expts to your present Mizuno experiments. =============================================================== >> Why are you systematically ignoring determining the location >>of the peak, which is relevant since optimal operating >>points have been shown for the system with which you work >>for a number of flow rates? > >I would love to determine the location of a peak! However, all my runs to >date have exhibited a dead-level Pout = Pin landscape. No data analysis >technique, however creative, will legitimately extract a peak from my data. What ever you say, Scott. It is useless to argue with you. More importantly, those who are seriously interested can look at your data arranged correctly in our past papers, and decide for themselves if they are interested. With the OOP information, a high school student on her/his science fair project will outperform you. =============================================================== >> [Do you really start your car in fifth gear, Scott? Or >>do you really switch back to first gear on the highway?]" > >No to both. Q.E.D. =============================================================== Sorry that this information has not been as helpful to you as it has been to others and our work. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 06:23:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA07537; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 06:22:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 06:22:38 -0800 Message-Id: <199912221422.JAA24324 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Giant (5000k words) Mills Story in Village Voice Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:16:25 -0000 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: "Eugene F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"5FcLY.0.gr1.jwDOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32379 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vortexians: A very lengthy front page story about Mills appears in the Village Voice Newspaper (in the heart of Manhattan, but with much wider outreach). I hope the Wall Streeters Take Note -- how can they miss it! It's been on the web since yesterday. www.villagevoice.com It is by Erick Baard -- the reporter who wrote the Wall Street Journal article on "fringe energy" -- September 13, 1999 in the special energy section of that day. I have been in communication with Baard since finding out about this impending story -- although I did not know the place it would appear was the Village Voice till this a.m.. It was to have been a front page story in the Wall Street Journal -- which obviously would have given it greater impact. It had been approved for such publication by the top front page editor of the WSJ. However, a higher up at the WSJ killed the story, according to Baard. Baard quit WSJ/Dow Jones as a result, he told me. He's still on friendly terms with WSJ, or so he said. December 7th was his last day at WSJ. The story was to have appeared in the Voice on December 8th, but was delayed as the top editor fo the VV helped make it longer and longer. It is the longest such story managed by that editor, Baard says. The WSJ let Baard sell the story to the VV. I think the VV plans additional coverage on Mills in a few more weeks -- this time on his medical achievements. One of the biggest bombshells in the article is confirmation -- at last! -- that Mills excess heta was confirmed at MIT Lincoln Laboratory. The MIT graduate (aero/astro) who did that work was Dr. Charles Haldeman and he is quoted in the article. It is, of course, a shame that MIT Lincoln Lab's results could not have been used to provide public support to other confirmations of excess heat results around the world. Holiday Cheers to ALL! Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Director, New Energy Research Lab. (NERL) Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Ph: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 07:59:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA09413; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:57:35 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:57:35 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991222091855.017a2fa8 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:18:55 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling curves In-Reply-To: <19991222054742.19525.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"-gz9t1.0.-I2.fJFOu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32380 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:47 PM 12/21/99 -0800, Michael Schaffer wrote: >Droplet entrainment is likely to be geometry sensitive. Unless the geometries >of the experiments are identical, unequal steam wetness is a plausible >candidate explanation of the differences between the Little and the O & M >vapor powers. Yes, I have wondered about this effect. In the IE article (p. 34 of #27), the diagram depicts a cell that has lots of open space at the top for droplets to be expelled through. On the other hand, our cell has an O-ring sealed lid with a rather small hole (~ 4 mm diameter) in it for the escaping gases. Most of the droplets propelled upwards in our cell just hit the lid and eventually fall back down into the "soup". 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 Dec 22 08:11:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA21256; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:10:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:10:06 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222110948.0079d530 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:09:48 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Galileo and the invention of the telescope and GPS Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"VUCln2.0.xB5.SVFOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32381 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I did not notice this, but Mitchell Swartz accused me of "repeatedly attempting to 'blame' the Jews for the Holocaust." Either he has flipped his lid or he confuses me with someone else. In any case, this is an abominable accusation and I emphatically deny it. Swartz disgraces himself by spreading these filthy rumors about me & others. Swartz adds: >or claiming that the Pope did not jail Galileo but actually set him >up in business to manufacture telescopes . . . It wasn't the Pope, it was the Venetian Senate and the Doge (the Chief Magistrate). They gave him the equivalent of a defense contract, to build a telescope for harbor defense. Any short, canned biography of Galileo covers these events. For example, see: August, 1609. Thomas Harriot, observing near London, makes a drawing of the Moon as seen through a 6- powered telescope. Through the connections of his friend Paolo Sarpi, Galileo presents an eight-powered telescope to the Venetian Senate. He is rewarded by a doubling of his salary and life- tenure at the University of Padua. He is disappointed by the fine print. - http://es.rice.edu/ES/humsoc/Galileo/galileo_timeline.html In August [1609] he presented an eight-powered instrument to the Venetian Senate (Padua was in the Venetian Republic). He was rewarded with life tenure and a doubling of his salary. Galileo was now one of the highest-paid professors at the university. In the fall of 1609 Galileo began observing the heavens with instruments that magnified up to 20 times. In December he drew the Moon's phases as seen through the telescope, showing that the Moon's surface is not smooth, as had been thought, but is rough and uneven. In January 1610 he discovered four moons revolving around Jupiter. He also found that the telescope showed many more stars than are visible with the naked eye. These discoveries were earthshaking, and Galileo quickly produced a little book, Sidereus Nuncius (The Sidereal Messenger), in which he described them. He dedicated the book to Cosimo II de Medici (1590-1621), the grand duke of his native Tuscany, whom he had tutored in mathematics for several summers, and he named the moons of Jupiter after the Medici family: the Sidera Medicea, or "Medicean Stars." Galileo was rewarded with an appointment as mathematician and philosopher of the grand duke of Tuscany, and in the fall of 1610 he returned in triumph to his native land. - Encyclopedia Britannica It is astounding that Swartz denies such a well documented, uncontroversial facts which can be found in any reference book. The Inquisition did not criticize Galileo until 1616. Neither the Pope nor anyone else "jailed him" then or any other time. He was actually on pretty good terms with authorities during most of his last years. In 1627 the Pope was an old friend of his. He gave Galileo's son a lifetime sinecure, and encouraged Galileo to publish a book. Around this time, Galileo was working under a Spanish government grant to solve the longitude problem. He succeeded partially. His method was impractical for shipboard use, but used on land as a GPS it contributed immensely to improvements in mapmaking. In 1633 Galileo was sentenced to prison, but he was placed under house arrest instead, until he died in 1642. House arrest in a villa was a far more lenient punishment than prison in the 17th century. Prison for an old man was tantamount to a death sentence. For a lively short account of the telescope development, see: http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/lectures/galtel.htm - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 08:30:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15632; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:28:39 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:28:39 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222112538.0079a550 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:25:38 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: [TEST] Re: Mizuno300 - cooling curves Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"22VAL2.0.7q3.pmFOu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32382 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [This may be COPY #3 of this meessage. It did not appear on Vortex the first two times I sent it, perhaps because the heading repeated "Vortex-L eskimo.com" twice. Sorry to waste bandwidth. - JR] Michael Schaffer wrote: >Droplet entrainment is likely to be geometry sensitive. Unless the geometries >of the experiments are identical, unequal steam wetness is a plausible >candidate explanation of the differences between the Little and the O & M >vapor powers. That has been a concern from day one. Ohmori uses a tall, thin test tube to reduce the problem. Drops should fall back before being carried out of the top. For a while, Mizuno ran the flow calorimeter with a reflux condenser -- a long tube sticking out of the top of the cell in which the steam condenses and falls back into the cell. He did not attempt to measure the heat from the condenser. Naturally, this greatly reduced the excess, essentially by eliminating the term from the heat balance equation, but he still measured some excess when you take into account the losses from the flow calorimeter cell measured during calibration. That is a muddy result, but anyway he has addressed the concern. One way to check for entrainment is to condense the steam and look for lithium salts in the condensate. (You measure acidity -- pH.) You will always find some Li, but not much. That is what the NHE did before concluding that the P&F cell produced entrained water which "explained" the excess heat. Fleischmann looked at their numbers and pointed out that the numbers were a couple of orders of magnitude away from their hypothesis, but a couple orders of magnitude seldom stops a naysayer from nay-saying. It does no good to measure the weight of the condensate, as someone suggested. You could be measuring entrained water. I do not know whether O&M have looked for Li. They should. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 08:34:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA31869; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:32:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:32:18 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222102016.007a6160 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:20:16 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling curves In-Reply-To: <19991222054742.19525.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gAqR81.0.ln7.HqFOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32383 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael Schaffer wrote: >Droplet entrainment is likely to be geometry sensitive. Unless the geometries >of the experiments are identical, unequal steam wetness is a plausible >candidate explanation of the differences between the Little and the O & M >vapor powers. That has been a concern from day one. Ohmori uses a tall, thin test tube to reduce the problem. Drops should fall back before being carried out of the top. For a while, Mizuno ran the flow calorimeter with a reflux condenser -- a long tube sticking out of the top of the cell in which the steam condenses and falls back into the cell. He did not attempt to measure the heat from the condenser. Naturally, this greatly reduced the excess, essentially by eliminating the term from the heat balance equation, but he still measured some excess when you take into account the losses from the flow calorimeter cell measured during calibration. That is a muddy result, but anyway he has addressed the concern. One way to check for entrainment is to condense the steam and look for lithium salts in the condensate. (You measure acidity -- pH.) You will always find some Li, but not much. That is what the NHE did before concluding that the P&F cell produced entrained water which "explained" the excess heat. Fleischmann looked at their numbers and pointed out that the numbers were a couple of orders of magnitude away from their hypothesis, but a couple orders of magnitude seldom stops a naysayer from nay-saying. It does no good to measure the weight of the condensate, as someone suggested. You could be measuring entrained water. I do not know whether O&M have looked for Li. They should. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 08:37:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA01476; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:35:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:35:33 -0800 Message-ID: <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:36:18 -0700 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K System X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems References: <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DKr-L3.0.vM.LtFOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32384 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, At the risk of getting into other confusing exchange with Swartz, I would like to offer a few ideas on this subject. The flow direction in a flow calorimeter is always up so that bubbles of air, either within the fluid or released by the temperature change, will flow out of the calorimeter rather than being trapped. Therefore, regardless of any other consideration, use of reverse flow is unwise. As long as fluid is flowing through the jacket, temperature stratification does not matter. All that matters is that the temperature of the water leaving the jacket be uniform and known. Any nonuniformity within the jacket is irrelevant. This is obvious because the amount of energy being carried out of the system by the water is only related to the amount of water leaving the jacket with the indicated temperature. Local hot spots within the jacket do not contribute to this energy. While I agree with Mitch that OOPs exist, I do not agree that the location of these points can be predicted in advance. Consequently, a person must try various conditions and only then is the OOP revealed for that particular piece of apparatus. This being the case, the fact that OOPs exist is not of much use to an experimenter. Keep up the good work. Regards, Ed Storms Scott Little wrote: > At 08:32 PM 12/21/99 -0500, Michael T Huffman wrote: > > >Not to be answering for Mitch, but it would be quite simple for you to > >reverse the direction of the flow of water from top to bottom and just see > >what the differences were. Mitch's principles for the ideas that he > >presented are sound both in an idealized theoretical situation, and in > >practice. I don't understand the objections to his ideas. > > I was hoping Dr. S would help us avoid misconception by restating his ideas > for us but let's see if we can work them out for ourselves. Here's my take > on it: > > Heat buoyancy and internal convection are proposed as mechanisms by which > the water in a vertically-oriented flow calorimetry chamber can achieve a > steady-state temperature stratification with warmer water at the top and > cooler water at the bottom. Since the exit port is located at the top of > the chamber the water exiting is therefore hotter that it should be and a > persistent false positive result is obtained. > > Is that your understanding as well? > > Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 08:41:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA17871; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:39:32 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:39:32 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222113631.007a65f0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:36:31 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Oops, oops, oops Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"MdbpT1.0.8N4.0xFOu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32385 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: My message about "Mizuno300 . . ." may appear here 3 times or 5 times, depending on what the mail handler makes of the heading, with the duplicated address. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 08:42:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA04998; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:41:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:41:06 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991222084302.017a1154 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:43:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991222064742.007c3870 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991221224754.006ccbb0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221200445.007ba790 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221183256.006cf824 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"I4smB2.0.0E1.YyFOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32386 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:47 AM 12/22/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>Therefore the time constant of a boiling cell is also essentially zero. > > That does not seem to be physically true. > First, the response time is a function of the materials and barriers >(like R and C). In a linear time invariant system, such time constants >remain constant. Not in the case of boiling. Have you ever cooked on a gas stove? What happens when you have a pot of water already boiling gently and you suddenly turn up the flame to maximum? How long does that system take to equilibrate...i.e. to reach it's new stable temperature? Answer: a very short time (~ 1 second). The water in the pot promptly begins to boil vigorously and the temperature of the water remains at 100C. BTW, this issue is almost immaterial to my Run 3 (which was a copy of Ohmori's calorimetry style). This particular calorimetric measurement is an ENERGY balance. The electrical input power is integrated over the duration of the run and that input energy is compared to the heat energy required to evaporate the water lost by the cell (plus corrections for the heat lost thru the walls of the cell and energy stored in the heat capacity of the cell during the warmup to boiling). > If you now apply an x = x0 + x(t) which has an x(t) which is very >small, so small that you cannot measure the corresponding y(t), where >y = y0 + y(t), then do you really believe that that the time constant >of the system simply disappears in the limit that the amplitude >of y(t) goes to zero? As described above, there is no need to hold x(t) to small values for the unique conditions in a boiling cell. You can make x(t) (the input power) arbitrarily large and y(t) the cell temperature will not increase. >The optimal operating point was derived from Mizuno's more >carefully obtained data. Your data, Scott, was possibly corroborating >as the paper stated at that time. It was removed because your data >had other problems (as you were also told through email). You, >Scott, were advised to go back and repeat it at the input power >which maximized your system, if you were seriously interested. >Did you go back do it again? Yes, take a look at: http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/2ndtry/run8.html In that run, we deliberately explored a wide range of input power levels and saw no sign of a peak. >Did you go back and >improve the data collection to see if it was true, or to get >an improved curve? What is wrong with my data collection? What kind of improvement would you like...the appearance of excess heat? > In contrast, Dr. Mizuno has found the data helpful and informative. > Others have found the OOP behavior quite helpful and informative both >for their systems and their products. > > You apparently have not -- even though a maximum trend was >noted. ;-)X Please do not try to imply that you found a maximum trend in my data. What you THOUGHT was a maximum trend turned out to be completely due to disequilibrium. >Having done it both ways for several systems, you are incorrect. Like I said, we disagree on this point. We will have to leave it at that. >What ever you say, Scott. It is useless to argue with you. Did it ever occur to you that your difficulty might be due to the fact that I am right!? Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 08:54:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12318; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:53:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:53:38 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222114815.02b0dc20 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:48:15 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Galileo and the invention of the telescope and GPS In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991222110948.0079d530 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"K2HsS2.0.J03.H8GOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32387 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:09 AM 12/22/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >I did not notice this, but Mitchell Swartz accused me of "repeatedly >attempting to 'blame' the Jews for the Holocaust." Either he has flipped >his lid or he confuses me with someone else. Jed: The comments were made in ~'96, but if I have made an error or misinterpretation or if you have changed, then you have an apology and the simple request for increased accuracy in your own posts. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 09:03:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA19061; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:02:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:02:45 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222111634.007a7c40 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:16:34 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling curves Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"0Va35.0.kf4.qGGOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32388 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [This may be copy #2. The message did not appear on Vortex the first time I sent it. - JR] Michael Schaffer wrote: >Droplet entrainment is likely to be geometry sensitive. Unless the geometries >of the experiments are identical, unequal steam wetness is a plausible >candidate explanation of the differences between the Little and the O & M >vapor powers. That has been a concern from day one. Ohmori uses a tall, thin test tube to reduce the problem. Drops should fall back before being carried out of the top. For a while, Mizuno ran the flow calorimeter with a reflux condenser -- a long tube sticking out of the top of the cell in which the steam condenses and falls back into the cell. He did not attempt to measure the heat from the condenser. Naturally, this greatly reduced the excess, essentially by eliminating the term from the heat balance equation, but he still measured some excess when you take into account the losses from the flow calorimeter cell measured during calibration. That is a muddy result, but anyway he has addressed the concern. One way to check for entrainment is to condense the steam and look for lithium salts in the condensate. (You measure acidity -- pH.) You will always find some Li, but not much. That is what the NHE did before concluding that the P&F cell produced entrained water which "explained" the excess heat. Fleischmann looked at their numbers and pointed out that the numbers were a couple of orders of magnitude away from their hypothesis, but a couple orders of magnitude seldom stops a naysayer from nay-saying. It does no good to measure the weight of the condensate, as someone suggested. You could be measuring entrained water. I do not know whether O&M have looked for Li. They should. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 09:05:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA19559; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:03:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:03:10 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222120257.0079aad0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:02:57 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: [NEW!] Re: Mizuno300 - cooling curves In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991222102016.007a6160 pop.mindspring.com> References: <19991222054742.19525.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"nj3BQ3.0.Rn4.DHGOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32389 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Another solution to the entrainment problem is to run the cells for a short time (15 minutes) and ignore the losses from Hv (heat of vaporization). The spreadsheets for the graphs shown in I.E. p. 22 do not include Hv. The formal, full equation on p. 24 includes Hv, and it was used for the longer runs, but we left that term out of the July 8 runs, which reduces excess heat. We did not collect the data; that is, we did not measure the mass of the cell or condensate after the run. The steam escaped from the cell into the air. In other runs it was directed through a cooling column. (Scott and some others have copies of the spreadsheets I refer to, which I translated from the Japanese version of Lotus 1, 2, 3. All heat losses are in column O, peaking at 90.9 watts just as the power is turned off.) As I said, this entrainment problem has been on everyone's mind. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 09:11:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA24197; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:09:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:09:52 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222120457.02b11b50 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:04:57 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"VNjv12.0.wv5.UNGOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32390 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:36 AM 12/22/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >Scott, >At the risk of getting into other confusing exchange with Swartz, I would like >to offer a few ideas on this subject. > >The flow direction in a flow calorimeter is always up so that bubbles of air, >either within the fluid or released by the temperature change, will flow out >of the calorimeter rather than being trapped. Therefore, regardless of any >other consideration, use of reverse flow is unwise. I also do not want to get into a confusing exchange with Storms, so let us correct the issues he misinterprets STAT. 1) The issue, of course, was involving horizontal vs. vertical flow in flow calorimeters and not simply the direction of the flow in a vertical system. ============================================= >As long as fluid is flowing through the jacket, temperature stratification >does not matter. All that matters is that the temperature of the water >leaving the jacket be uniform and known. Any nonuniformity within the jacket >is irrelevant. This is obvious because the amount of energy being carried out >of the system by the water is only related to the amount of water leaving the >jacket with the indicated temperature. Local hot spots within the jacket do >not contribute to this energy. 2) Irrelevant, and also ignores actual flow characteristics and the issues of thermometry (ie. probe placement and ITS impact). Also, please see above. ============================================= >While I agree with Mitch that OOPs exist, I do not agree that the location of >these points can be predicted in advance. Consequently, a person must try >various conditions and only then is the OOP revealed for that particular piece >of apparatus. This being the case, the fact that OOPs exist is not of much >use to an experimenter. 3) Incorrect about predictions in advance. The height of the OOP depends on the QUALITY of the sample, its loading, and the impact of that loading on the quality (see Mike McKubre's papers regarding the three types of curves). It is the height (and the time characteristics) which cannot be predicted. Try starting a truck in fifth gear. ;-)X. The quality of the ride, and the terminal velocity, depend upon the truck; but the gear shifting is the same. OOPs are great use to an experimenter. Gears are also of no use to someone who is five years old and doesn't know how to drive. ============================================= >Keep up the good work. >Regards, > >Ed Storms Hope that helps clarify. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 09:13:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA26165; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:12:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:12:08 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:09:07 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"zG4FD3.0.lO6.dPGOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32391 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:36 AM 12/22/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >The flow direction in a flow calorimeter is always up so that bubbles of air, >either within the fluid or released by the temperature change, will flow out >of the calorimeter rather than being trapped. Therefore, regardless of any >other consideration, use of reverse flow is unwise. Good point. >As long as fluid is flowing through the jacket, temperature stratification >does not matter. All that matters is that the temperature of the water >leaving the jacket be uniform and known. Any nonuniformity within the jacket >is irrelevant. This is obvious because the amount of energy being carried out >of the system by the water is only related to the amount of water leaving the >jacket with the indicated temperature. Local hot spots within the jacket do >not contribute to this energy. Excellent! You have succinctly stated the point that I was slowly working up to: the buoyancy and convection mechanisms discussed by Dr. S cannot produce a persistent false positive result in a water-flow calorimeter! If they did the calorimeter itself would become a free energy machine. 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 Dec 22 09:14:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA27411; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:13:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:13:54 -0800 Message-ID: <38610F6C.22D2 ca-ois.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:50:36 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mjones jump.net CC: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [Fwd: Re: They thought they were free....] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------63B36386400" Resent-Message-ID: <"Rgbp23.0.3i6.IRGOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32392 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. --------------63B36386400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, Mitchell- Whatever it was you put down as a response to my latest message, did not come thru on my end. No Attachements. please try again. Jim Ostrowski --------------63B36386400 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from mx1.eskimo.com [204.122.16.48] by ca-ois.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-5.01) id A71A77A00DA; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 01:17:14 PST Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA10650; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:58:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:58:10 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3860710D.7F59 ca-ois.com> References: <19991210201104.3944.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> <3852B8FA.4169 ca-ois.com> <000501bf4458$76d75ea0$0101a8c0@john> <38535DAF.5DF1 ca-ois.com> <003c01bf44b4$ab345980$0101a8c0@john> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 02:54:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... Resent-Message-ID: <"wdX8O.0.Ic2.WA9Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32377 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com X-RCPT-TO: ***{Hi, Jim. I have responded to all of your significant points below. Enjoy! --MJ}*** --------------63B36386400-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 09:47:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA09323; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:46:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:46:07 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222124049.02b14e70 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:40:49 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991222084302.017a1154 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991222064742.007c3870 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224754.006ccbb0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221200445.007ba790 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221183256.006cf824 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2sOa23.0.bH2.VvGOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32393 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:43 AM 12/22/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 06:47 AM 12/22/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >>>Therefore the time constant of a boiling cell is also essentially zero. >> >> That does not seem to be physically true. >> First, the response time is a function of the materials and barriers >>(like R and C). In a linear time invariant system, such time constants >>remain constant. > >Not in the case of boiling. Have you ever cooked on a gas stove? What >happens when you have a pot of water already boiling gently and you >suddenly turn up the flame to maximum? How long does that system take to >equilibrate...i.e. to reach it's new stable temperature? Answer: a very >short time (~ 1 second). The water in the pot promptly begins to boil >vigorously and the temperature of the water remains at 100C. The issue is not necessarily electrolysis or boiling but loading the metals. THAT confusion led to a decade of misunderstanding about LENR/CF. Electrolysis leads away from the reactions. Swartz, M., "Quasi-One-Dimensional Model of Electrochemical Loading of Isotopic Fuel into a Metal", Fusion Technology, 22, 2, 296-300 (1992) Swartz, M., "Isotopic Fuel Loading Coupled To Reactions At An Electrode", Fusion Technology, 26, 4T, 74-77 (1994) Swartz. M., "Codeposition Of Palladium And Deuterium", Fusion Technology, 32, 126-130 (1997) So does failure to understand the role of the metal. ;-)X ============================================= >BTW, this issue is almost immaterial to my Run 3 (which was a copy of >Ohmori's calorimetry style). This particular calorimetric measurement is >an ENERGY balance. The electrical input power is integrated over the >duration of the run and that input energy is compared to the heat energy >required to evaporate the water lost by the cell (plus corrections for the >heat lost thru the walls of the cell and energy stored in the heat capacity >of the cell during the warmup to boiling). > >> If you now apply an x = x0 + x(t) which has an x(t) which is very >>small, so small that you cannot measure the corresponding y(t), where >>y = y0 + y(t), then do you really believe that that the time constant >>of the system simply disappears in the limit that the amplitude >>of y(t) goes to zero? > >As described above, there is no need to hold x(t) to small values for the >unique conditions in a boiling cell. You can make x(t) (the input power) >arbitrarily large and y(t) the cell temperature will not increase. Your argument is not convincing to the issue. Try those books on linear systems and consider the boundary conditions, and ALL the compartments. ============================================= >>The optimal operating point was derived from Mizuno's more >>carefully obtained data. Your data, Scott, was possibly corroborating >>as the paper stated at that time. It was removed because your data >>had other problems (as you were also told through email). You, >>Scott, were advised to go back and repeat it at the input power >>which maximized your system, if you were seriously interested. >>Did you go back do it again? > >Yes, take a look at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/2ndtry/run8.html > >In that run, we deliberately explored a wide range of input power levels >and saw no sign of a peak. > >>Did you go back and >>improve the data collection to see if it was true, or to get >>an improved curve? > >What is wrong with my data collection? What kind of improvement would you >like...the appearance of excess heat? You were asked about the plots of Pout/Pin. They are not clearly seen at that web site with adequate equilibrium between the values over a range of Pin. So here it is: click here: http://world.std.com/~mica/little8a.gif This is not a certification of your experiment OR any statment on the quality or results of your work, but an indication that there MIGHT be an OOP. [And if you diss the data, Scott, remember YOU took it. And if you purport the errors exceed the range, perhaps and then you should post them, and improve them. I look forward to seeing them.] ============================================= >> In contrast, Dr. Mizuno has found the data helpful and informative. >> Others have found the OOP behavior quite helpful and informative both >>for their systems and their products. >> >> You apparently have not -- even though a maximum trend was >>noted. ;-)X > >Please do not try to imply that you found a maximum trend in my data. What >you THOUGHT was a maximum trend turned out to be completely due to >disequilibrium. Perhaps. But here it might be: http://world.std.com/~mica/little8a.gif I removed the other graphs analyzing your earlier data. Sorry, but one will give you the idea, if it is there. ============================================= >>Having done it both ways for several systems, you are incorrect. > >Like I said, we disagree on this point. We will have to leave it at that. > > >>What ever you say, Scott. It is useless to argue with you. > >Did it ever occur to you that your difficulty might be due to the fact that I >am right!? Of course you are, have the last word. except for the proverbial thousand words at: http://world.std.com/~mica/little8a.gif Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 09:57:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12457; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:55:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:55:58 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:50:53 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> References: <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"7x21r.0.U23.k2HOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32394 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:09 AM 12/22/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 09:36 AM 12/22/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >>The flow direction in a flow calorimeter is always up so that bubbles of air, >>either within the fluid or released by the temperature change, will flow out >>of the calorimeter rather than being trapped. Therefore, regardless of any >>other consideration, use of reverse flow is unwise. > >Good point. > >>As long as fluid is flowing through the jacket, temperature stratification >>does not matter. All that matters is that the temperature of the water >>leaving the jacket be uniform and known. Any nonuniformity within the jacket >>is irrelevant. This is obvious because the amount of energy being carried >out >>of the system by the water is only related to the amount of water leaving the >>jacket with the indicated temperature. Local hot spots within the jacket do >>not contribute to this energy. > >Excellent! You have succinctly stated the point that I was slowly working >up to: the buoyancy and convection mechanisms discussed by Dr. S cannot >produce a persistent false positive result in a water-flow calorimeter! If >they did the calorimeter itself would become a free energy machine. Oh please. It is disproved in BOTH Barry Merriman's expt http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry/CF/CETIX.html (where he got the sign right) and the CETI patent itself. There is a possible false positive that is corrected to some degree, depending upon flow rates and other issues. Swartz. M.., "Patterns of Failure in Cold Fusion Experiments", Proceedings of 33RD Intersociety Engineering Conference on Energy Conversion, IECEC-98-I229, Colorado Springs, CO, August 2-6, (1998) Swartz, M, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221 (1996) Swartz, M, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130 (1996) [And BTW, in your model you ignore other possible stratification issues of real systems. Swartz, M., "Relative Impact of Thermal Stratification of the Air Surrounding a Calorimeter", Journal of New Energy, 2, 219-221 (1996)] ============================================================= > If they did the calorimeter itself would become a free energy machine. They would never become free energy machines except through the magic of Earthtech's Zero Point Energy (vacuum). ;-)X In contrast, LENR/CF systems use real materials, real fusion, and generate several products with seveal theories explaining the observations. Real fuels are used, with real loading, and it is more difficult that first thought. Hope that clarifies. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 10:37:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA29344; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:35:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:35:37 -0800 Message-ID: <3861112E.6A5C ca-ois.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:58:06 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: They thought they were free.... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UwV001.0.QA7.udHOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32395 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Schnurer wrote: > > Go back to science folks, please. If Mitchell will agree to take this to vortexb that's fine w/me. JO From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 11:40:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26928; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:39:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:39:03 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222143356.007c0e30 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:33:56 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: off topic Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Z7htz2.0.ga6.NZIOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32396 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: http://news.excite.com/news/r/991222/12/life-dog Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 11:44:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA29304; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:43:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:43:00 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222144245.00797320 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:42:45 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Mills in Village Voice Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2YeM-2.0.n97.4dIOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32397 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This article is impressive. It adds to Mill's credibility. I heard from several people who were doing replications years ago, especially at Lincoln labs and the Idaho national engineering lab, but they fell off the radar screen. They never reported any results, positive or negative. I did not know what to think. I am glad the replications worked after all. I am not a bit surprised that the scientists who observed positive results were forced to quit. That is what usually happens. It is a shame we cannot have full-length detailed reports from these places. A few lines in the newspaper are no substitute. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 13:35:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23927; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:32:20 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:32:20 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991222152622.0179e138 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:26:22 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991222124049.02b14e70 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991222084302.017a1154 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222064742.007c3870 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224754.006ccbb0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221200445.007ba790 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221183256.006cf824 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"JpPin.0.fr5.WDKOu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32398 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:40 PM 12/22/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > So here it is: > click here: > http://world.std.com/~mica/little8a.gif > > This is not a certification of your experiment OR >any statment on the quality or results of your work, but >an indication that there MIGHT be an OOP. > > [And if you diss the data, Scott, remember YOU took it. >And if you purport the errors exceed the range, perhaps >and then you should post them, and improve them. I look >forward to seeing them.] Indeed that is the case. I have stated many times that the typical error in my VWFC is about +/-2% relative. Also, you chose the uncorrected Pout values for the plot. When the corrected values are used, the pattern, insignificant as it is, disappears. I have prepared at graph which depicts these facts at: http://www.eden.com/~little/ms/oops.html 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 Dec 22 13:56:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA08215; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:52:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:52:58 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991222143356.007c0e30 world.std.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:48:32 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Canine Heroism Resent-Message-ID: <"myGh43.0.D02.vWKOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32399 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >http://news.excite.com/news/r/991222/12/life-dog > > Mitchell Swartz ***{Are you referring to the dog story? It's brief, so here it is: Updated 12:59 PM ET December 22, 1999 BUENOS AIRES (Reuters) - A dog saved his four-year-old master from a swarm of bees by covering him with his body, and then died from the stings, Argentine police said Wednesday. Kharin Toloza was playing with his dog Chocolate in Valle Viejo, northwestern Argentina, when he was attacked by the insects, local police told the state-run Telam news agency. The dog jumped and stayed on top of the boy, who was taken to hospital but was declared out of danger after receiving just a few stings. The dog died. ***{It would be interesting to know the breed of the dog. Show dogs are bred for appearance only, and are invariably stone curs--which means: they do not have the tolerance for pain that a feat like this requires. Thus this dog, genetically, was in substantial part from one of the working breeds that have to take punishment to do their work. It could have been one of the working sheep dogs, or a heeler, or one of the bear dogs, or the king of them all: a pit bull. The only way it could have been a show dog, however, would be if the critter was such a titty baby that he fainted after the first sting and fell on top of the boy. ;-) --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 13:58:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09573; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:56:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:56:27 -0800 Message-ID: <008b01bf4ccf$b7f39b40$44441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Electron-Encircled Protons-Deuterons Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:55:15 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"tpEXQ3.0.VL2.AaKOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32400 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If one accepts that the Electron is a Wave Circle or "Hoop" with a Major Radius, R = kq^2/E = 2.304E-28/(0.511E6*1.6E-19*Alpha) = 3.86E-13 meters, then instead of "orbiting" out at the 5.29E-11 meter ground state "Bohr Radius" with a potential of 27.2 (volts) it will encircle the Proton or Deuteron with a centered separation radius of 3.86E-13 meters, and a potential of 3730 (volts) thus giving the shrunken Proton or Deuteron a Neutral Entity Radius of 3.86E-13 Meters. Going by "String Theory" the Minor Radius of this wave circle is something on the order of the "Planck Length". When stimulated to align in this manner the EUV is in the 1865 to 3730 ev range, which could account for OU effects without any Cold Fusion-Fission, but it would substantially help in getting over the Coulomb Barrier for Fusion-Fission Reactions. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 14:26:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA05885; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:24:09 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:24:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 16:18:09 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"sIG2P.0.rR1.7-KOu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32401 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:50 PM 12/22/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >>Excellent! You have succinctly stated the point that I was slowly working >>up to: the buoyancy and convection mechanisms discussed by Dr. S cannot >>produce a persistent false positive result in a water-flow calorimeter! If >>they did the calorimeter itself would become a free energy machine. > > > Oh please. It is disproved in BOTH Barry Merriman's >expt http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry/CF/CETIX.html > (where he got the sign right) and the CETI patent itself. What is disproved? >[And BTW, in your model you ignore other possible stratification >issues of real systems. Air stratification is a second-order effect at most. Any good water flow calorimeter will have its water temperature measuring stations well isolated from both the ambient air and from the experiment itself. The issue here is the heat buoyancy and convection mechanisms that you have repeatedly offered up as artifactual explanations for the kilowatt excess heat result observed by CETI at the PowerGen show. My contention is that your mechanisms...in fact, ANY internal mechanism as Ed Storms pointed out...cannot produce a persistent false positive reading in a water-flow calorimeter. Don't get me wrong. I, too, am skeptical of the kilowatt PowerGen result but, if it was an artifact, the explanation MUST lie elsewhere. 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 Dec 22 14:58:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA24359; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:56:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:56:34 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222175606.0079b3a0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:56:06 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: RE: Galileo and the invention of the telescope and GPS Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"1rpxF3.0.Ty5.XSLOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32402 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bill Briggs complained to me by private e-mail that this subject is off-topic and that I should not quarrel with Swartz here. He wanted to know if this debate has been going on since 1996. The answer is I have been reading about Galileo and the history of science a lot longer than that, and this particular debate began in 1616. His other questions inspired me to write the following, comparing the Galileo trial to that of John Scopes in 1925. Most members of the public believe that the Pope and Catholic Church officials refused to look through the telescope and did not believe Galileo's claims, and they threw him in the hoosgow for claiming there are mountains on the moon. That is Comic Book history. They did look through the telescope, they believed, and they were highly supportive. Years later controversy broke out, but it was mainly about behavior and theory, not observations. The issue at trial was narrowly defined: Did Galileo technically violate the censorship laws. Science and scientific evidence were excluded, for the same reason they were excluded from the 1925 Scopes trial. The judge in the 1925 trial defined the issue just as narrowly: It was about Scope's actions in the high school classroom, not the validity of evolution, or religion, or the fairness of the law. When the case was appealed these larger issues were considered, and the ACLU (representing Scopes) won. I think Galileo himself was partly to blame for this atmosphere. By most accounts he was a political animal: opportunistic, ruthless and quick to steal ideas and betray his colleagues. He was a nasty piece of work, like Newton and Hawking. Brilliant scientists are not always nice people. He owed his success to his talent and also to politics and public relations, and when the PR began to work against him he was vulnerable. In other words, he was not a Saint & Martyr, and his ecclesiastical foes were not the dolts they are usually portrayed as. Real 18th century history was more complex, more human and more interesting. I expect that someday 20th century science history will be over-simplified, and CF scientists will also be portrayed as Saints and Innocent Victims of the Cruel Establishment, when in fact they deserve a large share of the blame for the fiascos of the last 10 years. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 15:28:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA31787; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:26:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:26:11 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222182211.007c9870 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:22:11 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"HKB0O.0.bm7.JuLOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32403 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:18 PM 12/22/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 12:50 PM 12/22/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >>>Excellent! You have succinctly stated the point that I was slowly working >>>up to: the buoyancy and convection mechanisms discussed by Dr. S cannot >>>produce a persistent false positive result in a water-flow calorimeter! If >>>they did the calorimeter itself would become a free energy machine. >> >> >> Oh please. It is disproved in BOTH Barry Merriman's >>expt http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry/CF/CETIX.html >> (where he got the sign right) and the CETI patent itself. > >What is disproved? Your statement that, "(there) cannot (be) produce(d) a persistent false positive result in a water-flow calorimeter!" There is a possible false positive that is corrected to some degree, depending upon flow rates and other issues. Swartz. M.., "Patterns of Failure in Cold Fusion Experiments", Proceedings of 33RD Intersociety Engineering Conference on Energy Conversion, IECEC-98-I229, Colorado Springs, CO, August 2-6, (1998) Swartz, M, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221 (1996) Swartz, M, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130 (1996) It is similar to when you used a 30 milliwatt offset in your previous experiment, Scott, rather than resetting to a null periodically. Not similar in etiology - but in impact. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 15:29:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA32744; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:27:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:27:15 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222182335.007b4b90 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:23:35 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991222152622.0179e138 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991222124049.02b14e70 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222084302.017a1154 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222064742.007c3870 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224754.006ccbb0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221200445.007ba790 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221183256.006cf824 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"DfjTV2.0.T_7.IvLOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32404 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:26 PM 12/22/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >At 12:40 PM 12/22/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> So here it is: >> click here: >> http://world.std.com/~mica/little8a.gif >> >> This is not a certification of your experiment OR >>any statment on the quality or results of your work, but >>an indication that there MIGHT be an OOP. >> >> [And if you diss the data, Scott, remember YOU took it. >>And if you purport the errors exceed the range, perhaps >>and then you should post them, and improve them. I look >>forward to seeing them.] > >Indeed that is the case. I have stated many times that the typical error >in my VWFC is about +/-2% relative. Also, you chose the uncorrected Pout >values for the plot. When the corrected values are used, the pattern, >insignificant as it is, disappears. I have prepared at graph which depicts >these facts at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/ms/oops.html Why Scott, you are a little disingenuous. You state, "The dark blue points in the plot above are the points chosen by Swartz from the Run 8 data presented at http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/2ndtry/run8.html" First, actually,they are from YOUR columns in YOUR Table, including all your points, labelled "Pin" and "Pout". Furthermore, the points were not "chosen" but were ALL of YOUR rows. Second, could you please exactly indicate why your corrections are appropriate, and what they were? Specifically, since the data which I plotted came from YOUR Tables "ave Pout" and "avg Pin" exactly which -- or both -- of those numbers was incorrect, and please include the derivations. Third, actually, with the correction, the form then approaches what you had before Scott, and my comments on the draft manscript which you saw, therefore, apply. Fourth, are those 2% bars, identical for each point, estimated or measured? Hope this helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 15:49:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA07518; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:48:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:48:00 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <0.39d042e9.2592bd27 aol.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:47:51 EST Subject: Re: Giant (5000k words) Mills Story in Village Voice To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 14 Resent-Message-ID: <"TnXjc2.0.Lr1.lCMOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32405 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 12/22/99 6:23:57 AM Pacific Standard Time, editor infinite-energy.com writes: > Vortexians: > > A very lengthy front page story about Mills appears in the Village Voice > Newspaper (in the heart of Manhattan, but with much wider outreach). I > hope the Wall Streeters Take Note -- how can they miss it! > > It's been on the web since yesterday. > > www.villagevoice.com Quite a writup, well done I thought. Presents both sides. My money is on Mills. I am looking forward to an IPO in 1qtr 2000. Vince Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 15:53:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA09291; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:51:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:51:23 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:51:18 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange transformer In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"b9vcF3.0.xG2.wFMOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32406 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Turn the DC on and off over and over again. Hank On Sun, 19 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Hi, > > Suppose one had an electrical transformer, with only DC flowing through the > primary, and this primary is physically inaccessible. Is there anything one > might do at the secondary, to nevertheless extract energy from the > transformer? > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 16:03:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA12768; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 16:02:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 16:02:41 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991222175929.017a2360 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:59:29 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991222182335.007b4b90 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991222152622.0179e138 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222124049.02b14e70 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222084302.017a1154 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222064742.007c3870 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224754.006ccbb0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221200445.007ba790 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221183256.006cf824 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221172155.00d24ac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221150810.017acf68 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221144335.014c0250 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991221105151.0079c830 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220172309.007d2450 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991220162057.007ad860 pop.mindspring.com> <199912202108.OAA27693 smtp.asu.edu> <3.0.6.32.19991220011526.00879370 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219232448.006b3da0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991219071204.007cfac0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991219003353.006ca214 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991218230006.007c5100 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991218204805.006bdee8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"wetUs.0.Q73.XQMOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32407 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:23 PM 12/22/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Second, could you please exactly indicate why your >corrections are appropriate, and what they were? That information is included in the text of the report on Run 8, located at: http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/2ndtry/run8.html >Third, actually, with the correction, the form then >approaches what you had before Scott, and my comments >on the draft manscript which you saw, therefore, apply. Yes, the trend towards infinite gain as input power goes to zero. I remember that well. I never could get you to understand/accept it. >Fourth, are those 2% bars, identical for each point, >estimated or measured? Both. The methods agree pretty well. Regarding the heat buoyancy, if you are just going to cite your papers instead of actually responding to the issues of violation of Conservation of Energy that Ed Storms and I have pointed out, then we're not having a discussion, are we? That doesn't help. 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 Dec 22 16:45:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24614; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 16:43:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 16:43:22 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange transformer Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 11:43:16 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 QAA24577 Resent-Message-ID: <"5SNUy1.0.Q06.g0NOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32408 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:51:18 -0800 (PST), hank scudder wrote: >Turn the DC on and off over and over again. >Hank > >On Sun, 19 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Suppose one had an electrical transformer, with only DC flowing through the >> primary, and this primary is physically inaccessible. Is there anything ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 18:29:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA29931; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:28:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:28:04 -0800 Message-ID: <386188E1.9CC524C ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 19:28:52 -0700 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K System X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems References: <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222182211.007c9870@world.std.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YweXd2.0.bJ7.qYOOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32409 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, I took the trouble to read the reference noted by Mitch (Swartz, M, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems",Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130 (1996)). In this paper, Swartz makes the assumption that buoyancy and convection mechanisms exist and goes about creating equations which would separate this effect from normal calorimetry. If the effect existed, these equations could be used to isolate its effect, provided the necessary measurements were made. If the effect does not exist, the equations are useless. Unfortunately, the physical description of a calorimeter which might show this effect is not provided. Thus, we must guess just what arrangement Swartz has in mind. In any case, conventional arrangements do not allow for this effect to occur. The only error which normal calorimetry might experience is poor thermal mixing within the fluid where the exit temperature is measured. This is an entirely different effect from the one Swartz tries to analyze and is recognized by everyone who has attempted flow calorimetry. Consequently, I see no purpose to continue this discussion. Regards, Ed Storms Mitchell Swartz wrote: > At 04:18 PM 12/22/99 -0600, Scott Little wrote: > >At 12:50 PM 12/22/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > > > >>>Excellent! You have succinctly stated the point that I was slowly working > >>>up to: the buoyancy and convection mechanisms discussed by Dr. S cannot > >>>produce a persistent false positive result in a water-flow calorimeter! If > >>>they did the calorimeter itself would become a free energy machine. > >> > >> > >> Oh please. It is disproved in BOTH Barry Merriman's > >>expt http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry/CF/CETIX.html > >> (where he got the sign right) and the CETI patent itself. > > > >What is disproved? > > Your statement that, "(there) cannot (be) produce(d) > a persistent false positive result in a water-flow calorimeter!" > > There is a possible false positive that is corrected to some > degree, depending upon flow rates and other issues. > Swartz. M.., "Patterns of Failure in Cold Fusion Experiments", > Proceedings of 33RD Intersociety Engineering Conference > on Energy Conversion, IECEC-98-I229, Colorado Springs, CO, > August 2-6, (1998) > Swartz, M, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy > Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221 (1996) > Swartz, M, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", > Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130 (1996) > > It is similar to when you used a 30 milliwatt offset > in your previous experiment, Scott, rather than resetting to > a null periodically. Not similar in etiology - but in impact. > > Hope that helps. > > Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 18:49:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA04208; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:48:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:48:48 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991222214337.007c2540 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 21:43:37 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <386188E1.9CC524C ix.netcom.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222182211.007c9870 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"PiQ9P2.0.g11.FsOOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32411 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:28 PM 12/22/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >Scott, >I took the trouble to read the reference noted by Mitch (Swartz, M, "Potential >for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems",Journal of New Energy, 1, >126-130 (1996)). In this paper, Swartz makes the assumption that buoyancy and >convection mechanisms exist and goes about creating equations which would >separate this effect from normal calorimetry. If the effect existed, these >equations could be used to isolate its effect, provided the necessary >measurements were made. If the effect does not exist, the equations are >useless. It is well-known, and the effect was linearly correct (to zeroth order) in BOTH Barry Merriman's expt http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry/CF/CETIX.html (where he got the sign right) and the CETI patent itself. Therefore, these equations have use, especially in low flow conditions. ============================================================ > Unfortunately, the physical description of a calorimeter which might >show this effect is not provided. Wrong. Actually, it is, Edmund, and therefore you are mistaken about this, as you are mistaken above (and corrected). Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 18:52:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA03690; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:48:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:48:24 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.445c8658.2592e76f aol.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 21:48:15 EST Subject: Re: Giant (5000k words) Mills Story in Village Voice To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 56 Resent-Message-ID: <"zBKnl3.0.Zv.urOOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32410 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gene, Thanks for the post about the fine story by Baard in THE VILLAGE VOICE. He got some people to go on the record who were unwilling to do so years ago, notably Haldeman and Jacox. I've been wondering for a long time what Marc Millis was going to do, and the answer to that question was in Baard's piece, too: nothing. In a message dated 12/22/99 7:49:57 PM, Vince Cockeram wrote: <> I doubt it'll be that soon, Vince. QI of 2001 seems more likely. Are you planning to continue your experiments after the holidays? (I hope to see a positive answer when I get back from them. I'll be offline for the next few days.) Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 20:27:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA14848; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 20:26:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 20:26:22 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:17:12 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Strange transformer Resent-Message-ID: <"8V9kZ3.0.qd3.jHQOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32412 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:51:18 -0800 (PST), hank scudder wrote: > >>Turn the DC on and off over and over again. >>Hank >> >>On Sun, 19 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Suppose one had an electrical transformer, with only DC flowing through the >>> primary, and this primary is physically inaccessible. Is there anything > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >[snip] > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk ***{I think Hank was a bit tongue-in-cheek, and deliberately took you too literally. Notice that you only said that the primary itself is physically inaccessible, not that the entire circuit which contains it is physically inaccessible. Therefore, it is possible to place a switch in the part of the circuit that *is* accessible, and simply flip the primary on and off. I think you've been had, Robin. :-) --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 03:30:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA06391; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 03:29:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 03:29:08 -0800 Message-ID: <00f301bf4d41$3fb36e40$44441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Wave Circle GUT Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 04:27:40 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"mBpm41.0.nZ1.4UWOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32413 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: eo = 8.84E-12 Farad/Meter uo = 4(pi)E-7 Henry/Meter c = 2.997925E-8 Meters/Second m = mass (kg) h = Planck's Constant = 6.626E-34 Joule-Second Compton Wavelength or Circumference of a Wave Circle = h/mc Circle Radius, R = 2(pi)*h/mc Capacitance, C = eo*h/mc Inductance, L = uo*h/mc Potential, V = q/C (volts) Energy, E = mc^2 = 1/2* C*V^2 + 1/2*L*I^2 (Joules) Charge, q = CV = 1.602E-19 (Coulombs) Frequency, f = 1/(L*C)^1/2 Displacement Current, I = q*f Stack the Wave Circles in a Nucleus with positive ones "rotating" clockwise and negative ones rotating counter-clockwise and you get the strong force, net spin, net charge, and nuclear magnetic moment. Plug in relativistic time/current dilation effects and you get the magneto-gravitational force. What more do you need? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 03:32:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA07552; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 03:32:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 03:32:02 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange transformer Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:31:56 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <10246sshm5eh7mhq572buuse71e27gv09r 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 DAA07529 Resent-Message-ID: <"lELTd3.0.sr1.oWWOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32414 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:17:12 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >***{I think Hank was a bit tongue-in-cheek, and deliberately took you too >literally. Notice that you only said that the primary itself is physically >inaccessible, not that the entire circuit which contains it is physically >inaccessible. Therefore, it is possible to place a switch in the part of >the circuit that *is* accessible, and simply flip the primary on and off. I >think you've been had, Robin. :-) --MJ}*** > [snip] Oh well, it happens :). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 07:50:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA31230; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 07:49:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 07:49:58 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 10:54:43 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Robert Calloway cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "swirling magnetic fields" In-Reply-To: <199808091501.KAA02824 neon.prysm.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"3-vwG.0.ud7.cIaOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32415 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear R., Where did you get on your search in magnetic fields? John PS: What is the differences between un usual and 'regular' magnetic fields, please On Sun, 9 Aug 1998, Robert Calloway wrote: > Hello all, I am studying and experimenting on the subject of unusual > magnetic fields. > Does anyone know of any url's on this? > Regards, Robert H. Calloway > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 09:35:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA02395; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:33:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:33:31 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:33:16 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ijt3c.0.Lb.gpbOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32416 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Storms writes: Unfortunately, the physical description of a calorimeter which might show this effect is not provided. Thus, we must guess just what arrangement Swartz has in mind. Swartz has said any flow calorimeter run at a "low" flow rate will show this effect. He has never revealed how low it must be, but he thinks the effect occurred at PowerGen where the rate was one liter per minute, which is much higher than any other I have ever seen. On that basis I surmise that virtually all flow calorimeters should show this effect, and therefore they should be impossible to calibrate. The arrangement he has in mind is a flow calorimeter oriented vertically, with the outlet above the inlet. Therefore, presumably, if you turn the cell 90 degrees on its side, or reverse the flow direction, the effect would go away. Years ago I asked Swartz whether he has performed this simple test. He said no, he has not. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 09:58:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA11461; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:57:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:57:21 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:02:09 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: smarts Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"wOica3.0.-o2.-9cOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32417 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A strong young man at the construction site was bragging that he could outdo anyone in a feat of strength. He made a special case of making fun of one of the older workmen. After several minutes, the older worker hadhad enough. "Why don't you put your money where your mouth is," he said. "I will bet a week's wages that I can haul something in a wheelbarrow over to that outbuilding that you won't be able to wheel back." "You're on, oldman," the braggart replied. "Let's see what you got." The old man reached out and grabbed the wheelbarrow by the handles. Then, nodding to the youngman, he said, "All right, Get in." ______________________________________________________ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 11:29:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA14661; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 11:27:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 11:27:54 -0800 Message-ID: <386277EA.B0955119 ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:28:48 -0700 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K System X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems References: <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5UIik2.0.ya3.wUdOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32418 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed, The study by Merriman, which Swartz quotes, observed a temperature stratification within the room air which caused the outlet temperature to be slightly higher than the inlet when no power was applied. They note that even this effect was too small to explain the claimed excess heat. Such an effect is only characteristic of this particular set up and does not apply to flow calorimetry in general. Normally, people keep their flow calorimeters in an uniform and constant temperature environment. Consequently, the effect seen by Merriman would not occur. The Swartz paper only alludes to the vertical-type calorimeter for which many variations are possible. He did not describe the variation he thinks would show the buoyancy effect nor how exactly this would occur. I have never seen this effect in my designs at flow rates of 20 gm/min and would be hard pressed to suggest a design of any practical value where the effect could be seen. Even the CETI design did not show buoyancy within the calorimeter, as Swartz claims, but picked up energy from the outside caused by external temperature differences. Regards, Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: > Ed Storms writes: > > Unfortunately, the physical description of a calorimeter which > might show this effect is not provided. Thus, we must guess just > what arrangement Swartz has in mind. > > Swartz has said any flow calorimeter run at a "low" flow rate will show > this effect. He has never revealed how low it must be, but he thinks the > effect occurred at PowerGen where the rate was one liter per minute, which > is much higher than any other I have ever seen. On that basis I surmise > that virtually all flow calorimeters should show this effect, and therefore > they should be impossible to calibrate. The arrangement he has in mind is a > flow calorimeter oriented vertically, with the outlet above the inlet. > Therefore, presumably, if you turn the cell 90 degrees on its side, or > reverse the flow direction, the effect would go away. Years ago I asked > Swartz whether he has performed this simple test. He said no, he has not. > > - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 11:53:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA25455; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 11:52:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 11:52:27 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991223144658.007c75c0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 14:46:58 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <386277EA.B0955119 ix.netcom.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"RYCV21.0.fD6.wrdOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32419 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:28 PM 12/23/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >Jed, > >The study by Merriman, which Swartz quotes, observed a >temperature stratification within the room air which caused the outlet >temperature to be slightly higher than the inlet when no power was applied. Wrong. The difference is not due to temperature stratification within the room air but due to Bernard instability. There may be both components, but the latter dominates. This seems to be where your misunderstanding begins. ================================================== >They note that even this effect was too small to explain the claimed excess >heat. Such >an effect is only characteristic of this particular set up and does not apply >to >flow calorimetry in general. Normally, people keep their flow calorimeters in >an >uniform and constant temperature environment. Consequently, the effect seen >by Merriman would not occur. Wrong. It always happens in vertically positioned flow calorimeters, and especially at relatively low flow rates. ================================================== >The Swartz paper only alludes to the vertical-type calorimeter for which >many variations are possible. He did not describe the variation he thinks >would >show the buoyancy effect nor how exactly this would occur. Wrong. It is stated exactly in the papers. ================================================== >I have never seen >this effect in my designs at flow rates of 20 gm/min and would be hard pressed >to suggest a design of any practical value where the effect could be seen. >Even the CETI design did not show buoyancy within the calorimeter, as Swartz >claims, but picked up energy from the outside caused by external temperature >differences. Wrong. Disproved by their patent application, and the loss of the "excess heat" claims in horizontal flow systems. I would suggest that you obtain and read 'Continuum Electromechanics' by Melcher (MIT Press) but you, Edmund, stated that you have no use for engineering, and Jed has no use for calibration. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 11:54:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA25992; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 11:52:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 11:52:59 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991223144812.007c8630 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 14:48:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"FWT_Q3.0.1M6.QsdOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32420 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:33 PM 12/23/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Ed Storms writes: > > Unfortunately, the physical description of a calorimeter which > might show this effect is not provided. Thus, we must guess just > what arrangement Swartz has in mind. > >Swartz has said any flow calorimeter run at a "low" flow rate will show >this effect. He has never revealed how low it must be, but he thinks the >effect occurred at PowerGen where the rate was one liter per minute, which >is much higher than any other I have ever seen. On that basis I surmise >that virtually all flow calorimeters should show this effect, and therefore >they should be impossible to calibrate. The arrangement he has in mind is a >flow calorimeter oriented vertically, with the outlet above the inlet. >Therefore, presumably, if you turn the cell 90 degrees on its side, or >reverse the flow direction, the effect would go away. Years ago I asked >Swartz whether he has performed this simple test. He said no, he has not. > >- Jed Characteristically wrong in many aspects. I would suggest that you obtain and read 'Continuum Electromechanics' by Melcher (MIT Press) but you appear to have no use for mathematics or calibrations. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 12:34:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07269; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:33:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:33:36 -0800 Message-ID: <3862874E.806DBE02 ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:34:32 -0700 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K System X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems References: <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991223144658.007c75c0@world.std.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-zVXC2.0.Vn1.WSeOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32421 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > At 12:28 PM 12/23/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: > >Jed, > > > >The study by Merriman, which Swartz quotes, observed a > >temperature stratification within the room air which caused the outlet > >temperature to be slightly higher than the inlet when no power was applied. > > Wrong. > The difference is not due to temperature stratification within the room air > but due to Bernard instability. There may be both components, but the latter > dominates. This seems to be where your misunderstanding begins. You may wish to support the idea of a Bernard instability but the paper you cite to support this idea states, "It was determined that this 0.2 C temperature bias was in fact due to the thermal stratification of the air in the room -- that is the room air is warmer near the ceiling than the floor ---". (page 16) No mention was made of a Bernard instability or any other kind of instability within the calorimeter. What evidence do you have to support a Bernard instability? > > > ================================================== > > >They note that even this effect was too small to explain the claimed excess > >heat. Such > >an effect is only characteristic of this particular set up and does not apply > >to > >flow calorimetry in general. Normally, people keep their flow > calorimeters in > >an > >uniform and constant temperature environment. Consequently, the effect seen > >by Merriman would not occur. > > Wrong. It always happens in vertically positioned flow calorimeters, > and especially at relatively low flow rates. While various complex mixing patterns would occur in the flowing water as it cools the heat producing region, these local hot spots have no effect on the energy values provided the exit water is at a known and uniform temperature. This a very basic concept which you must acknowledge before we can go any further. If the water does not have a uniform temperature, we have a mixing problem not a Bernard instability problem. Such a mixing problem did exist in the CETI cell at low power. > > ================================================== > > >The Swartz paper only alludes to the vertical-type calorimeter for which > >many variations are possible. He did not describe the variation he thinks > >would > >show the buoyancy effect nor how exactly this would occur. > > Wrong. It is stated exactly in the papers. I only have access to the paper I noted previously. I apologize if you provided the necessary detail in the other paper. > > ================================================== > > >I have never seen > >this effect in my designs at flow rates of 20 gm/min and would be hard > pressed > >to suggest a design of any practical value where the effect could be seen. > >Even the CETI design did not show buoyancy within the calorimeter, as Swartz > >claims, but picked up energy from the outside caused by external temperature > >differences. > > Wrong. Disproved by their patent application, and the loss of the "excess > heat" claims in horizontal flow systems. This is news to me. I see no evidence for this claim in their patent application. > I would suggest that you obtain and read 'Continuum Electromechanics' > by Melcher (MIT Press) but you, Edmund, stated that you have no use for > engineering, and Jed has no use for calibration. I have no idea where you get the idea that I have no use for engineering. It is true that I have no use for your particular engineering approach to defining the OOP but that is another issue. I'll let Jed provide the easy counter to your opinion of him. Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 12:45:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA11948; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:42:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:42:55 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Angular protons Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 07:42:49 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <725u5s4rlgjvklo7tlr7hepj2efh06np0f 4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <725u5s4rlgjvklo7tlr7hepj2efh06np0f 4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 MAA11920 Resent-Message-ID: <"A1LuS2.0.Xw2.FbeOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32422 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:49:16 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >When the protons of the solar wind enter the Earth's magnetic field they >start to spiral around, acquiring angular momentum. Since this is a >conserved quantity, they must get it from somewhere. Does it come from the >Earth itself? [snip] Come on people, was this too easy or too hard? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 13:08:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA18891; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:06:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:06:56 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991223160153.009f9a40 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 16:01:53 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3862874E.806DBE02 ix.netcom.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991223144658.007c75c0 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"hQkm03.0.5d4.mxeOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32423 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:34 PM 12/23/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: > > >Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >> At 12:28 PM 12/23/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >> >Jed, >> >The study by Merriman, which Swartz quotes, observed a >> >temperature stratification within the room air which caused the outlet >> >temperature to be slightly higher than the inlet when no power was applied. >> >> Wrong. >> The difference is not due to temperature stratification within the room air >> but due to Bernard instability. There may be both components, but the latter >> dominates. This seems to be where your misunderstanding begins. > >You may wish to support the idea of a Bernard instability but the paper you cite >to support this idea states, "It was determined that this 0.2 C temperature bias >was in fact due to the thermal stratification of the air in the room -- that is >the room air is warmer near the ceiling than the floor ---". (page 16) No mention >was made of a Bernard instability or any other kind of instability within the >calorimeter. What evidence do you have to support a Bernard instability? Your statement of what the paper purports is correct, but it is less clear that the statement is correct as claimed. However, first that has been dealt with elsewhere INCLUDING the fact that the gases evolved have a bigger impact [Swartz, M., "Relative Impact of Thermal Stratification of the Air Surrounding a Calorimeter", Journal of New Energy, 2, 219-221(1996)]. Second, any time there is a temperature differential from below, and the width is smaller than a Rayleigh-Taylor wavelength, the Bernard instability is seen. This is a very important subject BTW. Please get some books on continuum electromechanics yourself. The texts were suggested previously and in the references. This effect is very well-known and very well understood. And there can be an impact [Swartz. M.., "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)]. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz >> >> >> ================================================== >> >> >They note that even this effect was too small to explain the claimed excess >> >heat. Such >> >an effect is only characteristic of this particular set up and does not apply >> >to >> >flow calorimetry in general. Normally, people keep their flow >> calorimeters in >> >an >> >uniform and constant temperature environment. Consequently, the effect seen >> >by Merriman would not occur. >> >> Wrong. It always happens in vertically positioned flow calorimeters, >> and especially at relatively low flow rates. > >While various complex mixing patterns would occur in the flowing water as it >cools the heat producing region, these local hot spots have no effect on the >energy values provided the exit water is at a known and uniform temperature. >This a very basic concept which you must acknowledge before we can go any >further. If the water does not have a uniform temperature, we have a mixing >problem not a Bernard instability problem. Such a mixing problem did exist in >the CETI cell at low power. > >> >> ================================================== >> >> >The Swartz paper only alludes to the vertical-type calorimeter for which >> >many variations are possible. He did not describe the variation he thinks >> >would >> >show the buoyancy effect nor how exactly this would occur. >> >> Wrong. It is stated exactly in the papers. > >I only have access to the paper I noted previously. I apologize if you provided >the necessary detail in the other paper. > >> >> ================================================== >> >> >I have never seen >> >this effect in my designs at flow rates of 20 gm/min and would be hard >> pressed >> >to suggest a design of any practical value where the effect could be seen. >> >Even the CETI design did not show buoyancy within the calorimeter, as Swartz >> >claims, but picked up energy from the outside caused by external temperature >> >differences. >> >> Wrong. Disproved by their patent application, and the loss of the "excess >> heat" claims in horizontal flow systems. > >This is news to me. I see no evidence for this claim in their patent >application. > >> I would suggest that you obtain and read 'Continuum Electromechanics' >> by Melcher (MIT Press) but you, Edmund, stated that you have no use for >> engineering, and Jed has no use for calibration. > >I have no idea where you get the idea that I have no use for engineering. It is >true that I have no use for your particular engineering approach to defining the >OOP but that is another issue. I'll let Jed provide the easy counter to your >opinion of him. > >Ed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 13:12:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21934; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:11:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:11:25 -0800 Message-ID: <014301bf4d92$9823a4e0$44441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <725u5s4rlgjvklo7tlr7hepj2efh06np0f 4ax.com> Subject: Re: Angular protons Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 14:10:53 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"MUf7m1.0.eM5.z_eOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32425 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: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 1999 12:42 PM Subject: Re: Angular protons > On Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:49:16 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > >When the protons of the solar wind enter the Earth's magnetic field they > >start to spiral around, acquiring angular momentum. Since this is a > >conserved quantity, they must get it from somewhere. Does it come from the > >Earth itself? > [snip] > Come on people, was this too easy or too hard?\ Between about 1.0E30 Joules rotational kinetic energy of the Earth itself and the Kinetic energy of the solar wind protons, a few femto/atto joules of angular momentum of the proton picked up by interaction with the Earth's B field doesn't amount to much, does it? :-) Regards, Frederick > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 13:13:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21530; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:11:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:11:17 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991223161250.013c39d0 inforamp.net> X-Sender: quinney inforamp.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 16:12:50 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Colin Quinney Subject: Re: Angular protons In-Reply-To: References: <725u5s4rlgjvklo7tlr7hepj2efh06np0f 4ax.com> <725u5s4rlgjvklo7tlr7hepj2efh06np0f 4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"hOsfL3.0.GG5.q_eOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32424 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Too easy From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 13:18:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23837; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:14:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:14:22 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991223160905.009ff420 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 16:09:05 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems (corrected) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"bm2-G.0.Nq5.j2fOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32426 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I made an error in the previous post which is corrected here. The last post said "smaller" but it should have said "greater". Please excuse this important error. -m- =========== At 01:34 PM 12/23/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: > > >Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >> At 12:28 PM 12/23/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >> >Jed, >> >The study by Merriman, which Swartz quotes, observed a >> >temperature stratification within the room air which caused the outlet >> >temperature to be slightly higher than the inlet when no power was applied. >> >> Wrong. >> The difference is not due to temperature stratification within the room air >> but due to Bernard instability. There may be both components, but the latter >> dominates. This seems to be where your misunderstanding begins. > >You may wish to support the idea of a Bernard instability but the paper you cite >to support this idea states, "It was determined that this 0.2 C temperature bias >was in fact due to the thermal stratification of the air in the room -- that is >the room air is warmer near the ceiling than the floor ---". (page 16) No mention >was made of a Bernard instability or any other kind of instability within the >calorimeter. What evidence do you have to support a Bernard instability? Your statement of what the paper purports is correct, but it is less clear that the statement is correct as claimed. However, first that has been dealt with elsewhere INCLUDING the fact that the gases evolved have a bigger impact [Swartz, M., "Relative Impact of Thermal Stratification of the Air Surrounding a Calorimeter", Journal of New Energy, 2, 219-221(1996)]. Second, any time there is a temperature differential which is larger below in a gravitational field, and the width is GREATER than a Rayleigh-Taylor wavelength, the Bernard instability is seen. This is a very important subject BTW. Please get some books on continuum electromechanics yourself. The texts were suggested previously and in the references. This effect is very well-known and very well understood. And there can be an impact [Swartz. M.., "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)]. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 13:43:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA32685; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:40:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:40:51 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991223164035.007a0cf0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 16:40:35 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <386277EA.B0955119 ix.netcom.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"xaqwt3.0.d-7.ZRfOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32427 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edmund Storms wrote: >Normally, people keep their flow calorimeters in >an >uniform and constant temperature environment. Consequently, the effect seen >by Merriman would not occur. In Barry's defense, this was a particularly long, tall cell -- the longest I ever recall seeing -- and it was sitting in well-regulated, quiet ambient room air. It is remarkable that he managed to detect such a small difference. I think he was correct about the cause. It would not have seriously interfered with detection of excess heat. I extrapolated the temperature gradient from floor to ceiling in my office with a slow-acting thermometer, and I recall I measured something in the same order of magnitude. After Merriman said this, Dick Blue, I think it was, began telling people that all cold fusion results were caused by this problem. I looked up the cell height and power in 5 or 6 papers and determined that this would only work if the air at floor level was freezing and hot as an oven at the ceiling (3 meters up), and if all cells were run in ambient air. Blue did not respond. The hypothesis reminds me of Taubes' claim in his book that the water in an ordinary test can have a 50 deg C temperature difference from one side to the other. People have funny ideas about nature. Even highly trained people like Blue and Taubes. I always wonder why they don't just try a little test. I recall Tom Droge debating on and on about whether an electric current or power supply might affect a mercury thermometer. I finally said to him, "get a mercury thermometer, hold it next to a power supply, and find out!" - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 14:12:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA12717; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 14:11:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 14:11:06 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991223171054.007a1180 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:10:54 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991223164035.007a0cf0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <386277EA.B0955119 ix.netcom.com> <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Dyo_n1.0.Z63.wtfOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32428 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: >I extrapolated the >temperature gradient from floor to ceiling in my office with a slow-acting >thermometer . . . I meant to say: I extrapolated Barry's lab air temperature gradient from floor to ceiling, and then I measured the gradient in my office with a slow-acting thermometer, and found it was in the same ballpark. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 15:50:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA13988; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 15:48:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 15:48:18 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991223184455.007d4100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:44:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991223171054.007a1180 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991223164035.007a0cf0 pop.mindspring.com> <386277EA.B0955119 ix.netcom.com> <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"MSC3O2.0.TQ3.1JhOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32429 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:10 PM 12/23/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >I wrote: >>I extrapolated the >>temperature gradient from floor to ceiling in my office with a slow-acting >>thermometer . . . > >"I meant to say: I extrapolated Barry's lab air temperature gradient from >floor to ceiling, and then I measured the gradient in my office with a >slow-acting thermometer, and found it was in the same ballpark." >- Jed ?? The gradient of such a purported air temperature distribution would have to be carefully derived following measurement of the distribution of actual temperatures from the floor all the way to the ceiling and also requires the measurement of the height of the room. Slow-acting thermometers, ballpark guesses, (not sure what is being "extrapolated"), and measurements of temperatures in other rooms should probably be ignored. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 16:52:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA00427; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 16:51:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 16:51:03 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 19:55:46 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Angular protons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nHYAt2.0.Y6.sDiOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32430 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: They already HAD energy... they lose some as they start 'taking corners' On Fri, 24 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:49:16 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > >When the protons of the solar wind enter the Earth's magnetic field they > >start to spiral around, acquiring angular momentum. Since this is a > >conserved quantity, they must get it from somewhere. Does it come from the > >Earth itself? > [snip] > Come on people, was this too easy or too hard? > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 16:53:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA01424; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 16:51:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 16:51:55 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 19:56:44 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Angular protons In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19991223161250.013c39d0 inforamp.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hX3C-1.0.AM.hEiOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32431 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What is too easy? And what are 'angular protons' Please? On Thu, 23 Dec 1999, Colin Quinney wrote: > Too easy > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 17:21:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA08854; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:18:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:18:21 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wave Circle GUT Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 12:18:11 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <00f301bf4d41$3fb36e40$44441d26 fjsparber> In-Reply-To: <00f301bf4d41$3fb36e40$44441d26 fjsparber> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 RAA08829 Resent-Message-ID: <"Xzyj61.0.BA2.SdiOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32432 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 04:27:40 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: [snip] >Stack the Wave Circles in a Nucleus with positive ones "rotating" clockwise If you look at a clockwise rotating object from the other side, it is rotating anti-clockwise. Yet the charge doesn't change. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 17:22:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA10804; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:21:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:21:29 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Angular protons Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 12:21:24 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.5.32.19991223161250.013c39d0 inforamp.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 RAA10496 Resent-Message-ID: <"v-zKQ.0.de2.OgiOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32434 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 19:56:44 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: > > What is too easy? > > And what are 'angular protons' A catchy subject line. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 17:22:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09780; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:20:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:20:42 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Angular protons Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 12:20:37 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 RAA09750 Resent-Message-ID: <"hSTqI.0.kO2.gfiOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32433 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 19:55:46 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: > They already HAD energy... they lose some as they start 'taking >corners' Note below that I said "angular momentum", not energy. > >On Fri, 24 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >> On Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:49:16 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >> >> >When the protons of the solar wind enter the Earth's magnetic field they >> >start to spiral around, acquiring angular momentum. Since this is a >> >conserved quantity, they must get it from somewhere. Does it come from the >> >Earth itself? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 17:39:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA17645; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:38:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:38:22 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:43:12 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"x4Dew2.0.dJ4.EwiOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32435 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: y The simple convetion for assigning handed-ness of rotation: 1] you are standing and looking down on the rotating object. as though you were were standing in your house and looking downward at a record player on the floor. 2] If the thing is going like a clock hand does or like a standard wood or machine screw which you are putting into wood or metal. THEN 3] This is Clock wise Right handed + or plus or positive in Atomic Physics particle spin AND: What is GUT ??? On Fri, 24 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 04:27:40 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > [snip] > >Stack the Wave Circles in a Nucleus with positive ones "rotating" clockwise > > If you look at a clockwise rotating object from the other side, it is > rotating anti-clockwise. Yet the charge doesn't change. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 18:04:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA23113; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:03:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:03:26 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 19:08:56 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912240205.TAA19656 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: Resent-Message-ID: <"aEIPu.0.2f5.jHjOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32436 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:43 PM 12/23/99 -0500, you wrote: >y > The simple convetion for assigning handed-ness of rotation: > > > 1] you are standing and looking down on the rotating object. > as though you were were standing in your house and looking >downward at a record player on the floor. > > 2] If the thing is going like a clock hand does or like a >standard wood or machine screw which you are putting into wood or metal. > > THEN...[clockwise] If I hand you a symmetric spinning gyroscope with its axis horizontal, and the top of its wheel coming towards you while you are standing there, is it spinning clockwise or counterclockwise? --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 18:38:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA08441; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:37:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:37:50 -0800 Message-ID: <017701bf4dc0$2eb2e9c0$44441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <00f301bf4d41$3fb36e40$44441d26 fjsparber> Subject: Re: Wave Circle GUT Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 19:36:33 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"7B2uj2.0.p32.-njOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32437 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Robin van Spaandonk To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 1999 5:18 PM Subject: Re: Wave Circle GUT Robin wrote; > On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 04:27:40 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > [snip] > >Stack the Wave Circles in a Nucleus with positive ones "rotating" clockwise > > If you look at a clockwise rotating object from the other side, it is > rotating anti-clockwise. Yet the charge doesn't change. Who said it did? :-) Proton (Three Wave Circle "quarks") : -------> + q <------- - q external electron -q -------> + q Net charge + q, net spin + 1/2, a negative charge (Wave Circle) rotating CCW is ATTRACTED to a positive charge (Wave Circle) rotating CW same as currents flowing in the SAME direction in parallel conductors . AntiProton (Three Wave Circle "quarks"): ------> - q <------ + q external positron +q -------> - q Net charge - q, net spin - 1/2 You can flip it over if you want. :-) Regards, Frederick > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 18:42:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA11551; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:41:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:41:54 -0800 Message-ID: <018301bf4dc0$c111ebe0$44441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 19:41:17 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"zDYaS1.0.Kq2.nrjOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32438 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: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 1999 5:43 PM Subject: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT > > What is GUT ??? Good Until Tomorrow,or Grand Unified Theory, John? :-) Regards, Frederick > > > On Fri, 24 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > > On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 04:27:40 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > > [snip] > > >Stack the Wave Circles in a Nucleus with positive ones "rotating" clockwise > > > > If you look at a clockwise rotating object from the other side, it is > > rotating anti-clockwise. Yet the charge doesn't change. > > > > Regards, > > > > Robin van Spaandonk > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 21:20:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA18622; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:42:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:42:50 -0800 Message-ID: <19991224044248.298.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:42:48 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Angular protons To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"ojaB81.0.oY4.AdlOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32439 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >When the protons of the solar wind enter the Earth's magnetic field they >start to spiral around, acquiring angular momentum. Since this is a >conserved quantity, they must get it from somewhere. Does it come from the >Earth itself? When a charged particle enters a magnetic field, its trajectory is bent by the field. If the field is static and the magnetic field does not change extremely brusquely over the distance of a gyro radius, the particle trajectory is bent around and the particle exits the field. It looks like a reflection. The reflected particle has, of course a different momentum than it had on incidence. Momentum is a conserved quantity. The difference in momentum is taken up by the (electro)magnetic field as a wave. If the wave length is short enought relative to the distance back to a single source of the magnetic field, e.g. to Earth's core, then the momentum is transferred to the source object. Therefore, in the case of the solar wind incident on Earth's magnetosphere, the momentum change of the reflected ions (and electrons, but protons carry most of the momentum of the solar wind) appears macroscopically as a pressure on the magnetospheric bowshock, which in turn transmits the force to Earth's core. Thus, the solar wind "pushes" on the earth through the "cushion" of its magnetic field. Most of the ions and electrons flow around the bowshock and continue out into space. A minority of the charged particles get trapped in the magnetospheric field. This can happen when the field acting on the particle (that would have been reflected) changes temporally while the particle is in the field. This induces an electric field, thereby altering the particle energy and momentum, which can lead to trajectories that do not leave the altered magnetic field. Another mechanism is if our favorite incident particle collides with another particle (trapped or not) while in the field. So now we finally have one of Robin's "angular" protons, usually called a "gyrating" particle by those of us in the plasma field. If we draw a coordinate system with an origin inside the circle of gyration, then certainly we calculate that it has angular momentum. But, recall from physics/mechanics that in this coordinate system the particle had the SAME angular momentum (mvr) before it was trapped, too! In fact, the particle also had angular momentum before it got trapped in all coordinate systems, EXCEPT the special set of coordinates whose origin lies anywhere along the the straight line determined by the particle trajectory before it encountered the magnetic field. Absolute angular momentum (and linear momentum) depends one's coordinate system. However, changes in angular (and linear) momentum can be accounted in any coordinate system. So, the particle's angular momentum changed when it got trapped in the magnetic field. The electromagnetic field's angular momentum got changed, too, and eventually that change is coupled back to Earth's core, the source of the field. Re Robin's question, "Does it (particle's angular momentum) come from the Earth itself?" We see that particle and Earth exchange angular (and linear) momentum. Which "gives" and which is "receives" depends on one's point of view (coordinate system). I think Robin is interested in getting energy out of this system. We have two sources of energy here, the solar wind and rotation of the Earth. We can get some energy out of this system. The solar wind is not steady. It fluctuates, because the sun, which launches the solar wind, is very turbulent on all scales. The variations of the solar wind yield varying pressures on Earth's magnetospheric bow shock, which propagate back to the core. We here on the surface can measure these fluctuations (it's done) and can couple some energy out of them by large coils. (Is this Robin's transformer secondary?) Probably a stronger source of magnetospheric fluctuations (I do not know the numbers) is the magnetospheric turbulence driven by the solar wind. In either case, the solar wind, not Earth, is the source of the magnetic fluctuation energy. A small amount of energy comes from Earth's rotation when its small magnetic irregularities (Earth's field is not smoothly dipolar) interact with the solar wind. This only picks up varying or "AC". Robin's transformer analogy is not so clear here. An AC dynamo is a better analogy: mechanical energy (solar wind kinetic energy) moves a magnetized armature (magnetisphere) and induces electric current in a coil on the surface of the earth (stator). Even if the total power in the magnetic fluctuations is large, the power density low (much lower than solar) and varies a lot (like wind). I don't know the numbers, but since the fluctuations are measured, if they were of a practical size for human consumption, the news conferences would have been called right away. ===== Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 21:39:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA03209; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:38:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:38:42 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Angular protons Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:38:38 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <19991224044248.298.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <19991224044248.298.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 VAA03189 Resent-Message-ID: <"vbOUW.0.3o.YRmOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32440 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:42:48 -0800 (PST), Michael Schaffer wrote: Thanks Michael, for your detailed response. >When a charged particle enters a magnetic field, its trajectory is bent by >the field. If the field is static and the magnetic field does not change >extremely brusquely over the distance of a gyro radius, the particle >trajectory is bent around and the particle exits the field. It looks like a In the case of the Earth's field, the field isn't uniform, so I presume that as a particle approaches the Earth, encountering an ever stronger field, the radius gradually decreases. Does this prevent reflection, or just alter the direction? (Or perhaps cause the spiral to slip sideways around the planet?) [snip] >earth through the "cushion" of its magnetic field. Most of the ions and >electrons flow around the bowshock and continue out into space. Do you have any figures for the rate at which ions get trapped? (And the strength of the Earth's field in the van Allen belts too if you have that info on hand). [snip] > >A minority of the charged particles get trapped in the magnetospheric field. >This can happen when the field acting on the particle (that would have been >reflected) changes temporally while the particle is in the field. This >induces an electric field, thereby altering the particle energy and momentum, >which can lead to trajectories that do not leave the altered magnetic field. >Another mechanism is if our favorite incident particle collides with another >particle (trapped or not) while in the field. Given that the van Allen belts are filled with particles already, and every electrical interaction will affect incoming particles to an extent varying with the distance between them, wouldn't every incoming particle have it's trajectory altered? (Perhaps the result is that they are repelled by particles of the same charge already trapped in the nearest belt?) [snip] >So, the >particle's angular momentum changed when it got trapped in the magnetic >field. The electromagnetic field's angular momentum got changed, too, and >eventually that change is coupled back to Earth's core, the source of the >field. Does this result in a change of the rotation rate of the Earth, or of it's revolution rate, or both? (Since protons carry the most angular momentum, and they always turn the same way in the Earth's field, the effect should be cumulative over long periods - or at least until there is a field reversal). > >Re Robin's question, "Does it (particle's angular momentum) come from the >Earth itself?" We see that particle and Earth exchange angular (and linear) >momentum. Which "gives" and which is "receives" depends on one's point of >view (coordinate system). > >I think Robin is interested in getting energy out of this system. Correct. >We have two >sources of energy here, the solar wind and rotation of the Earth. We can get >some energy out of this system. The solar wind is not steady. It fluctuates, >because the sun, which launches the solar wind, is very turbulent on all >scales. The variations of the solar wind yield varying pressures on Earth's >magnetospheric bow shock, which propagate back to the core. We here on the >surface can measure these fluctuations (it's done) and can couple some energy >out of them by large coils. (Is this Robin's transformer secondary?) Yes and no. It is the secondary, but I'm not looking at only extracting energy from the variations in the flux (which falls within present technology), as this source of energy is relatively small compared to the total kinetic energy of the particles. It's the latter that I'm interested in. > Probably >a stronger source of magnetospheric fluctuations (I do not know the numbers) >is the magnetospheric turbulence driven by the solar wind. In either case, >the solar wind, not Earth, is the source of the magnetic fluctuation energy. >A small amount of energy comes from Earth's rotation when its small magnetic >irregularities (Earth's field is not smoothly dipolar) interact with the >solar wind. My reason for broaching the question of angular momentum was not as a means of extracting energy directly from the rotation of the Earth (I hadn't actually considered that), but rather that transfer of momentum (and angular momentum) is associated with mechanical forces, which usually result in efficient energy transfer. IOW while gyrating electrons will radiate at radio frequencies, and doubtless this energy could be tapped with an antenna, what I'm really interested in is intercepting the direct mechanical forces, which are far greater (e.g. as happens in electric motors). I previously used a transformer analogy, but it comes down to the same thing. Energy transfer through magnetic forces, not through radiated electromagnetic waves which are essentially lossy. > >This only picks up varying or "AC". Robin's transformer analogy is not so >clear here. An AC dynamo is a better analogy: mechanical energy (solar wind >kinetic energy) moves a magnetized armature (magnetisphere) and induces >electric current in a coil on the surface of the earth (stator). This is getting close, but once again utilises only the varying component of the flux, not the DC component which carries 99.9%(?) of the energy. > >Even if the total power in the magnetic fluctuations is large, the power >density low (much lower than solar) and varies a lot (like wind). I don't >know the numbers, but since the fluctuations are measured, if they were of a >practical size for human consumption, the news conferences would have been >called right away. I'm sure they would! :) [snip] I keep getting an association with Bearden and Whittaker, and "infolded" information. It seems to me that somehow the gyration frequency must be "infolded" in what is essentially a DC current. If we could find a way to "unfold" it, then we would have access to an AC field varying at the gyration frequency. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 21:54:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA08743; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:54:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:54:02 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 00:58:52 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT In-Reply-To: <199912240205.TAA19656 smtp.asu.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"VPlaQ2.0.X82.wfmOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32441 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Think of it as drafts writers do.... if one end of the axel is the 'top' ... and it is pointed at you... you could bend your knees, place the bottom on the floor, and it would still be that same orientation as you handed it to me...The top of the axel is pointed at me... then if the wheel is going like a clock, then it is 'clock wise' J After a little whaile, if this did not help you, you will get it, and you will be using the convention.... There is an exception, and I will look that one up for all of us. On Thu, 23 Dec 1999, Lynn Kurtz wrote: > At 08:43 PM 12/23/99 -0500, you wrote: > >y > > The simple convetion for assigning handed-ness of rotation: > > > > > > 1] you are standing and looking down on the rotating object. > > as though you were were standing in your house and looking > >downward at a record player on the floor. > > > > 2] If the thing is going like a clock hand does or like a > >standard wood or machine screw which you are putting into wood or metal. > > > > THEN...[clockwise] > > If I hand you a symmetric spinning gyroscope with its axis horizontal, and > the top of its wheel coming towards you while you are standing there, is it > spinning clockwise or counterclockwise? > > --Lynn > You have to decide one end is top .... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 22:02:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA10262; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:57:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:57:40 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 01:02:30 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: OH OOH Me MeRe: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT In-Reply-To: <018301bf4dc0$c111ebe0$44441d26 fjsparber> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"RWjHm1.0.BW2.JjmOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32442 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Question... PLEASE !!!!! See flag.... On Thu, 23 Dec 1999, Frederick Sparber wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: John Schnurer > To: > Sent: Thursday, December 23, 1999 5:43 PM > Subject: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT > > > > What is GUT ??? > > Good Until Tomorrow,or Grand Unified Theory, John? :-) > > Regards, Frederick > > > > > > On Fri, 24 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 04:27:40 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: > > > [snip] > > > >Stack the Wave Circles in a Nucleus with positive ones "rotating" clockwise > > > _________________________ FLAG ________________ OOOOOOOOH !!!! I want one...! If you change the rotation the charge changes??? > > > If you look at a clockwise rotating object from the other side, it is > > > rotating anti-clockwise. Yet the charge doesn't change. How? Cool! What is it? ____________________________________ end ___________________ > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Robin van Spaandonk > > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 23:37:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA01486; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 23:36:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 23:36:34 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199912240205.TAA19656 smtp.asu.edu> References: Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:51:58 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT Resent-Message-ID: <"gmB8R.0.8N.2AoOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32443 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 08:43 PM 12/23/99 -0500, you wrote: >>y >> The simple convetion for assigning handed-ness of rotation: >> >> >> 1] you are standing and looking down on the rotating object. >> as though you were were standing in your house and looking >>downward at a record player on the floor. >> >> 2] If the thing is going like a clock hand does or like a >>standard wood or machine screw which you are putting into wood or metal. >> >> THEN...[clockwise] > >If I hand you a symmetric spinning gyroscope with its axis horizontal, and >the top of its wheel coming towards you while you are standing there, is it >spinning clockwise or counterclockwise? ***{The notion of clockwise or counterclockwise presumes an observer standing at one pole or the other, rather than facing the equator. Assuming a person is doing that, whether he would say it is spinning clockwise or counterclockwise depends on which end he is facing. Thus the notion of clockwise or counterclockwise rotation describes a relationship between a spinning object and an observer, rather than anything intrinsic to the object itself. (How is this for absurdity: Bill is standing facing the left end of the thing, while Sam is looking at it from the right, and they are arguing over whether it is spinning clockwise or counterclockwise! Sounds like a plot line from sci.physics.fusion! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** > >--Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 01:10:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA13984; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 01:09:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 01:09:09 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 20:09:04 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <2nd66s4atfe16m8hd9b80r3o34fg615u0q 4ax.com> References: <199912240205.TAA19656@smtp.asu.edu> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 BAA13959 Resent-Message-ID: <"uevaR.0.MQ3.qWpOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32444 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:51:58 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >***{The notion of clockwise or counterclockwise presumes an observer >standing at one pole or the other, rather than facing the equator. Assuming >a person is doing that, whether he would say it is spinning clockwise or >counterclockwise depends on which end he is facing. Thus the notion of >clockwise or counterclockwise rotation describes a relationship between a >spinning object and an observer, rather than anything intrinsic to the >object itself. (How is this for absurdity: Bill is standing facing the left >end of the thing, while Sam is looking at it from the right, and they are >arguing over whether it is spinning clockwise or counterclockwise! Sounds >like a plot line from sci.physics.fusion! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** [snip] As some of you appear to have missed the point, I'll come straight to it. Positive and negative charges can't be related to direction of rotation as their underlying mechanism, precisely because of the absurdity that Mitchell describes here so eloquently. Lynn obviously appreciated this, some of the rest of you appear to have missed the boat. I gained the impression from Frederick's original post, that that had been his intention. However since his latest missive, I am more confused than ever. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 04:50:02 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA04147; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 04:48:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 04:48:31 -0800 Message-ID: <01f901bf4e15$8119e1a0$44441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Convention & Handedness, Wave Circle GUT Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 05:46:59 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BF4DD2.4BB53160" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"sJ9qN2.0.j01.UksOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32445 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_01BF4DD2.4BB53160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Still confused, Robin? :-) http://math.uic.edu/~fields/anim/8-knot.html ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BF4DD2.4BB53160 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Chirality.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Chirality.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://math.uic.edu/~fields/anim/8-knot.html [InternetShortcut] URL=http://math.uic.edu/~fields/anim/8-knot.html Modified=408A6E11154EBF016C ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BF4DD2.4BB53160-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 05:35:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA09616; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 05:34:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 05:34:36 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991224083227.007c6610 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:32:27 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991223164035.007a0cf0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <386277EA.B0955119 ix.netcom.com> <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"B443F2.0.AM2.hPtOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32446 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:40 PM 12/23/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >In Barry's defense, this was a particularly long, tall cell -- the longest >I ever recall seeing -- and it was sitting in well-regulated, quiet ambient >room air. It is remarkable that he managed to detect such a small >difference. I think he was correct about the cause. It would not have >seriously interfered with detection of excess heat. I extrapolated the >temperature gradient from floor to ceiling in my office with a slow-acting >thermometer, and I recall I measured something in the same order of magnitude. > >After Merriman said this, Dick Blue, I think it was, began telling people >that all cold fusion results were caused by this problem. I looked up the >cell height and power in 5 or 6 papers and determined that this would only >work if the air at floor level was freezing and hot as an oven at the >ceiling (3 meters up), and if all cells were run in ambient air. Blue did >not respond. Let's examine this for the case above in question which was a "particularly long, tall cell", in a room where the "floor level was freezing and hot as an oven at the ceiling". Let's say the "oven" was 400 and the floor was 32 (F). That and the height would yield a temperature gradient. Let's assume linearity, time-invariance and that the temperatures are boundary conditions. We will assume that the system subtends half the distance. Did Rothwell's calculation indicate that, at equilibrium, a system substending half such a temperature distribution will only itself show a delta-T or 1.5 or a few degrees (which is what was observed and reported in those expts)? Jed, could you please share that derivation that yielded your determination to support this notion - or a reference? > The hypothesis reminds me of Taubes' claim in his book that >the water in an ordinary test can have a 50 deg C temperature difference >from one side to the other. ... >- Jed Is there a page on this statement? Thanks in advance. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 07:14:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA25154; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 07:12:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 07:12:29 -0800 Sender: jack mail2.centurytel.net Message-ID: <38639BC2.5956D755 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:13:54 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Convention & Handedness, Wave Circle GUT References: <01f901bf4e15$8119e1a0$44441d26 fjsparber> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"L6-vx2.0.y86.TruOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32447 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber wrote: > > Still confused, Robin? :-) > > http://math.uic.edu/~fields/anim/8-knot.html Hi Frederick, Nice graphic! Happy holidays to all. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 07:36:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30465; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 07:34:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 07:34:28 -0800 Message-Id: <199912241534.KAA01805 fh105.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 09:28:51 -0600 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: <"XSsdF1.0.tR7.2AvOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32448 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > As some of you appear to have missed the point, I'll come straight to it. > Positive and negative charges can't be related to direction of rotation as > their underlying mechanism, precisely because of the absurdity that Mitchell > describes here so eloquently. Lynn obviously appreciated this, some of the > rest of you appear to have missed the boat. One question I would like to hear answered is this: what experiments were done to show that elementary particles do have this property of 'quantum spin'? I understand that it is fully integrated into modern quantum theory, but the question is, in my mind, was this property of spin physically measured, or implied by numbers? If the former, lets analyze it and see if (if at all) it applies to charge. If only mathematically implied, then there is a fair chance that it does not exist. Don't get me wrong, math is a great thing. But you can make any kind of mathematical statement, and have a lot of them not apply to our physical universe. To determine the truth, we must do an experiment, not deduce something we have never observed. Thoughts? --Kyle From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 08:38:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA28309; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:33:31 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:33:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:35:30 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin AND plus and minus In-Reply-To: <2nd66s4atfe16m8hd9b80r3o34fg615u0q 4ax.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"PvOGG1.0.Dw6.P1wOu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32449 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Spin is sometimes called postive and negative, or plus and minus... but this is NOT a state of charge, it is just a different way of saying right hand... plus or left hand... minus. J On Fri, 24 Dec 1999, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:51:58 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > [snip] > >***{The notion of clockwise or counterclockwise presumes an observer > >standing at one pole or the other, rather than facing the equator. Assuming > >a person is doing that, whether he would say it is spinning clockwise or > >counterclockwise depends on which end he is facing. Thus the notion of > >clockwise or counterclockwise rotation describes a relationship between a > >spinning object and an observer, rather than anything intrinsic to the > >object itself. (How is this for absurdity: Bill is standing facing the left > >end of the thing, while Sam is looking at it from the right, and they are > >arguing over whether it is spinning clockwise or counterclockwise! Sounds > >like a plot line from sci.physics.fusion! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** > [snip] > As some of you appear to have missed the point, I'll come straight to it. > Positive and negative charges can't be related to direction of rotation as > their underlying mechanism, precisely because of the absurdity that Mitchell > describes here so eloquently. Lynn obviously appreciated this, some of the > rest of you appear to have missed the boat. > I gained the impression from Frederick's original post, that that had been > his intention. However since his latest missive, I am more confused than > ever. > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 09:20:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA26856; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 09:17:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 09:17:53 -0800 X-Sender: rmuha mail Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <2nd66s4atfe16m8hd9b80r3o34fg615u0q 4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 12:17:23 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: ralph muha Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin-tronics Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id JAA26835 Resent-Message-ID: <"RhKc72.0.YZ6.1hwOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32450 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: http://helix.nature.com/nsu/991223/991223-10.html >physics : Getting in a spin >Two reports in Nature[2,3] may help to open up a new dimension in >electronics. So-called 'spintronics' manipulates electrical signals >conveyed by charge carriers (such as electrons) by means of their spins, >not of their electrical charge. The studies show how to line up spins in >an electric current injected into a device. >The current in a conventional electronic device such as a transistor is >controlled by means of the charge on the mobile 'charge carriers': >negatively charged electrons, and 'holes' in the electron sea which act >like positively charged particles. But in principle, the spin of an >electron provides an alternative handle for controlling the current. >Spin effects in metals are already utilized in many commercial >applications. Spin-electronic devices also exist that combine metals and >semiconductors. But even more enticing, says Michal Oestreich, of the >University of Marburg, Germany, is the dream of incorporating spin >electronics into all-semiconductor devices[1]. This would make it easy, he >says, for physicists to "engineer the electronic properties, combine >conventional and spin electronics on one chip, and build optoelectronic >spin devices". >Transistors, memory devices, even quantum computers based on spin have >been proposed, but one of the major difficulties of building them into a >fully fledged spintronics is that the carriers of the 'spin current' all >have to have their spins aligned at the outset, when they are injected >into the circuit. >This is what two teams have now achieved. Laurens Molenkamp and colleagues >of the University of Würzburg in Germany have injected electrons into a >light-emitting diode with their spins aligned or 'polarized', with 90% >efficiency[2]. The polarization of the current is revealed by polarization >of the light that the device emits when the electrons combine with holes >to generate photons. >Similarly David Awschalom of the University of California at Santa >Barbara, and colleagues, put spin-polarized holes into an LED with >comparable efficiency, and watched it emit polarized light[3]. >Both groups succeed in aligning the spins by using a magnetic >semiconductor as a polarizer. In a ferromagnet, the spins of the magnetic >atoms are already lined up; these help to drag the spins of the charge >carriers into alignment as a current is injected into the semiconductor. >So far, both experiments require low temperatures, whereas a practical >spintronics will probably have to function at room temperature. >Nonetheless, as Oestreich puts it, "the race towards commercial >semiconductor spin electronics is on". >1.Oestreich, M. Materials science: Injecting spin into electronics. Nature >402, 735 (1999). >2.Fiederling, R., Keim, M., Reuscher, G., Ossau, W., Schmidt, G., Waag, A. >& Molenkamp, L.W. Injection and detection of a spin-polarized current in a >light-emitting diode Nature 402, 787 (1999). >3.Ohno, Y., Young, D.K., Beschoten, B., Matsukura, F., Ohno, H. & >Awschalom, D.D. Electrical spin injection in a ferromagnetic semiconductor >heterostructure Nature 402,490 (1999). From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 09:25:54 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28474; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 09:21:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 09:21:55 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991224122141.007bfba0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 12:21:41 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Astounding paper by G. Mengoli Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Azx_a3.0.qy6.okwOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32451 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: During his talk at the ACS conference in October, Fleischmann recommended in this paper: G. Mengoli, M. Bernardini, C. Manduchi, G. Zannoni, "calorimetry close to the boiling temperature of D2O/Pd electrolytic system," journal of electroanalytical chemistry 444 (1998) 155-167 I finally read the paper yesterday. I should have got it sooner. It is astounding! If it can be replicated this will be one of the top ten most important papers in this field. It is "must read" for anyone seriously interested in CF. Here is the abstract, which does not describe the interesting aspects of the paper very well: The electrolytic insertion of deuterium into Pd at 95 deg C was investigated by a simple calorimetric technique. This involved continuous feeding of heating power to the electrolytic cell to maintain it isothermal with external thermostatic bath; any extraneous thermal phenomenon taking place inside the cell is directly determined by the lack of balance of the original heating power input. It was thus found that Pd loading by deuterium is always parallel to the excess power generation, which largely exceeds the electrolytic power input. After prolonged electrolysis the loaded electrodes were found to continue heat generation in open circuit (o.c.) conditions. The reproducibility of the thermal phenomenon allowed its dependence on several experimental parameters to be investigated. The paper describes six experiment performed in 1996, each lasting one to three weeks. All six readily produced excess heat; the technique is said to be completely reproducible, to the point where variations and materials and conditions can be easily investigated. For example, in the first five experiments, palladium foils were used, and in the last one a rod was employed. The foils appear to produce more excess heat which indicates that most of the heat is produced at the surface. They also experimented by bubbling N2, H2 and D2 through the electrolyte, with dramatically different results. Three things about these experiments are astounding: 1. The bulk palladium cathodes began generating heat almost immediately, presumably because they were held at such high temperatures. 2. The cathodes began producing heat long before they reached 80 or 90% loading, which is generally considered to the threshold below which heat will not appear. They could not have been loaded very much; they were not enough coulombs of electricity even if loading have been 100% efficient. 3. The cathodes readily produced heat after death. "Open circuit (o.c.)" means the electrolysis power is turned off and the cathode produces heat after death. In experiment No. 3, for example, heat generation began the first day of the experiment. Power was turned off on days 3 4 and 5, but excess heat continued, gradually increasing from 0.5 to 0.7 W. on days 6 and 7 power was turned on again and the excess the excess heat jumped to about a watt. On day 8 and 9 power is turned off again when excess gradually rises to around 1.2 watts, a calorimeter in which 1 sigma = 0.06 W. The total energy balance for experiment 3 was 0.42 megajoules input, 1.8 +/- 0.16 MJ output. The authors write, "a quantitative energy balance could easily be obtained from the power input and output integrated over 21 days as shown in Table 3 [1.4 MJ]. Any comment seems to be superfluous." Superfluous or not, let me spell it out: The cathode was a foil 1.3 x 2.5 x 0.02 cm, weighing 0.78 grams. It produced as much energy as 33 grams of gasoline -- the most potent chemical fuel -- and the reaction left no chemical ash, so we are not dealing with a chemical reaction. The most problematic part of this experiment is the calorimetry. It is complicated by the fact that this is an open cell, the electrolyte is close to boiling, so much of the energy is lost to vapor. I wish someone would replicate using a pressurized, electrolytically closed cell, to simplify the calorimetry. That might be rather hazardous. Although it is complicated and difficult to understand, the calorimetry appears to have been performed meticulously, and it is described in detail. So are the other aspects of the experiment such as the material preparation, electrolyte additions, the operation of the external oil heating bath, and so on. I would love to know what Mengoli has done after 1996. He and his co-workers did not publish anything in the ICCF-7 proceedings. I fear they may have run out of money, or they may have been gagged or driven out of business by politics, like the scientists at the MIT Lincoln labs and the Idaho National Engineering lab who did such fine replications of the Mills Ni-H experiments. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 09:57:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA06276; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 09:56:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 09:56:07 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:01:47 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT In-reply-to: <2nd66s4atfe16m8hd9b80r3o34fg615u0q 4ax.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912241757.KAA16280 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <199912240205.TAA19656 smtp.asu.edu> Resent-Message-ID: <"s7whW.0.vX1.sExOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32452 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:09 PM 12/24/99 +1100, you wrote: >On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:51:58 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>***{The notion of clockwise or counterclockwise presumes an observer >>standing at one pole or the other, rather than facing the equator. Assuming >>a person is doing that, whether he would say it is spinning clockwise or >>counterclockwise depends on which end he is facing. Thus the notion of >>clockwise or counterclockwise rotation describes a relationship between a >>spinning object and an observer, rather than anything intrinsic to the >>object itself. (How is this for absurdity: Bill is standing facing the left >>end of the thing, while Sam is looking at it from the right, and they are >>arguing over whether it is spinning clockwise or counterclockwise! Sounds >>like a plot line from sci.physics.fusion! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** >[snip] >As some of you appear to have missed the point, I'll come straight to it. >Positive and negative charges can't be related to direction of rotation as >their underlying mechanism, precisely because of the absurdity that Mitchell >describes here so eloquently. Lynn obviously appreciated this, some of the >rest of you appear to have missed the boat. Thanks Robin, I was beginning to wonder if anyone got the point. And Mitchell, I don't quite agree with you either. The spin of the object determines its angular velocity vector, and I would say that is intrinsic to the object. Whether an observer perceives it as counterclockwise or clockwise depends on whether the displacement vector from the object to the observer points to the same side or opposite side, respectively, of the plane of rotation as the angular velocity vector. There is no ambiguity. Note that the notion of "right handedness" is built into the definition of the angular velocity vector. And Merry Christmas and Happy New Millenium to the group from sunny, dry, Arizona. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 09:58:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA06316; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 09:56:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 09:56:13 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991224125603.0079fa60 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 12:56:03 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991224083227.007c6610 world.std.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991223164035.007a0cf0 pop.mindspring.com> <386277EA.B0955119 ix.netcom.com> <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"85H7L3.0.ZY1.yExOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32453 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz writes: The gradient of such a purported air temperature distribution would have to be carefully derived . . . Slow-acting thermometers, ballpark guesses, (not sure what is being "extrapolated"), and measurements of temperatures in other rooms should probably be ignored. And later he asks: Jed, could you please share that derivation that yielded your determination to support this notion - or a reference? Yo! Mitch. You just declared you are going to ignore whatever I say about this. Why should I bother to look it up or tell you anything? Is there a page on this [Taubes] statement? Thanks in advance. Thanks for nothing. It's in "Bad Science" p. 271, but you can find something just about as stupid on any page. I referenced that particular statement in my article about D. Britz, I.E. #18, p. 46. I point out that Britz did not mention all these idiotic mistakes in his review of the Taubes book, which like reviewing Windows 98 without mentioning that it crashes several times a week. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 10:41:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA19471; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 10:40:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 10:40:16 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991224134004.0079c990 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 13:40:04 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Astounding paper by G. Mengoli In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991224122141.007bfba0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"7DOh92.0.3m4.FuxOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32454 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: On day 8 and 9 power is turned off again when >excess gradually rises to around 1.2 watts, a calorimeter in which 1 sigma >= 0.06 W. That seems rather low (or high -- low accuracy, high power). In section 2.3.4 Accuracy, they explain: As already mentioned, the oil bath was thermostated at +/- 0.01 deg C, while cell temperature readings were made of sensitivity which, depending on the sensor used, corresponded to 0.009 and 0.012 deg C respectively; once temperature had been converted into power (by calibration), the latter was measured with typical sensitivity of 4 or 6 mW. However, considering possible cell temperature fluctuations due to either room temperature fluctuations or changes in the solution volume *, the temperature of the electrolyte was actually measured with an accuracy of +/- 10 microA and consequently sigma was +/- 40 or +/- 60 mW. [* Footnote: D2O refilling was done in batches, not continously.] Three sigma is the usual standard at which you declare "I am sure." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 11:23:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA00302; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:19:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:19:40 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991224141927.00798e70 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:19:27 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: 2,700-year-old organic stench? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"uirV-1.0.s_7.BTyOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32455 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The New York Times has an interesting article about the exploration of an ancient tomb in Turkey: J. Wilford, "King Midas's Funeral: Happy Hour at a Tomb," New York Times, Dec. 23, 1999, p. A18. Apparently, buried in the tomb along with the body was a large stack of dirty dishes and the remains of a meal. There were cups and plates for about 100 people and containers big enough to hold 100 gallons of potent wine-beer-mead punch, called "kykeon." It must have been a jolly wake, like Chris Tinsley's. The tomb was first opened in 1957, but an extensive analysis of the remains of the food was recently completed using a bunch of high-tech gadgets including "infrared spectrometry, high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry" and so on. Anyway, one part of this article sounds more like the National Enquirer than the New York Times: "The rancid smell of spoiled meat overwhelmed the archeologists when they opened the tomb." How could that be?!? Did these organic molecules survive underground for 2,700 years? The skeleton of the King, shown in a photo, has no flesh remaining on it of course. If meat left around in a tomb leaves a rancid smell, wouldn't the bodies in other ancient tombs leave a stench? I have never heard that they do. It makes you wonder what our dumps and sanitary landfills will look like 2,700 years from now. A sanitary landfill is a splendid place to preserve organic material. Newspapers, hot dogs and corn on the cob buried in the early 1950s have been excavated and found in mint condition. Our descendants will wonder why we went to all the trouble to preserve this stuff intact. They will probably think we worshiped garbage, which will not be far wrong. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 11:50:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA09646; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:49:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:49:19 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 13:45:41 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems Resent-Message-ID: <"OBy9d3.0.eM2.-uyOu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32456 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 12:50 PM 12/22/99 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >>>Excellent! You have succinctly stated the point that I was slowly working >>>up to: the buoyancy and convection mechanisms discussed by Dr. S cannot >>>produce a persistent false positive result in a water-flow calorimeter! If >>>they did the calorimeter itself would become a free energy machine. >> >> >> Oh please. It is disproved in BOTH Barry Merriman's >>expt http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry/CF/CETIX.html >> (where he got the sign right) and the CETI patent itself. > >What is disproved? > >>[And BTW, in your model you ignore other possible stratification >>issues of real systems. > >Air stratification is a second-order effect at most. Any good water flow >calorimeter will have its water temperature measuring stations well >isolated from both the ambient air and from the experiment itself. > >The issue here is the heat buoyancy and convection mechanisms that you have >repeatedly offered up as artifactual explanations for the kilowatt excess >heat result observed by CETI at the PowerGen show. My contention is that >your mechanisms...in fact, ANY internal mechanism as Ed Storms pointed >out...cannot produce a persistent false positive reading in a water-flow >calorimeter. > >Don't get me wrong. I, too, am skeptical of the kilowatt PowerGen result >but, if it was an artifact, the explanation MUST lie elsewhere. ***{I explained that years ago. As you may recall, I purchased a pump of the same type as that used at Power Gen (the so called "Magnum" aquarium pumps), set it up in a configuration like that used at Power Gen, did a number of experimental runs (the "Magnum 350 Runs"), and posted the results on spf. By means of those runs I proved to everyone's satisfaction (except Jed's) that (a) the setup used at Power Gen did not have the capacity to dissipate the heat which Jed's measurements implied; and (b) that the source of Jed's error was the method by which he measured the flow rate. To be specific on the latter point, he basically diverted the flow into a measuring container of known capacity, and used a stopwatch to determine how long it took to fill up. The problem with the method, as I demonstrated conclusively when I attempted to measure flow in that way, was that there was a *huge* speedup in the flow rate as soon as the flow was diverted. The reason: the back pressure drops, due to the fact that the various sources of resistance downstream from the point of diversion cease to slow down the flow rate. This explanation is simple, open and shut (no pun intended :-), experimentally verified, and it's what happened. Period. There aren't any ifs, ands, or buts about it. For those of you who don't know what is being discussed, the Power Gen setup consisted of a powerful pump which pumped electrolyte (mostly water) in a circle through various resistances, one of which was James Patterson's supposed heat producing cell, and each of which had the effect of slowing the flow. If the tubing was disconnected at any point in the loop, the resistances downstream from the disconnect point ceased to slow the flow, and the flow responded by speeding up. Since the heat production of the cell was directly proportional to the flow rate, an erroneously high measurement of flow rate translated into an erroneously high calculation of heat output. Jed's basic error here, in short, was failure to recognize that diverting the flow would affect the flow rate. And, to be fair, CETI must share part of the blame: they were the ones who neglected to include a flow meter in the loop, not Jed. (If they had, I suspect that he would have still wanted to double-check the flow rate himself, and would have tried the same technique, thereby producing the same error. With a flow meter in the loop, however, the error would have become immediately obvious: the meter reading would have been *vastly* lower than Jed's reading. Result: he would have asked himself why, and would in short order have figured it out for himself, thus avoiding the embarassment of posting the erroneous numbers.) --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > >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 Dec 24 13:12:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30272; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 13:11:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 13:11:17 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991224160723.007c0860 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:07:23 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991224125603.0079fa60 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991224083227.007c6610 world.std.com> <3.0.6.32.19991223164035.007a0cf0 pop.mindspring.com> <386277EA.B0955119 ix.netcom.com> <3.0.6.32.19991223123316.00798230 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"PiIWq3.0.wO7.p5-Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32457 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:56 PM 12/24/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Mitchell Swartz writes: > > The gradient of such a purported air temperature distribution > would have to be carefully derived . . . Slow-acting > thermometers, ballpark guesses, (not sure what is being > "extrapolated"), and measurements of temperatures in other rooms > should probably be ignored. > >And later he asks: > > Jed, could you please share that derivation that yielded your > determination to support this notion - or a reference? > >Yo! Mitch. You just declared you are going to ignore whatever I say about >this. Why should I bother to look it up or tell you anything? That is NOT what what said. It said that, "Slow-acting thermometers, ballpark guesses, (not sure what is being "extrapolated"), and measurements of temperatures in other rooms should probably be ignored". So it did not say that either you OR your models should be ignored. Did it? So how about a little accuracy. It sought important data and the model from which your purported information did arise. Therefore, there was not a declaration that I was going to ignore anything. Hope that clarifies. Have a happy holiday. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 14:17:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA08077; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:17:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:17:12 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199912241757.KAA16280 smtp.asu.edu> References: <2nd66s4atfe16m8hd9b80r3o34fg615u0q 4ax.com> <199912240205.TAA19656 smtp.asu.edu> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:13:38 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT Resent-Message-ID: <"h_X_F1.0.3-1.d3_Ou" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32458 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 08:09 PM 12/24/99 +1100, you wrote: >>On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:51:58 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>[snip] >>>***{The notion of clockwise or counterclockwise presumes an observer >>>standing at one pole or the other, rather than facing the equator. Assuming >>>a person is doing that, whether he would say it is spinning clockwise or >>>counterclockwise depends on which end he is facing. Thus the notion of >>>clockwise or counterclockwise rotation describes a relationship between a >>>spinning object and an observer, rather than anything intrinsic to the >>>object itself. (How is this for absurdity: Bill is standing facing the left >>>end of the thing, while Sam is looking at it from the right, and they are >>>arguing over whether it is spinning clockwise or counterclockwise! Sounds >>>like a plot line from sci.physics.fusion! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** >>[snip] >>As some of you appear to have missed the point, I'll come straight to it. >>Positive and negative charges can't be related to direction of rotation as >>their underlying mechanism, precisely because of the absurdity that Mitchell >>describes here so eloquently. Lynn obviously appreciated this, some of the >>rest of you appear to have missed the boat. > >Thanks Robin, I was beginning to wonder if anyone got the point. And >Mitchell, I don't quite agree with you either. ***{I only made one very narrow point: that the notion of clockwise or counterclockwise rotation describes a relationship between a spinning object and an observer, rather than anything intrinsic to the object itself. If you believe that the direction of rotation is intrinsic, then you would have to claim that the opinion of the observer at one end is somehow superior to that of the observer at the other end. How would you do that? --MJ}*** The spin of the object >determines its angular velocity vector, and I would say that is intrinsic >to the object. Whether an observer perceives it as counterclockwise or >clockwise depends on whether the displacement vector from the object to the >observer points to the same side or opposite side, respectively, of the >plane of rotation as the angular velocity vector. There is no ambiguity. >Note that the notion of "right handedness" is built into the definition of >the angular velocity vector. ***{I am not sure why you made the above comments, since I said nothing about angular momentum (spin) or angular velocity in the post to which you were responding. The fact that I denied that rotation was intrinsic does not mean I deny that other properties are intrinsic. Angular velocity is intrinsic because it has been deliberately defined in such a way as to make it so. To see why this is the case, imagine that we are looking at a spinning object from a position above one of its poles. Let w represent the angular speed, in radians/sec, at which the object is spinning, taking the counterclockwise direction as positive. If R is the angle in radians through which the object spins in time t, then w = R/t. In that case, if the object is spinning counterclockwise as we view it, then R > 0, and if the object is spinning clockwise as we view it, then R < 0. Naturally, t is always positive, since time only moves in the positive direction. Comparing the signs that angular speed will have, as calculated by observers standing at opposite poles of the spinning object, we note that one observer will view the object as spinning counterclockwise, and will assign R a positive sign, while the other will view the object as spinning clockwise, and will assign R a negative sign. Angular velocity, however, is defined as a vector parallel to the axis of rotation with magnitude equal to the angular speed, and pointing in the direction in which a right-threaded screw would move if rotated through R. Since a right-threaded screw will move in the same direction regardless of the end from which it is viewed, irrespective of the fact that an observer at one end will give its rotation a positive sign and an observer at the other end will give it a negative sign, it follows that angular velocity is intrinsic to the object, because we have defined our terms in such a way as to make it so. Angular momentum (spin) is merely the product of angular velocity, which we have already determined to be intrinsic, and moment of inertia. Thus the question is whether moment of inertia is intrinsic. By definition, the moment of inertia of a particle is the product of its mass and the square of its distance from an axis of interest, and the moment of inertia of a macroscopic object is the sum of the moments of inertias of the particles of which it is composed. Since the moment of inertia, so defined, is in no way dependent on the position of the observer, it follows that it is intrinsic to the object. And that means angular momentum (spin) is also intrinsic to the object, again because we have defined our terms in such a way as to make it so. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >And Merry Christmas and Happy New Millenium to the group from sunny, dry, >Arizona. > >--Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 16:02:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA22800; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:02:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:02:10 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 17:07:49 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912250003.RAA14559 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <199912241757.KAA16280 smtp.asu.edu> <2nd66s4atfe16m8hd9b80r3o34fg615u0q 4ax.com> <199912240205.TAA19656 smtp.asu.edu> Resent-Message-ID: <"PpZHG2.0.9a5.2c0Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32459 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:13 PM 12/24/99 -0600, you wrote: >***{I only made one very narrow point: that the notion of clockwise or >counterclockwise rotation describes a relationship between a spinning >object and an observer, rather than anything intrinsic to the object >itself. If you believe that the direction of rotation is intrinsic, then >you would have to claim that the opinion of the observer at one end is >somehow superior to that of the observer at the other end. How would you do >that? --MJ}*** > Mitchell, is it one of your requirements that any response you make must be at least twice as long as the article to which you are responding? I feel a word-play game coming on that I am not going to play with you, but any way you wish to look at it, if the object is spinning one way, it could just as well reverse itself. Which of these two ways it is spinning is intrinsic to the object, determines the direction of the angular velocity vector, and is independent of the position of any observer. Whether the observer perceives it as clockwise or counterclockwise depends on his position relative to the angular velocity vector, as I said, and that in turn depends on the intrinsic spin. Your comment about the superior observer is nonsense. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 19:15:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA21005; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:13:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:13:56 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Convention & Handedness, Wave Circle GUT Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 14:13:47 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <6hd86s096cl1657buol3ipgttlp7s34g83 4ax.com> References: <01f901bf4e15$8119e1a0$44441d26 fjsparber> <38639BC2.5956D755@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> In-Reply-To: <38639BC2.5956D755 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA20987 Resent-Message-ID: <"VOGit1.0.785.qP3Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32460 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:13:54 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: >Frederick Sparber wrote: >> >> Still confused, Robin? :-) >> >> http://math.uic.edu/~fields/anim/8-knot.html > >Hi Frederick, > >Nice graphic! Happy holidays to all. I agree very Christmassy ;) (well in the Northern hemisphere anyway). > >Jack Smith Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 19:50:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA25687; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:39:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:39:46 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin AND plus and minus Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 14:39:42 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <12f86s0a3bbttd9gm4vqsrjin6j2l8c1qh 4ax.com> References: <2nd66s4atfe16m8hd9b80r3o34fg615u0q 4ax.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA25664 Resent-Message-ID: <"smskL2.0.HH6.2o3Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32461 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:35:30 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: > > > Spin is sometimes called postive and negative, or plus and >minus... but this is NOT a state of charge, it is just a different way of >saying right hand... plus or left hand... minus. [snip] Good point John. Precisely how did you originally intend it Frederick? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 19:59:43 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA28218; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:58:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:58:36 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199912250003.RAA14559 smtp.asu.edu> References: <199912241757.KAA16280 smtp.asu.edu> <2nd66s4atfe16m8hd9b80r3o34fg615u0q 4ax.com> <199912240205.TAA19656 smtp.asu.edu> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 21:47:52 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin Re: Wave Circle GUT Resent-Message-ID: <"dHFa01.0.lu6.i34Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32462 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 04:13 PM 12/24/99 -0600, you wrote: > >>***{I only made one very narrow point: that the notion of clockwise or >>counterclockwise rotation describes a relationship between a spinning >>object and an observer, rather than anything intrinsic to the object >>itself. If you believe that the direction of rotation is intrinsic, then >>you would have to claim that the opinion of the observer at one end is >>somehow superior to that of the observer at the other end. How would you do >>that? --MJ}*** >> > > >Mitchell, is it one of your requirements that any response you make must be >at least twice as long as the article to which you are responding? ***{I'm a writer, Lynn. That means I do not have in mind merely the person to whom I am responding directly when I post here, but also the others, many of whom may be less clear than you about what the issue is. Result: I am inclined to spend some time trying to make what I am saying intelligible to a broader audience. Thus I go into detail about calculations, and about concepts, even when it would not be necessary if I were merely trying to communicate my thoughts to the specific person with whom I am interacting at a given moment. Therefore, when I go into more detail than you feel you need, don't take it personally. There is no implication that you do not understand each and every thing I say. I am trying to speak to a broader audience, that's all. (When I think you are mistaken about something, I will not imply it; I will come right out and say it. :-) --MJ}*** > >I feel a word-play game coming on that I am not going to play with you ***{What, pray tell, is "a word-play game?" Is that where I disagree with something you say, and you come back at me by stating counterarguments? If so, then I would say that's what this group is all about. After all, when two people disagree--I'm talking *real* disagreement here--one or both of them must be wrong, and I should think that finding out where the error lies would be worth some time and effort. The thing with Scott the other day is a perfect example: he thought I was in error when I failed to take heat of vaporization into account when I ran the numbers on recombination in his cell, and he said so. I had ignored those numbers because I thought them insignificant, and they continued to seem insignificant to me until we had gone through a couple of passes through the subject. Finally, I realized that when I converted the heat of vaporization per gram of water produced into heat per gram of hydrogen burned, it accounted for the entire difference between the number Scott was using and the one I had been using. But we had to go through a couple of iterations before the communication became effective enough so I could see that his point was well taken. The upshot of the process was that I cleared up a misunderstanding, and felt that I had benefitted from the exchange. (I have no idea whether Scott gleaned anything useful out of it, but I hope he did.) Anyway, I'm glad he stated his disagreement, despite the "word game" that it precipitated. We could all just sit around and agree with one another, of course, but then what would we learn? --MJ}*** >any way you wish to look at it, if the object is spinning one way, it could >just as well reverse itself. Which of these two ways it is spinning is >intrinsic to the object, determines the direction of the angular velocity >vector, and is independent of the position of any observer. Whether the >observer perceives it as clockwise or counterclockwise depends on his >position relative to the angular velocity vector, as I said, and that in >turn depends on the intrinsic spin. > >Your comment about the superior observer is nonsense. ***{No it isn't. "Spin," in physics, refers to *angular momentum*, which is intrinsic, for the reason given in my "unneeded tutorial." Direction of rotation as specified by the labels "clockwise" and "counterclockwise," however, is *not* intrinsic, since it depends on the relationship between the observer and the object--specifically: on which pole of the object the observer is looking at. --MJ}*** > >--Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 21:36:50 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA08242; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 21:26:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 21:26:43 -0800 Message-ID: <027701bf4ea0$f3548640$44441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <2nd66s4atfe16m8hd9b80r3o34fg615u0q 4ax.com> <12f86s0a3bbttd9gm4vqsrjin6j2l8c1qh@4ax.com> Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin AND plus and minus Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:26:10 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"yC1kd3.0.i02.IM5Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32463 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: Sent: Friday, December 24, 1999 7:39 PM Subject: Re: convention for assigning spin AND plus and minus Robin wrote: > On Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:35:30 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: > > > > > Spin is sometimes called postive and negative, or plus and > >minus... but this is NOT a state of charge, it is just a different way of > >saying right hand... plus or left hand... minus. > [snip] > Good point John. Precisely how did you originally intend it Frederick? It was intended to denote the angular momentum of the Wave Circles. The charge (+/-) q is a separate EM phase/force property. Regards, Frederick > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 22:08:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA13908; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:07:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:07:40 -0800 Message-ID: <19991225060738.25301.qmail web1306.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:07:38 -0800 (PST) From: George Wagner Subject: Re: 2,700-year-old organic stench? To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"KlW9L3.0.9P3.hy5Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32464 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: There are other accounts of the odors of decay emanating from ancient tombs. The 1930s archaeologist Anne Axtell Morris in one of her books recounted the opening of an Aztec or possibly Mayan coffin, which sickened all present with the smell. A similar event transpired in London in the 1890s when a 10th or 11th century tumb was opened in Westminster Abbey; people ran out into the streets to escape the terrible odor. I'm no physiologist, but I suspect that rancid suet can retain its odor for a very long time indeed. Can some forensic pathologist please comment? poetdreamerscholar yahoo.com (George Wagner in Cincinnati) _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 23:59:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA25927; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 23:58:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 23:58:50 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <001901bf4ead$df772760$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: Subject: Smelly old stuff Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 01:58:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"YW5493.0.1L6.va7Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32465 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed wrote: > "The rancid smell of spoiled meat overwhelmed the > archeologists when they opened the tomb." How could that > be?!? Did these organic molecules survive underground for > 2,700 years? Why not? If air sealed and shut off from sunlight, new energy inputs into the little eco-system don't exist. The initial biological agents produce chemical "ash" out of the limited amount of processable material and therefore will likely deplete the fuels in a relatively short period of time. Futher processing of the "ash" may thereafter depend upon inorganic chemical action that is not locally available (sunlight, oxygen) or the particular "ash" byproducts may not have specific biological agents available to further process them. The exact outcome would seem to vary with the available conditions. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 25 08:14:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15062; Sat, 25 Dec 1999 08:12:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 08:12:29 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> X-Sender: revtec postoffice.ptd.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 11:15:31 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: jeff fink Subject: Try this picture on for size Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cCzgR.0.Eh3.ipEPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32466 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > >There was an atheist couple who had a child. The couple never told their >>daughter anything about the Lord. >> >>One night when the little girl was 5 years old, the parents fought with >>each other, and the dad shot the mom, right in front of the child. Then, >>the dad shot himself. The little girl watched it all. >> >>She then was sent to a foster home. The foster mother was a Christian and >>took the child to church. >> >>On the first day of Sunday School, the foster mother told the teacher >>that the girl had never heard of Jesus, and to have patience with her. >>The teacher held up a picture of Jesus and said, >> >>"Does anyone know who this is?" >> >>The little girl said, >> >>"I do; that's the man who was holding me the night my parents died." >> > p.s. If anyone needs names and dates I'll see what I can do. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 25 10:44:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA09542; Sat, 25 Dec 1999 10:41:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 10:41:40 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <000501bf4f07$ad3d3be0$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 12:41:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"sYnHB1.0.yK2.a_GPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32467 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: jeff fink wrote: > >>The teacher held up a picture of Jesus and said, > >>"Does anyone know who this is?" > >>The little girl said, > >>"I do; that's the man who was holding me the night my parents died." The poor girl, for the rest of her life she will be confronted with pictures allegedly of Jesus that happen to differ from the one her teacher allegedly held up. I guess Jesus was too clever by half in this story, since he had to pick an appearance ahead of time that would ultimately match the picture in possession of the teacher, but thereby eliminating coincidence of appearance in all other variations of the Jesus image, including the Shroud of Turin, etc. Way to mess with a little girl's head -- which is why this story doesn't pass the smell test. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 25 11:50:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17591; Sat, 25 Dec 1999 11:46:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 11:46:46 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 13:41:47 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size Resent-Message-ID: <"cpecu1.0.iI4.cyHPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32468 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> >>There was an atheist couple who had a child. The couple never told their >>>daughter anything about the Lord. >>> >>>One night when the little girl was 5 years old, the parents fought with >>>each other, and the dad shot the mom, right in front of the child. Then, >>>the dad shot himself. The little girl watched it all. ***{I remember a story from New York City, which came over the newswire many years ago. It seems that a Christian woman was standing on the subway platform with her two young children, a boy and a girl, as a train approached. She had just come from church, where they had both accepted the Lord, so she knew that they were saved. Result: she pushed them both off the platform onto the tracks just before the train passed by. Both were killed, and, when the police asked her why she did it, she explained that life in Heaven was better than life on Earth, and that they would live forever once there. Thus she had not murdered them; she had granted them immortality. If she had waited, she said, they might have fallen into sin, died without repenting, and spent eternity in the Lake of Fire. Therefore, as a loving parent, she had to do what she did. --MJ}*** >>> >>>She then was sent to a foster home. The foster mother was a Christian and >>>took the child to church. >>> >>>On the first day of Sunday School, the foster mother told the teacher >>>that the girl had never heard of Jesus, and to have patience with her. >>>The teacher held up a picture of Jesus and said, >>> >>>"Does anyone know who this is?" >>> >>>The little girl said, >>> >>>"I do; that's the man who was holding me the night my parents died." ***{Totally absurd: there are no pictures of Jesus. Nobody knows what his face looked like with sufficient accuracy to actually permit recognition. The facial features on the icons that are typically used by, for example, Catholics, are merely a guess made by some anonymous artist. His guess was no better than yours or mine, and the odds are simply *enormous* that if the actual historical Jesus were to stand in a lineup, a person using that picture would fail utterly to pick him out. Thus there is sufficient detail included in this story for us to know, with virtual 100% certainty, that it is a bald-faced lie. --MJ}*** >>> >> >p.s. If anyone needs names and dates I'll see what I can do. ***{Why would any reasonable person believe the unsupported claims of religionists? Religious people have a long and thoroughly documented track record of wishful thinking, hallucinating, and even outright lying, where this sort of subject matter is concerned. It is routine for religionists to claim to have seen images in keeping with the particular religious mythology that is dominant in their culture, or claim that others have seen them. Such claims are not unique to Christianity: the Ancient Greeks frequently claimed to have seen Zeus and/or lesser deities in their pantheon of gods and goddesses, and even to have conversed with them. Good Buddhists sometimes claim to have had conversations with Buddha himself. Baal and Mammon spoke to their followers as well. Even animists--e.g., many Amerindians--had conversations with their deities, speaking to "the fox," "the wolf," "the eagle," and even to trees! Such contradictory claims cancel one another, leaving only one proven fact: that information emanating from religious sources is not to be trusted. --Mitchell Jones}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 25 12:42:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28796; Sat, 25 Dec 1999 12:38:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 12:38:57 -0800 Message-Id: <199912252038.PAA11546 fh105.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 14:33:22 -0600 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: <"Ub-451.0.s17.XjIPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32469 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > ***{I remember a story from New York City, which came over the newswire > many years ago. It seems that a Christian woman was standing on the subway > platform with her two young children, a boy and a girl, as a train > approached. She had just come from church, where they had both accepted the > Lord, so she knew that they were saved. If she had waited, > she said, they might have fallen into sin, died without repenting, and spent eternity in the > Lake of Fire. Weird person, if you can dignify calling her a human. Also not very knowledgeable about Christian doctrine, either. According to that, you cannot become 'unsaved.' Complicated matter to discuss, so I won't get into it. Anyways, the woman sounds like a real creep to me, the type that make religious people, of any belief system, look insane. I hope the woman was sentenced quite harshly...someone who does things like that to children really boils my blood. --Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 25 15:11:25 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA24324; Sat, 25 Dec 1999 15:07:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 15:07:10 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Point defects Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 10:07:05 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5dja6s4np1uaog9kb75mecjvlgrsmjphvg 4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA24263 Resent-Message-ID: <"FuzMp1.0.zx5.UuKPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32470 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, Missing atoms in a crystal lattice may serve as x-ray wavelength resonant cavities that might promote fusion reactions. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 25 21:01:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA18180; Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:00:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:00:03 -0800 Message-ID: <3865A949.28C4 ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:36:09 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"EEkTS.0.-R4.I3QPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32471 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >> > >>There was an atheist couple who had a child. The couple never told their > >>>daughter anything about the Lord. > >>> > >>>One night when the little girl was 5 years old, the parents fought with > >>>each other, and the dad shot the mom, right in front of the child. Then, > >>>the dad shot himself. The little girl watched it all. > > ***{I remember a story from New York City, which came over the newswire > many years ago. It seems that a Christian woman was standing on the subway > platform with her two young children, a boy and a girl, as a train > approached. She had just come from church, where they had both accepted the > Lord, so she knew that they were saved. Result: she pushed them both off > the platform onto the tracks just before the train passed by. Both were > killed, and, when the police asked her why she did it, she explained that > life in Heaven was better than life on Earth, and that they would live > forever once there. Thus she had not murdered them; she had granted them > immortality. If she had waited, she said, they might have fallen into sin, > died without repenting, and spent eternity in the Lake of Fire. Therefore, > as a loving parent, she had to do what she did. --MJ}*** This sort of nutcase thinking is in no way in alignment with any "Christian" doctrine I have ever heard of. > > >>> > >>>She then was sent to a foster home. The foster mother was a Christian and > >>>took the child to church. > >>> > >>>On the first day of Sunday School, the foster mother told the teacher > >>>that the girl had never heard of Jesus, and to have patience with her. > >>>The teacher held up a picture of Jesus and said, > >>> > >>>"Does anyone know who this is?" > >>> > >>>The little girl said, > >>> > >>>"I do; that's the man who was holding me the night my parents died." > ***{Totally absurd: there are no pictures of Jesus. There is a large body of evidence that the image on the Shroud of Turin is, in fact, genuine. The correctness of this conclusion is possibly debatable, however, while it is being debated, to at least the faction of debatees that argue that it is genuine, the Shroud of Turin is a picture of Jesus. Therefore your conclusion that the picture shown to the little girl, very likely based on the image on the shroud, is NOT "totally" or even marginally "absurd". Nobody knows what his > face looked like with sufficient accuracy to actually permit recognition. False, for the reason stated, above. > The facial features on the icons that are typically used by, for example, > Catholics, are merely a guess made by some anonymous artist. His guess was > no better than yours or mine, and the odds are simply *enormous* that if > the actual historical Jesus were to stand in a lineup, a person using that > picture would fail utterly to pick him out. Thus there is sufficient detail > included in this story for us to know, with virtual 100% certainty, that it > is a bald-faced lie. --MJ}*** No there isn't. Up until the shroud image became widely emulated by artists trying to depict Christ, in the early middle ages, He was often drawn with short hair and no beard. > > >>> > >> > >p.s. If anyone needs names and dates I'll see what I can do. > > ***{Why would any reasonable person believe the unsupported claims of > religionists? Religious people have a long and thoroughly documented track > record of wishful thinking, hallucinating, and even outright lying, where > this sort of subject matter is concerned. It is routine for religionists to > claim to have seen images in keeping with the particular religious > mythology that is dominant in their culture, or claim that others have seen > them. Such claims are not unique to Christianity: the Ancient Greeks > frequently claimed to have seen Zeus and/or lesser deities in their > pantheon of gods and goddesses, and even to have conversed with them. Good > Buddhists sometimes claim to have had conversations with Buddha himself. > Baal and Mammon spoke to their followers as well. Even animists--e.g., many > Amerindians--had conversations with their deities, speaking to "the fox," > "the wolf," "the eagle," and even to trees! Such contradictory claims > cancel one another, leaving only one proven fact: that information > emanating from religious sources is not to be trusted. --Mitchell Jones}*** Speaking from my own experience as a Christian, I have never seen Jesus, angels or anything of the like, be it in person or in any kind of vision. However, my conclusion that a certain version of what is called "Christianity" (a blanket term that unfortunately includes warped theologies held by the likes of the Bakkers, Swaggarts, Crouches and other so called "christians" too numerous to mention) is correct is not dependent on the idea that such visions are at all necessary. All that is pertinent to me is whether or not certain predictions ("prophecies"), precepts and laws as outlined in the Bible result in an accurate interpolation of data applicable the real world. They do. Take, for example, the Biblical prohibitions against lying, stealing and idol worship and the resultant penalties predicted for violation of these prohibitions. This nation, originally Constituted with such prohibitions in mind, has by deviating from these precepts, been overun by your "enemies of freedom" Mitchell, and certain of y'all are subject to an abject condition of legal slavery, from which you have no hope of redemption from, that I can see, unless SOMEBODY comes along and rescues you. Of course, if you voluntarily wish to remain a slave, that is certainly your business, and I don't think any such Rescuer is going to hear your whinings, if that is the case. Merry Christmas, Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Dec 25 21:04:09 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA18204; Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:00:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:00:11 -0800 Message-ID: <38659723.687B ca-ois.com> Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 20:18:44 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size References: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> <000501bf4f07$ad3d3be0$0101a8c0@john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"M8GOr1.0.HS4.Q3QPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32472 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > jeff fink wrote: > > >>The teacher held up a picture of Jesus and said, > > >>"Does anyone know who this is?" > > >>The little girl said, > > >>"I do; that's the man who was holding me the night my parents died." > > The poor girl, for the rest of her life she will be confronted with > pictures allegedly of Jesus that happen to differ from the one > her teacher allegedly held up. > > I guess Jesus was too clever by half in this story, since he had > to pick an appearance ahead of time that would ultimately > match the picture in possession of the teacher, but thereby > eliminating coincidence of appearance in all other variations > of the Jesus image, including the Shroud of Turin, etc. Many of the current depictions of Jesus are, in fact based on the image of the shroud. Therefore, if the Turin shroud is genuine, then that is what Jesus looked like. No "predictions" of which image is correct on the part of Jesus would have been nesessary. Jim Ostrowski > > Way to mess with a little girl's head -- which is why this > story doesn't pass the smell test. > > -- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - > - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - > - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 08:04:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27963; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 08:03:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 08:03:15 -0800 Message-ID: <38663C79.8F29EE9B ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 09:04:12 -0700 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K System X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re:Atachments References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tlWf_2.0.rq6.1nZPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32473 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear All, On occasion messages are sent with attachments that force a connection to the Web. The message accompanying the attachment can not even be read until the attachment has been down loaded. I suggest this practice is a bloody nuisance at least and is dangerous at worst. In self protection, I have started to block all persons sending such attachments starting with Rich Murray. Please, please do use this practice! Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 08:11:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA30425; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 08:10:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 08:10:23 -0800 Message-ID: <38659667.B70CE8BB servtech.com> Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 23:15:35 -0500 From: Robert Gray X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Looking for reference References: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> <000501bf4f07$ad3d3be0$0101a8c0@john> <38659723.687B@ca-ois.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DdTPK.0.ER7.ltZPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32474 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I'll frame my question in terms of the homopolar generator. I see three cases for a conductor moving in a magnetic field. I am looking for a *reference* to *experimental* results for case #3 below. case #1: Magnet fixed in lab frame, conductor moving: This is the usual Homopolar generator setup. You can measure a potential difference between the inner and out edges of the conductor. Easy to find references for this case. case #2: Magnet and conductor rotate together w.r.t. lab frame: Faraday tried this case and was able to measure a potential difference between the inner and outer edges of the conductor. Also JLN has test results on this. case #3: Magnet rotates, conductor stationary w.r.t. lab frame: I can't find any references for this case. Does anyone know of references or has anyone done this experiment? My guess is that no potential different will be measured in the lab frame. But then, in the ref. frame of the moving disk, this is the same as case #1 above, so there should be a potential difference measured in the disk ref frame. But a potential difference here means a movement of electrons in the conductor. But if we have movement and buildup of electrons in the conductor we should be able to measure that in the lab frame. Does anyone *know* what happens in case #3? Bob Gray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 09:02:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA09263; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 08:55:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 08:55:50 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991226105558.00a1a350 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 10:55:58 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re:Atachments In-Reply-To: <38663C79.8F29EE9B ix.netcom.com> References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"HWt-C.0.fG2.MYaPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32475 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:04 AM 12/26/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >On occasion messages are sent with attachments that force a connection to the >Web. The message accompanying the attachment can not even be read until the >attachment has been down loaded. I suggest this practice is a bloody nuisance >at least and is dangerous at worst. It's also a ridiculous misuse of the whole idea behind the web. All that is needed is to transmit the ADDRESS of the web page...not the CONTENTS of it. For example, http://www.eden.com/~little is the address of our home page. Does the address-only appriach cause you any problems, Ed? My mail client, Eudora, handled Rich's message in an odd way....I got two messages, one of them essentially empty and the other containing the text of the Baard article, which DID irritate me because I had already downloaded it days ago from the Village Voice website when Gene posted the ADDRESS. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 09:48:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA24147; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 09:46:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 09:46:41 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <38659723.687B ca-ois.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> <000501bf4f07$ad3d3be0$0101a8c0 john> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 11:42:14 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size Resent-Message-ID: <"C6KFh1.0.Dv5.0IbPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32476 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >John Logajan wrote: >> >> jeff fink wrote: >> > >>The teacher held up a picture of Jesus and said, >> > >>"Does anyone know who this is?" >> > >>The little girl said, >> > >>"I do; that's the man who was holding me the night my parents died." >> >> The poor girl, for the rest of her life she will be confronted with >> pictures allegedly of Jesus that happen to differ from the one >> her teacher allegedly held up. >> >> I guess Jesus was too clever by half in this story, since he had >> to pick an appearance ahead of time that would ultimately >> match the picture in possession of the teacher, but thereby >> eliminating coincidence of appearance in all other variations >> of the Jesus image, including the Shroud of Turin, etc. > >Many of the current depictions of Jesus are, in fact based on the image >of the shroud. ***{Utterly false. I suggest that you go to a library and look through some of the catalogues of art from various art museums. You will find that there are paintings depicting images of Christ dating back to Roman times, and that the features vary enormously. Indeed, they frequently vary in paintings done at different times by the same artist. --MJ}*** >Therefore, if the Turin shroud is genuine, then that is what Jesus >looked like. No "predictions" of which image is correct on the part of >Jesus would have been nesessary. ***{Try smearing your head with some substance that will transfer to a cloth and then wrap your head with the cloth. When, afterwards, you lay out the cloth on a flat surface, nobody on the planet will be able to pick you out of a lineup based on the resulting image, due to the distortion that results from going from three dimensions to two. --MJ}*** > >Jim Ostrowski > >> >> Way to mess with a little girl's head -- which is why this >> story doesn't pass the smell test. >> >> -- >> - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - >> - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - >> - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - >> >> _________________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 09:52:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA26985; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 09:50:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 09:50:18 -0800 Message-ID: <3866558E.C1A18DB0 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 10:51:13 -0700 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K System X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Atachments References: <384C502F.59EB8578 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <38512E08.242F930B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3.0.5.32.19991226105558.00a1a350@mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-t0Z62.0.Zb6.QLbPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32477 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > At 09:04 AM 12/26/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: > > >On occasion messages are sent with attachments that force a connection to the > >Web. The message accompanying the attachment can not even be read until the > >attachment has been down loaded. I suggest this practice is a bloody > nuisance > >at least and is dangerous at worst. > > It's also a ridiculous misuse of the whole idea behind the web. All that > is needed is to transmit the ADDRESS of the web page...not the CONTENTS of > it. For example, > > http://www.eden.com/~little > > is the address of our home page. Does the address-only appriach cause you > any problems, Ed? The address only approach works fine and, as you point out, should be the way information is accessed. > My mail client, Eudora, handled Rich's message in an odd > way....I got two messages, one of them essentially empty and the other > containing the text of the Baard article, which DID irritate me because I > had already downloaded it days ago from the Village Voice website when Gene > posted the ADDRESS. I had the same problem which was eventually solved by forcing a stop to the download and deleting the whole mess. When Gene sent the original notice of the article he did it correctly and I read the article at my leisure. A a safety policy, I delete any attachment which forces an opening. Who knows how many hackers have discovered this method of spreading a virus. Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 11:15:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA13936; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 11:13:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 11:13:40 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3865A949.28C4 ca-ois.com> References: Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:37:45 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size Resent-Message-ID: <"DqBso1.0.bP3.aZcPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32478 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >> >> >> >>There was an atheist couple who had a child. The couple never told their >> >>>daughter anything about the Lord. >> >>> >> >>>One night when the little girl was 5 years old, the parents fought with >> >>>each other, and the dad shot the mom, right in front of the child. Then, >> >>>the dad shot himself. The little girl watched it all. >> >> ***{I remember a story from New York City, which came over the newswire >> many years ago. It seems that a Christian woman was standing on the subway >> platform with her two young children, a boy and a girl, as a train >> approached. She had just come from church, where they had both accepted the >> Lord, so she knew that they were saved. Result: she pushed them both off >> the platform onto the tracks just before the train passed by. Both were >> killed, and, when the police asked her why she did it, she explained that >> life in Heaven was better than life on Earth, and that they would live >> forever once there. Thus she had not murdered them; she had granted them >> immortality. If she had waited, she said, they might have fallen into sin, >> died without repenting, and spent eternity in the Lake of Fire. Therefore, >> as a loving parent, she had to do what she did. --MJ}*** > >This sort of nutcase thinking is in no way in alignment with any >"Christian" doctrine >I have ever heard of. ***{I clipped that article out and carried it around in my billfold for ten or fifteen years, until the letters literally wore off of the thing and it became illegible. During that time I discussed it with dozens of people, and what I discovered in those conversations was that virtually all of them shared her premises. That is, they agreed that the murdered children would go to Heaven, and they agreed that, if they had not been murdered, there was a chance that they would have fallen into sin, died without repenting, and would have gone to Hell. Result: they were utterly unable, in any discussion of the subject, to give any logical reason for behaving differently than she did. Nevertheless, none of them agreed that she should have murdered her children. They simply refused to accept the logical implications of their own beliefs. (No surprise there: logic is seldom a matter of concern for people who believe in "miracles.") --MJ}*** > >> >> >>> >> >>>She then was sent to a foster home. The foster mother was a Christian and >> >>>took the child to church. >> >>> >> >>>On the first day of Sunday School, the foster mother told the teacher >> >>>that the girl had never heard of Jesus, and to have patience with her. >> >>>The teacher held up a picture of Jesus and said, >> >>> >> >>>"Does anyone know who this is?" >> >>> >> >>>The little girl said, >> >>> >> >>>"I do; that's the man who was holding me the night my parents died." > >> ***{Totally absurd: there are no pictures of Jesus. > >There is a large body of evidence that the image on the Shroud of Turin >is, in fact, genuine. The correctness of this conclusion is possibly >debatable, however, while it is being debated, to at least the faction >of debatees that argue that it is genuine, the >Shroud of Turin is a picture of Jesus. Therefore your conclusion that >the picture shown to the little girl, very likely based on the image on >the shroud, is NOT "totally" or even marginally "absurd". ***{You seem to think that it is possible to record a face with sufficient accuracy to permit recognition, by simply rubbing some transferrable substance (e.g., paint) on your face, and then wrapping your face with a cloth. If this were correct, we would have images of photographic quality for all historical figures, dating back to ancient times, and we would not have to rely on paintings or sculptures to know what they looked like. The best way for you to disabuse yourself of this notion is simply to try it. Smear some watercolor on your face and wrap your face with a cloth. Then lay the cloth out on a table top and see if the image looks like you! Have fun! --MJ}*** > > Nobody knows what his >> face looked like with sufficient accuracy to actually permit recognition. > >False, for the reason stated, above. ***{Nope. Image transfers by "rubbing" only work if the source is on a flat surface. You can, for example, lay a piece of paper on a tombstone and then lightly sweep a piece of charcoal back and forth across it, and you will pick up an excellent image of the lettering. On a fully contoured three-dimensional surface such as a face, however, the technique simply does not work. If it did, portrait painters would have been put out of business thousands of years before the advent of photography. --MJ}*** [snip] > >Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 11:17:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA15913; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 11:16:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 11:16:11 -0800 Message-ID: <386671E6.43D9 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 11:52:06 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size References: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> <000501bf4f07$ad3d3be0$0101a8c0 john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aLMg33.0.Zu3.wbcPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32479 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > > >Many of the current depictions of Jesus are, in fact based on the image > >of the shroud. > > ***{Utterly false. I suggest that you go to a library and look through some > of the catalogues of art from various art museums. You will find that there > are paintings depicting images of Christ dating back to Roman times, and > that the features vary enormously. Indeed, they frequently vary in > paintings done at different times by the same artist. --MJ}*** > I said "current depictions" by which I presumed one would understand that the word "current" does not apply to paintings dating back to Ancient Roman times. The Turin shroud, as an artifact, was known to have been in the possesion of the Knights Templar between 1204 and 1307. Where they might have obtained it or what kind of technology they might have used in order to produce the image itself were it not produced by the ressurection event, is a current topic of vigorus debate by scientists and historians who have been studying this relic. > >Therefore, if the Turin shroud is genuine, then that is what Jesus > >looked like. No "predictions" of which image is correct on the part of > >Jesus would have been nesessary. > > ***{Try smearing your head with some substance that will transfer to a > cloth and then wrap your head with the cloth. When, afterwards, you lay out > the cloth on a flat surface, nobody on the planet will be able to pick you > out of a lineup based on the resulting image, due to the distortion that > results from going from three dimensions to two. --MJ}*** You are obviously ignorant of the subject of the Turin Shroud, as you are about lots of other subjects you post about here, and have therefore stuck your foot in your mouth again. The process by which the image of the shroud was formed is still a mystery, but at least it is known that it was NOT formed in the way you describe, above. If you are interested in a subject, at least do a menial amount of research before commenting on it. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 12:23:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA32736; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:18:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:18:40 -0800 Message-ID: <38668049.79F0 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:53:30 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"IPyK.0.P_7.VWdPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32480 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >> > >> >> > >> >>There was an atheist couple who had a child. The couple never told their > >> >>>daughter anything about the Lord. > >> >>> > >> >>>One night when the little girl was 5 years old, the parents fought with > >> >>>each other, and the dad shot the mom, right in front of the child. Then, > >> >>>the dad shot himself. The little girl watched it all. > >> > >> ***{I remember a story from New York City, which came over the newswire > >> many years ago. It seems that a Christian woman was standing on the subway > >> platform with her two young children, a boy and a girl, as a train > >> approached. She had just come from church, where they had both accepted the > >> Lord, so she knew that they were saved. Result: she pushed them both off > >> the platform onto the tracks just before the train passed by. Both were > >> killed, and, when the police asked her why she did it, she explained that > >> life in Heaven was better than life on Earth, and that they would live > >> forever once there. Thus she had not murdered them; she had granted them > >> immortality. If she had waited, she said, they might have fallen into sin, > >> died without repenting, and spent eternity in the Lake of Fire. Therefore, > >> as a loving parent, she had to do what she did. --MJ}*** > > > >This sort of nutcase thinking is in no way in alignment with any > >"Christian" doctrine > >I have ever heard of. > > ***{I clipped that article out and carried it around in my billfold for ten > or fifteen years, until the letters literally wore off of the thing and it > became illegible. Interesting factoid. In my wallet, I carry around a little phone address book, a small book of selected Bible verses, a phone calling card, and that's about it other than my walking around money. It it obvious you must cherish this story a great deal. Why didn't you have it laminated or something? > During that time I discussed it with dozens of people, > and what I discovered in those conversations was that virtually all of them > shared her premises. That is, they agreed that the murdered children would > go to Heaven, and they agreed that, if they had not been murdered, there > was a chance that they would have fallen into sin, died without repenting, > and would have gone to Hell. Result: they were utterly unable, in any > discussion of the subject, to give any logical reason for behaving > differently than she did. Are you asserting that Christians, in order show that they believe in the precepts promoted by Christ, must logically then all go out and try to kill their own children? Christ said to obey the commandments one of which includes "You shall not commit murder". Nevertheless, none of them agreed that she should > have murdered her children. They simply refused to accept the logical > implications of their own beliefs. Non sequiteur. It does not follow that if one believes he should perform instructions A AND B AND C, they must also perform a D which contains instructions conflicting with A OR B OR C. > (No surprise there: logic is seldom a > matter of concern for people who believe in "miracles.") --MJ}*** Miracle are just things that occur which science doesn't understand, or that Mitchell Jones doesn't understand. One's lack of understanding of an event does not mean that the given event did not occurr. That would be another non sequiteur. (snip of rest of your rubbish which merely illustrates your ignorannce of the subject you are trying to discuss) Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 12:53:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07429; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:52:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:52:36 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 15:51:03 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"DqrS51.0._p1.J0ePu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32481 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: The problem with the method, as I demonstrated >conclusively when I attempted to measure flow in that way, was that there >was a *huge* speedup in the flow rate as soon as the flow was diverted. No, that is wrong. The test was done many times before and after PowerGen with flowmeters in place. No change in the flowrate occured when the tubes were removed, and the same level of excess heat was observed. Furthermore, as I pointed out, I could see that the flow rate was not changing very much, and as Logajan pointed out, the cell inlet and outlet temperatures would have changed if the flow rate had changed, and this did not happen. (The temperatures were also recorded in other test configurations.) CETI and Cravens were sloppy at time, but not *that* sloppy! >There aren't any ifs, ands, or buts about it. Correct: you are dead wrong, and so is Swartz. You are both living in a fantasy world as far as this experiment goes. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 12:57:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA08528; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:56:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:56:26 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991226155454.007cbb80 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 15:54:54 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, jeff fink From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"qMDRn.0.552.w3ePu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32482 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I do not often complain about off-topic messages, but please move this one to Vortex-BL or some other forum immediately. This is no place for extended discussions of religion. It is a personal and divisive subject. We get enough divisiveness here with discussions of calorimetry. There are thousands of e-mail discussion groups devoted to religion, so please go to one of them, or to Vortex-BL. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 13:09:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10399; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 13:08:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 13:08:11 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991226160639.007b1e40 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 16:06:39 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Smelly old stuff In-Reply-To: <001901bf4ead$df772760$0101a8c0 john> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lXu402.0.PY2.wEePu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32483 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: >Why not? If air sealed and shut off from sunlight, new energy >inputs into the little eco-system don't exist. The initial >biological agents produce chemical "ash" out of the limited >amount of processable material and therefore will likely >deplete the fuels in a relatively short period of time. In that case you would think the body would not rot. It would be a mummy instead. Yet it was completely skeletonized. The position of the artfacts in the tomb was not clear but the photo showed a large mound of earth. It is located in a dry area in Turkey (but who knows what it was like 2,700 years ago). I presume the body and the dishes were buried fairly far down. I wonder how far down underground insects, worms and microorganisms penetrate? In Africa a scientist dug a shaft next to a termite nest during a drought, when the insects were frantically digging to keep up with the falling water table. I do not recall how far down they went but it was several meters, and they were still at it when he stopped trying to keep up with them. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 13:22:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14863; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 13:21:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 13:21:34 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991226161956.007cf640 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 16:19:56 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size In-Reply-To: References: <3865A949.28C4 ca-ois.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"SftW1.0.4e3.URePu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32484 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{Nope. Image transfers by "rubbing" only work if the source is on a flat >surface. You can, for example, lay a piece of paper on a tombstone and then >lightly sweep a piece of charcoal back and forth across it, and you will >pick up an excellent image of the lettering. On a fully contoured >three-dimensional surface such as a face, however, the technique simply >does not work. If it did, portrait painters would have been put out of >business thousands of years before the advent of photography. --MJ}*** Artists and portrait painters developed many way to capture the exact dimensions of three-dimensional objects long before photography was perfected. The camera obscura was developed in the 16th century. Life masks and death masks have been around since ancient times. Having a life-mask made is rather uncomfortable, especially for men with beards, but posing to have your picture or bust made is no picnic either. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 13:58:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA20514; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 13:56:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 13:56:49 -0800 Message-ID: <38669701.56E7 ca-ois.com> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 14:30:25 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: jeff fink Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size References: <3.0.6.32.19991226155454.007cbb80 pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7HzD42.0.S05.WyePu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32485 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I do not often complain about off-topic messages, but please move this one > to Vortex-BL or some other forum immediately. This is no place for extended > discussions of religion. It is a personal and divisive subject. We get > enough divisiveness here with discussions of calorimetry. I am willing to move the discussion to vortexb. Since I am the most recent respondent, assuming Jones might have more to say, I'm posting this so that people who want to monitor our commentary or participate will know how to subscribe, if they do not already know. To subscibe to vortexb, send an email message to: vortexb-l-request eskimo.com with the word "subscribe" in the subject line of the message. Jim Ostrowski > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 14:25:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA27650; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 14:24:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 14:24:09 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:23:57 -1000 Subject: Re: Looking for reference From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <38659667.B70CE8BB servtech.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kOu342.0.xl6.8MfPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32486 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bob - Magnetic fields don't rotate on their axis, so there's no change at all in flux and no induction. Remember that field lines are a fiction, so visualizing them rotating about the pole axis with the spinning magnet is incorrect. The physical magnet rotates, but the field in space generated by it is stationary in terms of all its relevant characteristics - no change at all in geometry relative to the conductor. > case #3: Magnet rotates, conductor stationary w.r.t. lab frame: > I can't find any references for this case. Does anyone know > of references or has anyone done this experiment? My guess > is that no potential different will be measured in the > lab frame. But then, in the ref. frame of the moving disk, this > is the same as case #1 above, so there should be a potential > difference measured in the disk ref frame. But a potential > difference here means a movement of electrons in the conductor. > But if we have movement and buildup of electrons in the conductor > we should be able to measure that in the lab frame. > > Does anyone *know* what happens in case #3? > > Bob Gray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 15:03:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA00653; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 14:58:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 14:58:22 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991226175649.007b9e60 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:56:49 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size Cc: jeff fink In-Reply-To: <38669701.56E7 ca-ois.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991226155454.007cbb80 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5p2De3.0.7A.DsfPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32487 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: >I am willing to move the discussion to vortexb. Thanks! - JR From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 15:09:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA03020; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 15:08:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 15:08:01 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991226180448.007c3470 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 18:04:48 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"mPB7V.0.1l.H_fPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32488 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:51 PM 12/26/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell needs some correction when he wrote: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >The problem with the method, as I demonstrated >>conclusively when I attempted to measure flow in that way, was that there >>was a *huge* speedup in the flow rate as soon as the flow was diverted. >Rothwell: >"No, that is wrong. The test was done many times before and after PowerGen >with flowmeters in place. No change in the flowrate occured when the tubes >were removed, and the same level of excess heat was observed. Furthermore, >as I pointed out, I could see that the flow rate was not changing very >much, and as Logajan pointed out, the cell inlet and outlet temperatures >would have changed if the flow rate had changed, and this did not happen. >(The temperatures were also recorded in other test configurations.) Actually, Mr. Rothwell, Mitchell Jones is correct. The type of pump which was used does yield a flow rate which is impedance-(against the fluid flow)-related. That you did not notice a, or purport there is no, change in the flow-rate is probably both inaccurate and self-serving. ========================================== Rothwell: >CETI and Cravens were sloppy at time, but not *that* sloppy! Character attack by Jed Rothwell on two more cold fusioneers is noted -- but again unsupported. ========================================== >>There aren't any ifs, ands, or buts about it. Rothwell: >Correct: you are dead wrong, and so is Swartz. You are both living in a >fantasy world as far as this experiment goes. > >- Jed Actually, the correction for vertical flow calorimetry and thermal stratification were given earlier in this thread and need not be repeated. Those who think they can ignore math, physics, calibrations, and in-line flow meters, like Rothwell are more likely deep in fantasy. [Swartz, M., "Relative Impact of Thermal Stratification of the Air Surrounding a Calorimeter", Journal of New Energy, 2, 219-221 (1996); Swartz, M, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221 (1996); Swartz, M, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", ournal of New Energy, 1, 126-130(1996)] Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 15:47:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11426; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 15:46:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 15:46:37 -0800 Message-ID: <3866015C.A152A192 servtech.com> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 06:51:56 -0500 From: Robert Gray X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Looking for reference References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QX2w-2.0.So2.TZgPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32489 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > Bob - > > Magnetic fields don't rotate on their axis, so there's no change at all in > flux and no induction. Remember that field lines are a fiction, so > visualizing them rotating about the pole axis with the spinning magnet is > incorrect. The physical magnet rotates, but the field in space generated by > it is stationary in terms of all its relevant characteristics - no change at > all in geometry relative to the conductor. > > > But then one is left asking "stationary relative to what?" What you describe is the way that I am coming to understand this stuation. Bob Gray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 17:35:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA01491; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:33:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:33:56 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Looking for reference Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 12:33:51 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3866015C.A152A192@servtech.com> In-Reply-To: <3866015C.A152A192 servtech.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 RAA01475 Resent-Message-ID: <"TTj1Q1.0.DN.48iPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32490 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Rick Monteverde wrote: > >> Bob - >> >> Magnetic fields don't rotate on their axis, so there's no change at all in >> flux and no induction. Remember that field lines are a fiction, so >> visualizing them rotating about the pole axis with the spinning magnet is >> incorrect. The physical magnet rotates, but the field in space generated by >> it is stationary in terms of all its relevant characteristics - no change at >> all in geometry relative to the conductor. Consider the situation, that the plate is stationary in the lab frame, but the magnet rotates, with the measuring equipment *attached to the magnet*, and rotating in the same frame with it. Now there is obviously no relative motion between external wiring and magnet, but only between magnet and plate. If as you say, field lines are figments of the imagination, and magnetic fields don't rotate on their axis, then no voltage should appear in the circuit. Yet I suspect strongly that it will. Or perhaps you have an alternate explanation for this setup? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 17:41:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA02649; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:39:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:39:54 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <003f01bf500b$451f3a40$0101a8c0 john> From: "John Logajan" To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991226160639.007b1e40@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Smelly old stuff Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:39:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"Ar1m_3.0.Hf.fDiPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32491 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > >If air sealed and shut off from sunlight, new energy > >inputs into the little eco-system don't exist. The initial > >biological agents produce chemical "ash" out of the limited > >amount of processable material and therefore will likely > >deplete the fuels in a relatively short period of time. > > In that case you would think the body would not rot. It would be a mummy > instead. Yet it was completely skeletonized. I don't think we can specify the "end point" without knowing the energy stores and bioagents available at the beginning of entombment. My view is that without addtional energy inputs which we typically assume on the face of the earth, entombed "fuels" will burn to a point until they no longer can sustain the reaction, and then the products and byproducts will remain in that mix and quantity until some outside event allows the local system to move to a new state. I imagine in different sites you might find different degrees of decay depending upon such initial conditions as water content, oxygen access, etc. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan yahoo.com -- 651-633-8918 - - 4234 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - I don't endorse any commercial messages that may appear below. - _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 18:53:37 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA29321; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 18:46:35 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 18:46:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <38662AD7.6D6BF47 servtech.com> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 09:48:56 -0500 From: Robert Gray X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Looking for reference References: <3866015C.A152A192@servtech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7heu8.0.s97.7CjPu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32492 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >Rick Monteverde wrote: > > > >> Bob - > >> > >> Magnetic fields don't rotate on their axis, so there's no change at all in > >> flux and no induction. Remember that field lines are a fiction, so > >> visualizing them rotating about the pole axis with the spinning magnet is > >> incorrect. The physical magnet rotates, but the field in space generated by > >> it is stationary in terms of all its relevant characteristics - no change at > >> all in geometry relative to the conductor. > > Consider the situation, that the plate is stationary in the lab frame, but > the magnet rotates, with the measuring equipment *attached to the magnet*, > and rotating in the same frame with it. Now there is obviously no relative > motion between external wiring and magnet, but only between magnet and > plate. If as you say, field lines are figments of the imagination, and > magnetic fields don't rotate on their axis, then no voltage should appear in > the circuit. Yet I suspect strongly that it will. Or perhaps you have an > alternate explanation for this setup? I don't think this kind of measurement setup will work. We know that a conductor attatched to a rotating magnet, and therefore rotating with the magnet, will develop a potential difference. This could effect the measurements taken. This is why I am now thinking that a single wire should be used and cut in half while the magnet is rotating. The measurements should not be made until the rotating magnet stops rotating. Bob Gray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 19:27:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24278; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:26:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:26:01 -0800 Message-ID: <008701bf5022$6abf5f20$498e1d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Commutating Light String, FTL? Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 20:24:48 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"YjCVA2.0.Gx5.9njPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32493 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: With all of the Xmas decorations about, this puzzle crops up. Put 137 light bulbs on a cable, spaced 1.0 meter apart (137 meters), then with a commutator sequentially switch each of them in at 3.333E-9/137 second = 24.33E-12 second intervals. How fast is the "light-front" moving back and forth, and what is the "apparent" acceleration, on a straight or circular line? Is this the true nature of particles, or non-radiatiing Bohr "orbits"? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 19:46:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA29716; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:44:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:44:21 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:44:15 -1000 Subject: Re: Looking for reference From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6wKdf2.0.9G7.K2kPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32494 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin - There are three parts magnet, disc, and external circuit. Your case is the functional equivalent of case #1, the standard one. The disc is now rotating relative to the magnet, so current flows. But it still doesn't matter if the magnet is or isn't spinning on its own axis - relative to *anything* - lab, universe, disc, external circuit, whatever. Therefore a symmetrical magnetic field can't be rotated on its axis. It is the one variable (the magnet spinning or not) that in all possible cases has no effect at all on the outcome of the experiment. Only the movement (or not) of the other two elements makes any difference. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI on 12/26/99 3:33 PM, Robin van Spaandonk at rvanspaa bigpond.net.au wrote: > Consider the situation, that the plate is stationary in the lab frame, but > the magnet rotates, with the measuring equipment *attached to the magnet*, > and rotating in the same frame with it. Now there is obviously no relative > motion between external wiring and magnet, but only between magnet and > plate. If as you say, field lines are figments of the imagination, and > magnetic fields don't rotate on their axis, then no voltage should appear in > the circuit. Yet I suspect strongly that it will. Or perhaps you have an > alternate explanation for this setup? > [snip] > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 19:47:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA32016; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:45:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:45:55 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:45:49 -1000 Subject: Re: Looking for reference From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3866015C.A152A192 servtech.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"bUJUV.0.Aq7.o3kPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32495 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: on 12/26/99 1:51 AM, Robert Gray at rwgray servtech.com wrote: > But then one is left asking "stationary relative to what?" Please see my response to Robin. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 19:48:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA00431; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:47:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:47:17 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:47:12 -1000 Subject: Re: Commutating Light String, FTL? From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <008701bf5022$6abf5f20$498e1d26 fjsparber> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RjlhM3.0.f6.55kPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32496 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: on 12/26/99 6:24 PM, Frederick Sparber at fjsparber earthlink.net wrote: > How fast is the "light-front" moving back and forth, and what is the > "apparent" acceleration, > on a straight or circular line? Can't I just have an egg nog, kick back and enjoy the decorations? ;) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 22:22:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA15346; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 22:21:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 22:21:29 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Looking for reference Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:21:23 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5k0e6ssl8o88l0hs048g67a15mci8jeq42 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 WAA15326 Resent-Message-ID: <"-9ouS1.0.il3.eLmPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32497 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:44:15 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Robin - > >There are three parts magnet, disc, and external circuit. Your case is the >functional equivalent of case #1, the standard one. The disc is now rotating >relative to the magnet, so current flows. Correct. > >But it still doesn't matter if the magnet is or isn't spinning on its own >axis - relative to *anything* - lab, universe, disc, external circuit, >whatever. Therefore a symmetrical magnetic field can't be rotated on its >axis. It is the one variable (the magnet spinning or not) that in all >possible cases has no effect at all on the outcome of the experiment. Unfortunately you can't draw this conclusion from this experiment, because it's equally possible that in this case the spinning magnet induces equal and opposite voltages in the disk and the measuring equipment, resulting in no current flow. Any rearrangement of the two, can simply be taken as a shift in the dividing line between "disk" and "the rest". The only way to ensure that no voltage is induced in a conductor by the magnet is for that conductor to remain in the same frame as the magnet. >Only >the movement (or not) of the other two elements makes any difference. Correct, so we end up with the conclusion, that no experiment can determine whether or not the field goes around with the magnet. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 22:28:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA16439; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 22:23:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 22:23:53 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Commutating Light String, FTL? Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:23:47 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <008701bf5022$6abf5f20$498e1d26 fjsparber> In-Reply-To: <008701bf5022$6abf5f20$498e1d26 fjsparber> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 WAA16418 Resent-Message-ID: <"ghp8g.0.i04.uNmPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32498 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 26 Dec 1999 20:24:48 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: [snip] >With all of the Xmas decorations about, this puzzle crops up. > >Put 137 light bulbs on a cable, spaced 1.0 meter apart (137 meters), then >with a commutator sequentially switch each of them in at 3.333E-9/137 second >= 24.33E-12 second intervals. The poor elves! Their fingers must be worn to the bone. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 23:32:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA27764; Sun, 26 Dec 1999 23:31:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 23:31:29 -0800 Message-ID: <19991227073125.1867.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 23:31:25 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Angular protons To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"mu12v3.0.kn6.GNnPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32499 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >>When a charged particle enters a magnetic field, its trajectory is bent by >>the field. If the field is static and the magnetic field does not change >>extremely brusquely over the distance of a gyro radius, the particle >>trajectory is bent around and the particle exits the field. It looks like a >In the case of the Earth's field, the field isn't uniform, so I presume that >as a particle approaches the Earth, encountering an ever stronger field, the >radius gradually decreases. Does this prevent reflection, or just alter the >direction? (Or perhaps cause the spiral to slip sideways around the planet?) The charged particles are still reflected. Just the details of the trajectory change. [snip] >>earth through the "cushion" of its magnetic field. Most of the ions and >>electrons flow around the bowshock and continue out into space. >Do you have any figures for the rate at which ions get trapped? >(And the strength of the Earth's field in the van Allen belts too if you >have that info on hand). No, I don't have numbers. I can make an educated guess, that Earth's magnetic field in the van Allen belts is on the order of 10^-5 tesla. [snip] >Given that the van Allen belts are filled with particles already, and every >electrical interaction will affect incoming particles to an extent varying >with the distance between them, wouldn't every incoming particle have it's >trajectory altered? (Perhaps the result is that they are repelled by >particles of the same charge already trapped in the nearest belt?) Yes, all incoming particles are affected to some extent by the presence of other particles. In fact, "hard," near-encounter collisions are very rare. Most collisions are with the Coulomb fields of distant particles and make only tiny wiggles in the trajectory of a particle. The very distant particles can act by the electric and/or magnetic fields they generate when large numbers of them act together, e.g. as part of a wave. Occasionally, the combined result of all these small nudges on a trajectory alter it enough that the particle does not reflect, but is trapped in the field instead. [snip] >>So, the >>particle's angular momentum changed when it got trapped in the magnetic >>field. The electromagnetic field's angular momentum got changed, too, and >>eventually that change is coupled back to Earth's core, the source of the >>field. >Does this result in a change of the rotation rate of the Earth, or of it's >revolution rate, or both? >(Since protons carry the most angular momentum, and they always turn the >same way in the Earth's field, the effect should be cumulative over long >periods - or at least until there is a field reversal). I think there is a lot to this story, and I probably won't think up all of it here tonight. First, the angular momentum of the particle's gyration is a very small part of its total angular momentum. If a particle gets trapped in the bow shock far from the line joining Earth and Sun, most of its angular momentum is that of the incident particle mass times velocity times its moment distance with respect to the center of the Earth. However, particles strike all across the bow shock, some on the "leading" side of the earth, some on the "trailing" side, and these would cancel out if the solar wind were uniform. However, it is not uniform, so solar wind turbulence probably determines how much angular momentum enters the Earth system via the solar wind. The solar wind itself leaves the Sun with angular momentum, which can increase the Earth's rate of revolution about the former (if the numbers are such that the solar wind has a greater velocity around the sun than does Earth at Earth's orbit. If not, then the solar wind exerts a drag on Earth. I don't know the numbers. ) The solar wind also pushes the earth outward (linear momentum). This must decrease Earth's orbital speed slightly. The angular momentum (with respect to Earth's axis) of particles trapped in its magnetic field must eventually change Earth's rate of rotation slightly. The direction of the change depends on the sign of the angular momentum of all the particles that get trapped. This does not depend on the magnetic field, but, I think, on the solar wind turbulence. [snip a lot of Robin's message] >My reason ...... but rather that transfer of momentum (and angular >momentum) is associated with mechanical forces, which usually result in >efficient energy transfer. IOW while gyrating electrons will radiate at >radio frequencies, and doubtless this energy could be tapped with an >antenna, what I'm really interested in is intercepting the direct mechanical >forces, which are far greater (e.g. as happens in electric motors). >I previously used a transformer analogy, but it comes down to the same >thing. Energy transfer through magnetic forces, not through radiated >electromagnetic waves which are essentially lossy. The DC magnetic forces {electromagnetic waves exert force, too} do work on the Earth at large. I do not see offhand how we can tap into this work path, since its distance scale is so large. It is worth some thought, though. [snip] >I keep getting an association with Bearden and Whittaker, and "infolded" >information. It seems to me that somehow the gyration frequency must be >"infolded" in what is essentially a DC current. If we could find a way to >"unfold" it, then we would have access to an AC field varying at the >gyration frequency. I don't know about "infolded" and "outfolded." There is an AC field near a gyrating particle, which is electromagnetic radiation at greater distances. There is also the DC electric and magnetic field components at distance, too. The energy of the gyrating particles typically ends up in the upper atmosphere of the Earth, because on average they hit the atmosphere before they radiate their energy away. You need a way to get the particles' energy before they hit atmosphere. ===== Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 00:04:26 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA00981; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 00:03:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 00:03:22 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <386671E6.43D9 ca-ois.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> <000501bf4f07$ad3d3be0$0101a8c0 john> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 02:00:33 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size Resent-Message-ID: <"m9m2T.0.FF.ArnPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32500 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> > >> >Many of the current depictions of Jesus are, in fact based on the image >> >of the shroud. >> >> ***{Utterly false. I suggest that you go to a library and look through some >> of the catalogues of art from various art museums. You will find that there >> are paintings depicting images of Christ dating back to Roman times, and >> that the features vary enormously. Indeed, they frequently vary in >> paintings done at different times by the same artist. --MJ}*** >> > >I said "current depictions" by which I presumed one would understand >that the word "current" does not apply to paintings dating back to >Ancient Roman times. ***{Current depictions vary by at least as much as those from former times. In the last month alone, I have seen Christ depicted with Negroid, Amerindian, Asiatic, Mediteranean, West European, and Nordic features, with the West European versions being present in mind-numbing variety. Every artist who does the face of Christ feels free to guess at the facial features, and the guesses, as a consequence, are tremendously variable. --Mitchell Jones}*** The Turin shroud, as an artifact, was known to have >been in the possesion of the Knights Templar between 1204 and 1307. >Where they might have obtained it or what kind of technology they might >have used in order to produce the image itself were it not produced by >the ressurection event, is a current topic of vigorus debate by >scientists and historians who have been studying this relic. ***{One thing is sure: if the face on the shroud were the result of a process of physical contact between the shroud and a human face, it would be impossible to use it to produce a recognizable image of that person's face. And if the smudges on the shroud were *not* the result of a process of physical contact with a human face, but instead were the result of some sort of crude attempt at artistic depiction, they would have precisely the same likelihood of matching the unknown features of Christ's actual face as the depictions by other artists--that is, virtually no chance at all. Either way, the story about the little girl being held by a Christ figure having the features of a specific icon is virtually certain to be a lie. --MJ}*** > >> >Therefore, if the Turin shroud is genuine, then that is what Jesus >> >looked like. No "predictions" of which image is correct on the part of >> >Jesus would have been nesessary. >> >> ***{Try smearing your head with some substance that will transfer to a >> cloth and then wrap your head with the cloth. When, afterwards, you lay out >> the cloth on a flat surface, nobody on the planet will be able to pick you >> out of a lineup based on the resulting image, due to the distortion that >> results from going from three dimensions to two. --MJ}*** > >You are obviously ignorant of the subject of the Turin Shroud, as you >are about lots of other subjects you post about here, and have therefore >stuck your foot in your mouth again. ***{Your wishful thinking about the state of my knowledge is not under discussion here, Jim. We are discussing the question of whether it is reasonable to believe the tale about the little girl which was posted here several days ago by Jeff Fink. Since your speculations about the state of my knowledge are both pejorative and irrelevant, and since they were not preceded by similar pejoratives coming from me, they are an instance of bad manners. The introduction of such statements into a discussion has the effect of tempting the person on the receiving end to respond in kind, and hence is destabilizing in nature. Such comments tend to cause reasoned discussions to degenerate into personal bickering, and ought to be avoided. --MJ}*** The process by which the image of >the shroud was formed is still a mystery, but at least it is known that >it was NOT formed in the way you describe, above. ***{As noted above, either the smudges on the shroud were formed by means of a physical process involving contact with a human face, or they are the result of an artistic depiction. If the former, then there is no way they could be used to reconstruct the image of the face; and if the latter, then they have no more validity than any other attempted artistic depiction, of which there are literally thousands. --MJ}*** > >If you are interested in a subject, at least do a menial amount of >research before commenting on it. ***{As noted earlier, your speculations about the state of my knowledge on this topic are both pejorative and irrelevant to the issue under discussion, and, as a consequence, it is very ill mannered of you to introduce such comments into this discussion. But, of course, there is no surprise there: you exhibit the manners of a billy goat in every discussion in which you become involved, as soon as you begin to suspect that you do not have the upper hand. --MJ}*** > >Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 01:17:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA11807; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 01:15:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 01:15:51 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 02:57:10 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems Resent-Message-ID: <"WhdXP2.0.Pu2.7voPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32501 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >The problem with the method, as I demonstrated >>conclusively when I attempted to measure flow in that way, was that there >>was a *huge* speedup in the flow rate as soon as the flow was diverted. > >No, that is wrong. The test was done many times before and after PowerGen >with flowmeters in place. No change in the flowrate occured when the tubes >were removed, and the same level of excess heat was observed. ***{Jed, you are denying the laws of physics. The Power Gen demo pumped fluid out of a reservoir, through a system of plastic tubing, past various resistances (including kinks in the tubing which were clearly visible on photographs), and then back into the reservoir. Simple logic says that if you disconnect the tubing to divert flow into a measuring vessel, the flow rate is going to speed up, because you have taken the downstream resistances out of the loop. (As the resistance drops, the flow speeds up proportionately, until one begins to approach the capacity limit of the pump itself, just as happens for electric current.) To deny this is to abandon principles of physics that have withstood experimental testing for hundreds of years. Nobody in his right mind is going to do that merely on your say so. --MJ}*** Furthermore, >as I pointed out, I could see that the flow rate was not changing very >much, and as Logajan pointed out, the cell inlet and outlet temperatures >would have changed if the flow rate had changed, and this did not happen. ***{When thermometry is used to deny basic laws of physics--laws which summarize the results of tens of thousands of experiments--the proper response is to ask what was wrong with the thermometry. In this case, as I pointed out to you almost five years ago, the sampling rates of the digital thermometers that were in use at the time were too slow for you to have noticed a change if you had been looking. Anyway, to repeat what I said above: nobody in his right mind is going to toss out the principle that current increases when resistance decreases, merely on your say so. --MJ}*** >(The temperatures were also recorded in other test configurations.) > >CETI and Cravens were sloppy at time, but not *that* sloppy! ***{There you go again, trying to put this off on others. Neither CETI nor Cravens claimed that the cell produced more than a kilowatt. That was *your* claim, based on a measurement that would have earned you an 'F' for the day in any physics lab in the country. Anyway, if there is anyone else out there who seriously doubts that current increases as resistance decreases, I can only shake my head in wonderment and suggest that they go down to a local aquarium supply story, buy themselves a Magnum 350 pump, set up a circular loop of flow through plastic tubing, including various resistances, and test it out for themselves. They will find that the flow rate will be lowest when measured just before the flow enters the reservoir, and that as you disconnect the tubing further and further back, the flow will speed up, with the greatest measured increase in flow occurring if you disconnect the tubing immediately after the flow exits the reservoir. That's what the laws of physics say will happen, it's what happened when I did it, and it's what will happen if anyone else does it. Period. End of story. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >>There aren't any ifs, ands, or buts about it. > >Correct: you are dead wrong, and so is Swartz. You are both living in a >fantasy world as far as this experiment goes. ***{Wrong again. You choose fantasy, apparently in preference to admitting that you made a mistake, while I choose to believe the laws of physics and the results of my own experiments. --MJ}*** > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 02:40:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA19740; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 02:38:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 02:38:12 -0800 Message-ID: <00bf01bf505e$c78b3440$498e1d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: Commutating Light String, FTL? Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 03:36:52 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"_ip7m3.0.Gq4.K6qPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32502 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Monteverde To: Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 7:47 PM Subject: Re: Commutating Light String, FTL? Rick wrote: > on 12/26/99 6:24 PM, Frederick Sparber at fjsparber earthlink.net wrote: > > > How fast is the "light-front" moving back and forth, and what is the > > "apparent" acceleration, > > on a straight or circular line? > > > Can't I just have an egg nog, kick back and enjoy the decorations? > > ;) Sure, along with a dish of Poi,son. :-) Regards, Frederick > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 05:06:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA26262; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 05:05:40 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 05:05:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3866BBFA.504F7587 servtech.com> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 20:08:10 -0500 From: Robert Gray X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Looking for reference References: <5k0e6ssl8o88l0hs048g67a15mci8jeq42@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FOxPV.0.EQ6.YGsPu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32503 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:44:15 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: > > >Robin - > > > >There are three parts magnet, disc, and external circuit. Your case is the > >functional equivalent of case #1, the standard one. The disc is now rotating > >relative to the magnet, so current flows. > > Correct. > > > > >But it still doesn't matter if the magnet is or isn't spinning on its own > >axis - relative to *anything* - lab, universe, disc, external circuit, > >whatever. Therefore a symmetrical magnetic field can't be rotated on its > >axis. It is the one variable (the magnet spinning or not) that in all > >possible cases has no effect at all on the outcome of the experiment. > > Unfortunately you can't draw this conclusion from this experiment, because > it's equally possible that in this case the spinning magnet induces equal > and opposite voltages in the disk and the measuring equipment, resulting in > no current flow. > Any rearrangement of the two, can simply be taken as a shift in the dividing > line between "disk" and "the rest". > Which is why I have been suggesting cutting the wire in half, stopping the magnet motion and *then* taking a measurement. That way there is no influence of the magnet on the leads or measurement device. The magnet can be completely removed before the measurement is done. Bob Gray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 09:15:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA31586; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 09:14:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 09:14:12 -0800 Message-ID: <19991227171410.15234.qmail web2103.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 09:14:10 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Looking for reference To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"EvQwC.0.Hj7.avvPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32504 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > case #3: Magnet rotates, conductor stationary w.r.t. lab frame: > I can't find any references for this case. Does anyone know > of references or has anyone done this experiment? My guess > is that no potential different will be measured in the > lab frame. But then, in the ref. frame of the moving disk, this > is the same as case #1 above, so there should be a potential > difference measured in the disk ref frame. But a potential > difference here means a movement of electrons in the conductor. > But if we have movement and buildup of electrons in the conductor > we should be able to measure that in the lab frame. Case 3 produces EMF = 0. Case 3 differs from cases 1 & 2 in that there is no relative motion between the disk and the external electrical circuit. (Case 3 does not need a pair of sliding contacts.) In particular, case 3 is NOT simply case 1 viewed from a different rotating reference frame. Homopolar machine analysis can be subtile. It tests one's knowledge and understanding of Faraday's induction law and how electrons in a conducting material respond. We go through this on vortex every couple of years. I don't plan to give this "class" again. ===== Michael J. Schaffer _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 09:38:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA06618; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 09:32:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 09:32:00 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991226161956.007cf640 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3865A949.28C4 ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:20:14 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Try this picture on for size Resent-Message-ID: <"wOHmD3.0.Kd1.GAwPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32505 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>***{Nope. Image transfers by "rubbing" only work if the source is on a flat >>surface. You can, for example, lay a piece of paper on a tombstone and then >>lightly sweep a piece of charcoal back and forth across it, and you will >>pick up an excellent image of the lettering. On a fully contoured >>three-dimensional surface such as a face, however, the technique simply >>does not work. If it did, portrait painters would have been put out of >>business thousands of years before the advent of photography. --MJ}*** > >Artists and portrait painters developed many way to capture the exact >dimensions of three-dimensional objects long before photography was >perfected. The camera obscura was developed in the 16th century. ***{Absolutely correct. Such devices were part of the artist's toolbox for centuries, and were considered as much a part of painting as paints, brushes, and canvas by many. Nobody, however, produced portraits by merely laying a cloth on the subject's face to make an image by a physical process of contact. The reason: one cannot make a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional object by merely flattening the object out. (That's why the steamroller was never part of the artist's toolbox. :-) --MJ}*** Life masks >and death masks have been around since ancient times. Having a life-mask >made is rather uncomfortable, especially for men with beards, but posing to >have your picture or bust made is no picnic either. ***{Life masks were not a tool of the portrait painter, but of the sculptor. After they were made, they could be used as a mold, from which a bust with an exact duplicate of the subject's face could be made. They were of little use to the painter because they remained in three-dimensional form, and thus posed the same problem as the face of the actual subject--to wit: the problem of translating the features onto a two-dimensional surface. --MJ}*** > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 11:40:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA12196; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:37:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:37:21 -0800 Message-ID: <3867C82A.1841 ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 12:12:26 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process References: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> <000501bf4f07$ad3d3be0$0101a8c0 john> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"WiH0a3.0.U-2.m_xPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32506 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Note to Jed: I promised to take the subject of the logical foundation of "Christian" ethics as embodied in the argumentum contained in posts under the subject header "try this picture on for size" to vortexB. However, Jones has not responded to my argument in that category so evidently the debate on that is over. Pasted below is the status of the argument, which I agree should be carried on at vortexb, if it is to be furthered by Jones, since it does not involve science, merely logic having to do with "religious" beliefs. On the other hand the subject of the how the image was formed on Turin Shroud is a matter of vigorous _scientific_ debate by scientists and historians using sophisticated analysis equipment, and I feel THAT is a worthy topic for for the Vortex-L. Note to Mitchell: If you have anything further to say regarding the point below, please post that to vortexb - JO ------- Jones: >Nevertheless, none of them agreed that she should > have murdered her children. They simply refused to accept the logical > implications of their own beliefs. Ostrowski: Non sequiteur. It does not follow that if one believes he should perform instructions A AND B AND C, they must also perform a D which contains instructions conflicting with A OR B OR C. ------- Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >> > > >> >Many of the current depictions of Jesus are, in fact based on the image > >> >of the shroud. > >> > >> ***{Utterly false. I suggest that you go to a library and look through some > >> of the catalogues of art from various art museums. You will find that there > >> are paintings depicting images of Christ dating back to Roman times, and > >> that the features vary enormously. Indeed, they frequently vary in > >> paintings done at different times by the same artist. --MJ}*** > >> > > > >I said "current depictions" by which I presumed one would understand > >that the word "current" does not apply to paintings dating back to > >Ancient Roman times. > > ***{Current depictions vary by at least as much as those from former times. > In the last month alone, I have seen Christ depicted with Negroid, > Amerindian, Asiatic, Mediteranean, West European, and Nordic features, with > the West European versions being present in mind-numbing variety. Every > artist who does the face of Christ feels free to guess at the facial > features, and the guesses, as a consequence, are tremendously variable. > --Mitchell Jones}*** > OK, what I meant by "current depictions" perhaps should have also been adjectived with the word "traditional". This means in general, non negroid features including beard, moustache, rectangular face, long, perhaps semitic nose, in short, images looking like the face in the shroud which is in effect a photographic negative. When the negative is developed into a positive image (by photographing it) you get what looks like a lot of extant _traditional_ pictures of Jesus. This image has been around "publicly" it is known, since the 1300's. During the time prior to the 1300's there is evidence it could have existed in Palestine due to plant spores found on the cloth that could only have originated there. > The Turin shroud, as an artifact, was known to have > >been in the possesion of the Knights Templar between 1204 and 1307. > >Where they might have obtained it or what kind of technology they might > >have used in order to produce the image itself were it not produced by > >the ressurection event, is a current topic of vigorus debate by > >scientists and historians who have been studying this relic. > > ***{One thing is sure: if the face on the shroud were the result of a > process of physical contact between the shroud and a human face, it would > be impossible to use it to produce a recognizable image of that person's > face. And if the smudges on the shroud were *not* the result of a process > of physical contact with a human face, but instead were the result of some > sort of crude attempt at artistic depiction, they would have precisely the > same likelihood of matching the unknown features of Christ's actual face as > the depictions by other artists--that is, virtually no chance at all. There is a third possibility, which you purposefully omitted here, evidently, because I mentioned it, above: The image was formed by an as yet uncomprehended resurrection event, as claimed by the Biblical accounts in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, perhaps involving a radiative process of some kind. > Either way, the story about the little girl being held by a Christ figure > having the features of a specific icon is virtually certain to be a lie. > --MJ}*** > Not if the Gospel accounts are correct, or if the image on the shroud is what it appears, to many, to be, as stated above: evidence of the ressurection (from the death state) of Jesus Christ. > > > >> >Therefore, if the Turin shroud is genuine, then that is what Jesus > >> >looked like. No "predictions" of which image is correct on the part of > >> >Jesus would have been nesessary. > >> > >> ***{Try smearing your head with some substance that will transfer to a > >> cloth and then wrap your head with the cloth. When, afterwards, you lay out > >> the cloth on a flat surface, nobody on the planet will be able to pick you > >> out of a lineup based on the resulting image, due to the distortion that > >> results from going from three dimensions to two. --MJ}*** > > > >You are obviously ignorant of the subject of the Turin Shroud, as you > >are about lots of other subjects you post about here, and have therefore > >stuck your foot in your mouth again. > > ***{Your wishful thinking about the state of my knowledge is not under > discussion here, Jim. We are discussing the question of whether it is > reasonable to believe the tale about the little girl which was posted here > several days ago by Jeff Fink. Since your speculations about the state of > my knowledge are both pejorative and irrelevant, and since they were not > preceded by similar pejoratives coming from me, they are an instance of bad > manners. The introduction of such statements into a discussion has the > effect of tempting the person on the receiving end to respond in kind, and > hence is destabilizing in nature. Such comments tend to cause reasoned > discussions to degenerate into personal bickering, and ought to be avoided. > --MJ}*** > Your exclusion of the third possibility, described above, was either willful or resulted from ignorance of that possibility. If it was willful then that is worse than being merely ignorant, therefore I ascribed to you the lesser of the two deficits. > The process by which the image of > >the shroud was formed is still a mystery, but at least it is known that > >it was NOT formed in the way you describe, above. > > ***{As noted above, either the smudges on the shroud were formed by means > of a physical process involving contact with a human face, or they are the > result of an artistic depiction. If the former, then there is no way they > could be used to reconstruct the image of the face; and if the latter, then > they have no more validity than any other attempted artistic depiction, of > which there are literally thousands. --MJ}*** Again, you omit the possibility I mentioned, above. In response, I refer you to: http://www.shroud.com/meacham2.htm which contains pro and con scientific arguments about the Shroud's "Authenticity". The claim is that the shroud is essentially a photographic negative of the body of Jesus Christ, created by light impinging on it as it was emitted during the resurrection event. It is proposed that the body of Christ was the emitter of this radiation, and the shroud was the absorber. If you are interested in this subject, the article provides many scientific points in favor of this hypothesis, and many disfavoring it, and is therefore the subject of scientific debate as I mentioned earlier. The science here is not being carried on by amateurs, such as you or I might be in this field. Therefore, if you want to discuss this topic here, I suggest you pick out some point represented as fact made by the professionals involved in this research and focus on THAT if you want to have an intelligent disscusion appropriate for Vortex-L. > > > >If you are interested in a subject, at least do a menial amount of > >research before commenting on it. > > ***{As noted earlier, your speculations about the state of my knowledge on > this topic are both pejorative and irrelevant to the issue under > discussion, and, as a consequence, it is very ill mannered of you to > introduce such comments into this discussion. I can only see two possibilities, you either willfully ignored the idea that the image was formed by the ressurection event, or you were ignorant of it. I merely assumed that you were not being purposefully omissive, but were rather ignorantly omissive. If the case were the latter, my comments were appropriate, if the former, then I suppose I should have berated you for being purposefully evasive rather than just ignorant. > But, of course, there is no > surprise there: you exhibit the manners of a billy goat in every discussion > in which you become involved, as soon as you begin to suspect that you do > not have the upper hand. --MJ}*** I'll compare my manners with yours anyday, Mitchell. In our previous discussion, you accused me of using hallucinogens, and when I responded with a non abusive inquiry about that theory, you declined to respond. What am I to think, then? When I present you with a reasoned argument in this discussion, I get a response either resulting from ignorance or willful time wasting evasion. That's what I call "bad manners". Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 11:48:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA16268; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:47:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:47:15 -0800 Message-Id: <4.1.19991227113833.00a7b750 pop3.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:41:45 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Ross Tessien Subject: Vortexb.....Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process In-Reply-To: <3867C82A.1841 ca-ois.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> <000501bf4f07$ad3d3be0$0101a8c0 john> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"I3kV1.0.6-3.39yPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32507 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:12 PM 12/27/99 -0800, you wrote: >Note to Jed: > > I promised to take the subject of the logical foundation of "Christian" >ethics as embodied in the argumentum contained in posts under the >subject header "try this picture on for size" to vortexB. However, There is NO .......... "However". These discussions don't belong on vortex, they belong on vortexb. If Jones or anyone else didn't respond over there, then too bad, the debate is over. The loading of messages on vortex is huge, and these just make for a lot of need to hit the "garbage" icon for those of us not interested. If you don't get the response you want from someone on vortexb, then send them a private email letting them know you are waiting for ***their*** response over there. don't pollute this forum with your debate on non scientific discussion. I am not passing judgement on the discussion, merely on the content, which is clearly NOT deserving of being on vortex, and clearly IS deserving of being on vortexb. rt From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:01:24 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03402; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 12:59:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 12:59:41 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:59:02 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:59:19 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:08:13 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process In-reply-to: <4.1.19991227113833.00a7b750 pop3.oro.net> To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:59:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2346ZYGIMUDK7 X400-MTS-identifier: [;20955172219991/4352147 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"XiYhD2.0.zq.yCzPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32508 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ross, au contraire mon ami, There is an aspect of the Shroud of Turin that is scientific in nature. A legitimate subject as stated on the "Vortex-L Discussion Group" page: "reports of theoretically impossible phenomena" Therefore: How did he get out? Wrapped and tied into a coarse material, in a sealed tomb. It implies that he was somehow teleported out. Or as the Bible puts in reference to other disappearances "translated". How was it done. If you consider that a lot of things that we take for granted would be considered flat out miracles back then, anything that would still be considered a miracle simply means WE haven't figured it out yet. So if we think in terms of just science proposed methods we have: 1. Scanned, disassembled, reassembled? 2. Worm hole like gateway? 3. Interdimensional? 4. Some kind of universal position indicator pointers reset (quantum mech.)? 5. Conversion into a pure energy entity? 6. Unknown other? Results of any of the above on the shroud material: Ionization effects? EM pulse effects? Sudden vacuum effects, from the body suddenly being elsewhere. >> I promised to take the subject of the logical foundation of "Christian" >>ethics as embodied in the argumentum contained in posts under the >>subject header "try this picture on for size" to vortexB. However, >There is NO .......... "However". >These discussions don't belong on vortex, they belong on vortexb. If Jones >or anyone else didn't respond over there, then too bad, the debate is over. > The loading of messages on vortex is huge, and these just make for a lot >of need to hit the "garbage" icon for those of us not interested. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:32:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA13020; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:28:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:28:56 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 16:28:19 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 16:28:35 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 16:20:14 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: Giant (5000k words) Mills Story in Village Voice In-reply-to: <0.445c8658.2592e76f aol.com> To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 16:28:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2342ZYGINJ8WT X400-MTS-identifier: [;91826172219991/4352203 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"hfMHI.0.KB3.OezPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32509 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, Now if this Baard guy could carry a tune, he could have his own column as: "The Village Baard" (Sing a song of science) Great article, waiting on an IPO with baited breath. (Ugh, pass the mints) Bill webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com >Thanks for the post about the fine story by Baard in THE VILLAGE VOICE. He >got some people to go on the record who were unwilling to do so years ago, >notably Haldeman and Jacox. www.villagevoice.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:37:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA15109; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:34:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:34:12 -0800 Message-ID: <19991227213400.24652.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.120] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:34:00 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"c9RxL2.0.-h3.KjzPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32510 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bill, I have watched this list for a long time and tried to get interest and help with my work. Although there are a couple of people of this list with interest almost anything not in the interest of the core group, which is mainly those interested in cold fusion and related to select groups already established in the energy fields, is shot down or ignored or said to be off topic. I agree with you that the guidelines for this group are not followed and not followed by the guideline makers. I have more news and will have more news as my work is rapidly gaining interest and support. But I don't feel welcome here so I don't participate. I am watching to see if I can gain further information but see very little that pertains to the gravity constant and the gravity paradigm, which, in my opinion will make most of this stuff look like bunk very soon anyway. David Dennard http://www.whirlpower.cc >From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 >Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com >To: vortex-l >Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process >Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:08:13 -0500 (EDT) > >Ross, au contraire mon ami, > >There is an aspect of the Shroud of Turin that is scientific in nature. > >A legitimate subject as stated on the "Vortex-L Discussion Group" page: > > "reports of theoretically impossible phenomena" > >Therefore: > >How did he get out? Wrapped and tied into a coarse material, in a sealed >tomb. > >It implies that he was somehow teleported out. Or as the Bible puts in >reference to other disappearances "translated". How was it done. > >If you consider that a lot of things that we take for granted would be >considered flat out miracles back then, anything that would still be >considered a miracle simply means WE haven't figured it out yet. > >So if we think in terms of just science proposed methods we have: >1. Scanned, disassembled, reassembled? >2. Worm hole like gateway? >3. Interdimensional? >4. Some kind of universal position indicator pointers reset (quantum >mech.)? >5. Conversion into a pure energy entity? >6. Unknown other? > >Results of any of the above on the shroud material: >Ionization effects? >EM pulse effects? >Sudden vacuum effects, from the body suddenly being elsewhere. > > > >> I promised to take the subject of the logical foundation of "Christian" > >>ethics as embodied in the argumentum contained in posts under the > >>subject header "try this picture on for size" to vortexB. However, > > > >There is NO .......... "However". > > >These discussions don't belong on vortex, they belong on vortexb. If >Jones > >or anyone else didn't respond over there, then too bad, the debate is >over. > > The loading of messages on vortex is huge, and these just make for a lot > >of need to hit the "garbage" icon for those of us not interested. > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:51:48 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA27256; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:48:06 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:48:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3867E5E2.5E32 ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 14:19:15 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortexb.....Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process References: <3.0.1.32.19991225111531.006f2a88 postoffice.ptd.net> <000501bf4f07$ad3d3be0$0101a8c0 john> <4.1.19991227113833.00a7b750@pop3.oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7dpGO2.0.lf6.JwzPu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32511 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ross Tessien wrote: > > At 12:12 PM 12/27/99 -0800, you wrote: > >Note to Jed: > > > > I promised to take the subject of the logical foundation of "Christian" > >ethics as embodied in the argumentum contained in posts under the > >subject header "try this picture on for size" to vortexB. However, > > There is NO .......... "However". I beg to differ. There were two different topics under discussion posted with the same header, one regarding the "logic" of religious beliefs (initiated by JONES) and one about the science of authenticating or de-authenticating the Turin Shroud (initiated by me). This science involves such things as carbon - 14 dating, spectroscopic analysis, computer enhancement and so on which is perfectly within the scope vortex-l topics. If debate about the former is over, due to Jones' lack of response, there is no need to take that over to vortexb. > > These discussions don't belong on vortex, they belong on vortexb. We are now referring to ONE discussion, precluding the idea you are trying to convey that there are a plurality of discussions by use of the word "these". This discussion is necessarily is a scientific one involving points raised by various scientific tests. and data resulting from these tests. > If Jones > or anyone else didn't respond over there, then too bad, the debate is over. If Jones doesn't respond to the "logic" debate over on vortexb then you should address your comments to him. On the other hand, if he wishes to discuss the scientific merits of various experiments performed on the Shroud, I see no problem with doing that right here. > The loading of messages on vortex is huge, and these just make for a lot > of need to hit the "garbage" icon for those of us not interested. I hit the trash icon on a lot of so called "scientific" discussions of the as yet unproven, but nonetheless firmly held idea, that there is such a thing as "cold fusion". Doing so is not a big problem for me, nor is it for you if you want to discard things you do not want to read about. > If you don't get the response you want from someone on vortexb, then send > them a private email letting them know you are waiting for ***their*** > response over there. I respectfully decline to take instructions from you, Ross. You do not own this place. > don't pollute this forum with your debate on non > scientific discussion. I'm not. I am perfectly willing to take the discussion of religious ethics over to vb, as I stated. It appears that that discussion is concluded, however if Jones or anyone else has more to say about religious ethics, I will expect further responses to come via the vb channel, and if they do not, then complain to JONES or whoever, not me. > I am not passing judgement on the discussion, merely on the content, which > is clearly NOT deserving of being on vortex, and clearly IS deserving of > being on vortexb. Which discussion? Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:49:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA18581; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:45:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:45:55 -0800 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 14:51:53 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Giant (5000k words) Mills Story in Village Voice In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912272147.OAA00973 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <0.445c8658.2592e76f aol.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"LK7691.0.DY4.IuzPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32512 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:20 PM 12/27/99 -0500, you wrote: >...with baited breath. (Ugh, pass the mints) Yeah, no kidding! Try "bated". --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:50:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA20512; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:49:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:49:31 -0800 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 14:55:31 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process In-reply-to: X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199912272151.OAA30149 smtp.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <4.1.19991227113833.00a7b750 pop3.oro.net> Resent-Message-ID: <"jaBv31.0.Q05.hxzPu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32513 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:08 PM 12/27/99 -0500, you wrote: >Ross, au contraire mon ami, > >There is an aspect of the Shroud of Turin that is scientific in nature. > Including the, so far unmentioned in this thread as far as I can tell, fact that the shroud has been carbon dated and shown to be from the middle ages, somewhere around 600 AD if I recall correctly. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:59:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA24058; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:55:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:55:53 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:55:39 -1000 Subject: Re: Giant (5000k words) Mills Story in Village Voice From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199912272147.OAA00973 smtp.asu.edu> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zoqff.0.lt5.f1-Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32514 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ok, you said your peace... ;) on 12/27/99 11:51 AM, Lynn Kurtz at kurtz imap2.asu.edu wrote: > At 04:20 PM 12/27/99 -0500, you wrote: > >> ...with baited breath. (Ugh, pass the mints) > > Yeah, no kidding! Try "bated". > > --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 14:12:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26457; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 14:01:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 14:01:04 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:00:35 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:00:51 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 16:59:14 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: Giant (5000k words) Mills Story in Village Voice In-reply-to: <199912272147.OAA00973 smtp.asu.edu> To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:00:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2344ZYGIOAOW4 X400-MTS-identifier: [;53007172219991/4352274 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"vLv383.0.JT6.W6-Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32515 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lynn, But my spell checker said it was OK... ;^) >>...with baited breath. (Ugh, pass the mints) >Yeah, no kidding! Try "bated". >--Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 14:51:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA07517; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 14:49:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 14:49:22 -0800 Message-ID: <3867F34F.47B4 ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:16:31 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process References: <4.1.19991227113833.00a7b750 pop3.oro.net> <199912272151.OAA30149@smtp.asu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"h0tC2.0.Nr1.op-Pu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32516 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lynn Kurtz wrote: > > At 03:08 PM 12/27/99 -0500, you wrote: > >Ross, au contraire mon ami, > > > >There is an aspect of the Shroud of Turin that is scientific in nature. > > > > Including the, so far unmentioned in this thread as far as I can tell, fact > that the shroud has been carbon dated and shown to be from the middle ages, > somewhere around 600 AD if I recall correctly. > At the site: http://www.iea.com/~bradh/shroud/shroud_testhoax.htm the authors go into considerable scientific detail tending to show that the samples taken from the Shroud were mixed with samples of other linen, known to be more resent in origin. When one reads the description of the shenanigans alleged, one is reminded of the OJ Simpson / Mark Furman debacle. Enjoy! Jim Ostrowski > --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 17:25:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA14578; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:21:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:21:23 -0800 Message-ID: <19991228012119.18498.qmail web2105.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:21:19 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"B2xKZ1.0.fZ3.I21Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32517 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The date is more or less 1300 AD. > Including the, so far unmentioned in this thread as far as I can tell, fact > that the shroud has been carbon dated and shown to be from the middle ages, > somewhere around 600 AD if I recall correctly. > > --Lynn ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 18:19:49 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA02784; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 18:18:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 18:18:14 -0800 Message-ID: <38682667.7AD6 ca-ois.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 18:54:32 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process References: <19991228012119.18498.qmail web2105.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"nXX251.0.Lh.bt1Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32518 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael Schaffer wrote: > > The date is more or less 1300 AD. Could you please cite the reference, Michael? Which lab(s) and researchers involved? Jim Ostrowski > > > Including the, so far unmentioned in this thread as far as I can tell, fact > > that the shroud has been carbon dated and shown to be from the middle ages, > > somewhere around 600 AD if I recall correctly. > > > > --Lynn > > ===== > Michael J. Schaffer > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. > http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 19:45:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA25995; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 19:43:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 19:43:29 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Angular protons Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 14:43:21 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <19991227073125.1867.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <19991227073125.1867.qmail web2101.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA25967 Resent-Message-ID: <"i6ntP2.0.4M6.V73Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32519 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks Michael, this will take some thinking about. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 21:26:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA21838; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 21:24:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 21:24:46 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:29:32 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: Spin question (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"K3wuk3.0.6L5.Tc4Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32520 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:19:18 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Schnurer Subject: Spin question > some "continuous field". > ))))))_________________ FLAG ____________________- In text, below, we see several terms and some of these terms are often used .... I have a question, to all parties, about one of these terms. Note: The term is "spin" Q: Please tell us, or give us a reference we may go to which tells us what "spin" is. To limit the scope so we do not have yards of mathmatical examples please look to the following reduction of the question: Q: Spin. Spin as it is used to describe a property exhibited by electrons. Not a mathmatical description, but a recap or reference to the acrual primary experiments which demonstrated the electron a] was spinning ... or "twirrling about on its axis as does a top" b] electron was orbiting the nucleus of the atom. So this is really two questions, maybe more. If there is a body of required mathmatics, please put it as a second section. TO RECAP: An electron is said to spin.... An electron is said to orbit the nucleus Q: What primary experiments let us prove this? Q: What demonstrates this orbiting? I think we has all heard the concepts the electton is in motion and is only statistically at some mean distance [s] from the nucleus... but the item remains, we are taught there is aspinning and an orbiting, how was this demonstrated and discovered, please. Example, generalized, of a primary experiment. 1: There is a relationship between electricty and magnetism. Q: What is an example experiment which demonstrates this, please? A: An electric battery can be used to cause a current to flow in a copper wire. A magnetic direction indicating compass, placed near the wire can show there is a magnetic field near the wire when the current flows in a copper wire. If the battery is disconnected, the deflection of the compass needle dissappears. ...............------------ END FLAG ---------------................ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 22:01:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA01587; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 21:59:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 21:59:41 -0800 Message-ID: <19991228055938.38509.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.132] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spin question (fwd) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 21:59:38 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"-SX_U2.0.jO.D75Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32521 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John, my reseach may apply to your questions, maybe not. It is stated in the Washington Post the day after the frame dragging studies were announced, "that just as a moving charge generates an additional force (the magnetic), a second kind of gravitational should be generated when an-object-spins". This concpet was dimissed for alomst one hundred years due to the void concept of space Einstein proposed. In a void space gravity is not seen as tranmitting across the void. But now all data points to a fluid space, which would mean Einstein was wrong and all science based on his concepts is wrong. Pretty funny, from man of the century to bunk of the century. So we see two forces coming from spin. Magnetic and gravitational, but not the usual up and down gravitational but a whirlpool like circular dragging force. But most important from my perspective and Whirlpower Theory is the wobble of the spin. That is the missing link in the whole story. IMO And great news! Whirlpower has just been published and Callum Coats has contacted me. A new movie on Schauberger is coming out and Whirlpower Theory by your's truely just might be the centerpiece. Finger's crossed. It's wish upon a star time. David >From: John Schnurer >Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com >To: Vortex >Subject: Spin question (fwd) >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:29:32 -0500 (EST) > > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:19:18 -0500 (EST) >From: John Schnurer >To: Schnurer >Subject: Spin question > > > some "continuous field". > > >))))))_________________ FLAG ____________________- > > In text, below, we see several terms and some of these terms >are often used .... I have a question, to all parties, about one of >these terms. > > Note: The term is "spin" > > Q: Please tell us, or give us a reference we may go to which >tells us what "spin" is. To limit the scope so we do not have yards of >mathmatical examples please look to the following reduction of the >question: > > Q: Spin. Spin as it is used to describe a property exhibited by >electrons. Not a mathmatical description, but a recap or reference to the >acrual primary experiments which demonstrated the electron > a] was spinning ... or "twirrling about on its axis > as does a top" > b] electron was orbiting the nucleus of the atom. > > So this is really two questions, maybe more. > > If there is a body of required mathmatics, please put it as a >second section. > TO RECAP: > > An electron is said to spin.... > An electron is said to orbit the nucleus > > Q: What primary experiments let us prove this? > Q: What demonstrates this orbiting? > > I think we has all heard the concepts the electton is in motion >and is only statistically at some mean distance [s] from the nucleus... >but the item remains, we are taught there is aspinning and an orbiting, >how was this demonstrated and discovered, please. > > Example, generalized, of a primary experiment. > > 1: There is a relationship between electricty and magnetism. > Q: What is an example experiment which demonstrates this, please? > > A: An electric battery can be used to cause a current to flow in >a copper wire. A magnetic direction indicating compass, placed near the >wire can show there is a magnetic field near the wire when the current >flows in a copper wire. If the battery is disconnected, the deflection of >the compass needle dissappears. > >...............------------ END FLAG ---------------................ > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 22:47:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA13738; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 22:42:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 22:42:38 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <38682667.7AD6 ca-ois.com> References: <19991228012119.18498.qmail web2105.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:37:21 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process Resent-Message-ID: <"oi7u73.0.VM3.Tl5Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32522 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Michael Schaffer wrote: >> >> The date is more or less 1300 AD. > >Could you please cite the reference, Michael? Which lab(s) and >researchers involved? > >Jim Ostrowski ***{After roughly a decade of wrangling between clerics who thought testing would authenticate the shroud and those who feared that it would not, Turin's Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero, in Oct. 1987, approved a list of three radiocarbon laboratories that had been deemed above reproach, and which were to be allowed to test samples from the shroud. They were the Research Laboratory for Archaeology and Art History at Oxford University, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology's facility at Zurich, and the University of Arizona's radiocarbon dating lab at Tucson. Samples were collected on April 21, 1988. Results were announced on Oct. 13, 1988 in the Press Room of the British Museum. The findings of the three independent laboratories showed excellent agreement with one another, and the average of their results placed the date of the harvesting of the flax (which was then used to make the cloth of the shroud) at 1325 AD, give or take 65 years, with a 95% degree of probability. [See *The Blood and the Shroud*, by Ian Wilson, pg. 7.] By the way: this book also contains excellent protos of the image on the shroud--an image which is so indistinct that *nobody* would be able to pick someone out of a lineup based on it. A glimpse of a robber with a nylon stocking pulled down over his face would be better evidence, in fact. Thus, to return directly to the point at issue: the claim that the little girl in Jeff Fink's story recognized the face on the icon that was held up before her was virtually certain to have been a lie. The only question is, who was responsible? My answer: most culpable would be the religious zealots into whose clutches the little girl had fallen after the death of her parents. They said she had no idea who Jesus was. Thus if they were telling the truth, the girl would have had to have done something that was virtually impossible: recognize Jesus by looking at a painting by someone who hadn't the slightest idea what Jesus looked like. Therefore, either (a) they lied when they said she didn't know who Jesus was, and the little girl lied to curry favor with them, or else (b) they made up the entire tale themselves. If I were guessing, I would opt for (a). (It is very easy for adults to get children to say ridiculous things, if doing so will result in tangible benefits such as better treatment. Many false and even physically impossible charges of child abuse have been elicited by persistent investigators, who simply kept after children until they said what the investigators wanted to hear.) --Mitchell Jones}*** > >> >> > Including the, so far unmentioned in this thread as far as I can tell, >>fact >> > that the shroud has been carbon dated and shown to be from the middle >>ages, >> > somewhere around 600 AD if I recall correctly. >> > >> > --Lynn >> >> ===== >> Michael J. Schaffer >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. >> http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 00:41:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA07934; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:40:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:40:23 -0800 Message-ID: <001b01bf50ac$dc46fce0$8f7611ce office> Reply-To: "Robert Beasley" From: "Robert Beasley" To: References: <19991228012119.18498.qmail web2105.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 09:56:31 +1300 Organization: natvita MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="text/plain"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01BF5119.D19505E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"0ikQx3.0.ux1.tT7Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32523 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BF5119.D19505E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----- Original Message ----- From: Mitchell Jones To: Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 1999 7:37 PM Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process > >Michael Schaffer wrote: > >> > >> The date is more or less 1300 AD. > > > >Could you please cite the reference, Michael? Which lab(s) and > >researchers involved? > > > >Jim Ostrowski > > ***{After roughly a decade of wrangling between clerics who thought testing > would authenticate the shroud and those who feared that it would not, > Turin's Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero, in Oct. 1987, approved a list of > three radiocarbon laboratories that had been deemed above reproach, and > which were to be allowed to test samples from the shroud. They were the > Research Laboratory for Archaeology and Art History at Oxford University, > the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology's facility at Zurich, and the > University of Arizona's radiocarbon dating lab at Tucson. Samples were > collected on April 21, 1988. Results were announced on Oct. 13, 1988 in the > Press Room of the British Museum. The findings of the three independent > laboratories showed excellent agreement with one another, and the average > of their results placed the date of the harvesting of the flax (which was > then used to make the cloth of the shroud) at 1325 AD, give or take 65 > years, with a 95% degree of probability. [See *The Blood and the Shroud*, > by Ian Wilson, pg. 7.] > > By the way: this book also contains excellent protos of the image on the > shroud--an image which is so indistinct that *nobody* would be able to pick > someone out of a lineup based on it. A glimpse of a robber with a nylon > stocking pulled down over his face would be better evidence, in fact. Thus, > to return directly to the point at issue: the claim that the little girl in > Jeff Fink's story recognized the face on the icon that was held up before > her was virtually certain to have been a lie. The only question is, who was > responsible? My answer: most culpable would be the religious zealots into > whose clutches the little girl had fallen after the death of her parents. > They said she had no idea who Jesus was. Thus if they were telling the > truth, the girl would have had to have done something that was virtually > impossible: recognize Jesus by looking at a painting by someone who hadn't > the slightest idea what Jesus looked like. Therefore, either (a) they lied > when they said she didn't know who Jesus was, and the little girl lied to > curry favor with them, or else (b) they made up the entire tale themselves. > If I were guessing, I would opt for (a). (It is very easy for adults to get > children to say ridiculous things, if doing so will result in tangible > benefits such as better treatment. Many false and even physically > impossible charges of child abuse have been elicited by persistent > investigators, who simply kept after children until they said what the > investigators wanted to hear.) > > --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > > >> > >> > Including the, so far unmentioned in this thread as far as I can tell, > >>fact > >> > that the shroud has been carbon dated and shown to be from the middle > >>ages, > >> > somewhere around 600 AD if I recall correctly. > >> > > >> > --Lynn > >> > >> ===== > >> Michael J. Schaffer > >> > >> __________________________________________________ > >> Do You Yahoo!? > >> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. > >> http://messenger.yahoo.com > > ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BF5119.D19505E0 Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="jc.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://www.best.com/~tjc/jc.jpg /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgEBaAFoAAD/7QnIUGhvdG9zaG9wIDMuMAA4QklNA+0AAAAAABABaAAAAAEA AgFoAAAAAQACOEJJTQPzAAAAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAA4QklNBAoAAAAAAAEAADhCSU0nEAAAAAAACgAB AAAAAAAAAAI4QklNA/QAAAAAABIANQAAAAEALQAAAAYAAAAAAAE4QklNA/cAAAAAABwAAP////// //////////////////////8D6AAAOEJJTQQIAAAAAAAQAAAAAQAAAkAAAAJAAAAAADhCSU0ECQAA AAAI4gAAAAEAAACAAAAAJAAAAYAAADYAAAAIxgAYAAH/2P/gABBKRklGAAECAQBIAEgAAP/+ACdG aWxlIHdyaXR0ZW4gYnkgQWRvYmUgUGhvdG9zaG9wqCA0LjAA/+4ADkFkb2JlAGSAAAAAAf/bAIQA DAgICAkIDAkJDBELCgsRFQ8MDA8VGBMTFRMTGBEMDAwMDAwRDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM DAwMDAwMDAENCwsNDg0QDg4QFA4ODhQUDg4ODhQRDAwMDAwREQwMDAwMDBEMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM DAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM/8AAEQgAJACAAwEiAAIRAQMRAf/dAAQACP/EAT8AAAEFAQEBAQEBAAAA AAAAAAMAAQIEBQYHCAkKCwEAAQUBAQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAQACAwQFBgcICQoLEAABBAEDAgQCBQcG CAUDDDMBAAIRAwQhEjEFQVFhEyJxgTIGFJGhsUIjJBVSwWIzNHKC0UMHJZJT8OHxY3M1FqKygyZE k1RkRcKjdDYX0lXiZfKzhMPTdePzRieUpIW0lcTU5PSltcXV5fVWZnaGlqa2xtbm9jdHV2d3h5en t8fX5/cRAAICAQIEBAMEBQYHBwYFNQEAAhEDITESBEFRYXEiEwUygZEUobFCI8FS0fAzJGLhcoKS Q1MVY3M08SUGFqKygwcmNcLSRJNUoxdkRVU2dGXi8rOEw9N14/NGlKSFtJXE1OT0pbXF1eX1VmZ2 hpamtsbW5vYnN0dXZ3eHl6e3x//aAAwDAQACEQMRAD8A60kAFziGtGpcTAHzKEczDBAORUCYgb29 +O6o9YNbsjEpyADjl4e4Hgmdn0f5KoWY2M6rIe6tjWMsawOeBq1s/wA1Abt5/eSU7lubjV0OvFjb GtgAMcDLidrWz+b7lmu63mtftZhtuHfY5wj/AK48bXf5iyW1jebG2S1rGwyJ94+k+fpbP3Fq11lk P3tr3fSBGnzSUzd19zBNmFYwd9xP5RW5qG3629NcARVdJGrRsJH/AElbs9I0FzyAT9F5bJH5u3d+ a5jlSbjNGz6OzUOcajH5UlJq/rHRZJbiZMDuQwfAD3q5TnuuYH/ZMlgPZza/++3OWJnMLMe01u3W AwxzRBLSPzWvn6KHhV9dtDBj76x+c6x24R/UDfpJKd9/UqKzF1d9fmanEf51XqKTOpdPf9HJrHeH EsP/AIIGLE+w/WZom3KrI13AtcP+pVfIx+vV1PP2ippn2uO4CP7SSnqK8jHtbuqursb+817SPwci bXRMSPEcLiMKnqbw8uFTnOJLiQ33Huf0jFYor6vVYNlVDBHLXis/fV6aSnrklz1XVer1ui70NnEn IZz/ANd3Jres5b2hv2iqmw6O231gM+O2hzv9fzElPRJ1kdBv6hb6zcp/q1NANbiS4hxP0fVcNz27 PctZJT//0OnzMOjMq9K4aAy1w5B+ay7fqxU+AL/aHF+1zJ1P9Vy6j9j5f71f3n/yCqPbTXlPxLMq iu+oNc9r3OaAHlldf6R7BXue+6pm3d/hK0lPOWfV3Ioffl1W12HYSawwtc5oB3N7t3f6NTsNwx67 KwzJGR7yDHxjVdHVQy11gpysd7qHmq3bZ9GxrfUdW72/TYz3KozpfS8o22U2UWCt1bLH0vs2B14Y +na6kel+l9ap/wCi/wBIkpw7b+ptxLKq8VhN0y99k8/nhrWqtXZ9YXDcGVnZ9FrnSHEfvELo6vq7 0ixrRXbj2sEOA+02PbBLoMb/AHe5j0R/Tel0NreG4hZe1z631VmwFjI9S0vpps/RM3s/Sv8AYkp5 XIf1ZjDZditDgNYsYAAOY3uai42dn7Kz61e+wwylhNjgD+dtr9q6evG6cA01ZGDtc3e0tc2C0iWu 0Z+d+YjenQxjLDmYlbbWNtYTYG7q7CG1WD2t/R2PdtYkpwsbp/XLaw7LzK6Nwn0mVF72z++59ja9 /wDZRx0HAfrlmzMd/wAK7a3/ALao9Ji07RTRlDDuvrqvJa1osFjGuc8PfUyu59TabHvbTdt2P/wa maqQ0udmYrQA4kutAgVtFt26R7fSqc2y3/RsSU5juhdHc3b9lawD/Ruew/8AQe1NX0DozDP2UWH/ AIZz7f8Ao2vc1arqK22sqdlYwstDnVt9T6QZ/Obfb+Z/r9BRurqprZbZk0CqwNcywOc5pa/+advY xzdt30aP9PZ+jq/SJKa4xsUDaKKg3iPTZEf5qVeNi1N21UVVtPIbW0D/AKLUZv2V5cG5uLLGte6b Ihr3ehW7Vv51w9H/AI79EinFaHBn2nHL3QQ0PkkOLGNdtDfo77qvd/wtaSkAAAAAAA4A0CSvfsfL /er+8/8AkEv2Pl/vV/ef/IJKf//R9VWH1D/m79ut+2ep9p9u/b68TtbOz0f0e77N/SfT/wC0fq/a P1f1184pJKfoXE/5sfbLfR3+n9ku3b9/pehNfr7fU/S+n6P2f7H/ANpfsn/Jns+1q3X+wPsLI9T7 L67d+/159bbr9u9T9J/4a+2/ovW/pX6dfN6SSn6Ep/5nRj+jujbV6Wz7R9He/wBH1tn5u7f6/wBp /wAD/Sv0CsH/AJtfZcbb6noRkej6f2ifT3/r3qen+k+x+rs/nv1b+Y9P/BL5zSSU/RmR/wA1th9b 6Pqv/wBNPqbqPX+j7vpfZ9//AAO//Aeunyf+bW6r7Vvn0G+nv9eNnp2bd35v2v7N6/8AOfrvob/8 GvnJJJT9L9R/Yvrv+3fzu1m/+c+jtyvS/m/b9D7b/r6Ky2f8zttnp+p/OH1I+1bvVhno/wAv1v5r 9mf8P/yd+nXz4kkp+hB/zR9+31tus7Pte2P5Gz2bPtH816X/AHo/zP68rmL/AM3/AEMf7PP2T7Pi +lO7Z6Xqf5M3er+k3etu9Pd/19fN6SSn6Hp/5o/ZG/Z93o67PS9fdHs37fT/AEv81s9X/un6nq/q 3rJV/wDNP7W37NPrbH7fT9X0/T+2N+07N/6rs/aWz1vS/Sej6X/aX0V88JJKfqpJfKqSSn//2ThC SU0EBgAAAAAABwACAAAAAQEA//4AJ0ZpbGUgd3JpdHRlbiBieSBBZG9iZSBQaG90b3Nob3CoIDQu MAD/7gAOQWRvYmUAZIAAAAAA/9sAQwAIBgYGBgYIBgYIDAgHCAwOCggICg4QDQ0ODQ0QEQwMDAwM DBEMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM/8AACwgAjgH0AQERAP/dAAQAP//EANIAAAAH AQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAQFAwIGAQAHCAkKCxAAAgEDAwIEAgYHAwQCBgJzAQIDEQQABSESMUFRBhNh InGBFDKRoQcVsUIjwVLR4TMWYvAkcoLxJUM0U5KismNzwjVEJ5OjszYXVGR0w9LiCCaDCQoYGYSU RUaktFbTVSga8uPzxNTk9GV1hZWltcXV5fVmdoaWprbG1ub2N0dXZ3eHl6e3x9fn9zhIWGh4iJio uMjY6PgpOUlZaXmJmam5ydnp+So6SlpqeoqaqrrK2ur6/9oACAEBAAA/AJ0SanfNU+Oap8c3JqUq aZqnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzV PjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHN U+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap49 e+f/0J0epys2bNmzZs2bNjXdI1LyMEUdWY0H44WT+Y9GgJD3SmnUoCw+8CmIDzfoBNBck/7B/wCm DY9b0iVQyXkRB8WAP0g74Jiu7Wf+5mjkp14MG/UcWzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNm zZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2X+z9Of/9GdHqcrNmzZs2bNmxOeeO2hkuJjxjjUs59hkLvmvNdcTzs0VqD+ 5gB2A8W8WxNLG2X4TEHWlKsdsK9RurGKkSxqWGwVP7KYXCZ6fBDQn7JIJx6yzxMGmtA6DfkCVI96 1wdFqVpMoHqvGf5XZgR9NceHWRfhuXP+q+Wpuo94L+ZCDUfG1Nvpxx1zzFZkmK99UdlkCtX/AIIV wfbec9Z4fv7SBz4oWX9ZbLm86aurDhaQhe4PJj+DDG/431RR8VrCT/sh/wAbHEn866yfiSK3UeBD H/jbET581NTxc24b2jcj/iWWPPd+x2kQHpQRGlfprgx/ON+ijkYw5/yCw/AriH/KwL2J+LWscyjq VDIf1vg6L8wFc76ZNTxVgf1hcHW/nK1l2lsriM9qBW/42GKDzfZHra3I/wBgv8Hx482ad+3HMn+s g/5qzJ5w0JyR6zKRtQo38K4Kh8x6LMaLeID4PVf+JAYMivrKbeG5ik/1XU/qOCM2bNmzZs2bNmzZ s2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bL/Z+nP/0p0epysbJJHEhklYIi7lmNAMIp/NmnKxS2JnK/aYbKMZF5nM1eFu KjcAt1+7Az+bp/V4R2qlegPI1r9PHELzzdewPGqxIA1eWxP/ABtisPmu5dAzpGCRWgDHLTzg/PhJ bA9qqT+qhwwh8y2rlRKhjLfP+IXAfmXVLaeyWzgclpHV5KA0CKeW/wA244VQ31wQoCgxNsPbNMGl qASB3+WI2+nWo3Chn/DBp02KQKxBJHhtTFV02MkKVJB2AxL/AA9al2LxDeoFMBS+XLZB8AKH2JGB X0adN45WBHTfCrULTUomFfiX8cCKbxRQod/89sf/AKcw2UgHuaYoLa/YV4beJOKRaVcTN+9FKdaN Tb6MF/oxbegKqVO9SMMLeyiSEPw9SvbwyzFay7MoB8Dgu10vT9mKqT74e2djp60URLv1ODxaWYFF jUeBpj1tLXY0UeIoMa9lZnYgCu3UYWS6DYu5YhSd99sLJ/LkBJYKGHbxwul8tpuyA/JTuflicdnf 2dPQnnh7LR27fI8cGrfeZIx+7u2egr8aq1fvGCode8xx/wB9DDMo6niyn8DTFn816jH108N8mP8A TAzefpIZONzpjKvWqyCv/DKMMYfPGiS0BE8ZPXlETT/geWDv8S6LQE3NAfFJP+acv/EuhVA+vRgn saj9YwVDqmm3H9xdwv7K61+6uCgQRUGo8Rl5s2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNl/s/Tn/9OdHqcrIJ5hu59R kfg5+rJ8McY2DGtKn6cCadpD3EAkqI6VFafF/ZgqOxitbiKIysVl5Bu1KKW6D5YWjTUbUFCO6RSc uJDGvIb7rgrU/LgKLMkz1O4HI1+fXCwWOpW9eIMqU8aN9+CFuuKcZ4jE4INXBoT4g74n9ddpQHck HowO/wCIxbl6ySS067KfYYO09fUt3jHRdwcWEXI0Y0B3GKQRIjfEfmBhpG1uykAn5DHpQSKxFFUV AJqcWdw5Eafab9qvbE20mRqVk6mvXEJtJaM1SQk91JwnvYJWICEOehB7fdicem3EhA4IQPDHSadM tRxUf5+OPi0m4liDbADN9QnhrWnzxhiEvwOKHscYYLm2NUaqdcZPLGU5SUV/fAUOpW/OglBp2Bph nFraRKCJBQe+D4tft2oeQ+L6f1YNXV7R0HIj2pXrjH1u0C7EE+O+IHWLbjUMu3tlfpyFlpVSO+JS 6iW3RhQ9PowO19tSSh9qbYwXoJ22p22x31uVTUD4T13GJPqoH2u3iK4XaheW9yhHwn3OIWAtxHzk VSA1QD4DDSKWwnpy4r/n7Y+TT9NmFQ8Z9jiA8v2UleJQE+Bx66Rd2x5Wl7JD7Ryso+7pg+GbzPb0 Md8JlH7EyK//AAy8X/4bDCLXdaT++sYpv+MTlD9z8/14Li8xxHa5s54D3NFdfvU1/wCFwbDq+nzn ik4DeDgqf+GAwUssTGiupPgCDj82JyTwxf3sip3+JgNvpwFLr+iwGkl9CCOwcH/iNcLLzzppMBCW pN05/lqqD5uwyrbzlZSuizwtCrg/GDzFR8lXbJDDPDcxLNA4kjcVVlNRQ4pmzZs2X+z9Of/UnR6n AGr3gsrGWX9thxSnidshl+fSLCLpG61PXYCn8ckWmQxtYrx3qAa/PfAd3aB2DcxGyNzVm6AdDyxK 2sIxKJ/rUNUB4DkWpX22rjNRdBEVe7NO5RAo+81wsk9RLW5WNnZFYKSRvRvtCvYf5WCLCNJtPm5q HISoVt/oyJslwbt7eKtF7gVNO2HlpG0VuImBr74Ls7gQzhHNFbbbDFSkjUWgHQVxOSJyCFNKdffN FHOg2eg8N98MLQyNII5DyqNjgkBo5wT1G22Di9w4+FRXAswvnBDU98IpobpZTtuT1PTGxSXiClKg HfbKmku6AqOR7DHW1xfemRxp7DLaS9ValST/AFwGWuCwDoF36g9MMp6PBGOo6Hw6ZGNQgjdmD1DD xO2F9ta2ol5XLFUHdT44ZodEWIqqmVqbliTiFwdPgtA8dI3Br9ojamwpgaC+klZlRjtXcDbAE1/d h6BW+nbpmS/u/T3Qg5cV/fDYR/D4VocEpqcu3OOQfI1/pjpdWoCQGB98Si1cs+5YYpPqI41Lke9a YVTamQxAJYHqQ2Jpfry2Vqn+bcYNi1AbKzKB8t8MoZkI/vQFPbfHua1KzCvbE+UyCouKn/Pwynvr paUlr26nF7fVbgGhlH3/AO1hjFrF0g5F1YH3BxePzDOR8Sg07df448a5BI3F4UJ8emCrK4sweSxA E9N8EyXESipcrTp8ZH8caHkvDvezUHQeswH31xN9I0aGBrmZGuJepXmWY/KpwNLZ+Xnt1le3NtIf 2WO4/wCBwsmn0a0RuFxGAeu4JwDPd6W7ep9Y5mgoOGw+k4ZaDqkdvqUX1O6Leu8cTxmMKjAkBq9A OI+y2dNzZs2bL/Z+nP/VnR6nCPzGtYYTStCxAPjQUyKSJVHElTyAY/OmSfRrpfqaofhVlHHbCfzF O5iEMZoJZFV29q4no0D+rGzgSL6gR6jehGxw71a0jKEMn7sjcDCNmijge3DEiWoJO5qRTfG29xHp 8HpE8mIAFepwNDDHHyuGX95Kasem3hgsSJx2UE++B19Np1HGu9cN4YeUganHYHj3wa0QBOwpQZaK nWmwy5lKKrxijVBFMEqi3MKyr9tev0YvDdKvwsNhtXHSyoxNKVIrT2wrlesoZl2G2YTWtaMR4nfE biS340RhU+GXZ8TRTQDvWmGMi25A6UA6k4R3qxiTkh6YsOM0IVdzsfkaZFtZDidgq7AVNPHCUmWU BSAo6hT/AEwTDBeEEKxVT2AwWuiyThQ9Xp1rhtZ+X0ReVB4U8ce/lu3LAtH8/pwRH5cswlBHXx7n Gny/bAnigHiaY4eW7bjUr/DE28t2TLUpWnvgVPLtkCSikHwy5dAgkX02VSOgBrU4VXPli3J2RR2r TCq40WK2lQqQamhAxdNIQsvAVr7VphlHoxqf3YYgeGNl0VnBCRcT8sDNoNwRStD4UP8AXE5PL150 Vqewrj4fL1/QDlUeHbBR8u35FAR92ISeWtRpsQKb1pjF8uar9pZCPbp+rF18v63GAVkO1KUri8ui 6zJGCw5EdiK4pZaHfhTHK8aFjQctvuwc3le6jhMkt9RBuQjGvywrt9JgvLgQhJKoau7s1KDu1fHD C48tWtpH6ipGxpUHrSuARbSK4R5FCAbfuyxP3DBtjZCe/s7f1HjDNx4+nwJQfEeLEEfs50fNmzZs v9n6c//WnR6nC7WIBNaV/aRlYH5nif15CLxuFvMtQGDbEim2K6PfLFAIDQkGq1+0R1x+pSw3XGEt xIYMG8CDyGDtP9NGEnqUHLkVHcjpm1nXLZAF51bpQZHZdTiduQIB7Vy43hVvrNwxJ/YFdh88ZHqU LycAdq7VOGVuyOGFa08MfYxhr5Yz1G4GHSMIpTz7gAUxQy1HEEmu+B5ZTCodjTx9su0vEu/hVjU9 K9sE2l4be6eBt0JB+nBk0AkYPE/XrTC68W4ReMbfvY91qetOqn54Dt5ReAMrsOVRStSCOoOCYrCD lVyxJ7nBMllamnwkUwObZUI4uRiDeqhoHqPfE3Usp5btX2/DKN2lunBDUjCqVWuGd2/a23xttp8a sCasT9oDDq104s1ONF7CmGkOlKtORr4dsNYbCBVqBvtuTtiktpD1PGnucRSCFVoKfRtiZgiHYGv4 ffgOa3JJptXqSa9MSW2jAJdgQfA4wpEBRCASdycAXElvGS0k1W7AHrhHdapCGKpUjxOF7Mlwahqk 7jY4PtklVg0hFFFAMMobtYyPiovfpXFm1O3JoAPmf45Qv4RuOFMZLfWx3Jp2oMamo26bg/Opxb9O WibcgCO9cTOv2ZGzqex74w6/aRjcr74i/m20iOxNPAdNvpxI+b1ccV/EmuBrnzB8AKUdgfY4mnmC XqQNxWjMK/hiv6ekdahamu9K5l1ZJnAavyPTDBIorn4oZmlIG0UZkP4RqckGg6TLBIb67UrIRwii Ys3EbfH8ZLKx6Yf5s2bNl/s/Tn//150epxjqHVkbowofpyKeY9PRClV/dyV+LsWHb2bI2LPiRxoy U7bGuJXMMZerLJQeB4/jvgi2i+DnF6nEVA+LkT+NMKru35Ts0qsQd96/1x9rb2zMOCFietcF3lpC w9MRKDTctt/bhKllCsx4ScCO/bJFo8olV42+3Tf5jrhhasF1KN67BSTT2wXc3KSXKhTQbrT5YNgU Hao3HX3xtxbJIpjc1P8AA4nBbxWYDqan+nbA3IyX224O9O5JyQWnqRMqHoR37HNqECmJpTtw35eO RaG7FpqjIlPSuhuOyuvcf6ww0+vfFRSAR3ONl1B+W8godic0NwZJa8xTFZuG/UnsemA55uKhQKth ezcmqd6ZRPj08ME28ojIYMAcGrqpQ0V9x1oBiq6yXagYlu+2DY9SlpWp+dMTl1At36dN8bHfMBUi uUbyVieLAe1cSkum7zccByahAlecnI06YUXOrRmqwmg6bHCxpru7cx20bSudgqKzH8MXh8qeZ7qp FusK+MxCn7qscGweQ9eb++uIIx7Fj+pcW/wV5ggFYbqCT2qw/WMCT6D5qg3NmJh3Mbo33CobC6eP XITwl06ZCBXl6bUp8wCMREuoTkLFbM58EBY/gMEQ2GuzgiOwm8Axjdf1gYZW3kzX7r++MdsnjIxY /Qq1w3tPy7tU+K+vZZmPVYwEX8eeHkHlbQbcALZq9O8hZ/8AiRpggaFow6WFv9Man9YxRdJ0tTVb KAHxESf0wJd+V9Cvd5bNEb+aL92fp4UGAU8ieXkcMYpHANeDSNT/AIXicM4PL+iWwHo2EIpsCyBj 97cjgsWVmNhbxAeyL/TGHTdObraQnv8A3a/0xeOKKJeMUaxr/KihR9y0x+bNmzZsv9n6c//QnR6n KxOaCK4jMUyB0bqpwjufLjlybScKhOyODUDwDjfC258tX7125An9lxUf8FTATaNfwIyehJTuQpp+ FRhYdOvEckxO1D3qP1YLSCWgZlKf5Nf64GvLaVjQRq3LcEqSfvrhRDFci4KU2qeVQCfuwyVTaTrc R/3TfC9K7E9GocHRvwlD+LEV9jgxbV2YP3PX3rgtbg2sfBtvenTAzamviD7e+MN40gpyPXbF7N4I pRNJJ8S+GDhrlor83kAUHp3+jCzU/NFtODEktEHbpXIo+qerdGXnxji+we9a4rJrMrH92eI7n/bx L9JXDNu5Ye/9mKrq7wMGBp71IwUPMryniTQ9z1xU6k8tKtsfDF/rKcKqRgJ708tjXKN+V69My6jH 4k/LFk1VEOy7/MYqdXkk+FagYXXmrz27hQ3Ku464F/xHcsSi1DAVPXBFjfarelvQgllYDoisf64a R+XvNl6K+iLdT3lcA/ducMrXyHeSUbUdQp4pCCf+Gan/ABHDu08m6FbcS8JuHH7UzFt/9UUXDuGC C3XhBEsSjaiKFH4YpmzZs2agHTNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bL/Z+nP//RnR6nKzZs2bNlFVPUA/Rj JIIJQBJGrgbgEA4HGlaaK0tIqk1J4Cv34lPoWl3CFGgCA9Snw/2ZBbm3k0/U5NNdiyxkem5G5Vvs /hktsbZJolXowAxLULJhGQRXagpkWuLOdiUFVI7nEV06/dCrSUrtXvjU0i6U0NX8etcU/RErAHgx pgO40L1Hrw+LwpgaTQHX7Kjfr2xP9DXA2Cg/Ttg210S5qCQFXuBVsFz+XWn+Y+7Cs+WbqMkqajtu ccujalHXh27HKex1E/C0JPup/rgC4s76EcxExFfpx1vY6lcj+7MS92cmmSbSfLlsaPfSPLX7Kr8K 1w1urK0sVJtoYoqDdjQn8f2sLLeMy/EzvKCfhLAIn3nf7sRl0w319DaIilnbbYkDfqxJ5UXJ5Z+X 9Gsgvo2UIcAAyFAzE+NWrhkqKg4ooUeAFBl5s2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bL/Z+nP//S nR6nKzZs2bNmzZs2RfzbYMfR1ONOQhBS4p1CdVf/AGGI6deV4kN8NBuPbB95fhYjzavgMLBIztzN OLE/a646QNFRtvbBMFzEyDkRy6GlBmlem60IPfAcpi6sCa9hTApaNTVqAe5yo7uwjasjLTw98HQ3 +nzKFE6qK770xflasfgnSnzGOQ2wY1miFOhJGX9Y06FhzuYvepBwLNqWjLISZlYj+XC+81fTih9K MsexAwrS7uJ5keOGQonxFFUkNhmbi99PaCZBtxARht92ICO/u3KRWszPSgLITv8A6zdMNNO8q6lI 4lv5RAoH2a+o5/40XJRY6XZ6cD9XT42+3IxqzfM4MzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNl /s/Tn//TnR6nKzZs2bNmzZs2UQGBVhUHYg9CMj955ao7zaVIsJY8jbyAmPl/k03jwql07XeSi5tO YH7UTBh9AqGx5stW2MdnIRSm5UfrOF99p3mZqelauwr0qpp9xxCDT/MURBlsZa+Kjl+rBElr5kb+ 70+Q+FSFH4nEh5f82XJ3iSBf8qRf+NS+Gtr5Gd1B1O+ZidzHCKAH/Xev/EMHr5J0MACkxI7mQ4un lHQ0FPRY/ORv64p/hfQ/+WX/AIeT/mrMPK2gg1+qVp4vIR+LYvHoGixEFLGGo6FkDf8AEq4JWxsl +zbRL8kUfwxZYo0+wir8gBjs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmy/wBn6c//1J0e pys2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZsv8A Z+nP/9Xs3+GbA785f+CX/mnK/wAMaf8A78m/4Jf+ac3+GNP/AN+Tf8Ev/NOb/DGn/wC/Jv8Agl/5 pzf4Y0//AH5N/wAEv/NOEc97+X9rPLa3XmSyhuIXaOaGS+tUdHQ8XR0YhldWHFlbDz/DGn/78m/4 Jf8AmnN/hjT/APfk3/BL/wA04nPoGkWsEt1dXDw28KNJNNI6IiIg5O7uyhVRVHJmbNBoGkXUEV1a 3DzW8yLJDNG6Ojo45I6OqlWRlPJWXFP8Maf/AL8m/wCCX/mnN/hjT/8Afk3/AAS/805v8Maf/vyb /gl/5pwv0y28qa36v6G1aLUfQ4+v9TuYZ+HOvDn6XPhz4Px5fy4Mn0DSLWCW6urh4beFGkmmkdER EQcnd3ZQqoqjkzNmg0DSLqCK6tbh5reZFkhmjdHR0cckdHVSrIynkrLin+GdP/nl/wCCX/mnN/hn T/8Afkv/AAS/805v8Maf/vyb/gl/5pzf4Y0//fk3/BL/AM05v8Maf/vyb/gl/wCac3+GNP8A9+Tf 8Ev/ADThfplt5U1v1f0Nq0Wo+hx9f6ncwz8OdeHP0ufDnwfjy/lwRDo+hXF1c2MF76t3Z8Prdsks bSw+qvOL1o1HOL1U+KPmPjXBH+GNP/35N/wS/wDNOB5tH0K3uraxnvfSu7zn9UtnljWWb0l5y+jG w5y+knxScB8C4I/wxp/+/Jv+CX/mnN/hjT/9+Tf8Ev8AzTm/wxp/+/Jv+CX/AJpzf4Y0/wD35N/w S/8ANOb/AAxp/wDvyb/gl/5pzf4Y0/8A35N/wS/804Rz3v5f2s8trdeZLKG4hdo5oZL61R0dDxdH RiGV1YcWVs0d7+X8yTSReZLKRLdBJO6X1qwjQusQeQg/AnqyRx8m/bkRP2sPP8Maf/vyb/gl/wCa cD2uj6Ffev8AUb36z9Wle2ufRljk9OaOnqQycAeEqVHONvjXBH+GNP8A9+Tf8Ev/ADTm/wAMaf8A 78m/4Jf+ac3+GNP/AN+Tf8Ev/NOb/DGn/wC/Jv8Agl/5pzf4Y0//AH5N/wAEv/NOB7XR9CvvX+o3 v1n6tK9tc+jLHJ6c0dPUhk4A8JUqOcbfGuCP8Maf/vyb/gl/5pzf4Y0//fk3/BL/AM05v8Maf/vy b/gl/wCacL1tvKj30emJq0TahN6no2YuYTM/otJHNwi/vG9KSCdJOK/A8Mqt/dvgi+0fQtMtZL7U r36naRU9W5uJY4ol5MEXlJIFReTsqrv9rFINA0i6giurW4ea3mRZIZo3R0dHHJHR1UqyMp5Ky4nD o+hXF1c2MF76t3Z8PrdsksbSw+qvOL1o1HOL1U+KPmPjXBH+GNP/AN+Tf8Ev/NOb/DGn/wC/Jv8A gl/5pzf4Y0//AH5N/wAEv/NOb/DGn/78m/4Jf+acTk0DSIXhjluHje4cxwI7opkcI0pSMFfjf0o5 JOK/sRu/7OKf4Y0//fk3/BL/AM05v8Maf/vyb/gl/wCac3+GNP8A9+Tf8Ev/ADTm/wAMaf8A78m/ 4Jf+ac3+GNP/AN+Tf8Ev/NOb/DGn/wC/Jv8Agl/5pzf4Y0//AH5N/wAEv/NOb/DGn/78m/4Jf+ac v/DNhSnqS/8ABL/zTn//1u/5s2bNnnywutAjn882upeRL3zTeS67qwhvLTT1nRQxCpbG/WtxauH5 PyhVng9X1o/jyV+XPMV95U/J/wAvTwSRaxrd/wClYaLCZmeKS5u5n+q2skxoI/qUP7uaJ5IY42tX tPXj+B8PNF8y+cbDzRa+WfPcGmIdXt5ZtGvNJNwUea1o9zbSpccn5+g3r+q3ow/D6avNLJxii+ue a/PXmbyl5k13SNP0yXyXLb6hbWvOWZNRmtUjktXv4y1IFRXElx9XnihuPShe3X956U8hx+XvmueG 50Xybqht40uPLml6joLx1WSRBbiK7huDI/x3HqxvLBHbxf7yxySSv8OSTyp5kvvMeqeZaxxR6TpO oHSrGgZblprZB9eef4niMRldPqjR8H9P++j5YD81+ZfMcWv6f5S8mQWU+s3FvLqN9LqZlW3t7ONv RjciHi8j3FwfTX0nkeL0/wB5D6cnrRxfW/MvnHWPJXm/RbmDTLbzFoSTw+YIq3DW76ZPaSzR3NiV 5cbieL+5inkfj6bvcpD6iQpIPyj0mfT/ACdY3V5Y6Za3F9b20kU2lxGN57X6vG1u9+7KrS3vKSZp m/u/j+D9vDzz3/yg/mX/ALZV9/1DSZC7jzpP5U8g+R7PTWsk1fWLKxhtZNVlMFnDDFaxPdXNxLWN eEStGnpetHNI837lJ2T0XU0D8zr54/MlrrjaVqGo6Jp76xaSaDcNLaXVtHGTLH6jeubeWGZUjf1u Mjeurx23pR+rKM8o+bPO3mB7TWHtdHv/AC7fuEaLSLlnvtPMqCZPrxuDHbyvaoyRXsEPC45SerDD 8HouIsPOuq3Xlzzzq8kNuLjyze6taWCKr8HTT4hLAbgGQszsx/e+m0X+Rwwv1v8AMfVbDRvKBt00 y21PzVZfWzf6pO9vp1q8cEFzKJAvOVkm9Z4YP36cJfS/vcmHlq680TQT23myxt7e+t3AS8sJOdnc o45hoElb63C8P9zMlxH8T/vYZJEk4xRP8zLeTX9d8neSJpPT0nWru5utUVfUDTRabEtyLVjHJF+6 n5Ny/ajlWCeP4ofjMNe/LHQ736nfeWFi8ra5p0omsdU023jSlaLLHcW8fox3UUkfw8JD/wAkZJ4Z ovBN5zX8z/PcHk6209pX/RD3d3qryiGNUs+McKRW3755ZzIzrJ/dRJbyc/jliwZL+Z2vy+Q/Knmn TdLt59T13U4tMm05nZUcl7iFxbysy/V3nltl9JpvWS39T9563DngxdV81Wnm3yfpnm6y0SfUNRl1 X0rywimd7eGC0ikX6tLdESQyzSGVLmiskkHpLgPyv5/87ebUTXtIsNHutGV1F3oNvds2tQoztByd 5vq9irlo5LuFJ/Q9a2X0lk9T95iflH/FX/K3PO3L9H/o/wBWx/SlPW9b0fqsv6L+q/7r9X0/T+v+ r8HPn9XzoHmrzDa+VPLuo+Ybwc4rGIusVWHqSsRHBDyVZCnrTPHF6nDjHz5v8GQ+z80/mDomqaGn n2y0qHS9dlFgkumtOZrW+mT1LWG4V2nST1nV7f8A0fnCj/vXukjRfWK5vPf5kXkHmvUNHsdHj0zy te6jBLc3huC88VkOYjihhc/6RHEnKWWV4oZvrEKRLH6U2dM0LU/03oemaz6XofpG0gvPQ5c+Hrxr Lw50Tnw58eXBc53+c/lry5beQde1e30iyh1Nnt5Dfx20S3BeW8hErmdUEvOTm/qNy+Plm/Nvy15c 0b8t9futI0iy0+4dLWN5rS2ihcob22YoXiRW4clVuP8Ak4YWPmvz1Z+btD0XzXp+mQWfmNLx7KGy lmkurQ2sQufTu5X/ANHndUb0H+rqqPJ++R+CenKnonmDzFc2PmT/AAxoGnyahD5lvtM/dsLOFUVV /wByl/u8l3Kshj+tLBwnuE/uvsYp5Q86eY77zjfeT/MbaPdXFvZG9FzocsrpC8VwLWa0uVnLN9Y5 Mrsn7v0f2vU9X90VyefPzBvdL1DzroGm6VceTrOWZ7eKaSdL+6sbR/TuLqNiUhh5iOeREniWaLhw +r3H7v6wea55z1m+1HRtE/L5LK8vtUsjrMt1qfrx28OnHitvKUjEczPdTPwVU5Sw8P31vwk9WInv /wAyfMek+UfNE+pWllF5t8rXFtDdW0fqyWckN5LF9VuU+JHCTQSycYvrHrI8XqTJF6noZLNc8yX2 mecfKnl6COJrTXf0j9bkcMZV+p26zxeiysqLydv3nNJPh/kznfle6/MSOfzsvkux0yW3g8x6rNLJ qckvO4mYpS2tY4WjWN41jXlLcypDJ9Zi+NPRmyaJ5s8zeZfLuiat5F0y0mbV4ne5u9QndLawlhKr JDLEiR3V3ylW4tkkt1RfUjSb+5fE/wAu/Omq+Zr3XdK1dtMubjRntSmoaJK8tnMl3G0gVDKXYvC0 TLI/P7f7v019LnIM/MnWb7S/LqWOkv6Wra/dwaHptySypDNekp67yRMssXpRLK0csQkdJ/S/dOub zR5I/SOh6ba+Wbn9D6t5d4P5evR8fpelH6H1WV3EsrWlxFxjuF+P1OMbzJcqnoyQe212+/Mvjda+ JdG8p+VIo7rzXZS2rL9c1O15T3FoUY3PqafaeiskttJ/pPxoktu0klvNbJ2n5w6/Elhr2rzeXE0G 7uEF1plretLq9pazOUSeWNXkWV4FMcs8UFu1w37Vvbfvfq4yCbzmv5n+e4PJ1tp7Sv8Aoh7u71V5 RDGqWfGOFIrb988s5kZ1k/uokt5OfxyxYcQ/mVfXH5baX5qhsYm1/WpV03TNO5MIZb953tU+M/3c R9GS54Syp8C/V/rXP99ilp5l8/WGtjyz5og0dNR1eyuZvLV5ZG6Nq95arze2u0k5T8ODJO8o9FPT X043mmk4xJv+Y99d+QPL3mHS7eIa35iu7XSrWO5RvqiXskrQXDyrHKZltK29z6LI8s39xzj/ALzD DzTrXn2yurt9Jt9E0rRLH0+Ws6/dOIrj1lSnppbcTa+jMWgf6y379ni9HE9Lvbv8zvyvW9aNLHU9 St5TbmOWWNIb60mZbW5SWP8AfxIl5bRXKr+8aP8Au/3/AO2eeR/Mn+LvKml+YTH6Ut5EfrEYHFRN EzQXHprylPpetFJ6PJ+fpcOfx5IM2bNmzZs2f//X7/mzZs2cn0Q/mL5RvvMkFj5N/S1pqet32qW1 3+k7S2rFcMqxj0n9V/sRB/i4N8f2MTj/AC/80DybNeS/V283tro84waejcbVbyqk2EkhZ/UT0hJ9 maJPrDIn1r0Y/rEhxpdj5u8z+ctM8x+adDTy9Z+Xbe5GnW6XkV3LPdXoEMrSNCCn1eO3T7HGGT1u DepMnNIo+ND/ADG0Pyvq/wCXGi6Bb3mlMl9BpWuzXsak2l16kwjmtv3cr3retJbrLS3tkuGj5r9W ieaVTztb3XlH8vvKXmUyRWXmbylFZwW8M/GVZmmgjs7+w4rII35xhpXki9SVYraT6u8X98s88gaA /lfybo2iSq6XFvbh7qORkcpcTE3FzGHi+BkjnlkSPjy+D9uT7eE/mvS/Mmm+bdP87+VdMTW7g2Uu j6npslylqfq5k+tW81vJKAius4ZZ+bS8k9NI4P7yaMvsPLHmS90Lz3rOr2KWnmLzbbywQaRFOkqR RW9o9nYRtNtF9Yk5sZpfW9Fv3T8bf95Ek08p2N1pnlXQ9Nvo/Su7PT7S3uYqq3GWKFI5F5IWRuLq fiVuOQvzZo35gfpfXrbR4k1nQfNlkLEx3F0bcaRL6P1Rp0jkMiyW8iyPczJaw+tM/wDJ6SfWt5r8 h3q6N5Rk0ywt/Md55SRLR9LvvTit721kgS1uTwm9SJLhfRint/Ul9OH4/wDeh/TjYw8oaRq6T32o t5U0fya5tza2kUEcN1dPKxEhnnuLI2sX1IUiH1P++mkjd/Xg4xc4vY+R9bvvNGjXzeU7LyjcaNcR zXevaVdr6F7DBzWW2t9NtxE0aag0n97dfvo7T9zO8v8AcPrnQ/zG06087eWdJ0C3u7XzJe6lfQa1 JexpGsV9EKwC1PGf6xwUwRu7RwpdSc5P9Fj9V5Jd6Lrtv5H8tWA8v6f5gl0y0tYtS0DUfS5tLHbL BztLuUy2cUttIX9T1IpVng9T0Zo3/vt+V/lG+8sx6vdT2X6EtNUlhktPLa3TXq2foRmKWVrpmKSS 3r/vG4fYiSBPU/3XCYee/Kmpa/8AojV/L1xFaeYdBuxdWE1y0ywvE9FurWb6u3MRXCKnqfA7Okf1 f92k8j4T3Uf5m+dPQ026sv8AA+lpKj6ld29+l1f3EQqwhspLZAlt8afvpJG5fvI+HqxpPbzHHl3R NUsfPfnTWbqD09P1b9F/o+fmjep9Wtmin+BWMicJDx/eInL9jIfpnknzPb+RPIWjTWPHUNF8wQah qcHqwn0rZLm6leXmJPTkpHNG3CJ3k+L7GTDzFomqX3nvyXrNrB6mn6T+lP0hPzRfT+s2yxQfAzCR +cg4/u0fj+3kH8w+RfMXmHUhZP5W0/TdRS7M8Xn/AEu5FoFrMty10dNjb65LdtGno8bi4l9O8Z5Y rmOJvWyWabpfmTR/zM13UV0xLrQfMiWTvqiXKIbQ2VrJD6clq49aZ5puI/dfAiSI/P8AvEjPPPHl v/F3lTVPLwk9KW8iH1eQniomiZZ7f1G4yn0vWij9binP0ufD48h62vn/AM6ap5cg81+XotC07Rbu PV7y7ivYp3uLu1QrbR28URmMETzSM8scvq/uPs3SSp++Eab5W1238q/mJps1pxu9d1DWrjSovUiP rRXkIjtm5B+EXqv+zM0bJ/uzhkw8p2N1pnlXQ9Nvo/Su7PT7S3uYqq3GWKFI5F5IWRuLqfiVuOE/ 5paJqnmPyJq2jaNB9Z1C5+r+hBzSPl6dzDK/xyskYpGjt8T5vzS0TVPMfkTVtG0aD6zqFz9X9CDm kfL07mGV/jlZIxSNHb4nzeYtE1S+89+S9ZtYPU0/Sf0p+kJ+aL6f1m2WKD4GYSPzkHH92j8f28g+ q+RPNdz5d16zTT/rK3XnCbWpNJ+trb/pDS2K/uvWjfhF6r8ZOM7RvF6Pq8fWSFHMPJHlPXdI852+ vzeWrTQdJuNKk0pNPsJ4p5bZoZYpUm1KYmP61Ldem/Ge2+sy8fQW64sskuA10P8AMbRPLeo/lro2 gW93pEz3Nnp3mGa9jUR2N87Oz3Vt8E8lxClxMrvDHGvP+6trhY/9IPNV8s675V1jQdf8l6d+nfqG lDy5e6fc3MVtKbSIrLa3EUzqkQlEqf6Szc+a+msNunxyxk+o+RvNfmLyp52v7+zisfM3mmW1eLSV uFkiit9MaP6rC0ygx/W5o45eUnq/V3Z4P95P3qRmEVr5/wDMPnvyr5h1ry9Fo2l6P+kEkiW9iupl a4tvT9aRoyiNFK/pRQxwo8sbxzvP+7eHAelw/mh5Sn80rpPli31S31jWL+/06R72GF4jKR6c88bP xmt5l9L04UlguE9G49b0/UgwHr35Z6xZ+WfJmiWum/4l0/RPrTa1oovzZLPcXSGRZ45yIF9K1uXu PR5f6R6UiR8W9W4fJB+XXlvXdB8xeYdQ1TRrTSbTXYrO4tbbTGiNtaG3EsRspVX0n+t8JUkllt4H s5pPWkSZPhjww/NSxupPLtrrlnH68vlfULbX2tKqnrxWRZp4/VY0i4wvJNz4St+69NInd8mkE8F1 BFdWsqTW8yLJDNGwdHRxyR0daqyMp5Ky5B/K/lK9XSvO2ka7E9rb+YdY1WaF43jZ2s71EiSZCplW N2XnxWVea/tx5E9D8p+Y7e1svLt7+Xfl9ZrbjazeargWtzA8ULcfrTWKql9PLPAnw854WkuZPVm+ rx8445x5d0TVLHz3501m6g9PT9W/Rf6Pn5o3qfVrZop/gVjInCQ8f3iJy/YyJ6f5E8yQ/lVoOli2 SLzT5cvf0xY2M0qGGS4gu55o4ZpImdGSa3mbjwni/fen6k8Sephxpdj5u8z+ctM8x+adDTy9Z+Xb e5GnW6XkV3LPdXoEMrSNCCn1eO3T7HGGT1uDepMnNIg+j/l5qNh+Y1xrcrJ+gba4vtY0yQSVuHvt Xjit7yGdOHH6vbrbyPFx4N++t/39x+/SIr8zeTvMVz5/1HXD5YtPM9veRW0Wi3Wo3oW003jE0E4u dPkqbmL1na7eKKN/9+W7/WpH9M88qC9/Lb8r5o/MFukdx5eS9ajTRrDdEzSz25t5gXZEummjgi9e KO49b/j2+xzPPy68vXXlXyVo+h3xrd28TPcrRfglnke5khqjSI/oPMYfUV+MnD1P2slGbNmzZs2b P//Q7/mzZs2bNmzZB9d/5Vt/j3R/8Qel/i/0o/0R6/r8OHOb0Kf8ePq+v63oer+/9f0/S/e+hk4z Zs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bC/RP0X+i4P0L/AMc34/qlOfp+nzan1f1P+PT/ AJY/S/0X6r6P1P8A0T0cMM2bNmzZsL9V/Rf+hfpX+7+txfVuXP0vrO/1b1uP7r+94/VvrP7v699V 9H/TfquGGbNmzZs2bNn/2Q== ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BF5119.D19505E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 00:42:40 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA08297; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:41:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:41:00 -0800 Message-ID: <002401bf50ac$f2b4dec0$8f7611ce office> Reply-To: "Robert Beasley" From: "Robert Beasley" To: References: <19991227213400.24652.qmail hotmail.com> Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 09:57:10 +1300 Organization: natvita MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="text/plain"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0021_01BF5119.E84DAC60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"pA7Ae1.0.U12.SU7Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32524 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01BF5119.E84DAC60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----- Original Message ----- From: David Dennard To: Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 1999 10:34 AM Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process > Bill, I have watched this list for a long time and tried to get interest and > help with my work. Although there are a couple of people of this list with > interest almost anything not in the interest of the core group, which is > mainly those interested in cold fusion and related to select groups already > established in the energy fields, is shot down or ignored or said to be off > topic. > > I agree with you that the guidelines for this group are not followed and not > followed by the guideline makers. > > I have more news and will have more news as my work is rapidly gaining > interest and support. But I don't feel welcome here so I don't participate. > I am watching to see if I can gain further information but see very little > that pertains to the gravity constant and the gravity paradigm, which, in my > opinion will make most of this stuff look like bunk very soon anyway. > > David Dennard > http://www.whirlpower.cc > > > >From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 > >Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com > >To: vortex-l > >Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process > >Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:08:13 -0500 (EDT) > > > >Ross, au contraire mon ami, > > > >There is an aspect of the Shroud of Turin that is scientific in nature. > > > >A legitimate subject as stated on the "Vortex-L Discussion Group" page: > > > > "reports of theoretically impossible phenomena" > > > >Therefore: > > > >How did he get out? Wrapped and tied into a coarse material, in a sealed > >tomb. > > > >It implies that he was somehow teleported out. Or as the Bible puts in > >reference to other disappearances "translated". How was it done. > > > >If you consider that a lot of things that we take for granted would be > >considered flat out miracles back then, anything that would still be > >considered a miracle simply means WE haven't figured it out yet. > > > >So if we think in terms of just science proposed methods we have: > >1. Scanned, disassembled, reassembled? > >2. Worm hole like gateway? > >3. Interdimensional? > >4. Some kind of universal position indicator pointers reset (quantum > >mech.)? > >5. Conversion into a pure energy entity? > >6. Unknown other? > > > >Results of any of the above on the shroud material: > >Ionization effects? > >EM pulse effects? > >Sudden vacuum effects, from the body suddenly being elsewhere. > > > > > > >> I promised to take the subject of the logical foundation of "Christian" > > >>ethics as embodied in the argumentum contained in posts under the > > >>subject header "try this picture on for size" to vortexB. However, > > > > > > >There is NO .......... "However". > > > > >These discussions don't belong on vortex, they belong on vortexb. If > >Jones > > >or anyone else didn't respond over there, then too bad, the debate is > >over. > > > The loading of messages on vortex is huge, and these just make for a lot > > >of need to hit the "garbage" icon for those of us not interested. > > > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01BF5119.E84DAC60 Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="jc.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://www.best.com/~tjc/jc.jpg /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgEBaAFoAAD/7QnIUGhvdG9zaG9wIDMuMAA4QklNA+0AAAAAABABaAAAAAEA AgFoAAAAAQACOEJJTQPzAAAAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAA4QklNBAoAAAAAAAEAADhCSU0nEAAAAAAACgAB AAAAAAAAAAI4QklNA/QAAAAAABIANQAAAAEALQAAAAYAAAAAAAE4QklNA/cAAAAAABwAAP////// //////////////////////8D6AAAOEJJTQQIAAAAAAAQAAAAAQAAAkAAAAJAAAAAADhCSU0ECQAA AAAI4gAAAAEAAACAAAAAJAAAAYAAADYAAAAIxgAYAAH/2P/gABBKRklGAAECAQBIAEgAAP/+ACdG aWxlIHdyaXR0ZW4gYnkgQWRvYmUgUGhvdG9zaG9wqCA0LjAA/+4ADkFkb2JlAGSAAAAAAf/bAIQA DAgICAkIDAkJDBELCgsRFQ8MDA8VGBMTFRMTGBEMDAwMDAwRDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM DAwMDAwMDAENCwsNDg0QDg4QFA4ODhQUDg4ODhQRDAwMDAwREQwMDAwMDBEMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM DAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM/8AAEQgAJACAAwEiAAIRAQMRAf/dAAQACP/EAT8AAAEFAQEBAQEBAAAA AAAAAAMAAQIEBQYHCAkKCwEAAQUBAQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAQACAwQFBgcICQoLEAABBAEDAgQCBQcG CAUDDDMBAAIRAwQhEjEFQVFhEyJxgTIGFJGhsUIjJBVSwWIzNHKC0UMHJZJT8OHxY3M1FqKygyZE k1RkRcKjdDYX0lXiZfKzhMPTdePzRieUpIW0lcTU5PSltcXV5fVWZnaGlqa2xtbm9jdHV2d3h5en t8fX5/cRAAICAQIEBAMEBQYHBwYFNQEAAhEDITESBEFRYXEiEwUygZEUobFCI8FS0fAzJGLhcoKS Q1MVY3M08SUGFqKygwcmNcLSRJNUoxdkRVU2dGXi8rOEw9N14/NGlKSFtJXE1OT0pbXF1eX1VmZ2 hpamtsbW5vYnN0dXZ3eHl6e3x//aAAwDAQACEQMRAD8A60kAFziGtGpcTAHzKEczDBAORUCYgb29 +O6o9YNbsjEpyADjl4e4Hgmdn0f5KoWY2M6rIe6tjWMsawOeBq1s/wA1Abt5/eSU7lubjV0OvFjb GtgAMcDLidrWz+b7lmu63mtftZhtuHfY5wj/AK48bXf5iyW1jebG2S1rGwyJ94+k+fpbP3Fq11lk P3tr3fSBGnzSUzd19zBNmFYwd9xP5RW5qG3629NcARVdJGrRsJH/AElbs9I0FzyAT9F5bJH5u3d+ a5jlSbjNGz6OzUOcajH5UlJq/rHRZJbiZMDuQwfAD3q5TnuuYH/ZMlgPZza/++3OWJnMLMe01u3W AwxzRBLSPzWvn6KHhV9dtDBj76x+c6x24R/UDfpJKd9/UqKzF1d9fmanEf51XqKTOpdPf9HJrHeH EsP/AIIGLE+w/WZom3KrI13AtcP+pVfIx+vV1PP2ippn2uO4CP7SSnqK8jHtbuqursb+817SPwci bXRMSPEcLiMKnqbw8uFTnOJLiQ33Huf0jFYor6vVYNlVDBHLXis/fV6aSnrklz1XVer1ui70NnEn IZz/ANd3Jres5b2hv2iqmw6O231gM+O2hzv9fzElPRJ1kdBv6hb6zcp/q1NANbiS4hxP0fVcNz27 PctZJT//0OnzMOjMq9K4aAy1w5B+ay7fqxU+AL/aHF+1zJ1P9Vy6j9j5f71f3n/yCqPbTXlPxLMq iu+oNc9r3OaAHlldf6R7BXue+6pm3d/hK0lPOWfV3Ioffl1W12HYSawwtc5oB3N7t3f6NTsNwx67 KwzJGR7yDHxjVdHVQy11gpysd7qHmq3bZ9GxrfUdW72/TYz3KozpfS8o22U2UWCt1bLH0vs2B14Y +na6kel+l9ap/wCi/wBIkpw7b+ptxLKq8VhN0y99k8/nhrWqtXZ9YXDcGVnZ9FrnSHEfvELo6vq7 0ixrRXbj2sEOA+02PbBLoMb/AHe5j0R/Tel0NreG4hZe1z631VmwFjI9S0vpps/RM3s/Sv8AYkp5 XIf1ZjDZditDgNYsYAAOY3uai42dn7Kz61e+wwylhNjgD+dtr9q6evG6cA01ZGDtc3e0tc2C0iWu 0Z+d+YjenQxjLDmYlbbWNtYTYG7q7CG1WD2t/R2PdtYkpwsbp/XLaw7LzK6Nwn0mVF72z++59ja9 /wDZRx0HAfrlmzMd/wAK7a3/ALao9Ji07RTRlDDuvrqvJa1osFjGuc8PfUyu59TabHvbTdt2P/wa maqQ0udmYrQA4kutAgVtFt26R7fSqc2y3/RsSU5juhdHc3b9lawD/Ruew/8AQe1NX0DozDP2UWH/ AIZz7f8Ao2vc1arqK22sqdlYwstDnVt9T6QZ/Obfb+Z/r9BRurqprZbZk0CqwNcywOc5pa/+advY xzdt30aP9PZ+jq/SJKa4xsUDaKKg3iPTZEf5qVeNi1N21UVVtPIbW0D/AKLUZv2V5cG5uLLGte6b Ihr3ehW7Vv51w9H/AI79EinFaHBn2nHL3QQ0PkkOLGNdtDfo77qvd/wtaSkAAAAAAA4A0CSvfsfL /er+8/8AkEv2Pl/vV/ef/IJKf//R9VWH1D/m79ut+2ep9p9u/b68TtbOz0f0e77N/SfT/wC0fq/a P1f1184pJKfoXE/5sfbLfR3+n9ku3b9/pehNfr7fU/S+n6P2f7H/ANpfsn/Jns+1q3X+wPsLI9T7 L67d+/159bbr9u9T9J/4a+2/ovW/pX6dfN6SSn6Ep/5nRj+jujbV6Wz7R9He/wBH1tn5u7f6/wBp /wAD/Sv0CsH/AJtfZcbb6noRkej6f2ifT3/r3qen+k+x+rs/nv1b+Y9P/BL5zSSU/RmR/wA1th9b 6Pqv/wBNPqbqPX+j7vpfZ9//AAO//Aeunyf+bW6r7Vvn0G+nv9eNnp2bd35v2v7N6/8AOfrvob/8 GvnJJJT9L9R/Yvrv+3fzu1m/+c+jtyvS/m/b9D7b/r6Ky2f8zttnp+p/OH1I+1bvVhno/wAv1v5r 9mf8P/yd+nXz4kkp+hB/zR9+31tus7Pte2P5Gz2bPtH816X/AHo/zP68rmL/AM3/AEMf7PP2T7Pi +lO7Z6Xqf5M3er+k3etu9Pd/19fN6SSn6Hp/5o/ZG/Z93o67PS9fdHs37fT/AEv81s9X/un6nq/q 3rJV/wDNP7W37NPrbH7fT9X0/T+2N+07N/6rs/aWz1vS/Sej6X/aX0V88JJKfqpJfKqSSn//2ThC SU0EBgAAAAAABwACAAAAAQEA//4AJ0ZpbGUgd3JpdHRlbiBieSBBZG9iZSBQaG90b3Nob3CoIDQu MAD/7gAOQWRvYmUAZIAAAAAA/9sAQwAIBgYGBgYIBgYIDAgHCAwOCggICg4QDQ0ODQ0QEQwMDAwM DBEMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM/8AACwgAjgH0AQERAP/dAAQAP//EANIAAAAH AQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAQFAwIGAQAHCAkKCxAAAgEDAwIEAgYHAwQCBgJzAQIDEQQABSESMUFRBhNh InGBFDKRoQcVsUIjwVLR4TMWYvAkcoLxJUM0U5KismNzwjVEJ5OjszYXVGR0w9LiCCaDCQoYGYSU RUaktFbTVSga8uPzxNTk9GV1hZWltcXV5fVmdoaWprbG1ub2N0dXZ3eHl6e3x9fn9zhIWGh4iJio uMjY6PgpOUlZaXmJmam5ydnp+So6SlpqeoqaqrrK2ur6/9oACAEBAAA/AJ0SanfNU+Oap8c3JqUq aZqnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzV PjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHN U+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap8c1T45qnxzVPjmqfHNU+Oap49 e+f/0J0epys2bNmzZs2bNjXdI1LyMEUdWY0H44WT+Y9GgJD3SmnUoCw+8CmIDzfoBNBck/7B/wCm DY9b0iVQyXkRB8WAP0g74Jiu7Wf+5mjkp14MG/UcWzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNm zZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2X+z9Of/9GdHqcrNmzZs2bNmxOeeO2hkuJjxjjUs59hkLvmvNdcTzs0VqD+ 5gB2A8W8WxNLG2X4TEHWlKsdsK9RurGKkSxqWGwVP7KYXCZ6fBDQn7JIJx6yzxMGmtA6DfkCVI96 1wdFqVpMoHqvGf5XZgR9NceHWRfhuXP+q+Wpuo94L+ZCDUfG1Nvpxx1zzFZkmK99UdlkCtX/AIIV wfbec9Z4fv7SBz4oWX9ZbLm86aurDhaQhe4PJj+DDG/431RR8VrCT/sh/wAbHEn866yfiSK3UeBD H/jbET581NTxc24b2jcj/iWWPPd+x2kQHpQRGlfprgx/ON+ijkYw5/yCw/AriH/KwL2J+LWscyjq VDIf1vg6L8wFc76ZNTxVgf1hcHW/nK1l2lsriM9qBW/42GKDzfZHra3I/wBgv8Hx482ad+3HMn+s g/5qzJ5w0JyR6zKRtQo38K4Kh8x6LMaLeID4PVf+JAYMivrKbeG5ik/1XU/qOCM2bNmzZs2bNmzZ s2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bL/Z+nP/0p0epysbJJHEhklYIi7lmNAMIp/NmnKxS2JnK/aYbKMZF5nM1eFu KjcAt1+7Az+bp/V4R2qlegPI1r9PHELzzdewPGqxIA1eWxP/ABtisPmu5dAzpGCRWgDHLTzg/PhJ bA9qqT+qhwwh8y2rlRKhjLfP+IXAfmXVLaeyWzgclpHV5KA0CKeW/wA244VQ31wQoCgxNsPbNMGl qASB3+WI2+nWo3Chn/DBp02KQKxBJHhtTFV02MkKVJB2AxL/AA9al2LxDeoFMBS+XLZB8AKH2JGB X0adN45WBHTfCrULTUomFfiX8cCKbxRQod/89sf/AKcw2UgHuaYoLa/YV4beJOKRaVcTN+9FKdaN Tb6MF/oxbegKqVO9SMMLeyiSEPw9SvbwyzFay7MoB8Dgu10vT9mKqT74e2djp60URLv1ODxaWYFF jUeBpj1tLXY0UeIoMa9lZnYgCu3UYWS6DYu5YhSd99sLJ/LkBJYKGHbxwul8tpuyA/JTuflicdnf 2dPQnnh7LR27fI8cGrfeZIx+7u2egr8aq1fvGCode8xx/wB9DDMo6niyn8DTFn816jH108N8mP8A TAzefpIZONzpjKvWqyCv/DKMMYfPGiS0BE8ZPXlETT/geWDv8S6LQE3NAfFJP+acv/EuhVA+vRgn saj9YwVDqmm3H9xdwv7K61+6uCgQRUGo8Rl5s2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNl/s/Tn/9OdHqcrIJ5hu59R kfg5+rJ8McY2DGtKn6cCadpD3EAkqI6VFafF/ZgqOxitbiKIysVl5Bu1KKW6D5YWjTUbUFCO6RSc uJDGvIb7rgrU/LgKLMkz1O4HI1+fXCwWOpW9eIMqU8aN9+CFuuKcZ4jE4INXBoT4g74n9ddpQHck HowO/wCIxbl6ySS067KfYYO09fUt3jHRdwcWEXI0Y0B3GKQRIjfEfmBhpG1uykAn5DHpQSKxFFUV AJqcWdw5Eafab9qvbE20mRqVk6mvXEJtJaM1SQk91JwnvYJWICEOehB7fdicem3EhA4IQPDHSadM tRxUf5+OPi0m4liDbADN9QnhrWnzxhiEvwOKHscYYLm2NUaqdcZPLGU5SUV/fAUOpW/OglBp2Bph nFraRKCJBQe+D4tft2oeQ+L6f1YNXV7R0HIj2pXrjH1u0C7EE+O+IHWLbjUMu3tlfpyFlpVSO+JS 6iW3RhQ9PowO19tSSh9qbYwXoJ22p22x31uVTUD4T13GJPqoH2u3iK4XaheW9yhHwn3OIWAtxHzk VSA1QD4DDSKWwnpy4r/n7Y+TT9NmFQ8Z9jiA8v2UleJQE+Bx66Rd2x5Wl7JD7Ryso+7pg+GbzPb0 Md8JlH7EyK//AAy8X/4bDCLXdaT++sYpv+MTlD9z8/14Li8xxHa5s54D3NFdfvU1/wCFwbDq+nzn ik4DeDgqf+GAwUssTGiupPgCDj82JyTwxf3sip3+JgNvpwFLr+iwGkl9CCOwcH/iNcLLzzppMBCW pN05/lqqD5uwyrbzlZSuizwtCrg/GDzFR8lXbJDDPDcxLNA4kjcVVlNRQ4pmzZs2X+z9Of/UnR6n AGr3gsrGWX9thxSnidshl+fSLCLpG61PXYCn8ckWmQxtYrx3qAa/PfAd3aB2DcxGyNzVm6AdDyxK 2sIxKJ/rUNUB4DkWpX22rjNRdBEVe7NO5RAo+81wsk9RLW5WNnZFYKSRvRvtCvYf5WCLCNJtPm5q HISoVt/oyJslwbt7eKtF7gVNO2HlpG0VuImBr74Ls7gQzhHNFbbbDFSkjUWgHQVxOSJyCFNKdffN FHOg2eg8N98MLQyNII5DyqNjgkBo5wT1G22Di9w4+FRXAswvnBDU98IpobpZTtuT1PTGxSXiClKg HfbKmku6AqOR7DHW1xfemRxp7DLaS9ValST/AFwGWuCwDoF36g9MMp6PBGOo6Hw6ZGNQgjdmD1DD xO2F9ta2ol5XLFUHdT44ZodEWIqqmVqbliTiFwdPgtA8dI3Br9ojamwpgaC+klZlRjtXcDbAE1/d h6BW+nbpmS/u/T3Qg5cV/fDYR/D4VocEpqcu3OOQfI1/pjpdWoCQGB98Si1cs+5YYpPqI41Lke9a YVTamQxAJYHqQ2Jpfry2Vqn+bcYNi1AbKzKB8t8MoZkI/vQFPbfHua1KzCvbE+UyCouKn/Pwynvr paUlr26nF7fVbgGhlH3/AO1hjFrF0g5F1YH3BxePzDOR8Sg07df448a5BI3F4UJ8emCrK4sweSxA E9N8EyXESipcrTp8ZH8caHkvDvezUHQeswH31xN9I0aGBrmZGuJepXmWY/KpwNLZ+Xnt1le3NtIf 2WO4/wCBwsmn0a0RuFxGAeu4JwDPd6W7ep9Y5mgoOGw+k4ZaDqkdvqUX1O6Leu8cTxmMKjAkBq9A OI+y2dNzZs2bL/Z+nP/VnR6nCPzGtYYTStCxAPjQUyKSJVHElTyAY/OmSfRrpfqaofhVlHHbCfzF O5iEMZoJZFV29q4no0D+rGzgSL6gR6jehGxw71a0jKEMn7sjcDCNmijge3DEiWoJO5qRTfG29xHp 8HpE8mIAFepwNDDHHyuGX95Kasem3hgsSJx2UE++B19Np1HGu9cN4YeUganHYHj3wa0QBOwpQZaK nWmwy5lKKrxijVBFMEqi3MKyr9tev0YvDdKvwsNhtXHSyoxNKVIrT2wrlesoZl2G2YTWtaMR4nfE biS340RhU+GXZ8TRTQDvWmGMi25A6UA6k4R3qxiTkh6YsOM0IVdzsfkaZFtZDidgq7AVNPHCUmWU BSAo6hT/AEwTDBeEEKxVT2AwWuiyThQ9Xp1rhtZ+X0ReVB4U8ce/lu3LAtH8/pwRH5cswlBHXx7n Gny/bAnigHiaY4eW7bjUr/DE28t2TLUpWnvgVPLtkCSikHwy5dAgkX02VSOgBrU4VXPli3J2RR2r TCq40WK2lQqQamhAxdNIQsvAVr7VphlHoxqf3YYgeGNl0VnBCRcT8sDNoNwRStD4UP8AXE5PL150 Vqewrj4fL1/QDlUeHbBR8u35FAR92ISeWtRpsQKb1pjF8uar9pZCPbp+rF18v63GAVkO1KUri8ui 6zJGCw5EdiK4pZaHfhTHK8aFjQctvuwc3le6jhMkt9RBuQjGvywrt9JgvLgQhJKoau7s1KDu1fHD C48tWtpH6ipGxpUHrSuARbSK4R5FCAbfuyxP3DBtjZCe/s7f1HjDNx4+nwJQfEeLEEfs50fNmzZs v9n6c//WnR6nC7WIBNaV/aRlYH5nif15CLxuFvMtQGDbEim2K6PfLFAIDQkGq1+0R1x+pSw3XGEt xIYMG8CDyGDtP9NGEnqUHLkVHcjpm1nXLZAF51bpQZHZdTiduQIB7Vy43hVvrNwxJ/YFdh88ZHqU LycAdq7VOGVuyOGFa08MfYxhr5Yz1G4GHSMIpTz7gAUxQy1HEEmu+B5ZTCodjTx9su0vEu/hVjU9 K9sE2l4be6eBt0JB+nBk0AkYPE/XrTC68W4ReMbfvY91qetOqn54Dt5ReAMrsOVRStSCOoOCYrCD lVyxJ7nBMllamnwkUwObZUI4uRiDeqhoHqPfE3Usp5btX2/DKN2lunBDUjCqVWuGd2/a23xttp8a sCasT9oDDq104s1ONF7CmGkOlKtORr4dsNYbCBVqBvtuTtiktpD1PGnucRSCFVoKfRtiZgiHYGv4 ffgOa3JJptXqSa9MSW2jAJdgQfA4wpEBRCASdycAXElvGS0k1W7AHrhHdapCGKpUjxOF7Mlwahqk 7jY4PtklVg0hFFFAMMobtYyPiovfpXFm1O3JoAPmf45Qv4RuOFMZLfWx3Jp2oMamo26bg/Opxb9O WibcgCO9cTOv2ZGzqex74w6/aRjcr74i/m20iOxNPAdNvpxI+b1ccV/EmuBrnzB8AKUdgfY4mnmC XqQNxWjMK/hiv6ekdahamu9K5l1ZJnAavyPTDBIorn4oZmlIG0UZkP4RqckGg6TLBIb67UrIRwii Ys3EbfH8ZLKx6Yf5s2bNl/s/Tn//150epxjqHVkbowofpyKeY9PRClV/dyV+LsWHb2bI2LPiRxoy U7bGuJXMMZerLJQeB4/jvgi2i+DnF6nEVA+LkT+NMKru35Ts0qsQd96/1x9rb2zMOCFietcF3lpC w9MRKDTctt/bhKllCsx4ScCO/bJFo8olV42+3Tf5jrhhasF1KN67BSTT2wXc3KSXKhTQbrT5YNgU Hao3HX3xtxbJIpjc1P8AA4nBbxWYDqan+nbA3IyX224O9O5JyQWnqRMqHoR37HNqECmJpTtw35eO RaG7FpqjIlPSuhuOyuvcf6ww0+vfFRSAR3ONl1B+W8godic0NwZJa8xTFZuG/UnsemA55uKhQKth ezcmqd6ZRPj08ME28ojIYMAcGrqpQ0V9x1oBiq6yXagYlu+2DY9SlpWp+dMTl1At36dN8bHfMBUi uUbyVieLAe1cSkum7zccByahAlecnI06YUXOrRmqwmg6bHCxpru7cx20bSudgqKzH8MXh8qeZ7qp FusK+MxCn7qscGweQ9eb++uIIx7Fj+pcW/wV5ggFYbqCT2qw/WMCT6D5qg3NmJh3Mbo33CobC6eP XITwl06ZCBXl6bUp8wCMREuoTkLFbM58EBY/gMEQ2GuzgiOwm8Axjdf1gYZW3kzX7r++MdsnjIxY /Qq1w3tPy7tU+K+vZZmPVYwEX8eeHkHlbQbcALZq9O8hZ/8AiRpggaFow6WFv9Man9YxRdJ0tTVb KAHxESf0wJd+V9Cvd5bNEb+aL92fp4UGAU8ieXkcMYpHANeDSNT/AIXicM4PL+iWwHo2EIpsCyBj 97cjgsWVmNhbxAeyL/TGHTdObraQnv8A3a/0xeOKKJeMUaxr/KihR9y0x+bNmzZsv9n6c//QnR6n KxOaCK4jMUyB0bqpwjufLjlybScKhOyODUDwDjfC258tX7125An9lxUf8FTATaNfwIyehJTuQpp+ FRhYdOvEckxO1D3qP1YLSCWgZlKf5Nf64GvLaVjQRq3LcEqSfvrhRDFci4KU2qeVQCfuwyVTaTrc R/3TfC9K7E9GocHRvwlD+LEV9jgxbV2YP3PX3rgtbg2sfBtvenTAzamviD7e+MN40gpyPXbF7N4I pRNJJ8S+GDhrlor83kAUHp3+jCzU/NFtODEktEHbpXIo+qerdGXnxji+we9a4rJrMrH92eI7n/bx L9JXDNu5Ye/9mKrq7wMGBp71IwUPMryniTQ9z1xU6k8tKtsfDF/rKcKqRgJ708tjXKN+V69My6jH 4k/LFk1VEOy7/MYqdXkk+FagYXXmrz27hQ3Ku464F/xHcsSi1DAVPXBFjfarelvQgllYDoisf64a R+XvNl6K+iLdT3lcA/ducMrXyHeSUbUdQp4pCCf+Gan/ABHDu08m6FbcS8JuHH7UzFt/9UUXDuGC C3XhBEsSjaiKFH4YpmzZs2agHTNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bL/Z+nP//RnR6nKzZs2bNlFVPUA/Rj JIIJQBJGrgbgEA4HGlaaK0tIqk1J4Cv34lPoWl3CFGgCA9Snw/2ZBbm3k0/U5NNdiyxkem5G5Vvs /hktsbZJolXowAxLULJhGQRXagpkWuLOdiUFVI7nEV06/dCrSUrtXvjU0i6U0NX8etcU/RErAHgx pgO40L1Hrw+LwpgaTQHX7Kjfr2xP9DXA2Cg/Ttg210S5qCQFXuBVsFz+XWn+Y+7Cs+WbqMkqajtu ccujalHXh27HKex1E/C0JPup/rgC4s76EcxExFfpx1vY6lcj+7MS92cmmSbSfLlsaPfSPLX7Kr8K 1w1urK0sVJtoYoqDdjQn8f2sLLeMy/EzvKCfhLAIn3nf7sRl0w319DaIilnbbYkDfqxJ5UXJ5Z+X 9Gsgvo2UIcAAyFAzE+NWrhkqKg4ooUeAFBl5s2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bL/Z+nP//S nR6nKzZs2bNmzZs2RfzbYMfR1ONOQhBS4p1CdVf/AGGI6deV4kN8NBuPbB95fhYjzavgMLBIztzN OLE/a646QNFRtvbBMFzEyDkRy6GlBmlem60IPfAcpi6sCa9hTApaNTVqAe5yo7uwjasjLTw98HQ3 +nzKFE6qK770xflasfgnSnzGOQ2wY1miFOhJGX9Y06FhzuYvepBwLNqWjLISZlYj+XC+81fTih9K MsexAwrS7uJ5keOGQonxFFUkNhmbi99PaCZBtxARht92ICO/u3KRWszPSgLITv8A6zdMNNO8q6lI 4lv5RAoH2a+o5/40XJRY6XZ6cD9XT42+3IxqzfM4MzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNl /s/Tn//TnR6nKzZs2bNmzZs2UQGBVhUHYg9CMj955ao7zaVIsJY8jbyAmPl/k03jwql07XeSi5tO YH7UTBh9AqGx5stW2MdnIRSm5UfrOF99p3mZqelauwr0qpp9xxCDT/MURBlsZa+Kjl+rBElr5kb+ 70+Q+FSFH4nEh5f82XJ3iSBf8qRf+NS+Gtr5Gd1B1O+ZidzHCKAH/Xev/EMHr5J0MACkxI7mQ4un lHQ0FPRY/ORv64p/hfQ/+WX/AIeT/mrMPK2gg1+qVp4vIR+LYvHoGixEFLGGo6FkDf8AEq4JWxsl +zbRL8kUfwxZYo0+wir8gBjs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmy/wBn6c//1J0e pys2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZsv8A Z+nP/9Xs3+GbA785f+CX/mnK/wAMaf8A78m/4Jf+ac3+GNP/AN+Tf8Ev/NOb/DGn/wC/Jv8Agl/5 pzf4Y0//AH5N/wAEv/NOEc97+X9rPLa3XmSyhuIXaOaGS+tUdHQ8XR0YhldWHFlbDz/DGn/78m/4 Jf8AmnN/hjT/APfk3/BL/wA04nPoGkWsEt1dXDw28KNJNNI6IiIg5O7uyhVRVHJmbNBoGkXUEV1a 3DzW8yLJDNG6Ojo45I6OqlWRlPJWXFP8Maf/AL8m/wCCX/mnN/hjT/8Afk3/AAS/805v8Maf/vyb /gl/5pwv0y28qa36v6G1aLUfQ4+v9TuYZ+HOvDn6XPhz4Px5fy4Mn0DSLWCW6urh4beFGkmmkdER EQcnd3ZQqoqjkzNmg0DSLqCK6tbh5reZFkhmjdHR0cckdHVSrIynkrLin+GdP/nl/wCCX/mnN/hn T/8Afkv/AAS/805v8Maf/vyb/gl/5pzf4Y0//fk3/BL/AM05v8Maf/vyb/gl/wCac3+GNP8A9+Tf 8Ev/ADThfplt5U1v1f0Nq0Wo+hx9f6ncwz8OdeHP0ufDnwfjy/lwRDo+hXF1c2MF76t3Z8Prdsks bSw+qvOL1o1HOL1U+KPmPjXBH+GNP/35N/wS/wDNOB5tH0K3uraxnvfSu7zn9UtnljWWb0l5y+jG w5y+knxScB8C4I/wxp/+/Jv+CX/mnN/hjT/9+Tf8Ev8AzTm/wxp/+/Jv+CX/AJpzf4Y0/wD35N/w S/8ANOb/AAxp/wDvyb/gl/5pzf4Y0/8A35N/wS/804Rz3v5f2s8trdeZLKG4hdo5oZL61R0dDxdH RiGV1YcWVs0d7+X8yTSReZLKRLdBJO6X1qwjQusQeQg/AnqyRx8m/bkRP2sPP8Maf/vyb/gl/wCa cD2uj6Ffev8AUb36z9Wle2ufRljk9OaOnqQycAeEqVHONvjXBH+GNP8A9+Tf8Ev/ADTm/wAMaf8A 78m/4Jf+ac3+GNP/AN+Tf8Ev/NOb/DGn/wC/Jv8Agl/5pzf4Y0//AH5N/wAEv/NOB7XR9CvvX+o3 v1n6tK9tc+jLHJ6c0dPUhk4A8JUqOcbfGuCP8Maf/vyb/gl/5pzf4Y0//fk3/BL/AM05v8Maf/vy b/gl/wCacL1tvKj30emJq0TahN6no2YuYTM/otJHNwi/vG9KSCdJOK/A8Mqt/dvgi+0fQtMtZL7U r36naRU9W5uJY4ol5MEXlJIFReTsqrv9rFINA0i6giurW4ea3mRZIZo3R0dHHJHR1UqyMp5Ky4nD o+hXF1c2MF76t3Z8PrdsksbSw+qvOL1o1HOL1U+KPmPjXBH+GNP/AN+Tf8Ev/NOb/DGn/wC/Jv8A gl/5pzf4Y0//AH5N/wAEv/NOb/DGn/78m/4Jf+acTk0DSIXhjluHje4cxwI7opkcI0pSMFfjf0o5 JOK/sRu/7OKf4Y0//fk3/BL/AM05v8Maf/vyb/gl/wCac3+GNP8A9+Tf8Ev/ADTm/wAMaf8A78m/ 4Jf+ac3+GNP/AN+Tf8Ev/NOb/DGn/wC/Jv8Agl/5pzf4Y0//AH5N/wAEv/NOb/DGn/78m/4Jf+ac v/DNhSnqS/8ABL/zTn//1u/5s2bNnnywutAjn882upeRL3zTeS67qwhvLTT1nRQxCpbG/WtxauH5 PyhVng9X1o/jyV+XPMV95U/J/wAvTwSRaxrd/wClYaLCZmeKS5u5n+q2skxoI/qUP7uaJ5IY42tX tPXj+B8PNF8y+cbDzRa+WfPcGmIdXt5ZtGvNJNwUea1o9zbSpccn5+g3r+q3ow/D6avNLJxii+ue a/PXmbyl5k13SNP0yXyXLb6hbWvOWZNRmtUjktXv4y1IFRXElx9XnihuPShe3X956U8hx+XvmueG 50Xybqht40uPLml6joLx1WSRBbiK7huDI/x3HqxvLBHbxf7yxySSv8OSTyp5kvvMeqeZaxxR6TpO oHSrGgZblprZB9eef4niMRldPqjR8H9P++j5YD81+ZfMcWv6f5S8mQWU+s3FvLqN9LqZlW3t7ONv RjciHi8j3FwfTX0nkeL0/wB5D6cnrRxfW/MvnHWPJXm/RbmDTLbzFoSTw+YIq3DW76ZPaSzR3NiV 5cbieL+5inkfj6bvcpD6iQpIPyj0mfT/ACdY3V5Y6Za3F9b20kU2lxGN57X6vG1u9+7KrS3vKSZp m/u/j+D9vDzz3/yg/mX/ALZV9/1DSZC7jzpP5U8g+R7PTWsk1fWLKxhtZNVlMFnDDFaxPdXNxLWN eEStGnpetHNI837lJ2T0XU0D8zr54/MlrrjaVqGo6Jp76xaSaDcNLaXVtHGTLH6jeubeWGZUjf1u Mjeurx23pR+rKM8o+bPO3mB7TWHtdHv/AC7fuEaLSLlnvtPMqCZPrxuDHbyvaoyRXsEPC45SerDD 8HouIsPOuq3Xlzzzq8kNuLjyze6taWCKr8HTT4hLAbgGQszsx/e+m0X+Rwwv1v8AMfVbDRvKBt00 y21PzVZfWzf6pO9vp1q8cEFzKJAvOVkm9Z4YP36cJfS/vcmHlq680TQT23myxt7e+t3AS8sJOdnc o45hoElb63C8P9zMlxH8T/vYZJEk4xRP8zLeTX9d8neSJpPT0nWru5utUVfUDTRabEtyLVjHJF+6 n5Ny/ajlWCeP4ofjMNe/LHQ736nfeWFi8ra5p0omsdU023jSlaLLHcW8fox3UUkfw8JD/wAkZJ4Z ovBN5zX8z/PcHk6209pX/RD3d3qryiGNUs+McKRW3755ZzIzrJ/dRJbyc/jliwZL+Z2vy+Q/Knmn TdLt59T13U4tMm05nZUcl7iFxbysy/V3nltl9JpvWS39T9563DngxdV81Wnm3yfpnm6y0SfUNRl1 X0rywimd7eGC0ikX6tLdESQyzSGVLmiskkHpLgPyv5/87ebUTXtIsNHutGV1F3oNvds2tQoztByd 5vq9irlo5LuFJ/Q9a2X0lk9T95iflH/FX/K3PO3L9H/o/wBWx/SlPW9b0fqsv6L+q/7r9X0/T+v+ r8HPn9XzoHmrzDa+VPLuo+Ybwc4rGIusVWHqSsRHBDyVZCnrTPHF6nDjHz5v8GQ+z80/mDomqaGn n2y0qHS9dlFgkumtOZrW+mT1LWG4V2nST1nV7f8A0fnCj/vXukjRfWK5vPf5kXkHmvUNHsdHj0zy te6jBLc3huC88VkOYjihhc/6RHEnKWWV4oZvrEKRLH6U2dM0LU/03oemaz6XofpG0gvPQ5c+Hrxr Lw50Tnw58eXBc53+c/lry5beQde1e30iyh1Nnt5Dfx20S3BeW8hErmdUEvOTm/qNy+Plm/Nvy15c 0b8t9futI0iy0+4dLWN5rS2ihcob22YoXiRW4clVuP8Ak4YWPmvz1Z+btD0XzXp+mQWfmNLx7KGy lmkurQ2sQufTu5X/ANHndUb0H+rqqPJ++R+CenKnonmDzFc2PmT/AAxoGnyahD5lvtM/dsLOFUVV /wByl/u8l3Kshj+tLBwnuE/uvsYp5Q86eY77zjfeT/MbaPdXFvZG9FzocsrpC8VwLWa0uVnLN9Y5 Mrsn7v0f2vU9X90VyefPzBvdL1DzroGm6VceTrOWZ7eKaSdL+6sbR/TuLqNiUhh5iOeREniWaLhw +r3H7v6wea55z1m+1HRtE/L5LK8vtUsjrMt1qfrx28OnHitvKUjEczPdTPwVU5Sw8P31vwk9WInv /wAyfMek+UfNE+pWllF5t8rXFtDdW0fqyWckN5LF9VuU+JHCTQSycYvrHrI8XqTJF6noZLNc8yX2 mecfKnl6COJrTXf0j9bkcMZV+p26zxeiysqLydv3nNJPh/kznfle6/MSOfzsvkux0yW3g8x6rNLJ qckvO4mYpS2tY4WjWN41jXlLcypDJ9Zi+NPRmyaJ5s8zeZfLuiat5F0y0mbV4ne5u9QndLawlhKr JDLEiR3V3ylW4tkkt1RfUjSb+5fE/wAu/Omq+Zr3XdK1dtMubjRntSmoaJK8tnMl3G0gVDKXYvC0 TLI/P7f7v019LnIM/MnWb7S/LqWOkv6Wra/dwaHptySypDNekp67yRMssXpRLK0csQkdJ/S/dOub zR5I/SOh6ba+Wbn9D6t5d4P5evR8fpelH6H1WV3EsrWlxFxjuF+P1OMbzJcqnoyQe212+/Mvjda+ JdG8p+VIo7rzXZS2rL9c1O15T3FoUY3PqafaeiskttJ/pPxoktu0klvNbJ2n5w6/Elhr2rzeXE0G 7uEF1plretLq9pazOUSeWNXkWV4FMcs8UFu1w37Vvbfvfq4yCbzmv5n+e4PJ1tp7Sv8Aoh7u71V5 RDGqWfGOFIrb988s5kZ1k/uokt5OfxyxYcQ/mVfXH5baX5qhsYm1/WpV03TNO5MIZb953tU+M/3c R9GS54Syp8C/V/rXP99ilp5l8/WGtjyz5og0dNR1eyuZvLV5ZG6Nq95arze2u0k5T8ODJO8o9FPT X043mmk4xJv+Y99d+QPL3mHS7eIa35iu7XSrWO5RvqiXskrQXDyrHKZltK29z6LI8s39xzj/ALzD DzTrXn2yurt9Jt9E0rRLH0+Ws6/dOIrj1lSnppbcTa+jMWgf6y379ni9HE9Lvbv8zvyvW9aNLHU9 St5TbmOWWNIb60mZbW5SWP8AfxIl5bRXKr+8aP8Au/3/AO2eeR/Mn+LvKml+YTH6Ut5EfrEYHFRN EzQXHprylPpetFJ6PJ+fpcOfx5IM2bNmzZs2f//X7/mzZs2cn0Q/mL5RvvMkFj5N/S1pqet32qW1 3+k7S2rFcMqxj0n9V/sRB/i4N8f2MTj/AC/80DybNeS/V283tro84waejcbVbyqk2EkhZ/UT0hJ9 maJPrDIn1r0Y/rEhxpdj5u8z+ctM8x+adDTy9Z+Xbe5GnW6XkV3LPdXoEMrSNCCn1eO3T7HGGT1u DepMnNIo+ND/ADG0Pyvq/wCXGi6Bb3mlMl9BpWuzXsak2l16kwjmtv3cr3retJbrLS3tkuGj5r9W ieaVTztb3XlH8vvKXmUyRWXmbylFZwW8M/GVZmmgjs7+w4rII35xhpXki9SVYraT6u8X98s88gaA /lfybo2iSq6XFvbh7qORkcpcTE3FzGHi+BkjnlkSPjy+D9uT7eE/mvS/Mmm+bdP87+VdMTW7g2Uu j6npslylqfq5k+tW81vJKAius4ZZ+bS8k9NI4P7yaMvsPLHmS90Lz3rOr2KWnmLzbbywQaRFOkqR RW9o9nYRtNtF9Yk5sZpfW9Fv3T8bf95Ek08p2N1pnlXQ9Nvo/Su7PT7S3uYqq3GWKFI5F5IWRuLq fiVuOQvzZo35gfpfXrbR4k1nQfNlkLEx3F0bcaRL6P1Rp0jkMiyW8iyPczJaw+tM/wDJ6SfWt5r8 h3q6N5Rk0ywt/Md55SRLR9LvvTit721kgS1uTwm9SJLhfRint/Ul9OH4/wDeh/TjYw8oaRq6T32o t5U0fya5tza2kUEcN1dPKxEhnnuLI2sX1IUiH1P++mkjd/Xg4xc4vY+R9bvvNGjXzeU7LyjcaNcR zXevaVdr6F7DBzWW2t9NtxE0aag0n97dfvo7T9zO8v8AcPrnQ/zG06087eWdJ0C3u7XzJe6lfQa1 JexpGsV9EKwC1PGf6xwUwRu7RwpdSc5P9Fj9V5Jd6Lrtv5H8tWA8v6f5gl0y0tYtS0DUfS5tLHbL BztLuUy2cUttIX9T1IpVng9T0Zo3/vt+V/lG+8sx6vdT2X6EtNUlhktPLa3TXq2foRmKWVrpmKSS 3r/vG4fYiSBPU/3XCYee/Kmpa/8AojV/L1xFaeYdBuxdWE1y0ywvE9FurWb6u3MRXCKnqfA7Okf1 f92k8j4T3Uf5m+dPQ026sv8AA+lpKj6ld29+l1f3EQqwhspLZAlt8afvpJG5fvI+HqxpPbzHHl3R NUsfPfnTWbqD09P1b9F/o+fmjep9Wtmin+BWMicJDx/eInL9jIfpnknzPb+RPIWjTWPHUNF8wQah qcHqwn0rZLm6leXmJPTkpHNG3CJ3k+L7GTDzFomqX3nvyXrNrB6mn6T+lP0hPzRfT+s2yxQfAzCR +cg4/u0fj+3kH8w+RfMXmHUhZP5W0/TdRS7M8Xn/AEu5FoFrMty10dNjb65LdtGno8bi4l9O8Z5Y rmOJvWyWabpfmTR/zM13UV0xLrQfMiWTvqiXKIbQ2VrJD6clq49aZ5puI/dfAiSI/P8AvEjPPPHl v/F3lTVPLwk9KW8iH1eQniomiZZ7f1G4yn0vWij9binP0ufD48h62vn/AM6ap5cg81+XotC07Rbu PV7y7ivYp3uLu1QrbR28URmMETzSM8scvq/uPs3SSp++Eab5W1238q/mJps1pxu9d1DWrjSovUiP rRXkIjtm5B+EXqv+zM0bJ/uzhkw8p2N1pnlXQ9Nvo/Su7PT7S3uYqq3GWKFI5F5IWRuLqfiVuOE/ 5paJqnmPyJq2jaNB9Z1C5+r+hBzSPl6dzDK/xyskYpGjt8T5vzS0TVPMfkTVtG0aD6zqFz9X9CDm kfL07mGV/jlZIxSNHb4nzeYtE1S+89+S9ZtYPU0/Sf0p+kJ+aL6f1m2WKD4GYSPzkHH92j8f28g+ q+RPNdz5d16zTT/rK3XnCbWpNJ+trb/pDS2K/uvWjfhF6r8ZOM7RvF6Pq8fWSFHMPJHlPXdI852+ vzeWrTQdJuNKk0pNPsJ4p5bZoZYpUm1KYmP61Ldem/Ge2+sy8fQW64sskuA10P8AMbRPLeo/lro2 gW93pEz3Nnp3mGa9jUR2N87Oz3Vt8E8lxClxMrvDHGvP+6trhY/9IPNV8s675V1jQdf8l6d+nfqG lDy5e6fc3MVtKbSIrLa3EUzqkQlEqf6Szc+a+msNunxyxk+o+RvNfmLyp52v7+zisfM3mmW1eLSV uFkiit9MaP6rC0ygx/W5o45eUnq/V3Z4P95P3qRmEVr5/wDMPnvyr5h1ry9Fo2l6P+kEkiW9iupl a4tvT9aRoyiNFK/pRQxwo8sbxzvP+7eHAelw/mh5Sn80rpPli31S31jWL+/06R72GF4jKR6c88bP xmt5l9L04UlguE9G49b0/UgwHr35Z6xZ+WfJmiWum/4l0/RPrTa1oovzZLPcXSGRZ45yIF9K1uXu PR5f6R6UiR8W9W4fJB+XXlvXdB8xeYdQ1TRrTSbTXYrO4tbbTGiNtaG3EsRspVX0n+t8JUkllt4H s5pPWkSZPhjww/NSxupPLtrrlnH68vlfULbX2tKqnrxWRZp4/VY0i4wvJNz4St+69NInd8mkE8F1 BFdWsqTW8yLJDNGwdHRxyR0daqyMp5Ky5B/K/lK9XSvO2ka7E9rb+YdY1WaF43jZ2s71EiSZCplW N2XnxWVea/tx5E9D8p+Y7e1svLt7+Xfl9ZrbjazeargWtzA8ULcfrTWKql9PLPAnw854WkuZPVm+ rx8445x5d0TVLHz3501m6g9PT9W/Rf6Pn5o3qfVrZop/gVjInCQ8f3iJy/YyJ6f5E8yQ/lVoOli2 SLzT5cvf0xY2M0qGGS4gu55o4ZpImdGSa3mbjwni/fen6k8Sephxpdj5u8z+ctM8x+adDTy9Z+Xb e5GnW6XkV3LPdXoEMrSNCCn1eO3T7HGGT1uDepMnNIg+j/l5qNh+Y1xrcrJ+gba4vtY0yQSVuHvt Xjit7yGdOHH6vbrbyPFx4N++t/39x+/SIr8zeTvMVz5/1HXD5YtPM9veRW0Wi3Wo3oW003jE0E4u dPkqbmL1na7eKKN/9+W7/WpH9M88qC9/Lb8r5o/MFukdx5eS9ajTRrDdEzSz25t5gXZEummjgi9e KO49b/j2+xzPPy68vXXlXyVo+h3xrd28TPcrRfglnke5khqjSI/oPMYfUV+MnD1P2slGbNmzZs2b P//Q7/mzZs2bNmzZB9d/5Vt/j3R/8Qel/i/0o/0R6/r8OHOb0Kf8ePq+v63oer+/9f0/S/e+hk4z Zs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bNmzZs2bC/RP0X+i4P0L/AMc34/qlOfp+nzan1f1P+PT/ AJY/S/0X6r6P1P8A0T0cMM2bNmzZsL9V/Rf+hfpX+7+txfVuXP0vrO/1b1uP7r+94/VvrP7v699V 9H/TfquGGbNmzZs2bNn/2Q== ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01BF5119.E84DAC60-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 01:13:44 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA13940; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 01:12:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 01:12:48 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 23:12:36 -1000 Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image - Thread Elimination Process! From: Rick Monteverde To: vortex-l Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001b01bf50ac$dc46fce0$8f7611ce office> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dXi1P1.0.kP3.Fy7Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32525 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ok, enough with the pictures of the naked dead guy already. This isn't a weekend at Bernie's. And what is heck thiaoouba? Sounds like the best gotta-have-it Hollywood shampoo ingredient since jojoba. Is that a word some new-ager made up, or is it really another word for Yehova? And isn't Yehova basically a derivation of the same word root(s) from which we derive our name for a certain planet - Jupiter? Is the body of Jesus supposedly now on Jupiter? Could this THREAD be moved to Jupiter? Or maybe *Uranus*? Geez! At least the gas giants have persistent **Vortex Structures** in their atmospheres. Ahhh... back on topic. Thought we'd lost vortex-l there for a moment. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 01:53:32 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA17201; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 01:52:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 01:52:18 -0800 Message-ID: <003c01bf50b6$ecddebe0$8f7611ce office> Reply-To: "Robert Beasley" From: "Robert Beasley" To: References: Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image - Thread Elimination Process! Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 11:08:34 +1300 Organization: natvita MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"MxAUF3.0.hC4.IX8Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32526 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Not bad, Hebrew people pronounce Thiaoouba "Tyehouva" YHWH. Vortex, right on again, your blood type must be B. The vortex plays a part around a tree and you, so, no, we are not off target. Could this be the resonance of our several billion electronic mass? Could this resonance, holographically, leave an imprint that might survive for some time? If you were to study your own energy field or spin or vortex on a daily basis, then you would begin to see that it is possible to physically remove yourself from a given point whilst your image temporarily staid on the wall. In a suitable atmosphere, say of gold then it is possible to prolong this picture. Einstein knew of this and married into it. Because it is difficult for most to grasp the concept of seeing ones own energy field, it falls into an oddity group. Or, as you call it, a new agere group. It takes a few minutes to learn, with or without glasses and it can be taught over the phone. To understand energy, the vortex has to be seen. After all, it surrounds every cable on earth and is the name of this group. Ahhh... back on topic. Thought we'd lost vortex-l there for a > moment. > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 04:42:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA00895; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 04:40:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 04:40:58 -0800 Message-ID: <013801bf5139$1aa267e0$498e1d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: AntiGrav- 101? Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 05:39:40 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"DjibB3.0.vD.P_AQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32527 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It is fundamental that the electron has a pulse repetition frequency of 1.23E20 negative-polarity pulses per second and each of the two positive "quarks" in a proton have a positive pulse repetition frequency of ~624* 1.23E20 pulses/sec and the opposite spin negative "quark" a pulse repetition frequency of ~624*1.23E20 pulses/sec. This results in a Displacement Current, I = C dV/dt where C = eo*h/mc (or q*f = 19.7 amperes) where h/mc is the Compton Wavelength of the LC Wave Circle/Particle or "Quark". Stacked side-by-side in the nucleus, the "quarks" constitute a form of solenoid where each represents an ampere-turn of ~ 4.8E-11 ampere-meters (I* eo*h/mc). Factoring out the G constant, 6.67E-11 into magnetic units: (6.67E-11/1.0E-7)^1/2 = 0.02583 Ampere-Meters/Kilogram However, 0.02583*9.1E-31 = 2.35E-32 indicating that the relativistic effects are dilating the frequency or current by a factor of 4.8E-11/2.35E-32 = 2.0E21 thus reducing the magnetogravity field by the same amount or the the displacement current from 19.7 amperes to 19.7/2.0E21 = ~ 9.6E-21 Amperes! For the heavier "quarks" in a proton: 1.66E-27/3 * 0.02583 = 1.43E-29 indicates that the relativistic dilation is 4.8E-11/1.43E-29 = 3.36E18 thus reducing the magnetogravity field to a current of each "quark" from 624*19.7 = 1.23E4 amperes to 3.66E-15 amperes or the frequency from 624*1.23E20 = 7.68E22 pulses/second to 2.3E4 pulses/sec. Thus at the Earth's surface a current loop of 1.0 ampere meter fed with pulses of the right polarity and 2.3E4 pulse repetition rate should experience an AG force of: 1.0E-7*(0.02583)*1.0*5.98E24/(6.38E6)^2 = 379 newtons or ~85 pounds. The complications in the calculations introduced by the Fine Structure Constant "Alpha" (0.00729729) or it's reciprocal 137.03 might mean that the pulse repetition rate may have to be increased to ~ 3.2E6 pulses/second. This should also function as a Star Trek type "Tractor Beam" or "Shield/Force Field" against incoming missles or bullets :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 08:13:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA22842; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 08:12:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 08:12:02 -0800 Message-Id: <199912281611.LAA16436 fh105.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: Subject: Re: Spin question (fwd) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 10:06:21 -0600 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: <"Xqaym2.0.la5.G5EQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32528 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > This concpet was dimissed for alomst one hundred years due to the void > concept of space Einstein proposed. In a void space gravity is not seen as > tranmitting across the void. Einstein used the concept of void space only in special relativity. In general relativity, he believed space had definable material characteristics. > > But now all data points to a fluid space, which would mean Einstein was > wrong and all science based on his concepts is wrong. Pretty funny, from > man of the century to bunk of the century. Einstein was not wrong about this. Read his lectures. He gave a speech at the University of Leyden (I believe) in the 1920's, which he stated that he thought an ether existed. Not the kind of ether providing a preferred reference frame, but something that nonetheless gave space material characteristics. Frame dragging is predicted in general relativity. If you wish to disprove Einstein, you have to first know what you are trying to disprove. Bunk of the century? Even if his theories are succeeded, and I think they will be, he is still not bunk. He was a scientist, and his work on the photoelectric effect is priceless. --Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 11:58:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18306; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 11:55:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 11:55:17 -0800 Message-ID: <19991228195511.39542.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.251.11] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spin question (fwd) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 11:55:11 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"Vw7Nh1.0.xT4.aMHQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32529 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I'm not saying everything Einstein said was wrong, but his concept of void space threw us off. Frame dragging came from Lens and Thirring not Einstein and it was an outgrowth not a confirmation. It was dismissed because of the lack of substance in Einstein's void Universe. His concept of curved space was "his ether" but Bachall and Perlmutter show space is flat in "The Cosmic Triangle". That and Rubin's work clearly show to me Einstein was wrong. What do you think Vera Rubin is refering to when she says, "scientists are going to have to give up their most precious beliefs"? She has also said, "scientists are going to go kicking snd screaming into the next century" due to our new Hubble vision. It really is all about the refraction in the gravity telescope as shown in my previous post "The Curve". David >From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" >Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com >To: >Subject: Re: Spin question (fwd) >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 10:06:21 -0600 > > > This concpet was dimissed for alomst one hundred years due to the void > > concept of space Einstein proposed. In a void space gravity is not seen >as > > tranmitting across the void. > >Einstein used the concept of void space only in special relativity. In >general relativity, he believed space had definable material >characteristics. > > > > But now all data points to a fluid space, which would mean Einstein was > > wrong and all science based on his concepts is wrong. Pretty funny, >from > > > man of the century to bunk of the century. > >Einstein was not wrong about this. Read his lectures. He gave a speech at >the University of Leyden (I believe) in the 1920's, which he stated that he >thought an ether existed. Not the kind of ether providing a preferred >reference frame, but something that nonetheless gave space material >characteristics. Frame dragging is predicted in general relativity. If you >wish to disprove Einstein, you have to first know what you are trying to >disprove. Bunk of the century? Even if his theories are succeeded, and I >think they will be, he is still not bunk. He was a scientist, and his work >on the photoelectric effect is priceless. > >--Kyle R. Mcallister > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 12:15:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24670; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 12:13:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 12:13:50 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <38659667.B70CE8BB servtech.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 14:10:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Looking for reference Resent-Message-ID: <"qrkPe2.0.N16.-dHQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32530 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Bob - > >Magnetic fields don't rotate on their axis, so there's no change at all in >flux and no induction. Remember that field lines are a fiction, so >visualizing them rotating about the pole axis with the spinning magnet is >incorrect. ***{It is not necessary that flux lines be a fiction in order for them to remain fixed in space as a magnet rotates about its polar axis. If, as I believe, flux lines are strings of spinning particles, immersed in a fluid substrate of the aether, and attracted together by the flows that they engender in that fluid, then the coupling between adjacent particles in a flux line offers essentially zero resistance to twisting. Result: the rotation of a permanent magnet about its axis has a negligible tendency to rotate the flux loops that emanate from it. Instead, they remain fixed in place relative to the aether in which they are immersed. To make the point clear, imagine that you drill holes through some marbles, string them loosely on a circular piece of wire that is substantially smaller than the holes, and then reconnect the free ends of the wire. If you then rotate one of the marbles about the wire, there will be an essentially zero tendency for the wire loop as a whole to move in the direction of rotation. The reason is that adjacent marbles are not coupled in a way that transfers twisting forces from one to the next. --MJ}*** The physical magnet rotates, but the field in space generated by >it is stationary in terms of all its relevant characteristics - no change at >all in geometry relative to the conductor. ***{The conception of a field as an entity without parts leads to indissoluble logical contradictions, as has been discussed previously. Thus reason forces us to think of a magnetic field as an entity with parts. And if we do, then we must inquire as to the nature of those parts, after which we are forced quickly to the conclusion that flux lines are *not* a fiction. Rather, they are the parts of which the magnetic field is composed. --MJ}*** > > > >> case #3: Magnet rotates, conductor stationary w.r.t. lab frame: >> I can't find any references for this case. Does anyone know >> of references or has anyone done this experiment? My guess >> is that no potential different will be measured in the >> lab frame. But then, in the ref. frame of the moving disk, this >> is the same as case #1 above, so there should be a potential >> difference measured in the disk ref frame. But a potential >> difference here means a movement of electrons in the conductor. >> But if we have movement and buildup of electrons in the conductor >> we should be able to measure that in the lab frame. >> >> Does anyone *know* what happens in case #3? ***{To Bob: I have never rotated a permanent magnet about its polar axis and tested to see if a current is engendered in an external circuit in the equatorial plane of the field, but I would expect a negligible effect. Rotating the magnet would have very little effect on the pool of aether in which the magnet was immersed, and hence the flux lines would move very little if at all. The reason is that the aether substrate with which we are here concerned (E2) moves freely within atoms. If, for example, a hydrogen nucleus were the size of a bowling ball, then the ground state electron would be a marble circling at a distance of roughly 20 miles. Thus when small chunks of "solid" matter are moved about, they have little effect on the motion of the E2 particles in which they are immersed. Under normal circumstances, aether entrainment requires masses of planetary magnitude or larger. [Note: if one were to place a rod of some enormously dense, tremendously strong alloy inside a hollow, cylindrical permanent magnet, and spin the rod at a gigantic angular velocity, one might be able to rotate the pool of aether, and hence the flux lines of the permanent magnet, enough to produce a detectible current in an external circuit. By such means, the existence of an entrained aether might be verified. However, I have no idea whether a strong enough alloy, having sufficient density, even exists.] --MJ}*** >> >> Bob Gray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 12:51:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA04663; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 12:49:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 12:49:27 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <0.dceb170.259a7c47 aol.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:49:11 EST Subject: H2K: Calibration with H2+K fill To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 14 Resent-Message-ID: <"cDPvI2.0.j81.N9IQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32531 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Greetings and best Holidays to all. Please enable speculation on this.... I have been running a glow discharge in a quartz tube, 0.225 inch inside diameter between W electrodes spaced about 0.50 inches for 7 weeks, current about 40 milliamps, voltage about 800 volts DC, no temperature measurements taken. There was about 1/2 gram of metallic K in the tube in H2 atmosphere at a fill pressure of 100 torr. I just wanted to test electrode life and glow stability in a long term run. This morning I shut the run down, cleaned the tube and electrodes with distilled water, rinsed the electrodes with 100% isopropyl alcohol and air dried them. I then placed the W electrodes in test tubes and added 30% HCL solution to clean them. Now the question: What would turn the HCL solution a royal blue color? Royal blue is subjective but it compares well under fluorescent lighting to the light blue color on a pack of GPC Light 100's cigarettes. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada 702-254-2122 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 13:36:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA18276; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:25:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:25:06 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Poke holes in this Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:24:59 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 NAA18249 Resent-Message-ID: <"w0uRI.0.OT4.ngIQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32532 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: 1) Assumption: The magnetic field of a magnet is the superposition of the magnetic fields of the atoms in the magnet. 2) Observation: When a magnet is moved perpendicular to its magnetic axis, its field moves along with it (i.e. doesn't get left behind). 3) When a magnet is rotated about its magnetic axis, the individual atoms in the magnet are moved in a direction perpendicular to the axis of their magnetic fields => they take their fields with them (see 2). 4) Since the field of the entire magnet is the superposition of the individual fields of the atoms (see 1), when the magnet rotates on its axis, its field rotates with it. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 13:50:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25438; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:46:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:46:00 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <0.5fc705ea.259a8991 aol.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:53 EST Subject: H2K: Calibration with H2+K fill To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 14 Resent-Message-ID: <"H3g741.0.ND6.N-IQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32533 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Additional info to my last post: The blue material is a suspension in the HCL solution. It is slowly precipitating out leaving the clear acid. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada 702-254-2122 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 14:17:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA25675; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 14:12:21 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 14:12:21 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 12:09:12 -1000 Subject: Re: Poke holes in this From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7wJEG1.0.0H6.0NJQu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32534 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin - This makes sense. I *want* fields to rotate. But here's the poke: Have a perfect cylinder magnet spinning on its axis inside a black box (box has no effect on fields). Another black box has an identical magnet, not spinning. Can you devise a test of the magnetic fields around these boxes that will detect any difference between them? You're allowed to spin or move the boxes << c if you need to - magnets will stay relative within them, but normal gyroscopic forces from the spinning magnet mass don't count of course, unless anomalies in those forces are themselves the factor you're looking for. I say you won't be able devise such a test, and the meaning of that is: as far as we can tell, the fields don't spin. IMO falsifying this assertion would be huge, and reveal "new" long range twisty forces to play with! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI on 12/28/99 11:24 AM, Robin van Spaandonk at rvanspaa bigpond.net.au wrote: > 1) Assumption: The magnetic field of a magnet is the superposition of the > magnetic fields of the atoms in the magnet. > 2) Observation: When a magnet is moved perpendicular to its magnetic axis, > its field moves along with it (i.e. doesn't get left behind). > 3) When a magnet is rotated about its magnetic axis, the individual atoms in > the magnet are moved in a direction perpendicular to the axis of their > magnetic fields => they take their fields with them (see 2). > 4) Since the field of the entire magnet is the superposition of the > individual fields of the atoms (see 1), when the magnet rotates on its axis, > its field rotates with it. > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 15:16:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA19073; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:14:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:14:10 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Poke holes in this Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 10:14:02 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA19037 Resent-Message-ID: <"SYMQE.0.vf4.1HKQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32535 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 12:09:12 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Robin - > >This makes sense. I *want* fields to rotate. But here's the poke: > >Have a perfect cylinder magnet spinning on its axis inside a black box (box >has no effect on fields). Another black box has an identical magnet, not >spinning. > >Can you devise a test of the magnetic fields around these boxes that will >detect any difference between them? [snip] Most tests won't detect any difference. However there is a chance, that one test will. The rotating magnet may alter the decay rate of a radioactive substance that has a short half life, provided that it is rotated rapidly enough. I haven't tried this, but I think it would make an interesting experiment. The best type of substance to try it on would be a pure gamma emitter. Actually, I suspect that even a non-rotating magnet may have some effect, but that said effect will increase with both rotation rate and field strength. I also suspect that the effect will decrease with increasing half-life. Another interesting experiment, would be to have the magnet provide the magnetic field in a cloud chamber. If the field rotates with the magnet, then the axis of rotation, of gyrating particles caught in the field, may go around with the magnet. Are the van Allen belts symmetrical about the Earth, and if not, do they rotate with it (I suspect not)? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 15:31:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA22373; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:27:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:27:30 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:27:13 -1000 Subject: Re: Poke holes in this From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3p3CY2.0.VT5.WTKQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32536 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin - > Another interesting experiment, would be to have the magnet provide the > magnetic field in a cloud chamber. If the field rotates with the magnet, > then the axis of rotation, of gyrating particles caught in the field, may go > around with the magnet. The question of small particles might go to the situation of field homogeneity. Viewed close enough, domains are moving and *variations* between them near the surface move and will introduce uneven features to the field that could have some effect. But this isn't really the fundamental kind of thing we're looking for, and probably gets blended out in any real system a couple inches away from a best-case source. Same goes for flux tubes from a HT superconductor designed with the kind of chemistry that produces that effect. Do you know of a handy source of gammas that would work for your decay rate experiment? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 16:00:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA30427; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:58:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:58:21 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Poke holes in this Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 10:58:17 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA30397 Resent-Message-ID: <"jFx8A1.0.LR7.TwKQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32537 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:27:13 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: [snip] >Robin - > >> Another interesting experiment, would be to have the magnet provide the >> magnetic field in a cloud chamber. If the field rotates with the magnet, >> then the axis of rotation, of gyrating particles caught in the field, may go >> around with the magnet. > >The question of small particles might go to the situation of field >homogeneity. Viewed close enough, domains are moving and *variations* >between them near the surface move and will introduce uneven features to the >field that could have some effect. But this isn't really the fundamental >kind of thing we're looking for, and probably gets blended out in any real >system a couple inches away from a best-case source. Same goes for flux >tubes from a HT superconductor designed with the kind of chemistry that >produces that effect. I wasn't talking about fine scale variations. I was afraid when I wrote it that the description might not be clear enough. What I meant was that the entire spiral might rotate bodily with the magnet, i.e. you might be able to see the axis of an "off centre" spiral revolve around the magnetic axis. Just like eddies go round 'n round in a vortex (whew... back on topic ;). > >Do you know of a handy source of gammas that would work for your decay rate >experiment? [snip] I remember reading that there is one natural element that consists entirely of excited state nuclei, because for some reason the excited state has a very long half life, while the ground state doesn't. However I doubt this is readily available for the casual experimenter. You could use Am241 from a smoke detector, if you shield the alphas and betas from the detector with a metal plate (Al foil?). Most of the decays also produce a gamma ray. The reason for excluding the charged particles, is avoid the influence of inhomogeneities in the magnetic field on the path of the charged particles, which may cause differing numbers of them to enter the detector. OTOH, if you have a near perfectly symmetrical and homogeneous cylindrical magnet, then such a variation may be just what we are looking for :-). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 16:22:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA05363; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:20:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:20:51 -0800 Message-ID: <386953E4.9F4D6C5C gorge.net> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:20:52 -0800 From: tom gorge.net (Tom Miller) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: Spin question (fwd) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"BvNJ53.0.5J1.YFLQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32538 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Schnurer wrote:> TO RECAP: > > An electron is said to spin.... > An electron is said to orbit the nucleus > > Q: What primary experiments let us prove this? > Q: What demonstrates this orbiting? A seemingly simple question, about a fundamental issue. To it, I would add: A photon is said to be a particle Q: What primary experiment(s) let us prove this? IF we can look at these basic issues, without filtering the evidence through the prejudicial glass of what "WE ALL KNOW," maybe we can begin to allow for alternate concepts. Physics describes protons and electrons such that the description more or less fits the experimental evidence. What if there were other ways of describing them, which ALSO more or less fits the available evidence. What if Mills isn't crazy? What if the guy who used to be here, and was about to write a book about how electrons, etc. were TOROIDs? (Sorry, I can't remember his name.) What if it was ALL about VORTICES? What if the concepts of "charge" and "magnetism" could be explained by the topography of these two particles? (Maybe even "gravity?") What if? What I think is that no one will even attempt to answer these questions. I think we are more interested in Shrouds, politics, and vertical flow calorimeters, to even start looking at anything which might not fit "what we all know." If I had any money to bet, I would bet that that is exactly what will happen. Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 16:27:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA05962; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:25:58 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:25:58 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991228182302.00a09a10 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 18:23:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"-o4df1.0.1T1.KKLQu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32539 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:57 AM 12/27/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >They will find that the flow rate will be lowest when measured >just before the flow enters the reservoir... Maybe that's where they measured the flow rate. If so, your hypothesized error could be negliglible. 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 Dec 28 16:32:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA09454; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:31:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:31:04 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2K: Calibration with H2+K fill Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 11:30:57 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <9gli6sgnmemanco9nn9ndchi4ir4f13o8k 4ax.com> References: <0.5fc705ea.259a8991 aol.com> In-Reply-To: <0.5fc705ea.259a8991 aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 QAA09415 Resent-Message-ID: <"Wj94n1.0.cJ2.7PLQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32540 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:53 EST, VCockeram aol.com wrote: >Additional info to my last post: > >The blue material is a suspension in the HCL >solution. It is slowly precipitating out >leaving the clear acid. [snip] See if it crystallises into blue crystals, then send them to Scott for x-ray analysis, if he's willing. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 17:51:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA31015; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:50:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:50:16 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19991228182302.00a09a10 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:46:58 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems Resent-Message-ID: <"z6FNZ.0.Xa7.OZMQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32541 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 02:57 AM 12/27/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>They will find that the flow rate will be lowest when measured >>just before the flow enters the reservoir... > >Maybe that's where they measured the flow rate. If so, your hypothesized >error could be negliglible. ***{Nope: according to Jed's old posts, he diverted the flow between the cell and the heat exchanger, which means roughly 20 feet of tygon tubing with multiple sags and kinks were downstream from the point where he took his measurement. Thus he took *a lot* of resistance out of the flow when he did his measurement, and, as a consequence, a large increase in the flow rate obviously occurred. It's open and shut. Case closed. --MJ}*** > > >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 Dec 28 18:14:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA14490; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 18:13:27 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 18:13:27 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991228210626.008a0d20 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:06:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.5.32.19991228182302.00a09a10 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"N84XN1.0.5Y3.1vMQu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32543 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:46 PM 12/28/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>At 02:57 AM 12/27/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>They will find that the flow rate will be lowest when measured >>>just before the flow enters the reservoir... >> Scott Little: >>Maybe that's where they measured the flow rate. If so, your hypothesized >>error could be negliglible. > >***{Nope: according to Jed's old posts, he diverted the flow between the >cell and the heat exchanger, which means roughly 20 feet of tygon tubing >with multiple sags and kinks were downstream from the point where he took >his measurement. Thus he took *a lot* of resistance out of the flow when he >did his measurement, and, as a consequence, a large increase in the flow >rate obviously occurred. It's open and shut. Case closed. --MJ}*** Despite the important apparent tardive endorsement by Earthtech International of the Rothwell kilowatt cold fusion system using CETI beads, Mitchell Jones actually (with several others) did the experiment on this matter. His point is very reasonable. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 18:12:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA05214; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 18:10:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 18:10:20 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991228210559.008a2100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:05:59 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"AQWJY1.0.FH1.BsMQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32542 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:57 AM 12/27/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>Mitchell Jones wrote: >>The problem with the method, as I demonstrated >>>conclusively when I attempted to measure flow in that way, was that there >>>was a *huge* speedup in the flow rate as soon as the flow was diverted. Jed Rothwell purports: >>No, that is wrong. The test was done many times before and after PowerGen >>with flowmeters in place. No change in the flowrate occured when the tubes >>were removed, and the same level of excess heat was observed. Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{Jed, you are denying the laws of physics. The Power Gen demo pumped >fluid out of a reservoir, through a system of plastic tubing, past various >resistances (including kinks in the tubing which were clearly visible on >photographs), and then back into the reservoir. Simple logic says that if >you disconnect the tubing to divert flow into a measuring vessel, the flow >rate is going to speed up, because you have taken the downstream >resistances out of the loop. (As the resistance drops, the flow speeds up >proportionately, until one begins to approach the capacity limit of the >pump itself, just as happens for electric current.) To deny this is to >abandon principles of physics that have withstood experimental testing for >hundreds of years. Nobody in his right mind is going to do that merely on >your say so. --MJ}*** ..... Jed Rothwell purports: >>(The temperatures were also recorded in other test configurations.) >>CETI and Cravens were sloppy at time, but not *that* sloppy! Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{There you go again, trying to put this off on others. Neither CETI nor >Cravens claimed that the cell produced more than a kilowatt. That was >*your* claim, based on a measurement that would have earned you an 'F' for >the day in any physics lab in the country. >Anyway, if there is anyone else out there who seriously doubts that current >increases as resistance decreases, I can only shake my head in wonderment >and suggest that they go down to a local aquarium supply story, buy >themselves a Magnum 350 pump, set up a circular loop of flow through >plastic tubing, including various resistances, and test it out for >themselves. They will find that the flow rate will be lowest when measured >just before the flow enters the reservoir, and that as you disconnect the >tubing further and further back, the flow will speed up, with the greatest >measured increase in flow occurring if you disconnect the tubing >immediately after the flow exits the reservoir. That's what the laws of >physics say will happen, it's what happened when I did it, and it's what >will happen if anyone else does it. Period. End of story. > >--Mitchell Jones}*** Mithell Jones is obviously correct, which explains the lack of need for calibration by Rothwell. ;-)X =========================================================== Mitchell Jones wrote: >>>There aren't any ifs, ands, or buts about it. Jed Rothwell purports: >>Correct: you are dead wrong, and so is Swartz. You are both living in a >>fantasy world as far as this experiment goes. Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{Wrong again. You choose fantasy, apparently in preference to admitting >that you made a mistake, while I choose to believe the laws of physics and >the results of my own experiments. --MJ}*** In addition to the Magnum comments, a simple back of the envelope calculation will demonstrate that the flow rate was so low that the system could not have supported anything like a kilowatt at equilibrium. As a second proof, and corroborating the absence of a true kilowatt was the purported small delta-T actually seen. Corroborating the absence of a true kilowatt was the later, more accurate levels such as 0.5 +/- .4 watts [after Miley]. Corroborating the absence of a true kilowatt are the semiquantitatively corrections which corrects the erroneous "kilowatts". [Swartz, M., 1996, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using A Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221. Swartz, M. 1996, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems". Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130. Keywords: density instability, thermal gradients, nondimensional numbers of Archimedes and Rayleigh] Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 19:46:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA30058; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:44:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:44:16 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:41:33 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Axially Rotating Magnets Resent-Message-ID: <"5DNXt1.0.TL7.FEOQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32544 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >1) Assumption: The magnetic field of a magnet is the superposition of the >magnetic fields of the atoms in the magnet. >2) Observation: When a magnet is moved perpendicular to its magnetic axis, >its field moves along with it (i.e. doesn't get left behind). >3) When a magnet is rotated about its magnetic axis, the individual atoms in >the magnet are moved in a direction perpendicular to the axis of their >magnetic fields => they take their fields with them (see 2). >4) Since the field of the entire magnet is the superposition of the >individual fields of the atoms (see 1), when the magnet rotates on its axis, >its field rotates with it. ***{As you say, when a magnet moves perpendicular to its axis, it takes its field with it. However, flux lines are not impervious to breaking. For example, consider a series of points A, B, C, etc., each being the same distance from the center of rotation on the north polar end of the bar. Assume that, before rotation begins, distinct flux lines emerged from each of A, B, C, etc. Then, due to rotation of the bar, point A moves to the position formerly occupied by B, while B moves to the location formerly occupied by C, etc. Result: as the movement gets under way, the flux lines will bend a bit at first; but then, when their tolerances are exceeded, they will break and reattach themselves to the nearest broken loop above them. That means the line emerging from A will reattach to the broken strand above B, the line emerging from B will reattach to the broken strand above, C, etc. Such processes of breaking and reattachment occur at lightspeed, so that the period of time during which an emerging line of flux is being bent due to the rotation of the bar will be orders of magnitude greater than the time spent detached from its former loop and moving toward reattachment with another. (Assuming that the bar is not rotating at "relativistic" velocities.) Similar processes of breaking and reattachment occur under more familiar circumstances, such as when two bar magnets X and Y are moved toward one another. As the north pole of X approaches the south pole of Y, lines connecting the poles of X break, as do lines connecting the poles of Y. After the break, lines from the north pole of X link up with lines from the south pole of Y, while lines from the south pole of X link up with the north pole of Y. Result: the fields merge into one. Having said the above, I must add a caveat: I don't know how resistant flux lines are to breaking, so I have no way to know how much bending takes place before a break occurs. If the strands are tough enough, then it is conceivable that breaks do not occur until the flux lines above the poles of a rotating bar magnet twist into spirals. On the other hand, the breaks may begin before the bar gets through even a small fraction of one rotation. If I were forced to guess, I would guess the latter, but the truth is that I do not know. The math offers no clues here because--at least as far as I am aware--the existing equations were not fitted to a data set that involved measurements made under these conditions. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 19:56:53 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA01493; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:54:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:54:41 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:54:34 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00@pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0@mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0@world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19 991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A@ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990@mail.eden.com> <3.0.5.32.19991228182302.00a09a10@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA01470 Resent-Message-ID: <"pCULh1.0.FN.0OOQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32545 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:46:58 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >***{Nope: according to Jed's old posts, he diverted the flow between the >cell and the heat exchanger, which means roughly 20 feet of tygon tubing >with multiple sags and kinks were downstream from the point where he took >his measurement. Thus he took *a lot* of resistance out of the flow when he >did his measurement, and, as a consequence, a large increase in the flow >rate obviously occurred. It's open and shut. Case closed. --MJ}*** [snip] Don't forget that the cell itself with all its beads was upstream of the measurement, and it would likely have contributed the lion's share of the overall resistance. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 20:12:58 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA07889; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:11:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:11:33 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Axially Rotating Magnets Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 15:11:25 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 UAA07856 Resent-Message-ID: <"zjlVt2.0.Bx1.rdOQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32546 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:41:33 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >***{As you say, when a magnet moves perpendicular to its axis, it takes its >field with it. However, flux lines are not impervious to breaking. For >example, consider a series of points A, B, C, etc., each being the same >distance from the center of rotation on the north polar end of the bar. >Assume that, before rotation begins, distinct flux lines emerged from each >of A, B, C, etc. Then, due to rotation of the bar, point A moves to the >position formerly occupied by B, while B moves to the location formerly >occupied by C, etc. [snip] Suppose I replace the nice cylindrical magnet with a wide thin bar magnet. What would you expect to happen in this case as the magnet is rotated about its magnetic axis? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 20:40:07 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA16214; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:37:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:37:30 -0800 Message-ID: <3869BB4C.7D69 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 23:42:04 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Poke holes in this References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RJQOB3.0.Gz3.50PQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32547 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What if the magnet is not symmetrical about the axis of rotation. The field would be irregular and tied to the geometry of the magnet. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 21:16:08 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA25577; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:13:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:13:41 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991229000931.007c8d90 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:09:31 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> <3.0.5.32.19991228182302.00a09a10 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"frkN32.0.TF6.4YPQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32548 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:54 PM 12/29/99 +1100, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:46:58 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>***{Nope: according to Jed's old posts, he diverted the flow between the >>cell and the heat exchanger, which means roughly 20 feet of tygon tubing >>with multiple sags and kinks were downstream from the point where he took >>his measurement. Thus he took *a lot* of resistance out of the flow when he >>did his measurement, and, as a consequence, a large increase in the flow >>rate obviously occurred. It's open and shut. Case closed. --MJ}*** >[snip] >Don't forget that the cell itself with all its beads was upstream of the >measurement, and it would likely have contributed the lion's share of the >overall resistance. > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk Good point, Robin, and the vertical-directed flow calorimetric system would also add an impedance too. ;-)X Their relative contributions seems important as you point out. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 21:28:22 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA30980; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:27:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:27:12 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:32:00 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Decay rate ??Re: Poke holes in this In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"r0SxL2.0.zZ7.mkPQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32549 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Rick and Robin, Questions and stuff... What is the 'decay rate' at bottom of letter about? C: If you want a solid, real world permanet magnet... not a theory magnet, a real one, you see real word fluctuations as you rotate it... and if you record these on tape and keep your sensor at the same spot and pick one of the local variations you like, you can even tell the RPM On Tue, 28 Dec 1999, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Robin - > > > Another interesting experiment, would be to have the magnet provide the > > magnetic field in a cloud chamber. If the field rotates with the magnet, > > then the axis of rotation, of gyrating particles caught in the field, may go > > around with the magnet. > > The question of small particles might go to the situation of field > homogeneity. Viewed close enough, domains are moving and *variations* > between them near the surface move and will introduce uneven features to the > field that could have some effect. But this isn't really the fundamental > kind of thing we're looking for, and probably gets blended out in any real > system a couple inches away from a best-case source. Same goes for flux > tubes from a HT superconductor designed with the kind of chemistry that > produces that effect. > > Do you know of a handy source of gammas that would work for your decay rate > experiment? > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 21:32:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA32720; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:31:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:31:25 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991229002732.007c5970 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:27:32 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Smelly old stuff In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991226160639.007b1e40 pop.mindspring.com> References: <001901bf4ead$df772760$0101a8c0 john> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"6Y2NV1.0.A_7.joPQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32550 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:06 PM 12/26/99 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >John Logajan wrote: > >>Why not? If air sealed and shut off from sunlight, new energy >>inputs into the little eco-system don't exist. The initial >>biological agents produce chemical "ash" out of the limited >>amount of processable material and therefore will likely >>deplete the fuels in a relatively short period of time. > >In that case you would think the body would not rot. It would be a mummy >instead. Yet it was completely skeletonized. > >The position of the artfacts in the tomb was not clear but the photo showed >a large mound of earth. It is located in a dry area in Turkey (but who >knows what it was like 2,700 years ago). I presume the body and the dishes >were buried fairly far down. I wonder how far down underground insects, >worms and microorganisms penetrate? Probably many kilometers, and life may similarly exist at very great depths off-Earth, as the temperatures rise. "Even at depths more than several kilometers below the Earth's surface, extremophilic microorganisms and bacteria (e.g. Bacillus infernus) have been found which are poisoned by oxygen and which can metabolize diverse hydrocarbons. Some bacteria live deep within the Earth on igneous deposits of basalt. (*)" [(*) from upcoming chapter updating M. Swartz, "Mars as a Possible Abode of Life", in "Case for the Face: Scientists Examine the Evidence for Alien Artifacts on Mars", John E. Brandenburg, Horace W. Crater, Daniel Drasin, James Erjavec, Lan Fleming, Harry Moore, Chris O'Kane, Brian O'Leary, Randolfo Pozos, Ananda Sirisena, Cesar Sirvent, James Strange, Mitchell Swartz, Erol Torun, Baron Johannes von Buttlar, Stanley V. McDaniel, and Michael Zimmerman [eds. Stanley McDaniel, Monica Paxson; February 1998; ISBN: 0932813593]. Which is why Martian life should be sought at depth deep in the Northern hemisphere. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 21:35:14 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA01780; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:34:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:34:08 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Decay rate ??Re: Poke holes in this Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 16:34:03 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 VAA01719 Resent-Message-ID: <"-2eWt3.0.kR.GrPQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32551 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:32:00 -0500 (EST), John Schnurer wrote: [snip] > > > Dear Rick and Robin, > > Questions and stuff... > > What is the 'decay rate' at bottom of letter about? That was from the prior email, which you may not have received yet. > > C: If you want a solid, real world permanet magnet... not a >theory magnet, a real one, you see real word fluctuations as you rotate >it... and if you record these on tape and keep your sensor at the same >spot and pick one of the local variations you like, you can even tell the >RPM Now this I like :). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 21:37:23 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA03197; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:36:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:36:15 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:41:06 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: AnswersRe: Spin question (fwd) In-Reply-To: <386953E4.9F4D6C5C gorge.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"cIEaf1.0.on.EtPQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32552 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Tom and Vo, Some may not want to know the answers, but I do. Someone wrote [paraphrase] "It good to finally challenge this" I am not challenging ... I am ASKING... J On Tue, 28 Dec 1999, Tom Miller wrote: > John Schnurer wrote:> TO RECAP: > > > > An electron is said to spin.... > > An electron is said to orbit the nucleus > > > > Q: What primary experiments let us prove this? > > Q: What demonstrates this orbiting? > > > A seemingly simple question, about a fundamental issue. To it, I would > add: > > A photon is said to be a particle > > Q: What primary experiment(s) let us prove this? > > > IF we can look at these basic issues, without filtering the evidence > through > the prejudicial glass of what "WE ALL KNOW," maybe we can begin to allow > for > alternate concepts. > > Physics describes protons and electrons such that the description more > or > less fits the experimental evidence. What if there were other ways of > describing them, which ALSO more or less fits the available evidence. > > What if Mills isn't crazy? > > What if the guy who used to be here, and was about to write a book about > how electrons, etc. were TOROIDs? (Sorry, I can't remember his name.) > > What if it was ALL about VORTICES? > > What if the concepts of "charge" and "magnetism" could be explained by > the > topography of these two particles? (Maybe even "gravity?") > > What if? > > What I think is that no one will even attempt to answer these questions. > > I think we are more interested in Shrouds, politics, and vertical flow > calorimeters, to even start looking at anything which might not fit > "what we all know." > > > If I had any money to bet, I would bet that that is exactly what will > happen. > > Tom Miller > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 22:22:10 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA13119; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:20:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:20:57 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:25:49 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: How do you...Re: Axially Rotating Magnets In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nJOs8.0.vC3.9XQQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32553 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To All vo... How do you 'break' "lines of force" of a magnet? What causes them to 'break'? How do they 're attach'? By what mechanism? Can a 'break' or 'mend' be sensed of measured? And ... because almost every magnetic field sensing instrumentation I can think of relies on some manner of transduction ... what would the mechanism be that is used to sense the break. Example: A Hall Effect sensor is often a semiconductor bit or tiny piece.... and magnetic field causes a change in the nature of electron flow in the tiny 'bit' of stuff. SO: We do not look a a meter and see 'magnetism' we see a current change cause by a magnetic field... and we hope not too much other artifact. J PS: I am not talking down or making fun. I am asking some fundamental questions... as I did ... and still do, about 'spin' J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 22:32:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA16676; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:31:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:31:21 -0800 Message-ID: <19991229063115.6682.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:31:15 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"JxdXY.0.O44.vgQQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32554 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Michael Schaffer wrote: >> >> The date is more or less 1300 AD. > > Could you please cite the reference, Michael? Which lab(s) and > researchers involved? > > Jim Ostrowski Just by chance, I read an article by R.E. Taylor, "Fifty Years of Radiocarbon Dating," American Scientist (not Scienitfic American!) v. 88 (Jan-Feb 2000) p. 60. The lead paragraph reads: Since the 1350s, when a linen fabric bearing full-scale front and back images of what appeared to be a crucified man was first displayed in a small village in France, many people debated whether this famous cloth---later enshrined in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy---could have once served as the burial shroud for Jesus of Nazareth. Arguments raged for six centuries about the "Shroud of Turin;" then, during the 1980s, a group of scientists decided to seek a final answer to the question of authenticity. Investigators in England, Switzerland and the United States analyzed swatches from the linen shroud (along with other ancient textile samples of known vintage). They applied the now-famous technique for determining the age of organic materials using the radioactive carbon isotope 14C---or carbon-14. These measurements showed that the flax from which the linen was produced grew sometime in the 13th or 14th century AD---far too recently to have had anything to do with the death of Jesus. There is also a photograph of several people looking on as another person works at a table. The figure caption reads: Testing material from theShroud of Turin to determine whether this linen is old enough to have served as the burial cloth for Jesus of Nazareth is just one of the widely known applications of radiocarbon dating. Sampling took place at the Turin Cathedral in April 1988 under the gaze of many observers, including Paul Damon (standing at right), a radio carbon expert from the University of Arizona, and Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero (farthest left), then Archbishop of Turin. The magazine's presentation of the author states: R.E. Taylor currently chairs the Department of Anthropology at the University of California, Riverside, where he directs the radiocarbon laboratory. Taylor received his Ph.D. in anthropology at the University of California, Los Angeles in 1970. He has written extensively on the applicaton of radiocarbon and other dating methods in archeology, with particular emphasis on issues surrounding the peopling of the new World. There is no other mention of Shroud of Turin in this article. Most of the article discusses how radiocarbon dating has been calibrated. There is some material on techniques. There is also mention of problems and limitations. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 22:36:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA18151; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:34:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:34:55 -0800 Message-ID: <19991229063452.29098.qmail web2106.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:34:52 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Poke holes in this To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"dV3WZ.0.XR4.EkQQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32555 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > [snip] Are the van Allen belts symmetrical about the Earth, > and if not, do they rotate with it (I suspect not)? The van Allen belts are not symmetrical about Earth. Nor is Earth's magnetic field, either. The magnetic inhomogeneities rotate with Earth. I do not know enough about the motion of the van Allen belts to comment on their motion. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 22:49:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA21523; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:47:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:47:57 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:44:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Axially Rotating Magnets Resent-Message-ID: <"K6p9M3.0.DG5.TwQQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32556 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:41:33 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >[snip] >>***{As you say, when a magnet moves perpendicular to its axis, it takes its >>field with it. However, flux lines are not impervious to breaking. For >>example, consider a series of points A, B, C, etc., each being the same >>distance from the center of rotation on the north polar end of the bar. >>Assume that, before rotation begins, distinct flux lines emerged from each >>of A, B, C, etc. Then, due to rotation of the bar, point A moves to the >>position formerly occupied by B, while B moves to the location formerly >>occupied by C, etc. >[snip] >Suppose I replace the nice cylindrical magnet with a wide thin bar magnet. >What would you expect to happen in this case as the magnet is rotated about >its magnetic axis? ***{That's a wonderful question! What I would expect is that the flux lines would wrap together somewhere above/below each end of the bar, and the breaks would occur there. The reason I like your idea is that it points to an experimental test: if the flux lines twist at any point, the flux density will intensify at that point, and the resulting aberrant concentration of flux ought to be detectible with a search coil. Wow! I will have to think about this some more, but at the moment it looks to me like this ought to work! --MJ}*** > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 23:06:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA26337; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 23:05:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 23:05:00 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19991229063452.29098.qmail web2106.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:57:51 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Axially Rotating Magnets Resent-Message-ID: <"llfoc3.0.RR6.RARQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32557 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> [snip] Are the van Allen belts symmetrical about the Earth, >> and if not, do they rotate with it (I suspect not)? > >The van Allen belts are not symmetrical about Earth. Nor is Earth's magnetic >field, either. The magnetic inhomogeneities rotate with Earth. ***{Yes. As I said, the flux lines remain at rest relative to the aether in which they are immersed. Since planetary masses are large enough to entrain aether, a vast pool of aether rotates with the earth, and, since the flux lines of the Earth's magnetic field remain at rest relative to the aether in which they are immersed, they rotate with the earth as well. I would not, however, expect that a bar magnet spinning about its magnetic axis in a laboratory would entrain the surrounding aether; hence I would expect the flux lines in the surrounding space to remain stationary as the magnet rotates. That would force continuous breaking and reattachment of flux lines, and, in the case of a wide, thin bar magnet, should cause the flux to twist into a spiral somewhere above/below each pole, thereby permitting an experimental test. --MJ}*** I do not know >enough about the motion of the van Allen belts to comment on their motion. > >===== >Michael J. Schaffer > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. >http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 05:54:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA18126; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 05:53:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 05:53:16 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991229074952.017b6a38 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:49:52 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.5.32.19991228182302.00a09a10 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"AD0KS2.0.3R4.C9XQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32558 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:46 PM 12/28/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{Nope: according to Jed's old posts, he diverted the flow between the >cell and the heat exchanger, which means roughly 20 feet of tygon tubing >with multiple sags and kinks were downstream from the point where he took >his measurement. Thus he took *a lot* of resistance out of the flow when he >did his measurement, and, as a consequence, a large increase in the flow >rate obviously occurred. Perhaps not. It all depends upon the total circuit resistance as Robin pointed out. Another point: If the flow rate did increase dramatically during flow measurements as you suggest, then the delta-T across the cell would necessarily decrease dramatically during the same flow measurements. Surely they would have noticed that and then figured out what was going on. Again, since the CETI kilowatt result was so unreproducible that they've apparently abandoned further research on it, I don't believe it anymore than you do. I'd just like to see you accept the fact that your "open and shut" case against it might have some holes in it. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 07:01:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA05376; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:59:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:59:50 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:59:20 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:59:38 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:58:22 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: Re: Poke holes in this In-reply-to: <19991229063452.29098.qmail web2106.mail.yahoo.com> To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:59:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2342ZYGKEA6FC X400-MTS-identifier: [;02959092219991/4356139 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"5Esbn1.0.wJ1.c7YQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32559 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick, Here is a candidate solution for you. A while back some one on the list started a thread about someone who finally found a way to "free float" a magnet above another without it sliding off to one side or another. The trick was to spin the floater above the base magnet. Forgetting for the moment about having to suspend the black box as well, the spinning black box magnet would float, the other wouldn't. I suspect that the spinning homogenizes the field irregularities of John's real world magnet, making it easier to balance. On the other hand how do you tell the difference between gyroscopic field stability, from gyroscopic mass stability? Bill webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com >This makes sense. I *want* fields to rotate. But here's the poke: >Have a perfect cylinder magnet spinning on its axis inside a black box >(box has no effect on fields). Another black box has an identical magnet, >not spinning. >Can you devise a test of the magnetic fields around these boxes that will >detect any difference between them? You're allowed to spin or move the >boxes << c if you need to - magnets will stay relative within them, but >normal gyroscopic forces from the spinning magnet mass don't count of >course, unless anomalies in those forces are themselves the factor you're >looking for. >I say you won't be able devise such a test, and the meaning of that is: as >far as we can tell, the fields don't spin. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 07:43:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20633; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:42:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:42:36 -0800 MR-Received: by mta EUROPA; Relayed; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 10:42:05 -0500 (EDT) MR-Received: by mta GOSIP; Relayed; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 10:42:25 -0500 (EDT) Alternate-recipient: prohibited Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 10:04:13 -0500 (EDT) From: Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 Subject: RE: Poke holes in this In-reply-to: To: vortex-l Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Posting-date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 10:42:00 -0500 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal UA-content-id: E2340ZYGKFB2DV X400-MTS-identifier: [;50240192219991/4356331 ODNVMS] A1-type: MAIL Hop-count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"GYfRs2.0.I25.ilYQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32560 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin, Dumb question... If we can't tell if a spinning magnets field is spinning as well, how do we know that a stationary magnets field isn't already spinning. Maybe by spinning the magnet itself, it only adds a small differential +- spin amount that is hard to distinguish. Ah, but what about John's real world irregular magnet? I would think a spinning field as it flowed over irregularities would look like the surface of a stream, revealing the bumps & dips of the bottom, but continuing to flow. Bill webriggs concentric.net briggs XLNsystems.com >1) Assumption: The magnetic field of a magnet is the superposition of the >magnetic fields of the atoms in the magnet. >2) Observation: When a magnet is moved perpendicular to its magnetic axis, >its field moves along with it (i.e. doesn't get left behind). >3) When a magnet is rotated about its magnetic axis, the individual atoms >in the magnet are moved in a direction perpendicular to the axis of their >magnetic fields => they take their fields with them (see 2). >4) Since the field of the entire magnet is the superposition of the >individual fields of the atoms (see 1), when the magnet rotates on its >axis, its field rotates with it. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 07:52:45 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA23858; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:51:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:51:08 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991229074952.017b6a38 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19991228182302.00a09a10 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991226155103.007c0c00 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222161809.017aeec0 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991222125053.02b115d0 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19991222110907.017ad254 mail.eden.com> <3860FDF7.F9D81C5A ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991221224844.006c7990 mail.eden.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:45:34 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Flow calorimetry problems Resent-Message-ID: <"PGXI73.0.iq5.htYQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32561 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 07:46 PM 12/28/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>***{Nope: according to Jed's old posts, he diverted the flow between the >>cell and the heat exchanger, which means roughly 20 feet of tygon tubing >>with multiple sags and kinks were downstream from the point where he took >>his measurement. Thus he took *a lot* of resistance out of the flow when he >>did his measurement, and, as a consequence, a large increase in the flow >>rate obviously occurred. > >Perhaps not. It all depends upon the total circuit resistance as Robin >pointed out. ***{Photos showed *kinks* in the tubing downstream from the sampling point. In addition, the heat exchanger was set up with Tygon tubing coiled on the inside of a vertically oriented plastic cylinder. Thus, to hold the tubing in place, it was tied to the inside walls of the cylinder at various points. Since Tygon tubing becomes very soft and pliable when heated, the result was that the tubing sagged on both sides of each point at which it was tied to the inner wall of the cylinder. Result: there were *lots* of constricted flow points inside the heat exchanger. Concerning the resistance offered by the CETI cell upstream from the point at which Jed measured the flow, you need to remember that the CETI beads that filled the cell were analogous to buckshot--small spheres which held their shape and, thus, offered lots of openings through which the electrolyte could flow. Since the cross-sectional area of the bead bed perpendicular to the flow was *much* larger than that of the Tygon tubing, the flow resistance in the bead bed may very well have have been *less* than it would have been in a similar length of unobstructed Tygon tubing. Bottom line: I find it entirely conceivable that upwards of 90% of the total resistance in the system was downstream from the point at which Jed took his sample, and that the "over unity" result was, in its entirety, due to Jed's botched measurement. --MJ}*** Another point: If the flow rate did increase dramatically >during flow measurements as you suggest, then the delta-T across the cell >would necessarily decrease dramatically during the same flow measurements. >Surely they would have noticed that and then figured out what was going on. ***{Neither CETI nor Cravens supported Jed on this. He is the only one who claimed that the Power Gen cell produced more than a kilowatt. Thus there is no "they" here; there is only Jed. Concerning the temperature measurement, as I have also noted repeatedly, the digital thermometers that were in use only sampled once a minute. Thus there is no reason to expect that they would have changed in the time it took Jed to run his sample. Anyway, I am thoroughly sick of this interminable discussion, which has been going on intermittently for almost 4 years. I would say, therefore, that it is time for us to all simply agree to disagree, and drop the matter. --MJ}*** > >Again, since the CETI kilowatt result was so unreproducible that they've >apparently abandoned further research on it, I don't believe it anymore >than you do. I'd just like to see you accept the fact that your "open and >shut" case against it might have some holes in it. ***{If you are unwilling to accept my conclusions, then I suggest that you do what I did: go down to the nearest aquarium supply store, buy yourself a Magnum pump, and study the performance of the system yourself. If you want, you can even set yourself up a fake bead bed, using buckshot, which matches the configuration of the one used at Power Gen, and actually measure the flow resistance which it produces. Then duplicate the heat exchanger, with its vertical orientation, its method of attachment, sags, kinked tubing, etc., and see what percentage of the total resistance it contains. Have fun! As for me, I have investigated this nonsense long enough. I am completely satisfied, based on the investigation I have already done, that Jed's Power Gen measurements were thoroughly botched, and I am frankly *amazed* that anyone who claims to know anything about physics--including Jed--would attempt to defend such a procedure. Now, please, let's drop this. OK? --MJ}*** > > >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 Dec 29 11:33:31 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA27067; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 11:31:08 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 11:31:08 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <386A681C.4A22 ca-ois.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 11:59:24 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process References: <19991229063115.6682.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"WH_121.0.oc6.w5cQu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32562 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael Schaffer wrote: > > >Michael Schaffer wrote: > >> > >> The date is more or less 1300 AD. > > > > Could you please cite the reference, Michael? Which lab(s) and > > researchers involved? > > > > Jim Ostrowski > Hi, Michael! Thank you for your response, below. You have confirmed that we are all talking about the same people, places and events that are discussed by one Brother Bruno Bonnet-Eymard in his allegation at http://www.iea.com/~bradh/shroud/shroud_testhoax.htm that there are some curious facts and inconsistencies involved in the referenced carbon 14 tests. I've reviewed the allegations there, and there appears to me to be some merit to his complaint, but I must admit I do not understand all of it. You are a physicist. When you have time, I wonder if you would just click on this url and give me your opinion of Bonnet-Eymard's complaint. The plot is somewhat convoluted, but the scientific evidence seems coherent. From what I can gather, the allegation is that there is a arithmetical problem with the respective weights of the pieces of the shroud sent to the labs at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, which shows that these pieces are not consistent with the weights of the peices that the original sample was divided into. They are consistent however, with the idea that the samples of the shroud were swapped for control samples definitely traceable to a 14th century linen, and what was supposed to be a "control" sample from a known first century mummy, was actually the shroud sample. The scientific evidence for this goes beyond the weights of the pieces, but is developed by Bonnet-Eymard from test results on the control 14th century pieces and the supposed "Shroud" sample being too exactly coincident, from what I can gather, and I admit my understanding of what he is saying might be flawed. Can you tell me if I have this right? Jim Ostrowski ---- > Just by chance, I read an article by R.E. Taylor, "Fifty Years of Radiocarbon > Dating," American Scientist (not Scienitfic American!) v. 88 (Jan-Feb 2000) > p. 60. The lead paragraph reads: > > Since the 1350s, when a linen fabric bearing full-scale front and back > images of what appeared to be a crucified man was first displayed in a small > village in France, many people debated whether this famous cloth---later > enshrined in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy---could > have once served as the burial shroud for Jesus of Nazareth. Arguments raged > for six centuries about the "Shroud of Turin;" then, during the 1980s, a > group of scientists decided to seek a final answer to the question of > authenticity. Investigators in England, Switzerland and the United States > analyzed swatches from the linen shroud (along with other ancient textile > samples of known vintage). They applied the now-famous technique for > determining the age of organic materials using the radioactive carbon isotope > 14C---or carbon-14. These measurements showed that the flax from which the > linen was produced grew sometime in the 13th or 14th century AD---far too > recently to have had anything to do with the death of Jesus. > > There is also a photograph of several people looking on as another person > works at a table. The figure caption reads: > > Testing material from theShroud of Turin to determine whether this linen is > old enough to have served as the burial cloth for Jesus of Nazareth is just > one of the widely known applications of radiocarbon dating. Sampling took > place at the Turin Cathedral in April 1988 under the gaze of many observers, > including Paul Damon (standing at right), a radio carbon expert from the > University of Arizona, and Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero (farthest left), > then Archbishop of Turin. > > The magazine's presentation of the author states: > R.E. Taylor currently chairs the Department of Anthropology at the > University of California, Riverside, where he directs the radiocarbon > laboratory. Taylor received his Ph.D. in anthropology at the University of > California, Los Angeles in 1970. He has written extensively on the applicaton > of radiocarbon and other dating methods in archeology, with particular > emphasis on issues surrounding the peopling of the new World. > > There is no other mention of Shroud of Turin in this article. Most of the > article discusses how radiocarbon dating has been calibrated. There is some > material on techniques. There is also mention of problems and limitations. > > ===== > Michael J. Schaffer > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. > http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 13:06:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09828; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 13:04:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 13:04:16 -0800 Message-ID: <000901bf5248$943fdf00$3a441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Tank Circuit Analysis Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:03:05 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"uth3M1.0.UP2.GTdQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32563 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A Tank Cicuit is named such because it can store energy and if it is a Superconductor oscillate indefinitely. I couldn't find any literature to treat the following problem: A lossless capacitor C is charged to a voltage V before connecting to the lossless inductance L across the capacitor. Since a parallel resonant tank circuit is resonant when Xc = Xl or the energy in C = 1/2CV^2 = the energy in L = 1/2LI^2 , what is the waveshape and magnitude of the Voltage and Current of the oscillations? Anyone? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 13:16:03 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04051; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 13:09:04 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 13:09:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991229160602.0079ed10 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 16:06:02 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: New Japanese textbook on CF Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5wfYE3.0.7_.jXdQu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32564 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The Kogakusha publishing company has just issued a textbook on cold fusion: Kotainai kakuhannou kenkyu No. 1 [solid-state fusion research, Vol. 1], (Kougakusha, 1999), ISBN4-87593-229-4, 287 pages The price is 2,500 yen ($25), which is very reasonable. The book consists of 10 chapters of varying length, a glossary, and the authors bios. Akito Takashi of Osaka University is the principal author. Other leading researchers contributed chapters. The chapters are basically scientific papers with comprehensive, well reproduced figures. The titles are translated into somewhat fractured English; everything else is in Japanese. (I wish they had let me proofread the titles.) The chapters are: 1. A. Takahashi, "Introduction of the nuclear reaction in the solid" 2. A. Takahashi, "Introduction of the theory for the nuclear reaction in the solid" 3. A. Takahashi, "Method of detection for particles of the nuclear reaction" 4. H. Numata, "Evolution of faults and microvoids in Deuterated Pd" 5. H. Yamada, "Transmutation reaction by glow discharge in the gas" 6. Y. Iwamura, "Electrochemical experiment on the multilayer cathode" 7. T. Ohmori, "Nuclear transmutation reaction in metal-light water electrolysis systems" 8. T. Mizuno, "Isotopic change in the elements deposited on palladium induced by cathodic reaction" 9. T. Mizuno, "Heat, light, neutron and products induced by glow discharge in the liquid" 10. T. Akimoto, "Neutron measurement technique" Chapter 6 looks interesting but it is only six pages long, unfortunately. As far as I know, this is the first organized, comprehensive, technical textbook on cold fusion published in any language. Previous books were conference proceedings, or reviews like "Fire from Ice." Much of this book is too technical for me to translate, or even understand, but it will be good practice trying. This publisher also put out Mizuno's book, "nuclear transmutation: the reality of cold fusion," translated by me. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 15:12:01 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA03613; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 15:10:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 15:10:26 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <386A681C.4A22 ca-ois.com> References: <19991229063115.6682.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 17:06:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process Resent-Message-ID: <"Bbk_c1.0.Nu.XJfQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32565 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Michael Schaffer wrote: >> >> >Michael Schaffer wrote: >> >> >> >> The date is more or less 1300 AD. >> > >> > Could you please cite the reference, Michael? Which lab(s) and >> > researchers involved? >> > >> > Jim Ostrowski >> > >Hi, Michael! > >Thank you for your response, below. You have confirmed that we are all >talking about the same people, places and events that are discussed by >one Brother Bruno Bonnet-Eymard in his allegation at >http://www.iea.com/~bradh/shroud/shroud_testhoax.htm that there are some >curious facts and inconsistencies involved in the referenced carbon 14 >tests. I've reviewed the allegations there, and there appears to me to >be some merit to his complaint, but I must admit I do not understand all >of it. > >You are a physicist. When you have time, I wonder if you would just >click on this url and give me your opinion of Bonnet-Eymard's complaint. >The plot is somewhat convoluted, but the scientific evidence seems >coherent. From what I can gather, the allegation is that there is a >arithmetical problem with the respective weights of the pieces of the >shroud sent to the labs at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, which shows that >these pieces are not consistent with the weights of the peices that the >original sample was divided into. >They are consistent however, with the idea that the samples of the >shroud were swapped for control samples definitely traceable to a 14th >century linen, and what was supposed to be a "control" sample from a >known first century mummy, was actually the shroud sample. ***{This argument doesn't wash. The samples from the shroud were easily recognizable, due to its distinctive weave, and all the scientists involved in the dating procedure knew precisely which ones they were. If the samples had been switched, that fact would have been detected instantly. [See *The Blood and the Shroud*, by Ian Wilson, pg. 11.] --MJ}*** > >The scientific evidence for this goes beyond the weights of the pieces, >but is developed by Bonnet-Eymard from test results on the control 14th >century pieces and the supposed "Shroud" sample being too exactly >coincident, from what I can gather, and I admit my understanding of what >he is saying might be flawed. Can you tell me if I have this right? > >Jim Ostrowski ***{For those with a morbid interest in this topic, another attack on the radiocarbon dating procedure merits mention: it has been alleged by a Dr. Leoncio Garza-Valdes that bacteria, for some unknown reason, slowly deposit a "bioplastic coating" on linen fibers. Thus with the passage of the centuries, there would have been an accumulation of "bioplastic" material around the fibers of the shroud. Since the carbon in that material would be of more recent origin that that of the shroud material itself, when the fibers were tested they would show more C14 than expected, and thus would date to a later time. [Op. cit., pg. 223-231.] Unfortunately (1) it is difficult to imagine why bacteria would do such a thing, and (2) even if you assume they did, the numbers don't work: the C14 in the bioplastic coating would have accumulated over the entire 2000 year span, and would average out to a date of about 1015 AD, while the C14 in the fibers themselves would date to roughly 30 AD. Result: it would be impossible to produce the measured date of 1325 AD. --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 15:46:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA25149; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 15:44:12 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 15:44:12 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tank Circuit Analysis Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:40:42 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <000901bf5248$943fdf00$3a441d26 fjsparber> In-Reply-To: <000901bf5248$943fdf00$3a441d26 fjsparber> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id PAA25076 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZjU5J1.0.q86.9pfQu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32566 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:03:05 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: [snip] >Since a parallel resonant tank circuit is resonant when Xc = Xl or >the energy in C = 1/2CV^2 = the energy in L = 1/2LI^2 , what is the >waveshape and magnitude of the Voltage and Current of the oscillations? The waveshape is a sine wave, and the magnitude of the oscillations can be determined from considering the boundaries, where all the energy is stored in either the capacitor or the coil. > >Anyone? > >Regards, Frederick > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 16:24:38 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA04986; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 16:23:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 16:23:30 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:23:23 -1000 Subject: Re: Poke holes in this From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"LPkXC3.0.qD1.2OgQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32567 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bill - I think that the mass gyro stability has everything to do with that, but again - really how would you know? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI on 12/29/99 4:58 AM, Bill Briggs 614-752-0199 at MH2_BRIGGS ODNVMS.A1.Ohio.Gov wrote: > On the other hand how do > you tell the difference between gyroscopic field stability, from gyroscopic > mass stability? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 18:29:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA18614; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 18:28:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 18:28:27 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991229202902.006de2c0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 20:29:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Tank Circuit Analysis In-Reply-To: <000901bf5248$943fdf00$3a441d26 fjsparber> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"XGznd3.0.iY4.BDiQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32568 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:03 PM 12/29/99 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: >A Tank Cicuit is named such because it can store energy and if it is >a Superconductor oscillate indefinitely. > >I couldn't find any literature to treat the following problem: > >A lossless capacitor C is charged to a voltage V before connecting to >the lossless inductance L across the capacitor. > >Since a parallel resonant tank circuit is resonant when Xc = Xl or >the energy in C = 1/2CV^2 = the energy in L = 1/2LI^2 , what is the >waveshape and magnitude of the Voltage and Current of the oscillations? Robin's right. Specifically, the voltage across the capacitor will go as V(t) = Vo*cos(w*t) where Vo is the initial voltage, t is time, and w is given by: w = 1/(SQRT(L*C)) The current starts at zero and thus will go as: I(t) = Io*sin(w*t) remaining always 90 degrees out of phase with the voltage. Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 19:12:39 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA06056; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:10:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:10:59 -0800 Message-ID: <001e01bf527b$ce3b21a0$60441d26 fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Tank Circuit Analysis Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 20:09:42 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"A1R5N.0.YU1.2riQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32569 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin wrote: (Snip) > > Yes it's a sine wave. > Yup, but it never goes to a negative value around an equilibrium point. Assume the capacitor is 2.145E-23 farads (eo*h/mc the Capacitance of an electron at the Compton Wavelength h/mc)and is charged to a voltage so as to store 8.19E-14 joule the energy E = 0.5*C*V^2, then V = (8.19E-14/.5*2.145E-23)^1/2 = 87,360 volts. When the Inductor (for resonance at 377 ohms, 3.05E-18 Henry) that will take away 1/2 of the 8.19E-14 joules (E = 0.5*L*I^2, then I = (8.19E-14/3.05E-18)^1/2 = 168 amps) is connected by a switch the voltage appearing across the tank circuit drops to 61,177 volts, putting the non-negative equilibrium point for the sine wave somewhere between these two voltages. However, since I = C dV/dt and the intrinsic charge q = 1.602E-19 ~ = I*t*(alpha)^1/2 = 164*8.13E-21*8.54E-2 ~ = 1.6E-19 the intrinsic (+/-) charge of an electron, or q = CV*(alpha)^1/2 then spin is merely the result of the Simple Harmonic Motion (SHM) of the manifest-mass displacement in the Tank Circuit. :-) Ie., the sine function can be a particle moving to-and-fro, like a pulse on an open-circuited transmission line or in a circle, thus Spin(m*c*r). Or, then again..... :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 19:45:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA25701; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:43:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:43:32 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tank Circuit Analysis Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:43:25 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <001e01bf527b$ce3b21a0$60441d26 fjsparber> In-Reply-To: <001e01bf527b$ce3b21a0$60441d26 fjsparber> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 TAA25666 Resent-Message-ID: <"zqxyZ2.0.VH6.aJjQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32570 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 29 Dec 1999 20:09:42 -0800, Frederick Sparber wrote: [snip] >When the Inductor (for resonance at 377 ohms, 3.05E-18 Henry) that will take away >1/2 of the 8.19E-14 joules (E = 0.5*L*I^2, then I = (8.19E-14/3.05E-18)^1/2 = 168 amps) is >connected by a switch the voltage appearing across the tank circuit drops to >61,177 volts, putting the non-negative equilibrium point for the sine wave somewhere between >these two voltages. In an ideal tank circuit, all the energy oscillates between capacitor and inductor. I.e. when the capacitor is empty, the current is at maximum, and the energy is all stored in the inductor. When the current is zero, the voltage across the capacitor is at maximum, and all the energy is in the capacitor. So I don't see where you get the figure of 1/2 above. But then that could be because I'm not 100% sure what your getting at. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 02:36:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA22051; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:35:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:35:17 -0800 Message-ID: <386B3548.8FE249E8 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:34:49 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Way to measure the mass of the magnetic field? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8D9wD.0.TO5.aLpQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32571 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, The discussion whether the magnetic field spin or not give me an idea to test the magnetic field have a mass. Setup is an rotating solenoid. Solenoid's field would have asymmetry respect to axis of rotation. If the body of solenoid is balanced precisely, no vibration occurs when rotating unpowered. If it start to vibrate when it is powered while absence of external magnetic fields and in a homogen medium with fixed permeability, we can suspect the magnetic field would have a mass. A similar experiment can be done to test whether the magnetic field is subject to centrifugal forces. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 02:37:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA22523; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:35:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:35:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:35:50 +0000 (GMT) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Head for the mountains! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"tpjji.0.mV5.BMpQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32572 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The End of the World is nigh! Bru ha ha (mad laughter) The World's major software support systems are written in C on.... Windows.... 3.0 by.... dyslexic savants !!!Ahhhhh! Scream!!! Full NBC gear and survival manual! See ya!! (or not) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 08:41:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA02565; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:39:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:39:52 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <386B3548.8FE249E8 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:31:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Way to measure the mass of the magnetic field? Resent-Message-ID: <"0vLP71.0.-d.NhuQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32573 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Hi, > >The discussion whether the magnetic field spin or not give me an idea to >test the magnetic field have a mass. Setup is an rotating solenoid. >Solenoid's field would have asymmetry respect to axis of rotation. If the >body of solenoid is balanced precisely, no vibration occurs when rotating >unpowered. If it start to vibrate when it is powered while absence of >external magnetic fields and in a homogen medium with fixed permeability, >we can suspect the magnetic field would have a mass. ***{Hi, Hamdi. I believe it is generally accepted that magnetic fields have mass. After all, when a magnetic field collapses, it induces a current. Since the induced current can do work, it has energy; since mass and energy are equivalent, it therefore has mass. In spite of that, your idea has merit: it is one thing to believe something based on theory, and quite another to confirm that belief by doing an experiment. --MJ}*** > >A similar experiment can be done to test whether the magnetic field is >subject to centrifugal forces. > >Regards, > >hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 09:25:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA23611; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:22:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:22:45 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:19:58 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Gary North's Latest Comments re Y2K Resent-Message-ID: <"5Nw-T.0.mm5.bJvQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32574 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{Well, it looks like Gary North hasn't budged one iota from his Y2K disaster predictions. Here is the latest from www.garynorth.com. Enjoy! --MJ}*** *********************************************** Gary North's Y2K Links and Forums The Year 2000 Problem: The Year the Earth Stands Still By now, you have heard about the Year 2000 computer problem, also known as Y2K or the Millennium Bug. When I started this Web site in January of 1997, not many people had heard of it. There were no books for a general audience on it. Now, there are hundreds. Yet even this late in the game, the press is convinced that readers do not understand it. Today, in almost every published article on y2k, the journalist feels compelled to include this: "The problem exists because programmers for three decades used the last two digits of the century as substitutes for all four digits. Thus, 1967 is written 67, and 1999 is written 99. The problem will come in 2000 when unrepaired computer programs will read 00 as 1900." Actually, unrepaired IBM-clone personal computers will revert to either 1980 or 1984, but the problem still exists, and not just in ancient models (pre-1998). Millions of old PC's are still used in running the infrastructures of most of the world. There may be 300 million PC's still in use, worldwide, and most are not compliant. Add to this 50 billion embedded chips -- or maybe 70 billion. Perhaps only 1% of these are noncompliant. Or 3%. No one seems to know. (Three percent of 70 billion chips is over two billion chips.) We know only that there is a lot of chip-based systems to test, replace bad chips, and test again. (See Noncompliant Chips.) But it is not just computer programs that are noncompliant. The data stored in these computers are noncompliant. It is also computer operating systems, including DOS, Windows 95, and early versions of Windows 98. Over the last three to five years, large organizations around the world have been paying programmers to fix these systems. With only a few weeks to go before the century date change, the vast majority of these firms and governments are still noncompliant. This includes the largest money center banks on earth. The threat is two-fold: bank runs by depositors and, far more important, what Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan calls cascading cross defaults, where banks cannot settle accounts with each other, and the banking system goes into gridlock, worldwide. Because corporate computer systems are noncompliant, they have not been subjected to rigorous final testing, which can take months. This was always a major problem, as I have said on this site from the beginning. (See Testing.) In 1997 and 1998, Fortune 1000 company after company promised to be finished with all repairs, leaving "a full year for testing." With very few exceptions, organizations missed this crucial deadline. The press, which had quoted it faithfully, promptly dropped the missed deadline down the Orwellian memory hole. The U.S. government, still noncompliant, has had numerous deadlines, beginning with September 30, 1998. It never meets these deadlines. No mainstream reporter ever mentions this fact in print. Yet few people have changed their minds about y2k since March 1, 1999. In that month, all signs of panic, even among the 1% or less of American y2k-preparationists, disappeared overnight. The U.S. press has cooperated with the U.S. government and large trade groups in assuring the public that there is no big problem, that the December 31 deadline will not be missed by any important segment of the society. (Why will this deadline be any different from all the earlier ones? No one asks.) In every country, the public has been assured that there is no need to panic, that everything will be all right. Especially banks. Over and over, the public is assured that banks will be all right, that there is no reason to get more than a few days' worth of currency. If everything is all right, why have the vast majority of organizations missed the numerous deadlines that they have publicly announced? The U.S. government assures the nation that y2k will seriously affect only foreign nations (rarely named, and when named, issue immediate official denials) and small businesses. But in the U.S., small businesses -- under 500 employees -- number 24 million. One-third of them are thought by the U.S. government's Small Business Administration to have done nothing to repair y2k. These businesses employ tens of millions of people. They also supply the largest businesses that are "not quite compliant." Oil-exporting nations are not compliant. The U.S. imports half of its oil. The largest companies that convert oil into finished products were not compliant as of early 1999. The industry promised it would be compliant by September 30. So far, no such announcement has been made. There is a new deadline for the industry: December 31. U.S. ports are noncompliant. But 95% of all imported goods come through these ports. We are told that the electrical power generating industry is almost compliant, but the basis of these assurances is a series of unverified, self-reported data from anonymous firms. These reports have been assembled by a private agency financed by the U.S. power industry, NERC. What happens to electrical power generation if fuel and spare parts cease to be produced? The typical urban power company relies on more than 5,000 suppliers. The reports issued by NERC never discuss this aspect of the y2k problem. As for the chemical industry, the news is not reassuring. The U.S. government's Chemical Safety Board sent a warning about noncompliant chemical plants to all 50 state governors on July 22, 1999. Yet this industry is the major exporter of goods industry in the U.S. The U.S. Navy published on the Web, and then pulled (no explanation offered), a report on the risks to 144 U.S. cities due to failures of public utilities. The U.S. government and then the Navy went into damage control mode when the findings of this report were posted on a Web site that, within days, received so many hits that it had to be shut down and redesigned. Updates to the Navy's June, 1999 "Master Utilities" report have reduced many risk assessments, but the risks are still serious. There is little but bad news coming from the nation's water and sewer utilities. Think of your community without water or sewer services for, say, a month. The universal refrain is: "We can run it manually." For a few hours, maybe. But where is there publicly available evidence that large public utilities have produced detailed operations manuals and have implemented extensive training programs to be sure that employees can run all systems manually for days or weeks or months? There is no such evidence. The slogan is a public relations ploy. I am not a computer programmer. My Ph.D. is in history. For over three decades I have studied the operations of bureaucracies. I have served as a Congressman's research assistant. I have seen how the U.S. government operates. All things are going according to standard operating procedure: public relations handouts, unverified positive statements, and verbal assurances that everything is fine here. Serious y2k problems are limited to the Other Guys Over There. But the computers of the Other Guys Over There exchange data with "our" computers. Bad data from their computers can reinfect our computers and their data. This, the PR people never discuss in public. Even if our computers somehow can be programmed to lock out noncompliant data, then the computerized systems that rely on shared data will break down. Think "banking system." (See Imported Data.) Things will not break down all at once in early January unless the power grid goes down and stays down. But the domino effect will create ever-increasing institutional noise and confusion throughout January and beyond. Your check will not be in the mail. (See Domino Effect.) *********************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 09:34:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA27572; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:32:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:32:59 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991230123247.00798cc0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:32:47 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Y2K hits Japan Friday - YK2 retrospective Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"EcOT01.0.kk6.ATvQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32575 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Japan is the first major country to enter the new year, the 14 hours ahead of the U.S. EST. The Japanese newspapers are a little edgy this morning. They report an incident in England in which 10,000 credit card machines stopped working yesterday because of a Y2K glitch. I expect there will be disruptions of this nature, but I do not expect any major infrastructure problems. At the Georgia Power generating plants they jumped to the gun and set the clocks for the year 2000 back in May, and they have been running with them set a year ahead since then. I'm thinking of writing an article about the Y2K problem for the magazine. I realize it has been beaten to death, but there are some aspects of which have not been considered. I think it is an interesting example of the strengths and weaknesses of our high-tech society. For my point of view, as a programmer, the Y2K problem never should have happened. Even if programmers in 1978 did not anticipate the problem, they should have written structured, modular programs, which would have made it a cinch to find, repair or replace code related to dates. All date handling routines such as input, output, formatting, comparing, deriving the day of the week and elapsed days between dates, and so on, should have been in one place. (That is, all source code should have been in one subroutine, procedure or include file -- in modern programming it would be in one unit or module.) The variable names referring to things like dates and days a week should have been standard across all programs, which would have made it trivial to find the portion of the main program dealing with dates. I was writing programs in 1978 and that is how I did it, because I read the textbooks by Wirth, Brooks and Knuth. Programmers who do not adhere to structured programming principles should not be allowed near a keyboard. As long as I am grousing, let me add that I am tired or reading in the newspapers and even in the technical trade magazines that it took "two spaces" to save the two-digit format year, and that a 4-digit year like "1975" would have taken "four spaces." Presumably, "spaces" refers to bytes or nibbles with BCD numbers. Perhaps this was true in some early benighted versions of COBOL or with punch cards, but with every computer language I worked with back then, you converted the month, day and year to a single number (a Julian date), and saved it in a two-byte unsigned integer. This gave enough room for 179 years. The only extra spaces a four digit year would have taken up would be on the printer, and printers moved like greased lighting back then. * The Y2K "disaster" has already happened. Society paid billions of dollars to fix a problem which never should have occurred in the first place, caused by sloppy programmers and lax management. - Jed * Most printers moved quickly, and made a terrific racket, but interestingly enough the one at Three Mile Island crawled along at 1200 baud -- believe it or not. It was obsolete, undersized and unreliable. I know it was, because I had one of the same Data General model. It was a major contributing factor to the confusion and information gap that exacerbated the problem. An extra $1000 for a proper printer might have avoided $973 million for the cleanup alone, and the ruination of the fission reactor industry. History sometimes hinges upon this kind of overlooked detail. "For want of a nail, the shoe was lost . . ." (B. Franklin) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 10:21:15 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA01668; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:19:37 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:19:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <014401bf52f2$65e8ebb0$c404aec7 Craig> From: "Craig Haynie" To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991230123247.00798cc0 pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Y2K hits Japan Friday - YK2 retrospective Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:19:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"Vybxz3.0.rP.r8wQu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32576 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello Jed! > ... Even if > programmers in 1978 did not anticipate the problem, they should have > written structured, modular programs, which would have made it a cinch to > find, repair or replace code related to dates. All date handling routines > such as input, output, formatting, comparing, deriving the day of the week > and elapsed days between dates, and so on, should have been in one place. > (That is, all source code should have been in one subroutine, procedure or > include file -- in modern programming it would be in one unit or module.) > The variable names referring to things like dates and days a week should > have been standard across all programs, which would have made it trivial to > find the portion of the main program dealing with dates. I was writing > programs in 1978 and that is how I did it, because I read the textbooks by > Wirth, Brooks and Knuth. Programmers who do not adhere to structured > programming principles should not be allowed near a keyboard. Yeah, but you lost the source code to that program back in 1989... but it wouldn't have made a difference anyway because you never kept a copy of the compiler which originally compiled the program... but it wouldn't have made a difference if you had kept the compiler because the compiler was saved on 5 1/4 inch, 100KB floppies, and your computer hasn't supported that disk drive since 1985... and it wouldn't have made a difference if you had tried to upgrade your program with each compiler upgrade because the third party software you linked-in with your software, to assist with some of the program's functionality, uses a different memory model than the new compiler upgrade and that third party designer has been out of business since 1982. Craig Haynie (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 10:49:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA29745; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:47:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:47:25 -0800 Message-ID: <19991230184723.2068.qmail web1304.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:47:23 -0800 (PST) From: John Logajan Subject: Re: Gary North's Latest Comments re Y2K To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"Ke1aS1.0.hG7.zYwQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32577 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > Gary North hasn't budged one iota from his Y2K > disaster predictions. North is pretty consistent in his doom and gloom view of life. People who follow his economic advice have missed the boom of the last two decades. There is prudence and then there is paranoia. ===== -- - John Logajan 4234 Hamline Ave, Arden Hills, MN 55112 - jlogajan yahoo.com 651-633-8918 - I don't endorse any commercial message that may appear below. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 11:02:30 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA02850; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:59:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:59:51 -0800 Message-ID: <386BAB18.F2F2611A verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:57:28 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Way to measure the mass of the magnetic field? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Qr1VA1.0.Ni.ckwQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32578 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > > > ***{Hi, Hamdi. I believe it is generally accepted that magnetic fields have > mass. After all, when a magnetic field collapses, it induces a current. > Since the induced current can do work, it has energy; since mass and energy > are equivalent, it therefore has mass. In spite of that, your idea has > merit: it is one thing to believe something based on theory, and quite > another to confirm that belief by doing an experiment. --MJ}*** > Yes, but how we can assume safely that energy have mass? It is true that anything have mass is "energy". Even I can generalize the mass-energy equivalence saying everything is a form of energy. But even this statement does not assure that any form of ener gy exhibit mass. Remember that the neutrino case is still discussed. Quantum physicists prefer that neutrino do not have mass, despite everybody have no doubt that neutrino have energy. So it is quite possible that static magnetic field does not exhibit mass. Mass, inertia, gravity are strange things. You may recall that a recent paper proved numerically that gravitational field have mass. (by calculating exact mass of an hydrogen atom, and giving close figures for Pioneer anomalies and for rotational anomalies of spiral galaxies) It is strange that the gravitational field having mass may not have energy for this. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 11:10:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA08972; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:09:10 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:09:10 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991230140852.00790ca0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:08:52 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Y2K hits Japan Friday - YK2 retrospective In-Reply-To: <014401bf52f2$65e8ebb0$c404aec7 Craig> References: <3.0.6.32.19991230123247.00798cc0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"i-fBK2.0.4C2.ItwQu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32579 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Craig Haynie wrote: >Yeah, but you lost the source code to that program back in 1989... but it >wouldn't have made a difference anyway because you never kept a copy of the >compiler which originally compiled the program... but it wouldn't have made >a difference if you had kept the compiler because the compiler was saved on >5 1/4 inch, 100KB floppies, and your computer hasn't supported that disk >drive since 1985... Ha, ha! Funny, and true. I have heard of examples of lost source code. It is hard to believe anyone would risk running a large business, government office or other critical application with something like that, but I guess it happens. I suppose it must be a common problem when people buy object code from vendors, and the vendors go out of business. Data from the 1960 U.S. census was nearly lost when the last tape drives wore out. I think it was transferred to CD-R or something like that. Archiving and data preservation is a huge problem. Another fundamental issue here, which I have not seen addressed in the press, is the idea that software should run for 20 to 30 years with little or no maintenance. Other major capital investments such as machinery and office buildings are not expected to last this long. I do not understand why people buy new computers but keep the old software. I suppose people feel that software does not physically wear out or run down so it ought to work forever. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 12:01:46 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA13835; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:59:22 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:59:22 -0800 (PST) From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: H2K: Calibration with H2+K fill Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:05:43 -0500 Message-ID: <01bf5301$40f0f870$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: <"DKtky.0.5O3.OcxQu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32580 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:53 EST, VCockeram aol.com wrote: > >Additional info to my last post: > >The blue material is a suspension in the HCL >solution. It is slowly precipitating out >leaving the clear acid. - Hi Vince, I would expect solid hydrino compounds to have a higher probability of being ferromagnetic, due to the unpaired hydrino electron spins. Test the blue precipitate with a strong magnet. - Regards, George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems 1924 US Hwy 22 East Bound Brook, NJ 08805 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 12:04:41 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA31479; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:02:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:02:10 -0800 Message-ID: <386BC0C4.6D02 ca-ois.com> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:29:56 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process References: <19991229063115.6682.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"0xhM11.0.nh7.1fxQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32581 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > From what I can gather, the allegation is that there is a > >arithmetical problem with the respective weights of the pieces of the > >shroud sent to the labs at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, which shows that > >these pieces are not consistent with the weights of the peices that the > >original sample was divided into. > >They are consistent however, with the idea that the samples of the > >shroud were swapped for control samples definitely traceable to a 14th > >century linen, and what was supposed to be a "control" sample from a > >known first century mummy, was actually the shroud sample. Mitchell Jones wrote: > > ***{This argument doesn't wash. The samples from the shroud were easily > recognizable, due to its distinctive weave, and all the scientists involved > in the dating procedure knew precisely which ones they were. If the samples > had been switched, that fact would have been detected instantly. [See *The > Blood and the Shroud*, by Ian Wilson, pg. 11.] --MJ}*** If that is a fact, then it is a fact in favor of Bonnet-Eymard's argument. The original procedure called for blindness on the part of the carbon dating labs as to which sample was from what artifact: "After announcing in the "protocol letter" published by Nature, <>, Tite summons Professors Damon and Donohue from Tucson, Hall and Hedges from Oxford, and Wolfli from Zurich to be present at the sample taking... and to see what should have been hidden from them!" (source: http://www.iea.com/~bradh/shroud/shroud_testhoax.htm ) The reason for this requirement is obvious. If it was not followed, then what was agreed on was not performed, therefore the test result is invalid, legally. Regarding Wilson, apparently an historian, had this to say in defense of his friend, Michael Tite: "Many of you here in continental Europe have opted for there having been some kind of clandestine switch of the samples used for the dating, basically, that Dr. Michael Tite and/or his colleagues in some way conspired to pervert the truth. If that is what you still believe, then I can only disagree with you most strongly. I would also put it to you that if the test were to be run again with different personnel whom you ruthlessly watched for the slightest sleight-of-hand, only for the same result to be reached, where would you be? All that you would have proved is that the 1988 test had been honestly run after all - which I could have told you all along." (source: http://www.shroud.com/wilson.htm) This argument amounts to a mere plea of "not guilty", and is based on circular logic. The conclusion does not follow from the facts alleged (that if the test were performed again with different parties supervising the result would have been the same). > > > >The scientific evidence for this goes beyond the weights of the pieces, > >but is developed by Bonnet-Eymard from test results on the control 14th > >century pieces and the supposed "Shroud" sample being too exactly > >coincident, from what I can gather, and I admit my understanding of what > >he is saying might be flawed. Can you tell me if I have this right? > > > >Jim Ostrowski > > ***{For those with a morbid interest in this topic, another attack on the > radiocarbon dating procedure merits mention: it has been alleged by a Dr. > Leoncio Garza-Valdes that bacteria, for some unknown reason, slowly deposit > a "bioplastic coating" on linen fibers. Thus with the passage of the > centuries, there would have been an accumulation of "bioplastic" material > around the fibers of the shroud. Since the carbon in that material would be > of more recent origin that that of the shroud material itself, when the > fibers were tested they would show more C14 than expected, and thus would > date to a later time. [Op. cit., pg. 223-231.] Unfortunately (1) it is > difficult to imagine why bacteria would do such a thing, and (2) even if > you assume they did, the numbers don't work: the C14 in the bioplastic > coating would have accumulated over the entire 2000 year span, and would > average out to a date of about 1015 AD, while the C14 in the fibers > themselves would date to roughly 30 AD. Result: it would be impossible to > produce the measured date of 1325 AD. --MJ}*** This is the obvious strawman set up by the opponents of authenticity. Of course you are correct here, Mitchell, and I won't waste time arguing against your conclusion, above. Recently it has come to my attention that there is a new claim for who it is that the shroud image is supposed to depict. Jaques DeMolay, as detailed in the book "The Second Messiah", by Knight and Lomas. The only way Knight and Lomas' claims for the Image as being that of Demolay could be plausible is if it could be shown that the Shroud was much more recent in origin than is claimed by the Church. This poor fellow (DeMolay) was a martyr to the religion of Freemasonry. If the age of the Shroud is not what all the historical evidence suggests, but rather what the 1988 c14 tests allegedly prove, then rightful ownership of this artifact could possibly be said not to belong to the Church of Rome, but rather to the Organization of Freemasonry, which claims to trace it's "roots" back to the Knights Templar, DeMolay's faction which was effectively excommunicated from the Rommn Catholic Church just prior to his martydom. I have a copy of the Masonic tome "5/5/2000: Ice, the Ultimate Disaster" (Richard W. Noone, Harmony Books c 1982) which is basically about an occultic claim that the world as we know it will end on that date (Antactic Ice Cap slides into the surrounding waters), which contains a lot of extraneous information about other issues of concern to Masons, one of which is the "Rightfull" ownership of the Shroud. Noone had the following to say on this topic: "...after the the leaders of the Templars were burned at the stake the Church acquired the Shroud from the widow of Geoffrey De Charnay, a Knight Templar, burned at the Stake by inquisitors at Poitiers, France. "International Laws on ownership of Ancient Relics may be invoked, a world court engagement of many years may be involved, with the Vatican and the Supreme Council of Masons in Washington DC, fighting over rightfull ownership of the Shroud of Turin" I can tell you this, if there's any one thing I've learned over my years of self inflicted court experiences, the so called "ethics" of our soon to be "One World" judicial system closely parallel the ethics and precepts associated with the Masonic Order, whose decorative Emblems and Symbols currently grace our dollar bills. So, to me, what we seem to be getting around to is the element of "MOTIVATION" for the C-14 test to have been hoaxed, which is: acquistion of legal rights to ownership, and acquision of a new identity for the Man in the Shroud. DeMolay, rather than Christ. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 12:29:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA08891; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:27:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:27:45 -0800 From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <386BC0DB.5CE1 ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:30:19 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Dec 30, 1999] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QsghP2.0.mA2.11yQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32582 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dec. 30, 1999 I hope everybody had nice holidays and here's hoping for an even better new year! I am doing catch-up here after going through open heart sugery after Dec. 10th.. The Flu saved my life by aggravating an existing unsuspected condition which lead to the major emergency operation. -ak- Robert L.Park wrote: > WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 31 Dec 99 Washington, DC > > 1. SCIENCE LOBBY: NEWT GINGRICH URGES SCIENTISTS TO SPEAK OUT. > "The fate of our country may depend on whether or not scientists > recognize that they have real responsibilities as citizens," the > former speaker of the House wrote in the Boston Globe this week. > Describing the mind set of most scientists as a conviction that > "their work is so obviously important that they should not have to > explain it," Gingrich asks scientists to attend town hall > meetings, contact members of Congress, and go on talk radio. "All > I'm asking is that every scientist spend an hour or two each month > being an active citizen. Do your duty and educate your fellow > countrymen about the exciting world that awaits...and we will help > you find the resources to achieve these breakthroughs." > > 2. SECRETS: FEDERAL JUDGE DENIES BAIL FOR WEN HO LEE. Citing the > missing tapes of downloaded secrets, which Lee says he destroyed, > the judge refused to allow bail. However, he urged authorities to > accept Lee's standing offer to take a polygraph exam on what > happened to the tapes. Well, that should--uh--clear things up. > > 3. PREDICTIONS: WN STILL REFUSES TO PLAY IT SAFE. The National > Examiner this week predicted that a manuscript by Albert Einstein > will be discovered in 2000 that contains the secret of time > travel. Piffle! WN will take you on a trip into 2000 without a > time machine. Look at our record: for the third straight year, WN > scored a perfect six out of six in its predictions for 1999 (WN 1 > Jan 99). But we don't plan to sit on our lead--we're coming out > throwing deep. Here is what we see for the coming year: > > * Following new School Board elections, Kansas will restore both > evolution and the big bang (WN 17 Sep 99). > > * There will be serious delays and cost overruns on the ISS, along > with new concerns about shuttle reliability, leading to calls for > termination of the space station project. > > * President Clinton will postpone a decision on deployment of a > National Missile Defense pending realistic tests involving > countermeasures (WN 26 Nov 99). CTBT will languish. > > * BlackLight Power, which has already raised $25M on the claim > that it generates energy by putting hydrogen into a state below > the ground state (WN 22 Jan 99), will announce an IPO. > > * Our challenge to Jacques Benveniste to prove in a double-blind > trial that homeopathic information can be sent over the Internet > will continue to go unmet (WN 14 May 99). > > * A book coining the term "voodoo science" will be published. It > will name names, point fingers and step on toes. > > THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY (Note: Opinions are the author's and > are not necessarily shared by the APS, but they should be.) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 12:34:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA11114; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:31:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:31:53 -0800 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:23:06 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <0.f99f3d25.2530f9b5 aol.com> X-Mailer: YAM 2.0 [060] AmigaOS E-Mail Client (c) 1995-1999 by Marcel Beck http://www.yam.ch Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Inexpensive Proton beam generator MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"D8zqC2.0.Sj2.u4yQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32583 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: See: http://www.newscientist.com/ns/19991204/newsstory10.html Proton beam generated with laser & aluminium foil. Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 13:23:00 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30971; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 13:18:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 13:18:42 -0800 Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 14:18:35 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Y2K hits Japan Friday - YK2 retrospective In-reply-to: <3.0.6.32.19991230140852.00790ca0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <014401bf52f2$65e8ebb0$c404aec7 Craig> <3.0.6.32.19991230123247.00798cc0 pop.mindspring.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"MBVF61.0.hZ7.nmyQu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32584 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:08 PM 12/30/99 -0500, you wrote: >Craig Haynie wrote: > >>Yeah, but you lost the source code to that program back in 1989... but it >>wouldn't have made a difference anyway because you never kept a copy of the >>compiler which originally compiled the program... but it wouldn't have made >>a difference if you had kept the compiler because the compiler was saved on >>5 1/4 inch, 100KB floppies, and your computer hasn't supported that disk >>drive since 1985... > >Ha, ha! Funny, and true. I have heard of examples of lost source code. It >is hard to believe anyone would risk running a large business, government >office or other critical application with something like that, but I guess >it happens. I suppose it must be a common problem when people buy object >code from vendors, and the vendors go out of business. > I lost some C source when a tech who didn't know what he was doing partitioned all my drives, including my backup drive, while trying to install a Linux partition. I still have that source on volumes called pcbackup.001, pcbackup.002, and pcbackup.003, which I think (but I'm not sure) I created long ago with Central Point Software's PC Tools. I tried to reinstall pctools on my current computer and it doesn't seem to work properly. Sigh. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 15:20:13 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA12923; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:18:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:18:54 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Way to measure the mass of the magnetic field? Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 10:18:45 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <9upn6s4eudv3t25ss899cefncl4ama4g4n 4ax.com> References: <386BAB18.F2F2611A@verisoft.com.tr> In-Reply-To: <386BAB18.F2F2611A verisoft.com.tr> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 PAA12889 Resent-Message-ID: <"X8Wh22.0.n93.TX-Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32585 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:57:28 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: [snip] >Yes, but how we can assume safely that energy have mass? It is true that anything have mass is "energy". Even I can generalize the mass-energy equivalence saying everything is a form of energy. But even this statement does not assure that any form of ene rgy exhibit mass. Remember that the neutrino case is still discussed. Quantum physicists prefer that neutrino do not have mass, despite everybody have no doubt that neutrino have energy. When they talk about "massless" neutrinos, they refer to rest mass. An energetic neutrino however will always have relativistic mass which represents its energy. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 15:43:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA20541; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:42:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:42:18 -0800 Message-ID: <386BEDC0.B4532F5C verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 01:41:52 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Way to measure the mass of the magnetic field? References: <386BAB18.F2F2611A@verisoft.com.tr> <9upn6s4eudv3t25ss899cefncl4ama4g4n@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qcUJL1.0.t05.Pt-Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32586 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:57:28 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: > [snip] > > When they talk about "massless" neutrinos, they refer to rest mass. An > energetic neutrino however will always have relativistic mass which > represents its energy. > [snip] > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk Yes, you are right, without rest mass, neutrino should travel always with c. But it interesting that there are a spectrum of neutrino energies, just as spectrum of photons. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 16:00:35 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA07485; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:57:42 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:57:42 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <386BC0C4.6D02 ca-ois.com> References: <19991229063115.6682.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 17:53:48 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process Resent-Message-ID: <"fHEYK.0.sq1.q5_Qu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32588 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Jim Ostrowski wrote: > >> From what I can gather, the allegation is that there is a >> >arithmetical problem with the respective weights of the pieces of the >> >shroud sent to the labs at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, which shows that >> >these pieces are not consistent with the weights of the peices that the >> >original sample was divided into. >> >They are consistent however, with the idea that the samples of the >> >shroud were swapped for control samples definitely traceable to a 14th >> >century linen, and what was supposed to be a "control" sample from a >> >known first century mummy, was actually the shroud sample. > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >> >> ***{This argument doesn't wash. The samples from the shroud were easily >> recognizable, due to its distinctive weave, and all the scientists involved >> in the dating procedure knew precisely which ones they were. If the samples >> had been switched, that fact would have been detected instantly. [See *The >> Blood and the Shroud*, by Ian Wilson, pg. 11.] --MJ}*** > >If that is a fact, then it is a fact in favor of Bonnet-Eymard's >argument. ***{This is just silly. You are arguing, in essence, that the conditions which rendered a switch impossible to get away with, somehow confirm allegations that a switch occurred! --MJ}*** The >original procedure called for blindness on the part of the carbon dating >labs as to which sample was from what artifact: > >"After announcing in the "protocol letter" published by >Nature, <sample comes from the shroud>>, Tite summons Professors >Damon and Donohue from Tucson, Hall and Hedges from Oxford, >and Wolfli from Zurich to be present at the sample taking... >and to see what should have been hidden from them!" > >(source: http://www.iea.com/~bradh/shroud/shroud_testhoax.htm ) > >The reason for this requirement is obvious. If it was not followed, then >what was agreed on was not performed, therefore the test result is >invalid, legally. ***{If the Church of Rome had been really serious about not letting the researchers know which samples were which, then they should have proceeded differently. When they announced with great fanfare that samples from the shroud were to be dated, and named the labs that had been selected to do it, the researchers at those labs naturally began to familiarize themselves with the issue. Since there were many books floating around that contained photos of shroud material under magnification, with commentary about the distinctive pattern of the weave, it was a foregone conclusion from the moment the public announcement was made that a blind study would be unobtainable. And that was good, in my view: given the number of labs and lab personnel involved, and the fact that many of them were devout Catholics, it rendered a switch of the samples utterly impossible. For example, "Professor Damon's chief technician at Arizona, Professor Douglas Donahue, is a devout Catholic who reportedly paled visibly on becoming the first man to learn the Shroud's dating to the Middle Ages, as this was being printed out on the Arizona laboratory's computer." [*The Blood and the Shroud*, pg. 11] Bottom line: the fact that a switch of the samples was impossible does *not* prove that a switch occurred. :-) --MJ}*** It was simply a fact that the researchers at the labs > >Regarding Wilson, apparently an historian, had this to say in defense of >his friend, Michael Tite: > >"Many of you here in continental Europe have opted for >there having been some kind of clandestine switch of the samples used >for >the dating, basically, that Dr. Michael Tite and/or his colleagues in >some >way conspired to pervert the truth. If that is what you still believe, >then >I can only disagree with you most strongly. I would also put it to you >that >if the test were to be run again with different personnel whom you >ruthlessly watched for the slightest sleight-of-hand, only for the same >result to be reached, where would you be? All that you would have proved >is >that the 1988 test had been honestly run after all - which I could have >told you all along." > >(source: http://www.shroud.com/wilson.htm) > >This argument amounts to a mere plea of "not guilty", and is based on >circular logic. The conclusion does not follow from the facts alleged >(that if the test were performed again with different parties >supervising the result would have been the same). ***{It is sad, but predictable, that the reputations of honest researchers will be impugned if they reach conclusions that do not agree with religious doctrine. It happened to Darwin, and the same thing is happening here. Frankly, I am surprised that these labs were willing to accept a "hot potato" such as this. The only explanation I can think of is simply that they were all run by devout Christians who, like Professor Douglas Donahue, expected the shroud to date to the first century. Since they expected to be able to confirm the authenticity of the shroud, they failed to appreciate the risk they were taking. Result: they continue to be slammed about their findings even today, more than a decade after they failed to say what the Pope wanted to hear. --MJ}*** [snip] > >Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 16:03:28 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA07463; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:57:35 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:57:35 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19991230184723.2068.qmail web1304.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:46:31 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Gary North's Latest Comments re Y2K Resent-Message-ID: <"QJ8rY1.0.Xq1.k5_Qu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32587 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: >> Gary North hasn't budged one iota from his Y2K >> disaster predictions. > >North is pretty consistent in his doom and gloom >view of life. People who follow his economic >advice have missed the boom of the last two >decades. ***{Gary didn't miss it. He got rich selling disaster advice! :-) --MJ}*** > >There is prudence and then there is paranoia. ***{And there is also euphoria. (For proof, see the NASDAQ Average. :-) --MJ}*** > > >===== >-- > - John Logajan 4234 Hamline Ave, Arden Hills, MN 55112 > - jlogajan yahoo.com 651-633-8918 > - I don't endorse any commercial message that may appear below. >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. >http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 16:09:59 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA31289; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:08:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:08:32 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:08:15 -1000 Subject: Re: Way to measure the mass of the magnetic field? From: Rick Monteverde To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <386B3548.8FE249E8 verisoft.com.tr> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"B-Qg32.0.pe7.0G_Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32589 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hamdi - How would you commutate the current from the power source to the solenoid without introducing vibrational changes due to heat, minor arcing, etc.? There are also (magnetic?) forces seen at the juction where brushes or slip rings meet armatures - current crosses into a part of the circuit in a different inertial frame. I've been pondering these subjects again for a few days, and I keep going back to wondering if there wouldn't be some sort of detectable difference between: 1) a rotating solenoid that has its power flowing in (and back out) from the lab frame of reference while it rotates, and... 2) one whose power supply - batteries probably - rotates with it. There was a strange message from someone quite a while back on one of Bill B.'s boards about a setup like the second case having some odd reaction forces, but the responses on the board were that they were just ordinary gyro forces the poster was experiencing. But the poster was sure the force occured only when the power was on, or switched on, or something like that - it was a while ago. The 'trick' to getting current from a homopolar seems to be just this thing: part of the circuit under magnetic influence is in a different inertial frame. Robin van Spaandonk said it succinctly in a post on freenrg I didn't save. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI on 12/30/99 12:34 AM, hamdi ucar at hamdix verisoft.com.tr wrote: > Hi, > > The discussion whether the magnetic field spin or not give me an idea to test > the magnetic field have a mass. Setup is an rotating solenoid. Solenoid's > field would have asymmetry respect to axis of rotation. If the body of > solenoid is balanced precisely, no vibration occurs when rotating unpowered. > If it start to vibrate when it is powered while absence of external magnetic > fields and in a homogen medium with fixed permeability, we can suspect the > magnetic field would have a mass. > > A similar experiment can be done to test whether the magnetic field is subject > to centrifugal forces. > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 16:31:27 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA07303; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:30:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:30:09 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Way to measure the mass of the magnetic field? Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:30:04 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <386B3548.8FE249E8 verisoft.com.tr> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 QAA07283 Resent-Message-ID: <"-OLqc.0.1o1.Ga_Qu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32590 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:08:15 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Hamdi - > >How would you commutate the current from the power source to the solenoid >without introducing vibrational changes due to heat, minor arcing, etc.? >There are also (magnetic?) forces seen at the juction where brushes or slip >rings meet armatures - current crosses into a part of the circuit in a >different inertial frame. [snip] You also need to consider interactions with the Earth's field, which are going to overshadow any mass effects, by many orders of magnitude. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 17:10:56 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA16722; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 17:07:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 17:07:17 -0800 Message-ID: <005601bf532b$67891740$0e637dc7 computer> From: "Ed Wall" To: References: <386BC0DB.5CE1 ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Dec 30, 1999] Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:07:26 -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 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"faFhA3.0.C54.570Ru" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32591 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Akira, Well, I'm very glad you're still with us! And thanks again, as usual for keeping us abreast of Park's diatribe. Here's to your health and a happy year to go with it, Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 19:23:19 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24130; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 19:22:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 19:22:14 -0800 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <0.a8d3ead8.259d7b61 aol.com> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 22:22:09 EST Subject: Re: H2K: Calibration with H2+K fill To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 14 Resent-Message-ID: <"EVCTO.0.xu5.c52Ru" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32592 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 12/30/99 12:01:30 PM Pacific Standard Time, george varisys.com writes: > Hi Vince, > I would expect solid hydrino compounds to have a > higher probability of being ferromagnetic, due to the > unpaired hydrino electron spins. Test the blue > precipitate with a strong magnet. > - > Regards, > George Holz george varisys.com Thanks for the suggestion. I will try that tomorrow. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 19:55:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA18811; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 19:54:13 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 19:54:13 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:54:25 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Mizuno300 - cooling rates Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"IHEVu.0.rb4.aZ2Ru" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32593 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This brief study of cooling rates, http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run3/cool.html shows that there is a fundamental difference between Mizuno's cooling rates and ours. Mizuno's data come from a recent private communication and I believe it is data that he has taken in his own lab recently in response to my queries. I will relay what he has to say about this comparison. Perhaps he IS using a strong fan on his cell. That's the only way I can make our cooling rate even approach his. Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 20:19:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA08753; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:17:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:17:27 -0800 X-Sender: knuke mail.lcia.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke LCIA.COM (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: Y2K hits Japan Friday - YK2 retrospective Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 23:27:20 -0500 Message-ID: <19991231042720390.AAA264 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Resent-Message-ID: <"KSPwk2.0.c82.Nv2Ru" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32594 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lynn writes: >I lost some C source when a tech who didn't know what he was doing >partitioned all my drives, including my backup drive, while trying to >install a Linux partition. I still have that source on volumes called >pcbackup.001, pcbackup.002, and pcbackup.003, which I think (but I'm not >sure) I created long ago with Central Point Software's PC Tools. I tried to >reinstall pctools on my current computer and it doesn't seem to work >properly. Sigh. > >--Lynn A good friend of mine is working for an old publishing company in Germany, and had the same thing happen on his laptop. A tech from his company was re-partitioning my friend's drive, and actually wiped out the drive so completely that he had to have the drive replaced. I didn't think that it was possible, but evidently it is. My friend no sooner got his laptop back from the shop when the same tech wiped out all the drives on the main server for the entire company. They found that the "automatic" backup system had failed since October, and dozens of books will have to be scanned, run through an OCR, re-edited, and re-formatted for the publishing software. I've been wanting to convert to Linux for well over a year now, but am really glad that I took the time to research it first. For one thing, not all the boards that I have in my machine have drivers available, and secondly, I've looked at enough of the freeware re-partioning software that is available to conclude that it is too big of a risk to run any of that junk on my machine, even though my machine itself is largely a collection of second-hand, obsolete junk. While there are some great drive re-partitioning programs available for a reasonable amount of money (around $50), I still would risk running the program incorrectly and losing everything. The best alternative that I've seen so far, is buying an inexpensive machine that has been assembled and tested specifically for Linux by an expert, and has the OS already installed. I've seen some pretty decent machines advertised for under $500 new, and you can at least be assured that the keyboard, monitor, storage media, sound card, etc. will function from the start. I've been an amateur programmer since 1984, and would like nothing better than to be able to spend a couple of years to write my own OS from the ground up, but I can say that about 5 or 6 other passions that I have, as well. Life is just too short for my liking. Knuke Michael T. Huffman Huffman Technology Company 1121 Dustin Drive The Villages, Florida 32159 (352)259-1276 knuke LCIA.COM http://www.aa.net/~knuke/index.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 21:04:20 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA24375; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:02:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:02:24 -0800 Message-ID: <19991231050221.82337.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.150] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spin question (fwd) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:02:21 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"bChyl.0.dy5.VZ3Ru" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32595 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Well said, Tom. I don't see how any thinking person can't be amazed that man has never built a whirlpool or spun a top on a turntable. I don't see how any thinking person can't see that Einstein got his prism and lens effect backwards in his perception of the condensed light in the gravity telescope. If the energy of motion spiral galaxy and the hurricane are both such mysteries, and a whirlpool has the same pattern of the dual radial arms, why not build a whirlpool and see what happens? We have built what appears to be the first whirlpool ever built by man on the Whirlpower List. It shows the action I have been screaming as loud as I can for three years on thousands of archived pages on many lists. But when a person is not a scientist, has no money, has no clout, has no degrees, I guess it doesn't matter what he says. No one will listen or lift a finger to help. All science based on Einstein's void universe is void. Space is fluid. This was stated in Whirlpower Theory long before "mysterious dark matter", "frame dragging", and "The Cosmic Triangle". But now Whirlpower Theory has been published by Eagle Research and the letters are starting to come in offering help. Year 2000, off with the old and on with the new!!! Clean infinite energy is almost here. "One man will intuit the exact way to connect to the God Energy of the Universe", James Redfield, "The Celestine Prophecy". David Dennard http://www.whirlpower.cc >From: tom gorge.net (Tom Miller) >Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com >To: Vortex >Subject: Spin question (fwd) >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:20:52 -0800 > >John Schnurer wrote:> TO RECAP: > > > > An electron is said to spin.... > > An electron is said to orbit the nucleus > > > > Q: What primary experiments let us prove this? > > Q: What demonstrates this orbiting? > > >A seemingly simple question, about a fundamental issue. To it, I would >add: > > A photon is said to be a particle > > Q: What primary experiment(s) let us prove this? > > >IF we can look at these basic issues, without filtering the evidence >through >the prejudicial glass of what "WE ALL KNOW," maybe we can begin to allow >for >alternate concepts. > >Physics describes protons and electrons such that the description more >or >less fits the experimental evidence. What if there were other ways of >describing them, which ALSO more or less fits the available evidence. > >What if Mills isn't crazy? > >What if the guy who used to be here, and was about to write a book about >how electrons, etc. were TOROIDs? (Sorry, I can't remember his name.) > >What if it was ALL about VORTICES? > >What if the concepts of "charge" and "magnetism" could be explained by >the >topography of these two particles? (Maybe even "gravity?") > >What if? > >What I think is that no one will even attempt to answer these questions. > >I think we are more interested in Shrouds, politics, and vertical flow >calorimeters, to even start looking at anything which might not fit >"what we all know." > > >If I had any money to bet, I would bet that that is exactly what will >happen. > >Tom Miller > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 21:10:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA29661; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:08:56 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:08:56 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 16:08:09 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id VAA29574 Resent-Message-ID: <"nLQOl.0.MF7.bf3Ru" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32596 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:54:25 -0600, Scott Little wrote: >This brief study of cooling rates, > >http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run3/cool.html > >shows that there is a fundamental difference between Mizuno's cooling rates >and ours. Mizuno's data come from a recent private communication and I >believe it is data that he has taken in his own lab recently in response to >my queries. I will relay what he has to say about this comparison. >Perhaps he IS using a strong fan on his cell. That's the only way I can >make our cooling rate even approach his. [snip] If his lab is at a higher altitude, the pressure on his cell would be lower, which would facilitate evaporative cooling. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 21:33:57 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA04793; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:32:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:32:21 -0800 Message-ID: <19991231053220.63929.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [168.150.253.119] From: "David Dennard" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: [jlnlabs] Quickdraw McGraw Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:32:19 PST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"Z039i2.0.pA1.a_3Ru" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32597 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Support on this list is growing rapidly. >From: "David Dennard" >Reply-To: jlnlabs egroups.com >To: jlnlabs egroups.com >Subject: [jlnlabs] Quickdraw McGraw >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:41:47 PST > > >The Third Wave is rising with the Phoenix! > >All science based on void space is void. > >Einstein was wrong. From man of the century to bunk of century. > >Here is where the error was made. > >Einstein got his prism effect and his lens effect backwards in his >perception of the refraction observed in the gravity telescope. > >Einstein Perception: > > ||||| > ||||| > O(||| > ||||| > ||||| > >Dennard Perception > > ||||| > \|||| > O)||| > /|||| > ||||| > > >Einstein saw void space as less dense than light, thus light was pulled in >by gravity. > >But in fluid space light is less dense than space thus repelled by the >action described in "The Pearl of Wisdom". > >A so called black hole appears "black" because no light can enter. > >The measurement of the refraction was said by Einstein, had to be exactly >1.75, his theory "hinged" on that measurement. But the measuremnt is 1.64. >Science has danced around this for decades with so called + or - error >bars. > >A real scientist could plug in my concept of gravitation repulsion of light >and then measure the back side of the slipstream effect and prove, fluid >space, mysterious dark matter, "The Pearl of Wisdom", and Whirlpower. > >It is so simple once you realize, refraction, causes a rainbow not >condensed >light. Defraction causes a halo, the condensed light, the Einstein Rings; >or should it be the "Dennard Rings"? :) > >David Dennard >The Phoenix (Quickdraw) >http://www.whirlpower.cc > >Please hard copy, just in case the bug's bite is worse than its buzzzz. > >______________________________________________________ > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Messages archives at : >http://www.egroups.com/group/jlnlabs/ >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to jlnlabs-unsubscribe egroups.com >JLN Labs web site at: http://go.to/jlnlabs > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >GRAB THE GATOR! FREE SOFTWARE DOES ALL THE TYPING FOR YOU! >Gator fills in forms and remembers passwords with NO TYPING at over >100,000 web sites! Get $100 in coupons for trying Gator! >http://click.egroups.com/1/340/1/_/2785/_/946593718 > >-- Check out your group's private Chat room >-- http://www.egroups.com/ChatPage?listName=jlnlabs&m=1 > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 00:10:42 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA06109; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 00:09:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 00:09:27 -0800 Message-ID: <19991231080925.17082.qmail web2106.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 00:09:25 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"3UFt33.0.IV1.tI6Ru" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32598 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > Hi, Michael! [snip some stuff from Jim] > You are a physicist. When you have time, I wonder if you would just > click on this url and give me your opinion of Bonnet-Eymard's complaint. > The plot is somewhat convoluted, but the scientific evidence seems > coherent. From what I can gather, the allegation is that there is a > arithmetical problem with the respective weights of the pieces of the > shroud sent to the labs at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, which shows that > these pieces are not consistent with the weights of the peices that the > original sample was divided into. > They are consistent however, with the idea that the samples of the > shroud were swapped for control samples definitely traceable to a 14th > century linen, and what was supposed to be a "control" sample from a > known first century mummy, was actually the shroud sample. > > The scientific evidence for this goes beyond the weights of the pieces, > but is developed by Bonnet-Eymard from test results on the control 14th > century pieces and the supposed "Shroud" sample being too exactly > coincident, from what I can gather, and I admit my understanding of what > he is saying might be flawed. Can you tell me if I have this right? I won't get into the weights of the pieces and such. It is more convoluted than I care to follow on a subject that doesn't interest me, on either side. Bonnet-Eymard cites two features of the radiocarbon ages determined by the Oxford group as evidence that the samples were tampered with: (1) There is a near coincidence of the radiocarbon ages of samples 1 and 4 obtained by the Oxford group. (2) The Oxford group radiocarbon age determination of sample 1 is greater than 1 sigma different from the Arizona and Zurich determinations. With respect to point (2), he argues that his application of a chi-square statistical test to the sample 1 determinations rejects as improbable the hypothesis that all three groups made measurements on samples from the same cloth. He does not state his actual chi-square result, so we cannot ascertain its strength. (The result should be stated as a calculated confidence level or probability for rejection of the hypothesis). Frankly, my knowledge of statistics is weak enough, that I can't tell you if the chi-square test is even appropriate to the question at hand or not. There are many statistical tests, each developed for specific statistical situations. To my eye, unfamiliar with the subtilties of radiocarbon dating, the age spreads among the three groups do not look bad, for either sample 1 or sample 4, which has almost as much age spread. Nor does the Oxford age coincidence between samples 1 and 4 stand out to me, since all groups agree that samples 1 and 4 do not differ much in age. If I look at all six ages (two samples, three laboratory groups), the two features claimed to be anomalous by Bonnet-Eymard seem to me within the distribution. I see "spreads" (defined here by me as the interval between the lowest and the highest ends of the error bars) to be about 200 y in sample 1, about 150 y in samples 3 and 4, and about 100 y in sample 2; or about a 150 year spread, but with some possibility of higher and lower spreads. This is what I would expect if there were a roughly constant percentage error in the determination of the quantity of C-14, and if I then back calculate through an exponential decay to get the age uncertainty. I'm not much help for you, here. I don't know much more scientifically than what I have already written. Outside of science, I think that the journal "CRC," frequently cited by Bonnet-Eymard, is probably the French initials for the "Catholic Counter Reformation in the XXth Century," for which Brother Bruno writes. Counter Reformation is no longer part of official Roman Catholicism. Therefore, I would guess that Brother Bruno Bonnet-Eymard is part of a dissident movement against modernization in that church. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 00:45:16 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA12868; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 00:44:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 00:44:01 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 02:40:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates Resent-Message-ID: <"gtZFc.0.-83.Hp6Ru" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32599 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >This brief study of cooling rates, > >http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run3/cool.html > >shows that there is a fundamental difference between Mizuno's cooling rates >and ours. Mizuno's data come from a recent private communication and I >believe it is data that he has taken in his own lab recently in response to >my queries. I will relay what he has to say about this comparison. >Perhaps he IS using a strong fan on his cell. That's the only way I can >make our cooling rate even approach his. ***{If Mizuno's cooling rate is 2.7 times higher than yours, and if his rate is correct and yours is incorrect, then you would be "over unity" by virtue of that fact alone. (I got a C.O.P. of 1.29 when I re-ran your earlier numbers using that assumption.) Therefore, is it possible that you are somehow undermeasuring the cooling rate of your cell by that amount? What, exactly, was the procedure that you used to determine your cooling rate? Are you, for example, using a digital thermometer which has a long sampling interval, so that the numbers fall more slowly than the actual temperature is falling in your cell? Or are you using a temperature probe that is dampened in some way--e.g., by being coated with "heat sink glop"? --MJ}*** > > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 05:14:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA13528; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 05:13:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 05:13:29 -0800 Message-ID: <386CABD9.A66ECDD7 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 15:12:57 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,tr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Way to measure the mass of the magnetic field? References: <386B3548.8FE249E8 verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tHagP2.0.IJ3.ulARu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32600 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:08:15 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: > > >Hamdi - > > > >How would you commutate the current from the power source to the solenoid > >without introducing vibrational changes due to heat, minor arcing, etc.? > >There are also (magnetic?) forces seen at the juction where brushes or slip > >rings meet armatures - current crosses into a part of the circuit in a > >different inertial frame. It would be optimistic that such an experiment can be build with a low budget. If one gonna spend money, every mechanical problems can be overcome. I think the main problem here is a build a rock solid solenoid with using hardest epoxy. There would be no tolerance on deformation of solenoid with large centrifugal forces. May a clever coil design is required. > [snip] > You also need to consider interactions with the Earth's field, which are > going to overshadow any mass effects, by many orders of magnitude. It would not pose a problem, as it possible to neutralize the earth magnetic field by large loops at a distance. One need also vacuum, or house the solenoid symmetrically. Regards, hamdi ucar > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 07:11:04 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08271; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:08:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:08:55 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:09:19 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"oT20Q1.0.912.6SCRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32601 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:40 AM 12/31/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{If Mizuno's cooling rate is 2.7 times higher than yours, and if his >rate is correct and yours is incorrect, then you would be "over unity" by >virtue of that fact alone. (I got a C.O.P. of 1.29 when I re-ran your >earlier numbers using that assumption.) True. >Therefore, is it possible that you >are somehow undermeasuring the cooling rate of your cell by that amount? >What, exactly, was the procedure that you used to determine your cooling >rate? I'm using the glass-jacketed thermistor probe that normally resides in the cell to monitor electrolyte temperature. You can see this probe in the two photos at: http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run1.html There is some heat sink glop (conductive epoxy, actually) between the thermistor and the glass jacket but it is quite thin. I let the data acquisition system run as it does during a water-flow calorimetry run so the probe is read every 15 seconds. To check the accuracy of this, I recently placed a 70 cm long precision glass thermometer (0.1C graduations - 0.1C accuracy) in the cell along with the thermistor probe. I read the glass themometer more-or-less simultaneously with the thermistor reads performed by the data acquisition system (an audible relay click "announces" the read time). To my mild surprise, the glass thermometer read about 0.4 degrees higher than the thermistor (biggest difference I've ever seen) but the observed slope of temperature vs time (i.e. the cooling rate) was essentially identical for the two probes. Both of these probes have some thermal inertia but it appears to be negligible compared to that of the 150 ml of electrolyte in which they are immersed. Jed, do you happen to recall if it was windy inside the constant temperature enclosure that Mizuno typically runs his experiments in? Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 08:07:17 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27147; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 08:05:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 08:05:41 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 10:02:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates Resent-Message-ID: <"S6WCc.0._d6.KHDRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32602 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 02:40 AM 12/31/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>***{If Mizuno's cooling rate is 2.7 times higher than yours, and if his >>rate is correct and yours is incorrect, then you would be "over unity" by >>virtue of that fact alone. (I got a C.O.P. of 1.29 when I re-ran your >>earlier numbers using that assumption.) > >True. > >>Therefore, is it possible that you >>are somehow undermeasuring the cooling rate of your cell by that amount? >>What, exactly, was the procedure that you used to determine your cooling >>rate? > >I'm using the glass-jacketed thermistor probe that normally resides in the >cell to monitor electrolyte temperature. You can see this probe in the two >photos at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run1.html > >There is some heat sink glop (conductive epoxy, actually) between the >thermistor and the glass jacket but it is quite thin. I let the data >acquisition system run as it does during a water-flow calorimetry run so >the probe is read every 15 seconds. To check the accuracy of this, I >recently placed a 70 cm long precision glass thermometer (0.1C graduations >- 0.1C accuracy) in the cell along with the thermistor probe. I read the >glass themometer more-or-less simultaneously with the thermistor reads >performed by the data acquisition system (an audible relay click >"announces" the read time). To my mild surprise, the glass thermometer >read about 0.4 degrees higher than the thermistor (biggest difference I've >ever seen) but the observed slope of temperature vs time (i.e. the cooling >rate) was essentially identical for the two probes. ***{I notice that your temperature probe is located near the bottom of the cell, and I assume that Mizuno's is positioned similarly. Thus I find myself wondering if thermal stratification could be the source of the discrepancy between your cooling curve and his. In these sorts of runs, the cathode is a source of a great deal of turbulence, with consequent mixing of the electrolyte. Likely result: temperature uniformity throughout the cell. Since the electrolyte is boiling at the top of the cell under those conditions, that would mean it is boiling throughout the cell, and that is the condition under which the cooling curve should be measured. Suppose, however, that Mizuno determined his cooling curve by merely heating the cell to boiling *without* stirring. In that case, it will have cooled from the bottom up, with a layer of cold water building up at the bottom, and, when that layer reaches the temperature probe, the average temperature in the cell will be *much higher* than the reading of the temperature probe indicates. Result: Mizuno will think his cell is dissipating heat much more rapidly than it really is. My question, therefore, is this: did Mizuno employ stirring within the cell when he determined his cooling curve, or not? If not, then that may be the source of the discrepancy between his results and yours. --MJ}*** > >Both of these probes have some thermal inertia but it appears to be >negligible compared to that of the 150 ml of electrolyte in which they are >immersed. > >Jed, do you happen to recall if it was windy inside the constant >temperature enclosure that Mizuno typically runs his experiments in? > > > > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 08:43:29 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA04447; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 08:39:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 08:39:49 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991231113940.007a3cf0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:39:40 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4Nqxk.0.N51.KnDRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32603 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >Jed, do you happen to recall if it was windy inside the constant >temperature enclosure that Mizuno typically runs his experiments in? Pretty windy, I think. See photo July 12, 1999, Image08.jpg on the CD-ROM I sent you. The fan is on the lower left. It is a computer "muffin" fan. Please note we are talking about rapid cooling in tests where the cell was exposed to air, as shown in Image08.jpg. In the tests I saw the cell was insulated in the blue strofoam container, cooling was slo-o-o-w, and I think the fan make no measurable difference. You have the spreadsheets for this configuration. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 09:00:06 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA10977; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 08:58:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 08:58:37 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991231115827.0079d330 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:58:27 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5fRYj1.0.Mh2.z2ERu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32604 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: >Suppose, >however, that Mizuno determined his cooling curve by merely heating the >cell to boiling *without* stirring. No, he used a magnetic stirrer. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 09:19:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA18115; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:16:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:16:12 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991231113940.007a3cf0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:12:29 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates Resent-Message-ID: <"a5DUq3.0.zQ4.SJERu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32605 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Scott Little wrote: > >>Jed, do you happen to recall if it was windy inside the constant >>temperature enclosure that Mizuno typically runs his experiments in? > >Pretty windy, I think. See photo July 12, 1999, Image08.jpg on the CD-ROM I >sent you. The fan is on the lower left. It is a computer "muffin" fan. > >Please note we are talking about rapid cooling in tests where the cell was >exposed to air, as shown in Image08.jpg. In the tests I saw the cell was >insulated in the blue strofoam container, cooling was slo-o-o-w, and I >think the fan make no measurable difference. You have the spreadsheets for >this configuration. ***{I'm not sure what you are saying here, Jed. Surely the cell was not inside of a styrofoam jacket when the "over unity" runs were made. If so, then without significant ability for the cell to dissipate heat through the walls, the result would be much more intense boiling, and an increased rate of steam production. In that case, the cooling curve would also have to be done with the cell inside the styrofoam jacket. Result: the rate of heat dissipation would be much *lower* than that measured by Scott, not much higher. If Mizuno ran his cell inside a styrofoam jacket, and used a heat dissipation curve based on a cell without a jacket, he would get very large, and false, over unity numbers. I doubt that this is what happened, but your above comments leave me rather confused. --MJ}*** > >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 09:29:47 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA21896; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:27:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:27:52 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991231122726.007a5100 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 12:27:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991231113940.007a3cf0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"BL6Ww3.0.2M5.OUERu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32606 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: >I'm not sure what you are saying here, Jed. Surely the cell was not >inside of a styrofoam jacket when the "over unity" runs were made. Yeah, it was in some of the runs. It is described in my report, in I.E. and in various messages posted here. If so, >then without significant ability for the cell to dissipate heat through the >walls, the result would be much more intense boiling . . . He cut it off after 5 minutes or so of boiling. The insulated runs were short. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 09:37:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA25313; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:35:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:35:30 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991231123521.007a65f0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 12:35:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates COPY 2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"bMvF3.0.RB6.XbERu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32607 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [TEST. This message did not get back to me, although it looks like Mitchell Jones got it. Vortex has been acting funny lately. - JR] Scott Little wrote: >Jed, do you happen to recall if it was windy inside the constant >temperature enclosure that Mizuno typically runs his experiments in? Pretty windy, I think. See photo July 12, 1999, Image08.jpg on the CD-ROM I sent you. The fan is on the lower left. It is a computer "muffin" fan. Please note we are talking about rapid cooling in tests where the cell was exposed to air, as shown in Image08.jpg. In the tests I saw the cell was insulated in the blue strofoam container, cooling was slo-o-o-w, and I think the fan make no measurable difference. You have the spreadsheets for this configuration. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 09:41:21 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA27502; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:40:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:40:00 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991231122726.007a5100 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3.0.6.32.19991231113940.007a3cf0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:37:19 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates Resent-Message-ID: <"BMRpb3.0.Zj6.mfERu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32608 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>I'm not sure what you are saying here, Jed. Surely the cell was not >>inside of a styrofoam jacket when the "over unity" runs were made. > >Yeah, it was in some of the runs. It is described in my report, in I.E. and >in various messages posted here. > > > If so, >>then without significant ability for the cell to dissipate heat through the >>walls, the result would be much more intense boiling . . . > >He cut it off after 5 minutes or so of boiling. The insulated runs were short. > >- Jed ***{You skipped over the main point I wanted you to address, so let me be specific: is it possible that when Mizuno thought he was over unity, it was because he ran his cell inside a styrofoam jacket, and used a heat dissipation curve based on a cell without a jacket? --MJ}*** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 10:53:51 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA16093; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 10:52:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 10:52:35 -0800 Message-ID: <386CFBAD.3C8533F ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:53:36 -0700 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K System X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates References: <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18@mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"A7PUh1.0.Nx3.pjFRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32609 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, Thermistors are not absolute detectors but need to be calibrated. Normally the calibration coefficients supplied by the manufacturer are only average values and can not be trusted to give good values for a particular thermistor. The fact that you obtained the same slope both from the thermistor and the thermometer indicates that the thermistor has a offset error which needs to be corrected. Normally, this does not cause a problem if temperature difference is the important parameter which is the case in most calorimetry. Regards, Ed Storms Scott Little wrote: > At 02:40 AM 12/31/99 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >***{If Mizuno's cooling rate is 2.7 times higher than yours, and if his > >rate is correct and yours is incorrect, then you would be "over unity" by > >virtue of that fact alone. (I got a C.O.P. of 1.29 when I re-ran your > >earlier numbers using that assumption.) > > True. > > >Therefore, is it possible that you > >are somehow undermeasuring the cooling rate of your cell by that amount? > >What, exactly, was the procedure that you used to determine your cooling > >rate? > > I'm using the glass-jacketed thermistor probe that normally resides in the > cell to monitor electrolyte temperature. You can see this probe in the two > photos at: > > http://www.eden.com/~little/Inc-W/300volt/run1.html > > There is some heat sink glop (conductive epoxy, actually) between the > thermistor and the glass jacket but it is quite thin. I let the data > acquisition system run as it does during a water-flow calorimetry run so > the probe is read every 15 seconds. To check the accuracy of this, I > recently placed a 70 cm long precision glass thermometer (0.1C graduations > - 0.1C accuracy) in the cell along with the thermistor probe. I read the > glass themometer more-or-less simultaneously with the thermistor reads > performed by the data acquisition system (an audible relay click > "announces" the read time). To my mild surprise, the glass thermometer > read about 0.4 degrees higher than the thermistor (biggest difference I've > ever seen) but the observed slope of temperature vs time (i.e. the cooling > rate) was essentially identical for the two probes. > > Both of these probes have some thermal inertia but it appears to be > negligible compared to that of the 150 ml of electrolyte in which they are > immersed. > > Jed, do you happen to recall if it was windy inside the constant > temperature enclosure that Mizuno typically runs his experiments in? > > Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 11:28:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA00997; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:26:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:26:46 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19991231132709.006e6a34 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 13:27:09 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates In-Reply-To: <386CFBAD.3C8533F ix.netcom.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Gid-A3.0.UF.sDGRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32610 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:53 AM 12/31/99 -0700, Edmund Storms wrote: >Thermistors are not absolute detectors but need to be calibrated. Normally >the calibration coefficients supplied by the manufacturer are only average >values and can not be trusted to give good values for a particular >thermistor. Right, but these particular thermistors (BetaTherm) are factory selected to read within 0.2C of the actual temp over the range 0-100C. Except for the present data, every time I've checked them against my 0.1C glass thermometer(s), they have easily met that spec (e.g. see http://www.eden.com/~little/waterflow/therm.htm). The present data was not collected under ideal conditions for comparing temperature readings. The electrolyte was cooling steadily. A difference in response time could well be responsible for part of the observed 0.4C offset. As you suggest, the offset between two of these thermistors used for Tin and Tout measurements in my flow calorimeter must be carefully measured (to about 0.001C) and then applied as a zero correction. As indicated on the web page referenced above, minor differences in the sensitivity of the two thermistors don't make a big impact on the observed delta-T. Mitchell, When Mizuno places his cell in the styrofoam insulation, he is NOT doing the open-air style of calorimetry that I am presently emulating. As I understand it, Ohmori is the principle proponent of this open-air style of calorimetry. Mizuno primarily uses flow calorimetry and dT/dt (rate of temperature increase) methods. Scott R. Little EarthTech International 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 Austin Texas USA 78759 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 13:03:36 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA02293; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 13:02:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 13:02:32 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991231132709.006e6a34 mail.eden.com> References: <386CFBAD.3C8533F ix.netcom.com> <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 14:58:39 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates Resent-Message-ID: <"4Ctji3.0.lZ.ddHRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32611 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [snip] >Mitchell, > >When Mizuno places his cell in the styrofoam insulation, he is NOT doing >the open-air style of calorimetry that I am presently emulating. As I >understand it, Ohmori is the principle proponent of this open-air style of >calorimetry. Mizuno primarily uses flow calorimetry and dT/dt (rate of >temperature increase) methods. ***{Meaning there is no possibility that Mizuno did his runs with the cell in a styrofoam jacket, and determined his cooling curves when running without the jacket? OK, I can accept that. As noted, I doubted that was what was happening, but I had to ask anyway, just in case. Anyway, the discrepancy between the two cooling curves remains *huge*, and must be accounted for. Jed says that when Mizuno did his cooling curve, he had a magnetic stirrer in the cell. I assume that the impeller blades are visible through the glass, so that there is no possibility that the thing became stuck when the cooling curve was being determined? If not, then perhaps the explanation must rely on a combination of factors. You have suggested that Mizuno's cell may have been in a breeze, and this has been confirmed by Jed. Robin has suggested that Mizuno's lab may be at a higher altitude than yours, thereby producing a greater evaporation rate. If Mizuno is at Hokkaido University, does that mean he is located in Sapporo? If so, what is the altitude there, and what is the altitude at the Earthtech lab? Can these two factors, taken together, explain the discrepancy? Or is there something else afoot? --MJ}*** > > >Scott R. Little EarthTech International > 4030 Braker Lane, Suite 300 > Austin Texas USA 78759 > 512-342-2185 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 13:17:33 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06950; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 13:16:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 13:16:39 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 16:21:32 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Drives, Second OS ..Unix In-Reply-To: <19991231042720390.AAA264 mail.lcia.com@lizard> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nMFs82.0.Ri1.tqHRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32612 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Folks, If you want to install a second OS, such as Unix there is an alternative to partitioning a drive. Install a second drive as a slave. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 13:31:05 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA11975; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 13:29:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 13:29:29 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2000 07:58:31 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340@mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991231115827.0079d330@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991231115827.0079d330 pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 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 NAA11939 Resent-Message-ID: <"iF7p43.0.0x2.t0IRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32613 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:58:27 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>Suppose, >>however, that Mizuno determined his cooling curve by merely heating the >>cell to boiling *without* stirring. > >No, he used a magnetic stirrer. > >- Jed Is it possible that the primarily horizontal motion of the fluid produced by a magnetic stirrer doesn't sufficiently prevent thermal stratification? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 16:26:52 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24626; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 16:24:38 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 16:24:38 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991231115827.0079d330 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> <3.0.6.32.19991231115827.0079d330 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 18:20:51 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates Resent-Message-ID: <"YxfvK3.0.e06.1bKRu" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32614 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:58:27 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >>Mitchell Jones wrote: >> >>>Suppose, >>>however, that Mizuno determined his cooling curve by merely heating the >>>cell to boiling *without* stirring. >> >>No, he used a magnetic stirrer. >> >>- Jed >Is it possible that the primarily horizontal motion of the fluid produced by >a magnetic stirrer doesn't sufficiently prevent thermal stratification? ***{I haven't seen a lot of magnetic stirrers, but the ones I have seen, including the one in the Magnum 350 pump, operate like squirrel cage blowers: the blades rotate in the horizontal plane, hurling fluid out horizontally, but the fluid that is hurled outward horizontally is replaced by fluid that is sucked down vertically into the center of the impeller. Thus thermal stratification would seem to be unlikely in a cell that had this type of stirrer sitting on the bottom. --MJ}*** > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 17:50:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA21327; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 17:49:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 17:49:28 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991231204754.007bbd90 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 20:47:54 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Mizuno300 - cooling rates In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.19991231122726.007a5100 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.6.32.19991231113940.007a3cf0 pop.mindspring.com> <3.0.1.32.19991231090919.006dbe18 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19991230215425.006b7340 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Jmr3l3.0.9D5.dqLRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32615 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: >is it possible that when Mizuno thought he was over unity, it was >because he ran his cell inside a styrofoam jacket, and used a heat >dissipation curve based on a cell without a jacket? No, he uses the cooling curve from the same dataset, in a process built into the spreadsheet. That is to say, he runs the cell for ~15 minutes, lets it cool for an hour or two, and then transfers all temperature data into a single spreadsheet. The cooling curve is actually the same in every case; the difference from one run to another are too small to be measured, but he recomputes it every time anyway. (The spreadsheet I sent to Scott Little may not have had a full data set, and it may use a curve from an earlier run. We truncated the process in order to run several tests the day I was there. Normally, he lets it sit and cool.) This discussion may get a little confusing since Mizuno used three or four different menthods of calorimetry, including the one Ohmori and Scott Little are using, without insulation. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 18:01:18 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA23932; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 18:00:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 18:00:15 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19991231205846.0079b470 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 20:58:46 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Happy New Year! / No Y2K problems in Yamaguchi Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"I0L8s2.0.sr5.j-LRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32616 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Happy New Year everyone! The news from Japan is good. No problems reported anywhere in the national news. The home page from my home away from home Oshima, Yamaguchi shows a picture of the rising sun and the text says "we have had no problems." Click on the box for date 1/1: http://www.total.co.jp/town-kuka/kyoukuka.htm The 12/24 pictures are cute too. The "Virtual Town Meeting" section reports they tested the water system a few weeks ago and found no potential Y2K problems. That is what I expected, since as far as I know it is mostly gravity fed pipes from the mountains with zero machinery. Gravity remains unchanged. (I should not make fun of the town council. Apparently there are two pumps, and they tested okay. People in countryside are self-reliant and they know how to deal with pumps.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 18:14:12 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA25732; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 18:08:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 18:08:29 -0800 Message-ID: <386D6070.209E ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 18:03:28 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process References: <19991231080925.17082.qmail web2106.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"S6D_j3.0.oH6.R6MRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32617 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > From what I can gather, the allegation is that there is a > > arithmetical problem with the respective weights of the pieces of the > > shroud sent to the labs at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, which shows that > > these pieces are not consistent with the weights of the peices that the > > original sample was divided into. > > They are consistent however, with the idea that the samples of the > > shroud were swapped for control samples definitely traceable to a 14th > > century linen, and what was supposed to be a "control" sample from a > > known first century mummy, was actually the shroud sample. > > > > The scientific evidence for this goes beyond the weights of the pieces, > > but is developed by Bonnet-Eymard from test results on the control 14th > > century pieces and the supposed "Shroud" sample being too exactly > > coincident, from what I can gather, and I admit my understanding of what > > he is saying might be flawed. Can you tell me if I have this right? > Michael Schaffer wrote: > I won't get into the weights of the pieces and such. It is more convoluted > than I care to follow on a subject that doesn't interest me, on either side. > Yes, that is something I think I can sort out on my own as I get the chance to get caught up on this subject. I hadn't thought about or read much about this subject since I read the Habermas book back before the C14 studies. Thanks for looking into it. > Bonnet-Eymard cites two features of the radiocarbon ages determined by the > Oxford group as evidence that the samples were tampered with: (1) There is a > near coincidence of the radiocarbon ages of samples 1 and 4 obtained by the > Oxford group. (2) The Oxford group radiocarbon age determination of sample 1 > is greater than 1 sigma different from the Arizona and Zurich determinations. > With respect to point (2), he argues that his application of a chi-square > statistical test to the sample 1 determinations rejects as improbable the > hypothesis that all three groups made measurements on samples from the same > cloth. He does not state his actual chi-square result, so we cannot ascertain > its strength. (The result should be stated as a calculated confidence level > or probability for rejection of the hypothesis). This is valuable information, I would not have thought of this. If I can determine this calculated confidence level in further research, I will get back to you. > Frankly, my knowledge of > statistics is weak enough, that I can't tell you if the chi-square test is > even appropriate to the question at hand or not. There are many statistical > tests, each developed for specific statistical situations. I will gather what I can on this point, too. > To my eye, unfamiliar with the subtilties of radiocarbon dating, the age > spreads among the three groups do not look bad, for either sample 1 or sample > 4, which has almost as much age spread. Nor does the Oxford age coincidence > between samples 1 and 4 stand out to me, since all groups agree that samples > 1 and 4 do not differ much in age. If I look at all six ages (two samples, > three laboratory groups), the two features claimed to be anomalous by > Bonnet-Eymard seem to me within the distribution. I see "spreads" (defined > here by me as the interval between the lowest and the highest ends of the > error bars) to be about 200 y in sample 1, about 150 y in samples 3 and 4, > and about 100 y in sample 2; or about a 150 year spread, but with some > possibility of higher and lower spreads. This is what I would expect if there > were a roughly constant percentage error in the determination of the quantity > of C-14, and if I then back calculate through an exponential decay to get the > age uncertainty. > OK. > I'm not much help for you, here. I don't know much more scientifically than > what I have already written. It's enough to get me headed in the right direction. Thanks again. > > Outside of science, I think that the journal "CRC," frequently cited by > Bonnet-Eymard, is probably the French initials for the "Catholic Counter > Reformation in the XXth Century," for which Brother Bruno writes. Counter > Reformation is no longer part of official Roman Catholicism. Therefore, I > would guess that Brother Bruno Bonnet-Eymard is part of a dissident movement > against modernization in that church. Undoubtedly. There was supposedly another public exhibition of the Shroud in 1998, which I do not recall anything of whether or not that actually took place. If it did, then from what I know of Vatican policy, it is still regarded as genuine by the Church, in spite of the c14 result, which would mean that some political element within was still holding out against capitulating altogether. > > ===== > Michael J. Schaffer > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? Occasionally, but only when nobody's looking. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 18:49:11 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA02553; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 18:48:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 18:48:27 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: <0.cc293882.259ec4f3 aol.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:48:19 EST Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Dec 30, 1999] To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 147 Resent-Message-ID: <"SYwFJ2.0.kd.whMRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32618 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 12/30/99 9:11:06 PM, Ed Wall wrote: << Akira, Well, I'm very glad you're still with us! And thanks again, as usual for keeping us abreast of Park's diatribe. Here's to your health and a happy year to go with it,>> Hear, hear, as the British say. All the best for 2000, Akira. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 21:15:55 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA02397; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:14:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:14:36 -0800 Message-ID: <386D8AF8.43D5 ca-ois.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:04:56 -0800 From: Jim Ostrowski X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process References: <19991229063115.6682.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; name="SHROUD1.TXT" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="SHROUD1.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA02340 Resent-Message-ID: <"AkbOF1.0.Jb.yqORu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32619 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: From what I can gather, the allegation is that there is a arithmetical problem with the respective weights of the pieces of the shroud sent to the labs at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, which shows that these pieces are not consistent with the weights of the peices that the original sample was divided into. They are consistent however, with the idea that the samples of the shroud were swapped for control samples definitely traceable to a 14th century linen, and what was supposed to be a "control" sample from a known first century mummy, was actually the shroud sample. Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{This argument doesn't wash. The samples from the shroud were easily recognizable, due to its distinctive weave, and all the scientists involved in the dating procedure knew precisely which ones they were. If the samples had been switched, that fact would have been detected instantly. [See *The Blood and the Shroud*, by Ian Wilson, pg. 11.] --MJ}*** > JO: If that is a fact, then it is a fact in favor of Bonnet-Eymard's argument. MJ: ***{This is just silly. You are arguing, in essence, that the conditions which rendered a switch impossible to get away with, somehow confirm allegations that a switch occurred! --MJ}*** JO: When it comes to human nature, especially where money and vested interests such as those exhibited by secular "authority" (government) is involved, I would be little surprised by anything, and I cannot say with any certainty at this point that the conditions outlined rendered a switch impossible to get away with. The fact is, if the switch happened, they haven't gotten away with it because it looks like old Brother Bruno caught `em red handed. Which means someone could simply be lying, for which they (MAYBE) could be forgiven for later, if they were from the Vatican camp, or for which lying is not even morally wrong anyway , if they were from the other (authoritarian - government) camp. If you don't believe it is possible for hoaxes to be perpetrated by authoritarian government funded "science", then I suggest you look into the way the Great Pyramid was supposedly "dated" to the time of the Pharoahs. A good start in this direction would be to read about it Zecharia Sitchin's book "Stairway to Heaven" where the role corresponding to Tite in this particular affair, was played by a fellow named Vyse in that episode. Vyse, Tite... interesting juxtposition of names for "henchmen", come to think of it. Then of course, we have the Piltdown Affair. Jim Ostrowski wrote: The original procedure called for blindness on the part of the carbon dating labs as to which sample was from what artifact: "After announcing in the "protocol letter" published by Nature, <>, Tite summons Professors Damon and Donohue from Tucson, Hall and Hedges from Oxford, and Wolfli from Zurich to be present at the sample taking... and to see what should have been hidden from them!" (source: http://www.iea.com/~bradh/shroud/shroud_testhoax.htm ) The reason for this requirement is obvious. If it was not followed, then what was agreed on was not performed, therefore the test result is invalid, legally. Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{If the Church of Rome had been really serious about not letting the researchers know which samples were which, then they should have proceeded differently. JO: Then the question becomes what interest Church could possibly have had in allowing the test to be performed in the first place, if they were so dead set on perpetuating a supposed myth. There is an overwhelming case for authenticity, both historically and scientifically, if one merely discards the c-14 result. If you have a mountain of facts arguing one way, against the certainty of the machines, but uncertainty of the personalities and motivation of parties involved arguing the other way, real science would not just accept the conclusion promoted by THE BRITISH MUSEUM and the "Nature" publication, which is not even a peer reviewed journal. Mitchell Jones wrote: When they announced with great fanfare that samples from the shroud were to be dated, and named the labs that had been selected to do it, the researchers at those labs naturally began to familiarize themselves with the issue. Since there were many books floating around that contained photos of shroud material under magnification, with commentary about the distinctive pattern of the weave, it was a foregone conclusion from the moment the public announcement was made that a blind study would be unobtainable. JO: True, and then you do not have a truly scientific protocol capable of settling the issue once and for all time. The fact that these issues _can_ be raised with documentation regarding sizes and weights shows that the procedure should have been rejected by the Church, which was just too trusting in letting them get away with taking any sized bite out of what it claims to be sacred relic, and handing it over to secular authoritarians, in the name of "science". But once the camel get's it's nose under the tent, there goes the whole tent. In any event the weights of the selected samples just don't add up. Here are the points to be refuted, and if you can, please do so and put the entire issue to rest: .. the Holy Shroud sample. It is in two pieces. The large piece weighs 40 mg; the small piece 14 mg. Damon and Donahue are going to keep the small piece secret, and place the big piece in the tube marked "A3 " after having previously taken from this tube n=B0 3 the sample officially labeled <> In reality: Linen from the Beck collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum (14th-15th century, weight: 53.7 mg), which is going to take its place in the tube marked "A1". Unfortunately for the hoaxers, this nocturnal transformation from 40 mg to 50 and even 53 mg is inexplicable... ...To think that we reconstituted the whole of this crime six years ago, published it and everyone learned of it. Yet nowhere has there been heard an echo of this, in any book or article, journal or review. = (and) In our Appeal to the "twenty-one" co-authors of the report on the carbon 14 dating of the Holy Shroud, published in the CRC n=B0 260 (January 1990, p. 23-26) [3], we put two questions. The first concerned <>: <> (Bruno Bonnet-Eymard) Mitchell Jones, continued: And that was good, in my view: given the number of labs and lab personnel involved, and the fact that many of them were devout Catholics, it rendered a switch of the samples utterly impossible. For example, "Professor Damon's chief technician at Arizona, Professor Douglas Donahue, is a devout Catholic who reportedly paled visibly on becoming the first man to learn the Shroud's dating to the Middle Ages, as this was being printed out on the Arizona laboratory's computer." [*The Blood an= d the Shroud*, pg. 11] Bottom line: the fact that a switch of the samples was impossible does *not* prove that a switch occurred. :-) --MJ}*** JO: That a switch of the samples was "impossible" just has not been demonstrated. Donahue's reaction may just reflect incredulity that he may have been swindled by nothing more than a con man's sleight of hand at the sample taking. The fact is that this whole process of separating samples, depositing and transporting them in supposedly sealed tubes, then distributing them all over the place, is very reminiscent of a con artist shell game does not prove that a switch did NOT occur. :-) Jim Ostrowski  From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 23:51:34 1999 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA31107; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 23:46:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 23:46:42 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <386D8AF8.43D5 ca-ois.com> References: <19991229063115.6682.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2000 01:42:49 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Turin Shroud Image Formation Process Resent-Message-ID: <"9A1on.0.zb7.Y3RRu" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32620 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Jim Ostrowski wrote: > [snip] > > In any event the weights of the selected samples just don't add > up. Here are the points to be refuted, and if you can, please do > so and put the entire issue to rest: > > .. the Holy Shroud sample. It > is in two pieces. The large piece weighs 40 mg; the small piece > 14 mg. Damon and Donahue are going to keep the small piece secret, > and place the big piece in the tube marked "A3 " after having > previously taken from this tube n=B0 3 the sample officially > labeled < the British Museum, associated with a mummy of Cleopatra dating > from the beginning of the 2nd century AD, originating from Thebes > (EA 6707).>> In reality: Linen from the Beck collection of the > Victoria and Albert Museum (14th-15th century, weight: 53.7 mg), > which is going to take its place in the tube marked "A1". > Unfortunately for the hoaxers, this nocturnal transformation from > 40 mg to 50 and even 53 mg is inexplicable... ***{Turin microanalyst Giovanni Rigi performed the actual cutting of the shroud. He removed a five-sided piece that was roughly 8 cm by 1.2 cm, which was roughly twice the amount needed to meet the lab's sample size requirements, and he photographed the piece that he removed. He then cut off what he intended to be a 50 mg sample for each of the three labs, but guessed wrong with the first sample cut, and only obtained 40 mg. He then cut two more samples, making them enough larger to hit the 50 mg target. Finally, he cut one more thin section, intended to bring the 40 mg sample up to the 50 mg minimum. This final piece turned out to weigh about 14 mg. Thus the 40 mg and 14 mg samples went into the vial that was handed to the representative of the Arizona lab, and the 50 mg pieces went to Oxford and Zurich. As soon as the various lab representatives got home, they photographed their samples. This was done because the radiocarbon dating technique would destroy them. Here is what happened to those photos: (1) Arizona: the 40 mg piece was photographed, but only a small portion of that photo turned out to be legible. (2) The sample that went to Zurich was photographed from the back side of the cloth, and thus did not show the distinctive herringbone weave. [There were two sides, so the likelihood that the technician would select the "wrong" side was 50%, assuming that he lacked the ability to foresee the controversy that arose later.] (3) The Oxford sample was photographed from the front, and did show the distinctive herringbone weave. In addition, by a lucky coincidence, this piece had a distinctive wrinkle across the weave, which permitted it to be matched *exactly* back to the original 8 cm by 1.2 cm piece from which the samples were cut. The arguments cited by you, above, rely on the fact that the Arizona sample was in two pieces, and that the photo did not turn out, and on that basis allege a conspiracy. Unfortunately for the authors of those arguments, the Oxford sample was in one piece, the photo *did* turn out, and, even better, it matches back perfectly to the photo of the strip from which it was cut. Since the date obtained at Oxford showed excellent agreement with the dates obtained by Arizona and by Zurich, the explanation which best fits the facts is the one given by those who actually cut the samples: the Arizona sample was in two pieces because, until a piece had been cut out and weighed, nobody knew what size piece would weigh the agreed-to 50 mg. Thus the first piece cut was too small. See how simple that was? Of course, if you want to toss out the Arizona and Zurich samples, go ahead. The Oxford sample can be matched back perfectly to the shroud, by photographic evidence, and it dated to the 14 century, just like the other two samples. For the details, and the photos, see *The Blood and the Shroud*, by Ian Wilson, pg.185-189.] --MJ}*** > > ...To think that we reconstituted the whole of this crime six > years ago, published it and everyone learned of it. Yet nowhere > has there been heard an echo of this, in any book or article, > journal or review. = > > (and) > > In our Appeal to the "twenty-one" co-authors of the report on the > carbon 14 dating of the Holy Shroud, published in the CRC n=B0 260 > (January 1990, p. 23-26) [3], we put two questions. The first > concerned < substituted>>: < precise, and your answer will be decisive. Either your report is > erroneous: the sample n=B0 1 you dated did not come from a strip > of 70 x 10 mm, and you must draw attention to the error. Or else > your report is correct, in which case the 70 x 10 mm strip > analyzed by you did not belong to the Holy Shroud, -- you were > certainly the victim of a sample substitution, and your report > wrongfully concludes that < mediaeval>> > >(Bruno Bonnet-Eymard) ***{These arguments remind me of the "reasoning" employed by self-styled "Holocaust revisionists" in an attempt to prove that the Holocaust never happened. What they do, in essence, is analyze each piece of Holocaust evidence until they find some discrepancy, however small, and then toss the evidence out in its entirety. If, for example, a survivor of Treblinka gives thousands of pages of detailed testimony concerning what went on there, they will search through that testimony until they find an error, and then toss out *everything* the man said. Since no lengthy statement about anything complicated is ever going to be without flaws, they are enabled by this procedure to toss out *all* damning evidence about the Holocaust. And here, concerning the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin, we see this very same type of rationale at work: the Arizona sample was in two pieces, not one, and the photo of the larger of the two pieces did not turn out. Therefore, say the critics, let's toss *all* of the evidence out, including the evidence from the Oxford sample, to which the alleged flaw did not apply! Well, I don't buy it: nothing forces us to toss *all* the evidence out. We can use reason to decide which of the facts to believe and which to disbelieve. Result: despite the fact that the Arizona photo didn't turn out, and despite the fact that the Zurich photo was of the wrong side of the cloth, the Oxford sample is smoking gun proof that the shroud dates to the 14 century. Anyway, that's enough for me. I have no further interest in this topic, so it is time for us to agree to disagree. If you want to know more about it, I suggest you obtain Ian Wilson's book. --Mitchell Jones}*** [snip] > >Jim Ostrowski