From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 1 12:36:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA19788 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:45:46 -0800 Received: from escape.com (escape.com [198.6.71.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA19741 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:45:40 -0800 Received: (from chope localhost) by escape.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id NAA11576; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 13:47:02 -0500 Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 13:47:02 -0500 (EST) From: Charles Hope To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wonderful example (was electron clusters) In-Reply-To: <9510261148.AA01873 sun18.aic.nrl.navy.mil> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 26 Oct 1995 hartley aic.nrl.navy.mil wrote: > > > I have a wonderful > > example of a problem in classical mechanics which is difficult if > > approached from a nonintellectual, plug-and-chug mindset. It caused me > > great grief and months of thought. > > Surely you're not going to leave us hanging like that, are you? > What is the problem? > > Ralph Hartley > hartley aic.nrl.navy.mil > Consider that we have a wire anchored at the origin and extending infinitely. The wire is frictionless and on it is a smooth bead. I don't recall whether the bead is given an initial velocity away from the origin, so consider it as having some. Since force is defined as mass * acceleration, and the any point on the wire, namely, the point in contact with the bead, only accelerates radially inward, how can the wire affect the bead at all? Since the bead and wire are frictionless, the wire cannot impose a radial force on the bead. And yet it can be simply proven that the wire does affect the bead. Consider the bead trajectory in absence of the bead: a straight line from near the origin to infinitely far away. This path is impossible if the bead is constrained to a wire. What's my problem? Charles From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 1 12:44:20 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA22800 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 12:44:09 -0800 Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA22726 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 12:43:59 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzoac11136; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:43:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA19901; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 11:47:41 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400GA) id 384946110095305FEPRI; 01 Nov 1995 11:46:11 PST Message-Id: Date: 01 Nov 1995 11:46:11 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: Assistance for Fabricating Patterson Beads... To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/01/95 11:46:48 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Assistance for Fabricating Patterson Beads... - After originally having some suspicious feelings about the Patterson device, and the circumventiveness of some of the principles with regard to obtaining samples of the beads for testing, I have begun to understand their reticence to hand out samples! - It's simple---A. You don't just order these things from Edmund, B. If you try to make them you better be a pretty good chemist/electrochemist. - So here's what I need to do: Obtain some .8mm polystyrene beads. (Simple) Sensitize surface with polysulfonic acid (more difficult). Plate with electrolysis nickel. (Even higher up the difficulty ladder!) Plate with Pd (probably through local commercial plater, vibrating or suspending during plating the trick to assure uniform plating. Last, flash plate with Ni. ( Also difficult.) - Object here to VERIFY Clean Energy Tech's results. And, maybe, to play with scale up. Please NOTE: CETI has the Patents on all these concepts/processes, etc. Any commercial application would owe them much royalties, and properly so. - CETI is seeking to license the technology for a considerable sum and that is quite appropriate. However, despite some aspects of their 1 cc, 5 watt producing (heatwise) ...., .05 watt electrical input demo, I can still see where their are problems in obtaining full "conviction" from the $$$ people that what they are seeing is real. I'm beginning to feel that one method of making a "convincing" demonstration is to have an output temp above 98.6 degrees F. so that the warmth can be felt by hand, and an input power co-demonstration which can show individuals that they CANNOT feel any warmth from a .05 watt source. - But I digress! NEEDED: Good electro-chemist, plating expert, willing to tinker for a couple months. MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 1 12:45:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA12583 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:22:35 -0800 Received: from receptor.ibg.uu.se (receptor.ibg.uu.se [130.238.36.157]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA12543 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:22:26 -0800 Received: from synapse.ibg.uu.se by receptor.ibg.uu.se via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO) id TAA23679; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 19:24:00 +0100 Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 19:23:58 +0100 (MET) From: David Jonsson X-Sender: david synapse.ibg.uu.se To: vortex cc: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: MagnetoGravitics, Monstein (Was: Does this make sense?) In-Reply-To: <951101144119_100433.1541_BHG61-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 1 Nov 1995, Chris Tinsley wrote: > To:vortex > > Or, is it relevant anyway? This was picked up off the 'net, but I don't know > from where. If it's sane or relevant, I could trace it. I'm only passing it > on because it sort of feels like it might connect somewhere. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > The Mechanism of MagnetoGravitics > > It has been known for a long period of time that rotating masses > create magnetic fields (See the Blackett Effect). This effect is This is highly relevant. You can come to the same conclusion if you assume that the centrifugal forces cause the electrons or the nucleii to dislocate differently. Then a radially electric field is produced. And as we all know a rotating electric field causes a magnetic field. Maybe someone involved in Solid State Physics can answer how the nucleii and electrons respond to forces. It would be very interesting to know in which direcion the field is oriented and if it is different for different materials. BTW Can it be related to the Monstein effect? It says that magnetic materials rotates easier in one direction than the other. (If spun up to a specific rpm value it will take different times to slow down to a lower value depending on orientation of the rotation.) David David Jonsson Voice +46-18-24 51 52 Fax +46-18-10 37 37 P.O Box 353 david ibg.uu.se Cellular Phone (GSM) +46-70-721 25 19 S-751 06 UPPSALA Postgiro 499 40 54-7 Web: http://www.ibg.uu.se/~david/ SWEDEN ++++ Acceleration/gravity is electromag: see web above ++++ From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 1 12:52:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA16264 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:35:13 -0800 Received: from receptor.ibg.uu.se (receptor.ibg.uu.se [130.238.36.157]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA16227 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:35:05 -0800 Received: from synapse.ibg.uu.se by receptor.ibg.uu.se via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO) for id TAA23700; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 19:36:36 +0100 Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 19:36:36 +0100 (MET) From: David Jonsson X-Sender: david synapse.ibg.uu.se To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vortex-l: Inertia is electromagnetical? In-Reply-To: <199510311816.MAA07275 matrix.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Maybe this is of interest to you. It is of interest to me. Be sure you use a monospaced font when you view this or you wont comprehend much. David -----------Included file---------- Hello Take a look at the following fact. I show how the inertial properties of the electron can be explained by elecromagnetics. If the principle of equivalence is taken into consideration then one can start to wonder what gravity is. I like to hear comments. For PostScript and WordPerfectversions plus assiciated documents take a look at http://www.ibg.uu.se/elektromagnum/ David Jonsson ---begin of documnet--- The inertia of the electron as an electromagnetic effect by David Jonsson, Uppsala , Sweden Take a look at the equation for the magnetic flux around a moving electron in the nonrelativistic case, the simple Biot-Savarts law _ _ _ mu0 e v x r B = ----- . ----- (1) 4 Pi 3 r The energy-density of this field is according to eq. (2) _ 2 B _2 _ _ u = ----- (B = B * B) (2) 2 mu0 In order to calculate the magnetic energy of the moving electron we insert (1) into (2) to get (3) 2 2 2 mu0 e v sin (theta) u = ------ . ------------- (3) 2 4 32 Pi r Lets integrate eq. (3) outside the electron to find out the entire energy of its magnetic field. 2 2 mu0 e v U = ------ . -- (4) r 12 Pi e Lets install the classical electron radius re, 2 2 e mu0 e r = ------------------- = -------- (5) e 2 4 Pi m 4 Pi epsilon0 c m e e in (4) to get 2 m v e U= ------- 3 This reminds very much of the equation of the kinetic energy of the electron. Only 1/6 of the kinetic energy is missing but remember that I haven't included the field inside the electron in the calculus. Can it be so simple that the inertia of the electron is due to Lenz' law only? David Jonsson Voice +46-18-24 51 52 Fax +46-18-10 37 37 P.O Box 353 david ibg.uu.se Cellular Phone (GSM) +46-70-721 25 19 S-751 06 UPPSALA Postgiro 499 40 54-7 Web: http://www.ibg.uu.se/~david/ SWEDEN ++++ Acceleration/gravity is electromag: see web above ++++ From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 1 15:10:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA03472 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:10:49 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA03439 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:10:41 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.69]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA00527 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:26:28 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 14:11:26 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Assistance for Fabricating Patterson Beads... Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Assistance for Fabricating Patterson Beads... >-[snip] >Object here to VERIFY Clean Energy Tech's results. And, maybe, to play with >scale up. Please NOTE: CETI has the Patents on all these concepts/processes, >etc. Any commercial application would owe them much royalties, and properly >so. >- >CETI is seeking to license the technology for a considerable sum and that >is quite appropriate. [snip] If you are going to use US patented technology for experimental purposes it is important to send $1 to the address noted on the patent and a letter stating you are going to use it for such purposes. Unless there have been some recent changes, I believe that is all that is required. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 1 15:19:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA05956 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:19:21 -0800 Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA05940 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:19:18 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA21099 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 18:18:02 -0500 Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 18:18:02 -0500 Message-ID: <951101181759_10077835 emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Kentucky Fried Chicken, funny motors. Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, With regard to the Takahashi device, go for it! The press on it has been so unequivocal and so beyond what one would expect that it would appear that it provides the opportunity for a binary output: nonsense, or it's for real. With regrd to what is described it doesn't look like there's any possibility of an ambiguous interpretation if it's demonstrated. (Perhaps I underestimate the level of scam that could be involved?) Hal Puthoff P.S. If it's From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 1 19:02:53 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA11700 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 19:02:39 -0800 Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA11687 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 19:02:36 -0800 Received: from 204.111.1.84 (eb1ppp20.shentel.net [204.111.1.84]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id WAA10459 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 22:03:56 -0500 Message-Id: <199511020303.WAA10459 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 02 Nov 95 08:29:00 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: CO2 Enhanced Cavitation? To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <951101120932_102021.3045_EHT34-1 CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 01 Nov 95, Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> wrote: >Yesterday, I thought maybe electron bombardment of a can of beer which is fairly >saturated with CO2 might prove to be of interest. Did you happen to see the movie "Young Einstein" ? _____________(.)(.)________________________________________ The answer is only important if you ask the right question! From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 00:58:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA00697 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:02:37 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA00645 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:02:26 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA05457; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 18:00:30 -0500 Date: 01 Nov 95 17:58:56 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: Three phase? Message-ID: <951101225856_100433.1541_BHG49-3 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex I have now heard from St Petersburg that the tests will be run on Saturday, with the assistance of an engineer from Moscow who has some familiarity with the Yusmar. My friend Dr Onoochin is clearly doing everything he can to hurry things along, and I'm grateful to him. However, I am not exactly delighted with the Polsunov Institute, who seem to be very slow. For example, they have now fitted the pump with a *three phase* motor, which is unfortunate. At 230V there is no problem with finding a single phase motor of appropriate power, and I made the following comments as part of my reply to Dr Onoochin: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. That power meter is extremely accurate, tested and with a list of its errors. 2. It is designed to measure three-phase power. It is true that such measurements are limited in accuracy, because it assumes that all three phase lines are delivering the same power. But it will do quite a good job, by measuring current on one line and voltage on the other two. 3. It is not possible with that meter to measure energy. It was supplied only to check a disc-type energy meter by measuring power at one moment. It will therefore test a three-phase energy meter perfectly, since it will measure instantaneous power on each line. 4. I did ask them to use a single phase motor, but not because of my meter. That was because it is always more difficult to measure three-phase power. I know that single-phase motors of the size required are in common use, so you will understand that I find it strange that they should be suffering this additional delay. I do thank you very much for all the efforts you have made with all this, and with your kindness to me when I came to St Petersburg. I still hope that Saturday's tests will be successful, and that I will be able to visit you again soon. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 01:05:03 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA29972 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 11:20:27 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA29920 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 11:20:19 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA00011 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 11:36:02 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:21:04 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spin/genesis Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > -> PUTHOFF AOL.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > -> FRANK ZNIDARSIC > In my last posting I stated that, "Angular Momentum must be supplied for > Genesis to occur." > In review. This conclusion was based on the following assumptions. > 1. The total energy of matter is zero. The positive energy of matter > is balanced by a negative amount of energy in its gravitational > field. > 2. The spin of a graviton and the spin of a photon are not equal. > > > The total amount of angular momentum in the > universe is conserved. I believe the universe contains a net amount of > angular momentum = h. That does not mean the the universe does [snip] > I am quite alone in my thinking about the process of genesis. > Any comment, even a good slam, would be most helpful. > > Frank Znidarsic Hello, I am new to this group, and should lurk a while, but I can't resist this opportunity to have the fun of questioning the assumption that angular momentum is conserved, and, as an aside, voice my frustration with toy and science kit manufacturers that they haven't noticed that a good battery powered gyroscope would be a wonderful thing for kids, especially with a set of detachable gimbals. What I am offering is definitely not a slam, and may be erroneous, but hopefully will be thought provoking and therefore helpful. If you have ever played with a gyroscope, you are first amazed at how much resistance to torque a good gyro has. However, if you play with a gyro on gimbals, it is amazing that, if the gimbals are freewheeling, a small touch can flip a gyro over. The resistance to rotation of the poles (axis) of a gyro is present only if rotation of the axis in a direction perpendicular to the applied torque is suppressed. If precession is freewheeling it takes almost no torque or energy to flip the gyro over 180 deg. However, this fact seems to preclude conservation of angular momentum. If a gyro has angular velocity w it will have angular momentum kw and kinetic energy .5kw^2. If a gyro flips over, it's momentum becomes -kw, so there is a change of momentum of 2kw. Now for the thought experiment. Imagine a platform in space with two pairs of gyros, each pair of gyros can be connected with a clutch and motor system when coaxial. Both pairs start out coaxiallly with the clutch/motor engaged. The motors apply identical but opposite torque to each gyro of a pair and bring them up to speed w and -w, for a net angular momentum of zero. The input energy to do this is kw^2 for each pair, or a total of 2kw^2 for the platform. Call the 2 gyros with angular momemntum w "top" gyros, the other gyro of each pair is then a "bottom" gyro. Now to the top gyros we apply equal but opposite torque to the spin axis causing a freewheeling flip of 180 deg. Note that there is no appreciable energy spent doing this because the gyro axis does not move in the direction the torque is applied, but purpendicular to it. The top gyros are therefore converted to bottom gyros with no appreciable expenditure of energy. The net angular momentum associated with the platform is no longer zero, but now -4kw. We converted 2kw^2 potential energy into -4kw angular momentum. Now we have two pairs of gyros spinning in unison, each gyro of a pair now being coaxial and spinning at the same rate. We engage the clutch and turn on the motor and again spend 2kw^2 energy to impart momentum change kw and -kw to the gyro's of both pairs. This will leave two gyros with momentum and knetic energy zero, and two gyros each with momentum -2kw and kinetic energy .5k(2w)^2=2kw^2, giving for the platform a total resulting angular momentum -4kw and kinetic energy 4kw^2. Our total expenditure of energy to do this was 4kw^2. We just spent a bunch of energy for no additional total angular momentum. Not much in the way of conservation. This implies you can convert energy into net angular momentum of the universe, but the form it is in determines how much you get for the energy expended. Note that the platform itself has remained stationary throughout this process due to continually balanced forces, none of which are applied to the platform. So now comes the question of how to recover the 4kw^2 of kinetic energy without disrupting the platform. One way to do this is to utilize another platform which is put through the same process in mirror image. Now the motions of the gyros moving at 2w and -2w can simultaneously be linked to the platform by generators to convert the kinetic energy into electrical energy to charge a battery, etc. This implies the process is reversable, except for entropy. Total energy appears to be conserved. It also implies energy can be extracted from changing the angular momentum of the universe. So, where is the problem? Why is angular momentum not conserved in this example? If it can be shown angular momentum is not conserved, can you get free energy from a local system, like a vortex? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 01:50:39 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA04545 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 01:50:38 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA04532 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 01:50:35 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA18737; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 04:49:18 -0500 Date: 02 Nov 95 04:46:23 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: Takahashi motor Message-ID: <951102094622_100433.1541_BHG113-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Hal, You say this Takahashi motor has had solid press coverage? What has been said about and by whom? It's not a joke? I agree that there is no grey area in this case - unless the statement of the London representative (that it runs indefinitely without batteries) is some error on his part. Either is is 'nonsense' (there are other words) or real, I do agree. And I am interested to find out if it has one of these 'snail cam' rotors that most of the patented-as-over-unity motors seem to have. That is, I'm interested in that because it would help get a handle on whether there is any anomalous behaviour in such motors. My own view is that in the very unlikely event that I see something clearly anomalous - but could I ever be certain? - I would encourage Takahashi to supply small versions to - ah - 'certain scientists of our acquaintance', so that further more rigorous evaluations be made possible. You know, if the thing (assuming I actually do get to see it, that the whole thing doesn't vanish in a puff of hot air and excuses) has *anywhere* that an energy source could be hidden I shall be more than suspicious. Chris /ex From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 05:02:32 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA00768 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 05:02:16 -0800 Received: from matrix.eden.com (root matrix.eden.com [199.171.21.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA00755; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 05:02:13 -0800 Received: from net-1-188.austin.eden.com (net-1-188.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.188]) by matrix.eden.com (8.6.12/8.6.12.1) with SMTP id HAA17229; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 07:02:09 -0600 Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 07:02:09 -0600 Message-Id: <199511021302.HAA17229 matrix.eden.com> X-Sender: little eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: Three phase? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:58 PM 11/1/95 EST, Chris wrote: >For example, they have >now fitted the pump with a *three phase* motor, which is unfortunate. A 3-phase watthour meter, Chris, does measure the power in all three legs so if they base their conclusions on such a meter, everything will be cool. I used a 3-phase motor and 3-phase watthour meter in my tests. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 06:06:14 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA13842 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 06:06:13 -0800 Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA13764 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 06:05:57 -0800 Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tB0JA-000MNhC; Thu, 2 Nov 95 16:07 EET Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 16:07:55 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: ZPE Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends, I was very pleased to see in one of my favorite magazines,"The Sciences", November-December 1995 p48 an answer of our colleague Dr. H. E. Puthoff (together with his co-authors of the paper "Beyond E=mcc") to some readers. A very fine answer. He mentions that there are "several ways of creating inhomogeneities or anisotropies in the zero-point field". Hal, two kinds of loci with quantum confinement, the catalytic centers and the cavitation bubbles seem to be such 'magic places' which make the capture of profound energy possible. Your opinion? Thank you in advance, Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 06:06:16 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA13798 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 06:06:04 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA13776 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 06:06:00 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA06879 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Thu, 2 Nov 1995 09:05:51 -0500 Message-Id: <199511021405.AA06879 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 2 Nov 1995 09:05:51 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Takahashi moto Date: Thu, 02 Nov 95 09:05:12 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Subject: Takahashi motor Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com To:vortex I'm having a hard time believing that any electrical motor is capable of producing extra energy. That's because I believe that extra energy can come from one of two sources. aid 1. Fusion. What can a simple electromagnetic field fuse? Nothing that I know about. Of course we can invent hypothetical particles that arrive from space. These particles fuse and then vanish back into he space. J. Newman came up with a theory like this and his motor soon stopped after the batteries went dead. Many questioned, why do you , I need the batteries? I question that to. m' 2. The genesis process. As I explained before, this process requires s, extra angular momentum. To supply an amount of angular momentum equal is to h an electron must move at near light speeds. The ground state momentum of the hydrogen atom = h. To quire this much momentum the electron must move at a velocity of c/137 at a radius of .5 ang units. A shaft would have to spin real fast to supply this much momentum. I don't believe it. I do believe, however, that a plasma can supply o the needed angular momentum by the way of its natural vibrations. Horrace. Angular momentum is always conserved. When a gyroscope is wound e up the earth (or whatever) is spun up the opposite direction. Don't forgotten about the reaction to the original force. Did you enjoy my tape? Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 06:21:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA17356 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 06:21:18 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA17316 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 06:21:11 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA21350; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 09:19:55 -0500 Date: 02 Nov 95 09:18:50 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: Re: Three phase? Message-ID: <951102141849_100060.173_JHB113-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, >> everything will be cool << I hope not!!! Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 07:05:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA23362 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 06:43:20 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA23303 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 06:43:12 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA00320; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 09:41:50 -0500 Date: 02 Nov 95 09:21:03 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: Three-phase Message-ID: <951102142103_100433.1541_BHG60-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Scott, Yes, I do realise that 3-phase is very measureable. It just seeems to me to be introducing an unnecessary complication - knowing that Polsunov do not always have very good lab equipment. That was the idea of my giving them a meter to cross-refer to. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 10:04:47 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA00284 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:04:14 -0800 Received: from mail06.mail.aol.com (mail06.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.108]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA00259 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:04:10 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA29346 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:02:51 -0500 Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:02:51 -0500 Message-ID: <951102130249_10776887 mail06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ZPE Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Peter says >Dear Friends, I was very pleased to see in one of my favorite magazines,"The Sciences", November-December 1995 p48 an answer of our colleague Dr. H. E. Puthoff (together with his co-authors of the paper "Beyond E=mcc") to some readers. A very fine answer. He mentions that there are "several ways of creating inhomogeneities or anisotropies in the zero-point field". etc.> Without a doubt bubbles do provide the right environment to generate usable differences in the ZPE spatial distribution, as Schwinger has emphasized in his series of papers in Proc. Nat'l Acad. Sci. (Casimir model for sonoluminescence). With regard to catalytic centers I must admit I don't understand the microstructure well enough to know whether this provides an additional candidate for ZPE energy extraction. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 10:50:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA10846 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:50:34 -0800 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA10836 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:50:31 -0800 Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA14080; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:49:15 -0500 Date: 02 Nov 95 13:48:11 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: O-U Effects in Bubble Chambers? Message-ID: <951102184810_102021.3045_EHT56-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: About every liquid from hydrogen to pentane is used in bubble chambers for particle detection. I'm wondering if the tracks in these and cloud chambers have any connection to metastable dumping of the molecules? F. J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 11:23:37 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA18662 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 11:23:22 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA18637 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 11:23:16 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.72] ([204.57.193.72]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA02985 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 11:39:30 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:24:07 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spin/genesis Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Horrace. Angular momentum is always conserved. When a gyroscope is wound e >up the earth (or whatever) is spun up the opposite direction. Don't forgotten >about the reaction to the original force. Did you enjoy my tape? > >Frank Znidarsic I have not yet received the tape. If it goes by barge it will take 2 weeks to get here! That's life on the frontier for 'ya. Thanks much for sending it! I think you missed the fact that in the gedanken the initial spin of pairs of gyroscopes is acquired by counter-rotating them. The events are on a platform in space, the earth is not involved at all. No spin is imparted to the platform by any operation because every operation noted below occurs in symmetry. In case you delete your mail like I usally do, I have requoted below and marked the relevant places. > >If you have ever played with a gyroscope, you are first amazed at how much >resistance to torque a good gyro has. However, if you play with a gyro on >gimbals, it is amazing that, if the gimbals are freewheeling, a small touch >can flip a gyro over. The resistance to rotation of the poles (axis) of a >gyro is present only if rotation of the axis in a direction perpendicular >to the applied torque is suppressed. If precession is freewheeling it >takes almost no torque or energy to flip the gyro over 180 deg. However, >this fact seems to preclude conservation of angular momentum. > >If a gyro has angular velocity w it will have angular momentum kw and >kinetic energy .5kw^2. If a gyro flips over, it's momentum becomes -kw, so >there is a change of momentum of 2kw. Now for the thought experiment. > >Imagine a platform in space with two pairs of gyros, each pair of gyros can ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >be connected with a clutch and motor system when coaxial. Both pairs start >out coaxiallly with the clutch/motor engaged. The motors apply identical ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >but opposite torque to each gyro of a pair and bring them up to speed w and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >-w, for a net angular momentum of zero. The input energy to do this is >kw^2 for each pair, or a total of 2kw^2 for the platform. Call the 2 gyros >with angular momemntum w "top" gyros, the other gyro of each pair is then a >"bottom" gyro. Now to the top gyros we apply equal but opposite torque to >the spin axis causing a freewheeling flip of 180 deg. Note that there is no >appreciable energy spent doing this because the gyro axis does not move in >the direction the torque is applied, but purpendicular to it. The top >gyros are therefore converted to bottom gyros with no appreciable >expenditure of energy. The net angular momentum associated with the >platform is no longer zero, but now -4kw. We converted 2kw^2 potential >energy into -4kw angular momentum. > >Now we have two pairs of gyros spinning in unison, each gyro of a pair now >being coaxial and spinning at the same rate. We engage the clutch and turn >on the motor and again spend 2kw^2 energy to impart momentum change kw and >-kw to the gyro's of both pairs. This will leave two gyros with momentum >and knetic energy zero, and two gyros each with momentum -2kw and kinetic >energy .5k(2w)^2=2kw^2, giving for the platform a total resulting angular >momentum -4kw and kinetic energy 4kw^2. Our total expenditure of energy to >do this was 4kw^2. We just spent a bunch of energy for no additional total >angular momentum. Not much in the way of conservation. This implies you >can convert energy into net angular momentum of the universe, but the form >it is in determines how much you get for the energy expended. Note that the >platform itself has remained stationary throughout this process due to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >continually balanced forces, none of which are applied to the platform. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >So now comes the question of how to recover the 4kw^2 of kinetic energy >without disrupting the platform. One way to do this is to utilize another >platform which is put through the same process in mirror image. Now the >motions of the gyros moving at 2w and -2w can simultaneously be linked to >the platform by generators to convert the kinetic energy into electrical >energy to charge a battery, etc. This implies the process is reversable, >except for entropy. Total energy appears to be conserved. It also implies >energy can be extracted from changing the angular momentum of the universe. > >So, where is the problem? Why is angular momentum not conserved in this >example? If it can be shown angular momentum is not conserved, can you get >free energy from a local system, like a vortex? > > Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 12:55:41 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA18151 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 12:55:22 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA18127 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 12:55:17 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA28409; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 15:54:00 -0500 Date: 02 Nov 95 15:51:52 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: O-U Effects in Bubble Chambers? Message-ID: <951102205152_102021.3045_EHT46-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In going over some of the early work(before science got bogged down with abstract theories) " P. von Lenard and M. Wolf, who found that ultra-violet light falling on a zinc plate could produce condensation in a steam jet attributed the effect,actually due to electrons thus liberated,to dust." " In 1890 R. von Helmholtz and F. Richarz attributed the condensation of a steam jet by a point discharge to the formation of ions, and in 1896 Richarz found that X-rays could produce condensation in the steam jet, without, however, pursuing the subject." " C.T.R. Wilson, later found that the ions formed from the action of ultra-violet light, rays from radioactive substances, and other agents that produce ions lead to the condensation effects." Any meat here for microcavitation phenomena and metastable dumping? Donald A. Glaser, reversed the cloud chamber effect by using the production of boiling in a superheated liquid by ionizing radiation. I'm gonna go pour a glass of beer and study the bubbles. I think that's where Donald Glaser got the idea. It got him a Nobel in physics in 1960. F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 13:00:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA19058 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:00:25 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA19013 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:00:07 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA08546 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Thu, 2 Nov 1995 15:59:53 -0500 Message-Id: <199511022059.AA08546 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 2 Nov 1995 15:59:53 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Genesis Date: Thu, 02 Nov 95 15:59:14 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 15:52:26 -0500 Return-Path: fznidarsic gpu.com Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by emin07.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA18635 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 15:51:02 -0500 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA11494 Thu, 2 Nov 1995 15:53:15 -0500 Thu, 2 Nov 1995 15:53:15 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC To: VORTEX-L AOL.COM Subject: genesis Date: Thu, 02 Nov 95 15:52:37 EST If the zero point energy of matter is extracted it must be replenished by some energy exchange mechanism. I propose that gravity is the energy exchange mechanism. I used Edward Tryon's model of the universe to show that the positive energy of the universe is balanced by a negative gravitational potential. Two days ago I called Edward Tryon at Hunter City College NY. I asked him what he thought about cold fusion. He gave me a number of reasons why the process could not be fusion. I agreed and told him I thought that the process was one of genesis similar to the process outlined in his classic (nature vol 246) 1973 paper "Is The Universe a Vacuum Fluctuation?" All of my ideas are based on Tryon's paper, talking with him was of great importance to me. He informed me that I had misapplied his model and the gravity was a very weak force. He informed me that his model only applies at the moment of creation when the universe was still very small and gravity was still very strong. He informed me that remote regions of the universe were to far away to effect local phenomena. There you have it! The author of the model that I base my ideas on tells me directly that I am wrong. I still believe that I am correct and now I beginning to appreciate the mountain of resistance that main stream science has against any genesis or ZPE energy process. Those of us who believe it are way out on a limb. I answer, true, gravity is a very weak force but its long range makes it a potent energy transfer mechanism. True, gravity travels at luminal velocities and the energy produced by its force x distance relationship with the rest of the universe is not immediately realized. In the end, however, energy is conserved, and the force x distance relationship of the field and the rest of the universe has an energy equivalent. In the mean time, until the field has had time to propagate to the far reaches of the universe, this negative energy is stored in the transient gravitomagnetic and induced gravitational fillds. These induced fields are produced by velocity and acceleration. The laws of physics are invariant with respect to size and location. No one believes this but me....Either the rest of the world is wrong and I am right...or perhaps...I just can't understand. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 13:22:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA25479 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:22:57 -0800 Received: from escape.com (escape.com [198.6.71.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA25466 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:22:54 -0800 Received: (from chope localhost) by escape.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id QAA00326; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 16:24:16 -0500 Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 16:24:15 -0500 (EST) From: Charles Hope To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spin/genesis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 2 Nov 1995, Horace Heffner wrote: > >Horrace. Angular momentum is always conserved. When a gyroscope is wound e > >up the earth (or whatever) is spun up the opposite direction. Don't forgotten > >about the reaction to the original force. Did you enjoy my tape? > > > >Frank Znidarsic > > > >If you have ever played with a gyroscope, you are first amazed at how much > >resistance to torque a good gyro has. However, if you play with a gyro on > >gimbals, it is amazing that, if the gimbals are freewheeling, a small touch > >can flip a gyro over. The resistance to rotation of the poles (axis) of a > >gyro is present only if rotation of the axis in a direction perpendicular > >to the applied torque is suppressed. If precession is freewheeling it > >takes almost no torque or energy to flip the gyro over 180 deg. However, > >this fact seems to preclude conservation of angular momentum. I don't know what you mean here. Let's assume that a gyro is spinning with angular momentum in the +z direction. The resistance to torques in the +-z directions is trivial and does not depend on the gyro's speed. The resistance to torques in the x and y directions is symmetrical (since the gyro is assumed to have symmetry around the z axis!) and certainly does increase due to the gyro's angular momentum. The torque required is more than that of the same body stationary, and cannot be discounted. Once you are able to really feel why the gyro imposes that strange resistance to rotation around axes perpendicular to the spin axis, and I mean understand this in terms of basic linear concepts of force and acceleration, confusion will disappear. The concepts of torque and angular momentum are one step removed, and in their cross-product relations are buried deep relationships which need to be brought out and studied. It is similar to the situation with energy. The concepts of work and energy are extremely powerful and generate results easily without requiring clear understanding. For understanding one needs to turn to the most basic concepts available, and in this case that means discarding torque and angular momentum and paying attention to force and linear acceleration. If you really want cheap and dirty answers, use the Lagrangian! But you won't understand a thing, and you certainly won't be able to convince yourself that anything is being unconserved! > > > Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 > Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 13:26:39 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA26090 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:26:39 -0800 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA26085 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:26:36 -0800 Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA23189; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 16:25:19 -0500 Date: 02 Nov 95 16:21:42 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: The good old days. Message-ID: <951102212142_100433.1541_BHG42-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Frederick, "...going over some of the early work (before science got bogged down with abstract theories)" You noticed! Ah, those old papers. I once saw an absolute lulu from J J Thomson, in which he trashed some chemists who'd claimed transmutation. Trouble is, what he found instead was even worse ... I asked around, but just got the usual foot-shuffling. There must be some real gold in those old dusty shelves. From before physics became fizzix. Frank, I shouldn't niggle, but your latest posting was *triple* spaced, and the blank lines were packed with space characters. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 13:42:00 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA01463 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:41:58 -0800 Received: from relay4.UU.NET (relay4.UU.NET [192.48.96.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA01426 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:41:53 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay4.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzody07166; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 16:41:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA13674; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 13:41:15 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400GA) id 972040130095306FEPRI; 02 Nov 1995 13:40:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 02 Nov 1995 13:40:13 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: The good old days. To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/02/95 13:40:18 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/02/95 13:34 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: The good old days. Chris T. --- I have a 1937 textbook on "Colloid Chemistry". It is a goldmine of forgotton info. Even has a formula for room temperature vulcanizing of rubber via electrochemistry! I agree, it is worth searching 1800 to 1950's lit., there are some gems out there. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 21:57:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA02054 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 21:56:10 -0800 Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA01920 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 21:55:41 -0800 Received: from dialup-a45.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a45.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.45]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7/8.7) with SMTP id QAA23346 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 16:53:15 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511030553.QAA23346 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 16:55:38 +0900 Subject: Re: vortex-l: Inertia is electromagnetical? Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear David Jonsson, on 1 Nov 95 at 19:36, you wrote: > Maybe this is of interest to you. It is of interest to me. > Be sure you use a monospaced font when you view this or you wont > comprehend much. > > David > > -----------Included file---------- > Hello > > Take a look at the following fact. I show how the inertial properties of > the electron can be explained by elecromagnetics. If the principle of > equivalence is taken into consideration then one can start to wonder what > gravity is. I like to hear comments. For PostScript and > WordPerfectversions plus assiciated documents take a look at > http://www.ibg.uu.se/elektromagnum/ > > > David Jonsson > > ---begin of documnet--- > > The inertia of the electron as an electromagnetic effect > > by David Jonsson, Uppsala , Sweden > > > Take a look at the equation for the magnetic flux around a moving electron > in the > nonrelativistic case, the simple Biot-Savarts law > > _ _ > _ mu0 e v x r > B = ----- . ----- (1) > 4 Pi 3 > r > > The energy-density of this field is according to eq. (2) > > _ 2 > B _2 _ _ > u = ----- (B = B * B) (2) > 2 mu0 > > > In order to calculate the magnetic energy of the moving electron we insert (1) > into (2) to get (3) > > 2 2 2 > mu0 e v sin (theta) > u = ------ . ------------- (3) > 2 4 > 32 Pi r > > > Lets integrate eq. (3) outside the electron to find out the entire energy of its > magnetic field. > > 2 2 > mu0 e v > U = ------ . -- (4) > r > 12 Pi e > > > Lets install the classical electron radius re, > > 2 2 > e mu0 e > r = ------------------- = -------- (5) > e 2 4 Pi m > 4 Pi epsilon0 c m e > e > > in (4) to get > > 2 > m v > e > U= ------- > 3 > > This reminds very much of the equation of the kinetic energy of the > electron. Only 1/6 of the kinetic energy is missing but remember that I > haven't included the field inside the electron in the calculus. Can it be > so simple that the inertia of the electron is due to Lenz' law only? > > > David Jonsson Voice +46-18-24 51 52 Fax +46-18-10 37 37 > P.O Box 353 david ibg.uu.se Cellular Phone (GSM) +46-70-721 25 19 > S-751 06 UPPSALA Postgiro 499 40 54-7 Web: http://www.ibg.uu.se/~david/ > SWEDEN ++++ Acceleration/gravity is electromag: see web above ++++ > > Try looking up the definition of classical electron radius. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 2 21:57:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA02116 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 21:56:23 -0800 Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA02000 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 21:55:58 -0800 Received: from dialup-a45.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a45.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.45]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7/8.7) with SMTP id QAA23396 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 16:53:25 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511030553.QAA23396 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 16:55:38 +0900 Subject: Re: Wonderful example (was electron clusters) Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Charles Hope, on 1 Nov 95 at 13:47, you wrote: > > > On Thu, 26 Oct 1995 hartley aic.nrl.navy.mil wrote: > > > > > > I have a wonderful > > > example of a problem in classical mechanics which is difficult if > > > approached from a nonintellectual, plug-and-chug mindset. It caused me > > > great grief and months of thought. > > > > Surely you're not going to leave us hanging like that, are you? > > What is the problem? > > > > Ralph Hartley > > hartley aic.nrl.navy.mil > > > > > Consider that we have a wire anchored at the origin and extending > infinitely. The wire is frictionless and on it is a smooth bead. I don't No such thing as a frictionless wire or bead either. > recall whether the bead is given an initial velocity away from the > origin, so consider it as having some. > > Since force is defined as mass * acceleration, and the any point on the > wire, namely, the point in contact with the bead, only accelerates > radially inward, how can the wire affect the bead at all? Since the bead If the _only_ acceleration is radially inward, then any change in velocity will be along the length of the wire, in which case the wire does not affect the bead. > and wire are frictionless, the wire cannot impose a radial force on the bead. Wrong see above. (I would point out here that no two objects actually ever "touch". They just get close enough that the repulsion force between them counterbalances any force trying to move them together. Thus when examined at a microscopic level, all friction is infact "frictionless" :-). What this really means, is that in the case of your "frictionless" bead and wire, what would normally be multiple tiny repulsion forces, are in fact combined into one single repulsion force between wire and bead acting on the bead when some external force tries to move it in any direction other then along the length of the wire.) > And yet it can be simply proven that the wire does affect the bead. > Consider the bead trajectory in absence of the bead: a straight line from > near the origin to infinitely far away. This path is impossible if the > bead is constrained to a wire. > > What's my problem? > > Charles > > > Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 3 03:27:11 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id DAA13138 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 03:26:43 -0800 Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA13057 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 03:26:09 -0800 Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tBKIS-000MNVC; Fri, 3 Nov 95 13:28 EET Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 13:28:32 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: paper on sonol.. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends, Hal: Thanks for the message; will try to get usable data for catalytic centers -quantum size & confinement effects for a follow up of the discussion. A new very interesting paper on the bubbles: ....... K. Weninger, R. Miller, B. P. Barber, D. Lcoste, S. J. Puttermann "Sonoluminescence from single bubbles in NON-AQUEOUS liquids: New parameter space for sonochemistry" Journal of Physical Chemistry 99:39 (SEP 28, 1995) pp 14195 - 7. I'll go tomorrow to see if this journal has arrived in the library of the Chemical Faculty..but anyway it's once again clear that the secret is cavitation not water, and catalysis not the catalyst. In one of my previous postings I made an error, the complex cathode of the Patterson Cell is only 156 times more efficient than the compact cathode of the McKubre Cell on the weight basis. The ratio of the geometrical surfaces is 13 to 1 but we have no data of the surface porosity of the microspheres; has somebody seen one at the microscope? Best wishes from Peter ! From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 3 05:22:20 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA03697 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 05:21:54 -0800 Received: from Sun0.AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil (sun0.aic.nrl.navy.mil [192.26.18.51]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA03678 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 05:21:50 -0800 From: hartley aic.nrl.navy.mil Received: from sun18.aic.nrl.navy.mil by Sun0.AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA26372; Fri, 3 Nov 95 08:21:47 EST Received: by sun18.aic.nrl.navy.mil; Fri, 3 Nov 95 08:21:46 EST Date: Fri, 3 Nov 95 08:21:46 EST Message-Id: <9511031321.AA28956 sun18.aic.nrl.navy.mil> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spin/genesis Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > No spin is imparted to the platform by any operation because every > operation noted below occurs in symmetry. This is not the case, although it may seem that way from your description. > The motors apply identical but opposite torque to each gyro of a pair > and bring them up to speed w and -w, for a net angular momentum of > zero. OK so far. > Now to the top gyros we apply equal but opposite torque to the spin > axis causing a freewheeling flip of 180 deg. This sounds symmetrical but is not. To flip a gyro the torque must be perpendicular to the axis. As the axis turns you have to change the torque vector to KEEP it perpendicular. The opposite torques cause one gyro to turn to the left, and one to turn to the right. When they have both turned 90 degrees (and are spinning in opposite directions) the two torques, initially 180 degrees apart, will be equal (parallel to the original spin axis). This will cause whatever you are standing on (or, failing that, your own body) to acquire an angular momentum equal and opposite to the change in the angular momentum in the gyros. > Note that there is no appreciable energy spent doing this because the > gyro axis does not move in the direction the torque is applied, but > perpendicular to it. True. And this explains the observation. > However, if you play with a gyro on gimbals, it is amazing that, if > the gimbals are freewheeling, a small touch can flip a gyro over. The > resistance to rotation of the poles (axis) of a gyro is present only > if rotation of the axis in a direction perpendicular to the applied > torque is suppressed. If precession is freewheeling it takes almost > no torque or energy to flip the gyro over 180 deg. Muscle uses energy and fatigues in proportion the the amount of work it does (oversimplification), not the force it generates. Thus even a fairly large force, if it does no work (leaning against a wall for example) seems like very little effort. It actually takes quite a bit of torque (integrated over time) but no energy. Exercise for reader: What if instead of flipping two "tops" you flipped one "top" and one "bottom"? Ralph Hartley hartley aic.nrl.navy.mil From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 3 21:20:49 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA02343 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 12:56:04 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA02253 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 12:55:52 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA28272; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 15:54:25 -0500 Date: 03 Nov 95 15:42:20 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: O-U Nucleate Boiling? Message-ID: <951103204219_102021.3045_EHT72-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If one took a strip of platinum or palladium 0.01 cm thick by 1 cm wide and 6 cm long and immersed it in water and ran a current sufficient to get up to 150 watts/cm^2, (aprox. 400 amps at 2.5 volts) would the bubbles formed by keeping the boiling in the nucleate range yield over unity heat? The nucleate range which lies between convection and film (Leidenfrost) boiling at 10^4 to 5 x 10^5 btu/ft^2 /hr should create the bubbles and mimic cavitation effects in water at it's boiling point at atmospheric pressure. The trick will be in getting sufficient "nucleation sites" in the heater strip by proper treatment. These tests need to be carried out in a sealed chamber, possibly with CO2 prepressurization. Any takers? F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 3 21:25:11 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA18054 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 09:26:13 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA17990 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 09:26:05 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA05759 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 09:42:32 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 08:26:47 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spin/genesis Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 16:24:15 -0500 (EST) >From: Charles Hope > >On Thu, 2 Nov 1995, Horace Heffner wrote: > >> >Horrace. Angular momentum is always conserved. When a gyroscope is wound e >> >up the earth (or whatever) is spun up the opposite direction. Don't >>forgotten >> >about the reaction to the original force. Did you enjoy my tape? >> > >> >Frank Znidarsic >> > >> >If you have ever played with a gyroscope, you are first amazed at how much >> >resistance to torque a good gyro has. However, if you play with a gyro on >> >gimbals, it is amazing that, if the gimbals are freewheeling, a small touch ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >can flip a gyro over. The resistance to rotation of the poles (axis) of a ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >gyro is present only if rotation of the axis in a direction perpendicular >> >to the applied torque is suppressed. If precession is freewheeling it >> >takes almost no torque or energy to flip the gyro over 180 deg. However, >> >this fact seems to preclude conservation of angular momentum. > >I don't know what you mean here. Let's assume that a gyro is spinning ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >with angular momentum in the +z direction. The resistance to torques in >the +-z directions is trivial and does not depend on the gyro's speed. >The resistance to torques in the x and y directions is symmetrical (since >the gyro is assumed to have symmetry around the z axis!) and certainly >does increase due to the gyro's angular momentum. The torque required is >more than that of the same body stationary, and cannot be discounted. > [snip] The assumed fact that a small touch can flip a gyro over is from personal experience of over 30 years ago. There were war surplus motorized gyros for sale for almost zero cost. When playing with these sometimes they would suddenly just flip over in the gimbals. When spinning in the z axis, if you applied a small force in say the x axis, a flip would occur in the y axis if the gyro was freewheeling in the y axis. I am not sure, but I think the wobble correcting nature of the bearings had something to do with the effect. I belive there is a name for this effect, but I don't recall what it is. There is even a hypothesis that the effect could, in certain circumstances, like a large meteor hit, cause the earth to flip poles. Maybe someone in the group knows about it. This effect certainly does not appear to conserve angular momentum, so I am now questioning my own memory. I guess I'll just have to build a gyro to find out for sure. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 3 21:28:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA22593 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 11:07:15 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA22529 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 11:07:07 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA06068 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 11:23:27 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 10:07:41 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spin/genesis Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> No spin is imparted to the platform by any operation because every >> operation noted below occurs in symmetry. > >This is not the case, although it may seem that way from your >description. > >> The motors apply identical but opposite torque to each gyro of a pair >> and bring them up to speed w and -w, for a net angular momentum of >> zero. > >OK so far. > >> Now to the top gyros we apply equal but opposite torque to the spin >> axis causing a freewheeling flip of 180 deg. > >This sounds symmetrical but is not. To flip a gyro the torque must be >perpendicular to the axis. As the axis turns you have to change the >torque vector to KEEP it perpendicular. The opposite torques cause >one gyro to turn to the left, and one to turn to the right. When they >have both turned 90 degrees (and are spinning in opposite directions) >the two torques, initially 180 degrees apart, will be equal (parallel >to the original spin axis). This will cause whatever you are standing >on (or, failing that, your own body) to acquire an angular momentum >equal and opposite to the change in the angular momentum in the gyros. Bingo! This is a nicely distilled explanation. > >> Note that there is no appreciable energy spent doing this because the >> gyro axis does not move in the direction the torque is applied, but >> perpendicular to it. > >True. And this explains the observation. > >> However, if you play with a gyro on gimbals, it is amazing that, if >> the gimbals are freewheeling, a small touch can flip a gyro over. The >> resistance to rotation of the poles (axis) of a gyro is present only >> if rotation of the axis in a direction perpendicular to the applied >> torque is suppressed. If precession is freewheeling it takes almost >> no torque or energy to flip the gyro over 180 deg. > >Muscle uses energy and fatigues in proportion the the amount of work it >does (oversimplification), not the force it generates. Thus even a >fairly large force, if it does no work (leaning against a wall for >example) seems like very little effort. It actually takes quite a bit >of torque (integrated over time) but no energy. So the explanation is illusion. I guess it really does pay to take careful measurements! > >Exercise for reader: > >What if instead of flipping two "tops" you flipped one "top" and one >"bottom"? If you flip them both they reverse roles. You are still left with a top and a bottom. Opposing torques produce identical reactions. Momentum and energy is conserved continuously throughout the flipping process, as is the axial relationship of the two gyros. > > Ralph Hartley > hartley aic.nrl.navy.mil Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 3 21:58:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA06328 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 21:58:43 -0800 Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA06309 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 21:58:39 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzoix13962; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 00:58:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA32254; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 21:58:36 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400GA) id 360158210095307FEPRI; 03 Nov 1995 21:58:21 PST Message-Id: Date: 03 Nov 1995 21:58:21 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: O-U Nucleate Boiling? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/03/95 21:57:59 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/03/95 21:24 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: O-U Nucleate Boiling? Nice thought. Sorry....this needs to be said with a "George Bush" type presentation--- Thought good, pressure vessel bad. Bad policy, no can do...get's into deep doggie doo-doo real fast.... All kidding aside, pressure vessel stuff means $$$$ to do it right, and not get yourself killed in the process. I like staying with stuff near 1 atm, and stuff that by design and its nature is capable of free and easy "relief" of any "transients". (5 minor hydrogen explosions in the last 6 years... each one "blew the lid" on the devices, as it was intended to.) - MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 4 01:32:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA18561 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 01:32:07 -0800 Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA18549 for ; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 01:32:04 -0800 Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA21559; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 04:30:48 -0500 Date: 04 Nov 95 04:29:18 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: Spin/genesis/Earth axial stability. Message-ID: <951104092917_100433.1541_BHG54-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Horace, Quote Horace Gold, writing in Nature (175:526, 1955): "...the smallest beetle walking over it would be able to change its axis of rotation relative to markings on the sphere by an arbitrarily large angle; the axis of rotation in space would change by a small angle only. What stability the Earth's axis possesses against movement relative to the solid Earth is derived from its geoidal shape ... This complete stability against a secular [slow] change is therefore dependant upon the stability of the shape." Which means that if you give it an unbalanced couple large enough to overcome the equatorial bulge it will simply topple and then start precessing under the influence of moon and sun. I would expect the geoidal geometry of the Earth (the equatorial bulge) to be small enough not to put up much resistance, but I may be wrong. Precession is significant here. A satellite of a planet will, as I understand it, attempt to twist a 'bulgy' planet's axis, and thus cause it to precess. If the satellite is very small, that interaction will just pull the satellite into an equatorial orbit (see the moons of Uranus, with its near 90deg axial tilt, all in the equatorial plane; or the rings of Saturn). The other way around, as in the sun/earth system, the axial tilt will be pulled under tidal forces. That will cause the 'precession of the equinoxes' on a 25,000yr cycle, as the equatorial bulge is torqued by the sun (and Moon). In the case of a very slowly rotating planet (Venus) or one in a very shallow gravitional gradient (Uranus) this tidal effect will be very small. Three questions therefore arise: 1. Why is the Moon's orbit almost in the plane of the ecliptic, and not in the plane of the earth's equator? 2. Is the axial tilt of the earth been that way for long in geological terms? 3. Are there any conditions under which a significant shift of the axis could occur without destroying all life on earth? Which effect would dominate, the ease of tipping (with no great effect on the surface) or the interference of the bulge? Could the tipping (interaction of a passing body with the earth's magnetic field or actual impact) be done without wrecking the planet for life's continued existence? Could a massive magnetic pulse pass through the solar system and interact with the earth's field without disrupting the planet? Subsidiary questions involve the origin and the very large variability of both the intensity and axis of the earth's magnetic field. I don't actually *know* anything about any of this stuff, I'm just prattling. I wonder if the Earth's axis may have shifted significantly during 'historical' time, for example at circa 10,000BC. That might well explain a large number of curious events which appear to be of that date, as well as other apparent geological anomalies. Just a thought. A crazy one, but no crazier than continental drift was for 50-60 years. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 4 07:50:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA11696 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 07:50:14 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA11675 for ; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 07:50:09 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA13355 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Sat, 4 Nov 1995 10:49:59 -0500 Message-Id: <199511041549.AA13355 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Sat, 4 Nov 1995 10:49:59 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: genesis Date: Sat, 04 Nov 95 10:49:21 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> FRANK ZNIDARSIC -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 10:25:04 -0500 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com To: p8156 memo.gpuc.com Cc: Puthoff aol.com Subject: genesis k THE GENESIS PROCESS Matter generates a static gravitational field. This field is given by: field (newtons/kg) = GMm/rr M = mass 1, m = mass 2, G = the grav constant, r = radius The first derivative of the field is the gravatomagnetic field. This field carries the momentum of moving matter. The second derivative of the static field is the induced gravitational field. This field carries the energy of moving matter. It is given by: field (newtons/kg) = (G/ccr) (dp/dt) c = light speed, dp/dt = change in momentum or a force. According to Mach's principle all forces exhibit a kind of symmetry. When mass accelerates a force is developed. If that mass remained stationary and the universe accelerated the same force would be applied to the body (abet a bit later in time). This force (that the an induced gravitational field will impress on the universe) is given by: (force impressed on the universe) = (G/ccr)(Mu)(dp/dt) Mu = the mass of the universe (dp/dt)local = the local acceleration force The local acceleration force must equal the force applied to the universe by the induced gravitational field. (dp/dt)remote = the force impressed on the univese at large. (dp/dp)remote = (G/ccr)(Mu)(dp/dt)local Eq #1 If equation #1 is true: (G/ccr)(Mu) =1 Eq #2 Given G = 6.67 exp -11 new-mm/kg Mu = 2 exp 53 kg c = 3 exp 8 m/c Given the immense magnitude of the numbers involved equation #2 does equal 1 and equation 1 is an identity. This is an important and amazing fact. This fact tells us something about the transfer and the genesis of energy. The positive energy imparted to an accelerated body is given by Equation #3. Positive energy = (force)(distance) Eq #3 Positive energy = (dp/dt)(distance) A negative amount of gravitational potential energy is imparted to the body by the same local force (dp/dt). Negative potential = - (G/ccr)(Mu)(dp/dt) Eq #4 Negative energy = (negative potential)(distance) Eq #5 Substituting Eq #4 into Eq #5 yields Eq #6 Negative energy = - (G/ccr)(Mu)(dp/dt)(distance) Eq #6 Substituting Eq #2 into Equation #6 yields Eq #7 Negative energy = -(dp/dt)(distance) Eq #7 Negative energy = -(force)(distance) Conclusion: The process of acceleration transferers positive energy. Negative gravitational potential is also transferred by the acceleration process. The two forms of energy balance. They exactly cancel. The energy of the universe remains constant. This value of this constant energy is zero. Now we will examine the forces produced by an evanescent plasma on the zero point Femi energy levels of a sold. One of you said, "The zero point energy of matter cannot be extracted..the energy is already in the ground state..it cannot drop to a lower energy state and and expel any energy!" This comment is CORRECT. Zero point energy cannot be extracted. It must remain within the zero point system. Zero point motions, however, CAN exert a force. This force will as described in equations #2 & #7 simultaneously generate positive energy and negative gravitational potential. The process CONSERVES ENERGY. Conclusion: The zero point energy of a solid can exert a force on an evanescent plasma. This force will produce new energy through a process of genesis. ...Think about it.... Frank Znidarsic  From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 4 15:39:32 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA12495 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 15:39:15 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA12473 for ; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 15:39:11 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA10005; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 18:37:55 -0500 Date: 04 Nov 95 18:36:21 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: First data from St Pete Message-ID: <951104233620_100433.1541_BHG27-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 04-Nov-95 20:08 GMT From: "Vladimir V. Onoochin" > INTERNET:onoochin a33.spb.su Subj: first test Dear Chris, First test has been carried out today. Although it is rather checking out of installation. I explain why? The aim of this test was being an achievment of steady regime of working Yusmar. Such an regime has been achieved approximately in four hours after switching on of the el.motor. I give you description of one test. The scheme of it is almost coincide with that you have except the outlet tube of the device is directed horizontally. Power of el.motor at nonsteady regime was about 2.33 kWt and 2.22 kWt at steady regime. The volume of the water was 20 litre. Points 1-12 correspond: 1 and 2 to the temperature of the water flow in and out the device 3 to ... of the water in tank 4 to the left high corner of the tent 5 to .... middle corner of the tent 6 to .... low corner of the tent 7 - 9 the same in opposite side (all inside the tent) 10 and 11 to the high middle of the lateral sides of the tent 12 to the temperature outside the tent. The initial temperature was 10 degree Celcius for all points. The values of 1, 2 and 3 are very close one another while nonsteady regime at initial stage so I give for them the following data: Time | Temp | (min)| (deg)| 0 | 10 | 5 | 22 | 8 | 30 | 15 | 40 | 20 | 50 | 27 | 60 | 39 | 70 | In four hours: 1 and 2 - 83.5 deg. 3 - 86 deg. 4 and 7 - 35 deg. 6 and 9 - 32 deg. (the values of other points are between 32 and 35 degs.) 12 - 10 deg. The experiment was carried out at presence of Dr Fedorovich and Dr Afanas'ev (from Aundry's staff). The following step is the same test but with the heater instead of the device. So I am waiting from you the comments on my report. With warm regard, Volodya --------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply: Dear Volodya, Thank you very much for the results of the first test. Since the temperature outside the tent is so beautifully stable, then the next test (if that outside temperature remains the same) should be very interesting. Obviously, the tent is also large enough for the Yusmar to heat to a reasonable temperature. If the power required to maintain the same temperature with the electric heater is significantly less, or the same power gives a higher temperature, then it might be useful to perform the null-balance test. But we can talk about that possibility after seeing the results of the next test! Thank you again for all the work. I shall post this preliminary result to the discussion group (vortex-l mail.eskimo.com). This sounds like a very good piece of work, and I ask you to thank Drs Fedorovitch and Afanas'ev. Thank you also for working so late to post the report! Can you tell me when the next part of the testing is expected to be done? Is the 'steady state' of the machine with thermostatic control? Or is the reduction in power consumption due to some other factor, like reduced water viscosity? Warm regards, Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 4 16:05:21 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA18932 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 16:05:20 -0800 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA18919 for ; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 16:05:17 -0800 Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id TAA03419; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 19:04:02 -0500 Date: 04 Nov 95 19:02:19 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: first test Message-ID: <951105000219_100060.173_JHB75-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> is the reduction in power consumption due to some other factor, like reduced water viscosity? << More likely due to reduced density as the temp rises. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 5 01:43:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA00376 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 01:42:56 -0800 Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA00349 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 01:42:45 -0800 Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tC1eE-000MNVC; Sun, 5 Nov 95 11:45 EET Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 11:45:53 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: experiment Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris: It's fine that the work has started at St. Petersburg! The first data are really interesting and I hope that eventually good results will be obtained. Can you tell the approximate dimensions of the tent and some data about the radiators, I don't understood how is the air in tent heated. And, if I have understood it correctly the Yusmar has no recirculation tube? Thank you, and please understand that beyond any technical disputes the most important is to solve the problem. Bill Beaty: there are some very disturbing rumours that we shall lose this e-mail line for reasons of impossibility to pay the external connection; this is predicted for Nov. 10; if it happens I shall ask you to change the address to . Will send a help message if it happens. All the best wishes from Peter Gluck! From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 5 03:16:53 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id DAA10634 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 03:16:46 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA10627 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 03:16:44 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id GAA13995; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 06:15:27 -0500 Date: 05 Nov 95 06:14:05 EST From: Dean Miller <75110.3417 compuserve.com> To: Vortex list Subject: St. Pete test Message-ID: <951105111404_75110.3417_CHK34-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Chris, I'm happy to see the testing get under way in St. Petersburg. I do have one question about the temperatures indicated by the thermometers, though. The difference in temperatures is much greater than I would have expected. Are there any fans inside the tent to move the air? .Dean - from Des Moines From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 5 04:33:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id EAA18071 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 04:32:54 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA18062 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 04:32:52 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA07375; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 07:31:36 -0500 Date: 05 Nov 95 07:26:52 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: During the lull... Message-ID: <951105122652_100433.1541_BHG40-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A To:Vortex 1. To 'somebody': I have now twice had mailings returned here, which I suspect were forwarded by somebody else, but came back to me as originator. Could 'someone' please check this transaction record and correct their error? ---------------------------------------------------------- Date: 05-Nov-95 10:29 GMT From: INTERNET:Mailer-Daemon notes.worldcom.com Subj: Returned mail Sender: 100433.1541 compuserve.com Received: from safety.worldcom.com by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA21589; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 05:22:43 -0500 Received: (from smtp localhost) by safety.worldcom.com (8.7.1/8.6.9) id EAA04213 for <100433.1541 compuserve.com>; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 04:16:29 -0600 (CST) Received: from worldcom-45.worldcom.com(198.64.193.76) by safety.worldcom.com via smap (V1.3) id sma004188; Sun Nov 5 04:16:03 1995 Received: by worldcom-45.worldcom.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 1.3.14/3.3) id AA7661; Sun, 05 Nov 95 04:18:27 -0500 Message-Id: <9511050918.AA7661 worldcom-45.worldcom.com> Received: from worldcom with "Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP" id 24B89DDB3F22BA048625626B00389343; Sun, 5 Nov 95 04:18:27 To: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> From: Mailer-Daemon notes.worldcom.com Date: Sun, 5 Nov 95 04:18:27 Subject: Returned mail Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="-- message ----" ---- message ---- Router: Unable to open mailbox file MCKINSEY&COMPANY mail.box: Server not responding ---- message ---- [my comments on gyroscope axial stability] --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dean, You comment on the question of the temperature variation within the tent. I don't think it is so bad, it is only 3degC. They were hoping to avoid the use of small fans, but had contingency plans to use them if necessary. But 3C seems OK surely? Peter, I will pass your questions on to St Pete. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- While waiting for the St Pete tests to come through, I find myself thinking about "scientific archaelogy". I mentioned Kervran, and I note the recent report in New Scientist of Pellegrini's re-analysis of an early experiment (around 1913 or so) which appears to cast doubt on relativity. My favourite is one paper by J J Thomson (one of my heroes, a real 'benchtopper') who reported in Nature around the same date his trashing of a group of chemists who claimed transmutation. He used the technique of 'positive rays' (mass spectroscopy) to show that when he bombarded certain metals with 'kathodic rays' - his own discovery, remember - he could obtain a substance he called X[sub]3. He got this stuff from a variety of metals, using his curved, focussing 'kathode'. And he said he could remove all the X3 from metal samples, because the amount he could get out declined with exposure to the electron beam. He commented that this substance must be very tightly bound to the metal, because (for example) boiling lead for a long time wouldn't remove it. Only his curved 'kathode' would do that. An excellent paper. An excellent 'benchtopping' of some chemists who had done poor work. Only ... er ... what is his X[sub]3? Nobody would ever dispute JJ's experimental skills, he was arguably the Michael Faraday of his age. He said he could drive a substance of mass number 3 from metals. What did he see, where did he go wrong? Or did he not go wrong? I searched Nature for the following few years, and found no further mention of this experiment. I've asked a lot of people what was going on there, and I never had a single response. Can anybody here do better? One of my pet notions is that all these aged journals be trawled through, looking for odd results and odd theories supported by good reasoning from the very different perspective of their authors. It is that very perspective shift which seems to me to be the key - people did experiments which nobody would nowadays even think of doing. But I am told - and have even seen - that many University libraries are in the habit of throwing old journals away. To call that a tragedy would be to understate. I see that Gates is collecting old photos, maybe somebody could provide a warehouse to preserve all this priceless information, or have it transferred to newer means of storage. Somewhere in there may the experimental result which would be the last jigsaw piece some theoretician needs to complete his picture, or something which would stimulate some fine mind. Meanwhile, how about ol' JJ? Any ideas? Hey, how's this for a quote from a TV programme? "If we can invent things like the Internet and self-cleaning ovens, surely we can do something about the polecat problem." Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 5 11:54:43 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA29108 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 11:52:59 -0800 Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA29092 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 11:52:55 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzoot00725; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 14:52:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA32851; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 11:52:51 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400GA) id 731952110095309FEPRI; 05 Nov 1995 11:52:11 PST Message-Id: Date: 05 Nov 1995 11:52:11 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: First data from St Pete To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/05/95 11:52:18 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/04/95 15:46 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: First data from St Pete With regard the St. Petersburg test...do we have an "air flow" through the box around the radiators? You know I have seen HVAC contractors in the US put a large (1 meter by 1 meter face, almost 1 meter deep) "box" over an HVAC supply vent and make a direct air flow measurement. I think these devices are like +/- 5% accurate. Surely enough to give reasonable results in this situation. I'd hope that this would work out... - My only hope for the Yusmar devices is that there is something very subtle balance wise, and to make one work as claimed one needs to run with "radiative" transfer from finned tubes to ambient air, and` one needs to have some "run" of pipe attached. That's where I figure if this is "formula" it should be tested as "formula" does everyone know what I mean? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 5 12:28:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA07063 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 12:27:00 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA07054 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 12:26:57 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA16348; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 15:25:40 -0500 Date: 05 Nov 95 15:24:03 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: More from Volodya Message-ID: <951105202402_100433.1541_BHG55-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex -------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 05-Nov-95 18:22 GMT From: "Vladimir V. Onoochin" > INTERNET:onoochin a33.spb.su Subj: some comments to the test Dear Chris, Here I would like to give some comments to the test and to answer to your questions. 1. Size of the tent is about (length*width*higth) 3,5*2*2 meters so someone can freely come into it. The distance between the floor and the surface of polyethilene film is about 10 cm. 2. All the temperature data are controlled in each minute and it is recorded on a paper. Of course, the temperature at the point 12 is changing, however, only at range of 1 degree and very slowly. 3. The power supplied to the el.motor is changing due to the change of load from the device. However, the decision that "steady state" is achieved is accepted after temperature data, i.e. nonchanging of the values at all the mearured points (1 to 11) for the period about half of hour. 4. Because there will be some problems with installation of the heater instead of the device (space distribution of heat extraction from the heater differs from that one of the device) the following test is supposed to be at the end of the next week. Anyway, until next Tuesday there are selebrate days of Great October Revolution in Russia. Now I would like to tell you about engineering approach to the OU problem. First of all, I don't believe in scientific approach to that one. A current scientific level is too low to describe fusion reaction. I give one example. The main obstacle preventing of fusion of two hydrogen nuclei is Coulomb field. So at least, to calculate the latter, one must describe it in terms of quantum electrodynamics. However, no one physicist can do it in correct and consistent way (for example, to describe Coulomb field of single nucleus of hydrogen). You can ask everybody of you group about it and I will be very and very surprised if I will hear the answer "Yes, I do!". So not having solid scientific basis, there are no sense to expect theoretcal predictions for the conditions of OU. However, even the engineering approach requires some calculations. Actually, Yusmar design is much simpier than that one of Griggs machine. So it is easier for Yusmar to calculate a share of heat extraction due to hydraulic resistion (after the experimental data on the water flow, pressure etc.) and other share of heat due to cavitation effect. Could you say did someone of your group make such calculations, for example, after the data of Scott Little? Both I and Afanas'ev are very interested in that problem. I am waiting for answering to any questions of your group about performed test. With warm regards, Volodya ------------------------------------------------------------------ Reply: Dear Volodya, Thank you very much for the extra information. Here are the additional questions (these come from Dr Peter Gluck, of Cluj in Romania): 1. Are radiators used to dissipate the heat? 2. Can you also confirm that there is no bypass tube fitted to the device - this would require a hole to be made in the chamber at the input end of the Yusmar tube? I would also like to know whether a thermostat device is employed (I think you are saying it is, because you say that the temperature changes at point 12). If a thermostat is used, what is the time interval between the thermostat switching on the motor and switching it off, and the time for the full cycle to be completed (all at the 'steady state')? On the matter of theory, I agree that the theory is weak. In that context, Dr Puthoff comments that conditions for obtaining energy from the Casimir effect are predicted in very snall bubbles, and mentions Schwinger's discussion of the Casimir effect in sonoluminescence. Many of the discussion group do not study the messages at weekends, and many of them are in the USA, so the time-zone shift is a further delay. Thank you again for all this work. With warm regards, Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 5 12:50:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA00776 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 11:59:30 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA00728; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 11:59:22 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id LAA27098; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 11:59:19 -0800 Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 11:59:19 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: freenrg-list mail.eskimo.com cc: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 5 Nov 1995, alex wrote: > P.S. Soon I'll close email address alex frolov.spb.su. Write by post if you > are interested in contact with me. > > Alexander V. Frolov email: alex frolov.spb.su > P. O. Box 37, St.-Petersburg, 193024, Russia > """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Sorry to hear that you will be unable to participate in this forum. Is there any way that we can help you retain internet connection? There are other users on Vortex-L and Freenrg-L in Russia who may be able to give advice if you need it. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 5 13:28:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA21024 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 13:26:56 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA21009 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 13:26:53 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id NAA06289; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 13:26:51 -0800 Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 13:26:51 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Bill Beaty: there are some very disturbing rumours that we shall > lose this e-mail line for reasons of impossibility to pay the > external connection; this is predicted for Nov. 10; if it happens > I shall ask you to change the address to . > Will send a help message if it happens. Greetings Peter! .You can change the subscription yourself. Using your old account, send .this message to majordomo eskimo.com . unsubscribe vortex-L itimc utcluj.ro From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 5 15:57:59 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA03034 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 15:56:36 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA03021 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 15:56:33 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA23033; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 18:55:17 -0500 Date: 05 Nov 95 18:15:02 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: O-U & Exotherms in Cellulisic Materials Message-ID: <951105231501_102021.3045_EHT122-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Wood and other cellulosic materials undergo exothermic reactions when heated to about 273 deg C or about 525 deg F. This is one of the difficult problems to confront in fire fighting. Starch and sugar (carbohydrates similar to cellulose and hemicellulose) also exotherm at around this temperature. This effect is exploited in the thermochemical conversion of biomass to useful fuel forms, ie., gasification to hydrogen, methane and carbon monoxide etc. Wood is about 40% to 50% cellulose, 20% to 35% hemicellulose, and 15% to 35% lignin. Basically there is one water molecule "attached" to each carbon atom in cellulose or any sugar. The possibility that each of these water molecules may be dumping stored up metastable energy at the exothermic temperature would not be surprising. IF about 525 deg. F is the magic temperature for the dumping, then a steam boiler should be able to show over unity at around this temperature (about 875 psig steam pressure). Electrical power plants usually operate at 1800 psig (625 deg F ) and 400-500 degrees superheat or about 1100 deg F. If this is the magic number, between these steam conditions an supersonic impact of the steam on the turbine vanes the O-U potential of the water should be depleted in the first pass through the power plant. The condensate should tell the story. F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 5 20:35:41 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA12653 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 20:35:36 -0800 Received: from matrix.eden.com (root matrix.eden.com [199.171.21.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA12636 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 20:35:32 -0800 Received: from net-2-126.austin.eden.com (net-2-126.austin.eden.com [204.177.170.126]) by matrix.eden.com (8.6.12/8.6.12.1) with SMTP id WAA08602 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 1995 22:35:29 -0600 Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 22:35:29 -0600 Message-Id: <199511060435.WAA08602 matrix.eden.com> X-Sender: little eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: St. Pete test question X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, Did I understand correctly that the tests in St. Pete are being conducted either with the Yusmar in the tent or the electric heater...but not with both in the tent at the same time? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 6 07:55:16 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA01081 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 07:55:00 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA01073 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 07:54:57 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA24994; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 16:55:30 +0100 Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 16:55:30 +0100 From: Dieter Britz Message-Id: <9511061555.AA24994 kemi.aau.dk> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Ni & hydrogen Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A couple of weeks ago, there was a question on this list about nickel/hydrogen. I knew I could find something on it in our library, but there were workmen in there, and all the books were covered in plastic to keep 'em clean. Now they are all accessible again, so I went for Gmelin. I guess the volumes on Ni are a bit long in the tooth (from the '50's and '60's) but still they contain a wealth of info. I would urge whoever asked the question to dust off their German and go look at the Ni volume, Teil B, Lieferung 2, pp. 367-371. Among other things, there is mention that electrochemical loading is more successful than gas loading; and that a pressure of 20000 atm is required for the stoichiometry NiH0.7. This has a citation, Baranowski, Bull. Acad. Polon., Sci. Ser., Sci. Chim. 10 (1962) 451. There are, in fact, lots of citations. As for the thermodynamics, lots of numbers are given. E.g., for temps. from 300-700 C, delta-H for hydrogen entering Ni is -6.85 kcal/mol H2, and -6.79 ditto per mol D2 (Gmelin gives positive values but calls them heats of solution). I was not able quickly to find diffusion coefficients; I did find in the next section that the chemical compounds nickel hydride are doubtful; so the above info pertains to a solid solution of hydrogen in the metal. If you want to know more, and can't get much out of Gmelin, ask me specific questions. I guess you could modernise the information by going to Chem. Abstracts between the 60's and now, especially those decennial indices. My guess is that you'll find lots of stuff there. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 6 10:07:46 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA08171 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 10:07:43 -0800 Received: from matrix.eden.com (root matrix.eden.com [199.171.21.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA08163 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 10:07:40 -0800 Received: from net-1-150.austin.eden.com (net-1-150.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.150]) by matrix.eden.com (8.6.12/8.6.12.1) with SMTP id MAA10764; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 12:07:37 -0600 Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 12:07:37 -0600 Message-Id: <199511061807.MAA10764 matrix.eden.com> X-Sender: little eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: Ni & hydrogen X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:55 PM 11/6/95 +0100, Dieter wrote: >I would urge whoever asked the question >to dust off their German and... Meine Deutsch ist sehr schlect, Dieter. Ich habe studieren nur zwei jahren im Hochschule. ...which I think says, "My German is very bad, Dieter. I only studied 2 years in highschool." Thanks for the info anyway. I think I have what I need now. In view of the info that you and Peter have provided, I do not expect to see the entire Ni rod load up to 0.7 atoms of H per atom of Ni under the conditions I'm going to subject it to (i.e. 0.5 atm and 200 degrees C). Only the surface of the Ni rod will get any significant loading I think. I suspect that the actual surface condition is rather important for this Ni-hydrogen experiment. My apparatus is nearly complete. Experimentation should start this week. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 6 11:37:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA05688 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 11:37:14 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA05653 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 11:37:07 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id OAA02068; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 14:14:14 -0500 Date: 06 Nov 95 14:09:03 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: DTA Testing of Water? Message-ID: <951106190902_102021.3045_EHT77-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: It would seem that a suitable capsule of different samples of water placed in an oven could detect any thermal anomalies using differential thermal analysis (DTA). Naturally the capsules would need to be capable of withstanding the pressures achieved. F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 6 23:58:29 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA13155 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 23:57:59 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA13128 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 23:57:53 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA25113; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 08:58:26 +0100 Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 08:58:26 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Ni & hydrogen In-Reply-To: <199511061807.MAA10764 matrix.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A On Mon, 6 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: > At 04:55 PM 11/6/95 +0100, Dieter wrote: > > >I would urge whoever asked the question > >to dust off their German and... > > Meine Deutsch ist sehr schlect, Dieter. Ich habe studieren nur zwei jahren > im Hochschule. > > ...which I think says, "My German is very bad, Dieter. I only studied 2 > years in highschool." Not so bad, in fact. > > Thanks for the info anyway. I think I have what I need now. In view of the > info that you and Peter have provided, I do not expect to see the entire Ni > rod load up to 0.7 atoms of H per atom of Ni under the conditions I'm going > to subject it to (i.e. 0.5 atm and 200 degrees C). Only the surface of the > Ni rod will get any significant loading I think. I suspect that the actual > surface condition is rather important for this Ni-hydrogen experiment. > > My apparatus is nearly complete. Experimentation should start this week. A Ni rod sounds fairly solid. At 0.5 atm, you certainly will not get a loading of 0.7. Penetration depth we can get a rough handle on, using simple diffusion. Assuming a spherical cow - no, sorry, linear diffusion, this is equal to SQRT(D*t), D being the diffusion coefficient. I know that's a lot smaller than that for hydrogen in Pd; let's say 10^-12 m^2/s, so we have a depth of 10^-6*SQRT(t) m or SQRT(t) microns. Here's a little table: t depth --------- ------- 1 s 1 mu 1 min 8 mu 1 h 60 mu 1 d 0.3 mm 1 week 0.8 mm Actually, the diffusion coefficient might be smaller than that, I might try to find out what it is, seem to remember I have it somewhere. Diffusion is a very slow process. However, Peter and I would agree that if there be a hitherto unknown exotic process taking place between some metals and deuterium, it's most likely to take place at (or very near) the metal surface. I have said this many times. If F&P's arguments hold, i.e. those invoking "electrochemical pressure", then that is greatest at the point of entry of deuterium into the metal, i.e. the surface. Damnit, Scott, I might have to see if I can find absorption isotherms for hydrogen in Ni; we should be able to predict the equilibrium loading at 0.5 atm. If it follows Henry's law... well, that would be 0.7/40000, no? As Winnie the Pooh would say, what if it doesn't? -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 7 01:13:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA04798 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 08:19:07 -0800 Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (0 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA04767 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 08:18:58 -0800 Received: from wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca (wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca [131.136.255.106]) by dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA25531 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 10:25:32 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199511061525.KAA25531 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca> X-Sender: wspage dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 06 Nov 1995 10:35:01 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: wspage ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: Re: St. Pete test question Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > >Did I understand correctly that the tests in St. Pete are being conducted >either with the Yusmar in the tent or the electric heater...but not with >both in the tent at the same time? > If this is the case, then they are *not* doing null-balance calorimetry. Why don't people seem to understand this very simple measurement scheme? Also, please be careful to distinguish between the thermostat that might be controlling the Yushmar (if there is one) and the thermostat that must be *simultaneously* controlling the reference heaters while the the Yushmar is in operation. I would recommend that the Yushmar's thermostat be disabled during the testing. Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 7 05:57:02 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA14946 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 05:56:29 -0800 Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA14796 for ; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 05:55:53 -0800 Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tCoYi-000MNhC; Tue, 7 Nov 95 15:59 EET Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 15:59:27 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends, Due to some family troubles and to very bad weather my working program is disturbed. And so is my life but this isn't quite so important. Anyway, I am happy that Scott will start a Piantelli style experiment and I hope he will not try this time to 'measure fuel consumption very precisely before starting the car.'It is predictable that this device needs some know-how elements or tricks in order to work, you have to find them..beautiful calorimetry has to wait. According to my 'catalytic theory of the former CF (now cooperative capture of profound energy) phenomena the quantity of energy obtained is proportional to the number of the catalytic centers- which in this case are continuously generated by the surface dynamics. One obvious trick is to repeat many times the triggering procedure in order to have a sufficiently loose and mobile surface structure. 10, 50 times? Scott and Dieter agree with a surface phenomenon, the other two conditions are localization (point-like) and dynamics- it seems some implosion process as in the case of the cavitation bubbles has to take place, possibly collapse of some aggregates of electrons. I succeed to attain a comprehensive and consistent vision of the field including both catalysis and cavitation, with a perfect logical continuity from one to the other- the link is "microfusion" (Stringham- George) characterized by cavitation-promoted generation of active sites. The Arata Cell links wet and dry systems, the Reifenschweiler phenomenon supports catalysis and sonoluminescence supports cavitation. If and when I can solve my problems, I'll publish a paper describing the taxonomy and evolution of these systems. Scott will make now experiments with the optimal system- the only which intentionally breeds catalytic centers. The best choice. The Yusmar was also the best choice because it is efficient in breeding cavitation bubbles. The future will confirm this. I wish you success! Best regards, Peter From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 7 07:18:36 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA07463 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 07:18:25 -0800 Received: from matrix.eden.com (root matrix.eden.com [199.171.21.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA07442 for ; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 07:18:20 -0800 Received: from net-1-227.austin.eden.com (net-1-227.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.227]) by matrix.eden.com (8.6.12/8.6.12.1) with SMTP id JAA11989; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 09:18:16 -0600 Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 09:18:16 -0600 Message-Id: <199511071518.JAA11989 matrix.eden.com> X-Sender: little eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: Ni & hydrogen X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:58 AM 11/7/95, Dieter wrote: >I know that's a lot >smaller than that for hydrogen in Pd; let's say 10^-12 m^2/s, What is the value for Pd, Dieter? Ni may not be so far away. Here is a quote from the 1970 Britannica's Hydrides article, "Hydrogen diffuses with great rapidity through several heated metals such as palladium, iron and nickel." Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 7 07:35:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA12895 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 07:35:22 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA12868 for ; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 07:35:17 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id HAA14079; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 07:35:15 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 07:35:14 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: Ni & hydrogen In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 7 Nov 1995, Dieter Britz wrote: > t depth > --------- ------- > 1 s 1 mu > 1 min 8 mu > 1 h 60 mu > 1 d 0.3 mm > 1 week 0.8 mm Is the rate of diffusion not temperature dependant? Accelerate it by use of a kiln? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 7 08:20:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA26734 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 08:19:57 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA26721 for ; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 08:19:54 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id IAA19228; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 08:19:51 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 08:19:49 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: <--- LOOKEE HERE! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortex-L will now have a "vtx:" in the subject line! I didn't know majordomo had this feature. *BOY* could I have used it over the last six months! Of course the ability to save the messages for later reading might make me save them without reading a bit more than I should. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 8 00:28:37 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA23379 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 00:26:42 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA23295 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 00:26:13 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA02880; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 09:26:01 +0100 Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 09:26:01 +0100 From: Dieter Britz Message-Id: <9511080826.AA02880 kemi.aau.dk> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Diffusion continued Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Further to diffusion of hydrogen isotopes in metals: Scott asks me just what the diffusion coefficient is, in Pd. I combed through the bibliography and found quite a disparate lot of values. My colleague here points out that D measured in Pd (and presumably Ni) may not be the true value, but may be "accelerated" by faster transport along grain boundaries. Even using a single crystal of Pd in, say, a permeation study, would eventually be subject to this, as cracks form. So on the one hand, you might say that for a number of reasonably reliable seeming studies, the lowest value might be close to the true one. The lowest D (for deuterium in Pd) I found is 1.2*10^-12 m^2/s (Kapali et al, JEC 1994). However, there are two permeation studies that look pretty good and agree on their value: Mukhopadhyay et al, Solid State Com. 1990 get 5*10^-11, while Pyun et al, J. Alloys Comp. 1994 get (5.1 +-1.04)*10^-11. The largest value was 10*-10, which is about that of a solute in water. Yes, these are temperature dependent. On the other hand, if you want a practical value, then the one for a bit of Pd with cracks and voids might be more relevant. The trouble is that then, there is no single value, it all depends on how cracked the Pd sample is. None of this says anything about nickel. I'll have a go finding info about that; there is nothing in the biblio file, but I'll keep looking. There may be some info in Alefeld and Voelkl's book, which I don't have here but can borrow. Stay tuned. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 8 00:36:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA24798 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 00:36:06 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA24786 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 00:36:00 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA06316; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 09:36:24 +0100 Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 09:36:24 +0100 From: Dieter Britz Message-Id: <9511080836.AA06316 kemi.aau.dk> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Jo blocks & ZPE Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: About a week ago, I posted to the new mailing list set up by Rich Schroeppel, on the subject of ZPE (you can see what I wrote, below). This got an interesting response from Robert Eachus, and I have his permission to pass it on to this list. Along with that permission, he sent me more interesting information, which I also pass on: >From rcs cs.arizona.edu Tue Nov 7 03:53:05 1995 Reply-To: fusion cs.arizona.edu Arizona Fusion Digest #8: 2 messages Send contributions to fusion cs.arizona.edu ---------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 10:27:06 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Arizona Fusion Digest #6 Dieter Britz said: > ZPE is being bandied about a bit too much these days, I think. It > seems to me that the reason for that is, that noone understands it > very well, so it's a nice buzz word, like "magnetic" used to be at > one time. On the vortex-l list, I asked Puthoff (who posts to it) > a week or so ago about the potential magnitude of the effect of, > say, two metal plates casimiring together, and the answer should > sober up the ZPE enthusiasts. I forgot the exact figure, but two > metal plates each 1 m^2, moved from infinity to one nm from each > other would yield something like - was that micro- or nano- > Joules? Certainly bugger-all. Have him check his arithmetic! Seriously, since the Casmir strenghtens as the plates approach it is only in the last millimeter that the force is noticeable, but any machinist who has worked with Jo blocks can tell you it is VERY noticable. Jo (Johannsen) blocks are "optically" flat metal blocks used for precision measurement. Two Jo blocks--even non-magnetic ones--brought close together will snap together with a click, and can only be gotten apart by sliding one off the other. Air pressure makes the job of getting them apart much more difficult, but it is the Casmir force that pulls them together. > Can anyone think of ANY rational reason, such as theoretical > argument or actual experimental evidence, for invoking "ZPE"? If the experiments showing energy production are believed, there are two possible sources--nuclear and ZPE. Nuclear seems to require too many miracles. ZPE requires nanoscale structure. But the successful experimenters have always talked about the importance of the palladium preparation. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... ---------------------- [ I had asked about the air film between the blocks, residual magnetism as the possible cause of the attraction, and suggested that two really clean metal surface wowuld want to stick together to form a yet larger crystal. db] >From eachus spectre.mitre.org Tue Nov 7 16:45:20 1995 To: britz kemi.aau.dk Sure, forward away. There were many proposed "explanations" for the Jo block effect before someone figured that the Casmir Force was a real phenomena, and yes in many cases residual magnetism is a problem. (Spelled needing a mallet to get the blocks apart.) But for the most precise calibration standards, you want non-magnetic blocks with low surface absorption, and almost zero thermal expansion coefficient. These blocks often stick harder than the steel ones. There is another point you referred to, which I have spent entirely too much time trying to deal with: adsorption, or the lack of it. Yes it is hard to get "clean" surfaces absent a vacuum, but I did a lot of this stuff in good (but not great) vacuums. If you put two Jo blocks together in a vacuum after cleaning and degassing them, you have one piece of metal. In space this is called vacuum welding and is a major problem. The solutions are to matte the mating surfaces of moving parts, to use teflon bearing surfaces, or to keep the surfaces wetted with gas. Now vacuum welded metals do exchange molecular and ionic bonds once the weld has formed, but the initial weld AFAIK is entirely due to the Casmir Force. Robert I. Eachus From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 8 01:38:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA05669 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 01:37:34 -0800 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA05660 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 01:37:32 -0800 Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA00794; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 04:36:14 -0500 Date: 08 Nov 95 04:32:11 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Takahashi motor etc Message-ID: <951108093210_100433.1541_BHG55-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex I'm reporting this on the basis of an informal agreement not to publish anything, Takahashi wants to handle his own publicity. So, in the event that anybody wants to cross-post the report, please do not put it on any public boards. His associate made it clear that he would be perfectly happy to have me report to groups of individuals. I would add that I found myself trying to do the impossible, to lean over backwards both in favour of and in opposition to Takhashi's claims. That's plain silly of me, I do realise that, and I hope it doesn't show! The problem with this kind of thing is that you can windmill your arms in both directions, and end up believing anything you want to. Without numbers, this was an 'interesting but futile' exercise. My *tentative* conclusion is that the scooter is not over-unity, and that Takahashi may be kidding himself. Others may form more definite opinions either way. Time will tell. Takahashi gave us each a sizeable (1cm thick) pile of photocopies. I'm willing to copy and snailmail some/all of these, within reason. [My car started to run very erratically on the way to London. This turned out to be due to partly stripped threads on the distributor baseplate, where the contact-breaker screws on. In the fine tradition of the kind of automotive engineering which requires a 4-pound lump hammer to be within easy reach at all times, I pushed a few strands of copper wire down the hole and screwed the contact breaker on again. On this basis, I negotiated the M1 motorway for the requisite remaining 250 miles. Urrgghh.] The meeting was at the home of Mr Takeo Sawai, of Sciex UK (the local branch of Mr Yasunori Takahashi's company). The house was large, well furnished, and in an expensive part of London. Also present when I arrived were Mr Takhashi, Mr M Allen of Nexus magazine, and Mr Mark Goldes (CEO, Magnetic Power Inc, Sebastopol, CA). An engineer from a certain national University arrived later with an associate. The engineer does not wish me to identify him. We were shown a video of the motor in action. In this case, it was driving a generator by way of a rather sloppy solid plastic V-belt (maybe 40cm diameter), and was run up with a set of batteries. The generator was then set to drive two car headlamps. The supply batteries were then disconnected, and the lamps went on running - seemingly indefinitely. There was a fair-sized bank of what appeared to be conventional capacitors, but I didn't get a chance to ask what their spec was. The video camera was moved around the machine to show it from all angles. The actual machine was not on view. I asked about the scooter, and was offered a chance to ride it. With some disregard for the legalities, I hammered this scooter around Cricklewood for some 25 minutes. It was a modified Honda electric scooter, but the motor was Takahashi's. It was less than 6 inches in any dimension, and ran pretty much cold. The batteries were not - as reports had led me to believe - replaced with small NiCds, but were what appeared to be original equipment. Four lead-acid 12V batteries, of about 5*8*6 inches (estimated), wired in series. The weight of the scooter was given as 120kg, which I would accept (after having a bit of trouble lifting either end). My own weight is perhaps 90kg, but the scooter had no trouble accelerating very well up a long hill I would not have enjoyed tackling with a pedal cycle. Up this hill, it registered in excess of 75kph, in fact the main problem was that I could not give the machine a proper test, it was much too powerful for that. I am willing to accept that it can manage 70mph on a level road. On return (but not before) I measured one of the 12V batteries at 12.85V. On a static run of the motors, the voltage fell in the way that one would expect (we were melting the surface of the back tyre), but showed evidence of regenerative braking. Later, we repeated these tests, using the University engineer's clamp-on. This showed some pretty heavy drain (20A steady, 36A peak) with a brief regen peak of 20A. In this test, no load was placed (Takahashi hadn't liked us melting his back tyre). The behaviour appeared very conventional. I did wonder about the thin insulated leads supplying the current. The engineer, who claimed considerable experience with electric bikes and cars, said he would rate it at 50A without damage. We were invited to probe the return wire from the motor. This was showing effectively zero current, but it was only later that we realised that we had only tried the clamp-on with its dc setting. Earlier reports had led me to understand that the scooter was (on one occasion) delivered with the NiCds nearly discharged, yet had returned from a run with them fully charged. That is strange, given that NiCds recharge rather slowly. in fact, Takahashi stated that the switch to lead-acid was to permit more rapid charging. He also complained of the large losses inherent in a scooter of this kind. He quoted the batteries as being 5A.hr, but I think there was confusion in the translation (this was a constant difficulty, as Mr Sawai did not appear to be highly technical). I would agree with the engineer, who rated them at about 20A.hr or maybe a bit less. I tested the scooter again after an hour or two, this time in the dark for about ten minutes. It performed in the same way. Mr Sawai said it had not been on charge between the two runs, but I noticed that he put it on charge after the second test. In each case, I did try to give the thing as hard a test as possible in the circumstances. The scooter also had four capacitors, we were told that these were each 1F 48V. Personally, I was led to feel that the scooter was conventional, but a superb vehicle in its own right. If anybody is looking for the ideal Christmas gift for me, I would accept one of these! One other gadget Takahashi claims is a super-capacitor of 20F capacity 25V, occupying 10mm diameter and 10mm length. This he says is now being manufactured by Panasonic and three other well-known companies. He also showed a water heater which uses this device to keep a thermos of water at/near boiling point after the mains is disconnected, by way of a 1.5W heater element. Yes, I have done the arithmetic, and I would say that it must be a very good thermos if (as he claims) one of these capacitors will keep the water hot for any length of time. He also showed an 'o-u' brushless dc motor of about 22mm diameter and 8mm thick. Takahashi claims that the motors are essentially conventional, and derive their o-u performance from the type of magnets used. Here is a brief summary of the sheets we were given. CV (resume) of Takahashi. Age 55, grad Tokyo U, ME Washington U. Considerable experience in R&D with Sony (1963-83). Founded Scitek (later Sciex). Invented 'YT' magnet 1993. "Battery Doubler" 'uses high power magnets to double the storage capacity of lead-acid or NiCd cells'. Graph shown. Not clear if these are used on the scooter.... Claims new 'bond magnet' has highest known energy product at 128.4MGOe. Graphs show (inter alia) B/H curve. Looks queer to me, ends curve over. Lots of detail on the 'YT' magnet, inc SEM analysis, much manufacturing info, etc. Data on the (scooter etc) motor, which again is conventional brushless dc. What is so very strange is that this evidently competent, well-educated and experienced electrical/electronics engineer (whose obvious wealth is itself indicative of his ability) is bare-facedly claiming that his motors are way over unity. I just do not know what to think at all. One graph, showing "Subsidiary Torque Characteristics by Power Generator" (torque vs, speed of the motor) is of sufficient interest that I am faxing it to Scott Little. I hope he will comment on it, it seems to be the only real 'evidence' for the motor's behaviour. Finally, I would add that Mr and Mrs Sawai were excellent hosts, and provided what looked like a superb buffet supper. Anxious about the state of my own vehicle, I felt obliged to skip this meal. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 8 02:13:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA10869 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 02:13:10 -0800 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA10860 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 02:13:07 -0800 Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA03994; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 05:11:51 -0500 Date: 08 Nov 95 05:07:16 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Yusmar testing Message-ID: <951108100715_100433.1541_BHG55-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Further exchange of notes: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 06-Nov-95 13:31 GMT From: "Vladimir V. Onoochin" > INTERNET:onoochin a33.spb.su Subj: answers to the questions Dear Chris, Unfortunately, I received your message too late so I answer to the questions only today. <1. Are radiators used to dissipate the heat? No. Dr Sudakov assembled the installation according to the scheme you have, i.e. with so called small loop. However, the latter contains two tanks, first one is included in the water circuit (the volume of it is about 10 litres) and second one connects with the water circuit by the pipe, the second pipe from the tank connects with air. <2. Can you also confirm that there is no bypass tube fitted to the device - ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 05:13:14 -0800 Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id IAA01142; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 08:11:56 -0500 Date: 08 Nov 95 08:10:31 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: O-U in Gear Pumps? Message-ID: <951108131030_102021.3045_EHT57-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The 1.3 gpm 100 psi gear pumps which require about 1/3 hp. (1725 RPM) have a built in trapping effect for liquid "caught" in the meshing gears. Having noticed that when these little pumps are used as water recirculators they get very hot in a hurry, gives one pause to wonder if the trapping in the gears is doing something similar to the vortex effects? F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 8 06:12:03 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA20701 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 06:11:47 -0800 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA20694 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 06:11:44 -0800 Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA11813; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 09:10:28 -0500 Date: 08 Nov 95 09:07:00 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Takahashi motor etc Message-ID: <951108140659_100060.173_JHB111-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I can't add much to Chris's report on the Takahashi. I arrived much later, after he had test-driven the scooter. When I arrived the batteries were on charge. I was shown the video of the motor/generator keeping the two car fog-lights brightly lit for about 10 mins with the battery disconnected. I asked why they had thought it necessary to recharge the scooter batteries after Chris's test runs. I was told that it was to ensure that they were topped-up for the next day's demo! I was also shown two Seiko wrist-watches, both being worn by the inventor and his colleague. Both were alleged to be powered by miniaturised motor-generators taking the place of the normal battery. Chris has given you all the relevant extracts from the hand-out literature, so I won't bore you with a repeat. My over-riding impression is that Takahashi is a very clever Engineer, and that he seems to have discovered a method of production of sintered magnets which results in very high magnetic density storage. The engineering of the samples, and of the scooter is of the highest order, tool-room stuff, no schmutte. When I asked him (and we had to use his associate as interpreter at all times) whether his devices were ou, he told me that there was no evidence which proved ou, but that his thinggies kept on running without batteries, delivering power for a very long time - until something mechanical wore out. There is no doubt that they have a good product, and even if there is no real ou, there is enough advance in technology there to change the face of energy storage IMHO. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 8 10:45:47 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA04130 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 10:44:40 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA04100 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 10:44:36 -0800 Received: from net-1-201.austin.eden.com (net-1-201.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.201]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id MAA12918 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 12:44:29 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 12:44:29 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511081844.MAA12918 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: graph of Takahashi motor performance X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: As Chris said, he sent me a graph. It is a plot of torque (y-axis) vs rpm (x-axis). Plotted are three lines which are labelled. 1. "Battery Output: 10kW" This line is a hyperbola with the equation T = 10kW/rpm. In other words, each point on this line...which represents a specific torque and rpm...computes to 10kW (with appropriate handling of the units). This line simply shows what a motor's output torque would be over a range of speeds if it were made to always draw a constant 10 kW from the battery (which would take some doing...). 2. "Targeted Characteristics (70kW)" Another hyperbola but this one is T=70kW/rpm. 3. "Subsidiary Torque by Power Generator" This one starts off low at low rpm and grows sorta exponentially until it gets to 60kW whereupon it switches abruptly to the eqn T=60kW/rpm. The first part looks like a real DC motor's output power vs rpm curve when driven at a fixed voltage. The title of the third line, which is also the title of the graph, just confuses me. I don't understand what this graph represents. Chris, do you suppose that "power generator" is the name of his motor? In Chris' report he says: > I pushed a few strands of copper wire down the hole >and screwed the contact breaker on again. Ah, Chris! A perfect blend of ingenuity and respectful disregard for established machining practices. Congratulations! 99.9% of the population would have paid thru the nose (i.e. towing, expensive repairs, etc) to recover from that situation. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 8 12:36:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA07131 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 12:35:46 -0800 Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA07083 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 12:35:39 -0800 Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA18724; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 15:34:22 -0500 Date: 08 Nov 95 15:31:14 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Upcoming CETI demo Message-ID: <951108203113_72240.1256_EHB163-3 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: CETI plans to do the next demonstration at the Power-Gen '95 Americas conference in Anaheim, California, December 1 - 4, 1995. I have made reservations to attend. I will bring my portable computer and a new tape cassette recorder I bought the other day called a "Pressman." It is designed to be shoved in a spokesman's face during a press conference. I am not good at taking photographs and I do not have a video camera. I'll get some photos from the CETI people later on. Patterson and Cravens hope to prepare a larger and more powerful cell in time for this demonstration. If they cannot finish it in time, they will have to fall back to one like the cell they showed at SOFE '95, which produces 5 to 20 watts excess. The Power-Gen conference is the world's largest electric power industry trade show, attracting over 850 exhibitors, 14,000+ attendees from 75 countries, and 250 conference paper presentations. The conference is devoted to topics like gas turbines, government regulations, particulate control systems, atmospheric fluidized beds and other arcane technology that cold fusion will make as obsolete as the buggy whip and the slide rule. The Conference Center is next door to Disneyland, making it the perfect place to unveil the next big breakthrough in cold fusion. With all those attendees and trade show booths, I am a little concerned that CETI may be lost in the shuffle and overlooked. And by the way: no, I will not go on any roller coaster rides at Disneyland. They frighten me to death and upset my stomach. Life has enough ups and downs built in. My idea of heady risk-taking is to try a new brand of oatmeal cookies with my afternoon tea. I just did that as a matter of fact. I do not recommend these "New Keebler Classic Collection" ones. Too much sugar. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 8 14:05:49 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA07530 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 14:03:50 -0800 Received: from karloff.lanl.gov (karloff.lanl.gov [128.165.16.190]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA07466 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 14:03:40 -0800 Message-Id: <199511082203.OAA07466 mail.eskimo.com> Received: by karloff.lanl.gov (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA075098152; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 15:02:32 -0700 From: Ron McFee Subject: vtx: CF Gossip To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 8 Nov 95 15:02:31 MST Cc: mcfee lan.gov, joy@lanl.gov, pbradley@lanl.gov Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greetings! I received the following message from Tom Claytor and Ed Storms which I am passing on to you with their permission. Since it contains a good deal of information concerning current CF research, I thought that several of you would be interested. Regards, Ron Date: Wed, 08 Nov 1995 12:09:35 -0700 From: "Thomas N. Claytor" Subject: News To all: Here is a communication I received from Ed Storms last week, but have not had time to post it until now due to work package duties. I followed up on a few items, George Miley (prof. nuclear eng.) did indeed have an excess heat demonstration at the U of I that was successful, at least they couldn't tell what was wrong. The demo lasted three days and they poked around the system, measured the electrical power in, attached more thermocouples etc. They must have been impressed because they are trying to fabricate higher temperature thin film electrodes for the system. According to CETI, they get about 10 to 70 times excess heat at 4.5 W out, they are working on a 100 W prototype and expect to demo it at a power company meeting in CA in Dec. A fortune 100 company is interested in this system and is testing one or more units. I'm trying to get more details. I also sent a fax to Ikegami at the fusion institute, but so far he has not replied. The Russian group at LUTCH continues to publish and make progress on their tritium generation method. They faxed me back with an offer of collaboration if we could offer to support their activities at some level. The usual disclaimer is that Ed is over/hyperenthusiastic, but it appears the pot is boiling more vigorously. >Edmund Storms (505) 988 3673 11 /1 /95 MEMORANDUM To: Tom Claytor From: Edmund Storms Subject: Update on Cold Fusion Date: 11/1/95 Several interesting events have occurred since we talked last. They are summarized below with details following. SUMMARY 1. The Pons-Fleischmann patent has been issued by the European Union. 2. The Piantelli patent has been issued by Italy. 3. MITI (Japan) has increased its funding for Cold Fusion (New Hydrogen Energy) from $30M/4years to $100M/4 years because of significant success. 4. The CETI (Patterson) light-water device has been tested by 3 major laboratories and found to produce excess energy. A factor of 10 excess is routine with levels of x7O being recently reported. 5. The American Nuclear Society arranged for a panel discussion on Cold Fusion at the recent SOFE meeting. 6. The Fiat Auto Company arranged for an all expense paid meeting of experts on Cold Fusion at Asti (Oct. 11-13, 1995) in Italy which I attended. 7. My self-funded efforts to make excess energy using palladium supplied by IMRA(Japan) have succeeded in producing 10% excess (4 W max). 8. The Third Conference on Cold Fusion and Nuclear Transmutation (RCCF-3) took place in Dagomis (Russian Federation) on Oct 2-7, 1995. DETAILS 1. The European Union, after much study, has decided to issue the P-F patent. We all hope this will provide the push needed by the U.S. patent office to do what is increasingly obvious. If not, they will be taken to court for failing to follow case law. The situation has left the state-of- reasonable caution and has entered the state-of-scandal. 2. The energy producing method discovered by Piantelli has been patented in Italy. He described his work at the Asti meeting. A summary follows: The described cell contains a nickel rod surrounded along its length by a freestanding, single-layer coil of platinum wire. This is contained in a Pyrex tube into which hydrogen is introduced. The Pyrex assembly is contained in a metal envelope which is air-cooled. Thermocouples are located on the Ni rod, outside of the glass tube, and outside of the metal envelope . A current is passed through the Pt coil to heat the Ni, to calibrate the measured temperature with respect to power, and to provide a magnetic field. He claims this field is 2400 gauss but the value seems high. The system is heated to 700 K, hydrogen is introduced at 0.2 atm, and the system is excited by various methods. These methods include changes in pressure or temperature. The magnitude of excess power is determined by noting the change in temperature measured at each thermocouple. The temperature change is in the range of 8-10 degrees. Claims were made for several observations. One claimed 29 W applied power resulting in 68W excess for 218 days (1280 MJ) and the other claimed 20 W excess giving 590 MJ. Use of deuterium instead of hydrogen produces similar powers while the sys- tem is said to turn on more quickly. Neutron emission was detected using a 3He counter and gold activation. A steady background is seen with bursts when the conditions are changed- He claims an average flux of 600nsec over a 3 week period. Clearly, a significant neutron flux is produced. Gamma emissions at 2.7.MeV,as well as several other energies,are seen. Clear evidence for charged particle emission having a range in air of 10 cm was seen when the Ni rod was placed in a cloud chamber. Large amounts of He4 were detected but the measurements were not done well. The results have been reproduced in Italy using a nickel rod supplied by Piantelli. Unfortunately, he has not revealed the required pretreatment. His work is being funded by Fiat. 3. Hideo Ikegami announced at the Asti meeting that MITI has increased support for CF from $30M/4year to $lOOM/Year. Work in Japan has demonstrated the reality of CF and is now being directed toward a commercial product. Therefore, detailed information is no longer forthcoming. 4. The Patterson light-water cell was demonstrated at the SOFE meeting after being assembled and tested in Prof. George Miley's laboratory at the University of Illinois. They were able to generate 4 W, of excess power by applying 0.4 W. The recombination energy is not included. This device has obtained the attention of a major company where it was tested with success. This company is now going to acquire CETI. The results of the deal will be announced in the next few months. 5. A panel discussion on CF was held at the SOFE meeting (Oct. 1995). Much interest was shown with only a few people revealing extreme skepticism. With the hot fusion budget dropping, people are looking for any port in the storm. Unlike the attitude in US government and at LANL, interest in learning about the phenomenon is growing elsewhere. 6. For the second time, Fiat arranged for a private workshop about CF in Italy. About 40 people from 4 countries were present. After a three-day discussion of the science, Fiat arranged for a news conference to announce their support for the field. At least this company is not shy about their support for the field. 7. I have finally constructed a calorimeter and have used it to demonstrate excess energy. The sample used had the optimum properties based on a pretest of 19 samples. Detailed information about the nature of the energy-active-state is being discovered and will be published soon. It's ironic that LANL will not support CF work even though it can now be done successfully in ones home. 8. Work on CF is continuing in Russia in spite of their other problems. Excess energy using cavitation is getting a lot of attention and has resulted in a minor industry there. The attitude of a skeptic is becoming more and more difficult to support without looking like a complete fool. Events are rapidly unfolding that will overwhelm such attitudes and will embarrass those who did not recognize the obvious in time. The field is gradually finding ways to go around the blocks to information exchange created by conventional scientific Journals and is finding support from commercial sources. Gradually, the institutions and infrastructures of conventional science are being ignored. As the field grows, the slow change in the negative attitude of conventional scientists will raise questions about their competence. Meanwhile, a whole new set of institutions and journals will be created, largely outside of conventional science. Once again, a new discovery has to fight conventional thinking and, with its success, destroys the old structure.< From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 8 23:01:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA25284 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 23:01:00 -0800 Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA25272 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 23:00:56 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzozh12011; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 11:26:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA46176; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 08:17:44 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 032716080095312FEPRI; 08 Nov 1995 08:16:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 08 Nov 1995 08:16:08 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Takahashi motor etc To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/08/95 08:16:24 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/08/95 06:22 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Takahashi motor etc I like this point about the "Takahashi devices", i.e. even if they are not OVER UNITY, they still might represent something important if they are of high enough POWER DENSITY, vis-a-vis STORAGE. I.e., you get something that can store the same 2 to 3 million BTU's that an auto gas tank can, and you've got a winner!!!! From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 02:06:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA12593 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 16:55:52 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA12564 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 16:55:47 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id TAA24667; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 19:54:25 -0500 Date: 08 Nov 95 16:12:52 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Power-Gen dates: Dec. 5 - 7 Message-ID: <951108211251_72240.1256_EHB115-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Correction: the Power-Gen '95 Americas conference in Anaheim, California, is from December 5 - 7, 1995. I seem to have a talent for mixing up dates. I better check my airplane reservations. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 02:06:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA25209 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 16:08:57 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA25152 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 16:08:50 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id TAA12966; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 19:07:31 -0500 Date: 08 Nov 95 19:00:22 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: All Those Metastable States? Message-ID: <951109000021_102021.3045_EHT54-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: It's beginning to look like nature is storing up energy on a nuclear scale as metastable states. Possibly same thing on a molecular scale. A mass spectrometer that can "weigh" hydrogen to a few parts per million should see a mass spread of about one part per million per kev of energy dumped. About half that for deuterium. The "REST MASS" of hydrogen is probably all over the map. F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 02:07:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA18329 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 17:13:39 -0800 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA18293 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 17:13:33 -0800 Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id UAA02360; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 20:12:16 -0500 Date: 08 Nov 95 15:30:31 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Not thrilled by Takahashi report Message-ID: <951108203030_72240.1256_EHB163-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:vortex-l mail.eskimo.com I do not think that we can draw any firm conclusions from the information Takahashi gave Chris. It is difficult to judge performance by riding on a motorscooter, and it would be dead simple to judge it by observing a live performance of the motor shown in the video. So why didn't they bring the motor? I'll bet they are worried about patents. I still do not believe these magnetic motors are real. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 02:07:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA24061 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 13:22:32 -0800 Received: from relay4.UU.NET (relay4.UU.NET [192.48.96.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA24030 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 13:22:28 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay4.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpab25737; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 16:21:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA12121; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 13:19:58 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 713318130095312FEPRI; 08 Nov 1995 13:18:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 08 Nov 1995 13:18:13 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Upcoming CETI demo To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/08/95 13:18:31 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/08/95 13:03 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Upcoming CETI demo Jed: - Good stuff up. Ask Gene. Go back and revisit our "Ni Rod Shaped" Italian friend! From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 02:12:43 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA16439 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 14:26:27 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA16387 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 14:26:19 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA08173; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 17:25:01 -0500 Date: 08 Nov 95 17:20:25 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: More Takahashi. Message-ID: <951108222024_100433.1541_BHG30-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex I think I'll mail a set of copies of these documents to Scott. By the time he and Chris Morriss have been through them, something more may have emerged. As Scott implies, I'm really more the hairy-handed type. I would never have even imagined paying somebody to fix the car - even if I could afford to. I just don't think that way, so I just operated inside my limited mind-set. Though I did twitch a bit every time one of the loose strands shorted and fused itself open circuit while I was passing an 18-wheel 40-tonne monster at 80mph... I'd not dared cut them short for fear of ripping the things out... Dum vivimus, *vivamus*! as Peter would doubtless say. I'd appreciate it if somebody would check on the spec for a standard Honda battery scooter. The motor and generator are - as I understand the drawings, and from the look of the vehicle - combined as the same unit in the single 5 to 6 inch diameter (and length) motor/generator. This is no half-arsed technology, and I would defer to - but agree with - Norman's assessment of the engineering standards achieved. I'll go further: I've ridden all manner of two-wheelers, this was the best-engineered bike I've ever sat on. It ran like a watch, not a twitch, squeak or rattle. Everything worked precisely as you would expect. Honda engineering, sure, but you mess up a good product by playing with it like that. This was different. My sole problem was even on the major 'arterial routes' nearby I could not (read 'dared not') give the thing its full head - and I've ridden 1-litre bikes in my time. That's not a compromise messy electric vehicle, it's a high performance machine. I am more enthusiastic than I was by this morning's cold light. I note from Takahashi's sheet that he claims to have ended his career with Sony as 'General Manager for Research and Development'. Whether or not this is true, this is a *very* competent person, with a reputation to lose. The motor, so small and so cold-running, is clearly at the very least a big breakthrough of some kind. Whether or not it is anomalous - I just don't know. But let us be quite clear, the man is either a fraud or straight up. That video demo was either fraud or real. The scooter - well, 'suggestive' is as far as I will go. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 04:31:38 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id EAA05153 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 04:31:26 -0800 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA05135 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 04:31:21 -0800 Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA05438; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 07:30:05 -0500 Date: 09 Nov 95 07:28:04 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Even if not o-u. Message-ID: <951109122804_100433.1541_BHG103-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex I was thinking - that little motor of Takahashi's would surely work OK to drive an electric car? One motor inside each wheel, perhaps geared to drive the wheel-rim, would not be too great an increase in unsprung weight? (The control program would be fun to design...) A modest 2/4-seater car would not need to weigh more than 4 times as much as the scooter, and its rolling and air resistance would be less per person. Takahashi himself is no lightweight, yet the bike (he says, and I believe him) goes well with him riding with a *passenger*. Looks like it would be a good product. If it were a trifle small, Scott would doubtless be able to have one with a head- or shoulders-sized hole in the roof. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 05:24:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA16494 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 05:24:07 -0800 Received: from roimar.imar.ro (roimar.imar.ro [193.226.4.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA16348 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 05:23:25 -0800 Received: by roimar (MX V3.1C) id 27479; Thu, 09 Nov 1995 15:31:35 0200 Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 15:30:55 0200 From: itimc roimar.imar.ro To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Message-ID: <00999240.D3542640.27479 roimar> Subject: vtx: Yusmar, sonoluminescence Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends, 1- Due to the interruption of the Bucharest-Cluj phone line I couldn't get my messages from Nov 9, but I got my messages from a day before. (was busy with family problems) I learned that the YUSMAR in St. Petersburg has no radiators (this explains the slow temperature increase in the tent), and no by-pass tube. As I have told, in my opinion it cannot work. All I can do is to repeat once again that the heat source needs a heat consumer and that the Delovoi Mir's leaflet shows clearly the presence of the by-pass tube ; if the YUSMAR is liquid/gas/liquid cavitation device as I think, this tube is the heart of the device. Everything depends on how long the experiments can continue after radical changes. 2-I have found today some interesting papers on sonoluminescence and cavitation in Current Contents: T. G. Leighton: "Bubble population in acoustic cavitation" Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 2: 2 (OCT 1995) pp 123-136 L. Crum: "Comments on the evolving field of sonochemistry by a cavitation physicist" Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 2; 2 (OCT 1995) pp147-152 L. S. Bernstein, M. R. Zakin: "Confined electron model for single- bubble sonoluminescence" Journal of Physical Chemistry 99:40 (OCT 5 1995) pp 14619-14627 It is possible that the last one could contribute to the understanding of how cavitation bubbles are capturing ZPE and which electronic dynamic structures are characteristic for both these bubbles and the catalytic centers. Will try to get all. And all the best wishes from Peter Gluck! From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 06:53:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA13033 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 06:52:54 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA13005 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 06:52:49 -0800 Received: from net-1-184.austin.eden.com (net-1-184.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.184]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA00539 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 08:52:46 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 08:52:46 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511091452.IAA00539 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: Takahashi's magnets X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, you said: >Claims new 'bond magnet' has highest known energy product at 128.4MGOe. >Graphs show (inter alia) B/H curve. Looks queer to me, ends curve over. FAX me that BH curve, please. 128MGO is pretty damned unbelieveable. In my alter ego as magnetic bearing design engineer I have surveyed the state-of-the-art in permanent magnets and the best you can buy now is in the 40's (NdFeB of course). Some vendors have talked about achieving 50's in the lab but they quickly admit that they don't last and don't hold together. Also, were the four batteries EACH 5" x 8" x 6" or were they all together that size? With tha info, I'll make an estimate of the energy capacity. Also, you said the motor was "less than 6" in all directions"....care to make a estimate of actual length and diameter? With that info, I could make an estimate of its power capability both with real magnets and with 128 MGO magnets. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From fznidarsic gpu.com Thu Nov 9 08:58:04 1995 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA29858 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 08:57:55 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA03957 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM); Thu, 9 Nov 1995 11:57:34 -0500 Message-Id: <199511091657.AA03957 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 9 Nov 1995 11:57:34 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM Subject: vtx: Stupid qu Date: Thu, 09 Nov 95 11:56:00 EST Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: 09 Nov 95 10:43:40 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Stupid question about Newton's laws Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com To:vortex This is not a subject I'd raise elsewhere, but it's been bugging me "these thir'y year nor more, man and beast'. Perhaps somebody would have the patience and charity to straighten me out. If we take the Newtonian laws of motion, if distance = s and time = t, we have m*s/t = momentum (I suppose we should say m*ds/dt, but no matter) No force appears here, of course. And F = m*s/t*t And our taking the second differential wrt time gave us a force. Fine. So what do we get if go at it again? Is it just F/t = m*s/t*t*t ? Or is it less simple? I only ask because long, long ago - when I did at least have some faint grip on mathematics - I seemed to get some funny answers playing with this. Any comment, anybody? Chris Chris...I started thinking about the same relationships several years ago. I began at that point to get interested in fields. For example the magnetic field carries the momentum of a moving electric charge. This momentum is described by a property called inductive reactance. I found, to my surprise, that General Relativity describes the gravitomagn etic field. It, like the electric field, is the first derivative of the original field. It carries the momentum of moving matter. The transitional forces produced by the gravitomagnetic field are very small, however, they have been detected by satellite gyroscope experiments. The second derivative of the electric field is the induced electric field. This is the field that makes the spark when you turn off a switch. This field carries the kinetic Energy of a moving charge. Likewise the second derivative of the gravitational field carries the kinetic energy of moving mass. This is the field Webber was looking for. I tried to derive these fields from a simple integration of the laws of motion. I did not succeed, because these fields are vectors with a magnitude and direction. Once I realized this, I was able to derive all of the components of the electric and gravitational fields by following the Maxwell's developments. All of this development is on my "book on a disk". The results are as follows: The original equation express the relationship between a moving electric field and an electric current. .......................................... / I = eo(d/dt)| E*da / cs Its first derivative expresses the momentum carried by a moving electrical charge. (Total flux) = uo(dq/dt) Its second derivative is a resistance to acceleration. The product e. of this resistance and distance expresses the energy of a moving -e. volts = uo(di/dt) ....................................................................... A similar sequence of equations applies to the gravitational field. The original equation expresses motion as a flow of gravitational flux. / I = (uoeo)(d/dt)| E*dA / cs Its first derivative gives the gravitomagnetic field. This field like the magnetic field carries the momentum of moving mass. field = (G/cc)(dm/dt) Its second derivative of expresses a resistance to motion or inertia. The product of this inertia and distance expresses the negative grav' potential associated with moving matter. -Energy = (G/ccr)(dp/dt) ....................................................................... This is a rather long story but all of the momentum and energy carried by moving matter and moving electrical charges can be expressed by these equations. This is the proper way to do what you have tried to do, in vector space, with fields. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 11:30:09 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA03149 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 11:30:07 -0800 Received: from big.aa.net (root big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA03107 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 11:30:01 -0800 Received: from s3c3p0.aa.net (s3c3p0.aa.net [204.157.220.156]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA21923 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 11:29:59 -0800 Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 11:29:59 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199511091929.LAA21923 big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mwm aa.net (Michael Mandeville) Subject: vtx: Takahashi Query Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Is Takahashi or any of his associates net capable? -email address? -web url? ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 22:23:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA24813 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 22:22:57 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA24781 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 22:22:52 -0800 Received: from net-1-191.austin.eden.com (net-1-191.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.191]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id AAA22160 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 00:22:47 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 00:22:47 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511100622.AAA22160 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: Takahasi's data X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris sent me about 10 pages of data and description from Takahasi. There is a lot of information in these pages and I have extracted what looks really interesting: The "Y.T. Magnet": He named it after himself (Yasunori Takahasi). The data presented is rather contradictory: One sheet that looks like a section title page says "NEW DEVELOPMENT Succeeded in the development of Bond Magnet having the world's highest value of max energy product of 44.4 MGO" OK, a "bond magnet" is one that has the magnetic particles glued together in some kind of matrix (e.g. epoxy, glass, rubber, etc.) The relatively soft bond matrix limits the maximum degree of magnetization that can be maintained in the magnet. The other way to make a magnet is by sintering the particles together which is much stronger and can thus be magnetized more thoroughly. In the text, he claims that when such a bond magnet is "converted" to a sintered magnet, the MGO product will exceed 100. Several places he talks about the Y.T. magnet as if it was sintered and does exceed 100 MGO. He shows a convincing-looking BH curve that has BHmax = 144.7 MGO and Br = 2.75 Tesla...absolutely unheard-of figures for permanent magnets! He varies greatly on the composition of this fabulous magnet: CoFeY, FeSbMn, and FeYbMn are listed apparently interchangeably! He talks about using >100MGO magnets (i.e. sintered) in his motor but then presents an outline of the production method for making the bonded version...? The motor design is a typical PM motor except there are two stationary coils; a field coil for motoring, and an induction coil for generating. He goes on and on about how lower MGO magnets can't achieve high enough efficiencies and then he goes over the top and says "the magnet flux of the Y.T. magnet is so high that the induction energy generated upon passage of the induction coil thru the magnet flux is very large and, therefore, the rotor continues to be driven by the electric energy taken out of the induction coil and stored in the magnet, once a starting power input has been applied." (from p. 5 of the text). Here he appears to be saying: "I have an electric motor driving a generator to make electricity to drive the motor...and it can run itself once started". It is true that stronger magnets make more efficient motors and generators. This is because you get more force per unit of i^2R loss with higher B fields. Another way to improve motor efficiency is to use better conductors. Either approach, however, pushes the efficiency asymptotically towards 100%. >From an engineering standpoint, the motor appears well designed. The housing has cooling fins which would be appropriate to cool the field and induction coils. I'd guess you could get at least 10 horsepower out of the thing especially if he's right about the magnets. Perhaps he's just got a real efficient motor and regenerative braking and this makes for an impressive machine that just doesn't need charging very often. Chris, did you notice anything unusual about the braking? Could you tell if the motor was employed in the braking process? Jed, there's some Japanese writing on one of the pages that could be interesting (i.e. it might contain output specs for the motor). It's the page with the photo of the motor. Could you xlate it? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 07:48:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA01519 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 07:47:48 -0800 Received: from arl-img-3.compuserve.com (arl-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.7.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA01498 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 07:47:44 -0800 Received: by arl-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA29117; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 10:46:26 -0500 Date: 09 Nov 95 10:43:40 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Stupid question about Newton's laws Message-ID: <951109154339_100433.1541_BHG27-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex This is not a subject I'd raise elsewhere, but it's been bugging me "these thir'y year nor more, man and beast'. Perhaps somebody would have the patience and charity to straighten me out. If we take the Newtonian laws of motion, if distance = s and time = t, we have m*s/t = momentum (I suppose we should say m*ds/dt, but no matter) No force appears here, of course. And F = m*s/t*t And our taking the second differential wrt time gave us a force. Fine. So what do we get if go at it again? Is it just F/t = m*s/t*t*t ? Or is it less simple? I only ask because long, long ago - when I did at least have some faint grip on mathematics - I seemed to get some funny answers playing with this. Any comment, anybody? Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 9 23:57:41 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA20942 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 23:57:35 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA20924 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 23:57:31 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id CAA09702; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 02:56:14 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 02:54:25 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex , Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com>, Chris Morriss Subject: vtx: Takahashi's data Message-ID: <951110075425_100433.1541_BHG75-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex;Norman;Chris Scott's posting: "One sheet that looks like a section title page says "NEW DEVELOPMENT Succeeded in the development of Bond Magnet having the world's highest value of max energy product of 44.4 MGO" It's not a title page, just an 'announcement' page. "OK, a "bond magnet" is one that has the magnetic particles glued together in some kind of matrix (e.g. epoxy, glass, rubber, etc.) The relatively soft bond matrix limits the maximum degree of magnetization that can be maintained in the magnet. The other way to make a magnet is by sintering the particles together which is much stronger and can thus be magnetized more thoroughly." He does refer to 'glas' [sic] bond, but I get the impression that he's also talking about a two-phase material where both phases are magnetic. I am not really up on magnet technology. "In the text, he claims that when such a bond magnet is "converted" to a sintered magnet, the MGO product will exceed 100. Several places he talks about the Y.T. magnet as if it was sintered and does exceed 100 MGO. He shows a convincing-looking BH curve that has BHmax = 144.7 MGO and Br = 2.75 Tesla...absolutely unheard-of figures for permanent magnets! He varies greatly on the composition of this fabulous magnet: CoFeY, FeSbMn, and FeYbMn are listed apparently interchangeably! He talks about using >100MGO magnets (i.e. sintered) in his motor but then presents an outline of the production method for making the bonded version...?" I hope that Scott will be less confused after he gets all the sheets. Airmail today, I promise! Yes, I think the YT magnet has three tricks: the presence of an unnamed element, the cooking in hydrogen to prevent any ingress of oxygen or oxidation into the material, and this two-phase thing. There are also several diagrams of multi-layer 'needles', but whether these are crystals or constructed I haven't worked out. I hope Norman (who has copies of all this stuff) will chime in on all this 'cos I'm up to my neck in all sorts of jobs just now. "The motor design is a typical PM motor except there are two stationary coils; a field coil for motoring, and an induction coil for generating. He goes on and on about how lower MGO magnets can't achieve high enough efficiencies and then he goes over the top and says "the magnet flux of the Y.T. magnet is so high that the induction energy generated upon passage of the induction coil thru the magnet flux is very large and, therefore, the rotor continues to be driven by the electric energy taken out of the induction coil and stored in the magnet, once a starting power input has been applied." (from p. 5 of the text)." "Here he appears to be saying: "I have an electric motor driving a generator to make electricity to drive the motor...and it can run itself once started"." Yep. He is saying also that the power consumption of a brushless dc motor can be reduced by using it as a generator to supply some of the (true, I suppose, but surely pointless). He never quite comes out and says he is getting o-u, it's all done by suggestion. "It is true that stronger magnets make more efficient motors and generators. This is because you get more force per unit of i^2R loss with higher B fields. Another way to improve motor efficiency is to use better conductors. Either approach, however, pushes the efficiency asymptotically towards 100%." But not past it! All the other 'o-u' motors have a discontinuity in the rotation, like the 'snail cam' rotor. I had expected that my visit might give me a handle on those. You can imagine how I felt when I saw all this stuff! "From an engineering standpoint, the motor appears well designed. The housing has cooling fins which would be appropriate to cool the field and induction coils. I'd guess you could get at least 10 horsepower out of the thing especially if he's right about the magnets. Perhaps he's just got a real efficient motor and regenerative braking and this makes for an impressive machine that just doesn't need charging very often." Oh, it's well designed all right! I would agree with the last sentence, completely. So, I am sure would Takahashi - the old fox. So what is he playing at? Is his video demonstration a fraud? I'm confused. "Chris, did you notice anything unusual about the braking? Could you tell if the motor was employed in the braking process?" Definitely. You can feel it, and we measured it. I mentioned it in my first report. "Jed, there's some Japanese writing on one of the pages that could be interesting (i.e. it might contain output specs for the motor). It's the page with the photo of the motor. Could you xlate it?" What, Jed, the hard-line skeptic? That Jed? OK, I've faxed him that sheet on high res, which is all I can do... Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 00:21:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA28026 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 00:21:13 -0800 Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA28015 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 00:21:08 -0800 Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA23550; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 03:19:52 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 03:18:32 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Takahasi's data Message-ID: <951110081832_100060.173_JHB103-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, >> The housing has cooling fins which would be appropriate to cool the field and induction coils. << The very existance of cooling fins admits that there are significant losses - unless - Tak. has managed to introduce superconductivity !!!!! - Not very likely though. Further to my last posting, re: my comments about the continuous running devices not having any deceleration to create regen., I suppose that if the gen. coils are fed back to the propulsion field coils it might run for a short time on its own. If the reports are genuine, and the motor/gens keep on running for long periods without any battery, then we have problems. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ This all has the flavour of Harold Aspden and the Adams motor, so I wonder what validity Tak's patents have when compared with Aspden's. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 00:55:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA05096 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 00:55:15 -0800 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA05070 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 00:55:11 -0800 Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA29768; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 03:53:55 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 03:52:18 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Cooling fins Message-ID: <951110085218_100433.1541_BHG60-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Norman Horwood writes: "The very existance of cooling fins admits that there are significant losses - unless - Tak. has managed to introduce superconductivity !!!!! - Not very likely though." And (perhaps foolishly) I can't let that pass. If Takahashi is half as bright as I think he is, he would use existing castings for a standard motor casing to put his new motor in. Mouldings and castings would be unnecessarily expensive for a few prototypes. The 'professional' quality of the casing was one of those things which jarred slightly, it took me a while to recognise that this was what was 'wrong' about them. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:05:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA18660 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 02:05:24 -0800 Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA18653 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 02:05:22 -0800 Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA26520; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 05:04:05 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 05:00:53 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Cooling fins Message-ID: <951110100052_100060.173_JHB42-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> he would use existing castings for a standard motor casing to put his new motor in. << A very good point. In any case you reported that the motor housing was cool to the touch when you returned from your test run, so there was very little heat to disperse. I think you also said that the brakes were warm, so at least some of the energy of momentum was lost there!! Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:14:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA14632 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 19:03:50 -0800 Received: from ddi.digital.net (ddi.digital.net [198.69.104.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA14575 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 19:03:42 -0800 Received: from [198.69.104.36] (pm8_0.digital.net [198.69.104.36]) by ddi.digital.net (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA18580 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 22:01:52 -0500 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 22:01:20 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tilleyrw digital.net (Robert Tilley) Subject: vtx: E-Quest??? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Does anyone know what's happening with E-Quest? Have they totally dropped out of the energy business? Their president, Dick Raymonds, had told me over the phone that they have reproducible overy-unity, from a simple 2+ times O/U to an unstable 100+ times O/U. The last I knew was they they had written a paper to be published in a forthcoming journal about their recent work. I repeat, does anyone have any knowledge beyond what's on their WWW page? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | "Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, | | and why. Then do it." -- Lazarus Long | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | Robert Tilley || tilleyrw digital.net || "Once upon a time..." | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | **** -- ***** -| http://www.digital.net/~tilleyrw |- ***** -- **** | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:18:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA13699 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 10:43:32 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA13629; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 10:43:23 -0800 Received: from net-1-242.austin.eden.com (net-1-242.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.242]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id MAA13964; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 12:43:15 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 12:43:15 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511091843.MAA13964 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: question about Newton's laws X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:43 AM 11/9/95 EST, Chris wrote: >So what do we get if go at it again? Is it just > >F/t = m*s/t*t*t ? Switching notation a bit, Chris. this says dF/dt = m*da/dt or rate of change of force is proportional to rate of change of acceleration. That's correct. "rate of change of acceleration" has a name in engineering parlance: "jerk". Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:21:59 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA13508 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 16:26:38 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA13443 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 16:26:28 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id TAA04086; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 19:25:08 -0500 Date: 09 Nov 95 19:23:21 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: recent fax Message-ID: <951110002321_100060.173_JHB74-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, >> Nothing in our standard understanding of the interaction of currents and magnetic fields suggests that things go o-u when the magnets get real strong.<< Absolutely, and we must stop confusing performance with efficiency where seat- of-the-pants tests are concerned. As I suggested in my last posting, even if the Takahashi stuff is only very high performance and not ou, it must be a very good system for town transport. The regen. aspect is probably the most worthwhile feature, since if it really is as efficient as it appears in so small a unit, then it will have a useful range and relatively small batteries. However, in the continuous drive units, like the watches and the demo video fog-lights, there is no regen. possible in a deceleration mode, there being no deceleration. So what is going on there is still unclear. I asked Tak. whether there is a small demo unit available for bench testing with full instrumentation. He said that they were making one and it would be available soon. This was in the context of the RIGB getting something to play with. Like Chris said, if they have these frightening magnets, heaven help anyone trying to manipulate them without some robotic device. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:23:00 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA00512 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 12:31:41 -0800 Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA00450 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 12:31:31 -0800 Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA08250; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 15:30:05 -0500 Date: 09 Nov 95 15:28:41 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Takahashi query Message-ID: <951109202841_100433.1541_BHG75-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Michael Mandeville asks: "Is Takahashi or any of his associates net capable? -email address? -web url?" Not as far as I know. Takeo Sawai (Sciex UK) is at 20 Hocroft Road, London NW2 2BL, 0171 (from US that is 011-44-171) -794-1853, fax -1856. In the US, Mark Goldes (CEO, MPI - Magnetic Power Inc), has been following Takahashi's work with great interest over a period of time. He can be contacted at 301 A North Main Street, PO Box 880, Sebastopol, CA 95473. Tel 707-829-9391, fax -1002. He may be able and willing to give further information. Further study of the Takahashi papers does make me have quite a bit of confidence in him. In general, what I thought a bit dubious was mostly the way they are written. I now find that the bits I understand make reasonable sense, while those that look peculiar may only seem that way because I don't quite understand them. But Scott now has ten pages or so, he is better equipped than I am to comment. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott has just made those first comments, which fit my own assessments. Yes, he got my selection of pages! As to the supposed o-u performance, I agree precisely with what Scott says. On the other side, I have to then consider that the guy who can do all this is either legit with his claims, or is telling a pack of lies. There's no space here for error. I have come to no conclusion, but I would suggest that if Takahashi is correct in his assertions something very strange would be going on (probably at the molecular level) within those two-phase materials. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:25:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA15692 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 10:48:22 -0800 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA15610 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 10:48:12 -0800 Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA25036; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 13:46:55 -0500 Date: 09 Nov 95 13:45:09 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Magnets, motors Message-ID: <951109184508_100433.1541_BHG45-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Scott, ">Claims new 'bond magnet' has highest known energy product at 128.4MGOe. >Graphs show (inter alia) B/H curve. Looks queer to me, ends curve over." I sort of screwed up. Yes, he does claim that energy product, but it is a new claim, for a new material. He is not claiming that for the "YT" magnet, which he is apparently using in the motor on the scooter. That is an NdFeBX magnet, he doesn't disclose the X. I hadn't read the 52 pages of documentation properly. "FAX me that BH curve, please. 128MGO is pretty damned unbelieveable. In my alter ego as magnetic bearing design engineer I have surveyed the state-of-the-art in permanent magnets and the best you can buy now is in the 40's (NdFeB of course). Some vendors have talked about achieving 50's in the lab but they quickly admit that they don't last and don't hold together. " That's what I thought, too, though I prefer Teslas to Gauss(!). But I will shortly fax you some of the B/H curves. They seem a bit strange to me, but I'm not very familiar with such curves for exotic magnets. "Also, were the four batteries EACH 5" x 8" x 6" or were they all together that size? With tha info, I'll make an estimate of the energy capacity. Also, you said the motor was "less than 6" in all directions"....care to make a estimate of actual length and diameter? With that info, I could make an estimate of its power capability both with real magnets and with 128 MGO magnets." They were that size (estimated) EACH. I have to stick with by assessment of the dimensions of the motor, which I gave as 140mm diameter and about the same length. Norman may have seen it better, and maybe he can add to this. I am making allowance for my tendency to underestimate diameters as against dimensions of 'boxes'. I shall alsa fax diagrams of the motor/generator and its rotor, which are pretty much full size - perhaps a little smaller, the drawings come out at 120mm. I really think that 130-135mm would be a better size estimate than 140mm, I'm not that certain. On the batteries, they were fitted rather too neatly *not* to be the standard ones for this Honda electric scooter. Such scooters don't seem to be popular here, you may have more luck calling up your own local Honda dealer for more info. The vertical dimension of the batteries was difficult to see clearly - even the lateral one wasn't too good, because there is a shroud over their edges. Here are a few quotes from the documents, and don't shoot the messenger please: re regen capability of motor - best magnets are NdFeB, at 36MGOe. Disadvantage is low Curie point, inferior temp characteristics of flux density, low coercive force in demagnetisation curve [?], but with YT magnet: "The said power-generating electric motor can permit a long-lasting self-running by only supplying it with a starting power input and can realise an efficient storage [?] of electric power, by employing a special permanent having a BHmax value of at least 50MGOe, preferably at least 100MGOe, and a permeance coefficient of 1.0 to 4.0, preferably 2.5 to 3.5, in the form of, for example, duplex structure with an inner layer magnet of CoFeY and an outer layer magnet of NdFeB." Quite a bit of detail on the motor, I may fax some of it. I do note how the regen circuit has characteristics of a parallel resonant circuit. Ah! Motor dimensions! It is slightly longer than I thought, the total length of the casing is nearer 160mm, because I couldn't see the inner bulge. The diameter is 139mm, but 158mm across the widest diameter of the cooling fins. [I wonder why it has cooling fins!!] On the YT magnet, he says it was an accidental discovery made while researching semiconductors. BHmax of 18-120MGOe or higher. Seems to be a *two-phase* material, where oxidation of the mixture of [sic] BX, NdX and FeX is prevented before firing in an inert atmosphere. There are various test data, one shows Br (remanent flux, innit?) of 27976 Gauss. Oh, hell, this is all so confusing, and I think the pages are shuffled. The next section says that it has a needle-crystal structure, and consists of FeYbMnX. As far as I can tell, 'YT' magnet is a term covering a variety of compounds, it's the process and the presence of 'X' which produces the high remanence. I'll make sure the whole package is in the mail to you tomorrow morning, and fax some of the sheets meanwhile. It's all a bit clever for me, all this stuff. I'm really more a four-pound lump-hammer man, myself. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:28:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA09064 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 12:49:42 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA08895 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 12:49:19 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA01940 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Thu, 9 Nov 1995 15:47:07 -0500 Message-Id: <199511092047.AA01940 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 9 Nov 1995 15:47:07 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: PUTHOFF aol.com To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: derivative Date: Thu, 09 Nov 95 15:41:21 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> PUTHOFF AOL.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> FRANK ZNIDARSIC -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Chris, Thank you for you question about force, momentum, and energy. Commonly the derivative of displacement is taken to give velocity and the 2d derivative of of displacement is taken to yield acceleration. Taking the derivative of momentum to get kinetic energy does not make any sense in a classical sort of way. If you really want to understand (get a feel for) what is going on you must perform some field calculations in vector space. I have done this on a book on a disk. I will recap the main points here. Lets start with two assumptions; all forces are imparted by fields and all fields exhibit a type of symmetry. Maxwell developed an expression for current flow. This expression states the current flow (electron flow) is determined by the amount of electrical flux that passes through a closed surface. / I = eo(d/dt) |E*dA eq #1 / cs ......................................................................... Taking the derivative of equation #1 yields equation #2. Equation #2 states that the total magnetic flux around a current flow is proportional to the current flow. In a electrical current the magnetic field carries the momentum of current flow. This momentum is know as reactance. (total magnetic flux) = uo(dq/dt) eq #2 ...................................................................... The second derivative of eq #1 is the induced electrical field. This is the field that makes the spark when you turn off a light switch. It is the force produced by a changing momentum. This product of this force (in volts) and distance (current flow) yields the energy contained within an electrical current flow. The second derivative is given by equation #3. volts = uo(dI/dt) .......................................................................... ...................................................................... A similar analysis can be done for the gravitational field. Equation 1b states that the flow of mass is proportional to the flow of gravitational flux through a closed surface. / I = (eo)(d/dt)| E*dA Eq 1B m / cs ..................................................................... The first derivative of eq 1b yields the gravitomagnitic field. This field carries the momentum of moving matter. The gravitomagnitic field is predicted by General Relativity. The effect of the Earth's gravitomagnetic field has been measured by satellite gyroscope experiments. The first deravitive is expressed by eqaution 2b (field total) = (G/cc)(dm/dt) eq 2b Note dm/dt that's momentum. ........................................................................ The second derivative of eq 1b is the induced gravitational field. This field produces a force that acts against any acceleration. The product of this force and distance gives the negative gravitational potential energy imparted to accelerating mass. The second derivative is given by equation 3B and is expressed in units of newtons/kg. (induced field) = (G/ccr)(dp/dt) Eq 3b This second derivative force is the one Webber was looking for in his gravitational wave experiments. As per my past posting this field links local forces to the rest of the universe. (force local)= (force on the universe) dp/dt = field (mass of the universe) dp/dt = G/ccr (dp/dt)(Mu) -- | (G/ccr)Mu = 1 | ... dp/dt local = dp/dt unverse <- .G = the grav constant, c = light speed, r = radius of the univ in meters Mu = mass of the universe 2 x 10 exp 53 kg ................................................................... Some amazing things can be learned about fields from the study of symmetry. Intern some amazing things can be learned about momentum and energy from the study of fields. These are some a deep understanding that can be gleaned from the study of field theory. This things are so amazing that they may, in fact, explain the source of zero point energy. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:32:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA20042 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 23:53:55 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA20017 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 23:53:47 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA02421; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 08:54:26 +0100 Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 08:54:26 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Stupid question about Newton's laws In-Reply-To: <951109154339_100433.1541_BHG27-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 9 Nov 1995, Chris Tinsley wrote: > To:vortex > > This is not a subject I'd raise elsewhere, but it's been bugging me "these > thir'y year nor more, man and beast'. Perhaps somebody would have the patience > and charity to straighten me out. > > If we take the Newtonian laws of motion, if distance = s and time = t, we have > > m*s/t = momentum (I suppose we should say m*ds/dt, but no matter) > > No force appears here, of course. And > > F = m*s/t*t > > And our taking the second differential wrt time gave us a force. Fine. > > So what do we get if go at it again? Is it just > > F/t = m*s/t*t*t ? > > Or is it less simple? > > I only ask because long, long ago - when I did at least have some faint grip > on mathematics - I seemed to get some funny answers playing with this. > > Any comment, anybody? Yes: You are obviously not a Fortran programmer. {:] -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:32:46 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA22554 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 02:32:46 -0800 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA22545 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 02:32:43 -0800 Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA27156; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 05:31:26 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 05:29:31 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Newton's laws Message-ID: <951110102931_100433.1541_BHG72-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Scott, "Jerk"? I asked for that, didn't I? Actually, I decided to avoid using differential notation, but my question stands: Does dF/dt really, actually, measuredly equal da/dt? Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 02:46:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA17059 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 01:57:04 -0800 Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA17031 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 01:56:58 -0800 Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA13604; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 04:55:41 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 04:54:10 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Takahashi's data Message-ID: <951110095409_100060.173_JHB29-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris et al, >> I hope Norman (who has copies of all this stuff) will chime in on all this << I have been putting in my bits where I feel that I can add to the fund of knowledge and conjecture on the Takahashi hash. I still think that all he has is a very efficient motor/gen. Good luck to him in the market. If the cost is low enough then he has a commercial success on his hands. However if the thing has to be built like a Swiss watch, and he is talking to Swatch and others to make the bits, then he may price it out. We must not forget that if his sintered two-stage magnet is capable of mass production, as he suggests, then this could be his pot of gold, rather than specific applications. His descriptive literature reads like an extract from a patent application in some parts, which might explain the tortuous language, as well as the usual strange translation we have come to love. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 06:29:53 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA15149 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 06:29:27 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA15113 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 06:29:22 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA15191; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:28:04 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 09:26:59 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Magnet Generator Specifications Message-ID: <951110142658_72240.1256_EHB91-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris faxed me this odd document in Japanese. This is what it says, with a few comments in square brackets from me. Magnet Generator Motor (used with scooter) [This sounds as odd in Japanese as it does in English] Magnet generator motor specifications Length: 176 mm Weight 7 kg Input/output electric voltage: Input 50 VAC Internal generation 48 VAC 8 Khz External generation 100 V 30 A [Yes, this sounds weird too] Magnets: BHmax 120 MGOe two phase construction FeSbMn sintered magnet Curie point: 700 deg C Magnet can be used at 450 deg C Coil: 8 p [piece?] magnet 4 p X 2 Sciex Corporation 6-7-5-903 Aoyama Minato-Ku Tokyo 107 [Ritzy downtown address!] Tel: 03-5466-2168 Fax: 03-5485-5994 [photo caption:] Controller and magnet generator motor ------------------------ This document and the other statements from Takahashi give me the strong sense that they are deliberately evading the issue. They do not want to say the gadget is over unity. This may seem craven but I think it is a wise policy. It would be crazy to go around saying you have a perpetual motion machine given the politics of modern science and the patent office. You would incite religious hysteria in most scientists. If Takahashi is in business to make money, he will dance around the issue until it no longer matters. On the other hand, I wish he would do a live demonstration of a self-sustaining o-u motor, if he really has one. A video does not cut the mustard. A video from Toyota is fine; Toyota, Pons and Fleischmann have credibility. Sciex does not. They do not have to say anything, they should just demonstrate it live and let it speak for itself. I wish I could have attended this motor-scooter rally / meeting in England. I'd like to have a word with these people, but I doubt I could get anywhere with them. I am sure they have thought about their policies carefully. I am afraid, however, that they decided to act like all the other funny motor inventors. They will keep it under wraps for the time being.' That means we will never, ever see it, & never get to the bottom of it, & Takahashi will eventually wander off & be forgotten like Mayer the others who make these exotic claims. Sorry to sound so dour, but I am fed up with people like Takahashi. If he can do what he claims, then building a self sustaining machine would be a trivial problem. If he is going to show a video of such a machine, he might as well show the real thing. A video only invites suspicion that the demonstration is rigged. If CF cells put out electricity instead of heat, then they could be made to self sustain very easily. I would have run out of patience with the CF scientists years ago if they had held back from doing that. I have not run out of patience because I have not seen a single CF cell that could be converted into a self sustaining motor. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 06:41:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA19211 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 06:41:05 -0800 Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (0 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA19191 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 06:41:01 -0800 Received: from wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca (wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca [131.136.255.106]) by dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA18912 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:34:15 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199511101434.JAA18912 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca> X-Sender: wspage dgs.drenet.dnd.ca X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:43:57 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: wspage ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: vtx: CF cells with electricity out Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed wrote: > ... If CF cells put out electricity instead of heat, then they could be >made to self sustain very easily. I would have run out of patience with the CF >scientists years ago if they had held back from doing that. I have not run out >of patience because I have not seen a single CF cell that could be converted >into a self sustaining motor. > Surely the specification of the new CETI demo at SOFE suggest that this is possible. My understanding is that even simple semiconductor thermogenerators (TEDs) are at least 10% efficient, so a power factor greater than 10 (you have suggested that it might be as high as 80) would suffice for a self sustaining CETI demo. What do you think? Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 07:15:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA00593 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:15:33 -0800 Received: from relay2.UU.NET (relay2.UU.NET [192.48.96.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA00557 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:15:27 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpgm10173; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 10:13:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA43139; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:12:05 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 544510070095314FEPRI; 10 Nov 1995 07:10:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 10 Nov 1995 07:10:07 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: E-Quest??? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/10/95 07:10:44 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/10/95 03:23 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: E-Quest??? Russ George and company are still at work... I think their ultrasound takes to much tinkering. However, I take exception to calling their results Over Unity. They have measured considerable He4 from their units, indicating the reaction D + D = He4 (maybe D+D+D+D=2He4 to explain no hard gama radiation) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 07:19:38 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA01937 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:19:36 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA01895 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:19:31 -0800 Received: from net-1-100.austin.eden.com (net-1-100.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.100]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA10653 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:19:25 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:19:25 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511101519.JAA10653 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: Takahasi's motor X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks, Chris, Jed, Norman for all the good comments. You know, the more I look at that motor, the more I believe that the housing is a first-rate serious professional design. I'll bet that its the original Honda motor housing that Mr T has put new guts into. Did it fit like a glove into the scooter, Chris? or was it mounted on the typical prototype-looking brackets, etc.? Chris, do you suppose it would be OK for me to show this BH data, etc. to a technical guy I know at Dexter Permag (major supplier of high-tech magnets in the US) to get his reaction? Newton's Laws: Dieter is right...I actually thought you had things wrong for a minute, Chris, before I realized you'd just omitted the parens which would be necessary in most (all?) programming languages. You asked: Is dF/dt = da/dt ? Well not equal but proportional with proportionality constant = m. i.e. dF/dt = m*da/dt Are you asking whether this is really true, Chris? All I know is that it is for my car, especially when my younger son is driving it! Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 07:31:36 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA06298 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:31:29 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA06275 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:31:25 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA03671; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 16:31:58 +0100 Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 16:31:58 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: More on H diffusion in Ni In-Reply-To: <951110131421_100433.1541_BHG104-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I had another look at Gmelin (I've been busy), and this time found the page with diffusion info on it (still looking at Ni, Teil B, Lieferung 2), p.365. It gives, for hydrogen, a value at room temp. of ca. 9*10^-14 m^2/s at 450 C, 7.7*10^-10 " at 850 C 1.1*10^-8 " There is also a table of values of D0 and ED in the equation D(T) = D0 * EXP(-ED/RT) but the values (from many different workers) are all over the place and not worth reproducing. Mr. Gmelin then goes on to say, in the section on the mechanism of diffusion, that hydrogen moves as the atom within Ni, partially to wholly ionised to the proton state. This is known from the ratio of nickel's permeability to H (or the solubility of H in it) to SQRT(p) outside the metal, it says. There is what looks like a key reference to all this, Hill and Johnson, Acta Met. 3 (1955) 566 and 570. As for deuterium, I find no numbers, only the statement that it has a diffusion coefficient at most twice as small as that for hydrogen (that's how it is phrased); i.e. no less than half. There are D0 and ED values but again with quite some spread. There is a reference to a self targeting paper, which I have, by Fiebiger (1957). He shot deuteron beams at various metals and got fusion; its rate, as you might expect, depends on the interplay of deuterium accumulation near the surface, and its diffusion sway from it, so these people were interested in the diffusion rates. Well, when I say I have that paper, I guess I mean in principle; for the moment I can't find it. I hope this helps you, Scott. But by now, your Ni rod might be fully charged, Gmelin or no Gmelin. Don't forget the Pb apron. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 18:26:17 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA19377 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 18:24:17 -0800 Received: from karloff.lanl.gov (karloff.lanl.gov [128.165.16.190]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA19319 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 18:24:07 -0800 Message-Id: <199511110224.SAA19319 mail.eskimo.com> Received: by karloff.lanl.gov (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA179696655; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 19:24:15 -0700 From: Ron McFee Subject: vtx: Newton and Takahasi To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 10 Nov 95 19:24:14 MST Cc: mcfee lanl.gov Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris writes: >"Jerk"? I asked for that, didn't I? Actually, I decided to avoid using >differential notation, but my question stands: > >Does dF/dt really, actually, measuredly equal da/dt? Scott replies: >You asked: Is dF/dt = da/dt ? Well not equal but proportional with >proportionality constant = m. > >i.e. dF/dt = m*da/dt > >Are you asking whether this is really true, Chris? All I know is that it >is for my car, especially when my younger son is driving it! This is usually correct. However the general "Rocket Scientist" expression for this should be, dF/dt = m(t) * d(a(t))/dt + a(t) * d(m(t))/dt. Since in most cases d(m(t))/dt = 0, your form is correct. However if the mass is changing as in a rocket which is expelling large amounts of burning propellant this derivative of mass can be important. The Takahasi device is most interesting. However I agree with Jed that an open public demonstration is in order. I much admire the bold courage of James Patterson, Denis Cravens, and George Miley in demonstrating the CETI device openly. One must be suspicious of people like Yasunori Takahasi and Yuri Potapov who wish to be secretive about their inventions. This paranoiac behavior is definitely an indication that one must be on guard against fraud. The demonstration of the Yusmar in Saint Petersburg is taking unreasonably long. If they really had a device that produced 10's of kilo watts of excess heat, then it would be obvious by installing it in a reasonable structure and comparing it with a resistive heater in the same or similar structure. The whole test should take less than a few hours. This whole business has attracted quite a few con artists. Already much private money has probably been scammed from unwary investors. It is important to remember that in addition to billions of public monies large amounts of private capital were lost during the last fifty years to the so called "hot fusion" industry. A notable example was KMS Industries which went bankrupt losing several millions. I hope that the "cold fusion" backers fare better. As Peter might say "caveat emptor." Regards, Ron From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 10 23:36:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA23625 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:35:03 -0800 Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA23481 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:34:36 -0800 Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id CAA22832; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 02:33:18 -0500 Date: 11 Nov 95 02:32:07 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Newton and regeneration Message-ID: <951111073206_100060.173_JHB30-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> Strictly, Norman, regeneration is not a function of deceleration. It should cause deceleration, << Your absolutely right - silly loose talk on my part. What I meant to say was that there is an obvious energy conversion under a regen induced deceleration, whereas in a constant speed device the losses normally reduce the rate of energy return more or less hyperbolicly [sp] with time. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 01:24:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA18265 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 01:23:28 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA18245 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 01:23:24 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA27098; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 04:22:06 -0500 Date: 11 Nov 95 04:21:03 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Cc: Senator Domenici Subject: vtx: Copy of: KMS, CON? Message-ID: <951111092102_102021.3045_EHT54-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: FROM: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 TO: Vortex, INTERNET:VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM DATE: 11/11/95 1:59 AM Re: Copy of: KMS, CON? On 11/10/95 Ron McFee Writes: This whole business has attracted quite a few con artists. > Already much private money has probably been scammed from unwary investors. >It is important to remember that in addition billions of public monies >large amounts of private capital were lost during the last fifty years to the >so called "hot fusion" industry. >A notable example was KMS Industries which went bankrupt losing millions. Kip M Siegal (KMS) was a victim of the Los Alamos-D.O.E. resistance to a fusion concept that was placed under a secrecy order because of it's similarity to thermonuclear technology. The security classification stayed on the patent up until the mid eighties. This was the backbone of inertial confinement fusion, Laser and Ion beam that I believe is now called in part Antares. Kip died of a heart attack while testifying before a Senate committee trying to get the thing out from under the Cold War secrecy mode. I resent the insinuation that Kip was a charlatan, He was a victim of the times and jealousy of the "CTR" establishment. Frederick J. Sparber Foot-note to Senator Domenici, Senator: This is a classical example of the bureaucratic effort to compete with and stifle the private sector. They use the media for "Show and Tell" and scare off potential investors where ideas would be brought to the marketplace in an expedient and timely manner. When the tax supported/slipshod R&D gets in trouble, it's back to the well for more tax dollars. I think its time for these empires to be held accountable for this type of activity. Sincerely, F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 02:00:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA24210 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 01:59:55 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA24199 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 01:59:51 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA28712; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 04:58:35 -0500 Date: 11 Nov 95 04:58:07 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Copy of: Direct Conversion with Hydrogen-Nickel? Message-ID: <951111095806_102021.3045_EHT30-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 TO: Vortex, INTERNET:VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM DATE: 11/10/95 10:53 AM RE: Copy of: Direct Conversion with Hydrogen-Nickel? I think one might get a "solar cell" from Radio Shack and put about 500 angstroms of nickel on it and run the Piantelli experiment. The photons should create a decent output from the cell. Seems worth a try. F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 02:37:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA00860 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:16:19 -0800 Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA00823 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:16:13 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpgn16567; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 10:16:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA43580; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 07:09:05 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 250208070095314FEPRI; 10 Nov 1995 07:08:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 10 Nov 1995 07:08:07 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Magnet Generator Specifications To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/10/95 07:08:01 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/10/95 06:39 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Magnet Generator Specifications Right on JED! I think Takahashi (the Per Mo Motor Man, versus the Flat Plate CF Takahahi, so we shall call him PMOMO Tak!) is just what you say, he REEKS of con-man. I think he should be treated as such. Guys, FORGET IT! Anyone who cannot turn over a device to an independent evaluation group, who sounds like a wacky eccentric, probably IS a wacky excentric and not deserving of a moments notice. - Please note the difference here! Even though Patopov's device didn't perform as stated, we have to give P credit. With regard to the device itself, he NEVER TRIED TO HIDE ANYTHING... In point of fact, I am still suspicious that units run with radiative exchange to the outside, and with WATER from his area, might have a slight chance of performing as he claimed. I think it would be dynamite to send someone to P's labs in Moldova with some thermometer, a few portable power meters, and a portable air flow measuring device, some duct tape and plastic. Then his claims could be made or broken at the source. - But! Note the difference: Griggs---Invites people to look, see and try. CETI invites people to look, see, and try.... We do have comparisons. I'd say ANYONE that puts too many controls on what you can observe, who depends on "testimonials", who uses "video tape" (other than to document people who are LOOKING, SEEING and TRYING) is suspect. - Keep this in mind... From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 02:42:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA20071 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 06:43:32 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA19952 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 06:43:10 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA02946 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:41:12 -0500 Message-Id: <199511101441.AA02946 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:41:12 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: GAM+ PITT.EDU To: PUTHOFF aol.com To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com To: WILLIAMS ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: vtx: nuclear Date: Fri, 10 Nov 95 09:40:26 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> FRANK ZNIDARSIC -> PUTHOFF AOL.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> GAM+ PITT.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> WILLIAMS UXL.CSO.UIUC.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 As you all should know by now I am an advocate of the zero point energy theory. As a electrical engineer I have been schooled in field theory. ZPE is a match for an electrical engineer. I even hope to be the first gravitational engineer. There are two theories that attempt to explain the excess energy produced in a cold fusion reaction. 1. ZPE 2. Fusion As I have explained ZPE is generated when zero point fields produce forces in a evanescent plasma. These forces induce positive energy and negative gravitational potential. Energy is created and energy is conserved. The zero point system, which is in the lowest energy state, remains unchanged as it cannot give up any energy. It is the catalyst. A common objection to this scheme is that gravitational forces are 10 exp 39 times weaker than electromagnetic forces. Gravity is currently ignored in current atomic and nuclear models. True, gravity produces vanishingly weak translation forces on a atomic scale, however, it is a potent energy exchange medium. Energy is the area under the curve on a plot of force & displacement. The electromagnetic force is strong but has a limited range. The gravitational force is weak but has a very long range. What matters when it comes to energy is the area under the curve. This area is the same for both forces. I have explained, as best as I can, the source of ZPE. Nuclear...I am not a nuclear engineer and will need some help here. Conventional wisdom states that fusion takes place when sufficient energy is applied to overcome the coulomb repulsion of two protons. In hot fusion this energy is kinetic. What is it in cold fusion? I can see no mechanism for overcoming the coulomb barrier. Do You? If so please tell me. A second means of surmounting the coulomb barrier is tunneling through it. I don't know how to calculate the tunneling rate but others have done it. They found that a small amount of fusion could be occurring by this process; enough, in fact, to account for the few neutrons and gammas that are detected. Not enough, however, to account for the excess of thermal energy. Has anyone done a tunneling calculation? Can you shed some light of the parameters involved? A third nuclear process is K shell electron capture. This is the process where the innermost electron drops into the nucleus. As Scott pointed this reaction produces energetic gamma rays. These rays, which are a signature of K shell electron capture, have not been detected. There has been a lot of talk about catalytic reactions. These reactions lower the barrier that prevents a reaction from taking place. In chemical systems the catalyst mechanically absorbs two species lowering the barrier (work function) between them an allows the two species to react. The fundamental property of a catalyst is that it must react which the interacting species. Catalysts are electronic, are they not? I have never head of a nuclear catalyst. Can anything react with a proton that the shrouded by an immense cloud of electrons? Please tell me, what is a nuclear catalyst, how does such a catalyst reach in through the electron cloud and react with the nucleus? I did not find any answers in nuclear theory. I did, however, find answers in ZPE theory. I do admitt, these is a lot I do not know. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 02:42:46 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA14146 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:08:54 -0800 Received: from arl-img-3.compuserve.com (arl-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.7.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA14119 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:08:50 -0800 Received: by arl-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id MAA05764; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 12:07:28 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 12:00:21 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Direct Conversion with Hydrogen-Nickel? Message-ID: <951110170020_102021.3045_EHT27-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I think one might get a "solar cell" from Radio Shack and put about 500 angstroms of nickel on it and run the Piantelli experiment. The photons should create a decent output from the cell. Seems worth a try. F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 02:45:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA23120 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:33:03 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA23031; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:32:49 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA07047 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0); Fri, 10 Nov 1995 12:32:18 -0500 Message-Id: <199511101732.AA07047 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 10 Nov 1995 12:32:18 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: BILLB eskimo.com To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com To: WILLIAMS ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: vtx: invite Date: Fri, 10 Nov 95 12:31:35 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> BILLB ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> WILLIAMS UXL.CSO.UIUC.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Michael, It appears that you are interested in exchanging information. You may want to join our discussion group. We are certainly interested in your CETI cell tests at the Univ of Ill. Billb can we sign Michael up? Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 02:47:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA18192 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:15:39 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA18131 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:15:31 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id XAA15555; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:15:28 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:15:27 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: email traffic jams In-Reply-To: <199511110509.XAA04295 natashya.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 10 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: > Bill, it seems like we're getting into some email traffic jams that cause > Vortex distributions to lag up to several hours. > > Reckon it's just some nodes that have been clogged with all the newcomers to > the net? Is anyone else having problems? I've not noticed any here, so the trouble must be with messages being sent FROM majordomo. If Scott is the only one noticing it, there must be some weirdness between here and Texas. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 02:47:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA26686 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:42:19 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA26616 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:42:06 -0800 Received: from net-1-100.austin.eden.com (net-1-164.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.164]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id LAA18395 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 11:41:56 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 11:41:56 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511101741.LAA18395 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: attn Vortex Brains X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I need to know how the thermal conductivity of a hydrogen-air mixture varies with air content. Preliminary experience show that it goes something like this: | * C | o | n | d | u | * c | t | i | v | i | * t | y | * | * * _________________________________________________ 0 100 percent air In other words, a little air seems to rapidly spoil the high conductivity of hydrogen. Can anyone provide quantitative data on this? It'll help my "hydrogen energy" experiment which is sorta, barely going now (we're in the discovery phase...i.e. where you discover all the things that are wrong with your apparatus!). Thanks Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 02:54:09 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA27434 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:44:04 -0800 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA27372 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:43:54 -0800 Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id MAA19899; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 12:42:32 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 12:40:13 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Everything except vortices Message-ID: <951110174013_100433.1541_BHG65-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex 1. Takahashi. He claims magnets with a 3 Tesla surface field, when just about the most special NdFeB are 1.2T. He now claims to have beaten that (by implication from his later claim). He showed us the capacitor-energy-storing water heater which he said was a prototype from one of the main domestic appliance places in Japan - I forget the name. It looked like it, too. He has his man in London set up in a half-million-pound house and has a posh address in Tokyo (says Jed). He says those watches have no battery and no self-winder. I looked at them (they have a glass back), and I can only say that I couldn't see the trick if there was one. Thanks, Jed, for doing the translation. It adds information. But I think you are too quick to hang him. He is clearly feeling his way so far, and (according to Goldes) now leans toward backing off the o-u *claim* and letting his gadgets speak for themselves. See my comments on CETI. I doubt if he is going to wander away into the woodwork. I think he has a new magnet-making technology, the only real question is why he is mentioning the supposed o-u performance of the motors at all. Oh, hell, taking all in all I can only see this as real or some marketing trick - a trick which backfires badly. The academic engineer was so upset by the claim of o-u that he dismissed the whole presentation - which was pretty funny to watch him doing, actually. Unlike Jed, I'm keeping my options open. Note that T only recently developed this motor - I suspect that he is in a state of confusion about it himself. He may even have managed to kid himself, and may now be back-tracking at speed. Dieter, It was presumptuous of me to assume that you were not in at the beginning of computing - I too worked on thermionic machines for a short while. But I think you need a career devoted to a subject before you can be a real negativist - as I am about most aspects of computers. I respect those whose enthusiasm for science, computers, CF or whatever remains undimmed *after* many years slaving away at the coal-face of the subject. Most of us become more cynical, eh? "I seem to be the token black-sheep skeptic in this list." This list gives people a chance to discuss things like o-u without getting involved in wasteful flame wars. We don't get that opportunity elsewhere. We rarely agree about anything, which is as perhaps it should be, but we save ourselves from constantly having to fend people off while we disagree. Our willingness to discuss these things does not - you may have noticed - stem from incompetence in technical matters. Bill says: "Surely the specification of the new CETI demo at SOFE suggest that this is possible. My understanding is that even simple semiconductor thermogenerators (TEDs) are at least 10% efficient, so a power factor greater than 10 (you have suggested that it might be as high as 80) would suffice for a self sustaining CETI demo." Depends on too many factors. Getting back 10% of a glowing radiant heater's power is one thing. Getting back 2% of the 5W at delta-T of 5degC - not so easy, I think. Anyway, I would suspect that CETI (or Takahashi) would be commercially unwise to claim or demonstrate a self-sustainer. Think about it. Such is the state of education that a device which worked (for example) as a 2kW room-heater with 30W input would sell well and be quite acceptable if the price and lifespan were good. One that you could disconnect after 20 minutes would be regarded as a fraud and a trick. We tend to forget details like this. Oh, *later* they could sell them like that. Frank: I wish I could help with your programming question. But I've only ever written a few small programs for Windows, and never yet used C++ (I dropped out of computing nearly four years ago). Also, unfortunately perhaps, us old-timers tend to sneer at Windows and use things like Procomm and Aedit for our email (I'm now thinking of writing some of my own routines to help with that!). It is partly justified snobbery, partly a refusal to move with the times, and partly the desire to rest on our now-ancient achievements rather than risk being shown up by young whippersnappers. We like to swap tales of old mainframes, and how people left 3-phase 410V cables with male terminals lying around under the false floors. It beats competing in the real world, I kid you not. I will admit I was really looking for experimental confirmation that dF/dt = m.da/dt (better, Dieter)? rather than mathematical 'field mathematics'. Part of my problem is that I am unhappy about 'fields' - at least magnetic and electric ones mediated by virtual photons of apparently infinite penetrative ability. To proclaim their physical existence smacks to me of a violation of Ockham's razor, only needed because direct action at a distance between matter and matter (which is the only evidence for these fields that I've ever seen) is disliked. If I am correct, then this is pure illogic and defective reasoning - the same kind of reasoning which led Franklin, Lavoisier and the Academie Francaise to reject 'stones from the sky'. I'd rather take the universe as it is than attempt to impose my own weak reason on it. Scott: "You know, the more I look at that motor, the more I believe that the housing is a first-rate serious professional design. I'll bet that its the original Honda motor housing that Mr T has put new guts into. Did it fit like a glove into the scooter, Chris? or was it mounted on the typical prototype-looking brackets, etc.?" I think the only prototyping visible was the fitting of the four "1F 48V" caps in the underseat compartment. I also think that you should check with your local Honda people and get a leaflet and look at one of theirs. The fact that it was so well-behaved on the road also suggests it was an only slightly modified vehicle. "You asked: Is dF/dt = da/dt ? Well not equal but proportional with proportionality constant = m. i.e. dF/dt = m*da/dt "Are you asking whether this is really true, Chris? All I know is that it is for my car, especially when my younger son is driving it!" Yep, I missed the m!! Yes, of course that's what I'm asking. Why should I not ask? I've never seen this proven, and I know how naughty I am to even ask the question - that's why I prefaced it the way I did. In fact, I see nothing wrong with asking where the experimental proof for something is. Your anecdotal report is not adequate. [that is meant to be a joke, by the way] "Chris, do you suppose it would be OK for me to show this BH data, etc. to a technical guy I know at Dexter Permag (major supplier of high-tech magnets in the US) to get his reaction?" We were only asked not to *publish*. I see no problems with what you suggest. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 04:07:03 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id EAA14474 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 04:06:28 -0800 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA14461 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 04:06:23 -0800 Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA10405; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 07:05:06 -0500 Date: 11 Nov 95 07:03:04 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Delays, paranoid inventors Message-ID: <951111120304_100433.1541_BHG54-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Bill asks about delays. This morning (GMT) I received the following messages: 1 "MHUGO EPRI"/vtx: Magnet Generator Specifications 2 FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser/vtx: nuclear 3 Frederick J Sparber/vtx: Direct Conversion with Hydrogen-Nickel? 4 FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser/vtx: invite 5 William Beaty/vtx: Re: email traffic jams 6 Scott Little/vtx: attn Vortex Brains 7 Peter Quizert/vtx: Are You Preapred? 8 Chris Tinsley/vtx: Everything except vortices These were time-stamped (GMT) by Compuserve as being received at 10:47, 10:54, and 10:55. Message 8 is one I sent about 14 hours previously. I don't have the exact time, I deleted it unread. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark writes: "Right on JED! I think Takahashi (the Per Mo Motor Man, versus the Flat Plate CF Takahahi, so we shall call him PMOMO Tak!) is just what you say, he REEKS of con-man. I think he should be treated as such. Guys, FORGET IT! Anyone who cannot turn over a device to an independent evaluation group, who sounds like a wacky eccentric, probably IS a wacky excentric and not deserving of a moments notice." I feel that this comment is intemperate and unwise, and not a fair interpretation of Jed's remarks. It is likely that those on this group who were actually present (Norman Horwood and myself) are better placed to make comments on Takahashi. If my own description of my visit to Sciex UK can be interpreted in this way, then I must have lost any ability to make myself clear which I previously had. My mentions of the word 'fraud' was intended to consider the logical alternatives and not to impugn Sciex in any way. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott asks for assistance from the group's 'brains'. Well, at least that's one message I'm not obliged to respond to... Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 04:37:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA18780 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 13:06:05 -0800 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA18666 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 13:05:48 -0800 Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA16644; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 16:04:18 -0500 Date: 10 Nov 95 16:02:03 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 CompuServe.COM> To: Subject: vtx: CF heat to electricity engineering Message-ID: <951110210203_72240.1256_EHB119-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I mentioned that I have not seen a CF cell that could be converted into a self sustaining motor. Bill Page comments: "Surely the specification of the new CETI demo at SOFE suggest that this is possible." Yes indeed. But for that matter, so did the 1992 data from Pons and Fleischmann. We have known for a long time that CF can reach high enough temperatures, power density, and a large enough C.O.P. to allow a self sustaining machine. However, many practical problems have prevented a real-world implementation. CETI is the first to achieve sufficient control, stability and robustness. They only managed to do it this year, and they only achieved the high C.O.P.s in the last few months. There are still some engineering kinks to be ironed out before it will be safe and practical to scale up to kilowatt levels, but the problems are minor compared to the ones already solved. "My understanding is that even simple semiconductor thermogenerators (TEDs) are at least 10% efficient, so a power factor greater than 10 (you have suggested that it might be as high as 80) would suffice for a self sustaining CETI demo." That is a complicated issue. The efficiency depends upon the operating temperature (Carnot efficiency) and other factors which have not been optimized in the CETI cells. The cells have not been designed with insulation to concentrate the heat at one spot where the TED is located. Most of the heat from the cell would be wasted with today's setup. The CF cell demo as is, running at 5 to 20 watts in that thick glass cylinder, could never be used with TEDs to self sustain. Also, I do not think that ordinary TEDs get anywhere near 10%. I think 3 to 5% is more like it. Some advanced TEDs are more efficient, but they are delicate, unstable and oddly enough they have low melting points. One friend of mine tried to use one with a CF experiment. He ended up with an expensive puddle of rare metals melted together. I do not think it is practical to make a self sustaining heat to electricity machine at only 20 watts. It may be possible, but the components you need for the job are not readily available. It makes no sense to pursue that when we can now scale up safely and build generators of 1 kilowatt or 10 kilowatts instead. If thermal-to-electric CF generators are marketed, improved miniature TED will soon follow. They will be invented, just as miniature hard disks were invented for the emerging personal computer market. By the way, I would not call that a "power factor." It is a C.O.P. or input to output ratio. A power factor is a term used to describe one aspect of alternating current electricity. I think the term "gain" is not technically accurate, because a CF does not act as an amplifier. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 04:45:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA05562 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 22:31:22 -0800 Received: from mailhost1.primenet.com (mailhost1.primenet.com [198.68.32.51]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA03751; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 22:26:07 -0800 Received: from usr6.primenet.com (usr6.primenet.com [198.68.32.16]) by mailhost1.primenet.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id XAA04523; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:26:57 GMT Received: (from peterqz localhost) by usr6.primenet.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) id XAA06111; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:25:59 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:25:59 -0700 (MST) From: Peter Quizert Message-Id: <199511110625.XAA06111 usr6.primenet.com> To: aov-l eskimo.com, cepmail@eskimo.com, elfquest-l@eskimo.com, gtot-l eskimo.com, nhhs-mail@eskimo.com, nw_autox-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Are You Preapred? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The Problem: Most companies require a pre-employment drug test. If you are seeking employment, on probation, or in the military, you will have to take a drug test. Another Problem: Eating the wrong breakfast, or using certain over-the- counter pain relievers will falsely identify you as a drug user. The Real Problem: Public and private employers spend 1.2 billion dollars each year (1992 figures) on drug tests that are unreliable and inaccurate. Even hard working employees that do not use drugs are at risk. The Solution: ================================ Know the Facts. Know what foods and over the counter medicines are routinely mistaken for common illegal drugs. Simply eating a poppy seed bagel before a drug test can identify you as an opiate user. Know how long different illicit drugs can be detected in your system. Marijuana can be detected for more than a month if nothing is done to conceal its use. Know the different types of drug tests, especially the ones you are likely to face. GC/MS tests are almost impossible to beat, but are seldom used. The more common EMIT test is much easier to fool -- if you know how. Be Prepared! Know when the test is coming. Do not use illicit drugs, or ingest cross-reactive substances before the test. Clean your system of drug metabolites and cross-reactive substances. Drink plenty of water and urinate as often as possible before the test. Do NOT give them your first urine of the day! Use Clean 'n Clear. Clean 'n Clear is a three phase system designed to Clean out your body, so you will give Clear urine and Clear the test. The unique Clean 'n Clear Package includes: 1. Simple step-by-step instructions 2. All natural blood purifiers 3. All natural urine flow stimulators 4. Coloring vitamins to put 'yellow' back in your clear urine 5. Information you need about drug testing 6. A guarantee! This is not a simplistic "tea" or golden seal approach to the problem! This amazing three phase system is guaranteed! And not just guaranteed ... We are so sure our unique three phase system will work for you that we are including a DOUBLE YOUR MONEY BACK GUARANTEE!!! Everyone has a friend who needs this information! =================================================================== -------------------------------- P R I N T and S A V E ! ! -------------------------------- Be prepared. Stop worrying now! You will pass. We guarantee it!! Order your guaranteed Clean 'n Clear package now by sending $19.95 along with your name and address to: Clean 'n Clear 2809 East Hamilton Av #121D Eau Claire, WI 54701 Most companies require pre-employment drug screens. You may only have a few days notice of a drug test. Be Prepared. Order Now! =================================================================== Sorry, Clean 'n Clear is not legal in Texas, and will NOT be mailed to Texas addresses. Distributor inquires welcome. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 05:18:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA27383 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 14:43:15 -0800 Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA27266 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 14:42:57 -0800 Received: from dialup-a23.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a23.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.23]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA05629 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 09:40:19 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511102240.JAA05629 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 09:43:17 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Stupid question about Newton's laws Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Chris Tinsley, on 9 Nov 95 at 10:43, you wrote: [snip] > F = m*s/t*t > > And our taking the second differential wrt time gave us a force. Fine. > > So what do we get if go at it again? Is it just > > F/t = m*s/t*t*t ? > > Or is it less simple? > > I only ask because long, long ago - when I did at least have some faint grip > on mathematics - I seemed to get some funny answers playing with this. > > Any comment, anybody? > > Chris Surely, All you get is the rate of change in the accelleration due to a changing applied force? Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 05:19:05 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA07441 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 11:23:11 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA07243 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 11:22:45 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA11215 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 12:36:48 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 10:23:47 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: vtx: FRANK ZNIDARSIC's video tape Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I just want to than Frank Znidarsic for sending the video tape of his and Frank Steinger's experiments. It was a lot of fun to watch. I feel somewhat isolated in Alaska, and it was good to see there are actually people in the world with similar interests and facing the same financial limitations by adapting what equipment is accessable to do their experiments, kindred spirits. My experimental interests for some time have also been in the ball lightning arena. It is curious that my experiments have also been inspired by the USS Cutlass experiments. There is a pretty impressive set of experiments on the tape involving over 90 F capacitance and 50,000 J energy (a lot more than I have used). It is interresting that this impressive amount of energy is less than one tenth the energy involved in the Cutlass experiments (i.e. 156,000 A at 260 V, at 400,000 J to 4,000,000 J). Like you, I am trying ideas to get ball lightning with less energy through superior design. I highly recommend the tape to any amateurs interrested in ball lightning or high voltage experiments. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 11:14:59 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA28166 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 11:14:01 -0800 Received: from big.aa.net (root big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA28139 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 11:13:55 -0800 Received: from s3c2p3.aa.net (s3c2p3.aa.net [204.157.220.151]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA12365 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 11:14:01 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 11:14:01 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199511111914.LAA12365 big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net (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: mwm aa.net (Michael Mandeville) Subject: vtx: con men as paranoid inventors Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Mark writes: > > "Right on JED! I think Takahashi (the Per Mo Motor Man, versus the > Flat Plate CF Takahahi, so we shall call him PMOMO Tak!) is just what > you say, he REEKS of con-man. I think he should be treated as such. > Guys, FORGET IT! Anyone who cannot turn over a device to an > independent evaluation group, who sounds like a wacky eccentric, > probably IS a wacky excentric and not deserving of a moments notice." > >I feel that this comment is intemperate and unwise, and not a fair >interpretation of Jed's remarks. It is likely that those on this group >who were actually present (Norman Horwood and myself) are better placed to >make comments on Takahashi. If my own description of my visit to Sciex UK >can be interpreted in this way, then I must have lost any ability to make >myself clear which I previously had. My mentions of the word 'fraud' was >intended to consider the logical alternatives and not to impugn Sciex in any >way. > >Chris ________________________________________________________________ To Chris: Thank you for responding so incisively to Mark's comments To Mark: I think the essence of the vortexian philosophy, if I may be so bold as to speak on behalf of this self-assembled group, is that: NOTHING IS AS IT SEEMS AT FIRST BLUSH We strive to get past the easy, superficial answers and down into the nitty; even a simple voltage reading is too easy an answer and must be held to be suspect until proven otherwise. People with tall claims are easily dismissed by three dozen instant rationalizations, but the easy dismissals PROVE NOTHING. One thing that strikes me as common to this group is that the contributors have considerable technical expertise in some area or another, enough to know and deal with the fact that it isn't easy to be absolutely certain about any sweeping generalization, pro or con. Our stuff, our work, is imperfect and there is usually room for a glitch or an unknown which leads to wrong results and conclusions. The universe has an enormous cosmos hidden under the rug of our consciousness, with strange critters lurking which can come out and bite the ass of those who are too uncautious about their conclusions. See for instance, Bill Beatty's web pages at Eskimo. Vortexians seem also to have in common a persnickity dedication to intellectual honesty, enough to appreciate the debate AND the debaters, pro and con. Until we can draw a bead on some concept, work, or person from several angles of validation, pro or con, it furthers none of us to deal with Takahashi AS IF he were a con man. I have seen nothing posted here which brings us even remotely close to seriously suspecting anything in particular. At the moment, he seems just a phenomenon for investigation. Please do not assume I am defending Takahashi. I know nothing about him or his work except what I have read here. AS FOR TURNING YOUR WORK OVER TO AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION GROUP: HA HA HA HA. That can be a den of vipers, as the orginators or Vortex can explain in very intimate detail. Perhaps a repost or two is appropriate. -mwm aa.net From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 19:19:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA18102 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 19:17:50 -0800 Received: from karloff.lanl.gov (karloff.lanl.gov [128.165.16.190]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA18064 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 19:17:44 -0800 Message-Id: <199511120317.TAA18064 mail.eskimo.com> Received: by karloff.lanl.gov (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA228186277; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 20:17:57 -0700 From: Ron McFee Subject: vtx: Sorry Fred To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 11 Nov 95 20:17:56 MST Cc: mcfee lanl.gov Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On 11/10/95 Ron McFee Writes: > >>This whole business has attracted quite a few con artists. >> Already much private money has probably been scammed from unwary investors. >>It is important to remember that in addition to billions of public monies >>large amounts of private capital were lost during the last fifty years to the >>so called "hot fusion" industry. >>A notable example was KMS Industries which went bankrupt losing millions. > >Kip M Siegal (KMS) was a victim of the Los Alamos-D.O.E. resistance to a fusion >concept that was placed under a secrecy order because of it's similarity to >thermonuclear technology. The security classification stayed on the patent up >until the mid eighties. > >This was the backbone of inertial confinement fusion, Laser and Ion beam that I >believe is now called in part Antares. > Kip died of a heart attack while testifying before a Senate committee trying to >get the thing out from under the Cold War secrecy mode. > >I resent the insinuation that Kip was a charlatan, He was a victim of the times >and jealousy of the "CTR" establishment. Fred, sorry if you thought I was libeling Kip Siegal. As far as I know he was until he got involved in laser fusion a successful business person. I don't think anyone ever questioned his honesty and sincerity even in his big fusion gamble. His intentions and actions were as far as I know strictly honorable. Nevertheless many private investors lost money in his enterprise with laser fusion. I only cited the example as a warning of the risks that surround any capital venture whether it is public or private money being invested. Basic scientific research in most instances probably should only be done on a small scale by private persons. The possiblity of reasonable returns within short time scales is small. Big scale research should be reserved for rich corporations and governments. It is remarkable how much work has been accomplished by individuals in the CF area. However even now big corporations are moving into the action. In Italy, Japan, and India a good deal of government spending has already occurred, too. By the way KMS Fusion was not totally privately financed. Siegal was carried by direct government subsidy through most of his research. Thanks for blowing the whistle on me to Pet Domenici. As a government contractor I am forbidden by law to lobby congress. You can do further good by suggesting that he and the rest of the New Mexico congressional delegation do something to release basic research funding so that we can get to the bottom of this controversy. Then I am sure that private enterprise will waste no more time in developing this new technology. I did not intend to libel either Yuri Potapov or Yasunori Takahashi either. As far as I know they are both honorable men. However until they submit to close scientific scrutiny of their inventions, they must be treated as potential frauds. The burden of proof is on them. It will be interesting to compare their futures with those of James Patterson of CETI and Francesco Piantelli and his colleagues. These later individuals have chosen to pursue patents and openly disclose their work. They have my admiration, and I hope they make lots of money. Regards, Ron From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 20:43:09 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA05465 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 18:38:11 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA05323 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 18:37:49 -0800 Received: from [199.165.120.44] ([199.165.120.44]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA14998 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 19:52:09 -0900 X-Sender: hheffner matsu.ak.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 1 (Highest) Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 17:38:41 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: nuclear Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > -> FRANK ZNIDARSIC > -> PUTHOFF AOL.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > -> GAM+ PITT.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > -> WILLIAMS UXL.CSO.UIUC.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > > As you all should know by now I am an advocate of the zero point energy >theory. As a electrical engineer I have been schooled in field theory. >ZPE is a match for an electrical engineer. I even hope to be the first >gravitational engineer. There are two theories that attempt to explain >the excess energy produced in a cold fusion reaction. >1. ZPE >2. Fusion > [snip] > In hot fusion this energy is kinetic. What is it in cold fusion? > I can see no mechanism for overcoming the coulomb barrier. Do > > You? If so please tell me. > [snip] > > Frank Znidarsic OK, one good turn diserves another. Here is my pet hypothesis. It's obviously undeveloped, but I think it points in an interresting direction. THE SUB-ORBITAL HYPOTHESIS OF COLD FUSION A hypothesis is presented to explain various observed cold fusion experimental effects. Most significantly it explains where excess energy may be coming from and why nuclear signature events do no match the excess energy observed. The hypothesis is an extension of known physical effects to an atomic level, plus the assumption of the possibility that zero point energy (ZPE) enables (i.e. energy funds) quantum level events predicted by the the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP). Alternately, the hypothesis may be viewed as an assumption that the free electron wave function expansion through time, predicted by the Schroedinger Equation, is a real effect and the energy is funded by electron coupling with ZPE. A mechanism is described whereby localized free electrons and free nuclei initiate the defined energy creating condition. This condition is hypothesized to produce energy via electron tunneling with the energy loan paid back by ZPE. The hypothesized effect produces no ash and involves neither nuclear reactions nor electron shielding. A preliminary version of this hypothesis was posted in sci.physics.fusion under the name "The Straw Horse Hypothesis", as it is intended to be a "straw horse", a concrete but flexible manifestation of an idea that provides a focus of discussion, that can readily be picked at or rebuilt by others, a prototype. BACKGROUND EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS The following are assumed to be valid experimental results needing to be explained: 1. CF effects, i.e. excess heat and nominal fusion ash, have been observed at low voltages and temperatures in hydrogen loaded metal cathodes of electrolytic cells. 2. CF effects don't occur in the electrolyte or anode. 3. CF effects generally occur in metal hydrides loaded above 85%. 4. CF effects seem to inexplicably, uncontrollably and suddenly turn on, run a while, and then turn off. 5. High frequency sound has been measured in association with measured deuterium loading. 6. Some high frequency current transients have been measured in electrolysis cells, but not enough was measured to account for the excess heat. 7. Cracks are typically observed in metal cathodes after loading. Cathodes are often not reusable after an excess heat episode. 8. Warmer seems to be better. Warm cathodes have been reported by some experimenters to be more likely to activate the CF effect. 9. Various nuclear event signatures have been detected in addition to heat , including neutrons, gamma rays, and element transmutation. However, these signatures occur either unmeasurable or in quantities which are orders of magnitude too low to explain the corresponding excess heat. A feasible hypothesis must account for how the environment of the metal is different from the environment of an electrolyte, or a plasma. The proposed significant differences are: a low energy environment, the rigid structure of the metal lattice, it's maintenance of orbital shells in close proximity to all events, and it's ability to readily conduct low voltage electrons. BACKGROUND AND ASSUMPTIONS A key distinction made in this hypothesis is between electrons bound in metal atom shells, free electrons, and electrons associated with an electric current. Electrons in an orbital require an integral number of quanta of energy to jump out of the orbital, provided by absorption of an appropriate wavelength photon. Electrons jumping into a particular orbital give off a specific wavelength photon, the wavelength of which depends on what energy state they jumped in from. Electrons in an orbital exist as a very large (angstrom size) wave function, an electron charge probability distribution function. =46ree electrons used to bombard small nuclei in a target exhibit small waveforms (appear particle like) in their reactions with the small nuclei. Exhibiting this particle like nature is called being localized. There is no lower limit established for the size of an electron. High momentum electrons are so small they have been successfully used to distinguish the graininess of quarks in nucleons. For this reason, it is assumed there must be some physically manifested difference between the actions of electrons bound in shells, and free electrons. The former manifests more of it's wave nature, the latter more of it's particle nature. The nature of this difference is partially described by the de Broglie formula p=3Dh/L, where p is momentum, h is Plank's constant, and L is the wavelength of the particle. The faster an electron, the shorter it's wavelength, the more localized it is. Electrons involved in flowing current in metal do so in very low energy orbitals, so can jump from atom to atom very readily. The atoms of a metal lattice are all bound together, yet have unused low energy orbitals, so provide continuous conduction bands for electrons throughout the lattice. This accounts for the environmental difference between an electrolyte and a cathode. Although electrons, in response to an inducing field, readily move in cold metal, electrons on a cold metal surface in a vacuum can not break free unless enormous electrostatic field gradients (compared to electrolysis gradients) are present. However, this condition changes rapidly as the metal is heated. The hot end tail of the electron energy distribution expands in area rapidly as temperature, and therefore average conduction band electron energy, increases. The hotter the metal the less gradient needed to expel a free electron due to the atom's momentum. The electron ejection probability for a given area is a function of both temperature and voltage gradient. Occupied orbitals are not readily compressed or distorted or migrated through by the ingress of another atom's orbital. If it weren't for this property we would all be living on neutron star earth. Another relevant quality of metal lattices is the ability to transmit electrons, i.e. electron displacement waves, in response to very small charge movements near or in the metal. With suitable amplification, quantum level current fluctuations can be played on a loudspeaker, observed on an oscilloscope, or digitized for use in random cipher masks. This current (electron wave flow) response to a change in potential travels at near the speed of light. Because of the near light speed response to small field effects, we can expect a proton (use proton to mean any H nucleus) moving at thermal speeds, located in a lattice site, to readily attract conduction band electrons to it's immediate locality as it thermally moves and approaches the band. Likewise, if departing a band the induced electron charge in the band would be expected to dissipate, i.e. in a net sense to move around the cell the proton is trapped in to the locality the proton approaches. Thus we would expect conduction band electrons, in a net sense, to pair up with free protons. These paired up electrons would then have their mobility reduced because they are tied to the diffusion mobility of the proton. The conduction band electrons are initially supplied by the current source driving the electrolysis. THE HYPOTHESIZED EFFECT As a free proton, adsorbed by a metal lattice in electrolysis, approaches it's paired conduction band electron, a voltage gradient is created such that it, along with the radiant thermal energy of the vibrating metal lattice, if the combined effect is sufficient, will produce a photon exchange that will expel the conduction band electron and make it a free electron. The expelled free electron, now exhibiting it's more particle nature, accelerates toward the free proton, possibly forming an orbital, but in some cases not . In the case of a partial orbital around the free proton , which terminates at a conduction band (i.e blends or melds with the conduction band) of a metal atom, there is a momentum distribution, i.e energy distribution, created which is greatest at the electron's closest point of approach to the free proton, and less in all directions the further away from the free proton. This partial orbital can be very complex, including many rotations and complex motions, as well as significant changes in wave form through time, varying in the degree of localization. The significant facts are that the electron enters the local influence of a nucleus, i.e. follows a sub-orbital, emits one or more photons, and then leaves the influence of the nucleus. As the electron approaches the end of a sub-orbital, the possibility for tunneling exists. This is because there is an energy barrier, which if suddenly leaped, would result in a one way jump of the electron to the conduction band. An electron so doing would impart to the metal lattice any portion of the momentum and energy gained by it's acceleration toward the free proton which has not been paid back via climbing the coulomb hill, plus, when dropping into the conduction band, emit a photon to correspond to the original photon transaction that freed it. Since the ejected free electron is acting in a more particle like role, there is reason to believe it (some) could accelerate to the close proximity of either a free proton or stable lattice nucleus, in some cases gaining KeV energies before completing a partial course around the nucleus. Before returning to a conduction band, this energy would be lost due to work overcoming the coulomb force of the nucleus. In addition, a free electron approaching, circling, or departing a nucleus would be experiencing significant acceleration, thus would be expected to give off one or more photons, converting some of it's kinetic energy to the mass of these photons. As the electron continues on toward the band termination of it's partial orbital it is climbing an energy hill. However, if it can reach the band, there is a sudden energy cliff at the end, the electron falls back into a band and gives up a photon, converting energy to mass and releasing a photon of at least the mass of the photon that started the sequence to begin with. Now, since there is an energy barrier preceding entry to the conduction band, the possibility exists for the electron to tunnel through it. If the electron can do so, there are two possibilities for the creation of extra mass/energy: (1) any photon released while in the partial orbital would have been free, and (2) if the electron can tunnel the last bit of it's way there, it will arrive with more momentum (and energy) than if it did not tunnel, because it does not have to do the work to overcome the coulomb force of the proton. Now the crux of the issue. What happens in the very special seemingly paradoxical condition where a low energy free electron approaching a free nucleus, is accelerated toward the nucleus, expels one or more photons from the acceleration and thus ends up with insufficient energy to climb the coulomb hill away from the nucleus? It does not have the energy to climb out, and has insufficient energy to form an orbital. The proposed answer is that the size of the electron's wave function will spontaneously increase until sufficiently large that tunneling to an adjacent orbital becomes likely. Why? Because p=3Dh/L, i.e. de Broglie's' formula shows th= e wavelength must increase. If the momentum, and therefore velocity, of the electron approaches zero, the wavelength will correspondingly increase. The Schroedinger equation possibly lends some evidence of this possibility by virtue of the fact it predicts that a free electron's potential wave expands through time, without accounting for the implied lack of energy balance. The closer to zero momentum the electron goes, because p=3Dh/L, the larger the wavelength and the higher the probability of the electron "materializing" elsewhere in the lattice, and thus escaping the well, i.e. tunneling. Similarly, if the electron loses sufficient momentum such that a low radius orbit is indicated, such an orbit can not be maintained due to the uncertainty of the momentum, due to the HUP, i.e. (delta p)*(delta L)=3Dh. The better you know the location the worse you know the momentum, and vice versa. As the locus of the particle becomes fixed closer to the nucleus, it's momentum becomes unfixed, thus it gains an average increase in energy, it's probability of tunneling out of the well increases. Similarly interpreting de Broglie's formula, as the locality of the electron becomes small the wavelength becomes small so the momentum becomes large. DISCUSSION OF RATIONAL Though this hypothesis contradicts the first law of thermodynamics on at least a local basis, it seems more consistent with published results than looking at nuclear effects which invariably create neutrons detectable by beta decay, transmutations, or gamma radiation, none of which have been detected in sufficient quantities to account for the heat generated. The reason the sub-orbital hypothesis makes more sense is that it happens in a "mass to energy to mass exchange" regime (photon/electron) that is very active in the lattice at thermal lattice energies. There is a lot of infrared photon activity in the lattice, activity which increases with heat. The only assumption that needs to be made is that the electron wave expansion predicted by the Schroedinger Equation is correct, or that de Broglie's formula is correct, i.e. wavelength increases as momentum decreases, or that Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is correct, i.e. the more an electron's momentum is known, the less it's position is known, and vice versa. The laws of thermodynamics need not be violated if energy imbalances created by quantum level fluctuations are fueled by the quantum interconnectedness of matter, i.e vacuum fluctuations or zero point energy (ZPE). If quantum events distant from each other are connected in any way, the second law of thermodynamics practically demands that energy must flow from high energy to low energy locations. The key is simply finding a way to change the rate of the energy flow, to increase the degree of linkage. The exchange that is mainly active in the lattice regime is low energy, so possibly is a more viable place to look than the nucleus to explain unexplained phenomena with regard to cold fusion effects. There is a wealth of data that something real but unexplained is going on in cold fusion experiments, and a wealth of data that says almost no excess heat can be accounted for by nuclear effects, ash, etc. Also, typical distances in the lattice are too large for nucleon tunneling to be a likely source of interaction. The regime is in a prime range for electron tunneling effects. If tunneling is a result of borrowing the energy to jump over an energy barrier, then perhaps there is some mechanism for not paying back the loan. I suggest that mechanism is driven by the uncertainty principle and fueled by vacuum fluctuations or ZPE. Some support for the sub-orbital hypothesis may be manifest in Rydberg electrons (see "The Philosopher's Atom" by von Bayer, p. 102, Discover, Nov. '95) which, due to magnetic fields, have very long complex paths and wander far from the nucleus, so far that they leave the quantum world for the mechanical one. These electrons exhibit quantum form near the nucleus, and increasingly mechanical form further away, all within the same orbital/orbit. They permit strange non-discrete absorption peaks and photon absorption beyond the ionization potential of the atom. Rydberg electrons venture far from the nucleus and then plunge deep into the electron cloud toward the nucleus. (The experimental results discussed were for barium atoms.) John Delos of William and Mary found that in a strong magnetic field quantum interference patterns permit only certain classical style trajectories which are "fuzzy" near the nucleus, but more localized or Newtonian far away from the nucleus. The main observed effect of the long trajectories is fuzzy photon absorption peaks. ASH AND NUCLEAR SIGNATURES There is a finite probability that tunneling will not occur before other events preempting the tunneling scenario occur. After emitting sufficient energy via photons, the electron in the sub-orbital has lost momentum so can not return to a conduction band, so spirals into the proton, emitting photons as it goes, but can not combine with it because of the extra energy needed to create a neutron (i.e. about 0.5 MeV). If tunneling does not occur, you end up with a protoneutron, similar to or as described in Mitchell Jones' Protoneutron Theory of cold fusion as posted in sci.physics.fusion. This neutral charge protoneutron would be unable to stabilize and would eventually combine with a nucleus or another protoneutron, either of which it could join without penetrating a coulomb barrier. If, at thermal energies, protoneutrons were unable to combine with anything but protoneutrons, the potential also exists for creating 4n particles as described by Raymon Prasaad in sci.physics.fusion to result in T3 and H4, but no neutrons. Either way, through tunneling or protoneutron creation, the possibility of sub-orbitals gives rise to a potential explanation for excess heat, with protoneutron creation , however brief, indicating a small but finite probability of ash creation. The electron tunneling process described is hypothesized to generate most of the free energy of cold fusion. The lattice conditions described could also generate nuclear fusion through mechanisms as described by others, but the size of the free electron sub-orbital effect should be much larger than nuclear effects due to a higher probability of occurrence and the longer average tunneling distance of an electron. No significant energy is hypothesized to be generated by any nuclear reactions or electron captures. The tunneling referred to is electron tunneling through the potential barrier at the end of the free electron's sub-orbital. CONDITIONS TO INITIATE COLD FUSION What would be the conditions to initiate cold fusion? The conditions would be loading to a degree that there is a large density of free nuclei, plus thermal and electrical agitation. A significant number of free electrons must have sufficient energy to be localized enough to approach a nucleus closely, and thus emit one or more photons. Thermal agitation is partially caused by the electrolysis current, but not enough to trigger an episode. Once loading reaches a critical point, minor cracks develop in the lattice. These cracks immediately fill up with neutral hydrogen, thus can act like a local capacitor. In addition, the sudden crack produces a high voltage wave and an acoustical shock in the lattice. At first these conditions are not sufficient to create a critical mass of self perpetuating events. Eventually though, in some cases, a "critical mass" of cracks provides enough capacitance, and enough electromagnetic energy from cracking, to sustain a large collection of ultra high frequency resonant oscillating circuits. These localized electrical fluctuations and heat provide the needed conditions to create massive numbers of free nuclei and electrons , some portion of which generate enough excess heat and electromagnetic energy to sustain the process. The process can be expected to vary in intensity sporadically due to the unpredictable nature of a particular lattice with respect to fracturing, loading, etc. The end of the episode would occur at a highly unpredictable duration and energy output. It could not be expected that a cathode would be reusable without some kind of annealing process being performed. If an episode occurred, we would expect a measurable amount of sound or electromagnetic oscillations to occur, or both. The various experimental results to be explained are, at least qualitatively, explained. Now the question remains, what voltage electron to initiate the sub-orbital? To calculate this we need to know that the space inside a typical metal lattice accommodates a sphere of roughly 0.6 =C5 radius, roughly the space required for an isolated H atom. H2 atoms may also be present in some metal lattices, due to the fact the ionic bond for H is 0.32 =C5 radius. If a photon is to be generated by acceleration near the nucleus, it is reasonable that the de Broglie wavelength of the electron must be less than the distance to the nucleus at the moment of the electron beginning it's descent toward the nucleus. If this is not so, then the dipole moment of the electron-proton pair will be diminished, reducing the attraction and therefore the acceleration, and therefore the potential energy of the electron's descent. Also, it is necessary that a descent be initiated, as opposed to formation of a standard orbital. For this reason it is anticipated the de Broglie wavelength must be less than .32 =C5. At a smaller wavelength, dipole moment shielding would occur, preventing a close approach to the nucleus by the electron. At .32 =C5, and in absence of a magnetic field, the hypothesized effects would begin to be noticed, but a smaller wavelength, e.g. half that size, should produce more significant effects. Now: p=3Dh/L, where p=3Dmv so: mv=3Dh/L, v*(9.11E-31kg)=3D(6.626E-34 joule*sec)/(0.32E-10 m), v=3D2.273E7m/sec. Looking at energy, E=3D.5mv^2=3D(.5)(9.11E-31kg)(2.27E7)^2, E=3D2.353E-16joule/(1.602 E-19 joule/eV)=3D1470 eV. So a minimal energy electron to initiate the process should be about 1470 eV, quite a bit to get inside a lattice! This can not be accomplished by temperature alone because 1eV=3D1.15E4 deg K, so the temperature would be 1470*1.16E4=3D17,000,000 deg K. It would appear that, in the absence of a strong magnetic field, the main objective then to initiate the cold fusion effect is to get 2-3 keV electrons busy inside the lattice. Cosmic rays readily can do this, as well as a lattice fractures. HV pulses might accomplish this at the lattice/electrolyte boundary if the electrolyte is not too conductive, or EM pulses might do this, especially if conductor/insulator boundaries are present in the electrode. It seems like the most effective method would be putting beta emitters in the lattice. This could be accomplished by using a T2O electrolyte (18.6 KeV beta), or spiking the lattice metal with either beta emitters. Even alpha emitters, disrupting lattice electrons, should work. Other methods might include bombarding a thin foil electrode from the side opposite the electrolyte with charged particle emitters or with by using an electron beam. EFFECT OF STRONG MAGNETIC FIELDS One effect of strong magnetic fields on orbitals observed by Delos is the cancellation of the quantum potential wave function at many locations, leaving more Newtonian like "orbits", some of which plunge deep into the electron cloud toward the nucleus. This ability to suppress the electron's quantum fuzziness and permit nucleus approach at a lower voltage is exactly the effect needed to for energy producing effects at low voltages. Delos worked on stand alone barium atoms with electrons in stable or meta-stable (i.e. repeated) orbits. However, it seems reasonable that the hypothesized brief partial orbitals, or orbitals terminated in conduction bands, would result in similar deep nucleus approach effects, resulting in high energy photon emission by low voltage electrons, followed by electron waveform expansion and electron tunneling to freedom in the conduction bands. It is possible even small magnetic fields could create some effect in this regard. Since magnetic fields have not been a measured or controlled variable in many experiments, this effect, combined with cosmic rays, may account for some of the unexplained contrariness of CF experiments. HYPOTHESIZED EFFECT IN GASSES To some degree, the hypothesized effect could occur in a gas. The significant missing element is the adjacent metal conduction bands. After approaching a nucleus and emitting one or more photons, if an electron should lose too much energy to climb out of the energy well, the electron's momentum would be small, so it's location uncertainty should expand sufficiently for the electron to "tunnel up" to an orbital. Upon a subsequent and sufficient thermal or photon collision, the electron could be freed (ionized), and the process could be repeated. This seems like a much less effective environment than a metal lattice, but a strong magnetic field should greatly enhance the probabilities for "energy creating" events. POSSIBLE METHODS OF HYPOTHESIS VERIFICATION To verify the hypothesis several things might be done. One would be to bombard ionized hydrogen or hydrogen compound gas with electrons of energies from 1.5 to 3 KeV. A significant increase in radiant energy should be noted across that range. Calorimetry should be performed. A similar experiment could be conducted by bombarding the front side of a metal foil which is loaded with hydrogen from the back side by electrolysis. These experiments should be carried out over a wide range of magnetic field intensities. =46REE ENERGY DEVICES SUGGESTED BY THE HYPOTHESIS Building a conventional CF cell, but using a tritium (i.e. T2O) electrolyte and "spiking" the metal lattice with strong beta emitting metal isotopes. This would provide a continual stream of high energy electrons deep in the lattice to initiate chain reactions of the form e -> photon -> e -> photon, etc. The electrode should be immersed in a strong magnetic field. High voltage high frequency electrical oscillations in the electrode, separate from the electrolysis DC current flow, can be created by including the cathode in an oscillator circuit. The oscillator could be made small and included in the calorimetry cell. The current oscillations would not be through the electrolyte, but the cathode only. The electrode should be immersed in a strong magnetic field. Any device to induce contrary electron/nucleus motion in a gas in a magnetic field. Ball lightning seems to be the ideal embodiment of such a thing! However, HF HV fields in an H2 or steam environment might do the trick as well. SUMMARY A hypothesis has been presented to explain various observed cold fusion experimental effects. Most significantly it suggests where excess energy my be coming from and why nuclear signature events do no match the excess energy observed. The hypothesis is an extension of known physical effects to an atomic level, plus application of known quantum mechanical effects. A mechanism is described whereby localized free electrons and nucleons initiate the defined energy transfer condition. The hypothesized effect produces no ash and involves neither nuclear reactions nor electron shielding. Various tests and devices are indicated by the hypothesis. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 20:43:11 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA19612 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:16:51 -0800 Received: from relay5.UU.NET (relay5.UU.NET [192.48.96.15]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA19572 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:16:41 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay5.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpll22899; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 18:16:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA34055; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:16:03 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 732815150095315FEPRI; 11 Nov 1995 15:15:15 PST Message-Id: Date: 11 Nov 1995 15:15:15 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: attn Vortex Brains To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/11/95 15:15:27 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/11/95 02:53 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: attn Vortex Brains Scott: Dr. O. at the U. of MN has some of the best info on TC of Hydrogen Air mixtures right now. MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 20:46:48 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA16302 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:38:00 -0800 Received: from big.aa.net (root big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA16255 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:37:51 -0800 Received: from s3c2p3.aa.net (s3c2p3.aa.net [204.157.220.151]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA10849 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:37:51 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:37:51 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199511111837.KAA10849 big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mwm aa.net (Michael Mandeville) Subject: Re: vtx: Re: email traffic jams Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Fri, 10 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: > >> Bill, it seems like we're getting into some email traffic jams that cause >> Vortex distributions to lag up to several hours. >> >> Reckon it's just some nodes that have been clogged with all the newcomers to >> the net? > >Is anyone else having problems? I've not noticed any here, so the >trouble must be with messages being sent FROM majordomo. If Scott is the >only one noticing it, there must be some weirdness between here and Texas. > Bill: it seems like email keeps trickling in by the hour, no particular delay noticable, so looks like its traffic to Texas, which figures, it is so big it has got to take longer to stretch across that darned state {:> From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 20:47:11 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA12522 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 14:56:09 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA12445 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 14:55:55 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA05389; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 17:54:31 -0500 Date: 11 Nov 95 17:52:35 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Delays, paranoid inventors Message-ID: <951111225235_100060.173_JHB5-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris said: >> It is likely that those on this group who were actually present (Norman Horwood and myself) are better placed to make comments on Takahashi. << Fair comment - however since Takahashi seemed to understand some English, but only spoke in Japanese which was translated by his colleague, it is difficult to make definite judgements about his voracity. I will keep in touch with him as the address is reasonably close to me, and I will try to keep him to his word regarding the small test unit which he promised to produce. I can use my RIGB membership as far as it will take me with them if that will help. Watch this space - they have got something, but exactly what it is we have yet to discover. Xiting init? By the way - has anyone else been getting the advertising junk-mail from some jerk called Peter Quizert? I collected 2 long sales blurbs today from him, and I would appreciate it if his stuff could be filtered out before transmission. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 20:49:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA16418 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:08:02 -0800 Received: from relay5.UU.NET (relay5.UU.NET [192.48.96.15]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA16371 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:07:47 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay5.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzplk22250; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 18:06:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA39354; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:06:03 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 731805150095315FEPRI; 11 Nov 1995 15:05:15 PST Message-Id: Date: 11 Nov 1995 15:05:15 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Everything except vortices To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/11/95 15:05:17 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/11/95 03:08 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Everything except vortices Chris: Did I see you say that you took the T motor scooter up to 75 mph? Or was that 75 KPH? As I recall the old "Vespa" motor scooters were hard pressed to do over about 45 MPH, so doing 75 MPH or 75 KPH would put some sort of bounds on the power density/capability of T's arrangement. Could you give an absolute time for having witnessed it in use without recharging, and an estimate of the road speed/range during this use? - All these are very USEFUL for doing calculations. Let's put it this way, if you say, "I rode this thing for 45 minutes at 50 MPH in a circle on the M1 or such." I'm not going to doubt that. And if the best storage battery data I can come up with (for the size units) in there gives me 20 miles of range at 50 MPH, I am going to say: "At the least, this fellow T has THE Best electrical storage method invented to date. - Does that modify what people may have mistaken my position as??? - Yours: (Still CF'ing in the basement) Mark H. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 20:54:00 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA12173 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:26:01 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA12081 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:25:40 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.67] ([204.57.193.67]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA13741 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 11:39:55 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 09:26:31 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: FRANK ZNIDARSIC's video tape Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I just want to than Frank Znidarsic for sending the video tape of his and >Frank Steinger's experiments. It was a lot of fun to watch. I feel >somewhat isolated in Alaska, and it was good to see there are actually >people in the world with similar interests and facing the same financial >limitations by adapting what equipment is accessable to do their >experiments, kindred spirits. My experimental interests for some time have >also been in the ball lightning arena. It is curious that my experiments >have also been inspired by the USS Cutlass experiments. There is a pretty >impressive set of experiments on the tape involving over 90 F capacitance >and 50,000 J energy (a lot more than I have used). It is interresting that >this impressive amount of energy is less than one tenth the energy involved >in the Cutlass experiments (i.e. 156,000 A at 260 V, at 400,000 J to >4,000,000 J). Like you, I am trying ideas to get ball lightning with less >energy through superior design. > >I highly recommend the tape to any amateurs interrested in ball lightning >or high voltage experiments. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 Just a brief after thought: If I recall the tape correctly, 50,000 J was referenced. Also, the capacitors were about 96 F, at 300V. This is a discrepancy. If I calculate correctly, that would be 8,640,000 J, more than twice the USS Cutlass energies. I mailed the tape a couple days ago, so I have no way to check this. Where have I gone wrong? Also, any chance Frank wants to sell those capacitors? Thanks again for the fun tape. My whole family enjoyed it. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 20:54:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA02309 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 09:54:34 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA02273 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 09:54:26 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.67] ([204.57.193.67]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA13679 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 11:08:58 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 1 (Highest) Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 08:55:35 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Re: email traffic jams Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Fri, 10 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: > >> Bill, it seems like we're getting into some email traffic jams that cause >> Vortex distributions to lag up to several hours. >> >> Reckon it's just some nodes that have been clogged with all the newcomers to >> the net? > >Is anyone else having problems? I've not noticed any here, so the >trouble must be with messages being sent FROM majordomo. If Scott is the >only one noticing it, there must be some weirdness between here and Texas. > >.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 >EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ >Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page Don't feel bad. I have experienced up to 2 day delays in email. Also, the news server I subscribe to was 2 weeks behind recently. Plus, the mail server here goes down frequently, losing email. For example, I lost most of my email for the weekend of Nov. 4-5. The problem seems to be partially due to lack of reliable bandwidth. My last message posted to this group took over 12 hours to come back to me with the vtx id. Personally, I suspect much of the problem may be due to the massive numbers of new Netscape users. I think some means of providing priority based on a time weighted average of message character volume between two addresses is needed in internet routers to survive the onslaught of GUI, video, sound, and virtual reality applications. Somehow, the more efficient character based email, an order of magnitude or more efficient in conveying information, needs to remain viable during the coming period when new media chokes the net. I love Netscape and www, but until internet can be beefed up to handle the load, something needs to be done to protect basic services. Maybe just prioritizing email, especially short email with no attached binaries, from other traffic would do the trick. My email program, Eudora, has the capability to use a higher priority for specific email. It is set by clicking a square box in the upper left hand corner of the window (not the close box). The standard priority is "normal". The priorities listed include "lowest", "low", "normal", "high", and "highest". Maybe if I and others in the group simply set message priorities higher it will help. I don't know if majordomo passes that priority on through the list or not. Maybe it can be set to automatically assign a higher priority to all outbound email. This particular email message, my first use of priorities, is set to "highest". Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 20:55:56 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA26063 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 12:38:58 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA26034 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 12:38:52 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA03410 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:38:40 -0500 Message-Id: <199511112038.AA03410 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:38:40 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: zpesignature Date: Sat, 11 Nov 95 15:38:01 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> FZNIDARSIC AOL.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:07:09 -0500 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com To: p8156 memo.gpuc.com Cc: CldFusion aol.com, david@vesicle.ibg.uu.se, Puthoff@aol.com Subject: zpesignature I have been struggling for some time to come up with a signature for ZPE. I think I have finally came up with something. The equations of energy transfer involved with ZPE are symmetrical and reversible. The equations involved with a fusion reaction are not. Fusion reactions produce an irreversible jump in the entropy of the system. The experiment that I consider to be the first zero point energy experiment is outlined in "The Quest for Absolute Zero" by K Mendelsson page 229. In this experiment superfluid helium is passed through a series of narrow channels. The helium that flowed out of the channels was cooler than the helium that flowed into the channels, an apparent violation of the third law of thermodynamics. The effect is know as the mechano-caloric effect. The two fluid model was developed to explain the cooling effect. According to this model liquid helium is composed of two fluids, each of a different entropy. these fluids are separated upon passing through the narrow channels. The separation of the fluids supposedly results in the cooling effect. The two fluid model is seriously flawed in that superfluid helium is a single fluid. No clear explaination is offered about where the missing entropy went. What really happened was a reverse of genesis process. A similar cooling effect may be obtaind when hydrogen is forced through a "cold fusion" plate electrode. The loss of energy would be an indisputable signature of a zero point reaction. Frank Znidarsic  PS This superfluid experiment reveals much. If the mix of the fluids h as a higher entropy than the un-mixed fluids. What happens to the entropy after all of the fluid has passed through the orifice? The energy of the system is less after energy was applied to the system with a force times distance relationship. This is a true zero point energy process in reverse. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 20:59:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA09871 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:18:40 -0800 Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA09790 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:18:27 -0800 Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA11057; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 13:15:32 -0500 Date: 11 Nov 95 13:12:54 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>, Gene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com>, , vortex Subject: vtx: Takahashi motor not linear Message-ID: <951111181253_100433.1541_BHG76-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Jed;Gene;internet:little eden.com;vortex The biggest surprise on seeing the Takahashi motor was the realisation that it was apparently a linear device. Having played around with 'o-u' motors, I agree entirely with Scott that no motor which is in essence a linear system can possibly be over-unity. (It might also be assumed that a non-linear system like the 'snail-cam' or the scr-controlled resonant circuit motor - which is the nearest thing we have to a peer-reviewed 'o-u motor' - cannot be anywhere near unity, since they are inherently wasteful). But the Takahashi motor is not a linear system. It took Chris Morriss to point out to me where it goes non-linear, and I rather wonder if T realises what is actually going on... It looks as though it is non-linear *and non-wasteful* too, which makes it *very* interesting indeed. The reason for seeing non-linearity in what *appears* to be a conventional motor is that the combination of the field coils and the 'killer' magnets (as Scott so well describes them) is sufficient to exceed the saturation flux density of iron, which is around 2T. Thus the non-linearity will occur as the inductance of the drive and pickup coils suddenly changes from quite a high level to nearer what it would be if the iron were replaced by freespace. The drawings of the motor do not make the polarity of the magnets in it quite clear, but they do permit a possible arrangement which will cause all manner of odd things to happen to the iron. Any immediate analyses I've tried don't show exactly what is happening, but I never pretended to be clever - did I? The rotor has embedded magnets, with four (alternate N- and S-poles) facing outward, the stator has similar embedded magnets in what appear to be 8 poles. Exactly how the thing is switched isn't clear either, but my own bet is that T has just hacked the standard motor for this bike. My own (very tentative) opinion is now that T has indeed got an o-u electric motor, one which just possibly could be emulated using NIB magnets embedded in *ferrite* (B[sat] around 0.4T) rotors and stators. Going further out onto a limb, I reckon that his scooter is *not* over unity because its losses are too high. Perhaps he had one which worked for a while but the magnets weakened or something, I don't know. A scooter with that kind of power, and with the kind of use it would get, would need a motor COP of at least 8, I reckon. Scott, if I'm not making myself clear I'm suggesting the old, lame idea again - but seriously. You ramp your drive current up while the material is saturated, then de-saturate it and take the current off while it isn't. Or the other way around. I can think of all kinds of variations on this in this case, for example if the motor was always conventional because it always 'fired' at opposed-pole angles (non-sat), and the pickup coils were cycling through saturation/non-saturation while charging and discharging the big capacitors - oh, I'll just have to try to work it out. Note that the L-C circuit is specifically stated as being resonant near 500rpm, to increase the pick-up effect. Being very familiar with all this core saturation, pre-loading of ferrites with powerful magnets, and the power-scavenging capabilities of resonant circuits - and having seen certain combinations of NIB/power ferrite motors behave very oddly indeed, I am drawn closer and closer *toward* only one conclusion: Takahashi has done what he says he's done. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 21:00:20 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA11344 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:23:24 -0800 Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (0 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA11319 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 10:23:12 -0800 Received: from wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca (wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca [131.136.255.106]) by dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA03781 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 13:16:15 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199511111816.NAA03781 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca> X-Sender: wspage dgs.drenet.dnd.ca X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 13:26:00 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: wspage ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: Re: vtx: attn Vortex Brains Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >I need to know how the thermal conductivity of a hydrogen-air mixture varies >with air content. > ... >In other words, a little air seems to rapidly spoil the high conductivity of >hydrogen. > >Can anyone provide quantitative data on this? It'll help my "hydrogen >energy" experiment which is sorta, barely going now (we're in the discovery >phase...i.e. where you discover all the things that are wrong with your >apparatus!). > > > Scott, I recalled an exchange with Jeff Driscoll on sci.physics.fusion last year that bears on your problem. I am unable to locate the original posting by Laurie Besley (and for some reason I can't access the fusion-digest archives at sunsite right now) but you should be able to find it in one of the archives. Or you migth try to contact Jeff at the email address below. ------------------------------------------ On 9/21/94 Jeffrey J. Driscoll <74063.3546 compuserve.com> wrote Hi Bill, >Dear Mr/Dr. Driscoll, > >Since your original post to s.p.f. there have been a number of posts >on the subject of proton conductors, mine among them. However, I haven't >seen anything more from you. I realize that you may not have very much >time available for interacting on the network, but I would be most >interested to learn more about your work and to get your feedback on >whether the information that was posted to the net was of any use to you. >Sincerely, >Bill Page. I didn't get any response to help on making proton conductors but that is ok, I didn't really expect anything. I did get an answer to my question on why my chamber gets hotter when I add a little air to the chamber. The conductivity of the gas decreases which is completely counter intuitive to me. When I get some time I am going to write to s.p.f. about this conduction change. Instead of writing a long letter can I just email you the email that was sent back and forth between me and Laurie? It will give you some info on what I am doing. I thought it was interesting that the person that answered had read spf for the first time. Jeff ============================================ Hi Laurie thank you for your explanation. I have some comments that I put within your text - (your text has a ">" in front of it) >Your suspicions that the thermal conductivity of hydrogen falls when >you add air to it (even when both gases are at low pressures) are >well-founded. The basic misconception that many >people have is that the thermal conductivity of a body of trapped gas >increases if you increase the pressure. In fact this is true only up >to pressures where the dimensions of the chamber in which the gas is >trapped are of the same order as the mean free path of the gas >molecules. Above that pressure, the thermal conductivity is >essentially pressure-independent. For hydrogen at room temperature or >thereabouts, this critical pressure will be very low indeed, certainly >less than 0.01 atmosphere. the pressure that I am using is .07 - .12 atmospheres (I can evacutate the system down to about 100 mT with a roughing pump) and the size of my chamber is roughly 10 cm x 10 cm x 10 cm . The temp of the gas (dueterium) is approximately 200-350 C. There is a copper heater in it that is approx 3cm x4cm x 5cm and it is putting out 60 watts. A thermocouple on the surface of the heater measures about 385 deg C when there is just dueterium and when there is about 4% air and 96% D2 (at a pressure of .1 atm) the temperature is approximately 415 deg C. There are two other thermocouples in the chamber, one is in contact with a thin ceramic (proton conductor) which touches the copper heater and the other thermocouple is 1.5 cm above the copper heater and is does not touch anything, it is just in the gas atmosphere. Both of these thermocouples show a rise in temperature when 4% of the gas in the chamber is air and 96% is dueterium (at .1 atm). The one touching the heater (mentioned above) sees a rise of about 30 deg C (from 385 to 415 degC), the one touching the ceramic sees a rise of about 25 deg C (an increase from 320 to 345 deg C) and the one in the gas sees a rise of about 12 deg C (an increase from 260 to 272 deg C). The mean free path of the dueterium is much smaller than the dimensions of my chamber. I am not sure how to get the mean free path but I can get an estimate that I assume will be correct within the same order of magnitude if I calculate how far apart the molecules are if I was to distribute the molecules throughout the chamber in a pattern that puts each molecule in the corner of a cube and stacking the cubes one on top of another (this is not the closest packing arangement). at STP the gas has 2.7E19 molecules per cc. ===> (6E23 molecules/22.4 litres)* (1 litre/1000cc) = 2.7E19 if the gas temp is 350 deg C and the pressure is .1 atmospheres the number of molecules per cc is 6E18 ===> (623K/ 273K) * (2.7E19 molecules per cc) * (.1 atm) = 6E18molecules per cc if I take the cube root of this I get the number of molecules along one edge of the cubic centimeter which is 1.8E6. so the distance between each one is 1cm/1.8E6 = 5.5E-7 cm I assume this within the same order of magnitude of the real answer. If I add the small amount of air after the chamber has reached steady state with the dueterium gas at .1 atmosphere and the heater putting out 60 watts, the temperature still rises (the pressure rises a small amount - I don't evacutate any gas to keep the pressure constant). I am adding a tiny amount of air and this should be a second path for heat to escape and the temp should go down but it does not. So I think there is some other reason than what you had mentioned unless what you mentioned occurs at a pressure of .1 atmospheres. I think that the emissivity of the chamber walls (Aluminum) or the thermocouple or the copper heater changes which results in the increase in temperature. The copper heater does get a layer of copper oxide on it when there is air in the chamber and the heater is very hot - I can see a color change when this happens but I don't see a color change unless there is alot of air in there, say .3 atmospheres or more. I don't see a color change when I add air so that the air makes up 4% of the gas but that doesn't mean that there is not one. I get this temperature rise when I use D2 and air or H2 and air and without the proton conductor in the chamber. The experiments that I am doing is trying to reproduce the results of Mizuno who uses a proton conductor. I haven't got any positive results yet. Mizuno had sent me 3 proton conductors which didn't work( they worked as proton conductors but they gave no excess heat) and he sent me 4 more which I am going to try next week. >As others have pointed out, the thermal conductivity of air is much >lower than that of hydrogen. When you add air to the hydrogen, the >thermal conductivity of the mixture falls dramatically. All this is >somewhat counter-intuitive but is borne out by both calculations and >measurements. Certainly it would explain your observed results. > >I ran into this phenomenon two years ago when a Chinese student and I >were exploring the thermal exchange characteristics of germanium >resistance thermometers Jeff ============================================================== Dear Jeff, You seemed to have missed the point of my earlier communication. Perhaps I didn't explain it clearly enough. 1. Unless the pressure is extremely low, probably less than 0.01 atmosphere, the addition of any air to your hydrogen will decrease its thermal conductivity, thereby increasing the temperature of the heater inside your chamber. This will be true at any pressure of hydrogen above (say) 0.01 atmosphere. Your argument of "an additional thermal path" due to the air is quite wrong. It just does not work like that!! The addition of even a small quantity of gas of a lower thermal conductivity, like air, to a gas of higher thermal conductivity, like hydrogen/deuterium, will lower the overall thermal conductivity of the mixture. This is one case where the "common sense" approach leads you astray. To see the true effect you have to do the appropriate calculations. If you want a detailed explanation of this, see the two papers I cited in my earlier email message. 2. Any effects due to lower emissivities of the chamber walls should be of an order of magnitude less important than the effect due to the thermal conductivity of the gas. You should be able to see this by pumping out the air/hydrogen mixture and refilling wth pure hydrogen. Even though the emissivity of the surface will not now change, the temmperature of your heater surface should again fall due to the greater thermal conductivity of the pure hydrogen. At the risk of repeating myself, the effects you see are all completely explicable by assuming that the bulk of the thermal transfer is taking place through convective/conductive processes through the bulk gas in your chamber. By adding air you are lowering the thermal conductivity and thus increasing the temperature of the heater surface. To convince yourself, I suggest you do a few experiments in which you vary the air/hydrogen ratios and pressures. You should find that the more air you have present, the greater will be the temperature of your heater. The greater the proportion of hydrogen, the lower will be the temperature. Hope this is of some assistance. Laurie Besley (by the way, where are you in the world?) ================================================== Hi Laurie, I did misread your first message. I am glad that there is an explanation to the wierd results that I was getting. It is very counter intuitive that the thermal conductivity goes down when air is added. I am doing these experiments in my cellar by myself. I'm a mechanical engineer and I've been doing this full time for 7 months now, I did other experiments in my spare time for 1 year before that (no positive results). My boss has a Phd in materials and works for the Air Force, he pays me my salary out of his own pocket. I live near Boston, Mass. I don't really need any of those papers on thermal cond that you mentioned but I would find them very interesting. So if it is easy for you to fax them, then fax them to 617 871 2463. Do you read sci.physics. fusion often? how many months have you been reading it? None of the regulars of that forum knew the answer to my question. I am very pleased that someone else did. Can I quote parts of your second message in a letter to sci.physics.fusion? I won't use your name if you don't want me to. thanks Jeff ============================================================= Dear Jeff, Thanks for your message. I hope that you feel a little happier now about the results you have been seeing. I will send to you by fax the paper which best gives our results for air/He mixtures. The section of most relevance to your problem is the discussion on heat transfer through the gas, pages 743 to 745. I hope that you find it interesting. Certainly I am pleased that my work has been of use to you. In answer to your question re the sci.physics.fusion newsgroup, the day that I saw your original posting was the first time that I had read the newsgroup! I only came to read it because of a casual remark made to me by a colleague on the residual interest in the cold fusion question. He is a researcher with experience in the fusion (hot) reactor area (Tokamaks) and reads the newsgroup regularly. My interest was only very casual but your posting struck a familiar chord, so the whole thing was rather serendipitous. Please feel free to quote any parts of my message on the network if you so desire. I guess they may be of use to others working in this calorimetric area. Good luck with your work and I hope Boston is still looking beautiful. I visited there for a few days some 10 years ago when I called upon some people at MIT. Best wishes, Laurie Besley ================================================ Jeff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 21:33:30 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA28830 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 21:33:27 -0800 Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA28796 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 21:33:21 -0800 Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tEV1v-0005A6C; Sat, 11 Nov 95 23:32 CST Message-Id: Subject: vtx: Third Derivative Force To: vortex-l eskimo.com (vortex-l) Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 23:32:35 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2666 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris Tinsley askes about: > dF/dt = m*da/dt Nineteen years ago G. Harry Stein wrote about that very equation in the pages of Analog (Science Fact, Science Fiction) magazine -- I believe it was the June 1976 issue (if not, it was near that month.) In his article he recounted his introduction to a gentleman fifteen years previous by the name of Mr. Dean who claimed to have a propulsion device that expelled no exhaust. Harry and his associate, William Davis, visited Mr. Dean to watch a demonstration of his reciprocating device (the Dean Drive.) Harry recalled that when switched on, the device, sitting on the floor, produced a forward force that could be felt against the hand. Though they were never able to discount the "slip, stick" phenomena of the device/floor interface due to unequal rates of acceleration in opposite directions, this visit did inspire Stein and Davis to postulate an anomalous force proportional to the rate of change of acceleration (the third derivative, the rate of change of velocity being the second derivative, i.e. acceleration, while the rate of change of position, the first derivative, being velocity itself.) Davis Mechanics, as Stein called it, was described in an Analog article in the May 1962 issue. Here Davis speculated that the anomalous force was: F = D*m*da/dt, where D was known as the "critical action time" of the system. I understood this "critical action time" to be related to the speed of mechanical impulse through the dimensions of the system, i.e. the "sound wave." Clearly if you could alter either D or da/dt in one direction versus another, you could get a reciprocating device to produce a net uni- directional force -- to violate the conservation of momentum -- to produce a reactionless propulsion device. So is there such a third derivative force? No one has noticed it. You would think it would be evident in discrepencies in scientific measurements. Of course, as systems/particles get smaller, the "D" or "critical action time" gets smaller and so too therefore would the alleged force. I don't know. I do know that the Stein 1976 article inspired me to learn calculus (which turned out to be useless :-) I even invented an arrangement to maximize the Davis force, but I never constructed and tested it. The hypothesis seemed less and less tenable. Still, if I had the time, I'd build the jig -- just to settle a question that's been in the back of my mind these last 20 years. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 11 21:45:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA02788 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 21:45:37 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA02772 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 21:45:34 -0800 Received: from net-1-188.austin.eden.com (net-1-188.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.188]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id XAA20516; Sat, 11 Nov 1995 23:45:30 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 23:45:30 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511120545.XAA20516 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com, Gene Mallove <76570.2270@compuserve.com> From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: Re: Takahashi motor not linear X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 01:12 PM 11/11/95 EST, Chris Tinsley wrote: >the 'killer' magnets...exceed the saturation flux density of iron good point, Chris, you are quite right. >Scott, if I'm not making myself clear I'm suggesting the old, lame idea >again - but seriously. You ramp your drive current up while the material is >saturated, then de-saturate it and take the current off while it isn't. Or >the other way around. OK, but non-linearity does not mean non-conservative energy exchanges, does it? >I am drawn closer and closer *toward* only one >conclusion: Takahashi has done what he says he's done. It is certainly exciting to entertain that possibility...but I'm not getting drawn in yet. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 12 00:01:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA08555 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 00:00:55 -0800 Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA08526 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 00:00:46 -0800 Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tEXKa-0005IlC; Sun, 12 Nov 95 02:00 CST Message-Id: Subject: vtx: Ball lightning To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 12 Nov 1995 02:00:00 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" In-Reply-To: from "Horace Heffner" at Nov 10, 95 10:23:47 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2729 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner writes: > I am trying ideas to get ball lightning with less energy through superior > design. Paul Koloc has some interesting ideas on this. I have some brief writeups on my web page (url below.) If I understand his concept, he causes a helical path in air to be ionized between the gaps of a high voltage supply. He is a little vague on how this helical path is presently generated, but he alludes to a method of using a 3D focusing of a helical flashtube image. Thus the photon flux is made to converge most intensely in the image of the flashtube. Synchronous with this "preping" of the arc path, the high voltage is applied, and the spark breakdown preferentially travels along the helical path. This sets up an intense magnetic field in which energy is stored, and which causes the helical plasma to collapse its "coils" laterally, thus forming a torus of circulating charge. The energy previously stored in the magnetic field will then keep the torus current flowing until all the energy is dissipated. There is also the outer shell (or mantle) which is created by induction as a consequence of the extreme rate of change of events of the central genesis helix. Since lightning tends to ionize large volumes in the path of the pre-cursor limbs, the actual main stroke current onset through any helical structure is also going to induce counter-rotating current flows in that ionized volume. So this two part event, the creation of the inner torus and the creation of the outer mantle occur due to the same helical condition of the arc path. The outer mantle current takes on a sphere like shape (with leaks at the poles) and the inner torus interacts magnetically with the outer mantle. The two components have relativistic electron currents. These free electrons in the mantle act as if a mirror to many energies of photon loss from the inner torus. So the mirroring effect traps in a lot of energy. Air between the outer shell and inner torus is swept into one camp or the other by various mechanism and so a vacuum comes to exist between the mantle and the torus. Atmospheric pressure compresses the outer sphere and that compression force is felt and resisted by the energy of the inner torus. So you can begin to see how all these factors inter-relate and hold the ball lightning energy in a relatively stable and balanced condition, enough to give it longevity of several seconds, if not large fractions of a minute. He thinks it has hot fusion potential. An interesting concept in any event. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 12 02:35:41 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA07421 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 02:35:35 -0800 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA07412 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 02:35:30 -0800 Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA24039; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 05:34:12 -0500 Date: 12 Nov 95 05:32:50 EST From: Wolfram Bahmann <100276.261 compuserve.com> To: VORTEX_L Subject: vtx: info on RADIGEN-device Message-ID: <951112103249_100276.261_JHF44-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Excerpt of the companys (UTI AG) innovation newsletter of March 1995 and supplemented by results of an informal visit at the inventors laboratory facilities (summer 1995) The described device was presented on the special environmental fair during the UN Climate Conference in Berlin 1995. There is no o/u effect reported like in some other contributions, but I think this text is worth to be distributed because the inventor/manufacturer uses an ultrasonic cavitation process to achieve unusual effects. Maybe that could further other people to try similar applications. The reported effects have been acknowledged by independent laboratories and the devices are ready for being produced in quantities now. + + + + + RADIGEN-Generator 'The way is clear for the Diesel-engine that reduces waste gas and CO2' After years of development, UTI AG has finally managed to get to the roots of the environmental and health problems posed by the otherwised cost-effective diesel engine by using the RADIGEN-Generator. Until now, measures used to improve emssion values depended on catalysers, i.e. to deal with the results of poor fuel combustion just before venting the waste gases. In comparison to modern diesel engines the RADIGEN-Generator, which is installed in front of the injection pump on any small or large diesel engine unit, reduces carcinogenic soot particles by 93%, CO (carbon monoxide) by 82%, Nox (nitrous oxides) by 70% and uncombusted carbon by 50%. It is also possible, for the first time, to convert all the millions of stationary and mobile diesel engines existing world-wide in an environmentally-friendly way so that, even in comparison with petrol engines, there is an increased environmental advantage. A reduction of at least 15-20% is possible and, in comparison to petrol engines in, e.g. private cars, this increases to 40-45% at equivalent performances. Professor Schellmann from the Engineering College in Esslingen/Germany, who oversaw the scientific experiments over the past three years, talks of great opportunities available today, especially possibility of a great improvement in the environmental effects of the diesel engine, obtained by converting all existing diesel engines now without having to wait for the car manufacturers to completely convert all new vehicles in production which would take some years, Of course, all car manufacturers and their ancillary industries are working on systems which will produce similar results in the near future but, here and now, for the millions of diesel engines and their users there is a simple and practical solution to the CO2 and waste gas problem: the RADIGEN-Generator which, once in large scale production, will not cost much more than a catalytic converter (about US$ 1400,- + fitting), is easy to install and fights the problem at its roots. Fossil fuels or renewable sources of fuels like rape-seed oil are mixed with water in the device in a hydrolytic preparation process to produce a new patented fuel which yields almost the equivalent amount of energy. This fuel is then injected into the engine in required amounts using the existing injection system. Starting is not a problem as ordinary fuel is used before any additions; water is added only with increasing motor power output starting from 0% for idle mode up to 60% for full power mode when used in direct injection engines. The hydrolysis reactor (pat.) uses the catalytic effect of combining components with different specific electrochemical displacements, obtained by first separating hydrogen and oxygen nuclei and then combining them in the correct quantities in a stable foamy dispersed fuel. The stable mixture (pat.) is initially produced by mechanically combining the nuclei in a newly developed mixing unit (pat.) and then dispersed more finely by ultrasonic caviation (pat.). The sonic energy creates, using the piezo-electric effect in the metal lattices the voltages (some kV) which split the water molecules. This process cracks also large portions of the contained long hydro-carbon-moecule chains to less harmful species. The waste gas values mentioned above were obtained using a mixture containing approximately 35% water. Water supplies pose no problems for stationary diesel engines and hardly any for large diesel engine vehicles which can have a water tank fitted. A simple solution has also been found for cars which can be used on any make and type of car without increasing the original costs. According to current knowledge water, when separated into its constituent parts, produces a net combustion energy increase when mixed with fuel which acts as the dispersion matrix. The fuel can consits of fossil fuels or renewable fuels such as rapeseed oil without any modifications to the engine. On the whole, this is an invention which will bridge the two or three decades needed until other energy sources are found to replace current engine fuels. It marks a new era in the history of the energy efficient duesel engine and an end to ist bad reputation as a health damaging, cancer causing vehicle. UTI AG can initially supply RADIGEN-Generators for stationary diesel engines only (e.g. for block-type thermal power stations) or for large diesel engine vehicles due to the current production capacity of the plant which is in the process of being expanded. This, however, is the area where emissions of waste gas is geatest. Licensed manufactureres all around the world now have a chance to support the rapid distribution of a machine that protects environment. Another important point to remember: the RADIGEN-Generator, which has been developed for all combustion processes, is also specifically created for the problems in heat production and heating which contributes so much to the CO2 debacle. Both oil and gas-fired plants show the same emission improvments and fuel consumptino reduction as diesel engines when fitted with RADIGEN-Generators. The company offers various types of combustion systems which, when extra oxygen is added using the newly developed OXYVARIO-oxygen-enriching unit, produce sensational improvements for small and medium heating plants. The German inventor and engineer G. Poeschls recent patents are: Method and Device for the production of fuel mixtures # DE 4326360 C1 , 15 Dec 94 # DE 42 20 205 PCT/EP93/01544 # DE 42 23 434 PCT/EP93/01850 # DE 43 26 360 PCT/EP94/02592 The inventions and the placing of licenses of the Poeschl devices is managed by UTI Holding + Management AG, Schwindstr. 3/VI, D-60325 Frankfurt, Germany Tel. Int+49/69 97563100 Fax Int+49/69 747052 Mr. Poeschl may also be reached at GP Konstruktion and Management AG & Co. KG Friedrich-List-Str. 1-3 , D-73760 Ostfildern , Germany Fax Int+490711 348924-40 + + + + + reported by Wolfram Bahmann, P.A.C.E. & INE board member Planetary Association for Clean Energy, Inc. - EURO. SECR. Feyermuehler Str.12 D-53894 MECHERNICH Germany fax: Int+49/ 2443-8221 e-mail: 100276.261 compuserve.com From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 12 03:21:03 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id DAA12607 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 03:20:48 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA12601 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 03:20:45 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id GAA18301; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 06:19:28 -0500 Date: 12 Nov 95 06:17:42 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Newton, Takahashi Message-ID: <951112111742_100433.1541_BHG47-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Newton: Thanks to all and especially John Logajan for comments. John always seems to have something helpful to say. Reminds me of "The Village Schoolmaster": And still they watched, and still the wonder grew, That one small head could carry all he knew... Ah. So it's one of those things that is absurdly improbable, which should have shown up anyway, but which may not have been rigorously disproved. And some people have claimed it does something. A familiar pattern! I suppose I should add it to my list of "things I'd like to see rigorously tested, preferably by somebody else". Takahashi: Scott, of course non-linearity doesn't mean o-u! It's just that linearity does mean non o-u, and that made me set aside the persuasive evidence offered. I admitted that I am moving *towards* thinking it is real, they say the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. Mark asks about my bike ride, I'll email him a copy of my original report. Yes, it was 75*k*ph up a long hill I wouldn't like to pedal a cycle up, and I hammered around N London for 25 minutes. After that, the 12V batteries gave 12.85V. All suggestive, but not worth analysing, I think. What is impressive is the very small size of the motor and that it ran cold. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 12 04:09:41 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id EAA18262 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 04:09:39 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA18250 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 04:09:35 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA20631; Sun, 12 Nov 1995 07:08:18 -0500 Date: 12 Nov 95 07:06:55 EST From: Wolfram Bahmann <100276.261 compuserve.com> To: VORTEX-L Subject: vtx: Ball lightning Message-ID: <951112120654_100276.261_JHF67-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: to all: Concerning the recent contribution to the forum corresponding ball lightning, I want to give the interested attendees a hint to a paper published by Dr. K. Chukanov from May 1993 : ENERGY SOURCE OF THE 21st CENTURY. It discusses theoretical models of BL, CF and the CASIMIR effect and shows experimental set ups for generating ball lightnings in the lab. Because of the fact that I have only the paper print out version which also contains several sketches and diagrams I cannot mail the document itself. ... but you may ask for a copy from the author. His last address I know is: General Energy International K. Chukanov 3520 W, 8550 S., Unit B West Jordan, UT 84088 ------------------------------ Wolfram Bahmann P.A.C.E. & INE board member Feyermuehler Str.12 D-53894 MECHERNICH Germany fax: Int+49/ 2443-8221 e-mail: 100276.261 compuserve.com From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 01:50:32 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA16435 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 01:50:30 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA16404 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 01:50:22 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA02699; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:51:04 +0100 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:51:03 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Delays, paranoid inventors In-Reply-To: <951111225235_100060.173_JHB5-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 11 Nov 1995, Norman Horwood wrote: > Fair comment - however since Takahashi seemed to understand some English, but > only spoke in Japanese which was translated by his colleague, it is difficult > to make definite judgements about his voracity. I will keep in touch with him [...] You mean they didn't translate how much he eats? Couldn't you just watch at tea-and-biscuits time? -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 06:54:36 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA17060 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 06:54:35 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA17047 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 06:54:31 -0800 Received: from net-1-179.austin.eden.com (net-1-179.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.179]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA29911 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:54:25 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:54:25 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511131454.IAA29911 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: CF heat to electricity engineering X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >HI Everyone, > this is my first post to this group. I'm interested in these >thermoelectric chips (TEDs). Could some someone point me in the direction >of liturature descibing them and a company that makes them? Thankyou very >much. MELCOR 1040 Spruce Street Trenton NJ 08648 609-393-4178 609-393-9461 (FAX) They make the ones that go in the Igloo elecric ice chests as well as a zillion other sizes and shapes. I've got several of those...they're about $25 each in small quantities. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 07:18:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA24612 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 07:18:24 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA24588 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 07:18:20 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA06178; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:17:03 -0500 Date: 13 Nov 95 10:15:21 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Re: Nickel Mesh-Hydrogen Heater? Message-ID: <951113151520_102021.3045_EHT79-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: Scott Little, INTERNET:little eden.com TO: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 DATE: 11/13/95 7:51 AM RE: Re: Nickel Mesh-Hydrogen Heater? Sender: little mail.eden.com Received: from natashya.eden.com by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA20817; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 09:35:05 -0500 Received: from net-1-179.austin.eden.com (net-1-179.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.179]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA28557 for <102021.3045 compuserve.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:35:03 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:35:03 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511131435.IAA28557 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: Nickel Mesh-Hydrogen Heater? X-Mailer: >Scott, > >I got to thinking that if one took nickel mesh (wirecloth) and wrapped it around >a Chromalox or equivalent cartridge heater and stuffed it in a stainless steel >(304 or 316?) tube and then pressurized the sealed tube with hydrogen, one would >be close to the Piantelli approach. >With power into the cartridge heater and a suitable magnetic field, would this >do what Piantelli claims for that setup? Nominally, yes. However, if it doesn't work it's sufficiently different to get only a glance of total disregard from believers. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 07:19:13 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA24838 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 07:19:11 -0800 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA24809 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 07:19:04 -0800 Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA13681; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:17:45 -0500 Date: 13 Nov 95 10:16:34 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Copy of: Catalytic Converter Beads Message-ID: <951113151633_102021.3045_EHT79-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 TO: Scott Little, INTERNET:little eden.com DATE: 11/12/95 3:34 PM RE: Copy of: Catalytic Converter Beads Scott, The beads in auto catalytic converters are either platinum or possibly palladium. Used to be able to pick up the older converters in junk yards, last I heard recyclers were picking them up for $10.00 each. The catalysts are on an alumina bead with several square meters/gram, these can be fired in air or even in a self cleaning oven set on "clean" (watch out for lead vapors). United Catalyst Co. in Louisville Ky. has about every type of catalyst you can think of, especially easy to get is nickel types. George Beuhler (sp?) at United Catalysts (an international German company) and I go way back. George sent me several catalyst samples to try over the years on biomass conversion work, but couldn't do the Pt or Pd because of cost. Might be something there that you might want to try out. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 07:28:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA27389 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 07:28:11 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA27366 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 07:28:06 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA16145; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:26:48 -0500 Date: 13 Nov 95 10:24:53 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Copy of: Re: Catalytic Converter Beads Message-ID: <951113152453_102021.3045_EHT88-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 TO: Scott Little, INTERNET:little eden.com DATE: 11/13/95 9:02 AM RE: Copy of: Re: Catalytic Converter Beads FROM: Scott Little, INTERNET:little eden.com TO: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 DATE: 11/13/95 7:43 AM Re: Re: Catalytic Converter Beads Sender: little mail.eden.com Received: from natashya.eden.com by arl-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA11659; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 09:37:35 -0500 Received: from net-1-179.austin.eden.com (net-1-179.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.179]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA28806 for <102021.3045 compuserve.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:37:33 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:37:33 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511131437.IAA28806 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter Beads X-Mailer: >Scott, > >The beads in auto catalytic converters are either platinum or possibly >palladium. Yeah, I wonder if those beads wouldn't be just as good as CETI's special beads. Again, however, if it doesn't work it's sufficiently different to get only a glance of total disregard from believers. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) Response 11/13/95 Scott, In the CETI/PF electrolysis approach I think the electrons coming off the cathode to combine with the protons/deuterons are acting as nucleation sites for bubble formation. Thus at 60 milliamps or so there are plenty of bubbles formed and when these collapse you get an effect similar to the cavitation phenomena. I mentioned the cat converter beads as an approach to the Piantelli dry hydrogen-nickel effects as opposed to the CETI/PF wet approach. As much as these catalysts have been used in the petrochemical industry for hydrogenation reactions like CO + 3H2 = CH4 + H2O for synthetic natural gas production etc., one would think that the heat effects (Piantelli) might have been detected. However that's not a criteria for not taking a look see. United Catalyst Co. has countless variations of the catalysts that could take a lot of time to evaluate for the Piantelli effect, but it could be a good place to start looking. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 08:00:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA08635 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:00:40 -0800 Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA08615 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:00:34 -0800 Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA25872; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:59:16 -0500 Date: 13 Nov 95 10:57:37 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: TEDs, Ovshinky Message-ID: <951113155736_72240.1256_EHB110-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Martin Sevior asked about thermoelectric chips (TED, or TEC). Last week Marshall Dudley and I discussed them. I have literature quoting 3 to 5% efficiency. He called a manufacturer and confirmed that. His e-mail address is mdudley brbbs.brbbs.com. (I do not think he is tuned in here). I have some old information Atomergic Chemetals, and I have this note from someone named Gary L. Mills (glmills igc.apc.org), dated 18 Aug 94: "I have been working with thermoelectric coolers for space applications. I have been using coolers made by Marlow Industries of Dallas, TX. Thermoelectric coolers are cute devices, they produce a lot of cooling for their very small size. They have no moving parts and are inherently reliable if properly used. However, they not very efficient, especially if you compare them to Stirling refrigerators or even the standard vapor compression machines. They also are fairly limited in temperature range. They basically work best with a hot side temperature around room temperature and even multi-stage units cannot get below 180 Kelvin (minus 90 centigrade). The Marlow cooler I am currently working with weighs 15 grams, is .8 x 1.0 x .4 inches and will provide .25 watts of refrigeration at 190 Kelvin, consuming 13 watts. It consumes only a couple of watts at 230 Kelvin with a hot side of 270 Kelvin (O Centigrade). Marlow makes single stage commercial units that sell for less than $20. They also make coolers for space applications and you probably don't even want to think about what they cost. General Electric did a lot research on thermoelectric coolers in the early 1960's apparently for refrigerators and air conditioners. They dropped it, probably because they couldn't find a way around TEC's inherently low efficiency." In the last few years, a number of manufacturers have introduced thermoelectric portable refrigerator / food warmers. They are sold at K-Mart and elsewhere. Many magazines advertise the Comtrad Industries Koolatron P24A ($99) and P9 ($79). The P24A can be plugged into an automobile cigarette lighter outlet where it "consumes only three amps of power." I don't know how many volts those car outlets run at. Capacity is 30 quarts (28 liters). The advertisement says that in the heating mode it goes up to 126 deg F, and in cooling mode, quote: "The governing module, no bigger than a matchbook, actually delivers the cooling power of a 10 pound block of ice." How's that for a scientific description? Clear as mud. It reminds me of Potapov's calorimetry. It is sort of fun trying to sort out what they mean by that. The heat of fusion of water is 144 Btu per pound, so they must mean that over some (unlisted) period of time the gadget removes 1,440 Btu. Maybe one hour? One day? A 10 lb chunk of ice in an old fashioned icebox kept things cool for a long time. Anyway, this is a well insulated box like a picnic beer cooler with a TED and a thermostat built in. I have heard these things make dandy thermoelectric calorimeters (like Seebeck Envelope calorimeters), with very large capacity. They sure are cheap! They are not first principle calorimeters. You have to calibrate them, and you have to determine how much heat is lost through the walls of the cooler box. But you can fit a large cell power supplies and all inside one. Then theoretically all you have to do is set the thermostat, keep track of how much energy the refrigerator consumes, and adjust that number for the known inefficiency of the TED which you measure during calibration. In my thermoelectric file I also have an article from Science Digest (January 1984) about a fellow named Stanford Ovshinky, who invented some important improvements to TED, solar cells, storage batteries, fuel cells and other devices. He pioneered the use of noncrystalline (amorphous) materials in these devices, where it was previously thought that only single crystal materials would work. He has no formal scientific training, but he challenged the scientific status quo, and he has made a big name for himself and a lot of money. He "successfully challenged the theoretical underpinnings of solid state physics." Anyone familiar with the cold fusion saga will know what happened to him: " 'He has convinced industry and the country to take amorphous materials seriously,' says Nobel laureate Isidor Rabi of Columbia University. Along the way, he survived a nine-year controversy that brought bitter attacks on his integrity as well as his science, and finally saw his genius vindicated by the award of a Nobel prize -- to someone else." This is typical of the many stories you read in the back pages of the scientific press. It goes like this: unsung hero discovers something important; hero is rejected and scorned for a while; then Scientific Establishment catches on; hero is rewarded, feted; cue music, titles, happy ending. The most recent example is a nurse in Austria who had noticed that several AIDS positive hemophiliac patients have survived for years without developing any symptoms of the disease. She tried to draw attention to their case, and she was rewarded as usual with a bucket of slops poured on her head, accusations of insanity, criminality, threats to revoke her license to practice, etc., etc. It turns out these patients have a new form of AIDS. It has mutated into a non-lethal virus, which is what most viruses, bacteria and other parasites do eventually. This new strain may serve as the basis for a vaccine capable of eradicating the lethal strains. In other words, this nurse may have found the basis for a cure for AIDS. She said she almost gave up the struggle many times. These magazine articles always end on an upbeat David beats Goliath note. Reconciliation, and happy ever after is the theme. The question is, how many similar scientific discoveries and breakthroughs have *not* survived the ordeal? Ovshinky and his wife (a biochemist) kept plugging away for 9 years, living in poverty. How many other Ovshinys out there finally gave up? We can never know. That is like asking how many talented children in the third world starve to death every week. How many potential Feynmans do we lose? How many Fleischmanns? Nobody can say. All I know is that the game is rigged. The system is set up to suppress new ideas from outside of the establishment. It is set up to attack people who have new insights and creative ideas. They must devote years to political battles against jealousy, irrationality, and vested interests. I appalled at how corrupt academic science is. I grew up in Washington DC, and I have worked with hard-boiled people in the telephone and the computer industry where kickbacks, price fixing, and brutal competition are widespread, so I have seen a lot of greed & rotten behavior. But I have never seen anything like the scientific establishment. Competition is stifled by blatant violations of anti-trust laws, the peer review system, and funding rackets where the rule is "dealer wins and winner deals." It looks more like a medieval guild than a modern social institution. Behavior is tolerated which would be considered highly unethical if not downright illegal in other areas of modern life. Scientific institutions have made some social progress over the last century. There are now more women and more minority groups working in science. But overall, science remains a backwards, bigoted, 19th century discipline, prone to waste, emotion, and head-in-the-sand conservative behavior. Scientists remind me of the old fashioned businessmen of my grandfather's generation, circa 1900 to 1929. Many of them also fought to preserve the status quo, prevent change, and stifle progress. The Great Depression and crisis of the Second World War finally pushed them aside. Until the 1970s lawyers adhered to rules similar to the ones of the modern science. They were not allowed to advertise; their numbers were artificially limited; they were not allowed to publicly criticize one another or expose malfeasance. These rules literally did go back to the medieval guild laws that formed the basis of the profession. From a businessman's point of view (my point of view) these rules were violations of anti-trust, ethics, and freedom of speech. Muckraking reformers finally changed them. Science needs similar social and legal reforms. Change is long overdue. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 08:23:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA16999 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:23:47 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA16932 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:23:36 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA04227 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:23:11 -0500 Message-Id: <199511131623.AA04227 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:23:11 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: pictures Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 11:22:33 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Pictures are nice. I have been looking for an easy way to get pictures converted to GIF and PCX pictures. I could then send them out as an attached file on AOL or FTTP on the INTERNET. We have a scanner here at work, but I want to do the picture taking on my own time. I hope you don't take this as an add but I just sent some pictures into the Seattle Film Works at 206-283-9074 they will make pictures files for me at a good price, I hope. Others looking to get transmittable picture files made and who don't have a good color scanner may try the same. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 08:32:40 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA20189 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:32:26 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA20137 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:32:15 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id LAA23886; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:30:50 -0500 Date: 13 Nov 95 11:27:21 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Piantelli's preparation Message-ID: <951113162720_72240.1256_EHB52-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Scott, I gather you are doing a Piantelli replication. Have you talked to Ed Storms or someone else who has met with him recently? I gather that Piantelli prepares the nickel rod with some kind of surface treatment. I do not know what it is or what it entails. My guess is that he just cleans it, but I have heard of more elaborate treatments. Mizuno, for example, has recently been methodically scratching the surface of cathodes with ground glass. I have heard that Piantelli did not mention this preparation in the patent, perhaps deliberately. I have also heard that if you do not do the preparation, the gadget will not work. If that is true the patent will eventually be ruled invalid in the U.S. I do not know about Europe, but in the U.S. you must include all relevant information about the invention that you are aware of one the day you file the patent. I am sure the special preparation would be considered relevant. If you just want to clean the rod, I recommend those ultrasonic jewelry cleaning gadgets. I do not understand why you wrote: "However, if it doesn't work it's sufficiently different to get only a glance of total disregard from believers." Which believers? Surely not Ed Storms, Gene, or me. The Italian CF scientists and theorists like Preparatta are reported to be very pleased and excited by Piantelli's work. I think Piantelli has been received warmly, perhaps more warmly than Patterson. Some people do appear to disregard his work, but I think they are jealous. I myself am not convinced that Piantelli is real. I have doubts about the work, and I am not happy with the man's attitude or behavior. But I remain open minded and I am anxious to see an independent replication attempt. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 11:29:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA01875 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:29:41 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA01715 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:29:16 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.70]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA19262 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 12:44:07 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:29:54 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: nuclear Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reference to the sub-orbital hypothesis, a typo corrected version was just posted in sci.physics.fusion in reference to the following discussion which might be of interest here: (A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion) In article <47nsfp$f3r post.gsfc.nasa.gov>, "Lawrence E. Wharton" wrote: > The CF advocates have done a good job of defending their latest claims > about the CETI cell and it appears that there may be something there. If > there is something there then it still is necessry to develope a theory > to explain it. I think the critics have done a good job in showing that > there is not sufficient nuclear products to allow fusion as the energy > source. The supporters seem to have a case that the energy produced is > too large to be the result of a chemical proccess. Therefore the power > must come from some invisable backgound source like zero point energy. > I favor low energy neutrino flux as the source. Neutrinos are known to > exist, they can carry significant energy, and they are nearly invisable. > > Whatever the source is, lets call them CF rays and set the energy flux > to F. From the SOFE CETI cell demo we know that F must be at least > 5 watts/cc and, of course, these CF rays also interact with the Earth. > So one can calculate the increase in temperature of the Earth from CF > ray heating. The temperature increase, dT, is given by: > > dT = E * 4 * F / (sig * T**3) = E * 1.3e+5 > > with sig the Stephan-Boltzmann constant, E the efficiency of absorption > of CF rays in the Earth, and T the temperature (set to 300 degrees). I > have used a perturbation form because the effect of the CF rays on the > Earth must be small or otherwise it would have been noticed. Here I am > assuming that the distribution of CF rays are isotropic. This can be > tested by putting two CF cells close together and looking for a shading > effect and testing for any non isotropy. > > So in order that the Earth does not get too hot we must have > > E < 1.e-4 > > or the Earth must only absorb one part in ten thousand of the CF rays > that the CETI cell absorbs. That is a little hard to believe. There is > pleanty of palladium, nickel, and hydrogen in the Earth. For every CF > ray that comes in and is absorbed by the CETI cell, another one would > have to pass through 10,000 Earths to be absorbed. > > Larry Wharton > Wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov > 301 286-3486 To respond to this I have posted THE SUB-ORBITAL HYPOTHESIS OF COLD FUSION in a thread of that name. I think you have made an excellent case for proving that the coupling conditions, if they exist, are special conditions. You really have not shown that the conditions widely exist in nature. There is some evidence that the necessary conditions do exist in the earth to some extent, that evidence being core heating and tritium production. Evidence of zero point energy (ZPE) exists directly in the form of low temperature experiments, and indirectly through experiments that verify the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP). As temperature approaches absolute zero thermal vibrations subside to nearly zero, but can not come to zero, regardless the amount of thermal energy extracted. The reason for this is if motion stopped, then the relative location of every atom would be known absolutely, therefore, by the HUP, the conjugate variable, momentum, would be infinite. This can not be, so absolute zero can not be reached. More importantly, there must be a source of energy to offset the energy extracted. Unless the energy comes from a coupling process, the first law of thermodynamics is violated. Since the average temperature of the universe is less than 4 deg. K, this coupling must occur in a very low temperture, i.e. velocity, regime to get a positive energy flow. Obtaining useful energy from a cryrogenic environment sounds difficult at best. However, if the energy can be obtained from individual particles without affecting the entire thermal environment, then a practical device may be built. What I have suggested is the possibility that if a free electron can give off a sufficient amount of it's energy in the form of photons (a useable form of energy on the macro scale) while falling into a coulomb well, such a low energy electron can regain that energy from the ZPE sea to climb back out of the well. By the sub-orbital hypothesis, the conditions whereby this might happen are very special. The electron must (a) be free (i.e. not in an orbital), (b) must possess sufficient kinetic energy to fall into the well without forming an orbital, (c) must release most that kinetic energy in the form of photons while in the well, and (d) must not be disturbed by other particles prior to tunneling out of the well. This set of circumstances precludes efficient coupling in high temperature plasmas (d), low temperature static environments (a) & (b), and dieclectrics (a) & (b). Also, the ability of a low energy electron to closely approach a nucleus so that (c) can be met requires some amount of magnetic field to be present. The condition hypothesized to create the free electron in the metal lattice is approach of an adsorbed proton to the conductiion bands of the lattice, thereby stripping a paired electron from the band. The presence of adsorbed hydrogen, plus all the other conditions (a)-(d) in the earth seem to represent a very unlikely set of conditions to occur naturally. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 11:33:05 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA03322 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:33:01 -0800 Received: from mbunix.mitre.org (mbunix.mitre.org [129.83.20.100]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA03268 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:32:53 -0800 Received: from spectre.mitre.org (spectre.mitre.org [129.83.61.124]) by mbunix.mitre.org (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA05634 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:32:49 -0500 Received: from localhost (eachus localhost) by spectre.mitre.org (8.6.4/8.6.4) id OAA00957; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:32:48 -0500 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:32:48 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199511131932.OAA00957 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: (jlogajan@mirage.skypoint.com) Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "John Logajan" said: > If I understand his concept, he causes a helical path in air to be ionized > between the gaps of a high voltage supply. He is a little vague on how > this helical path is presently generated, but he alludes to a method > of using a 3D focusing of a helical flashtube image. Thus the photon > flux is made to converge most intensely in the image of the flashtube. > Synchronous with this "preping" of the arc path, the high voltage is > applied, and the spark breakdown preferentially travels along the helical > path. An elegant but capital intensive way of creating a helical arc. I've used two others that may be of interest. The first is to use a fine wire (or carbonized thread) to connect the two eletrodes via the path you want to use. The wire will vaporize, but the plasma you create will follow the inteneded path. You have to replace wire after each try, so this approach is labor intensive, but easy to set up. I used to use one strand from 16 AWG stranded silver wire. (And 1200 microFarads at 4000 VDC...) The other is to use a magnetic field and put an initial curve in the arc. I once used this technique and movable electrodes to literally wind a coil of plasma around a quartz mandrel. (Trick one: Work in a rarified noble gas atmosphere. Trick two: Without the mandrel and a magnetic field so that the coil is the "shortest" path between the electodes, the loops will pinch off.) Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 12:36:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA05992 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:26:26 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA05741 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:25:48 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpsb09209; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 13:24:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA26262; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 09:38:15 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 385436090095317FEPRI; 13 Nov 1995 09:36:09 PST Message-Id: Date: 13 Nov 1995 09:36:09 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Copy of: Re: Catalytic Converter Beads To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/13/95 09:36:52 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/13/95 07:37 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Copy of: Re: Catalytic Converter Beads Guys: Remember ONE thing about making "changes" to someone's "formula".... If you DO that and get negative results, that does not mean that the claims of the original "formula" user are invalid. Just that you have not followed the "formula". Any of you guys ever done any cooking? You might try it sometime....it's revealing. (Good practice in "sparse" information systems.) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 12:37:02 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA18215 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:56:12 -0800 Received: from big.aa.net (root big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA18067 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:55:53 -0800 Received: from s3c0p0.aa.net (s3c0p0.aa.net [204.157.220.132]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA14846 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:55:48 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:55:48 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199511131855.KAA14846 big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mwm aa.net (Michael Mandeville) Subject: Re: vtx: pictures Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >Pictures are nice. I have been looking for an easy way to get pictures >converted to GIF and PCX pictures. I could then send them out as an >attached file on AOL or FTTP on the INTERNET. We have a scanner here at >work, but I want to do the picture taking on my own time. I hope you don't >take this as an add but I just sent some pictures into the Seattle Film >Works at 206-283-9074 they will make pictures files for me at a good >price, I hope. Others looking to get transmittable picture files made and >who don't have a good color scanner may try the same. > > Frank Znidarsic > Frank: I didn't realize you are in the Seattle area. Go to Kinko's. Scanner there from 10 pm to 6 am is $18.00 /hr. One can scan a lot of photo prints in one hour, especially if you can use the zip drive - saves a one meg file in about one second. For delivery, put em up as ftp links on a simple web page. Attachements to email is a real clogger. More info on that...if you desire. Eskimo's web server is now real and dispatches pages with machine gun speed. Stash photo gifs in a web directory and ftp the links - a real simple method. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 12:42:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA13250 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:58:55 -0800 Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA13092 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:58:32 -0800 Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id OAA21635; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:57:05 -0500 Date: 13 Nov 95 13:44:51 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Meant Australia Message-ID: <951113184451_72240.1256_EHB47-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:vortex-l mail.eskimo.com I wrote: ". . . a nurse in Austria who had noticed that several AIDS positive hemophiliac patients have survived for years without developing any symptoms of the disease." I meant Australia, the country Down Under where people walk on their hands. I forgot to cut out the article. If anyone else sees it please send me details. Australia, by the way, is defined in the American Heritage Dictionary as follows: "The world's smallest continent, southeast of Asia between the Pacific and Indian oceans." How can they tell? I thought it was the world's largest island. Maybe England is the world's smallest continent. Getting back to serious subjects: Whatever happened to the tests in St. Petersburg? I grow anxious. Someone should contact them. If Mike Williams has signed on here, let me say Welcome! And I suggest you scale up more than 10 times. If you have enough beads, it would be great to see you scale up, say, 50 times, and get yourself roughly 100 watts excess. Finally, I certainly never intended to imply I think this Takahashi fellow is a fraud or a con man. I think he is not convincing. His behavior is counterproductive. His method of demonstrating the technology raises more questions than it answers. But that's his business, not mine. He seems to know a thing or two about how to succeed in business. If Takahashi asked me I would strongly advise him to be more open and more forceful, although I agree that it might not be a good idea to declare that the machine is over unity. I think that Jim Griggs strikes the right balance when dealing with this controversial subject. He says it is over unity as far as he can tell, and he stands by his measurements. On the other hand he says he will retract as soon as someone shows him a mistake in the calorimetry; he has never sold the machine as an over unit device; and he never mentions o-u in his sales literature. Other people in the CF business have told me recently that the o-u issue is political dynamite. The patent office now says that you can talk about excess heat. They say they might grant more patents to devices like CETI's or Pons and Fleischmann's. But the inventors *must not* publicly mention anything about self sustaining machines, where output is tied to input. You must not demostrate or discuss anything like that. Any hint of it, and they say your patent will be summarily rejected or tied up in red tape. I presume that is because it would fall into the category of perpetual motion machines. This is the patent office's strict policy, which they have explained with a straight face to people I know. Yes, even the bureacrats must realize this is lunacy. It is like saying eat all you want, just don't swallow. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 12:48:05 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA27338 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:18:51 -0800 Received: from mbunix.mitre.org (mbunix.mitre.org [129.83.20.100]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA27263 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 11:18:38 -0800 Received: from spectre.mitre.org (spectre.mitre.org [129.83.61.124]) by mbunix.mitre.org (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA03116 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:18:07 -0500 Received: from localhost (eachus localhost) by spectre.mitre.org (8.6.4/8.6.4) id OAA00746; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:18:07 -0500 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:18:07 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199511131918.OAA00746 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: (jlogajan@mirage.skypoint.com) Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Date: Sun, 12 Nov 1995 02:00:00 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2729 Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-MDF: Mail for eachus sent to eachus mbunix.mitre.org Horace Heffner writes: > I am trying ideas to get ball lightning with less energy through superior > design. Paul Koloc has some interesting ideas on this. I have some brief writeups on my web page (url below.) If I understand his concept, he causes a helical path in air to be ionized between the gaps of a high voltage supply. He is a little vague on how this helical path is presently generated, but he alludes to a method of using a 3D focusing of a helical flashtube image. Thus the photon flux is made to converge most intensely in the image of the flashtube. Synchronous with this "preping" of the arc path, the high voltage is applied, and the spark breakdown preferentially travels along the helical path. This sets up an intense magnetic field in which energy is stored, and which causes the helical plasma to collapse its "coils" laterally, thus forming a torus of circulating charge. The energy previously stored in the magnetic field will then keep the torus current flowing until all the energy is dissipated. There is also the outer shell (or mantle) which is created by induction as a consequence of the extreme rate of change of events of the central genesis helix. Since lightning tends to ionize large volumes in the path of the pre-cursor limbs, the actual main stroke current onset through any helical structure is also going to induce counter-rotating current flows in that ionized volume. So this two part event, the creation of the inner torus and the creation of the outer mantle occur due to the same helical condition of the arc path. The outer mantle current takes on a sphere like shape (with leaks at the poles) and the inner torus interacts magnetically with the outer mantle. The two components have relativistic electron currents. These free electrons in the mantle act as if a mirror to many energies of photon loss from the inner torus. So the mirroring effect traps in a lot of energy. Air between the outer shell and inner torus is swept into one camp or the other by various mechanism and so a vacuum comes to exist between the mantle and the torus. Atmospheric pressure compresses the outer sphere and that compression force is felt and resisted by the energy of the inner torus. So you can begin to see how all these factors inter-relate and hold the ball lightning energy in a relatively stable and balanced condition, enough to give it longevity of several seconds, if not large fractions of a minute. He thinks it has hot fusion potential. An interesting concept in any event. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 14:49:36 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA12385 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:32:40 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA12278 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:32:20 -0800 Received: from net-1-179.austin.eden.com (net-1-140.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.140]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id QAA16165 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 16:31:56 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 16:31:56 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511132231.QAA16165 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: Rothwell's query about Ni-H X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Scott Little >INTERNET:little eden.com >I gather you are doing a Piantelli replication. Yes, trying. >Have you talked to Ed Storms >or someone else who has met with him recently? no but I sure will. I gather that Piantelli >prepares the nickel rod with some kind of surface treatment. Yeah, that's what I hear too. >I have heard that Piantelli did not mention this preparation in the patent, That is correct. I have searched in vain. >I do not understand why you wrote: "However, if it doesn't work it's >sufficiently different to get only a glance of total disregard from >believers." Any believers, Jed...in fact, anybody. It's just another expression of the Experimentalist's Lament...not intended to offend anyone...just stating the obvious: If I do an experiment similar to Piantelli's that doesn't work I have proved nothing. >But I remain open minded and I am anxious to see an >independent replication attempt. Me too. The gaseous hydrogen-metal experiment is very attractive as a practical energy source. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 15:46:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA10610 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 15:46:19 -0800 Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA10541 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 15:46:08 -0800 Received: (from msevior localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id KAA10861; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 10:45:58 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199511132345.KAA10861 liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 10:45:58 +1100 (EST) Cc: msevior liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (Martin Edmund Sevior) In-Reply-To: <951113184451_72240.1256_EHB47-1 CompuServe.COM> from "Jed Rothwell" at Nov 13, 95 01:44:51 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 1004 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > To: >INTERNET:vortex-l mail.eskimo.com > > I wrote: ". . . a nurse in Austria who had noticed that several AIDS positive > hemophiliac patients have survived for years without developing any symptoms > of the disease." I meant Australia, the country Down Under where people walk > on their hands. I forgot to cut out the article. If anyone else sees it please > send me details. Australia, by the way, is defined in the American Heritage > Dictionary as follows: > > "The world's smallest continent, southeast of Asia between the Pacific > and Indian oceans." > > How can they tell? I thought it was the world's largest island. Maybe England > is the world's smallest continent. > I met a Swiss man once who said Americans didn't know th difference between Austrians and Australians. I guess there's something to that :)! It was on the TV news here in Melbourne "the world's most livable city". I didn't get the newspaper that day but I'll watch out for you. Cheers, Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 20:57:55 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA07608 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 20:57:47 -0800 Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA07516 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 20:57:36 -0800 Received: (from msevior localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id PAA13624 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 15:56:47 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199511140456.PAA13624 liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 15:56:46 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: from "John Logajan" at Nov 13, 95 10:35:29 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 630 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > John Logajan writes: > > I suspect this is what Koloc is doing today because his plasmas have > the effects of copper ions. But he says hi-Z atoms are not good for > plasmas (some sort of loss problem associated with increasing Z.) > Electron's radiate a lot of energy via X-rays in collisions with high Z nuclei. The effect is called Bremsstralung and the energy loss rate is proportional to Z**2 and some big power of temperature. It could well be a real killer at the very high temperatures Paul is trying for. All that vapourized copper could really poison the tenuous vaccum that is a typical plasma. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 21:35:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA13063 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 19:53:58 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA12933 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 19:53:32 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id TAA19777; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 19:53:17 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 19:53:16 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: pictures In-Reply-To: <199511131623.AA04227 power.gpu.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser wrote: > > -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > Pictures are nice. I have been looking for an easy way to get pictures > converted to GIF and PCX pictures. I could then send them out as an > attached file on AOL or FTTP on the INTERNET. Picture files are pretty big. We discussed this here months ago, and the upshot was that some users have very small mailboxes and limited bandwidth. Message size limit is set to 40K right now. If you can make a 20K JPG file, thats fine. Otherwise, the best way to post is to place the files on a web page and advertized the URL here. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 13 23:37:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA28037 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:37:55 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA28012 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:37:50 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA20985 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 00:53:24 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 22:39:00 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> >> John Logajan writes: >> >> I suspect this is what Koloc is doing today because his plasmas have >> the effects of copper ions. But he says hi-Z atoms are not good for >> plasmas (some sort of loss problem associated with increasing Z.) >> > >Electron's radiate a lot of energy via X-rays in collisions with high Z >nuclei. The effect is called Bremsstralung and the energy loss rate is >proportional to Z**2 and some big power of temperature. >It could well be a real killer at the very high temperatures Paul is trying >for. All that vapourized copper could really poison the tenuous vaccum >that is a typical plasma. > >Martin Sevior Based on the sub-orbital hypothesis, I would think the opposite. The xrays so created are not lost energy, only lost kinetic energy, and may in fact represent gained energy, provided the electrons involved in the collision were just the right speed. In addition, copper has been involved in many anecdotal natural ball lighting occurances. It is possible that the oxidation of the copper supports the ball until ZPE extraction and ball size reach equilibrium. I think the difference in viewpoint and possibly optimism has a lot to with our expectations and design. I read Koloc's work on John Logajan's www service some time ago, but Koloc and I are on totally different wavelengths, both in terms of objectives and ball mechanics. Koloc is looking for high energies to get good statistics for a P - B11 burn, while I am looking to optimize the electron/proton relative velocity in the 2-3 KeV range, below .02 C, or maybe much less in a magnetic field. I am just a rank amateur and Koloc has already had some success and I have not. However, I will be satisfied (and lucky) to recreate natural events, while Koloc needs to confine enormous energies to get fusion. Its hard to say which path will ultimately work, if either. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 00:20:02 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA07701 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 00:20:01 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA07678 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 00:19:54 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA13126; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 09:20:39 +0100 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 09:20:39 +0100 From: Dieter Britz Message-Id: <9511140820.AA13126 kemi.aau.dk> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Filimonov on Potapov machine Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: About 3 weeks ago, I had an email from Dr. Filimonov, of Byelorus. He is the author of several CNF papers, and has compiled a useful bibliography of former East-Block literature on the subject, which he was kind enough to send me. In this email, he gives me some information that I reckon might interest vortex-l people, and I now have his permission to reproduce his email, which I do below. I have trimmed the header a bit and removed some personal stuff, focussing only on stuff about the Potapov gadget. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk Date: Thu, 26 October 1995 To: Dr. Dieter Britz From: Veniamin Filimonov [...] As for Potapov's machine, an engineer from Minsk Leonard Radyno does produces Potapov's engines at Bobruysk Machine-Building Plant and installs them to heat buildings, it's his main business. Heat power of machines are 15 and 45 kilowatts. Being earlier a high rank official of Ministry (Energy Production? I'm not sure) he was captivated by Potapov's ideas and changed his life abruptly. Very nice man. They have an agreement with "Energiya" amalgamation near Moscow about research and development of the device, and Yuri Bazhutov with his collaborators is involved into this study. They reported about neutron emission up to 4 sigmas, generation of tritium and carbon-14 under the machine operation (however with addition of heavy water and something else), but not heat, because they are forced to use it in pulse (up to 5 minutes) regime due to fast increase of pressure inside. Radyno showed me official conclusions of consumers about efficiency of the machine and it is up to 150% excess heat, not 300%. From another hand, he doesn't want any more official expertise because it creates problems with commercialization in cases of both positive and negative results! I mean it is something we don't understand yet in these devices, but they work. May be, zero-point energy isn't a chimera? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 00:26:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA08814 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 00:26:05 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA08802 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 00:26:01 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA13303; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 09:26:47 +0100 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 09:26:47 +0100 From: Dieter Britz Message-Id: <9511140826.AA13303 kemi.aau.dk> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: More from Filimonov: Theory Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Further to my Filimonov forward, his email to me, in which he gives me permission to send on his earlier email, also permits me to forward the present one. In it, he outlines some theory on the working of the o-u devices, that also might interest you lot. It's above my electrochemical head, I'm afraid. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk Date: Wen, 8 Nov 1995 To: Dr. Dieter Britz From: Veniamin Filimonov [...] I add that my earlier intention to carry out testing of YUSMAR machine wasn't realyzed. Producer of the machine, Leonard Radyno, proposed me to visit Bobruysk Machine Building Plant testing laboratory and see instead of making experiments myself. Similar to James Griggs's, his matter is mostly the commercial success of machine, not a principle of operation. What about your correct note that information about neutron emission, tritium and radiocarbon generation etc. after YUSMAR operation are connected with not ZPE extraction but fusion rather: I have to point out that following to Hal Fox and Hal Puthoff and Peter Glueck and many others I don't consider these phenomena separately. Evidence that 'CF' excess energy when it is established surely may be barely explained by nuclear reactions properly is, for my mind, not a sequel of the fact that experimenter is liar or crasy, but as a sign to all of us that a Nature is more smart and complex than our imagination of it. Recent experiments in "Energiya" amalgamation confirm that 'cold fusion' and 'zero-point energy' (that may entitle phenomena the essence of which differs from their names) are connected in such a way that no one of them may be considered as primordial or secondary but their rank is caused by certain circumstances in each case. What does it mean, for my mind: the mechanism of energy extraction in highly non-equilibrium systems may be general one but predominant way of energy transformation and reservoir of energy may differ in dependence on presence or absence of relevant nuclei or anything else. This general mechanism is proposed by me earlier for certain processes such as 'CF' properly and/or chemical detonation of solids and its name is SYNERGETIC ACTIVATION. It may be applied easily to any other phenomenon/system under conditions of: 1) System is primordially highly ordered (e.g., crystal lattice) and conserves high ordering degree under condition of point 2. 2) Unidirectional action on it cause additional ordering, namely separating of subsystems having monotonously deducing levels of excitation energy. 3) As a sequel of the latter, any excitation up to high energy level may be implemented by not individual hop but step by step, yielding reciprocal power distribution of elements (molecules, atoms etc.) by energy fluctuations: P = A x E(n)/E(0)^-gamma (here P is probability, A is numerical factor, E(n) and E(0) are highest and lowest energy levels, gamma depends on the structure of excitation energy levels - or band - {for equidistant ones gamma=1, for logarithmically equidistant ones gamma>1 but constant etc.}) instead of exponential one, that causes easy overcoming of any potential barrier. Those points must be completed by notations that: A) Mentioned UNIDIRECTIONAL action (shock-wave-type nonlinear front propagating with velocity excluding INTERaction) may be self-generated in the system - the most cases of 'CF' are concerned with this circumstance - and B) Mentioned primordial ordering may be caused by p.2 condition itself in the case if medium possess a tendence to such ordering (say, liquid water which hasn't true crystalline structure but has a tendence to it). No doubts, formula of distribution placed above is intrinsic feature of any highly non-equilibrium system within and beyond the Universe, it is observed not only for energy distribution but for other ones. My contribution in the topic is restricted only by a new explanation of this formula nature (but I like other ones also). One may easily apply 'SA' to ZPE extracting, why no? As for imaginary experiment by Hal Puthoff yielding very little energy: May be, in EQUILIBRIUM imaginary system proposed by Dr. Puthoff (I don't know surely) a rate of increasing energy fluctuation density with shortening of the resonant wave length (or closening imaginary plates) is too steep and it is necessary to situate noted plates much more closer for obtaining significant asymmetry. Not the same must occur in HIHGHLY NON-EQUILIBRIUM imaginary system organized according to conditions mentioned above; namely shock wave front creates true asimmetry of space-time within itself, so, for my mind, energy yield may be much more in the case. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 08:00:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA14172 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 07:58:22 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA14152 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 07:58:17 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id HAA01272; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 07:58:16 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 07:58:15 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Another approach for neutralizing gravity (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: An interesting message from Newsgroups... .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page -> SearchNet's neotech Mailing List Newsgroups: sci.physics.research Subject: A Proposal to Alter Inertial Mass From: "\"Alan \\\"Uncle Al\\\" Schwartz\"" Date: 13 Nov 1995 05:59:48 GMT Organization: Netcom I invite enquiries toward collaboration to challenge the Equivalence Principle using common thin film fabrication technique and unequivocal measurement. Alan Schwartz uncleal0 ix.netcom.com ("zero" after "uncleal") A Proposal to Alter Inertial Mass Einstein postulated that shape of space creates gravitational geodesics, and assumed the Equivalence Principle (that inertial and gravitational masses are exactly equal). Haisch posits that inertia derives from an accelerated body's interaction with quantum zero point fluctuations (ZPF) of the vacuum. No falsifiable test of either assertion has been attempted. Would matter from which ZPF were measurably excluded fall faster than vacuum free fall? ZPF are manifest in deviations from uncorrected theory of the Lamb shift, electron g-factor anomaly, and the Casimir effect - which is conspicuous. Two optically flat, parallel, grounded, conducting plates are positioned less than 10 micrometers apart. ZPF are partially excluded from the cavity by boundary conditions. The plates sustain a calculated and empirically verified attractive force of unbalanced surrounding ZPF radiation pressure, F=-hc(pi)A/480d^4 where h=Planck's constant, c=lightspeed, A=area, d=distance separated. For a 500 nanometer gap the Casimir force is 0.2081 dyne/square centimeter. This is 5% of the areal weight of aluminum foil. A construct with 1/10 the gap would realize 10,000 times the effect. Proc. Royal Soc. A 312 435 (1969) Ann. Phys. (NY) 56 474 (1970) Edward G. Harris, "A Pedestrian Approach to Quantum Field Theory," Wiley-Interscience, NY 1972, pp. 108-9 Dr. Bernhard Haisch has modeled inertial mass as deriving from an accelerated body's interaction with ZPF, consonant with a large body of refereed physics literature. Haisch, FAQ sheet dated 29 August 1995 Haisch in Feb 1994 Phys. Rev. A Science vol 263 p 612 Scientific American vol 270, p 30 New Scientist 25 Feb 1995 p 30 Proposal: Vacuum deposit alternating layers of 80 nm reflective, electrically conductive metallic aluminum and 50 nm transparent dielectric magnesium fluoride, hundreds of them, upon a large area of suitable deposition substrate. Each dielectric gap will suffer ZPF exclusion by its conducting boundaries. As etalons, the primary propagation window is 140 nm, excluding all longer wavelength radiation and more than 20% at shorter wavelengths. ZPF exclusion within this Casimir stack of alternating metallic and dielectric thin films may alter gravitational and inertial mass commensurately (too little measured weight for the contained moles of matter), or do it incommensurately and violate the Equivalence Principle. J. Opt. Sci. Am. 51 719 (1961) J. Opt. Sci. Am. 51 913 (1961) J. Opt. Sci. Am. 53 620 (1963) Melles Griot 1995/6 Catalog, Sections 5-29 and 13-26pp By weighted average (Al=2.702 g/cm^3, MgF2=3.14 g/cm^3), the lamellar construct would have a classical density of 2.87 g/cm^3. Of that, 1.2 g/cm^3 or 42% will be Casimir Effect ZPF-excluded dielectric. COMMENSURATE TEST: Weigh a gram of Casimir matter (and some carbon black) within a thin-walled silica vacuum ampoule to sub-microgram precision. Laser heat (non-contact) to above 700 Celsius to melt the aluminum and disrupt the lattice. Does the weight INCREASE? INCOMMENSURATE TESTS: Dr. Faller of the University of Colorado designed and commercialized a laser-monitored corner cube free-fall gravimeter accurate to one part in ten billion. Casimir matter is an optically flat aluminum mirror. Fashion a hollow corner cube and see if the expected 9.8 m/sec^2 acceleration obtains vs. a control experiment with an ordinary hollow corner cube of similar mass and dimensions. No body falls faster than vacuum free fall. There are several industrial vacuum drop towers used for investigating (transient) weightless processing. A 100 meter vacuum drop requires 4.52 seconds. Dr. Faller's desktop device could be scaled up 240 times to one part in two trillion measurement. With less creativity, we could break a weak, narrow light beam as between aligned segments of an optical fiber to start and top timing. Calibration is dropping pieces of aluminum and magnesium fluoride. The measurement need only be precise. Will Casimir matter fall faster than vacuum free fall? Ultracentrifuges spin to 100,000 gravities (the Beckman Optima XL-100 gives 802,000 gravities with a Type 100 Ti rotor), albeit with mechanical vibration. An meticulously balanced static rotor, ordinary vs. Casimir matter, could be spun up and observed. Angular acceleration affords closure with linear acceleration. The desired result is a measured anomaly. A positive commensurate test would unify gravitation with electromagnetism through Haisch's theory - a Unified Field Theorem. A positive incommensurate result would provide empirical exception to the Equivalence Principle. I invite comment, posted or by e-mail. The experimental fabrication is typical for a solid state fabrication lab. Measurement is absolute: A body falling faster than vacuum free fall cannot be otherwise obtained. Alan "Uncle Al" Schwartz uncleal0 ix.netcom.com ("zero" after "uncleal") -> Posted by: Omer Zak From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 08:19:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA21403 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 08:19:06 -0800 Received: from mbunix.mitre.org (mbunix.mitre.org [129.83.20.100]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA21362 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 08:19:00 -0800 Received: from spectre.mitre.org (spectre.mitre.org [129.83.61.124]) by mbunix.mitre.org (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id LAA18716 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 11:18:57 -0500 Received: from localhost (eachus localhost) by spectre.mitre.org (8.6.4/8.6.4) id LAA04125; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 11:18:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 11:18:56 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199511141618.LAA04125 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: (jlogajan@mirage.skypoint.com) Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "John Logajan" said: > I suspect this is what Koloc is doing today because his plasmas have > the effects of copper ions. But he says hi-Z atoms are not good for > plasmas (some sort of loss problem associated with increasing Z.) That's why I mentioned the thread. I suspect that Paul is using a low-z wire such as beryllium if he is doing that, but that the copper is coming from the electrodes. Lowest Z electrodes I worked with were graphite, which is pretty reasonable, and an Aluminum/Magnesium alloy. (Don't use either in air, especially the second! Very spectacular but not what you are looking for. (And internal cooling for the electrodes is a big help in both reducing contamination and increasing electrode life.) > In the future he plans on "striking" the arc 50-60 times a second > (the powerline frequency) so the need for a fast repetition > system. No need! If you repeat at that frequency, there are still enough ions that the arc will restrike on the same path. I've run lots of AC arcs at line rate. (Macbeth Arc Lamp made carbon arcs for fifty years before getting into "clean" sources like pulsed Xenon arcs. But we only built a few DC arcs.) Seriously, we've gotten restrikes at about one ion per cc along the arc path--the electric field accelerates the ions, they knock into other atoms and in microseconds you have an avalanche. > I can't totally envision the structure suggested here, but it > might interfer with the creation of the ball lightning system, as > the internal helix-->torus is the core but not totality of the > ball lightning. The apparatus I had would be totally inappropriate. I built it to concentrate as much of the source as possible in a 2 cm sphere. But the (internally cooled) quartz rod through the center would ruin the ball lightning effect. (Actually depends on your terms. What I was creating was effectively a ball lightning nailed in one place by wall stabilization on the stake through its heart.) Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 08:55:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA05513 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 08:55:49 -0800 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA05477 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 08:55:43 -0800 Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id LAA19483; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 11:54:24 -0500 Date: 14 Nov 95 11:52:03 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Filimonov on Potapov machine Message-ID: <951114165203_72240.1256_EHB33-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Dieter reports that Filimonov reports than an engineer from Minsk reports that the Potapov gadget produces excess heat. Whew! That sounds like the Tom Lehrer song about Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevksi. I have heard the same thing from the same source. I keep hearing this and hearing it again from Filimonov and other usually reliable sources. That is why I still feel there must be something to it. Potapov himself has been most unhelpful. After his initial burst of enthusiasm, we got practically no assistance from him. If all we had to go on was his word, I would have dismissed the whole business months ago, but these sporadic reports of positive verification in Minsk or at Energia Keep Hope Alive (as the Reverend Jackson would put it), and they also Keep Frustration Percolating. What can I say? - Jed From david vesicle.ibg.uu.se Tue Nov 14 11:48:25 1995 Received: from receptor.ibg.uu.se (receptor.ibg.uu.se [130.238.36.157]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA11234 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 11:48:19 -0800 Received: from synapse.ibg.uu.se by receptor.ibg.uu.se via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO) for id UAA24436; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 20:50:38 +0100 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 20:50:37 +0100 (MET) From: David Jonsson X-Sender: david synapse.ibg.uu.se To: William Beaty Subject: Re: vtx: <--- LOOKEE HERE! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 7 Nov 1995, William Beaty wrote: > Vortex-L will now have a "vtx:" in the subject line! I didn't know > majordomo had this feature. *BOY* could I have used it over the last six > months! I hope I was the one to mention it to you? I did it maybe a month ago. > Of course the ability to save the messages for later reading might > make me save them without reading a bit more than I should. There are mailreaders which automatically saves mails to different mailboxes depending on what the Reply-To: line says. Elm and Eudora has this ability. David David Jonsson Voice +46-18-24 51 52 Fax +46-18-10 37 37 P.O Box 353 david ibg.uu.se Cellular Phone (GSM) +46-70-721 25 19 S-751 06 UPPSALA Postgiro 499 40 54-7 Web: http://www.ibg.uu.se/~david/ SWEDEN ++++ Acceleration/gravity is electromag: see web above ++++ From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 12:45:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA04565 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 12:45:04 -0800 Received: from receptor.ibg.uu.se (receptor.ibg.uu.se [130.238.36.157]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA04490 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 12:44:53 -0800 Received: from synapse.ibg.uu.se by receptor.ibg.uu.se via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO) for id VAA25263; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 21:47:06 +0100 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 21:47:05 +0100 (MET) From: David Jonsson X-Sender: david synapse.ibg.uu.se To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: vortex-l: Inertia is electromagnetical? In-Reply-To: <199511030553.QAA23346 tornado.netspace.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 3 Nov 1995, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Dear David Jonsson, on 1 Nov 95 at 19:36, you wrote: > > > Take a look at the following fact. I show how the inertial properties of > > the electron can be explained by elecromagnetics. If the principle of > > equivalence is taken into consideration then one can start to wonder what > > gravity is. I like to hear comments. For PostScript and > > WordPerfectversions plus associated documents take a look at > > http://www.ibg.uu.se/elektromagnum/ > > 2 > > m v > > e > > U= ------- > > 3 > > > > This reminds very much of the equation of the kinetic energy of the > > electron. Only 1/6 of the kinetic energy is missing but remember that I > > haven't included the field inside the electron in the calculus. Can it be > > so simple that the inertia of the electron is due to Lenz' law only? > > > Try looking up the definition of classical electron radius. I know that the classical electron radius is defined so that all mass comes from its E-field. The point is that no matter how small or great the electron radius is this effect still remains and it is not satisfying to me to have two explanations of inertia. Is anyone out there satisfied? Can we neglect this fact and say: "Inertia comes from mass and mass is a fundamental concept of nature". No we can't. We can not neglect electromagnetics. We have to wonder further and ask: "What is inertia?" Look at the mechanics textbook by Kleppner & Kolewnkow at page 369 where the state "Inertia remains a mystery" when discussing the Mach-principle. Every first year student at Uppsala University reads this sentence. We have to take it seriously. Look at the many indications that the US defense has some kind of antigravity devices. Note the many reports of EM effects assiciated with UFO's. Imagine the commercial interests. Can we stop thinking about it? I can't but I don't make any progress either. > Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, > Learns all his life, > And leaves knowing nothing. And the one who believes mass is mass is the one most perpetrated. My intention is not to know nature but to control it. We can control electromagnetism to a certain degree. Let us also be able to control inertia and begin a new chapter of humanity. David David Jonsson Voice +46-18-24 51 52 Fax +46-18-10 37 37 P.O Box 353 david ibg.uu.se Cellular Phone (GSM) +46-70-721 25 19 S-751 06 UPPSALA Postgiro 499 40 54-7 Web: http://www.ibg.uu.se/~david/ SWEDEN ++++ Acceleration/gravity is electromag: see web above ++++ From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 16:58:05 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA27086 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 16:55:49 -0800 Received: from mail02.mail.aol.com (mail02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.66]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA26981 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 16:55:33 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail02.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA26659; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 19:54:10 -0500 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 19:54:10 -0500 Message-ID: <951114195255_106591361 mail02.mail.aol.com> To: uncleal0 ix.netcom.com cc: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Casimir Matter Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Alan, As one of the co-authors of the inertia work with Haisch, I found your discussion of tests of the Equivalence Principle with "Casimir matter" (a great phrase you came up with, by the way!) quite interesting. We have an active experimental program here at the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin to test various consequences of the ZPE model for inertia and gravitation. Some predictions off the top of my head: First, I would predict that the Equivalence Principle would remain true (I used this to derive the ZPE-gravitation model - see "H. Puthoff, "Gravity as a ZPF force," Phys Rev A vol 39, p 2333, 1989). This is because the expressions for both gravitational and inertial masses, both considered driven by the ZPE, came out to be the same in the two derivations (gravity and inertia), which by the way involved independent calculation paths. Second, I would predict that "Casimir matter" would be identically lower in both inertial and gravitational masses, since the basic mass-energy E = mc^2 of the materials must in the Casimir configuration be decremented by the Casimir energy, with the final mass M = E/c^2 including the negative energy associated with the Casimir effect (as with, e.g., negative potential energy in general). With regard to the magnitude of mass reduction you calculated, I'm uncertain. Most of the mass, which we attribute to the quark components (the "partons" in our modelling), is due to the very high frequencies (e.g., well beyond x-rays) and these would not be excluded by the etalons, I would think. (It's true, as you say, that there is a relatively narrow passband in a well-constructed etalon, at least in frequency bands below uv cutoffs of the materials that form the Casimir boundaries. But at the higher frequencies where the boundaries no longer act as conductor/dielectric interfaces I think a passband re-emerges, contributing to the mass.) Comments? Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 19:19:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA16587 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 10:45:49 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA16546 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 10:45:39 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpvu04804; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 13:44:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA10658; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 10:42:21 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 011241100095318FEPRI; 14 Nov 1995 10:41:10 PST Message-Id: Date: 14 Nov 1995 10:41:10 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/14/95 10:41:10 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A *** Reply to note of 11/13/95 16:00 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia Martin S. are you from Australia? Say, wouldn't the Aussies be interested in CF because of the lack of domestic resources??? Got any real researchers down there, or just Kangaroo courts? MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 19:22:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA17712 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 14:29:34 -0800 Received: from mail02.mail.aol.com (mail02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.66]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA17656 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 14:29:24 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail02.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA18991; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 17:27:53 -0500 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 17:27:53 -0500 Message-ID: <951114172750_84520966 mail02.mail.aol.com> To: mwhisson uniwa.uwa.edu.au cc: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Inertia, Gravity from ZPE (References) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Responding to a suggestion that I provide references to recent papers on inertia/gravity as a ZPE phenomenon: H. E. Puthoff, "Gravity as a Zero-Point-Fluctuation Force," Phys. Rev. A vol 39, p 2333 (1989); Phys. Rev A vol 47, p 3454 (1993). H. E. Puthoff, "Everything for Nothing," New Sci. vol 127, p 52 (1990). B. Haisch, A. Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff, "Inertia as a Zero-Point Field Lorentz Force," Phys. Rev. A vol 49, p 678 (1994). See also Science vol 263, p 612 (1994). B. Haisch, A. Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff, "Beyond E = mc2," The Sciences (NY Acad. of Sciences) vol 34, p 26 (Nov/Dec 1994). H. E. Puthoff, "SETI, The Velocity-of-Light Limitation, and the Alcubierre Warp Drive: An Integrating Overview," Physics Essays vol 9 (in press, March 1996). Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 20:49:40 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA13026 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 20:17:25 -0800 Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA12959 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 20:17:14 -0800 Received: (from msevior localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id PAA15441 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:16:45 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199511150416.PAA15441 liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:16:44 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: from "MHUGO@EPRI" at Nov 14, 95 10:41:10 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 736 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > *** Reply to note of 11/13/95 16:00 > From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia > Martin S. are you from Australia? Say, wouldn't the Aussies be interested > in CF because of the lack of domestic resources??? Got any real researchers > down there, or just Kangaroo courts? MDH > > What's this? A flame on the vortex-l distribution list? I didn't think they were allowed here :)! All the time I've been posting on spf I haven't got a single one. A lack of resources? You ARE confusing us with Austria! Yet another data point confirming my Swiss friend's prejudices :) Before you you embarass yourself further I suggest you look at: http://www.dpie.gov.au/dfat/genmnu.html Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 21:11:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA01915 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 21:11:34 -0800 Received: from anugpo.anu.edu.au (anugpo.anu.edu.au [150.203.2.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA01884 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 21:11:29 -0800 Received: from nimbus.anu.edu.au (nimbus.anu.edu.au [150.203.126.21]) by anugpo.anu.edu.au (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA03768 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:11:23 +1100 Received: by nimbus.anu.edu.au (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07237; Wed, 15 Nov 95 16:11:22 EST Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 16:11:22 EST From: daved nimbus.anu.edu.au (Dave DAVIES) Message-Id: <9511150511.AA07237 nimbus.anu.edu.au> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > http://www.dpie.gov.au/dfat/genmnu.html > > Martin Sevior > G'donya Martin and thanks for the URL. dave From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 22:29:32 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA26668 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 22:29:18 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA26633 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 22:29:12 -0800 Received: from net-1-243.austin.eden.com (net-1-243.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.243]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id AAA28110 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 00:29:09 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 00:29:09 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511150629.AAA28110 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: St. Pete Tests? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Aren't we about due for another statement from the St. Pete investigators? Such a lengthy pause might indicate that they are getting positive results and are checking the hell out of them before reporting... From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 14 23:35:14 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA16810 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:35:11 -0800 Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA16787 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:35:07 -0800 Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tFcML-0005A1C; Wed, 15 Nov 95 01:34 CST Message-Id: Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 01:34:17 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" In-Reply-To: <199511141618.LAA04125 spectre.mitre.org> from "Robert I. Eachus" at Nov 14, 95 11:18:56 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 718 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > In the future he plans on "striking" the arc 50-60 times a second > > (the powerline frequency) so the need for a fast repetition > > system. > > No need! If you repeat at that frequency, there are still enough > ions that the arc will restrike on the same path. The path collapses into a torus, so it is not really there anymore in the form needed for the next arc re-strike. Plus he intends to compress the whole sphere to a fraction of its starting size in order to get compression heating of the inner kernel. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 00:34:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA02055 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 00:34:14 -0800 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA02043 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 00:34:11 -0800 Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA06188; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 03:32:54 -0500 Date: 15 Nov 95 03:30:37 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: St. Pete Tests? Message-ID: <951115083036_100060.173_JHB71-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> Such a lengthy pause might indicate that they are getting positive results and are checking the hell out of them before reporting... << Or even, Oh no! Were getting less heat than the immersion heater! :-( . ! . : . _._._ Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 04:13:47 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id EAA15189 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 04:13:41 -0800 Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA15020 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 04:12:56 -0800 Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tFghW-000MNdC; Wed, 15 Nov 95 14:12 EET Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 14:12:25 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: vtx: poor Yusmar! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends, The Yusmar used in the St. Pete experiment has not the slightest chance to show o/u effect as long as it has no radiators and no recirculation tube and is prisoner in a tent. It was obvious that it gave a unity performance from the first test when it consumed 1300 kcal and has spent 1200 kcal to heat the water from the circuit. The problem is what to do now: to blame Potapov and Delovoi Mir or to make a new plan according to what we have learned from Potapov and following the basic principles of engineering?? I am for the first variant because it is easier and cheaper and because we will have the proper information, second or third hand, after Potapov's visit in the US; his travel there will begin Dec 11. I hope to get first hand info from him when he returns to Moldova. If the second variant will win, I am ready to contribute in case that the machine will be tested in its natural environment-as a heater. Dieter, thanks for the info coming from Ben Filimonov. Best regards to all! Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 05:14:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA27236 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 05:14:40 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA27227 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 05:14:37 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id IAA03637; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:13:20 -0500 Date: 15 Nov 95 08:06:59 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: poor Yusmar! Frigorie? Message-ID: <951115130659_102021.3045_EHT56-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The frigorie is 50 Btu/minute or about 1/3 of the amount of heat necessary to melt a pound of ice at 32 deg. F. Seems that a polystyrene ice chest and a hundred pounds of ice might be a simpler "calorimeter". Lets see, how many calories/ frigorie? The Ton is 200 btu/minute, oh well. FJS From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 07:44:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA10173 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 07:44:17 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA10110 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 07:44:08 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpza27725; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:42:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA10747; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 07:26:29 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 985225070095319FEPRI; 15 Nov 1995 07:25:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 15 Nov 1995 07:25:07 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/15/95 07:25:52 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/14/95 21:06 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia Martin, Martin, Martin---- please don't be so sensitive. A flame? No... a serious comment. Perhaps I am somewhat mislead in my background, but I think that there are not major petroleum resources in Australia? I would mean to assert that Australia probably has some FINE engineering and scientific talent, (like Japan), but is somewhat dependent upon "out of country" sources for a significant amount of its energy supply. (like Japan) And that therefore there would be ample motiviation for individuals or entities to be persuing CF. - (PS "Kangaroo Courts" was simply a bad pun, and I would be quick to say that someone from Austria would be quite pleased to receive an order from me for a dozen Kangaroo's----they'd probably laugh for a month.) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 08:42:05 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA00971 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:41:58 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA00908 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:41:46 -0800 Received: from net-1-215.austin.eden.com (net-1-239.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.239]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id KAA22326 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:41:37 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:41:37 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511151641.KAA22326 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: poor Yusmar! X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Dear Friends, > The Yusmar used in the St. Pete experiment has not the slightest > chance to show o/u effect as long as it has no radiators and no > recirculation tube and is prisoner in a tent. Peter, I have to comment here: 1. Every square centimeter of the piping system and the Yusmar itself is a radiator. Why do you think the system needs another section of pipe named "radiator". 2. The Yusmar was supplied w/o the bypass tube by factory representatives who promised that it would work that way. 3. The tent is no more a prison than the building that the Yusmar was intended to heat. It is simply smaller. This means the thermostatically-controlled Yusmar will have a shorter duty-cycle when heating the tent than when heating the building. Do you think that difference will cause the o-u effect to disappear? > It was obvious that it gave a unity performance from the first > test when it consumed 1300 kcal and has spent 1200 kcal to heat > the water from the circuit. > The problem is what to do now: to blame Potapov and Delovoi Mir > or to make a new plan according to what we have learned from > Potapov and following the basic principles of engineering?? > I am for the first variant because it is easier and cheaper > and because we will have the proper information, second or > third hand, after Potapov's visit in the US; his travel there > will begin Dec 11. I hope to get first hand info from him > when he returns to Moldova. > If the second variant will win, I am ready to contribute > in case that the machine will be tested in its natural > environment-as a heater. > > Dieter, thanks for the info coming from Ben Filimonov. > Best regards to all! > Peter Gluck > Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 08:42:14 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA00991 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:42:01 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA00918 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:41:48 -0800 Received: from net-1-215.austin.eden.com (net-1-239.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.239]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id KAA22329 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:41:39 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:41:39 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511151641.KAA22329 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: Australia X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Australia may have some deficit in petroleum resources but they sure have some good stuff to trade for oil. Compared to Australia, the United States has hardly any mineral resources. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 08:51:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA04688 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:51:15 -0800 Received: from arl-img-3.compuserve.com (arl-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.7.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA04640 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:51:07 -0800 Received: by arl-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id LAA27208; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:49:48 -0500 Date: 15 Nov 95 11:46:13 EST From: Peter Unwin <100063.244 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Plasma & Ball lightning Message-ID: <951115164612_100063.244_EHK36-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have been most interested in the recent postings about ball-lightning and in the videotape prepared by Frank Znidarsic. Be most grateful if someone will post an update on the history and state of the art for generating ball-lightning to order. As far as I know, Tesla was one of the first in the field... using brute force (which sometimes worked and sometimes failed) rather than what is obviously what we would like to see, an efficient and reliable ball-lightning generator. When the ball-lightning topic came up on CIS Science forum a while back, I discussed some of the reports with Prof. R.C. Jennison whom some may recall as being on an aircraft when a ball passed down the aisle. Jennison collected data on several sightings and on those reported as originating from contactors in submarines, he ventured the opinion that there may be two types, plasma balls and ball-lighting, those observed as emanating from contactor arcs being plasma balls and not ball-lightning. Of the difference, he considered that ball-lightning has been seen clinging to ships masts and aircrcaft wings, a feat which seems difficult for a ball of plasma lacking a considerable reserve of energy to sustain itself in such conditions. I would be particularly interested to hear from anyone who has seen either plasma balls or ball-lighting at first hand and is able to confirm details of behaviour, size and whether the balls vanished with a pop. I am not particularly familiar with the various plasma-ball models. Such objects may well exist but to me, the really interesting and genuine ball- lightning is a spherical e.m. resonance which creates its own confinement by ionising the air around itself. Such a mechanism can be envisaged as commencing its life with sufficient stored energy to provide a few seconds lifetime after which the ionisation falls below a critical level and the object collapses, releasing the remaining e.m. energy which release should be detectable as conventional free-space radiation. If this theory is correct it predicts three things which are testable. 1) A burst of e.m. radiation should be detectable when the ball decays. 2) The lifetime of a ball will be related to the manner in which the ionisation of gaseous medium creates a reflective confinement for confining the e.m. resonance. The medium must provide a balance in these respects: On the one hand it must have sufficient density and ease of ionisation to become an adequate reflector at the wavelength of radiation involved, on the other, it should not be so easily ionised that the process of ionisation absorbs more energy than absolutely required to create an effective container because this will merely dissipate energy and shorten the liftetime of the ball. 3) Ball-lightning has an associated resonance and wavelength for particular diameters and support media. It would be expected that the most effective means of generation would be to create an artificial container, pump this container to build the resonance and then remove the artificial containment. One of the tricks from the old days of radio when arcs and sparks were the only ways of obtaining high frequency resonances was to feed the chambers with substances such as as alcholol. Presumably, this provided carbon which being more easily ionised than air, facilitated the necessary arcs and sparks. Some of the current experimentalists might like to consider if this idea could prove useful. I would be delighted to hear from anyone who has actually produced balls.. plasma or otherwise and is willing to cooperate in facilitating replication of a reliable means of producing ball-lightning. If I am slow to reply, please be patient... I'm supposed to be under doctors orders of no work for at least a month. Peter J. Unwin. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 09:00:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA08317 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 09:00:57 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA08296 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 09:00:53 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id JAA22267; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 09:00:46 -0800 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 09:00:43 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Smile! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Everyone: "Net symbolism" is less a nicety than a requirement. The low bandwidth and lack of facial expressions in email make "emoticons" or smilies necessary whenever you are taking a good-natured jab at someone. Unless the recipient is a personal friend, the good-natured part will be totally lost in translation to text. For example, (picking on Mark!) if I suddenly say this: Mark Hugo is just one of those uncouth Americans. And since we don't know each other well, there is serious doubt about whether its an insult or not. But if I it like this: Mark Hugo is just one of those uncouth Americans. ...or: Mark Hugo is just one of those uncouth Americans. ;) Mark Hugo is just one of those uncouth Americans. The meaning is very clear. For example "I'm not into arcane symbolism" the previous message comes across as dead serious and with a slight sneer. But if you say "I'm not into arcane symbolism !" it reads quite differently. Many people have been burned by the low-info content of email, and hence the creation of all these ";->" emoticon things. I notice that some never dare take jabs at anyone or ever act with assumed humor. Others put one of those darn ";)" things after every single sentence! I think the correct path is to use :) or only when you are making a flat-out insult, said with a smile. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 09:08:14 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA16797 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:03:41 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA16779 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:03:37 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA07513; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:03:31 +0100 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:03:31 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 15 Nov 1995, MHUGO EPRI wrote: > *** Reply to note of 11/14/95 21:06 > From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia > Martin, Martin, Martin---- please don't be so sensitive. A flame? No... > a serious comment. Perhaps I am somewhat mislead in my background, but > I think that there are not major petroleum resources in Australia? I would > mean to assert that Australia probably has some FINE engineering and > scientific talent, (like Japan), but is somewhat dependent upon > "out of country" sources for a significant amount of its energy supply. (like > Japan) And that therefore there would be ample motiviation for individuals > or entities to be persuing CF. Hugo, Hugo, Hugo. I'm from there, too, so I feel qualified to respond. Do have a look at that website Martin mentioned. I have not, but I guess you will be told that Australia does indeed (still) have (offshore) oil, and that it is one of the big coal suppliers in the world, and has a lot of Uranium, practically all metals, etc etc (I'm beginning to brag off-topic). -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 09:17:00 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA13981 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 09:16:59 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA13953 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 09:16:53 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpzg12065; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 12:14:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA21419; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 09:12:30 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 044911090095319FEPRI; 15 Nov 1995 09:11:09 PST Message-Id: Date: 15 Nov 1995 09:11:09 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Australia To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/15/95 09:11:48 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/15/95 08:54 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Australia Yes Scott. That's what I understand about Aus. I would note to you that the US has amazing mineral reserves, but our problem is typified by the Iron Ore in MN right now....Plenty off it, but very low concentrations. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 10:53:48 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA19888 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:53:47 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA19852 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:53:39 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpzn26767; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:50:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA04384; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:48:31 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 625147100095319FEPRI; 15 Nov 1995 10:47:10 PST Message-Id: Date: 15 Nov 1995 10:47:10 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/15/95 10:47:49 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/15/95 09:55 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia Oh! That's fantastic if Australia has off-shore stuff! Are you aware that one of the reasons natural gas is doing so well in the US is because in the last 3 years areas off the west coast of Florida they RE-DRILLED in areas explored in the '70's, and struck good producers? The difference was the '90's drilling was to 25 to 30 thousand feet versus the '70's 10-12 thousand. Now I am one that believes in a certain amount of "geological continuity/ symetry." Therefore I would hope, Martin, that the Aus. government encourages continuing off-shore work. And would hasten to add that there might be more than then would be accountable in the wildest dreams of oil/gas people of 20 years ago. Way to go! (PS, there is just a certain amount of self interest here, as natural gas becomes pretty important around here come Nov-March every year! ;) From neotech-approval europe.std.com Wed Nov 15 14:44:13 1995 Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA23770; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 14:44:09 -0800 Received: by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id RAA17795; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:42:48 -0500 Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id RAA17724; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:42:42 -0500 Received: from nectech.com (milkyway.nectech.com) by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA17061; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:42:41 -0500 Received: from cs010.NECTECH.COM by nectech.com with SMTP (5.65/29-nectech) id AA10314; Wed, 15 Nov 95 17:32:12 -0500 Received: by cs010.NECTECH.COM; Wed, 15 Nov 95 15:58:58 -0500 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 15:35:59 EST Message-Id: <4F06+jwYekA cs010.NECTECH.COM> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) From: "Robert A. Shannon" To: neotech world.std.com Subject: Electrostatic Gradiometer plans availability! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: neotech-approval world.std.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: neotech europe.std.com Status: RO X-Status: -> SearchNet's neotech Mailing List Thankyou to everyone who responded to my posts on this device. I am delighted at the level of interest generated by this offer. The schmatic has been scanned, and converted into a .GIF file. This file is being sent to Bill Beaty, who offered to "clean up" the file for space and clarity. I am in the process of finishing up the text file that goes along with the schmatic diagram, and this will transmit this to Bill as well. Both files will be made available through Bills web page as soon as practical. They will be located in the "Not your Average Construction Project" section. I'll ask Bill to post an announcment once all files are ready and in place. If anyone cannot access Bills "Weird Science" web page, and wishes to receive the plans for this device, email me and we will work something out. Again, thanks to everyone who responded. I had not estimated the level of interest generated. Hopefully this is only the first of several such projects to be released in this manner. Maybe Bill might have to change the name of the construction projects area on his web site soon? I look forward to hearing of your adventures with this little device on Neotech. Have fun! -> Posted by: "Robert A. Shannon" From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 15:18:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA07504 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:17:50 -0800 Received: from anugpo.anu.edu.au (anugpo.anu.edu.au [150.203.2.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA07459 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:17:41 -0800 Received: from nimbus.anu.edu.au (nimbus.anu.edu.au [150.203.126.21]) by anugpo.anu.edu.au (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA20634 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 10:17:35 +1100 Received: by nimbus.anu.edu.au (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11040; Thu, 16 Nov 95 10:17:35 EST Date: Thu, 16 Nov 95 10:17:35 EST From: daved nimbus.anu.edu.au (Dave DAVIES) Message-Id: <9511152317.AA11040 nimbus.anu.edu.au> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Re: Oil Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > tilleyrw digital.net (Robert Tilley) said: > > I personally think that we should remove ourselves from reliance on oil as > quickly as possible. > Exactly. Isn't that the main motivation behind this list, CF, and all other FL (free-lunch) energy schemes? For what it is worth, Australia has more hydrocarbon reserves than it is likely to use as energy unless some viable technique of eliminating CO2 emissions is found. Most of the state of Queensland is sitting on oil shale. Oz exports large qualtities of natural gas and coal and is largely self sufficient in the liquid form. Unfortunately, as I pointed out in evidence to a Senate committee in the early eighties, exploitation of the oil shale deposits would be an environmental disaster of huge proportions. Plans to create a million tonnes per day of oily soot off the southern end of the Great Barrier Reef were eventually abandoned though I suspect for economic rather than environmental reasons. One interesting approach to reducing atmospheric CO2 emissions that was suggested in the seventies was to compress it and pump it down into the deep ocean layers where it is most soluble. I haven't heard anything more about this idea since CO2 emission has become an major issue. Back on topic: To me the Holy Grail of energy production is ZPE. While I still think that low-temp fusion is possible, I find evidence of tritium production discouraging rather than the reverse. My past thoughts have been confined to ways that ZPE could be captured at a nuclear level but this was largely a consequence of the CF focus on nuclear events. Recently I have started thinking more at the molecular level and, in particular, ways that ZPE could be taken up in the dissociation of water at catalytic 'hot spots'. One rationale for looking in this area is that dissociation of water seems to be a common factor in all FL schemes with the possible exception of gas phase CF systems. What is the strongest evidence for GP-CF? dave From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 17:14:44 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA24061 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:14:36 -0800 Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA24029 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:14:28 -0800 Received: (from msevior localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id MAA21915 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:14:23 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199511160114.MAA21915 liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:14:23 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: from "MHUGO@EPRI" at Nov 15, 95 07:25:07 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 657 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > *** Reply to note of 11/14/95 21:06 > From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia > Martin, Martin, Martin---- please don't be so sensitive. A flame? No... > a serious comment. Perhaps I am somewhat mislead in my background, but > I think that there are not major petroleum resources in Australia? Mark don't take it so hard. I was mearly trying to make a point in the same tone your original post took ;)! Lots of people have already answered this and it's way off topic but at least there are now a few more Americans with a little more knowledge of the world outside their borders . Cheers! Martin From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 19:55:16 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA17333 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:47:11 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA17270 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:46:56 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpzm25835; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:44:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA16100; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:42:30 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 190541100095319FEPRI; 15 Nov 1995 10:41:10 PST Message-Id: Date: 15 Nov 1995 10:41:10 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Smile! To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/15/95 10:41:03 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/15/95 09:27 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Smile! OK Bill, gotcha! ;) is it? I'd share with you some of my concerns about my employeer, and the current status of myself and my fellow employees, but I'd be using ! )(*&$#)(, which isn't very couth....! From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 20:50:05 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA27230 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:12:38 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA27160 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:12:24 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzpzo29610; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 14:09:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA07487; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:51:30 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 932450100095319FEPRI; 15 Nov 1995 10:50:10 PST Message-Id: Date: 15 Nov 1995 10:50:10 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/15/95 10:50:23 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/15/95 09:55 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: Meant Australia PS Dieter: Many apologies....I looked at the name and made an assumption that you were German or Austrian, Swiss, etc. Little ethnic name judgement. (Which is dangerous I'll admit, my HUGO is 100% Swedish.) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 21:44:43 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA27637 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:08:37 -0800 Received: from freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (2754 freenet.edmonton.ab.ca [198.161.206.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA27571 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:08:24 -0800 From: douglas freenet.edmonton.ab.ca Received: by freenet.edmonton.ab.ca (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA136187; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:03:37 -0700 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:03:36 -0700 (MST) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning In-Reply-To: <199511131932.OAA00957 spectre.mitre.org> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > > "John Logajan" said: > > > If I understand his concept, he causes a helical path in air to be ionized > . > ***************************************************** I haven't been following this conversation too closely, but for what it's worth, a paper by J. Reece Roth entitled "Ball Lightning as a Route to Fusion Energy" in the Proceedings of the 13th IEEE Symposium on Fusion Energy, TexaS, 1989, PP1407-1411 might prove instructive. This theory deals with the ball lightning theory of Koloc - essentially a double kink instability in a plasma pinch. D.L. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 21:51:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA14170 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:38:24 -0800 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA14085 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:38:10 -0800 Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA09075; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:36:43 -0500 Date: 15 Nov 95 13:26:14 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Plasma & Ball lightning Message-ID: <951115182613_102021.3045_EHT118-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello Peter J. While you are following Doctors orders; In 1979, CBS News had a guy on griping about the government ignoring his idea of using ball lightning as an approach to controlled fusion. That determined fellow was Robert Golka, "The Wizard of Windover". Robert "BOB" had rented the abandoned Air Force hangar at Windover,Utah for a dollar a year and set up Tesla's original lightning machine in the hangar, plus a few niceties like a truck mounted 250 kw generator and a piano up on a platform in the hangar so "he could play whilst thinking" between sparks. Bob was a house guest for several days and he had some films of ball lightning that showed up in his experiments. We got down to the Langmuir thunderstorm labs on a mountain peak near Socorro, New Mexico, which as the crow flies is about 45 miles from my country home. They start their studies about July when the "monsoon" season starts in this area and I can see some of the strikes they trigger with rockets with trailing wires or prima cord. Since we are at 4,800 ft and the lab is at around 10,500 ft the view is good even from 45 miles. Anyhow Bob went to Tesla's hometown in Europe and found a lot of the original notes and put the thing together. The last I heard from Bob he was putting together an experiment in a submarine back east (probably rented it for $1.00/yr too) . I'll say one thing, our Wurlitzer never was played as well before or since Bob's visits. Dr.Ernst Steinhoff (V2s etc) had been a house guest a couple of times prior to Bobs visits, sure would've been an interesting time if they both could've been by at the same time. I don't know where BOB Golka is these days, maybe California? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 21:53:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA24935 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:06:58 -0800 Received: from mbunix.mitre.org (mbunix.mitre.org [129.83.20.100]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA24819 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:06:35 -0800 Received: from spectre.mitre.org (spectre.mitre.org [129.83.61.124]) by mbunix.mitre.org (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA24170 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 14:04:30 -0500 Received: from localhost (eachus localhost) by spectre.mitre.org (8.6.4/8.6.4) id OAA09075; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 14:04:30 -0500 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 14:04:30 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199511151904.OAA09075 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: (jlogajan@mirage.skypoint.com) Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I said: > No need! If you repeat at that frequency, there are still enough > ions that the arc will restrike on the same path. John Logajan said: > The path collapses into a torus, so it is not really there anymore in > the form needed for the next arc re-strike. Plus he intends to compress > the whole sphere to a fraction of its starting size in order to get > compression heating of the inner kernel. I guess the "right" approach is to ask where the kernel went, but I assume it is long gone. (Otherwise the magnetic field will seriously affect the next strike.) In my experience the collapse of the kernel will leave exactly the path you want to follow, assuming you are not blowing on the area of interest. (Blown arcs are a much different game, and I guess you could create kernals and blow them down to where you compressed them.) That reminds me, another "solution" I forgot is the blown arc solution. Start with a "dirty" vacuum, and have a gas jet in the tip of one electrode. You need a secondary igniter electrode nested inside. Also you want a strong magnetic field and the primary electrode aimed at an angle to it. Now puff some gas from the electrode, with the igniter going. (You want the igniter current limited and power limited, but that is a detail.) Now if your second electrode is correctly placed, the plasma should create a helical arc between the primary and secondary electrodes, which will quickly pinch off once struck unless you remove the magnetic field extremely fast. We never came up with a magnet with low enough impedence so that we could sustain the arc. (The magnetic field generated by the arc wants to align with the external field.) Of course in this application that sounds like what the physicist ordered. :-) Paul would probably have to put a huge current pulse through the arc as soon as it establishes, with a rise time in the microsecond range. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 21:58:13 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA06253 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 21:58:06 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA06242 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 21:58:04 -0800 Received: from net-1-214.austin.eden.com (net-1-214.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.214]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id XAA11351 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 23:58:01 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 23:58:01 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511160558.XAA11351 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: gas-phase CF X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:17 AM 11/16/95 EST, Dave Davies wrote: >What is the strongest evidence for GP-CF? Near the top of the list has to be the work of Piantelli, et al. They heat a metal rod in a H (natural D abundance) atmosphere and observe 20-40 watts of excess heat out of some 50 watts input heat. It's a heat-in heat-out experiment that presumably could be made self-sustaining by simply adjusting the thermal insulation of the metal rod so the excess heat could keep it at operating temperature (up around 200 C). I trying a similar experiment right now. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 21:59:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA18352 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 12:04:11 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA18217 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 12:03:50 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA11495 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:03:13 -0500 Message-Id: <199511152003.AA11495 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:03:13 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: video Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 14:58:46 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Anyone who interested in viewing my video send an email request for it to : fznidarsic aol.com I will get it out to you. Please forward it to the next person on the list if I get multiple requests. There are two theories about the energy content in ball lightning: 1. Stored energy a. chemical (some form of oxide of nitrogen) b. electromagnetic (current loops and contained microwave fields) 2. Produced energy a. zero point energy (the one I believe and where I started) b. fusion Hugo...Have you snapped! GPU, the company I work for just purchased about 1/2 of the electric utility industry in Australia because of the great growth potential in that area. Pejak the UFO designer is from New Zealand just across the water. To think, I advised you to join the group! Are you accepting any more prisoners down under? Can we send Hugo? (I know were to find him!) For additional info on ball lightning write to Frank Stenger at: 4562 Fox Road Kingsville Ohio 44048 He sends out information on his experiments and computer models. Did anyone see my Book On A Disk add In Infinite Energy July Aug 95? This is not an add but if you purchase one it would make me happy. Hugo, you should buy two. I've been flamed many times myself. For example. "Nothing but unscientific junk on that web page" Bob Lasar "UFO reverse designer" In ref to my paper on elektromagnum "Mr. Znidarsic, there are some real dangers to your present course of action. If you feel that the present referee's report is that of just another person who does not understand, of is just another hostile person, you already may be hooked. If you can remain objective about this report and circumspect about the disappointment, there is some hope. The dangerous pitfall which you must try to avoid is to forsake everything in you life and with it to jeopardize the health and welfare of yourself and your loved ones in favor of chasing what is likely to be a windmill." Professor R.M. Herman, Penn State University ........................................................................ "You do not relate your effort to the body of present-day theoretical physics and do not show why your approach should be considered preferable to the generally accepted, highly consistent body of knowledge that has been subjected to numerous experimental tests." Bernd Crasemann Physical Review A .................................................................... "you should quit your job" Said in a context that I don't know anything. Howard Hayden, Editor Galilean Electrodynamics ......................................................................... The only one who ever said anything nice was Puthoff. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 22:00:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA07099 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 22:00:33 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA07078 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 22:00:28 -0800 Received: from net-1-214.austin.eden.com (net-1-214.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.214]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id AAA11479; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 00:00:22 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 00:00:22 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511160600.AAA11479 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Smile! X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:41 AM 11/15/95 PST, vortex-l eskimo.com wrote: >*** Reply to note of 11/15/95 09:27 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: vtx: Smile! >OK Bill, gotcha! ;) is it? I'd share with you some of my concerns about >my employeer, and the current status of myself and my fellow employees, >but I'd be using ! )(*&$#)(, which isn't very couth....! Let me guess, Mark. The prototype for the dorky manager in the Dilbert cartoon strip is your boss, right? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 22:45:40 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA20942 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 22:45:37 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA20900 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 22:45:29 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzptl10265; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 22:18:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA42194; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 09:25:21 -0800 Received: from EPRI.EPRI.COM by SSW.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 760724090095317FEPRI; 13 Nov 1995 09:24:09 PST Message-Id: Date: 13 Nov 1995 09:24:09 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: Delays, paranoid inventors To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/13/95 07:14:51 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/13/95 01:58 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: Delays, paranoid inventors Dieter has a point, although I think it came about because of typing too fast and substituting an "o" for an "e" in veracity.. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 23:28:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA02826 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 23:28:52 -0800 Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA02624 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 23:27:57 -0800 Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tFyj3-000MNXC; Thu, 16 Nov 95 09:27 EET Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 09:27:13 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Re: Poor Yusmar. Scott, Thank you for the comment. My answer: >1. Every square centimeter of the piping and the Yusmar itself is a radiator. Why do you think the system needs another section of pipe named radiator. Yes, but a very small one compared to the usual radiators. The flux of heat is proportional to the radiating surface. This pseudo-radiator needs a lot of time to heat the air in the tent, while it is aimed to heat a room of 20 sq.m or some 60 cu.m; the tent is some 7 sq.m and 14 cu.m, and _this_ radiator wasn't able to heat it only slowly. >2. The Yusmar was supplied w/o the bypass tube by factory representatives who promised it would work that way. And it didn't. The leaflet of Delovoi Mir shows clearly the presence of this tube, the logic of liquid/gas/liquid cavitation is based on its very presence and vice-versa. Here is the point (if it was indeed promised) where Delovoi Mir which is not interested in any positive development before Yuri's travel to the US has to be blamed! It is a problem of choice (I quote): "Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective and being honest" The author is not some communist politician but vice-presidents Gore's advisor Stephan Schneider and the speech refers to use of ecology.. "To capture the public imagination..we have to offer some scarry scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements, and little mention of any doubts one might have.." (is not from 21-st Century Science and Technology but from Chemical Engineering News). Anyway, I am convinced-as told too many times- this tube is the clue of the machine. Any girl who marries an eunuch does so on her own risk. This tube must be there. I don't know what the patents say, because despite the fact that I have translated many pages of Russian text for the group my requests to receive the original patents haven't got any answer. 3.(a) The tent is no more a prison than the building that the Yusmar was intended to heat.(b) It's simply smaller.(c) This means that the thermostatically controlled Yusmar will have a shorter duty cycle when heating the tent than when heating the building. (d) Do you think that difference will cause the o/u effect to disappear. (a) It is, it suffocates a normal Yusmar endowed with radiators and r-tube. (b) Small enough to kill the effect. (c) This Yusmar has no thermostat. (d) YES. Dear Dave Davies, Could you give some details about this water dissociation idea in the context of all the systems? Thank you, Best regards, Peter Gluck. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 00:42:44 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA19694 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 00:41:28 -0800 Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA19672 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 00:41:24 -0800 Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA12674; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 03:40:07 -0500 Date: 16 Nov 95 03:38:54 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Message from Internet Message-ID: <951116083853_100060.173_JHB79-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Peter, Reading your post of the 16 Nov. where you insist that the size of the "radiator" in the Yusmar test is relevant to the ou or no-ou performance of the device. I really can't accept your reasoning. In any heating set-up where the conditions reach stability, and the rooms being heated are warm enough as defined by a control thermostat, the heater must be able to modulate its output. Are you saying that the Yusmar will only go ou above a certain minimum delta-t? This is beginning to look like all the other dodgey claims, and Chris Tinsley has been hoodwinked by the clever sales patter of the St Pete boys. We were promised full operational testing of a production standard Yusmar by independent scientists, and all we have had to date is a bunch of ******s playing with an empty pipe. I think I'm entitled to be gently fed up!!! Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 00:53:38 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA22081 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 00:53:37 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA22027 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 00:53:24 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.64] ([204.57.193.64]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA27135 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 02:09:47 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 23:54:34 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: video Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] >.................................................................... >"you should quit your job" Said in a context that I don't know anything. > > Howard Hayden, Editor Galilean Electrodynamics > ......................................................................... > The only one who ever said anything nice was Puthoff. > > > > Frank Znidarsic I, for one, have a genuine respect for the work you and Frank Stenger have done. Of course, Don Quixote was a hero of mine at one time. Since I am just a nobody, I guess you can now say nobody has something nice to say about you. 8^) I learned something about gravity from your lecture on the tape, and suspect the students in the class did too. Keep up the good work! You never really know what effect you are having on the world. However, I disagree with Howard Hayden, don't quit your job. It is a real asset. I would be interrested in your disk if my son hadn't absconded with the 486 and put Unix on it. I'm strictly in Mac PowerPC land now. Do you have a Mac version? Didn't you write a book on gravity, or is that still out of print? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 02:15:11 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA10766 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 02:15:09 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA10755 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 02:15:06 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA28432; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 05:13:48 -0500 Date: 16 Nov 95 05:11:30 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Yusmar in St Pete Message-ID: <951116101129_100433.1541_BHG61-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex I'm still waiting for the actual results, but it looks increasingly as though they are getting unity performance there. Norman writes: "Chris Tinsley has been hoodwinked by the clever sales patter of the St Pete boys." Other way around! The people in St Pete never had more than the slightest faith in this thing working. "We were promised full operational testing of a production standard Yusmar by independent scientists, and all we have had to date is a bunch of ******s playing with an empty pipe." Although I've not seen the test myself, we thrashed out the protocol. If the same input power to the Yusmar *or* the electric heaters produces exactly the same temperature in the tent (I don't know this yet) then it will not be necessary to do null-balance calorimetry. These people are by no means a "bunch of ******s", and they got hold of a Yusmar which was supposed to be a good one, from Potapov's representatives in Moscow. They have done everything possible to *test* the thing. Peter objects a little too strongly, I feel, since the thing going at full blast only raised the tent to 30+degC. The remaining question is (of course, yawn, yawn, you've heard it before) is whether the thing was being *driven* in its correct configuration etc. It is not possible for me over here to tell them over there whether the thing is set up or being run correctly. Whether or not the people in Russia wish to pursue that aspect of the problem is largely out of my hands. "I think I'm entitled to be gently fed up!!!" Why? Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 15 02:05:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA19798 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 02:04:34 -0800 Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA19757 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 02:04:25 -0800 Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA22757; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 05:03:06 -0500 Date: 15 Nov 95 05:01:34 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: St Pete/Australia Message-ID: <951115100133_100433.1541_BHG65-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Scott, I am waiting for something definitive from St Pete, but early indications are that a unity effect is being seen. I've mailed the magnet/motor papers, but only just. Some 'minor local difficulties' here these past few days. On the motor, I suspect that Takahashi has no wish to push the motor thing too hard, but is concentrating more on the magnet side. I could be wrong on that, but I certainly think it would be the wiser course. Certainly that engineer there was so enthusiastic to trash the o-u stuff that he was rather ignoring such things as the way the scooter behaved, and all the other interesting stuff. I strongly suggested that T involve you in motor testing, but I got a fairly enigmatic smile. Certainly I am not involved in any activity on that front, nor do I know if anyone else is. You'll appreciate that if he showed up with the motor in the videotape, it wouldn't so much be a matter of evaluating the energy balance as looking for any tricks! G'day Martin, I don't think Mark intended to flame. Not everybody is as well aware as some of us are that Australia makes a very significant contribution to science. And it was one of yours who found helicobacter pylori, wannit? Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 07:54:47 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA26414 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 07:54:38 -0800 Received: from ddi.digital.net (ddi.digital.net [198.69.104.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA26362 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 07:54:29 -0800 Received: from [198.69.104.170] (pm9_6.digital.net [198.69.104.170]) by ddi.digital.net (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA29514 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 10:52:29 -0500 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 10:52:09 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tilleyrw digital.net (Robert Tilley) Subject: vtx: CF Testing? Where is it? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Where is the actual testing for cold-fusion devices? After some of these experiments have worked, why is nothing done with them? Why do the scientists always try to get something better? In my opinion, as soon as an experiment is determined to be over-unity, even just a little bit, the experiment is finished. That experimental setup should be used to create a commercial over-unity device to help spread awareness of cold-fusion. Once a wide awareness is established, funding for future experiments will be easier to get if everyone knows something useful will come from it. What is wrong??? Have the $pe$ial interests invaded the CF world and are working behind the scenes to prevent the successful use of any of these experiments that work? I have heard that E-Quest Sciences has definate over-unity, but it appears that $$$$$ talks, and they have hidden behind their laboratory "testing" for a few more years of experiments. Pardon me. I am beginning to rant-and-rave in my hatred of the "the status quo" that is controlled by the biggest evil in our world...the oil industry...and I should just step off my soap-box and let scientific discussion resume. Something will result from all this...eventually. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | "Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, | | and why. Then do it." -- Lazarus Long | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | Robert Tilley || tilleyrw digital.net || "Once upon a time..." | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | **** -- ***** -| http://www.digital.net/~tilleyrw |- ***** -- **** | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 08:23:28 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA06521 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 08:23:22 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com (power.gpu.com [148.108.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA06450 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 08:23:11 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA04975 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Thu, 16 Nov 1995 11:22:51 -0500 Message-Id: <199511161622.AA04975 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 16 Nov 1995 11:22:51 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: GAM+ PITT.EDU To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: sickening Date: Thu, 16 Nov 95 11:21:37 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> FRANK ZNIDARSIC -> GAM+ PITT.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 This is an off topic memo..but I know what Hugo is going through...We are going through the same thing here. The utility industry is being deregulated and electric utilities are scrambling to meet the competition. Just today..our receptionist lost her job...she is crying..It bothers me badly...she can't bring here self to call home...She can't tell the kids. One mechanical maintenance and one electrical Forman lost there job. Both have young children in college. They both came up to see me and sat very sadly in my office. I don't know what to say. I've still got my job, for now, but the hatchet man is not through. I'm good for maybe a few more years. The people here remind me of wildebeests in Africa. One gets caught by the lion and the rest go about there business like nothing ever happened. One man is even happy! He is selling lotto tickets, I could smack the jerk. We don't have any money to send our R&D people to look at the new energy technologies that we have all been talking about, yet we have $400,000,000 dollars to purchase about half of the grid in Australia, and more to build power plants in China, Hong Kong, and Columbia, South America. I don't understand big business, Quiet, sad, and trying to make some sense out of it all. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 09:39:31 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA25353 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 09:14:13 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA25273 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 09:13:58 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzqcy23585; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:12:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA09280; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 08:51:00 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 994549080095320FEPRI; 16 Nov 1995 08:49:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 16 Nov 1995 08:49:08 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: CF Testing? Where is it? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/16/95 08:49:43 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/16/95 08:09 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: CF Testing? Where is it? Bob Tilly: Bob, if you want to send me $10 for mailing, I'll box up some copies of the 4th Annual CF conf. Report from EPRI, and the first (of 2) reports published by EPRI on their CF work. AFTER you get that material, I will gladly discuss point by point with you why there is ample evidence that CF is real, and why (at least with the D saturated Pd sample, ala Pons and Flieschmann) it is difficult to obtain. - The problem here is that the original P&F work was NOT as simple as it seemed. Should I go down a quick list as to why P&F's work worked and others didn't? 1. P&F were working in a cold laboratory. Why should this effect things? HA! Turns out that a 10 degree C difference of electrolyte temp. between the range of 10 degrees C to 40 degrees C can correllate quite nicely with a final D to Pd saturation level of .6, .7, .8 or .9 D atoms to 1 Pd atom. #2. P&F did all of their work with LiOD in Pyrex glass containers. - Again, to those who are very superficial (I'm not saying you Bob, but those people who I am refering to know who they are!!!) - This is insignificant. However, it IS significant. Turns out you can't acheive a .85 D to 1 Pd saturation with LiSO4, D2SO4, NaOD, etc. LiOD is OPTIMAL for putting D into Pd. - #3. LiOD etches glass, puts Silicate into solution. This process serendipidous- ly puts a "lock" on D charged into Pd, with just about the right timing for optimization. - #4. The Pd sample's metallurgy DOES affect the charging. P&F used one source (Engelhart?) and it turns out their Pd saturates best. - Now you put all this together, and "flying blind" it makes P&F's original work VERY DIFFICULT to duplicate. - Now ALL these points are available in the documents I refered to above, and they are deliniated carefully and with EXPERIMENTAL data. - And NO, the "oil companies" have not tied anything up. The best minds for the "oil companies" are mamsy-pamsy Phd's who read Science and Nature and believe every word they print. THANK GOD FOR MINDSET'S Because, if the "oil interests" were actively aware of what's going to hit them, THEY WOULD hire the mob to put an end to it. But MINDSETS are WONDERFUL in some cases Bob. While I originally chafed at them, I have now begun to APPRECIATE them. (If Adolf hadn't had a brutal mindset to "hurt" the Brits as much as possible, he may have used his Messcheschmit jets to DEFEND Germany, instead of bombing England. If so, we might all be speaking German these days!) - MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 11:43:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA20739 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 10:17:58 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (bilb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA20541; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 10:17:28 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id KAA15296; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 10:17:19 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 10:17:18 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: freenrg-list mail.eskimo.com cc: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Hooray! Free patent search! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The US Patent & Trademark Office has just put an online patent searcher on their homepage at http://www.uspto.gov. It does real keyword searches and comes back with the abstract of the patents you select. Lots like CASSIS. It only searches one year at a time, and only goes back to 1985 presently. But who cares! Desktop patent searching for free! For me, this means no more commuting to the U of Wash Engineering library, paying for parking, walking through the rain, only to find the search machines all booked up for the night. Yippee! .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 12:42:28 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA18076 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:42:24 -0800 Received: from ddi.digital.net (ddi.digital.net [198.69.104.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA18036 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:42:17 -0800 Received: from [198.69.104.103] (pm2_3.digital.net [198.69.104.103]) by ddi.digital.net (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA16234 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 15:40:15 -0500 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 15:39:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tilleyrw digital.net (Robert Tilley) Subject: Re: vtx: CF Testing? Where is it? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >*** Reply to note of 11/16/95 08:09 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: vtx: CF Testing? Where is it? >Bob Tilly: Bob, if you want to send me $10 for mailing, I'll box up >some copies of the 4th Annual CF conf. Report from EPRI, and the first >(of 2) reports published by EPRI on their CF work. I am quite interested. Where should I send the money to cover the cost of mailing this collection of information? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | "Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, | | and why. Then do it." -- Lazarus Long | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | Robert Tilley || tilleyrw digital.net || "Once upon a time..." | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | **** -- ***** -| http://www.digital.net/~tilleyrw |- ***** -- **** | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 12:59:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA23809 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:58:35 -0800 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA23795 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:58:31 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzqdn27923; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 15:57:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA12389; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:55:23 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400GA) id 311454120095320FEPRI; 16 Nov 1995 12:54:12 PST Message-Id: Date: 16 Nov 1995 12:54:12 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: CF Testing? Where is it? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/16/95 12:54:11 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/16/95 12:49 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: CF Testing? Where is it? Whoops! Sorry about that Robert: 5395 Shady Hills Cr, Excelsior, MN 55331 - I'm not sure if you are domestic or not. If so then $10>cost, if not then $10; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 13:25:07 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzqdp01411; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 16:21:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA16865; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 13:17:26 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400GA) id 724216130095320FEPRI; 16 Nov 1995 13:16:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 16 Nov 1995 13:16:13 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: CF Testing? Where is it? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/16/95 13:16:41 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/16/95 13:08 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: CF Testing? Where is it? PS I just happened to be online for about 15 minutes in a row and my last missive came through. This is about 3:00PM CST, which is a pretty good turn around I'd say. MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 13:40:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA10935 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 13:40:21 -0800 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA10886 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 13:40:13 -0800 Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA17436; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 16:38:55 -0500 Date: 16 Nov 95 16:34:47 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: O-U in Electrodeless Discharges? Message-ID: <951116213446_102021.3045_EHT38-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In rarefied gases a tesla coil or a high frequency EM field can cause luminescence. Could there be a release of more than the "pumping" energy? Even something as simple as heating a large test tube with a small amount of water in it and then sealing it after the air has been expelled and exciting the water vapor after cooling it, might be of interest. FJS From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 14:43:17 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA05958 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 14:43:07 -0800 Received: from l2.conline.com (root l2.conline.com [204.96.7.69]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA05937 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 14:43:03 -0800 Received: from dal1-20.conline.com (dal1-12.conline.com [204.96.7.108]) by l2.conline.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA26029 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 16:43:32 -0600 Message-Id: <199511162243.QAA26029 l2.conline.com> X-Sender: lorri l1.conline.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 16:41:54 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: lorri conline.com (Lorri Payton) Subject: Re: vtx: sickening Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > -> FRANK ZNIDARSIC > > -> GAM+ PITT.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > >This is an off topic memo..but I know what Hugo is going through...We are >going through the same thing here. The utility industry is being >deregulated and electric utilities are scrambling to meet the competition. >Just today..our receptionist lost her job...she is crying..It bothers me >badly...she can't bring here self to call home...She can't tell the kids. >One mechanical maintenance and one electrical Forman lost there job. >Both have young children in college. They both came up to see me and sat >very sadly in my office. I don't know what to say. I've still got my >job, for now, > but the hatchet man is not through. I'm good for maybe a few more years. >The people here remind me of wildebeests in Africa. One gets caught by >the lion and the rest go about there business like nothing ever happened. >One man is even happy! He is selling lotto tickets, I could smack the jerk. >We don't have any money to send our R&D people to look at the new energy >technologies that we have all been talking about, yet we have $400,000,000 >dollars to purchase about half of the grid in Australia, and more to build >power plants in China, Hong Kong, and Columbia, South America. > >I don't understand big business, > Quiet, sad, and trying to make some sense out of it all. > > Frank Znidarsic > >Dear Frank: You don't know me, but I have been following the list for about a month now. I am working on ZPE and read all that comes across the list. I can understand your feelings, as my family is now feeling the crunch of the government shut-down, not knowing whether to look for work elsewhere, apply for unemployment or just sit it out. I believe that everything happens for a pur- pose and change only comes through traumatic conditions. Many times we overlook things because we become too comfortable with the status-quo. There is a solution to every question, which is why I believe in free energy. Lorri From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 15:09:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA16020 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 15:09:09 -0800 Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA15930 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 15:08:54 -0800 Received: from 204.111.1.91 (eb1ppp27.shentel.net [204.111.1.91]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id SAA22858 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 18:10:10 -0500 Message-Id: <199511162310.SAA22858 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 17 Nov 95 18:10:26 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: sickening To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <199511162243.QAA26029 l2.conline.com> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Frank, I understand your feeling, I for one went from being on top of the hill to being homeless in a matter of weeks. It is a hard nut to crack indeed when you are fired and the wolf is at the door. We all know the world situation is changing and so must we all to survive. It is good that you feel, this I am afraid is lost on many these days. Maybe if we all work together we can use our findings to help not only ourselves, but others. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 20:21:46 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA06679 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 20:10:34 -0800 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA06636 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 20:10:26 -0800 Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id XAA21324; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:08:42 -0500 Date: 16 Nov 95 23:04:48 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? Message-ID: <951117040447_102021.3045_EHT59-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Took two air dried common bricks, soaked one in tap water, put it in a plastic freezer bag and microwaved for 1 min 45seconds. Too hot to hold. Microwaved "dry" brick for same period, slightly warm. Is water taken up by bricks showing O-U when exposed to microwaves? F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 21:15:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA28279 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:15:17 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA28243 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:15:10 -0800 Received: from net-2-120.austin.eden.com (net-2-120.austin.eden.com [204.177.170.120]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id XAA19558 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:15:03 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:15:03 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511170515.XAA19558 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: Peter's Yusmar concerns X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A > A similar > Yusmar we have seen at Kishinev was connected with 16 radiators > rated for 420 watts each. Here is the difference! Peter, your prodigious brain must have a serious reason for so dogmatically asserting this concept. I need to understand WHY you feel that the presence of large radiators is important. Let me state my thoughts again so you can focus your reply: I naturally assume that the Yusmar device, when properly installed, bypassed, and tuned, begins to generate excess heat immediately after the water flow is started...or perhaps it has to reach a certain operating temperature before it shifts into o-u operation. In either case, it will not matter whether the Yusmar has big or small radiators, it will still shift into o-u operation shortly after the water flow is started. Right? With small radiators and a closed loop, the system temperature will rise rapidly to a relatively high value. With a larger system with large radiators, the system temp will climb more slowly (due to the higher heat capacity) and will level off at a lower value. Nothing that I can see prevents the Yusmar from being o-u in both of these cases. The tests in St. Pete are being conducted with a small system with small radiators. Obviously you think that there is something critically wrong with these test conditions. Please explain. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 21:15:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA28277 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:15:16 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA28238; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:15:09 -0800 Received: from net-2-120.austin.eden.com (net-2-120.austin.eden.com [204.177.170.120]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id XAA19549; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:15:00 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:15:00 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511170515.XAA19549 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Vortex From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in Electrodeless Discharges? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:34 PM 11/16/95 EST, FJS wrote: >Even something as simple as heating a large test tube with a small amount >of water in it and then sealing it after the air has been expelled and >exciting the water vapor after cooling it, might be of interest. A while back, we got excited about electrical discharges in water, mainly due to Graneau's reports of apparently anomalous behavior therein, and performed a fairly extensive series of calorimetric measurements in which a 2 mfd 10kV cap was charge and switched onto a water-filled cell. We tried numerous electrode configurations, water additives (e.g. salts), D2O, etc....all to no avail. That is, all our experiments showed a unity energy balance within the precision of the calorimetry which was around 2% relative. Graneau was right about one thing: underwater arc discharges create tremendous shock waves. It was quite a challenge to develop an arc chamber which would tolerate thousands of shots (necessary for the style of calorimetry we employed) without disintegrating. Somewhere around here we have a box full of split and cracked chambers that preceeded the successful design. - Scott Little "Ex vacuo omne" EarthTech International, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 21:15:29 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA28343 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:15:28 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA28306; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:15:21 -0800 Received: from net-2-120.austin.eden.com (net-2-120.austin.eden.com [204.177.170.120]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id XAA19563; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:15:06 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:15:06 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511170515.XAA19563 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Vortex From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:04 PM 11/16/95 EST, vortex-l eskimo.com wrote: >Took two air dried common bricks, soaked one in tap water, put it in a plastic >freezer bag and microwaved for 1 min 45seconds. Too hot to hold. >Microwaved "dry" brick for same period, slightly warm. > >Is water taken up by bricks showing O-U when exposed to microwaves? Doubtful, Fred. Those microwaves are heavily absorbed by water...much more so than by most inorganics such as the dry brick. That's what makes 'em cook food so well. I know of quite a few laboratory applications for microwave drying of samples. Works great since the heat is applied only until the water is gone and then the specimen cools down even though the mocrowaves are still going. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 02:42:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA15609 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 02:42:13 -0800 Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA15523 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 02:41:48 -0800 Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tG1l9-000MNeC; Thu, 16 Nov 95 12:41 EET Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:41:29 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Norman, Thank you for the prompt message. On the technical side we have: a heat source without an adequate consumer; a system without the hydrodynamics we (I) suppose to be proper for o/u; I am asking you to think once again about how a heating system works and why you cannot get all the heat if you don't have sufficient radiating surface and delta-t. On the non-technical side we have a puzzle. I do not understand it and all we can do is to wait. The same is true in order to see if I am right technically or not. I do not want any kind of disputes with our vortex fellows. Best regards, Peter From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 03:09:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id DAA19954 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 03:09:17 -0800 Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA19898 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 03:09:01 -0800 Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tG2BY-000MNeC; Thu, 16 Nov 95 13:08 EET Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 13:08:52 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris wrote: You are right and I have to add that this has happened very slowly just due to the absence of the radiators. A similar Yusmar we have seen at Kishinev was connected with 16 radiators rated for 420 watts each. Here is the difference! Best regards, Peter From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 22:15:36 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA17535 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:15:32 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA17526 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:15:30 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id WAA28624; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:15:27 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:15:26 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Deregulation and scientists Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Date: 16 Nov 95 14:51:22 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> Frank, I do feel for you and your colleagues. You should know that the dislocation and distress you mention has been a fact of life here (UK) for several years. In fact, one of your countrymen told me not so long ago that the only difference is that we are some five years further down the road. Increasingly, mass employment is now a thing of the past, and people are more and more working in small groups or as self-employed individuals. Long term, it may be better - I don't honestly know. Meanwhile it has been pretty difficult for a great number of people, and it still is. The only way, I feel, to handle it is to accept it as a fact of life - small consolation. One of our darling government ministers (rather unwisely) said yesterday that job insecurity is a state of mind. I don't think he really meant it wasn't a real problem - though with politicians anything is possible. Certainly people here are said to be working harder and longer hours, taking no proper lunchbreak but eating a sandwich instead ... And, let's face it - if the CETI device is half what it is cracked up to be - how long will it take before home heaters are possible? Then, how long before the distribution grid is no longer commercially viable? The dislocation produced by 'new energy' will be a terrible thing indeed. Robert, I think what you describe is the (to many of us) puzzling behaviour of, on the one hand, scientists; and on the other the strange attitude of inventors who think that if they can keep it all under wraps a little longer they will gain the entire world. Rather than take a small slice of a big cake, they want the whole thing. Scientists though, are often not interested in commercial applications. Some see them as actively a bad thing. Not all of them, perhaps, but enough. Another factor is that they (like the inventors) want to win it all. In their case, that means that they want acceptance for their theory more than they want commercial products. And, with Shell (France) supporting CF research - and maybe others doing the same - I suspect that the Big Bad Oil Companies are not the villains that many suppose. I think we should all be grateful that CETI are taking a fairly robust, engineering, commercial attitude to this, while maintaining strong links with academics. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 22:48:21 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA26085 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:48:19 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA26070 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:48:15 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id WAA00950; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:48:11 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:48:10 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Peter's Yusmar concerns In-Reply-To: <199511170515.XAA19558 natashya.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: > > A similar > > Yusmar we have seen at Kishinev was connected with 16 radiators > > rated for 420 watts each. Here is the difference! > > Peter, your prodigious brain must have a serious reason for so dogmatically > asserting this concept. I need to understand WHY you feel that the presence > of large radiators is important. Butting in here, I recall a mention in Mike Huffman's documents on the Schaffer device of an unsettling anomaly. One where the water temperature at the outlet of a home radiator was significantly higher than the input water temp. If this was real, it implies that there may after all be a need for long runs of tubing in the radiator section. The assumption that the temperature rise occurs entirely within the Yusmar may not be accurate. If it is not, then the radiators play an important part in the effect. Does this sound like the usual excuse, "it didn't work, we must have set it up wrong?" But I was under the impression that this was supposed to be a guaranteed-working system totally built by the factory and not significantly modified by the experimenters. Was the small radiator installed by the Yusmar builders, or by the investigators in St. Pete? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 23:32:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA08154 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:32:37 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA08128 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:32:33 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id CAA19738; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 02:31:15 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 02:29:55 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Message from Internet Message-ID: <951117072954_100060.173_JHB55-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> I am asking you to think once again about how a heating system works and why you cannot get all the heat if you don't have sufficient radiating surface and delta-t. << If the heater is capable of supplying heat at a certain maximum rate, then whatever the rate of loss by the total system, and if the device is modulated by a normal thermostat with commercial tolerances, then the temperature cycling should reflect the heat input rate. The period of the cycle will vary depending on the heat-sink and radiation rate, but the heat flow rate should reflect the efficiency of the generator. Obviously, if the heat losses are so low and the thermal capacity of the whole circuit is so small that the generator is hardly taxed at any stage, then whoever set up the test arrangements should be fired as incompetent, and my earlier description of them remains valid! Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 23:32:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA08154 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:32:37 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA08128 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:32:33 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id CAA19738; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 02:31:15 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 02:29:55 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Message from Internet Message-ID: <951117072954_100060.173_JHB55-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: D >> I am asking you to think once again about how a heating system works and why you cannot get all the heat if you don't have sufficient radiating surface and delta-t. << If the heater is capable of supplying heat at a certain maximum rate, then whatever the rate of loss by the total system, and if the device is modulated by a normal thermostat with commercial tolerances, then the temperature cycling should reflect the heat input rate. The period of the cycle will vary depending on the heat-sink and radiation rate, but the heat flow rate should reflect the efficiency of the generator. Obviously, if the heat losses are so low and the thermal capacity of the whole circuit is so small that the generator is hardly taxed at any stage, then whoever set up the test arrangements should be fired as incompetent, and my earlier description of them remains valid! Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 16 23:32:45 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA08193 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:32:44 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA08160 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:32:38 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id CAA19733; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 02:31:14 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 02:29:52 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Yusmar in St Pete Message-ID: <951117072951_100060.173_JHB55-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> "I think I'm entitled to be gently fed up!!!" Why? << Because, once again what started out to be the discovery of the century has begun to look like BS. What about that long queue of monks and Chinese buying thousands of these supposedly highly efficient, nudge-nudge o-u, heaters. The detailed design drawings showing the location and size of the "by-pass" so essential to the o-u'ness of the thing, and then the test model has no by-pass - doesn't need it really we are told. Oh! Come on Chris, don't tell me that you are as enthusiastic about the Yusmar as you were. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 00:00:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA16236 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 00:00:35 -0800 Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA16189 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 00:00:27 -0800 Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id CAA22972; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 02:59:09 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 02:58:11 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Reality Message-ID: <951117075810_100060.173_JHB30-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear fellow Vortexians, Lets get to some semblance of reality here. We have been assured that the Yusmar has been in full production for some time, and has been retro-fitted to many thousands of simple homes and larger establishments with amazing results. What is all this crap we are now being fed about the thing being critical as to the size of the radiators being fed? Either it is ou or it is a fraud. If its ou then there is no excuse for withholding a standard production unit from testing. I am strongly of the opinion, based on the reports we have been quoted, that there is nothing other than straight conversion of kinetic energy to heat, and that cavitation is only being used as a buzz word by the salesmen. Any scientist who has had their hands on one of these devices, supposedly in good working order, has either reported nothing, or has made excuses for failure to display ou. And Chris Tinsley asks me why I'm starting to get fed up with the Yusmar project!!! Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 01:23:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA05736 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:22:59 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA05726 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:22:55 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA00974; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:22:54 +0100 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:22:54 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Deregulation and scientists In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, William Beaty wrote: (I thought that was Chris Tinsley, but pine made it WB) > Scientists though, are often not interested in commercial applications. Some > see them as actively a bad thing. Not all of them, perhaps, but enough. This bit about scientists is a myth, unfortunately taken on board by a whole generation of governments. In many countries, nowadays you have to show that your research proposal has industrial relevance; in Australia the key phrase is "links with industry". My experience is in fact that it is industry that lacks interest. The scientists I know (including myself) are tickled pink at the idea that they might have something that can make money. I worked for a few years in a place with such pressures, and the group had a couple of very nifty ideas. It turned out that the industry that should have been interested, couldn't be bothered. They had their plants doing things the old way, they were making money, so why rock the boat? Before I left there, the government set up a consortium consisting of two academic research groups (we were one of them) plus a few industrial labs. They were all given money to cooperate on the sodium/sulphur battery. Information was - of course - supposed to be freely exchanged within the consortium. It turned out that the industial groups just tapped the academics, but kept their own results strictly to themselves, and even lied. I am very skeptical about "links with industry", and not because of scientists reluctant to get their hands dirty. It's an urban myth. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 01:25:53 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA06263 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:25:52 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA06256 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:25:50 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA00979; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:25:49 +0100 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:25:49 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Yusmar in St Pete In-Reply-To: <951117072951_100060.173_JHB55-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Or, more to the point: Potapov in the US? Might this visit not resolve some of these questions? To whom will he be talking? -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 01:50:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA10367 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:50:17 -0800 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA10358 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:50:15 -0800 Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA00875; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 04:48:58 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 04:10:46 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Microwave Depletion of O-U in Water? Message-ID: <951117091046_102021.3045_EHT28-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Just out of curiosity measured out a pound of well water in a measuring beaker and ran a series of tests using a microwave oven. The microwave timer and a thermometer were used to see if there was a difference in the temperature rise of the water with repeated exposure of the water to the microwaves. On the first run of one minute exposure for the three fresh samples of water the temperature rose 27 to 28.8 deg F in the first exposure then dropped to 24 deg F for the second exposure, and held at 20 deg F on the third and fourth exposure. This needs to be repeated with a bit more care before jumping to conclusions, but the inference is that there might be microwave dumping of metastable energy states occurring and the higher btu yields on the first exposures is actually O-U energy delivered by the water. The way that the wet brick tests seemed to be hotter on the first runs prompted this "midnight oil" experiment. Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 04:14:43 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id EAA02624 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 04:13:56 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA02611 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 04:13:54 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA20451; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:12:17 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 07:09:31 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: St Pete, scientists Message-ID: <951117120930_100433.1541_BHG67-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex St Pete: As Bill Beaty points out, we don't know for certain that any anomalous heat would appear in the Yusmar device itself. That is why I proposed tent calorimetry. That was then enhanced to null-balance calorimetry. The problem looks to be that we are in what Scott calls the experimetalist's trap. Since we *not* have a complete system, only the bare tube, we don't know if the test configuration is OK. What we do know is that the testing method is a good one, unless Peter is right and the machine is having to heat too small an area. My only remaining hope for resolving the issue is that all this may produce a sufficient ruckus within the CIS as to bring the whole thing to a head. Norman writes: "Obviously, if the heat losses are so low and the thermal capacity of the whole circuit is so small that the generator is hardly taxed at any stage, then whoever set up the test arrangements should be fired as incompetent, and my earlier description of them remains valid!" No. The tent is dissipating several kilowatts. That should be plenty. Norman wrote earlier: "I think I'm entitled to be gently fed up!!!" And I asked why. Norman responds: "Because, once again what started out to be the discovery of the century has begun to look like BS." "What about that long queue of monks and Chinese buying thousands of these supposedly highly efficient, nudge-nudge o-u, heaters. The detailed design drawings showing the location and size of the "by-pass" so essential to the o-u'ness of the thing, and then the test model has no by-pass - doesn't need it really we are told." "Oh! Come on Chris, don't tell me that you are as enthusiastic about the Yusmar as you were." My point was that some of us (Scott, Gene and I) have put enormous effort into this thing. Others (some of them here - Jed and Robert) have put money into the investigation. We have come to no resolution between our own tests and the supposed results of others - or the device's commercial success. I do think it is for those of us who have tried to do an proper job who are entitled to be fed up with the situation, rather than those who (while having made a valuable contribution on other occasions) have been in this instance spectators. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dieter, In a frantic attempt to quench any squabbles between scientists and engineers, I would suggest that there is an obvious problem here. Most of us have seen what may well be a parallel. Many scientists and engineers have spent a lot of their education and early working lives in all-male groups. Within such groups they often hear of the vile treatment received by sweet, innocent males from the fiendish females. Many tears shed, much beer spilt. Remember? Yet - when some female is finally found who is daft enough to espouse one of our number, what does he hear? Quite. He hears about how brutish males have mistreated her friends. I think that all the stories of whacko scientists and crooked, grasping engineers are evidence of mutual misunderstandings. Perhaps we are entering a new Aquarian age, where Morrison and Rothwell will nostalgically recall their earlier 'disagreements', where Blue and Mallove will together raise their glasses to the good old days. Sort of like those RAF/Luftwaffe re-unions. The scientist and the engineer will each be heard to praise the other's brilliance and insight. Or maybe not. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 05:50:28 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA21548 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 05:50:25 -0800 Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA21283 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 05:49:13 -0800 Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tGR9N-000MNmC; Fri, 17 Nov 95 15:48 EET Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 15:48:17 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: vtx: Facts in our field. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends, Scott, Thank you for the polite and nice manner of letting me know that I am a (1) stubborn (2) old (3) ass! I hope that finally you will be convinced that this is true only 33- max 66%. Robert Tilley, You deserve a prize for the most stimulating questions put here- which I translate to : "Why so many apparently succcessful CF systems couldn't be scaled-up technologically?" Please allow me to combine the answers to these two, seemingly different questions. This is an excellent opportunity to discuss with you some aspects of my paper in course of preparation which is entitled "The BASIC FACTS OF OUR FIELD"- the first one where I have deliberately abandoned the outgrown and obsolete name -CF. My dogma is that the generation of heat takes place in active sites of nanometric dimensions- catalytic centers and cavitation bubbles- and that the production of heat is proportional to the number of these active sites present. Ergo, a system able to generate many active sites in a controlled manner is "good" and has chances to become a technology/ commercial device and one which is not able to do this is not viable and will be lost. The process of generation of heat (actually capture of profound energy) can have some negative side effects and, in some cases can be self destructive- a second possibility for lack of techno- logical viability. Good engineering is needed to limit this effect. We have to start with the electrochemical systems because electrochemistry was the cradle of the new energy systems. 1-Classical Pd/D2O system: Mark has lined out here the criticality of the conditions which determine success/failure- the devices with compact cathodes are not good for generating catalytic centers and are not reliable. It is more an art than a science to work with them and in my opinion nothing can be changed, the systems are too sensitive and vulnerable to be used commercially as such. They have no comercial future and, I think, it is a great loss that so many scientists are continuing to work only in this sub-field see e.g the Japanese NHE program. These devices have scientific potential but have no technological perspective. (I have shown here that the McKubre system is some 150 times less efficient than the Patterson system, based on weight). The high D/Pd ratio isn't an asset per se but a requirement for the birth of active sites, the more engineered systems do not need it. 2- Improved Pd/D2O systems: the Arata Cell- a fine combination of a wet sytem with a complex cathode inside which deuterium is in contact with dry, hyperfine palladium -is efficient and reliable. In my opinion it will work even better with Pd based catalysts protected by very thin Pd membranes. It was patented and ..let's wait and see. The Patterson cell- both Pd and Ni based, using 'metal plated microsphere catalysts' was discussed here in some detail. 3- Ni/H2O systems: I haven't heard for a long time anything about the Mills/HydroCatalysis Power Corp. developments. It seems that they have used cathodes, made from many miles long Ni wires, obviously not the best choice if the number of catalytic centers is the critical factor. A more complex, extended, developed active surface is better. The Ni Patterson beads are OK, but as seen from Hal Fox's report in Fusion Facts, if you increase current density, the o/u performance decreases- because the number of points of energy generation is constant and again this is the limiting factor. Increase of temperature is beneficial- the turnover of the catalytic centers is increased. 4-Pd-LiD/ molten salts system of Liaw and Liebert: it's almost forgotten; the breeding of active sites is not easy and the side effect-corrosion is dreadful. no technological future. 5- The protonic conductors are in a development stage; the basic idea- an enormous internal surface- is spectacular and promising. There are plagued by important side effects, the destruction of the material due to the heat generated. For the moment their future is uncertain. Non-electrochemical systems. 6- The sonofusion system of Stringham and George is, in my opinion a combination of cavitation and catalysis, the effect of the ultrasound is to activate the surface of the Pd target. Obviously a promising and apparently efficient system, if the destructive side-effects are under control. Insufficient information about the functional parameters and performance. 7, 8-Two of the six gas/solid devices are ab ovo eliminated from the technological competition: the gas loading/unloading system of Yamaguchi and Nishioka (N. T. T.) the ionic implant system of Kamada. The reason: their ephemeral functionality, they have a very limited reserve of gaseous fuel which is suddenly discharged/used and after that the system is dead. The scientific aspects-that's an other story. 9, 10- Glow discharge (Luch scientists) and Sparking ( Dufour) are generating active sites continuously and in a controlled manner, the obvious problem is the number of these sites- is it sufficiently high? Much development work is necessary, the gadgets are technologically immature. 11-Piantelli- I think is the technological optimum, is based on clever controlled generation of catalytic centers. We have to discuss it again in detail when Gene's info will be published. Cavitation systems. 12-Liquid/Gas/Solid cavitation: Griggs, Schaffer, Huffman: efficiency limited by destructive side effects, however the hydrosonic pump is a technological reality. Liquid/Gas/Liquid cavitation: Potapov; no side effects and very high efficiency of bubble production if the vortex/ hydrodynamics is in order. More dogma here: A quantitative, complete and technologically significant experiment has to be performed; a model is that of Belarus, comprising both small loop and great loop testing. Scott is right that an indicator of o/u is the rate of heating up in the starting phase when only the small loop works- see the Chinese experiment reported by Sapogin. We can do this- to put the r-tube on the Yusmar and start it again; in St. Pete the heating up time (10 to 70 deg C) was 39 minutes , if you obtain now 25 minutes this is a symptom of o/u. No radiators are necessary because only the small loop works. BUT: this result is not relevant technologically because (1)we have a heater at work and, as seen from the Belarus tests (2) COP is lower when only the small loop is working. At St. Pete actually we do not have a great loop-there is no other circuit and no radiators at all; therefore no relevant results can be obtained. The radiators cannot work inside the tent because they are critically underloaded and there is no thermostat to control the duty cycle. In many applications underload is as damaging as overload, such a case is at St. Pete. Should we better focus on what we have to do-install r-tube and radiators and make proper tests; forget the tent. This was my last word on this subject, let's experiment speak. A very interesting problem was rised here by Bill Beaty- if excess heat generation is restricted to the cavitation tube- this depends on the life time of the traveling bubbles. No data about that. Norman, I think you got this underload/Yusmar problem. The immense commercial success of the Yusmar is an undeniable reality, with or without those sensational aspects as the monks- former SU, China Japan etc. And (sometimes it is refreshing to be childish!) would you bet that eventually o/u of the Yusmar will be demonstrated? Dieter, It seems that Potapov's US travel is a non-event for this group. He has invited me to join him but I cannot afford it. To All, I have the highest respect for the professionals from the oil industry and for this industry as a whole. Anybody reading e.g Hydrocarbon Processing and Chemical Engineer will abandon most of the prejudices bound to them. I wish you all a very pleasant weekend and therefore wouldn't tell a word about my (our) problems with the jobs, money (lack of it) auditing and possible destruction of our research institutes..no definitely not a subject for weekend. Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 07:04:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA11794 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:04:00 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA11776 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:03:54 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA30260 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:20:59 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 06:05:16 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in Electrodeless Discharges? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 04:34 PM 11/16/95 EST, FJS wrote: > >>Even something as simple as heating a large test tube with a small amount >>of water in it and then sealing it after the air has been expelled and >>exciting the water vapor after cooling it, might be of interest. > >A while back, we got excited about electrical discharges in water, mainly >due to Graneau's reports of apparently anomalous behavior therein, and >performed a fairly extensive series of calorimetric measurements in which a >2 mfd 10kV cap was charge and switched onto a water-filled cell. We tried >numerous electrode configurations, water additives (e.g. salts), D2O, >etc....all to no avail. That is, all our experiments showed a unity energy >balance within the precision of the calorimetry which was around 2% relative. Did you try any discharges in magnetic fields? > >Graneau was right about one thing: underwater arc discharges create >tremendous shock waves. It was quite a challenge to develop an arc chamber >which would tolerate thousands of shots (necessary for the style of >calorimetry we employed) without disintegrating. Somewhere around here we >have a box full of split and cracked chambers that preceeded the successful >design. Yes. Exploding fine wire under water has been used for explosive forming by placing sheet metal over a dye filled with air and using the water pressure to blast the sheet metal into the air pocket. > > > - Scott Little "Ex vacuo omne" > EarthTech International, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 > 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 07:14:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA15133 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:14:03 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA15103 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:13:58 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id HAA12542; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:13:57 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:13:56 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Deregulation and scientists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 17 Nov 1995, Dieter Britz wrote: > On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, William Beaty wrote: > (I thought that was Chris Tinsley, but pine made it WB) This is a weird 'majordomo' thing which occasionally occurs. If majordomo sees its own commands in a vortex-L message, it will assume that the message was mis-addressed, and will pass it on to me instead of to vortex-L. This is a great security feature, it keeps me from accidentally sending passworded list-owner commands to vortex-L, where the entire world will see the system password. It also keeps everyone on vortex-L from seeing the constant "subscribe vortex-L janedoe lurker.com" messages which get misdirected to vortex-L instead of majordomo. But if a legitimate vortex-L message has the word "subscribe," or "sub," or "unsub" in its text in the wrong place, the message will bounce to me, and I'll have to CHANGE THE TEXT slightly and forward it manually to the list. Come on now, all of you must have suspected that I was slightly altering the text of your messages in order to fulfill the desires of my Oil Company employers and steer you away from the REAL keys to 'infinite energy!' mmHA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAA! ;-) Maybe I should get more sleep? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 07:18:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA16584 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:18:09 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA16549 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:18:03 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id HAA12748; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:17:59 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:17:58 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Yusmar in St Pete In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 17 Nov 1995, Dieter Britz wrote: > Or, more to the point: Potapov in the US? Might this visit not resolve some > of these questions? To whom will he be talking? > If enough were interested, we could all donate bucks towards a speaker's fee, rent a hall, fly to the (east?) coast, and attend a custom Vortex-L lecture and discussion session with Potapov. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 07:29:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA20518 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:29:13 -0800 Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (0 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA20488 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:29:07 -0800 Received: from wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca (wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca [131.136.255.106]) by dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA00682 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:21:58 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199511171521.KAA00682 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca> X-Sender: wspage dgs.drenet.dnd.ca X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:32:01 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: wspage ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: F.J. Sparber wrote: >Took two air dried common bricks, soaked one in tap water, put it in a plastic >freezer bag and microwaved for 1 min 45seconds. Too hot to hold. >Microwaved "dry" brick for same period, slightly warm. > >Is water taken up by bricks showing O-U when exposed to microwaves? > Aw, come on now, FJS, this is getting to be too much! Or do you post this stuff just for your own amusement? Remeber what our moderator posted recently about the desirability of including icons in your writing. I really can't tell if you intend this as substantive comment or as a joke. I have been wondering now for a few weeks when you might come up with a suggestion like: Go into your bathroom, measure the temperature of the water in the toilet bowl. Flush the toilet and observe the vortex. Now repeat your measurement of the temperature in the bowl. Is energy being dumped down the sewer every time you flush? Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 07:43:00 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA25161 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:42:58 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA25117 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:42:50 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA30369 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:59:56 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 06:44:12 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in Electrodeless Discharges? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 04:34 PM 11/16/95 EST, FJS wrote: > >>Even something as simple as heating a large test tube with a small amount >>of water in it and then sealing it after the air has been expelled and >>exciting the water vapor after cooling it, might be of interest. > >A while back, we got excited about electrical discharges in water, mainly >due to Graneau's reports of apparently anomalous behavior therein, and >performed a fairly extensive series of calorimetric measurements in which a >2 mfd 10kV cap was charge and switched onto a water-filled cell. We tried >numerous electrode configurations, water additives (e.g. salts), D2O, >etc....all to no avail. That is, all our experiments showed a unity energy >balance within the precision of the calorimetry which was around 2% relative. > >Graneau was right about one thing: underwater arc discharges create >tremendous shock waves. It was quite a challenge to develop an arc chamber >which would tolerate thousands of shots (necessary for the style of >calorimetry we employed) without disintegrating. Somewhere around here we >have a box full of split and cracked chambers that preceeded the successful >design. Just an afterthought: did your experiments show unity or substantially below unity? If at unity, there might be susbtantial kinetic energy lost via sound waves. What I am getting at is if you can harness the shock wave via piezoelectrics (or some other method) and still get heating, you might get over unity. I realize it's a long shot, because E = .5CV^2 = (1e-6)(1e4)^2 = 100J is a lot of energy to get back from a shock wave. > > > - Scott Little "Ex vacuo omne" > EarthTech International, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 > 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 07:59:48 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA00966 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:59:40 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA00929 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:59:32 -0800 Received: from net-1-205.austin.eden.com (net-1-205.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.205]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA15119 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 09:59:11 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 09:59:11 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511171559.JAA15119 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Facts in our field. X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Peter said: > Scott, > Thank you for the polite and nice manner of letting me know that > I am a (1) stubborn (2) old (3) ass! Don't be so hard on yourself, I intended only "intelligent" and "tenacious". >experiment reported by Sapogin. We can do this- to put the r-tube on >the Yusmar and start it again; in St. Pete the heating up time (10 to >70 deg C) was 39 minutes , if you obtain now 25 minutes this is a >symptom of o/u. Symptom? I'd call it PROOF of o-u (provided an electric heater of the same input power also takes 39 minutes to heat up the tent). If we can agree on that point then the test setup in St. Pete is satisfactory. Now, you insist that they get a r-tube fitted to their Yusmar. Hey! They're in about the same position I was in a while back (having a Yusmar with no r-tube). Who's going to make this r-tube for them? What diameter will it be? Where will it connect to the Yusmar discharge tube? Will it have washers in it? Potapov & Co. should be willing to install this tube on the unit in St. Pete...that is, IF they want the St. Pete tests to come out positive. Is Potapov aware that tests are being performed in St. Pete? Is he aware that an international group of scientists are awaiting the results of these tests? Peter, if you can contact Potapov, please discuss this situation with him. I can't see how he could refuse to provide some assistance for these tests. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 08:04:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA02993 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:04:49 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA02943 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:04:41 -0800 Received: from net-1-205.austin.eden.com (net-1-205.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.205]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id KAA15379 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:04:26 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:04:26 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511171604.KAA15379 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in Electrodeless Discharges? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace said: >Just an afterthought: did your experiments show unity or substantially >below unity? If at unity, there might be susbtantial kinetic energy lost >via sound waves. We considered that quite a bit and finally decided that the sound energy was small. Also, our calorimeter was extremely absorbing of that energy in such a way that it would be measured along with the radiated and conducted heat from the chamber. The thing made a load bang when operated out in the open but you could hardly hear it when it was in the calorimeter. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 08:06:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA03514 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:06:02 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA03396 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:05:44 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA30439 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 09:22:23 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:06:39 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Microwave Depletion of O-U in Water? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Just out of curiosity measured out a pound of well water in a measuring beaker >and ran a series of tests using a microwave oven. The microwave timer and a >thermometer were used to see if there was a difference in the temperature rise >of the water with repeated exposure of the water to the microwaves. > >On the first run of one minute exposure for the three fresh samples of >water the >temperature rose 27 to 28.8 deg F in the first exposure then dropped to 24 >deg F >for the second exposure, and held at 20 deg F on the third and fourth exposure. Do you mean deg. C? Maybe you are talking about temperature increments? Otherwise, this is a pretty amazing experiment! 8^) Assuming these are temperature incremenets, I think a partial explanation is that you are heating a two volume system, the water, which absorbs the energy, and the beaker and thermometer, which do not. As you increase the water temperature the heat flow (loss) from the water to surroundings increases, so you get less temperature increase in the water for a constant energy input. > >This needs to be repeated with a bit more care before jumping to conclusions, >but the inference is that there might be microwave dumping of metastable energy >states occurring and the higher btu yields on the first exposures is actually >O-U energy delivered by the water. > >The way that the wet brick tests seemed to be hotter on the first runs prompted >this "midnight oil" experiment. > >Frederick Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 08:38:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA15789 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:38:13 -0800 Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA15720 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:38:01 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzqgo16190; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 11:37:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA13842; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:37:52 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400GA) id 841921080095321FEPRI; 17 Nov 1995 08:21:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 17 Nov 1995 08:21:08 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/17/95 07:18:50 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/16/95 20:28 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? Mr. Sparber---a lot of your microwave energy in the dry brick experiment went into heating of the magnetron. MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 08:38:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA15774 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:38:10 -0800 Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA15721 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:38:01 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzqgo16192; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 11:37:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA20753; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:37:52 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400GA) id 631521080095321FEPRI; 17 Nov 1995 08:21:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 17 Nov 1995 08:21:08 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Peter's Yusmar concerns To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/17/95 07:17:47 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/16/95 21:22 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Peter's Yusmar concerns I can see a concern here with regard the Yusmar.... Guys, am I missing somethin g or are you? Classical "caviation" is most vigorous at a water "feed" temp. of about 90 to 120 degrees F. For the flow rates the Yusmar runs at, small radiators and a small test loop may easily allow the system to EXCEED this temp range. I can see where natural balance levels in an operating system may easily keep the return just slightly above 90 degrees F. So Chris' concern may not be totally bogus. - MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 08:38:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA15825 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:38:17 -0800 Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA15783 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:38:10 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzqgo16207; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 11:38:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA17177; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:37:56 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400GA) id 222536080095321FEPRI; 17 Nov 1995 08:36:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 17 Nov 1995 08:36:08 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: sickening To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/17/95 07:24:20 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/16/95 17:49 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: sickening I'm slightly concerned about the individual posting the note about "going from the top of the hill --- to being homeless in a matter of weeks." "Homelessness" is a political football of a very devious nature. Let me just briefly say that in 8 years I have had 6 resident "guests" at my home for periods of 6 months to 2 years, as they improved their situations in life. - Characteristic of all of these people: They were not insane. And that "catagorization" includes: 1. Engaged in criminal behavior, 2. Drug addicted, 3. Alcoholic, 4. Gambling addicted, etc. I think that the likelyhood of a sane, moral, non-criminal, "normal" person actually having to dwell without a roof over their head is quite low in both the UK and the US. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 08:49:49 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA20053 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:49:46 -0800 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA19995 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:49:37 -0800 Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id LAA16987; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 11:48:18 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 11:44:12 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? Message-ID: <951117164411_102021.3045_EHT55-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 11/17/95 Bill page wrote: >I really can't tell if you mean this as substantive comment or as a joke.< No joke Bill. A common brick weighs about 1,500 grams, has a volume of about one liter,takes up about 225 grams of water into that volume and distributes it evenly. In the catalyst industry some of the best catalysts are "glorified bricks" doped with a variety of metals and metal oxides etc. Here is a "natural" for having liquid-solid-gas interfaces that can be studied in a microwave environment where high pressures etc., are not difficult to handle, could be used with water soluble salts of interest for a variety of reasons. And I might add that a little humor isn't such a bad deal, one of the best ideas that is patented and used to hold a steady power flux for space power systems came out of an offhand joke. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 08:53:56 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA21595 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:53:55 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA21532 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:53:45 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.75]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA30581 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:10:46 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 07:55:01 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Facts in our field. Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >I wish you all a very pleasant weekend and therefore wouldn't tell >a word about my (our) problems with the jobs, money (lack of it) >auditing and possible destruction of our research institutes..no >definitely not a subject for weekend. >Peter Gluck Thank you for a very interresting summary of the free energy eletrochemical field (you know maybe CF isn't such a bad term after all). Reading it gave me the following idea: if the CF effect is due to catalytic centers, why not combine powdered catalysts (Pd, Ni, etc.) with cavitation devices. This would provide an enormous number of locations for bubble formation, lots of catalytic sites, maintain contact between bubbles and the catalysts, and possibly mininmize the destructive effects. The turbulence should automatically maintain a good suspention of the catalyst. The main problem might be abrasion. However, lots of sites for bubble formation might divert cavitation away from the walls of the device enough to *reduce* wear and tear. I would suggest to anyone who has a cavitation device handy to try a little powdered metal in the water. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From neotech-approval europe.std.com Fri Nov 17 09:20:27 1995 Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA28642; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 09:13:34 -0800 Received: by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id MAA03435; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 12:12:12 -0500 Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id MAA03422; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 12:12:09 -0500 Received: from ether.wayne.com (gateway.wayne.com) by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA27705; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 12:12:04 -0500 Received: from mail.wayne.com (mail.wayne.com [199.1.203.4]) by ether.wayne.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA21802 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 11:48:30 GMT Received: by mail.wayne.com with Microsoft Mail id <30ACDD9E mail.wayne.com>; Fri, 17 Nov 95 11:08:14 PST From: Len Bucuvalas To: neotech Subject: FW: Modulating Brain Signal Device (fwd) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 95 11:04:00 PST Message-Id: <30ACDD9E mail.wayne.com> Encoding: 240 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Sender: neotech-approval europe.std.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: neotech europe.std.com Status: RO X-Status: -> SearchNet's neotech Mailing List ---------- From: ladynada To: i_ufo-l Subject: Modulating Brain Signal Device (fwd) Date: Monday, November 13, 1995 4:44PM -> SearchNet's i_ufo-l Mailing List ----Forwarded---- From: vericomm linex.com (Mike Coyle) Newsgroups: alt.mindcontrol,alt.conspiracy,alt.politics.org.cia Subject: Modulating Brain Signal Device Date: 9 Nov 1995 10:00:15 GMT Message-ID: <47sjff$is3 miwok.nbn.com> [resnan1.zip] = [resnan1.txt], [fig11-12.pcx] ===================================================================== V E R I C O M M BBS 510.891.0303 / MindNet ===================================================================== VERICOMM Notes: The following is reproduced here, with the express permission of the author. Permission is given to reproduce, and redistribute for non-commercial purposes only; provided this information and the copy remain intact, and unedited. The views and opinions expressed below are not necessarily the views and opinions of VERICOMM, MindNet, or the editor, unless otherwise noted. Typesetting by Mike Coyle ===================================================================== RESONANCE Newsletter of the Bioelectromagnetics Special Interest Group (SIG) Judy Wall, Editor, 684 C.R. 535, Sumterville, FL 33585 USA Number 28, May 1995 Pages 11 to 15. --------------------------------------------------------------------- REVIEW OF PATENT # 4,889,526 "NON-INVASIVE METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MODULATING BRAIN SIGNALS THROUGH AN EXTERNAL MAGNETIC ELECTRIC FIELD TO REDUCE PAIN" _by Judy Wall_ This patent was granted December 26, 1989 to Elizabeth A. Rauscher and William L. Van Bise, both of San Leandro California; assignee MegTech Laboratories, Inc., Reno, Nevada. Michael Hutchinson's Megabrain Report, Vol. 1 #4, published a few years ago, gives this background information on the inventors: "Elizabeth Rauscher and Bill Van Bise are two of the leading investigators of the effects of electromagnetism on biological systems. They are currently engaged in clinical tests of a device they have developed that uses pulsed electromagnetic signals at specific frequency combinations for the treatment of cardiac problems and pain. "Elizabeth Rauscher earned her B.A. in physics and chemistry, a Masters in nuclear engineering and a Ph.D. in nuclear science from Berkeley. She spent 19 years with Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, three of them in a theoretical physics group at Lawrence Livermore Labs. She has served as a consultant with SRI International, NASA, and the Navy. For many years she has had a special interest in quantum electronics, the biological effects of electromagnetics, and natural sources of low- frequency, long wavelength magnetic field emissions from the earth. She has published influential papers in nuclear physics, astrophysics, and fusion research. She is presently engaged full time with the medical research project that involves the use of electromagnetic frequencies. "Bill Van Bise is an electrical engineer who served as consultant to broadcast companies throughout the U.S. He was instructor at the University of Oregon Health Sciences University Medical School. During the 1970s he was a consultant to the Oregon State Health division Radiation Section. He teamed up with Elizabeth Rauscher in 1984 when they began their current research and development in the area of electromagnetism and biological systems." The ABSTRACT for the invention reads: "The invention incorporates the discovery of new principles which utilize magnetic and electric fields generated by time varying square wave currents of precise repetition, with shape and magnitude to move through coils and cutaneously applied conductive electrodes in order to stimulate the nervous system and reduce pain in humans. Timer means, adjustment means, and means to deliver current to the coils and conductive electrodes are described, as well as a theoretical model of the process. The invention incorporates the concept of two cyclic expanding and collapsing magnetic fields which generate precise wave conjunction with each other to create a beat frequency which in turn causes the ion flow in the nervous system of the human body to be efficiently moved along the nerve path where the locus of the pain exists to thereby reduce the pain. The wave forms are created either in one or more coils, one or more pairs of electrodes, or a combination of the two. The patent is long, 30 pages, 7 in the introduction with diagrams, the rest divided into about equal parts of discussion, mathematical equations, and practical application. The discussion presents the most complete summary in single article of the interaction of biological materials and electromagnetic fields that I have seen. These are the highlights of the presentation: "The inventors have discovered that the beginning of the normal cardiac cycle and response to pain cycle originates in the mid-brain and the hypothalamus with excitation of the Purkinje cells and is oscillatorily propagated to the heart or source of pain, respectively." In the first embodiment of the invention, the authors employ an external magnetic field generating device that produces an expanding and collapsing magnetic field in the form of a square wave, frequency from 7.15 to 7.78 Hertz. This magnetic square wave triggers the PQRSTU wave form characteristic of an electrocardiogram. It is not necessary to mimic the wave. In the second embodiment, two frequencies of magnetic field impulses are generated, differing by a factor of ten, specifically 7.6 and 76 Hertz. The frequencies are mixed to counteract pain. "This invention incorporates the discovery of new principles involving both linear and non-linear properties of biologic material and inorganic semiconduction systems. By generating certain energies at a distance from, as well as in the proximity of, these materials or systems and at the same time optimal detecting their changes and emissions, unique new characteristics can be elicited and observed. Biologic as well as inorganic systems, when excited by external energies of specific, mixed, or varying in a narrow range of frequencies, polarizations, wave forms and intensities, will have their own characteristics changed and in turn will change the characteristic of the energies impinging upon the system. Thus a characteristic transmitted energy impinging upon of travelling through a given self-resonant system will stimulate the system to respond with a transmission of its own which different from its transmission characteristic when undisturbed by the impinging energy. These two separate characteristic energies will interact synergistically producing not only greater effects at the disturbed local material sites, but also will produce non-local effects at other sites. The interaction of emitted energies from artificial sources and biological systems, if both are characteristically self resonant at some compatible fundamental or harmonic frequency, results in the formation of an informational channel between the source and the system. The channel frequency is able to modulate the interacting systems with diode-like forward-reverse voltage fluctuation. The channel is therefore a system frequency modulator." The patent goes on to discuss the informational channel bandwidths, which are narrow with high "Q"s. There are at least three informational channels for humans. The cardiovascular system has a band width of approximately 30.4 Hertz with a frequency swing of plus of minus 15.2 Hertz, and the Bessel null at about 7.6 Hertz. The nervous system has an informational band width of 304 Hertz with frequency swing plus or minus 152 Hertz, first Bessel component at 23 Hertz "which represents a mix of 7.6 and 76 Hertz generated signals". The brain informational channel band width is 3040 Hertz with frequency swing plus or minus 1520 Hertz, "and a more complex mix of frequencies peaking between 70 and 123 Hertz". The informational channel bandwidths of the above three systems increases by a factor of ten. "It is a well known engineering fact that in order for signals of given frequencies to be faithfully detected and reproduced that the receiving channel must have a band width at least ten times the frequency of the highest emitted frequency which must be processed...Narrow band FM is therefore the logical choice which Nature evidently selected." "...the present invention relates to non invasive devices which emit magnetic pulses that can penetrate through and interact with biological materials and potentially all systems of the body in what is known as the ELF/VLF frequency range. These devices operate at low intensities, and except for the noted exceptions, without direct contact with the material affected. Through this effect, the present invention can enhance the ability of biologic systems toward a state of improved function in many areas of organic dysfunction." Later in the patent, it is stated, "The Soliton model of biological signalling becomes useful in describing the various conditions of bioelectromagnetic processing...Disruption or enhancement occurs because external signals transduced by the nonlinearities of the tissue form into Soliton-like waves. The waves, then, can modify and recohere processes which are too dispersive and hence reinforce normal neuronal or other signal paths. On the other hand, these waves, at other frequencies, wave forms, and intensities can increase dispersion and hence introduce disruption and biological damage in the system." There are 13 diagrams in this patent. The schematics included were sort of "generic" in that they did not have specific numerical values assigned to the components. I asked Chuck Allen of Tampa Bay Mensa if he could remedy this situation which he did very nicely in the two included diagrams. Note, the numbers in parentheses refer to the numbers on the original diagrams. By the way, Chuck tells me that there is no transmitter in this schematic; the desired effect is achieved by close proximity magnetic induction between the subject and apparatus. * * * * * ===================================================================== |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| || |||| | | | | | | | | | || ||| || || ||||| ||| | | ||||| || | | | | | | || |||| ||| ,,,,| || | ||||| || | ||| | ||| || ||||| |||| | ||| | | | | ||| | ||| || |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| || VERICOMM BBS 510.891.0303/MindNet : vericomm linex.com || |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| -- * * SearchNet HeadQuarters BBS 617-961-4865 or 508-586-6977 * Send a message to majordomo world.std.com * "subscribe snet-l your address" * "subscribe i_ufo-l your address" * "subscribe neotech your address" * "subscribe ruow your address" * SearchNet/Orvotron WWW HomePage * http://world.std.com/~snet/ * -> Send "subscribe i_ufo-l " to majordomo world.std.com -> Posted by: ladynada ix.netcom.com (LadyNada) -> Posted by: Len Bucuvalas From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 10:15:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA22224 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:14:59 -0800 Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA22168 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:14:46 -0800 Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA06112; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 13:12:55 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 13:11:06 EST From: Peter Unwin <100063.244 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Plasma & Ball lightning Message-ID: <951117181105_100063.244_EHK55-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frederick, How do you come to meet so many interesting people ? Hey... not a real whirling Wurlitzer you have at home is it ? I play a bit "by ear" as they say. Much influenced by Charlie Kunz and the days when as a lad I used to help my father put on the records and wind the gramophone when he gave film shows to wounded soldiers at one of the local hospitals in the last war. Ball-lightning is fascinating. I have traced references way-back, there is weather-lore relating to the number of balls clinging to a ships mast predicting how the wind will change. I'm told that it is seen quite often on oil-rigs. As far as I know, it originates where a sizable strike hits the ground or a chunk of metal. The ball seen by Jennison seemed to have no great external magnetic or electric field or it would not have floated smoothly past various objects in the way that was observed. This is why I suspect that true ball-lighting is an e.m. resonance as distinct from a plasma-ball supporting a circulating current. I will email Frank Z to learn what I can of his work. Meanwhile, If anyone else has any hard experience rather than just theory, I will be most interested to hear from them. For those interested in anomolous heat, we recently had a BBC program on one of the best and most widely experienced poltergeists of recent times that threw things at newspaper reporters, exorcists and just about anybody who chose to insult "it". Dozens of people experienced the events, collectively and individually. A guy from the Society of Psychophysical reasearch unit spent weeks with the family and identified the young girl linked to the events. He reported what he said was "normal"... on picking up the objects that had been flying around, they were hot to the touch. So what to believe ? I don't believe that mind can exist without brain or that a mischievous spirit threw things about. I might believe that this girl's brain subconciously contrived to throw things about in which case our understanding of physics has a long way to go. All I can say is that the program was convincing and that I for one keep an open mind on the so called laws of thermo-dynamics. A while after the program I mentioned that I wished I could (mildly) experience a poltergeist. Perhaps Uri geller heard me because shortly after, the door-bell kept ringing. Turned out to be a short somewhere... cured by removing the batteries Regards: Peter J. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 17:44:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA13516 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 09:52:06 -0800 Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA13460 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 09:51:49 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzqgt21868; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 12:50:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA17106; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 09:50:15 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 473649090095321FEPRI; 17 Nov 1995 09:49:09 PST Message-Id: Date: 17 Nov 1995 09:49:09 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Facts in our field. To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/17/95 09:49:35 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/17/95 06:19 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Facts in our field. Peter Gluck: Thanks for your insightful summary, and complementary comments. I too am delaying saying things on Piantelli, waiting for Gene's important comments to come out in the next IE. I do, however, have a couple insights I will share with you personally. Try MHUGO EPRI.EPRI.COM and see if you can get through. MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 17:45:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA19129 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 17:45:16 -0800 Received: from ddi.digital.net (ddi.digital.net [198.69.104.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA19093 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 17:45:12 -0800 Received: from [198.69.104.43] (pm8_7.digital.net [198.69.104.43]) by ddi.digital.net (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA16403 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 20:43:08 -0500 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 20:42:51 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tilleyrw digital.net (Robert Tilley) Subject: Re: vtx: Plasma & Ball lightning Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Frederick, >believe ? I don't believe that mind can exist without brain or that a >mischievous spirit threw things about. I might believe that this girl's brain You must live in a very ordinary world. What is your objection to a level of existence we do not know of yet? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | "Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, | | and why. Then do it." -- Lazarus Long | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | Robert Tilley || tilleyrw digital.net || "Once upon a time..." | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | **** -- ***** -| http://www.digital.net/~tilleyrw |- ***** -- **** | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 17:45:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA22316 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 12:49:23 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA22226 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 12:49:10 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA14746; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 15:47:34 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 15:19:35 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Plasma & Ball lightning Message-ID: <951117201935_102021.3045_EHT173-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Peter, You asked, > How do you come to meet so many interesting people?< I guess just plain common interests. The folks in this group are a prime example of that, without exception or I wouldn't be here. I'm not the socializing type, and definitely not a social climber. One of the most interesting couples I met recently was a young fellow maybe about 30ish and his very pregnant young wife, at an arts and crafts center in Albuquerque. We were discussing how difficult it was these days for a young couple to get an apartment with the deposits and so forth and I asked "where do you live?" The answer was"oh, we live in a tent, we come here to make ceramics and do artwork in hopes to get enough money to move into an apartment". Having arrived in this world about the time FDR took office,no electricity, no plumbing,no indoor priveys (to watch the coriolis effect as you flushed it), the big maple trees in the yard were cut for firewood, no antibiotics etc., I find it hard to believe that with the scientific-technology explosion we've had since then, that many are denied the basic necessities. Perhaps if history repeats itself and some of the scientific talent experiences some of this instead of their posh tax supported lifestyles these problems will be solved in a like manner. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 17:47:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA19759 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 12:43:00 -0800 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA19690 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 12:42:45 -0800 Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA27785; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 15:41:17 -0500 Date: 17 Nov 95 15:39:29 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Potapov Message-ID: <951117203928_100433.1541_BHG41-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: to:vortex I think that the general lack of excitement about Potapov's visit to the USA is caused by the constant re-scheduling of this visit. It was going to be July, then August, then September... Which is not to say that it has no significance if it eventually happens. There might be considerable gain. But that is for those of you in the USA. However, in my humble opinion it is the St Pete tests which have it. Here we have this fancy academic institute (very probably) about to report no over-unity. If Potapov or others see publicity given to this result as potentially damaging to their business, then they just might come in and help. It might even be that they don't *want* to help, because they know their help will have no effect! In the shoes of certain Russians, I would make it clear that failure to help might well be publicised in the same way, as being strongly indicative of the proposal that the thing doesn't work and never has. In this way, 'playing hardball' might have the effect of putting all our work and money to something of value - either way. But that is for those of you in the CIS. Here is my opinion. Since Potapov does not live by the system of 'implied warranty', then he owes us nothing - bizarre as that seems to us in the West. I happen to think that these customers of his are not so stoopid as to buy things that don't work and then come back for more. I also think that Potapov - honest or not - is impossible to deal with from our position. In Britspeak, he is 'a bloody nightmare'. Personally, I just do not see what more I can do in this matter. I would add that even if he does have the goods there are much better things now, much more worthwhile pursuing. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 18:10:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA26928 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 18:10:22 -0800 Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA26868 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 18:10:10 -0800 Received: from dialup-a16.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a16.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.16]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA07739 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 13:07:47 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511180207.NAA07739 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 13:11:31 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Peter's Yusmar concerns Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 16 Nov 95 at 22:48, William Beaty wrote: > Butting in here, I recall a mention in Mike Huffman's documents on the > Schaffer device of an unsettling anomaly. One where the water > temperature at the outlet of a home radiator was significantly higher > than the input water temp. If this was real, it implies that there may > after all be a need for long runs of tubing in the radiator section. The > assumption that the temperature rise occurs entirely within the Yusmar may > not be accurate. If it is not, then the radiators play an important part > in the effect. > > Does this sound like the usual excuse, "it didn't work, we must have set > it up wrong?" But I was under the impression that this was supposed to be > a guaranteed-working system totally built by the factory and not > significantly modified by the experimenters. Was the small radiator > installed by the Yusmar builders, or by the investigators in St. Pete? > This may sound a little potty, but here goes anyway. If it is indeed true that the effect increases with the size of the radiators, then perhaps this is because the radiators are made of iron. Iron will also absorb considerable amounts of hydrogen, so "maybe there is CF in the radiators...?" Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 20:11:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA07461 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 20:11:30 -0800 Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA07438 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 20:11:25 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzqii11809; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 23:11:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA11202; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 20:11:15 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 275609200095321FEPRI; 17 Nov 1995 20:09:20 PST Message-Id: Date: 17 Nov 1995 20:09:20 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: Facts in our field. To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/17/95 20:09:55 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/17/95 17:46 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: Facts in our field. Oh dear! As crazy as it may seem, maybe Horace is right! Potapov, crude, black iron pipe in old hot water heating systems, knocking off not just a little hematite into the flow...MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 22:15:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA19796 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 22:15:03 -0800 Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA19752 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 22:14:55 -0800 Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tGgXP-00059cC; Sat, 18 Nov 95 00:14 CST Message-Id: Subject: Re: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 00:14:07 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" In-Reply-To: <951117040447_102021.3045_EHT59-1 CompuServe.COM> from "Frederick J Sparber" at Nov 16, 95 11:04:48 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1039 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: F.J. Sparber writes: > Took two air dried common bricks, soaked one in tap water, put it in a > plastic freezer bag and microwaved for 1 min 45seconds. Too hot to hold. > Microwaved "dry" brick for same period, slightly warm. > > Is water taken up by bricks showing O-U when exposed to microwaves? Contrary to common belief, consumer grade microwave ovens run at too low a frequency to interact with the natural resonance of water molecules. Rather, microwave ovens heat by inducing electric currents in water which then experience the usual resistive losses. Bricks, on the otherhand, being generally non-conductive to electricity are not good candidates for heating in a microwave oven. But soak them with a little water and then electricty can flow. Ice is not as good a conductor as liquid water, so ice is hard to melt in a microwave oven. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 22:27:40 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA23717 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 22:27:39 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA23704 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 22:27:35 -0800 Received: from net-1-204.austin.eden.com (net-1-204.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.204]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id AAA02201 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 00:27:31 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 00:27:31 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511180627.AAA02201 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: rust in Potapov's water X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:09 PM 11/17/95 PST, Mark Hugo wrote: >Oh dear! As crazy as it may seem, maybe Horace is right! Potapov, crude, >black iron pipe in old hot water heating systems, knocking off not just >a little hematite into the flow...MDH I had a considerable amount of iron oxide in the water during my Yusmar tests. Portions of the device itself and some of my piping were uncoated steel. At elevated temperatures, it took only a short while for the water to become rather murky with a reddish color. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 17 22:33:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA25245 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 22:33:29 -0800 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA25194 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 22:33:19 -0800 Received: from net-1-204.austin.eden.com (net-1-204.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.204]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id AAA02387 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 00:33:15 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 00:33:15 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511180633.AAA02387 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: inconceivable behavior X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: It is virtually inconceivable that Potapov would not be willing to assist with the tests in St. Pete unless: 1. He is unaware of the tests and their audience. 2. He is a fraud. Peter, Robert, here is an important question: Do you know if Potapov is aware of the St. Pete tests? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 01:09:30 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA29863 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 01:09:13 -0800 Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA29855 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 01:09:07 -0800 Received: from dialup-a45.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a45.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.45]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA09303 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 20:05:56 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511180905.UAA09303 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 20:09:53 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Facts in our field. Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 17 Nov 95 at 7:55, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] > should automatically maintain a good suspention of the catalyst. The main > problem might be abrasion. However, lots of sites for bubble formation > might divert cavitation away from the walls of the device enough to > *reduce* wear and tear. > > I would suggest to anyone who has a cavitation device handy to try a little > powdered metal in the water. Why not use ultrasound induced cavitation, then abrasion wouldn't be a problem. I wonder if E-Quest have tried powdered metals? Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 05:52:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA10578 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 05:51:35 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA10566 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 05:51:30 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id IAA11313; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 08:50:12 -0500 Date: 18 Nov 95 08:49:24 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? Message-ID: <951118134923_102021.3045_EHT37-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 11/17/95 "John Logajan" wrote: > Contrary to common belief, consumer grade microwave ovens > run at too low a frequency to interact with > the natural resonance of water molecules. > > > Rather, microwave ovens heat by inducing electric currents > in water which then experience the usual > resistive losses. > > Bricks, on the otherhand, being generally non-conductive to electricity > are not good candidates for heating in a microwave oven. > But soak them with a little water > and then electricity can flow. > > Ice is not as good a conductor as liquid water > so ice is hard to melt in a microwave oven. Good points John, The standard frequency of 2.45 gigahertz (12.245 cm wavelength, I can't figure why that wavelength is called microwave) of microwave ovens,is well below the 60 gigahertz (0.5 cm) absorption or resonance frequency of water. Basically, the heat that is delivered is; W= frequency x dielectric constant x tangent loss factor. That is what is throwing me with the fall-off of heat rise in the beaker of water tests that followed the experiments with the bricks. I figured that there could be outgasing of the water on initial heating (maybe the dissolve gases catalyze the o-u effects?) the decrease in dielectric constant figures but it is not that large and should easily be offset by the increase in the tangent loss factor. I sure would like to see the water heating tests done carefully. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 07:29:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA27437 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 07:29:09 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA27428 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 07:29:07 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA18456; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 10:27:51 -0500 Date: 18 Nov 95 10:20:06 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Shaking The Piggy Bank Message-ID: <951118152006_102021.3045_EHT39-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In all of the "CF" or over unity (O-U) phenomena the common factor seems to be agitation of the atoms or molecules to get the heat out. Whether the energy is put there by primeval processes, ZPE, solar or candle light remains to be determined. So it comes down to getting the stored energy out in the most expedient manner. So far: 1, P&F, CETI and Piantelli, microbubbles on an interface and adsorption-absorption. 2, microcavitation 3, ultrasonic agitation 4, microwave agitation? 5, arcs and sparks 6, electrodeless discharges 7, high field corona discharges 8, supersonic steam jets 9, supersonic water jets 10, a hammer? Maybe the piggy bank is too full ! FJS From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 10:53:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA20794 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 10:53:14 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA20780 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 10:53:11 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id KAA14026; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 10:53:11 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 10:53:10 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? In-Reply-To: <951117040447_102021.3045_EHT59-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 16 Nov 1995, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > Took two air dried common bricks, soaked one in tap water, put it in a plastic > freezer bag and microwaved for 1 min 45seconds. Too hot to hold. > Microwaved "dry" brick for same period, slightly warm. > > Is water taken up by bricks showing O-U when exposed to microwaves? Another view: if the magnetron tends to put out a constant e-field, then items of various absorbtion will extract various power levels. So, a microwave doesn't put out constant power, even though it does have a maximum power ceiling. On your water test: interesting. But after years of watching the CF debate, I have to say with tounge in cheek, "but did he stir it!?" Also, you probably know that bodies of water are self-shielding, and only the outer inch or so (I've heard) is actually heated? It's a misconception that microwaves go all the way through foodstuffs. This only occurs if the item being heated is small. Also, the hotspots in the oven require that the location of the container of water be reproduced very exactly each time. I once saw (in The Physics Teacher magazine) a map made of the RF pattern in a microwave. The investigators made a stack of closely-spaced trays out of insulating material, layed cobalt-chloride-soaked paper towels on the trays, ran the oven long enough to dry about half of the towel area until it changed from pink to blue, then photographed the towels as crossectional maps of the radiation pattern. If anyone is REALLY interested I can go up in the attic and try to find that issue of TPT. A somewhat-control experiment would be to replace the water with vegetable oil. I think it heats pretty well because of dielectric losses. You'd of course have to stir it even more because of the increased viscosity. Does the oil have the same falloff in heating as does water? Would oil have a somewhat-equal dissolved gas content when compared with water? Or maybe try alcohol instead, the molecule size would be a closer match with water. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 11:05:37 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA24309 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 11:05:34 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA24286 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 11:05:30 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id LAA14812; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 11:05:28 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 11:05:28 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in Electrodeless Discharges? In-Reply-To: <199511170515.XAA19549 natashya.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: > A while back, we got excited about electrical discharges in water, mainly > due to Graneau's reports of apparently anomalous behavior therein... I just tracked down Graneau's son Neal (at Oxford.edu) and invited him to take a look at vortex-L. I don't know if he's interested in the same subjects as his father though. On this water thing: is everyone familiar with the flap about a year ago on newsgroups about an inventor having his o/u device bought by a Canadian company for commercial development? I think I have a file called "plasmafe.txt" somewhere about it. The basic idea was to generate steam by injecting water into an electrical arc. If I recall correctly, the claim was that the device was overunity, and if a tuned LC circuit was placed across the arc plasma, it would break into oscillation and more energy could be extracted from that circuit than was used to power the arc. Self-acting arc. Boy, if the energy source is ZPE, the peak power could be anything. Dangerous! Water plasma bombs. But if the energy source is metastable water, then the energy output could be easily regulated by regulating the water feed or the mix of new and condensed water. And speaking of weapons, should metastable water turn out to be real, I wonder if it's possible to trigger to dump its energy by exposing it to some low-energy catalyst. Feeble death-rays that cause explosions should they be directed at water bearing objects. Maybe there's a GOOD reason that the government (supposedly) doesn't want people to investigate free energy. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 12:24:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA19606 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 12:24:51 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA19597; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 12:24:49 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id MAA21891; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 12:24:48 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 12:24:47 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com cc: freenrg-list mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Interesting textfiles... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I just found a couple of good text files and placed them on Weird Science, under TEXT FILES... One link says "russian plasma arc", the other says "small CF explosion." Chris T., I think you were asking about the second one a few weeks back. I've tried contacting the author but without results plasmafe.txt Chernetski's self-acting plasma device. (NOT the one from the guy in canada, this one is at huge current levels and I think doesn't involve water. It accidentally blew up a megawatt power plant. plasbang.txt Report of a small explosion associated with D2O and ultrasonic cavitation. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 12:36:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA22937 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 12:36:06 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA22925 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 12:36:04 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id MAA23098; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 12:36:02 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 12:36:01 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Contact list for the group Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I'm going to assemble a list of vortex-L users and place it on the little vortex-L web page for our convenience. It won't be private, the world will be able to get to it, but it right now it is several levels deep within Weird Science, so I doubt there's much chance that cranks will start sending us hate mail. If desired, simply leave off your snailmail address, phone number, etc. For those with websites, I'll make this html and put links on the list. Anyone interested can send me something like the following, and I'll put it on that page: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Beaty Electrical engineer, programmer, science 7040 22nd Ave NW exhibit designer. Currently at Eaton/ Seattle, WA 98117 Cutler-Hammer Optoelectronics. Long time email: billb eskimo.com fascination with science teaching, hobby http://www.eskimo.com/~billb physics, and the damp, dark underbelly of phone: 206-781-3320 (USA) science from whence comes creativity, lists: vortex-L, freenrg-L crackpots, and earthshaking new discoveries. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 13:56:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA17104 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 13:56:49 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA17074 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 13:56:42 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.69]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA00935 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 15:14:18 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 12:58:04 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Facts in our field. Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >*** Reply to note of 11/17/95 17:46 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Re: vtx: Facts in our field. >Oh dear! As crazy as it may seem, maybe Horace is right! Potapov, crude, >black iron pipe in old hot water heating systems, knocking off not just >a little hematite into the flow...MDH Yes, it is possible lunatics can be right sometimes. Even a broken watch has the right time twice a day! The jury is still out on this one though. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 14:44:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA02752 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 14:44:17 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA02721 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 14:44:10 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.65]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA01085 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 16:01:49 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 13:45:34 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in Electrodeless Discharges? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: > >> A while back, we got excited about electrical discharges in water, mainly >> due to Graneau's reports of apparently anomalous behavior therein... > >I just tracked down Graneau's son Neal (at Oxford.edu) and invited him to >take a look at vortex-L. I don't know if he's interested in the same >subjects as his father though. > >On this water thing: is everyone familiar with the flap about a year ago >on newsgroups about an inventor having his o/u device bought by a Canadian >company for commercial development? I think I have a file called >"plasmafe.txt" somewhere about it. The basic idea was to generate steam >by injecting water into an electrical arc. If I recall correctly, the >claim was that the device was overunity, and if a tuned LC circuit was >placed across the arc plasma, it would break into oscillation and more >energy could be extracted from that circuit than was used to power the >arc. Self-acting arc. Boy, if the energy source is ZPE, the peak power >could be anything. Dangerous! Water plasma bombs. But if the energy >source is metastable water, then the energy output could be easily >regulated by regulating the water feed or the mix of new and condensed >water. > I would be very interrested in seeing that "plasmafe.txt" file. Also, IMHO, ZPE extraction must be difficult, and highly bounded, at best, due to the low energy situation that must be created to extract the energy. It is difficult to extract energy from a low energy situation. Maybe if we lived in a hotter universe it would be easier, but then maybe Plank's constant would have to be bigger and then we would not have the beautiful and somewhat predictable world we live in now. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 14:44:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA02752 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 14:44:17 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA02721 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 14:44:10 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.65]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA01085 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 16:01:49 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 13:45:34 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in Electrodeless Discharges? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: D >On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: > >> A while back, we got excited about electrical discharges in water, mainly >> due to Graneau's reports of apparently anomalous behavior therein... > >I just tracked down Graneau's son Neal (at Oxford.edu) and invited him to >take a look at vortex-L. I don't know if he's interested in the same >subjects as his father though. > >On this water thing: is everyone familiar with the flap about a year ago >on newsgroups about an inventor having his o/u device bought by a Canadian >company for commercial development? I think I have a file called >"plasmafe.txt" somewhere about it. The basic idea was to generate steam >by injecting water into an electrical arc. If I recall correctly, the >claim was that the device was overunity, and if a tuned LC circuit was >placed across the arc plasma, it would break into oscillation and more >energy could be extracted from that circuit than was used to power the >arc. Self-acting arc. Boy, if the energy source is ZPE, the peak power >could be anything. Dangerous! Water plasma bombs. But if the energy >source is metastable water, then the energy output could be easily >regulated by regulating the water feed or the mix of new and condensed >water. > I would be very interrested in seeing that "plasmafe.txt" file. Also, IMHO, ZPE extraction must be difficult, and highly bounded, at best, due to the low energy situation that must be created to extract the energy. It is difficult to extract energy from a low energy situation. Maybe if we lived in a hotter universe it would be easier, but then maybe Plank's constant would have to be bigger and then we would not have the beautiful and somewhat predictable world we live in now. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 15:10:29 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA10641 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 15:10:18 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA10588 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 15:10:10 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.65]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA01145 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 16:27:44 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 14:11:29 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] >Basically, the heat that is delivered is; W= frequency x dielectric constant x >tangent loss factor. > >That is what is throwing me with the fall-off of heat rise in the beaker of >water tests that followed the experiments with the bricks. A fall-off in heat rise is exactly what you would expect. As the water gets hotter, the bigger the temperature difference between the water and the beaker, thermometer, air, and microwave oven, so the more energy you lose out of the water through heat transfer. The water is absorbing almost all the microwave energy, while the environment remains cool due to the fan blown air carrying the heat away. The outside surface of the brick acts as a thermal insulator, plus the brick has a low specific heat, so the internal (just subsurface) temperature of the brick rises much faster than the temperature of water does for a given amount of microwave absobtion. Water in the beaker has a high specfic heat, and large thermal mass, and can, by convection, quickly distribute or lose what heat it gains from the microwaves, while the water in the brick is locked in place, holding the heat, and has a smaller thermal mass to absorb the same amount of micorwave energy, giving it a higher temperature. > >I figured that there could be outgasing of the water on initial heating (maybe >the dissolve gases catalyze the o-u effects?) the decrease in dielectric >constant figures but it is not that large and should easily be offset by the >increase in the tangent loss factor. > >I sure would like to see the water heating tests done carefully. > >Regards, Frederick Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 15:18:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA13054 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 15:17:58 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA13010 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 15:17:49 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA27147; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 18:16:29 -0500 Date: 18 Nov 95 18:15:48 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Inconceivable behaviour Message-ID: <951118231548_100433.1541_BHG41-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Scott, "It is virtually inconceivable that Potapov would not be willing to assist with the tests in St. Pete unless: 1. He is unaware of the tests and their audience. 2. He is a fraud." These are by no means unreasonable conclusions. However, I don't think this audience would be regarded by a Moldovan businessman as a threat to his operations. It reminds me of a Welsh village I know. One house was heavily decorated with posters denouncing the window company which had fitted it with new windows. Just down the road, a shop had a large printed list in its window, headed, "The Following Accounts Are Seriously In Arrears". One couple who had arrived to start a new business were asked by a waitress in a cafe how they were going to manage that with only five thousand in their bank account.... But what can we do? "Peter, Robert, here is an important question: Do you know if Potapov is aware of the St. Pete tests?" Excellent questions. I'd love to know the answers. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 17:02:51 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA13008 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 17:02:49 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (bilb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA13002 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 17:02:47 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id RAA24157; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 17:02:45 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 17:02:42 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: Re[2]: fnrg: Hooray! Free patent search! (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I thought the Vortex-L USA people might find the service mentioned below to be useful. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 17 Nov 95 13:00:01 EST From: Gary Steckly To: freenrg-list eskimo.com Subject: Re: Re[2]: fnrg: Hooray! Free patent search! Regarding Bill Beaty's note where he said (in part): >The patent search is now on the USPTO top page, a few screens down, next >to a link for patents involving AIDS research. > If you want to go directly to the site that maintains the USPTO search facility, the URL is: http://patents.cnidr.org:4242/ It works pretty well. Especially if used in conjunction with some of the commercial electronic services for delivering the complete patents via the net, once you know the patent number. For example, I recently subscribed to a service that will deliver the entire patent at 25 cents a page via the net. They also allow you to download for free a copy of the first page of any patent, just so can be certain that it is in fact the one you want before you pay up. Their archives currently go back to 1974. They use some proprietary software called "PatentImage Viewer" , which is distributed for free, that employs CCITT group 4 compression, so you get a great resolution image that doesn't take a lot of storage space or net bandwidth for transmission. If anyone is interested, check out this url: http://www.micropat.com/ regards Gary From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 18 17:50:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA25703 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 17:50:50 -0800 Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA25692 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 17:50:47 -0800 Received: from 204.111.1.71 (eb1ppp7.shentel.net [204.111.1.71]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id UAA15436 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 1995 20:52:12 -0500 Message-Id: <199511190152.UAA15436 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 19 Nov 95 20:52:20 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: Inconceivable behaviour To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <951118231548_100433.1541_BHG41-1 CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortex: In oder to answer Chris I need to offer a little history. This Odyssey for me began when I first agreed to contact Potapov and get information about the Yusmar. In speaking with him he first agreed to sell me a Yusmar for a test. When I sent my Associate in Kishinev to buy the Yusmar Potapov would not sell him one, but instead said that he must buy 10 units. I agreed to finance the purchase of ten units at which point my Associate found Potapov unwilling to sell the ten units. I even agreed to pay the price of ten Yusmars for a single unit. Dead end Kishinev. Later I spoke with Associates in Moscow and they agreed to try and purchase a unit through connections in Kishinev. In trying to locate Potapov in government records they found the wrong Yuri Potapov and reported that "Yuri was near death!" So much for the best of the Soviet intelligence community. I then fell back to my Associates in the Russian scientific community who were told by Potapov that they could get a sample Yusmar from his Moscow partners. I agreed to "rent" this Yusmar from the group for an amount many times the asking price of the Yusmar in order to deliver on my promise to Chris. My Associates were promised that this was a unit that was know to work to published specifications. I also agreed to finance the test of the Yusmar in St.Petersburg and assist Chris in anyway that I could. Most of the leg work in St.Petersburge was carried out by my true friend and Associate Volodya. Volodya is one of the finest people one could hope to meet. To return to the point of this, I asked that Yuri Potapov be invited to the test. The result of this invitation is unknown to me. I should also point out that the reason I invited Chris to St.Pete in the first place was on information that a test was about to begin on a Yusmar that already existed in that beautiful and somewhat run down city. I was then told that the Yumar did not exist. Now if the Yusmar ever existed there, or if the owners were just not willing to have their research become public knowledge, I just do not know. A small comment: Over the last dozen years or so I have arrange for government representatives, actors, musicians, doctors and many others to visit the now former Soviet Union. No one has ever treated my Associates with more respect and acted with more understanding than Chris. It has been a pleasure to work with this person. Now please understand that I only write much of this because of certain comments on the St.Pete test. Having asked no money and having repaid or offered to repay everyone taking part in this test, I see no reason for anyone except Chris to possibly complain. So far the amount for the test has totaled many thousands of dollars and the bill is still rising. I, more than anyone would like to see something useful to come from this. I have a great deal information collected on the Yumar and other Vortex devices. Hopes are that more will soon be obtained. Much of the information collected and all that is being collected from the test in St.Pete is or will be open to the Vortex group. Robert From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 19 01:34:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA22091 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 01:34:22 -0800 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA22081 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 01:34:19 -0800 Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA07748; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 04:33:02 -0500 Date: 19 Nov 95 04:30:07 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Inconceivable behaviour Message-ID: <951119093006_100433.1541_BHG41-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Dear Robert, Thanks for the clarification on all this, and I hope your message will remove a lot of the (perhaps understandable) confusion here. As to Volodya, Sasha-the-sculptor and the rest - no praise is too high. Volodya is an astonishing combination of tenacity, overwork, and sheer huge intellect. Not to mention his being willing to babysit an innocent Brit in Big Bad St Petersburg! As I said, a man who will *never* take 'nyet' for an answer. He makes a superb cup of tea, too. I trust I'll get the chance to meet up with him again before long, meanwhile I must send him copies of the photos I took. Regards and thanks, Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 19 05:40:40 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id FAA21315 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 05:40:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA21307 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 05:40:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id IAA27102; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 08:39:18 -0500 Date: 19 Nov 95 08:34:51 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Copy of: vtx: Plasma & Ball lightning Message-ID: <951119133451_102021.3045_EHT59-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: FROM: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 TO: Peter Unwin, INTERNET:100063.244 compuserve.com DATE: 11/19/95 6:39 AM Re: Copy of: vtx: Plasma & Ball lightning Peter John, > How do you come to meet so many interesting people?< Just a gravitation of common interests, I guess. This group is a good example. > Ball-lightning is fascinating. > I have traced references way-back, there is weather lore > relating to the number of balls clinging to a ships mast > predicting how the wind will change. I will add based on a fishing boat experience that I had several years ago, that there were a lot of sailors clinging to their balls also. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 19 08:28:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA19601 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 08:27:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail02.mail.aol.com (mail02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.66]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA19591 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 08:27:55 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail02.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA01463 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 11:26:38 -0500 Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 11:26:38 -0500 Message-ID: <951119112637_27344487 mail02.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Does Potapov know? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott writes: >It is virtually inconceivable that Potapov would not be >willing to assist >with the tests in St. Pete unless: >1. He is unaware of the tests and their audience. >2. He is a fraud. >Peter, Robert, here is an important question: >Do you know if Potapov is aware of the St. Pete tests? Good question, Scott, why is it so hard to get it answered? You've asked it many times before. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 19 12:02:00 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA13700 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 12:01:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA13680 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 12:01:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-3-019.austin.eden.com (net-3-019.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.19]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id OAA07376 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 14:01:48 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 14:01:48 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511192001.OAA07376 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: thanks Robert of Visor X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Many thanks for the history of your sponsorship of the St. Pete tests, Robert. You are to be commended for a very generous contribution to the energy campaign. You mentioned requesting that Potapov be invited to the tests. That is good. Would you please follow up on that request and let us know the situation? Thanks. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 19 13:28:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA08971 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 13:28:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA08947 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 13:28:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.80 (eb1ppp16.shentel.net [204.111.1.80]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id QAA20700 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 16:29:39 -0500 Message-Id: <199511192129.QAA20700 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 20 Nov 95 16:31:07 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: thanks Robert of Visor To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <199511192001.OAA07376 natashya.eden.com> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Scott, I would be happy for Yuri Potapov to come to what is left of this test or to cooperate in future tests. If anyone on the net speaks to him, "PLEASE" tell him that he is welcome. I know that I can be of little help toward his commercial progress, but would be happy to offer him any other help that my Associates or I can. Robert From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 19 19:13:17 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA21900 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 19:13:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA21871 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 19:13:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-3-019.austin.eden.com (net-2-128.austin.eden.com [204.177.170.128]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id VAA21755 for ; Sun, 19 Nov 1995 21:12:50 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 21:12:50 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511200312.VAA21755 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: Peter, you're closest X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert of Visor wrote: >I would be happy for Yuri Potapov to come to what is left of this test or >to cooperate in future tests. If anyone on the net speaks to him, "PLEASE" >tell him that he is welcome. Peter, can you try to contact Dr. P for us? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 01:01:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id BAA18440 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 01:01:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA18072 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 00:59:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tHS26-000MNmC; Mon, 20 Nov 95 10:56 EET Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 10:56:58 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends, Scott, Robert, I will try to get in touch with Yuri today by fax and phone and get the necessary info for you. Mark, As requested, I have tried to send you a direct message. Chris, It is possible that the YUSMAR is overunity; it is also possible that the YUSMAR is not overunity, but it is definitely not possible that the YUSMAR is both overunity and underunity in the same time and all the time. I suppose the best solution for our group is to discuss with Potapov, there are great chances that he knows the answer which is yes or no, tertium non datur. To All, My message re. "Facts of our Field" was focused on prediction in order to demonstrate that my theory is first rate. ("A first rate theory predicts, a second rate theory forbids, a third rate theory explains after the event" (A. I Kitaigorodski)). This focusing could give the impression that I dogmatically claim the absolute value of the "number of active sites present" as the unique factor determining the productivity and technological future of a given system/device. However, I am well aware of the existence of many kinds of catalytic centres, diferentiated both as structure and as dynamic functionality. For example Pd born and Ni born centers are unlike..see e.g. Storms' two reviews published in 1995. Our field is immensely complex..and that's fine! My duty is now to continuously improve the explanatory power of the theory and to demonstrate in practice its generative capacity. Your help is welcome. Peter From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 02:58:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id CAA04614 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 02:58:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from escape.com (escape.com [198.6.71.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA04607; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 02:58:23 -0800 (PST) Received: (from chope localhost) by escape.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id FAA18379; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 05:58:10 -0500 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 05:58:10 -0500 (EST) From: Charles Hope To: Vortex Discussion List cc: Free Energy Discussion List Subject: vtx: Server crashed; bead on wire; TT Brown Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: My Internet provider went and crashed hard, bouncing mail all around for a while. Then it stored some up so I was faced with megabytes greeting me when the doors finally opened. My apologies to those with whom I was corresponding. If these messages are archived immediately I can certainly refer to what I missed to pick up the threads where they left. In any case, if there was any response to the bead-on-wire example of why solid grounding in the concepts of physics is necessary, I'm available for discussion. This assumes, of course, that the original message actually made it out of my system! I find this T. T. Brown interest most exciting! I have been theorizing about the phenomenon for years now, and I've wanted to experiment many times but lacked experience with high voltage, or a reliable partner with same. So far as I can tell, none of you are in the greater New York metro area. I did see the address of a Gerry V. of Staten Island float by as a contact. What sort of research does he do, or does he simply sell videotapes? Is he net-less? In honor of the efforts being made here, I will dig out my old notes and see what I was thinking. I do recall, however, that my approach was more basic. I did not concern myself with the acquisition of special materials. I was focused on testing the cause of the effect: ion wind, or what? For this, not much voltage is needed; only (!) about 20KV, I guesstimated. This would be driving an object of little mass. The baggie idea is good; I was not convinced by my theoretical considerations that an ion wind effect would decrease as the gas pressure decreased, until of course a state of virtual evacuation existed. There is a time delay noted in Brown's early writings, which is entirely consistent with and suggestive of the buildup of charged gases, as I remember. Even a very crude theoretical treatment of the forces imposed by an ion wind setup was sobering. The existing theory was gapingly incomplete when I researched this (1994). I am not surprised, therefore, that people could for decades be mystified by an effect that, in my opinion, really will turn out to be ion wind. However, I would be willing to delve back into that morass of guesses and approximations as part of a distributed research effort. Assuming it to be ion wind doesn't satisfy my craving to, at long last, debunk or verify this most venerable of mysteries. Charles From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 04:54:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id EAA20091 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 04:54:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA20078 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 04:54:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA06740; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 07:53:26 -0500 Date: 20 Nov 95 07:50:12 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: ZPE, Specific Heat & Lattice Vibrations? Message-ID: <951120125011_102021.3045_EHT62-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In solid state physics literature, there is reference made to ZPE vibrations of the lattice and the Einstein-Debye characteristic temperatures that prevail even under absolute zero experimental conditions. The Debye characteristic temperatures for a few solids in degrees Kelvin: Be 1000 Ti 380 B 1250 Fe 420 C 1860 Co 385 H ? Ni 375 Pd 275 It would seem that when hydrogen goes into "solution" in the metals or combines with oxygen or nitrogen as in water and ammonia etc., these "ZPE oscillators" should dump energy thus acting as a delivery system for vacuum energy. FJS From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 06:29:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA10287 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 06:29:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA10241 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 06:28:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.66] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id HAA05085 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 07:47:04 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 05:30:10 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: ZPE, Specific Heat & Lattice Vibrations? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >In solid state physics literature, there is reference made to ZPE vibrations of >the lattice and the Einstein-Debye characteristic temperatures that >prevail even >under absolute zero experimental conditions. > >The Debye characteristic temperatures for a few solids in degrees Kelvin: > >Be 1000 Ti 380 > >B 1250 Fe 420 > >C 1860 Co 385 > >H ? Ni 375 > > Pd 275 > >It would seem that when hydrogen goes into "solution" in the metals or combines >with oxygen or nitrogen as in water and ammonia etc., these "ZPE oscillators" >should dump energy thus acting as a delivery system for vacuum energy. > >FJS Being a novice, I am probably missing the point here, but isn't the Debye temperature, i.e. "theta sub D", just a constant used to compare to actual temperature for purposes of calculating the specific heat of substances? If temperature T is less than the debye temperture D then a good appx. is: C_v = (12/5)R(pi^4)(T/D)^3 This only talks about specific heat, not temperature or energy. It doesn't imply, for example, that Pd left alone in a dark vacuum will heat up to or maintain 275 K. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 06:50:55 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA15941 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 06:50:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mbunix.mitre.org (mbunix.mitre.org [129.83.20.100]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA15901 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 06:50:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from spectre.mitre.org (spectre.mitre.org [129.83.61.124]) by mbunix.mitre.org (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA07330 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 09:50:37 -0500 Received: from localhost (eachus localhost) by spectre.mitre.org (8.6.4/8.6.4) id JAA20147; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 09:50:36 -0500 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 09:50:36 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199511201450.JAA20147 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: (jlogajan@mirage.skypoint.com) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U, Wet Bricks? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "John Logajan" said: > Contrary to common belief, consumer grade microwave ovens run at too low > a frequency to interact with the natural resonance of water molecules. All the ones I have had were tuned to the O-H bond resonance. (Actually slightly off to get penetration into bulk foods.) This is in a wavelength around one foot, and is in the range where magnetrons work best, so I don't know why any manufacturer would choose a different frequency. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 22:05:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA01601 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 13:18:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA01449 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 13:17:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.64] ([204.57.193.64]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA06075 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 14:32:45 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 12:15:45 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: zpesignature Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A totally wild, luniacal, but cheap, idea just occurred to me. Normally, I wouldn't say anything about it, but here in Bill Beatty's wonderful world of the underbelly of science, why not? Some useful information might possibly be provided to cavitation device experimenters (by removing phospor powder from flourescent lights) and putting phosphors into the cavitation fluid. By placing a window on the device, or building a transparent casing, it might be possible, in the dark, to directly see where the effect is occuring or measure it. With stirring to maintain phosphor suspention, such a technique might even work in a typical CF cell. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 22:07:47 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA06460 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 10:48:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail06.mail.aol.com (mail06.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.108]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA06335 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 10:48:24 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA16875 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 13:47:03 -0500 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 13:47:03 -0500 Message-ID: <951120134659_111782761 mail06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Server crashed; bead on wire; TT Brown Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Charles Hope writes of his interest in the T.T. Brown history. Personally, I'm down on it now, 'though having been up on it for awhile. The best case (to rule out ion wind effect) was an experiment he did in France wherein the electrode pairs, at the ends of a crosspiece swivelling at a midpoint, were ech encased in a glass bulb. Thus, no connection to the outer world to transfer ion wind. He reported that it worked. Being such a good case, we reproduced it here with aa truly good experimental setup and got nada. R. L. Talley of Veritay Technology, 4845 Millersport Hwy, East Amherst, NY 14051, then reproduced in in 1990 for an Air Force contract. He also got no positive results. Both Talley and I used voltages up into roughly 20 kV. One loophole not yet close (and so perhaps the T. T. Brown is not completely dead) is that Brown got his results at higher voltages, a few kV. So a true replication would require getting up there, which is difficult to do on a casual basis. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 22:08:17 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA23825 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 12:58:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA23726 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 12:58:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.64] ([204.57.193.64]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA06033 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 14:15:04 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 11:58:10 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: zpesignature Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A somewhat belated reply to: > >Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 15:07:09 -0500 >From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com >To: p8156 memo.gpuc.com >Cc: CldFusion aol.com, david@vesicle.ibg.uu.se, Puthoff@aol.com >Subject: zpesignature > > > I have been struggling for some time to come up with a signature > for ZPE. I think I have finally came up with something. The > equations of energy transfer involved with ZPE are symmetrical > and reversible. The equations involved with a fusion reaction ^^^^^^^^^^ > are not. Fusion reactions produce an irreversible jump in the > entropy of the system. Using the reasoning posted in sci.physics.fusion, in the "sub-orbital hypothesis" (I hope this doesn't hang up the email server so I'll call it the SO hypothesis, or SOH) the situation where an electron has sufficient energy to descend a coulomb well but then on close approach to the nucleus emits a photon with sufficient energy that the electron does not have enough energy to climb back out of the well, the situation is non-symmetrical. Only ZPE or a collision with another particle can then raise the electron out of the well. Based on the Rydberg electron experimental results discussed in the SOH, it is reasonable to suspect a signature of ZPE effects to be manifest when stimulating a gas with low energy electrons in a magnetic field. This can be done by using a low voltage arc. By the SOH, the signature would be soft xrays, which would not normally be expected from low voltage electron-nucleus collisions. The main difficulty would lie in detecting the low energy xrays. Does anyone know of an inexpensive electronic soft xray probe, or an easy way to make one? I know some dentists are now using ccd's to replace dental film, and using much lower xray exposures. It seems like a simple probe should be available cheaply. I suppose film under foil is a possibliity, but it would make obtaining a quantified plot of xray intensity vs. magnetic field strength tedious at best, and would make use in a vacuum, or in high temperature or corrosive conditions difficult also. If the SOH is valid, an xray probe could be used to adjust magnetic field strength, etc. in a prototype device, to tune for optimum over unity effect by maximizing the xray energy emitted, or possibly to trigger other events when a CF device "turns on". Such a probe would have to be impervious to or calibrate to or otherwise permit a way to compense for magnetic field effects. One possibility for making a probe that occurred to me is coating an optical fiber tip with a phosphor, and then depositing a gold film at a thickness that prevents light from entering. An xray transparent coating would be better than gold, but not as resilient. Any suggestions? For a low budget amateur like me, calibration would be a problem, as would the gold deposition, building a photomultiplyer, ect. Hopefully, there is some kind of xray probe commercially available. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 22:22:37 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA27319 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 22:22:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from escape.com (escape.com [198.6.71.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA27265 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 22:21:59 -0800 (PST) Received: (from chope localhost) by escape.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id BAA21669; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 01:21:43 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 01:21:42 -0500 (EST) From: Charles Hope To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Server crashed; bead on wire; TT Brown In-Reply-To: <951120134659_111782761 mail06.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 20 Nov 1995 Puthoff aol.com wrote: > Charles Hope writes of his interest in the T.T. Brown history. > > Personally, I'm down on it now, 'though having been up on it for awhile. The > best case (to rule out ion wind effect) was an experiment he did in France > wherein the electrode pairs, at the ends of a crosspiece swivelling at a > midpoint, were ech encased in a glass bulb. Thus, no connection to the outer > world to transfer ion wind. He reported that it worked. Being such a good > case, we reproduced it here with aa truly good experimental setup and got > nada. > > R. L. Talley of Veritay Technology, 4845 Millersport Hwy, East Amherst, NY > 14051, then reproduced in in 1990 for an Air Force contract. He also got no > positive results. > I'd like to see these two reports made available as links from Bill's web pages. There is a great dearth of solid information on experiments done with the Biefeld Brown experiment. I find this very frustrating. I went through my old notes last night and saw that I had decided upon a very simple apparatus: two metal objects suspended in Nitrogen gas, each oppositely charged. Nitrogen gas, because the ion mobility curves I had access to really were not worked out for air but for certain elemental gases, and N is the closest to air. I had drawn sketches of shields enclosing the objects to trap ion wind from escaping. > > Hal Puthoff > Charles From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 20 23:38:47 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA17653 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 23:38:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA17589 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 23:38:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.75] ([204.57.193.75]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA08075 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 00:57:02 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 22:39:52 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Server crashed; bead on wire; TT Brown Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Charles Hope writes of his interest in the T.T. Brown history. > >Personally, I'm down on it now, 'though having been up on it for awhile. The >best case (to rule out ion wind effect) was an experiment he did in France >wherein the electrode pairs, at the ends of a crosspiece swivelling at a >midpoint, were ech encased in a glass bulb. Thus, no connection to the outer >world to transfer ion wind. He reported that it worked. Being such a good >case, we reproduced it here with aa truly good experimental setup and got >nada. > >R. L. Talley of Veritay Technology, 4845 Millersport Hwy, East Amherst, NY > 14051, then reproduced in in 1990 for an Air Force contract. He also got no >positive results. > >Both Talley and I used voltages up into roughly 20 kV. One loophole not yet >close (and so perhaps the T. T. Brown is not completely dead) is that Brown >got his results at higher voltages, a few kV. So a true replication would >require getting up there, which is difficult to do on a casual basis. > >Hal Puthoff If you don't need highly regulated DC you might be able to use a 15KV neon sign transformer (I recently bought a 60 mA one for $75 used, was $225 new), two homemade capacitors, four 20 kV 120 mA diodes, and a nifty voltage doubler circuit to get up to 30kV. The diodes can be had for about $4 a piece. The only problem is neon sign transformers are center tapped so the output maintains a 30kV differential, but "float" 7500 V absolute. This kind of circuit is very useful for charging big 30KV capacitors in parallel prior to series discharging for big HV pulses. Other circuits requiring more diodes and capacitors but resulting in stable voltages and one grounded lead are also available. Commercially produced diode/capacitor stacks are also available up to 100 kV. You are probably aware of all this, but I though it might be worth posting in case there may be someone who has an interest. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 21 00:23:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA26849 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 00:23:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA26842 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 00:23:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA11084; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 03:22:03 -0500 Date: 21 Nov 95 03:19:32 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: ZPE Pumped Lattice Heat? Message-ID: <951121081931_102021.3045_EHT44-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If the ZPE pumping is occurring in the hydrogen-metal lattice, at a Debye temperature of 100 deg K with a hydrogen loading of 0.8 the energy yield could be: 1.38 x 10^-23 x 100 K x 1/1.66 x 10^-24 x 59 x 0.8 = 10.08 joules/gram for nickel. FJS From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 21 05:19:46 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id FAA25163 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 05:19:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA24960 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 05:18:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tHsaa-000MNXC; Tue, 21 Nov 95 15:18 EET Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 15:18:20 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: vtx: Potapov's travel Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Re: Dr. Yuri Potapov's US travel. I wrote a fax to Yuri and after many trials we succeeded to send it: Dear Yuri Semionovich, I hope that everything is OK with your USA travel and it will go as planned. Many American friends: scientists, journalists and Capitali$t$ want get in touch with you, to discuss, to participate at conferences and demonstrations. Which is the route of your travel where, when and how can they find you? Please send the necessary informations and your requests. I have asked him up-to-date informations about the Yusmar and his other devices. After sending the fax we discussed by phone and Yuri told that the schedule of his visit, conferences, committee of experts which will analyze his devices, the press are all OK and he will send me the exact program coordinates by fax. As soon I receive it, I'll translate it and send it to the group. That's all for today, Peter From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 21 06:32:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA11228 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 06:26:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA11163 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 06:26:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA08941 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:26:06 -0500 Message-Id: <199511211426.AA08941 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:26:06 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: zpesi Date: Tue, 21 Nov 95 09:25:27 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: H Heffner that's how beta's are detected. A cocktail is made up of a phosperescent organic material and water. Flashes are looked for in the solution. That's how the low level beta's of produced by a solution of trintium and water are detected. By a scintillation counter of this sort. Frank Znidarsic -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 12:15:45 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: zpesignature Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com A totally wild, luniacal, but cheap, idea just occurred to me. Normally, I wouldn't say anything about it, but here in Bill Beatty's wonderful world of the underbelly of science, why not? Some useful information might possibly be provided to cavitation device experimenters (by removing phospor powder from flourescent lights) and putting phosphors into the cavitation fluid. By placing a window on the device, or building a transparent casing, it might be possible, in the dark, to directly see where the effect is occuring or measure it. With stirring to maintain phosphor suspention, such a technique might even work in a typical CF cell. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 21 08:05:55 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA12690 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 08:05:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA12642 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 08:05:30 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA28244 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 11:04:07 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 11:04:07 -0500 Message-ID: <951121110406_112772075 emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Server crashed; bead on wire; TT Brown Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In my previous posting concerning the T T Brown experiments, I had a typo where I said there was a remaining loophole as to why we and others had not totally replicated the original conditions. In my posting I said, unlike our 20 kV experiments, Brown went up to a "few kV" which should have been a "few hundred kV." Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 21 10:09:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA26043 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 10:08:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA25920 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 10:08:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.65] ([204.57.193.65]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA09118 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 11:26:44 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:09:23 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: zpesi Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >H Heffner that's how beta's are detected. A cocktail is made up of a >phosperescent organic material and water. Flashes are looked for in the >solution. That's how the low level beta's of produced by a solution of >trintium and water are detected. By a scintillation counter of this sort. >Frank Znidarsic > -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > Yes, I have actually used the liquid scintillation technique for tritium measurements. It requires nasty chemicals though, unless there have been some big advances in the last 30 years, which is a very good possibility! It is increadably accurate for very small samples. However, there are several differences in this application. One is that most of the energy, by my hypothesis, will be in the under 10keV range. Liquid scintillation techniques work best in the 20keV range. Most of the conversion of the 20keV beta energy goes to uv light, which can not make it through water. For this reason, every effort is made to keep the percentage of water in the sample as low as possible, usually less than 1 percent. Another reason is that, while betas are necessary to initate the ZPE coupling by my hypothesis, the output energy is in the form of low voltage xrays, most of the resulting spectrum being in the less than 10keV range. The xray penetration in water would be in the micron range. Direct contact of the phosphorescent with the active site is essential. There may be some phosphate solutes that would be useful. Lithium phosphate comes to mind, but I don't know it's reponse to xrays. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 21 17:45:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA22487 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 11:20:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from halcyon.com (coho.halcyon.com [198.137.231.21]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA22369; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 11:20:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by halcyon.com id AA19230 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Tue, 21 Nov 1995 11:18:39 -0800 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 11:18:38 -0800 (PST) From: "Eaton/Cutler-Hammer Corp." To: vortex-L eskimo.com Cc: freenrg-list eskimo.com Subject: vtx: old 'steam table' message Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Remember this (below) from last December? Fred Sparber microwave oven experiment suggests that the boil/condense cycle mentioned below isn't needed, and that new water must be used each time or the "loop" will close and o/u will not be displayed. (Actually, in his phone conversation with me on Saturday he mentioned that the water seems to "recharge" overnight, so it again displays more temp. rise on the first cycle of heating.) ===================================+================================== Bill Beaty Design Engineer Eaton/Cutler-Hammer Corp. Industrial Optoelectronics 720 80th St. SW voice: 1-800-426-9184 Everett, WA 98203-6299 fax: 1-206-347-0544 From: mdudley brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY) Subject: Another theory for Griggs device Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 12:14 -0500 (EST) In a previous post I hinted at another possibility of what may be happening in the Griggs device when I mentioned "non-linearities in the steam table" as one of several things that should be looked at. Since I did not get any bites on that, let me outline a discussion I had with a scientist from Oak Ridge National Labs about the Griggs device several months ago. This dicsussion is off the record, and most likely will not be collaborated, just as some of the results of their CF cell experiments are. I had an occasion to meet with this person and begun describing the Griggs device to him. After telling him how it worked I ended it with, "and it is reported to produce more steam or hot water than then the input power should produce". His response was "that's not surprising". I was almost floored. He then told me that is is a fairly well known fact among some researchers that the published steam tables are wrong. The original team which made up the steam tables found that toward the extremes (high pressure high temperature and low pressure and temperature) there are unexplained non-linearities. Since these non-linearities could not be explained, and were shown to not obey the conservation of energy, they fudged the tables to get rid of the non-linearities. They had assumed that there must be an error in their measurements or equipment since it did not jive with theory. Since then others have found the same thing, but none of them will stick their neck out to declare that steam tables which have been in use for decades are wrong, especially since there seems to be no theory to explain these non-linearities. Anyway, he said that if you go through a cycle of vaporization at one pressure and condensation at a higher pressure and temperature, when you get back to the original temperature and pressure the "corrected" steam table does not close. That is to say accoring to the measurements there is steam left over which should not be there, and by conservation of energy cannot be there. Anyway, he said that it seems that such a device such as Griggs would enhance this non-linearity effect and therefore produce more energy than is supplied. He does not have the foggiest idea where the excess energy could come from, but simply that given what he knows about the non-linearities in the (corrected) steam tables, that seems like a good place to start looking. I find the idea intriguing, but as with so many other theories, it leaves one with as many questions as it gives answers. Marshall From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 21 17:45:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA07749 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 12:01:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA07649 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 12:00:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-147.austin.eden.com (net-1-147.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.147]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id OAA14035 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 14:00:27 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 14:00:27 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511212000.OAA14035 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: hydrogen-metal report #1 X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: H-metal experiment - Vortex-L Progress Report #1 21NOV95 Scott Little & Hal Puthoff, EarthTech International We are attempting to measure excess heat in a metal rod exposed to hydrogen gas at specific pressures and temperatures. A number of researchers have reported varying degrees of success in experiments that fall into this broad category. Apparatus A Ni rod .25" in diameter and 3.59" long is mounted by a stud (threaded into one end of the rod) to one end-cap of a brass chamber whose interior dimensions are 4.5" long by 1.37" in diameter. A chromel-alumel thermocouple fused into the end of a piece of thin-walled 0.059" dia SS304 hypodermic tubing is mounted in the other chamber end-cap and arranged so that it slides into a close-fitting axial hole in the free end of the Ni rod when the chamber is assembled. This thermocouple senses the rod temperature. A coil with an inside diameter of .30", outside diameter of .60" and length of 3.59" surrounds the Ni rod and is mounted to the other chamber end cap with a low thermal conductivity stainless steel bracket. The coil is wound with about 3850 turns of 30ga Cu wire and has a room temperature resistance of about 52 ohms. The coil is impregnated with a high-temperature epoxy which can stand 250 degrees C continuously. Coil power is fed into the chamber through epoxy-sealed feedthroughs. The chamber end caps are sealed with Viton O- rings. A 1/8" OD Cu tube emerges from one end cap and leads out to a gas-vacuum manifold which has a Bourdon-tube vacuum gauge that reads in inches of Hg. Clamped to the exterior of this brass chamber is a 50 watt strip heater which serves as a balance heater for null-balance calorimetry (thanks Bill Page et al). The chamber assembly is supported on thin wooden V-blocks near the center of an ordinary cardboard box that is 10" x 10" x 12". Also in the box is a 4" DC muffin fan that nominally draws 12v at .24a and another chromel-alumel thermocouple to sense the air temperature in the box. The fan blows directly on the brass chamber and the thermocouple is located behind the fan where it senses the temperature of the air returning to the fan after it has passed over the brass chamber and swirled around the box a while. Operation For the initial search for evidence of excess heat, null balance calorimetry is not being employed because of its requirement for constant monitoring. All data outputs and controls are presently manual (i.e. not computerized) so we are simply using a Newton's Law of Cooling approach to the calorimetry. If signs of excess heat are detected we will switch to the null balance method for verification. The heater coil is driven with steady DC power, typically around 25 watts (50 volts and .5 amps), so that the Ni rod reaches the desired temperature. The entire system is fairly light and reaches thermal equilibrium in about an hour. The following readings are taken periodically: Vcoil - DC voltage on the heater coil (volts) Icoil - DC current in heater coil (amps) Trod - temperature of Ni rod (degrees C) Tbox - air temperature inside box (degrees C) Tamb - air temperature in the room (degrees C) Ifan - DC current thru the fan in the box (amps) Vfan - DC voltage to the fan in the box (volts) p - gas pressure in the chamber (inches of Hg) >From these readings the total power being fed into the box is computed (sum of chamber power and fan power) and the delta-T between the inside of the box and the room is computed. From these two values the apparent thermal resistance of the box, R, is computed (in degrees C per watt). Excess heat would manifest itself as an unusually high R value. Here are some of today's (21NOV95) readings as an example: time Vcoil Icoil Pcoil Trod Tbox Tamb Ifan Vfan Pfan p R 0853 49.6 .552 27.38 188.8 38.9 22.8 .278 14.43 4.01 13.7 .513 0950 49.5 .551 27.27 188.9 39.2 23.1 .282 14.58 4.11 13.7 .513 1106 49.5 .551 27.27 189.3 39.7 23.8 .282 14.57 4.11 13.7 .507 Over the course of our experimentation the observed R values have ranged from 0.50 to 0.53, including a number of runs with the balance heater alone. The variation is probably due largely to the non-constant ambient temperature. The precision of this method is thus about +/- 3% relative. This gives us a nominal excess heat detection limit of around 10% relative. Experiments to date We started running the system on 7NOV95. We heated up the coil to 200 C (using the change in resistance of the Cu wire to measure the coil temperature) and ran the coil at that temperature under vacuum for several hours to outgas it. We then admitted hydrogen gas at 0.5 atm pressure and raised the coil power until the Ni rod was holding at around 190 degrees C. After thermal equilibrium was reached we took readings and computed R (.509 in this case). After some hours, we evacuated the chamber again, keeping the Ni rod hot so the H would diffuse out rapidly and then re-filled the chamber to load the rod's surface again. We cycled the system like this several times and saw no sign of unusually high R values. We then tried one of the excitation techniques mentioned in the Piantelli patent: mechanical shock. With the Ni rod soaked at 188 C for several hours in the H atmosphere, we opened a small hole in the side of the box and inserted a metal rod to make contact with the end of the chamber that the Ni rod is mounted to. We then struck the end of the rod with a small hammer to impart a sharp axial mechanical shock to the rod. After the shock, we watched the temperatures for signs of excess heat: we saw nothing. This procedure has been repeated about 5 times with varying degrees of shock. We have also tried applying a pulse of electrical power in the heating coil. This was achieved by switching a 250 ufd capacitor charged to 500 volts onto the heater coil. At operating temperature, the heater coil has a resistance of about 90 ohms so this produced a current pulse that started out at about 5 amps and decayed exponentially with a time constant of 22 mS back to the steady current of 0.5 amps. The inductance of the coil with the Ni rod in place is 39 mH so the L/R time constant for current growth in the coil is only about .4 mS and thus does not significantly interfere with this capacitor- induced current pulse. The total energy delivered to the chamber by the capacitor is only 30 joules which is approximately the energy delivered every second to the heater coil under steady-state operation. Thus one or two such pulses separated by long intervals (~ 1 hour) does not noticeably upset the condition of thermal equilibrium. Careful tracking of the temperatures after such current pulses show that they have no detectable effect. Regarding the surface finish of the Ni rod, we received it in a nearly-polished condition. On 16NOV95, after quite a few null- result trials we disassembled the cell and found the rod to be virtually unchanged in appearance. We then polished the rod further with a cloth buffing wheel and polishing compound, reassembled the cell and performed several loading-unloading cycles with both mechanical and electrical stimulation applied after the rod had been soaking for several hours. Most recently we tried loading the Ni rod at 195-200 C for four hours and then cooling it down to 188 C for the application of the pulse. For example, at 0922 this morning we applied three 500 volt pulses the heater coil. You can see from the three sets of readings quoted earlier in this report that nothing happened as a result of those pulses. Future Directions We are considering having the Ni rod plated with a thin layer of pure Ni to provide a "virgin" surface. This has been rumored to be an important part of the Piantelli experiment. We plan to continue cycling the rod up and down in H content as it has been rumored that multiple loading and unloading cycles are important. We welcome suggestions and questions from the group. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 21 22:50:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA12774 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 22:49:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA12764 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 22:49:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tI8zI-0005JeC; Wed, 22 Nov 95 00:48 CST Message-Id: Subject: Re: vtx: hydrogen-metal report #1 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 00:48:56 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" In-Reply-To: <199511212000.OAA14035 natashya.eden.com> from "Scott Little" at Nov 21, 95 02:00:27 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > H-metal experiment - Vortex-L Progress Report #1 > Scott Little & Hal Puthoff, EarthTech International > > slides into a close-fitting axial hole in the free end of the Ni > rod when the chamber is assembled. This thermocouple senses the > rod temperature. This seems to suggest an asymetrical sensing arrangement that could be susceptible to multiple modes of dominant convection flow. The center volume of the chamber is going to be hotter than the outer wall, therefore convection currents will flow from the center volume, generally upward to the top outer wall, cooling and descending along the outer side walls, and then being drawn back up through the central area again by the convection driving central heat source. We expect this to be symmetrical flow comparing cross-sectional slices along the length, but there might in fact be some left or right hand drift up (and the reverse handed drift down.) If the chamber was slightly off level, this might set up the conditions for a permanent drift bias (not necessarily bad.) But when the chamber is level, or nearly so, the drift direction might be bimodal, sometimes one way, sometimes the other. If your temperature sensor is asymetrically mounted, this bi-modal drift could alternately understate and overstate the apparent heat seen at the Ni rod (sometimes the convection current is coming from the cooler wall and sometimes the convection current is coming from the heater, relative to the position of the thermocouple.) Now after writing all this, I should go back and read your calorimetry description, as you may not rely on the Ni rod temperature for calorimetry and therefore my above complaint is irrelevant. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 02:58:16 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id CAA06320 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 02:58:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA06303 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 02:57:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA23746; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:57:41 +0100 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:57:40 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: hydrogen-metal report #1 In-Reply-To: <199511212000.OAA14035 natashya.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Interesting. One problem area here, as with Pd and Ti, is the metal surface. The patent is supposed to tell all, so there ought to be some words in there about surface treatment. In the case of Ti, if one does not remove the oxide layer, there may never be any hydrogen getting into the metal. Also, I have now seen some measured diffusion coefficients for hydrogen in Ni, and at room temp. it is about 10^-9 cm^2/s, or 10^-13 M^2/s; it may be you need to wait longer to get appreciable bulk loading - if bulk loading be important (which I'd doubt, on principle, agreeing with Peter Glueck that CNF would be a surface phenomenon). Again, the patent ought to say something about that. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 03:54:47 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id DAA15222 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 03:54:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA15196 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 03:54:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [] ([203.17.100.7]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA03690 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 22:52:16 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511221152.WAA03690 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 22:54:30 +0900 Subject: vtx: Electron clusters Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Some time back, I posted a message postulating the possibility of electron cluster moderated cold fusion. (To which I saw few if any replies). I would like now to suggest a way in which such electron clusters might form. Let us start with two electrons, with their axes parallel, spinning in opposite directions, such that their magnetic fields attract one another. If they are sufficiently close to one another, then their magnetic field attraction will outweigh their electrical field repulsion. (If this is not so, then please let me know). Now imagine that such a bound pair of electrons also rotates about an axis parallel with the axes of the electrons, and passing through their common centre of gravity. This rotating pair will by virtue of their equal negative charge, also generate a mag. field. Two such pairs rotating in opposite directions, will also attract one another magnetically. Now at this point, I don't know whether or not they can produce a mag. field strong enough to bind them together, but let us suppose that they can. If we continue this process, allowing ever larger groups of electrons to rotate, then we obtain a massive negatively charged pseudo particle, composed of contra-rotating pairs of electrons. It would even be possible for a single electron to bind to a single rotating bound pair in this fashion. In fact clusters of all sizes would seem possible. At least qualitatively speaking. Now comes the hard part. Does anyone see sufficient merit in this concept to do the math involved in proving whether or not it is viable? Questions that I believe need answering are the following: 1) Will even 2 electrons be bound in this manner? 2) How big would a single bound pair be? 3) Could a third electron bind to such a pair, given that it rotates in the opposite direction to the direction of rotation of the pair? 4) Could a fourth electron bind to the original pair directly, or would it need to form its own pair with the third electron? 5) What would the energy content of such pairs be? 6) It may be asking a lot, but how about a general equation describing the energy content of a cluster of "n" electrons (or would this depend upon the actual configuration)? Well even if all you get out of this is a laugh, at least it will have provided some entertainment value. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 06:38:28 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA21244 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 06:38:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA20804 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 06:36:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tIGHt-000MNeC; Wed, 22 Nov 95 16:36 EET Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:36:37 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: vtx: hydrogen-metal experiment Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: H-metal experiment no 1. First of all: my best wishes of success to Scott and Hal; we need very much successes in our field! And thank you for the present and future efforts! Some questions/implicit advices based more on experience, instinct and analogies: 1. How many devices are prepared? Due to the great number of parameters and for minimizing the evil effects of Murphy's Law, I would work with 3-6 devices; even if due to limited man- power or instrumentation you cannot work with them simultaneously it's excellent to have them at hand for making small changes & short trials. 2. In my opinion, the Ni rod has to be electrically isolated from the brass chamber and from the thermocouple as well. This can be an important advantage for many of the triggering methods. 3. Even more in my opinion, the brass chamber has to be thermally isolated with a good porous ceramic isolator. If not, it can happen that small positive feedback effects during the triggering stage are lost. See please for example what has done Dennis Cravens in order to improve the Patterson Cell or please explain why the Piantelli device, according to the patent, includes tubes for circulating a fluid which removes extra-heat. Sorry to say, but null balance calorimetry-an excellent however not universal method-is not the best in this very case. It is not in the spirit of the patent. 3. I would try a combined method triggering or loosening the surface structure of the generator with deuterium and later working with hydrogen. 4. What about the measurement of magnetic field? The recurrent dogma "the patent is supposed to tell all" is true only for the case of relatively simple mechanical devices and or electrical/electronic schemes. In the case of such a complex process comprising physics, chemistry, materials science, a real transdisciplinar game we have actually a strange bunch of real, relevant, redundant, in part false, in part contradictory, data. In this case I have shown that the process cannot be what it is claimed to be- straight D + H fusion- because the examples show that this source is too poor to justify the quantity of heat released. Unfortunately, a lot of important data is to be searched for in the realm of know-how. For example the patent describes a charging variant by "immersion of the core in solutions of HCl, HNO3, H2SO4" and this is actually a (or "the") surface treatment. It has to be tried, I think. I am ready to accept that the American patent law is very strict and that US patents are the Parsifals of the world of inventions however a complete description of the procedure is, in so many cases, a quasi-impossibility. Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 06:56:29 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA26947 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 06:56:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA26877 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 06:56:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.70]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA11906 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 08:15:18 -0900 X-Sender: hheffner matsu.ak.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 05:57:36 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: hydrogen-metal report #1 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >For example, at 0922 this morning we applied three 500 volt >pulses the heater coil. You can see from the three sets of >readings quoted earlier in this report that nothing happened as >a result of those pulses. > >Future Directions > >We are considering having the Ni rod plated with a thin layer of >pure Ni to provide a "virgin" surface. This has been rumored to >be an important part of the Piantelli experiment. > >We plan to continue cycling the rod up and down in H content as >it has been rumored that multiple loading and unloading cycles >are important. > >We welcome suggestions and questions from the group. Comment: If the 250 uF capacitor decay was from 500 V down to 49.5 V, then it appears the added shock was only about 25 J instead of 30 J. Not an important distinction. Suggestions: One possibility would be to border the cell externally with neodymium magnets. They don't like getting above 80 deg. C, so some air space is needed. Might be hard (expensive) to get a decent field strength in the 1.5 inch gap your chamber requires. About a week ago I ordered four .5 x 1 x 1 NdFeBo 35 MGO block magnets from Magnet Applications (1-800-437-8890) for $88 plus shipping. Completing the magnetic ciruit, but leaving only a .5 in gap, with these magnets will give a 1" by 2" face with 6900 Gauss field strength in the gap, for example. One possibility for stimulation is using a high frequency shock, applying one lead to the rod (cap) and the other to the lead attached to the inside windings of the coil (assuming the coil was wrapped in layers). I don't know if the insulation would permit much voltage to be applied though. One possibility might be to attempt to insert an insulated electrode between the coil and the rod, but things are a bit crowded already, plus you would need to get an insulated lead through the cap. If you went this route, you might also be able to try a light spark to the rod as a stimulus as well. You might get a lot more significant shock effect if you could discharge the capacitor directly through the rod instead of through a high resistance coil. For physical shock, insted of a hammer, you might just try the but end of a humming loudspeaker, or maybe just a tuning fork, appliied to the metal rod inserted through the hole in the box. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 07:03:39 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA28968 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 07:03:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA28951 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 07:03:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA24583; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 10:02:16 -0500 Date: 22 Nov 95 09:58:54 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: ZPE and Debye Temperature Message-ID: <951122145853_102021.3045_EHT99-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: For those of us who need a model to visualize what's going on in a lattice invaded by hydrogen atoms the following might be of help. Debye and others reasoned that the shortest wavelength of sound that could propagate through a material was about twice the interatomic spacing. This was also the infrared absorption wavelength threshold (for nickel 2 x 2.5 angstroms) and since the velocity of sound in nickel is about 3.3 x 10^3 meters/second the wavelength ( 5 x 10^-10 = 3.3 x 10^3/frequency, in this case the frequency is about 6.6 x 10^12 hertz (about 45 micron infrared or about 0.0273 ev which is room temp infrared). This would indicate that ZPE waves would have to play by the same rules and no ZPE frequency above this Debye frequency (Debye Temp x k/h) where k is Boltzman's constant and h is Plank's constant. Assuming the energy in an interacting ZPE wave is hf or hc/wavelength, the waves longer than two interatomic spacings, like sound can interact with and vibrate the atoms and thus manifest heat effects. So, along comes a hydrogen atom and shortens this interatomic spacing and in effect doubles the energy that can be extracted from the ZPF. Small wonder that "jarring" the Piantelli apparatus tends to get things going. Back to ultrasound? The propensity for nickel to oxidize, 2 Ni + O2 = 2 NiO at room temperature and above would tend to inhibit diffusion of hydrogen into it. Further the finely divided supported metal catalysts commercially available would seem to be a better choice than massive metal absorbers even from the ZPE field standpoint (the Casimir force says that massive materials exclude ZPE waves). At higher temperatures the hydrogen will reduce the NiO; H2 + NiO = H2O + Ni, this is why the catalyst companys supply reduced nickel catalysts on request. Otherwise it's quite tricky to get the oxygen off of the nickel unless one goes to temperatures of several hundred degrees centigrade as the above reaction is highly reversible at lower temperatures. Palladium doesn't have the oxide problem, nor does silver at temps slightly above 200 deg. centigrade. F.J. Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 07:28:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA06676 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 07:28:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA06649; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 07:28:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id HAA18850; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 07:28:42 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 07:28:41 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com cc: freenrg-list mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Electron cluster demonstration In-Reply-To: <199511221152.WAA03690 tornado.netspace.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have a friend who's comtemplating the sales of a simple kit of parts and instructions for demonstrating the existance of electron clusters. Anyone here interested? If he can get enough people interested, he'll put together the kits. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 09:10:21 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA10984 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 09:10:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout06.mail.aol.com (emout06.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.43]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA10927 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 09:10:03 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Received: by emout06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA07570; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:07:59 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:07:59 -0500 Message-ID: <951122120757_113889998 emout06.mail.aol.com> To: 102021.3045 compuserve.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: youarecorrect Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: F J Sparger computes the the natural wavelength of the hydrogen plasma in a cold fusion electrode to be in the mid-infrared band. I have been saying the same sort of thing for some years now...that the disolved hydrogen plasma will directly interact with the zero point Fermi levels in the metal when the natural frequency of the plasma decreases to mid-infrared wavelengths. This requires a plasma as dense as solid matter 10 exp 27 -e /meter3. At that point genesis will occur. Again, my mygraded paper on this subject. The last section of the paper was modified to explain the gensis process more clearly. Frank Znidarsic THE GENESIS OF THE UNIVERSE AND ZERO POINT ENERGY by Frank Znidarsic PE 481 Boyer St. Johnstown, Pa. 15906 USA Electrical Engineer for The Pennsylvania Electric Company 1001 Broad Street Johnstown Pa. 15906 USA July 1, 1994 Note if the math doesn't text download the file then bring it up in the DOS editor Edit filename.txt 2 ABSTRACT The idea that something can be created from nothing has always been considered to be impossible. This manuscript presents a historical account on the subject of creation. Recently, it has been shown that the gravitational field contains negative energy. Contemporary ideas on the subject of creation demonstrate the existence of a link between the energy in matter, zero point energy, and the negative gravitational potential of the universe. These new ideas are explored. Finally experiments, which seem to be creating energy, are examined. INTRODUCTION Since antiquity the genesis of the universe has been a subject of thought, study, and speculation by the greatest minds in philosophy and science. The original ideas on genesis were developed by philosophers. Some of the original philosophers were Greek. It became apparent to the Greeks that all things came from other things. The great Greek philosopher Plato (427-347 BC) described this with his idea of forms. According to Plato the form was the property that made a thing what it was. Aristotle (384-322 BC) developed the idea of forms and concluded that each form was composed of a substance. The form of a substance could be changed but the substance itself was eternal. The question then was where did the original substance come from? The conclusion 3 that the ancient Greeks drew was that a prime mover created the original substance. This prime mover was God. The Greek Empedocles defined what the fundamental substances of the original creation were. To him the fundamental substances were earth, air, fire, and water. Later the Greek Democritus redefined these original substances as atoms. According to Democritus these atoms were produced in the original creation and were eternal. In the Middle Ages the greatest thinkers on the subject of creation were theologians. One of these theologians was St. Augustine (354-430 AD). It became apparent to St. Augustine, like it did to the Greeks, that all things came from other things. If the material substance of the universe had not been created then this substance must have always been. If the substance of the universe has always been then time had no beginning. Every event is precipitated by a prior event. Without a first event everything that could have happened should have happened in the infinite past. For current time to have meaning there must have been a first event or moment of creation. St. Augustine used a Latin word to describe this creation process called exhihilo. This word means to create something out of nothing. St. Augustine concluded that an infinite source or prime mover created the universe exhihilo. This concept was developed to an apex by St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). He came up with a line of reasoning in his arguments from design. These arguments were 4 based on the idea that the substance of the universe required a divine origin. PROPOSED THEORY Today scientists are studying the problem of creation. Science does not address the question of who created the universe. Scientists have rules that they work by called conservation laws. Some of these conservation laws are the conservation of momentum, energy, and charge. Science addresses the question of how the universe formed within the framework of possibilities allowed by these laws. According to current theory and experimental evidence these conservation laws always hold true. In more precise language, they are invariant with respect to time and location. The scientific principle of the conservation of energy simply restates the old idea that something cannot come from nothing. According to the accepted theory of the big bang the universe sprang from nothing 15 billion years ago. In 1973 the great contemporary physicist Edward P. Tryon demonstrated how the universe could have formed without violating the principle of the conservation of energy. He 1 said that the total energy of the universe is zero. He said that the positive energy of the things we observe is balanced by a negative gravitational energy. Therefore the creation was formed without violating the principle of the 5 conservation of energy. Let's explore his idea. When something falls it loses gravitational potential energy. The relationship between potential energy and position, in a force field, is given by equation #1. In case you mailer does not line up like mine does the following are simple integtrals. / -> -> _ PE = W = - | F* dr Eq #1 / According to Tryon's theory if an object were to fall into the universe from an infinite distance away the gravitational potential energy the object lost would equal the total mass energy of the object. This is stated mathematically in equation #2: rad of univ / -> -> mcc = - | F*dr Eq #2 /infinity Assuming that the universe is spherical with an isotopic mass distribution, the amount of gravitational potential an object will lose upon falling to the edge of such a universe is given by equation #3. 2 / rad of univ mcc = -(G)(M )(m) | (1/rr) dr Eq#3 /infinity m = the mass of the falling object M = the mass of the universe Given a radius "r" of the universe is 15 billion light years 26 (1.42x10 meters) and the known gravitational constant G, the mass of the universe M may be determined. u 53 M = 1.91 x 10 KG If this is the mass of the universe then the total energy of the universe is zero. To check this result the mass of the universe was calculated from its density and volume. The universe was considered to be a sphere. This sphere has a radius of 15 billion light years and is filled with matter of the same density as the density of space in our galactic neighborhood. This "local" density is equivalent to one proton of ordinary matter and nine protons of "dark" matter per cubic meter. 3 Given that the volume of a sphere with a radius of 15 billion 79 3 light years = 1.2 x 10 M Please note that at one proton mass per cubic meter this is also the number of protons in the universe. The mass of the universe was derived from its volume and density in equation #4. 3 3 M = [(1 proton/m )+(9 proton masses dark matter/m )](volume) Eq#4 7 The mass of the universe according to this second argument is: 53 M = 2.00 x 10 KG Amazingly the resultant masses agree even though they were determined by two entirely different methods. This agreement indicates that the universe has a total energy of zero and that it formed without violating the principle of the conservation of energy. Edward Tryon's idea has proven to be very profound. THE GRAVITATIONAL INTERACTION Energy is neither created or destroyed. The total mass energy of the universe remains constant. This constant of energy is zero. The positive kinetic energy gained by accelerating matter is proportional to the product of the applied force "F" and the distance "d" through which the force acts. Refer to Equation #4. + Energy = Fd Equation #4 Given that the total energy of the universe is zero, an equivalent amount of negative gravitational potential must also be imparted to accelerated matter. 8 A symmetrical relationship exists between gravity and force. The force/gravity relationship resembles the symmetrical electromagnetic relationship in many ways. One notable difference is the magnitude of the constants involved. The force/gravity relationship, as given by General Relativity, is expressed in equation #5. F = G(dp/dt)/(ccr) Equation #5 F = the gravitational field in newtons/kg dp/dt = the change in momentum with respect to time (a force) Equation #5 reveals that negative gravitational potential is also imparted to accelerating mass by the force of acceleration. According to Mach's principle the force produced by a local acceleration is in reaction to this induced gravitational potential. Mach's principle is stated in Equation #6. Local force = Gravitational reaction Eq #6 (dp/dt) = M F dp/dt = M G(dp/dt)/(cc r) If Equation #6 is true equation #7 must equal one. 9 M G/(cc r) = 1 Equation #7 r = the radius of the universe G = the gravitational constant c = light speed M = the mass of the universe u Amazingly, against all odds considering the magnitude of the numbers involved, Equation #7 is an identity. Positive kinetic energy an negative gravitational potential are simultaneously imparted to accelerating matter by the force of acceleration. This process holds the sum total of the energy in the universe exactly at zero. THE ZERO POINT INTERACTION After a sufficient amount of hydrogen dissolves into a "cold fusion" electrode, the hydrogen molecules begin to get buffeted around by the zero point vibrations intrinsic to the solid crystal lattice. In more exact terms, the zero point Fermi energy levels within the solid evanescence within a sea of dissolved hydrogen molecules. Forces are imparted by this interaction. These forces cannot transfer energy from the zero point system to the dissolved hydrogen. A zero point system is already in the lowest energy state. The system cannot drop to a lower energy state and shed any energy. The forces do, however, generate new energy through a process of genesis. Positive kinetic and negative gravitational potential are simultaneously produced. The process generates new energy and conserves energy. 10 TWO COMMON OBJECTIONS 1. The gravitational field is very weak. It plays no role in atomic interactions. True, the gravitational field is a weak translational force. Energy is the product of force and distance. The long range of the gravitational interaction compensates for its weak translational nature. Gravity is a potent energy exchange medium. 2. Distant regions of the universe are a long way off. Given that forces propagate at luminal velocities, these distant regions cannot be directly linked to local events. Energy and momentum are carried by induced fields. These induced fields acts as a reservoir of momentum and energy. After the field has reached distant parts of the universe this reservoir of momentum and energy is depleted. In the end the books balance. Electrons are much smaller than a typical electrical circuit. Similar interactions balance momentum and energy in inductive circuits. 11 CONCLUSION New scientific arguments have shown how something can be created out of nothing. These arguments have tremendous philosophical implications. If the creation process is now understood, can something now be created out of nothing? Inventors have been trying to do this for many years. In fact, the patent offices currently reject all applications for patents on such perpetual motion machines. If a gravity producing machine could be built, however, it would produce positive energy in an amount equal to the negative gravitational potential of the induced field. As of late several scientists have appear to have created something (energy) from nothing. Among the most advanced is Dr. H. E. 4 Puthoff at the Center for Advanced Study in Austin Texas and Dr. J. A. Patterson inventor of Clean Energy Technology's cold fusion cell. Puthoff, in particular, is attempting to extract the zero point energy of matter. According to this author's theories , the theories of Hal Puthoff , and the 5 6 theories of Andrei Sakharov , the the zero point energy of 7 matter is intimately linked to its 12 gravitational field. If the zero point energy of matter is extracted a gravitational field will be produced. This gravitational field will reach out and retard the expansion of the universe. Some of the kinetic energy of the expansion of the universe will eventually be absorbed by this induced gravitational field. This energy will be locally available for use. We will have to wait and see to comes from these latest ideas. If man finally creates substance from nothingness he will have ventured into a realm that was, since antiquity, reserved for God. The world and its ideas will then surely change. 13 NOTES 1. Edward P. Tryon, NATURE VOL 246, December 14, 1973. 2. Technically, nothing can exist outside of the universe. The universe is a closed structure in which, according to the cosmological principle, all positions are equivalent. The model presented in this paper, in which an object falls from an infinite distance away to the edge of the universe, does not represent reality. The model does, however, allow for the calculation of the negative gravitational potential shared by all objects within the universe. 3. Fritz Zwicky proposed that 90% of the matter in the universe is "dark" in 1933. He came to this conclusion from the study of clusters of galaxies. Vera Rubin confirmed that 90% of the universe's matter is composed of the so called "dark matter" from her study of the rotational speeds of galaxies in 1977. 4. A ball lightning experiment in Japan appeared to produce excess energy. Y.H. Ohtsuki & H. Ofuruton, NATURE VOL 246, March 14, 1991 5. Frank Znidarsic, ELEMENTARY A. GRAVITY Adventures Unlimited Kempton Il. USA, 1989 "Antigravity on a Disk" Self published 1995 14 6. Working with electron condensations. Hal Puthoff, PHYSICAL REVIEW A, March 1989 Hal Puthoff, D.C. Cole, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, August 1993. Hal Puthoff, OMNI, "Squeezing Energy From a Vacuum" 2/91 7. Andrei Sakharov SOVIET PHYSICS DACKLADI Vol 12, May 1968, Page 1040, 14 . From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 10:28:00 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA08830 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 10:27:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA08752 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 10:27:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-179.austin.eden.com (net-1-170.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.170]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id MAA19407 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:25:36 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:25:36 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511221825.MAA19407 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: H-metal comments, explanations #1 X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: H-metal experiment - Comments & Further Explanations #1 22NOV95 Scott Little & Hal Puthoff, EarthTech International John Logajan pointed out some real potential problems with the Ni rod temperature measurement. At present we're just using the rod temperature reading to bring the rod to the recommended temperature. 187 C is 20 degrees above the Debye temperature for Ni, a value suggested by Piantelli. As John anticipated in his post, the calorimetry is not dependant upon this reading. This brings up and interesting point, however...how does Piantelli do his calorimetry? There is no mention of it in the patent so all we have to go on is the original paper. In there he speaks of using the rod temperature as the indication of excess heat. I now see two possible problems with this method: (1) the bimodal convection currents suggested by John and (2) an uncertainty in the thermal conductivity of the H gas due to its strong dependance upon impurities (in the gas). Peter, we only have one device at this time. I will consider getting more running. Regarding the thermal isolation of the chamber, I think mine is substantially more isolated than Piantelli's as I am able to maintain the rod at 188 C with only about 25 watts whereas his original paper indicates power levels around 100 watts. Regarding the method of calorimetry, I am presently using Newton's Law calorimetry to "scan" for excess heat. With this method, if excess heat occurs, things will get hotter (which will result in an increased heat flow from the chamber) than expected from the input power. Does this seem OK to you? Magnetic Fields: First of all I have not found all the information I need about the magnetic properties of Ni. Can anyone suggest a source for the B-H curve for pure Ni? I have performed the standard solenoid calculations for both my heater coil and Piantelli's heater coil which was described in the original paper. If we ignore the permeability of the Ni (just to compare the coils), one would expect a field of .042 tesla from my coil at 25 watts and only .011 tesla from P's coil at 25 watts. If you raise P's power to 100 watts, his field goes to 0.021 tesla. Thus, I have stronger MMFs on my Ni rod than did P by about a factor of two. I did find one reference which gave the saturation induction of Ni as .8 tesla. If the permeability of Ni is anything remotely like that of Fe, my coil should be able to saturate the Ni rod with only a few watts of power. However, a crude measurement indicates that something may be amiss here: I measured the field produced at the end of the Ni rod with a gaussmeter probe held against the end of the rod. A plot of B vs current in the coil looks something like this: .10 | * | t | e | * s | l | a | | * | | | * .05 | | | * | | | * | | |* 0 --------------------------------------------------------- 0 1 2 amperes The power at 2 amps is about 200 watts! I am quite surprised that the curve does not show an earlier and more abrupt flattening off...but I'm also not quite sure what to expect from this solenoid geometry in which the magnetic flux path is not closed and thus is dominated by leakage flux which has to go through the air. P claims to get a 1 tesla field in his rod. This seems kinda high to me. Gas diffusion rates: Dieter, I am puzzled by something. Is diffusion driven by weight concentration gradients or volume concentration gradients? If it is the latter, then H will diffuse into the Ni only until there are the same number of atoms per cc inside the Ni rod as there are outside the Ni rod. At 200 C and 0.5 atm gas pressure this results in a tiny concentration in the Ni rod amounting only to 1.7*E-4 atoms of H per atom of Ni. Regarding the Ni diffusion rate, interpolating the data you provided on 10NOV95 to get the diffusion rate at 200 C (i.e. 8E- 10 m^2/sec), it looks like a few hours will suffice to load up the first 250 microns to >70% of the saturation concentration. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 11:08:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA23977 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:08:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail04.mail.aol.com (mail04.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.53]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA23936 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:08:03 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Received: by mail04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA14989 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:06:37 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:06:37 -0500 Message-ID: <951122140636_113983031 mail04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: FZ&FJS Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I was quite suprized to see the posting of F.J. Sparger. His ideas are so close to mine. We should do a paper together! Puthoff and I agree that the zero point energy levels are fundamentally linked to the gravitational interaction. Puthoff's ideas are based on Sakhorov's work, Znidarsic's ideas are based on Mendelssohn's work. Puthoff and Znidarsic differ in the means they propose to extract the zero point potential of matter. Puthoff's method is based on the Casimir interaction, Znidarsic's method is based on the evanescent force. F. J. Sparger and Znidarsic agree (where Puthoff and Znidarsic disagree) on the idea of the evenscent interaction. This idea is basically that ZPE energies are adsorbed by an evanscent plasma This plasma consists of disolved hydrogen ions. I think Sparger missed the gravitational connection to ZPE that Puthoff and Znidarsic agree on. Fundamentals The frequency of evanescence is known as the natural frequency of a plasma. Natural frequency of a plasma = [n qq / (m eo)] exp .5 n the number of electrons q the electric charge m the mass of the electron eo the perm of free space The ideal gas law states: KNT = 2/3nu eq #2 u = 1/2 M v v Eq #3 Sub eq #2 into Eq #3 eq #4 v v = 3KT/M eq # 4 wavelength = velocity/frequency Eq #5 substituting eq #1 into eq #5 then sub eq #4 into eq #5 yields eq #6 below. (1.73) Natural wavelength of a plasma = (Debye wavelength) I think that between Sparger, Puthoff, and Znidarsic we have got it. Zero point Fermi energy levels have wavelengths in the mid infrared band. An evnascent plasma is a classical quantum violation...like tunneling When the density of a plasma becomes great enough it will directy interact with the ZPE Fermi level. The forces produced will result in below: Postive energy will be produced = force x distance Negative grav energy will be produced = force G/ccr postive energy = the negative energy New energy is produced through genesis. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 12:46:02 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA01974 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:45:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA01889 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:45:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.70]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA12502 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:05:00 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:47:13 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I wasn't ready to talk about this yet, but what the heck. I have been working on a theory the would tie my SO hypothesis to ancillary anomalies associated with cold fusion. The basis for the theory is the notion that the de Broglie wavength of a particle is *relative* to the motion of the observer. Because L=h/p, the wavelength is inversely related to the velocity of a specific particle. Velocity, however, is relative. I am not speaking in terms of Einstein's relativity theory, only pertinent at near light speeds, but simple relative velocity. The most significant result of this assumption is that as the realtive velocity of two particles in proximity to each other nears zero, their mutually observed wavelengths become arbitrarily large. This means the electric dipole moment, due to the enormous overlap of the wave functions, approaches zero as the relative velocities approach zero. If approach is close enough prior to the slowing to zero, a kind of feedback effect occurs. If there is *any* magnetic force due to spin, it should completely overwhelm the remaining electrostatic force. This leads to an interresting but typical quantum paradox: what happens if another fast moving particle interacts with the two body merged wave function. It doesn't see the wave functions of the two joined particles as being large. If it collides with the merged 2 body wave function it sees as small, you get a 3 body collision no matter how you cut it. From the merged particle's point of view, there has been an observation, their large wave functions collapse at the point of interaction with the fast moving particle. I think this idea might explain the frequent three body collisions observed in the Kasagi experiment, for example. Proton pairs might form via this mechanism in lattice sites, then interact with bombarding particles. To answer the question on this basis: >Questions that I believe need answering are the following: >1) Will even 2 electrons be bound in this manner? Yes, especially at a high voltage point. A thermal electron has a wavelength of over 60 A, larger than the tip of a very fine needle. It should be possible to force together electrons at such a point, even without .5 MeV you get out of the process (there's your over unity) by the above process. >2) How big would a single bound pair be? Depends on your relative velocity! Use L=h/p to figure it out. >3) Could a third electron bind to such a pair, given that it rotates >in the opposite direction to the direction of rotation of the pair? I would think they would all rotate the same way. Many could bind, but I think tunneling probabilities would highly limit the number. And once an electron tunneled out, it would have .5MeV times the number of remaining electrons in the bundle available for acceleration. That's what I call an energy hill! >4) Could a fourth electron bind to the original pair directly, or >would it need to form its own pair with the third electron? Dito as above. >5) What would the energy content of such pairs be? Given n electrons in a bundle, I would think it would be (.5 MeV)(n)(n-1)/2, or proportional to n^2. >6) It may be asking a lot, but how about a general equation >describing the energy content of a cluster of "n" electrons (or would >this depend upon the actual configuration)? The energy only depends on the proximity of the charges. >Well even if all you get out of this is a laugh, at least it will >have provided some entertainment value. I think these are stimulating ideas and questions you have Robin, as usual! >Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, >Learns all his life, >And leaves knowing nothing. >Robin Feb. 1995 Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 12:52:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA04450 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:52:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA04398 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:51:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.70]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA12522 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:11:18 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:53:30 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: ZPE and Debye Temperature Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >For those of us who need a model to visualize what's going on in a lattice >invaded by hydrogen atoms the following might be of help. >Debye and others reasoned that the shortest wavelength of sound that could >propagate through a material was about twice the interatomic spacing. This was This is not true is it? Perhaps it is the shortest wavelength for which a resonant coupling with the lattice can be obtained? >also the infrared absorption wavelength threshold (for nickel 2 x 2.5 >angstroms) >and since the velocity of sound in nickel is about 3.3 x 10^3 meters/second the >wavelength ( 5 x 10^-10 = 3.3 x 10^3/frequency, in this case the frequency is >about 6.6 x 10^12 hertz (about 45 micron infrared or about 0.0273 ev which is >room temp infrared). > >This would indicate that ZPE waves would have to play by the same rules and no >ZPE frequency above this Debye frequency (Debye Temp x k/h) where k is >Boltzman's constant and h is Plank's constant. >Assuming the energy in an interacting ZPE wave is hf or hc/wavelength, the >waves >longer than two interatomic spacings, like sound can interact with and vibrate >the atoms and thus manifest heat effects. > >So, along comes a hydrogen atom and shortens this interatomic spacing and in >effect doubles the energy that can be extracted from the ZPF. > >Small wonder that "jarring" the Piantelli apparatus tends to get things going. >Back to ultrasound? > >The propensity for nickel to oxidize, 2 Ni + O2 = 2 NiO at room temperature and >above would tend to inhibit diffusion of hydrogen into it. Further the finely >divided supported metal catalysts commercially available would seem to be a >better choice than massive metal absorbers even from the ZPE field standpoint >(the Casimir force says that massive materials exclude ZPE waves). > >At higher temperatures the hydrogen will reduce the NiO; H2 + NiO = H2O + Ni, >this is why the catalyst companys supply reduced nickel catalysts on request. >Otherwise it's quite tricky to get the oxygen off of the nickel unless one goes >to temperatures of several hundred degrees centigrade as the above reaction is >highly reversible at lower temperatures. > >Palladium doesn't have the oxide problem, nor does silver at temps slightly >above 200 deg. centigrade. > >F.J. Sparber Thanks for the wonderful exposition. I'll have to cogitate this for a while. Well, here in the US it's time to prepare for Thanksgiving. I must stay away from internet for a while or be excommunicated from my family. Happy Holidays to all. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 16:01:00 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id QAA14176 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:00:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from karloff.lanl.gov (karloff.lanl.gov [128.165.16.190]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA14143 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:00:50 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199511230000.QAA14143 mail.eskimo.com> Received: by karloff.lanl.gov (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA288844872; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 17:01:12 -0700 From: Ron McFee Subject: vtx: Fusion? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 17:01:12 MST Cc: mcfee lanl.gov Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Peter writes: >In this case I have shown that the process cannot be what it is >claimed to be- straight D + H fusion- because the examples show that >this source is too poor to justify the quantity of heat released. I believe that you are referring to what you posted Oct 17: >On a 200 mm long Nickel bar with a diameter of 3 mm, natural >hydrogen (D/H = 1/6000) was made to adsorb with the method of >immersion in gaseous environment at the critical temperature of >198 deg Celsius and contemporaneous application of a magnetic >field of 1 Tesla obtained by means of a coil wound around the >core... > >This device has generated an average power of 55 watts and >has gave a total of 4.74 x 31 = 146.94 MJ (some 41 kWh) >Given that 1MJ = 6.24 x 10 exp 18 MeV the heat developed >was equal to 9.17 x 10 exp 20 MeV; given that one atom of >deuterium generates 5.5 MeV we get a consume of > 1.667 x 1o exp 20 atoms of deuterium. >The system being closed it must contain this quantity of >deuterium and 6000 times more light hydrogen that's >1.0 x 10 exp 24 atoms of hydrogen. It is obvious that this is >a great quantity! > >The nickel rod has 1.413 cu.cm, 12.57 grams, that's 0.21 moles >of nickel and can contain in the best case (H/M =0.7) >0.14 atom-moles H + D -0.84 x 10 exp 23 atoms-and this at least >ten times less than necessary considering that the system can >arrive to a state of complete depletion in deuterium. >The free volume in the reactor is maximum 2oo mL and contains >a negligible quantity of hydrogen. (0.01 moles) >Conclusions? >There are three possibilities: >a) I am in great hurry and have made a blunder. >b) The system is not closed and is continually fed with >hydrogen. >c) An other source is at work. Nuclear? Don't think so! I calculate that using your assumptions that the deuterium in the natural hydrogen would be depleted in about two and a half days if the main reaction is H + D which gives 5.5 Mev and 3He. This is hardly the 31 days in your example. Another possibility is the 3He is "burnt" via 3He + D -> 4He plus 18.341 Mev. If this really occurs, then it explains why no one has reported much 3He production. This reaction seem improbable, however so does the H + D -> 3He. If all the 3He and D are consumed, one gets (18.3 + 5.5)/2 = 11.9 Mev per deuteron which would give you five days worth of 50 watt power for the .14 moles of natural hydrogen. I think the obvious answer is either your possibility b) and/or that there is either more gas in the reservoir than you are assuming or that their "natural hydrogen" is really enriched with some extra deuterium. I have not yet seen the whole Piantelli patent, only the parts that you and Scott have discussed, however from their "Anomalous Heat Production in Ni-H Systems," NUOVO CIMENTO, 107A, 1, 1994 it appears that any of these could be reasonable explanations. The fact that Piantelli et al. claim H + D fusion I consider good evidence that they have in fact measured 3He and the depletion of deuterium in their experiments. If so, I do not understand why they have not published their data. Delaying the development of their discovery at this time is certainly contrary to ethical scientific standards and is certainly a stupid business practice now that the clock is ticking on their patent. Regards, Ron From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 16:47:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA06416 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 08:57:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA06345 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 08:57:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id LAA21019; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:55:46 -0500 Date: 22 Nov 95 11:53:29 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: hydrogen-metal report #1 Message-ID: <951122165329_100060.173_JHB61-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, Re your experiments with Ni rod: >> We welcome suggestions << It might be worth leaving the plated Ni surface in the as-plated matt condition to increase the effective surface area. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 16:48:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id PAA01493 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:23:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA01273 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:23:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:23:05 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199511222323.PAA01273 mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:20:47 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: FZ&FJS Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The plasma frequency at solid densities is VERY high. Taking a conservative value for the electron density, n_e, say one unbound electron per atom and low density material, we use n_e = 5e22 cm^-3 = 5e28 m^-3. The corresponding plasma frequency is 2e15 Hz. This corresponds to an electromagnetic wave of length 150 nm = 1500 angstrom, which is well into the ultra violet. Our nomenclature "UV, visible, IR" applies to electromagnetic waves. It is meaningless to use the thermal speed of an atom to calculate the wavelength from a frequency and then to identify the result with "IR". Michael J. Schaffer schaffer gav.gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4146 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 16:54:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA16318 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:05:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA16245 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:05:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.70]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA12432 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 13:22:05 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:04:18 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Electron cluster demonstration Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I have a friend who's comtemplating the sales of a simple kit of parts >and instructions for demonstrating the existance of electron clusters. >Anyone here interested? If he can get enough people interested, he'll >put together the kits. > >.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 >EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ >Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page I would think the price tag would be the important thing. Any notion of about how much? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 16:55:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id QAA18434 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:13:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout06.mail.aol.com (emout06.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.43]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA18424 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:13:47 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by emout06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA00856 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:12:21 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:12:21 -0500 Message-ID: <951122191221_114243933 emout06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Heffner Sub-Orbital Hypothesis Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortexians, A few days ago H. Heffner posted a lengthy note concerning his sub-orbital hypothesis of CF. I just wanted to say that I thought it was a very ingenious proposal, well-stated, and one that I think deserves careful consideration. Here at EarthTech we have been looking at a "sibling" of Heffner's approach which, although coming at it from a different direction, is quite sympatico. In a word (more or less!), our ZPE theory of the quantum ground state of hydrogen (see Phys Rev D 35, 3266, 1987) posits that the ground state of the hydrogen atom results from a dynamic equilibrium between radiation emitted due to acceleration of the electron in its ground state orbit, and radiation absorbed from zero-point fluctuations of the background vacuum EM field. An implication, then, is that absorption of hydrogen into a metallic lattice upsets this equilibrium due to changes in the boundary conditions for the ZPE modes, resulting in orbital changes that release energy - an argument that has strong parallels to that of Heffner's. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 16:59:44 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id QAA03019 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:59:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA02990 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:59:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:59:34 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199511230059.QAA02990 mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:59:29 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Nickel Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [This is retransmission of a message sent earlier that does not seem to have been broadcast by eskimo.] In response to Scott Little's questions about nickel, I found a value of B = 0.6 tesla for saturation. (I derived this number from magnetization data given in a text book I had.) The relative permeability of Ni at low field is 50-100 at room temperature. Of interest for possibly triggering the Piantelli reaction, Ni is magnetostrictive. Maybe this is why Piantelli applies a magnetic field and then pulses it as well. (Why didn't I remember this earlier?) Magnetostriction is quadratic, ie. strain is proportional to B^2. For Ni the relative strain (delta l/l) approximnately c B^2 with c approximately -1.0e-4 m^4/weber^2 (negative sign means Ni contracts along the axis of B), and delta l/l saturates at about 33e-6 at the saturation B. I know nil about magnetostriction. If B is varied rapidly, the magnetic field does not penetrate the Ni fully, because of the electromagnetic skin effect. A high frequency pulse will stress the Ni surface, but it might not produce much actual strain, due to the unmoved Ni deeper in. A low frequency pulse will penetrate and strain the bulk Ni. If B in the Ni is already near saturation, you will get more magnetostriction by reducing the coil current than by increasing it. Michael J. Schaffer schaffer gav.gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4146 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 17:26:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id PAA27323 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:11:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA27253 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:11:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:11:10 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199511222311.PAA27253 mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:09:26 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Nickel Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In response to Scott Little's questions about nickel, I found a value of B = 0.6 tesla for saturation. (I derived this number from magnetization data given in a text book I had.) The relative permeability of Ni at low field is 50-100 at room temperature. Of interest for possibly triggering the Piantelli reaction, Ni is magnetostrictive. Maybe this is why Piantelli applies a magnetic field and then pulses it as well. (Why didn't I remember this earlier?) Magnetostriction is quadratic, ie. strain is proportional to B^2. For Ni the relative strain (delta l/l) approximnately c B^2 with c approximately -1.0e-4 m^4/weber^2 (negative sign means Ni contracts along the axis of B), and delta l/l saturates at about 33e-6 at the saturation B. I know nil about magnetostriction. If B is varied rapidly, the magnetic field does not penetrate the Ni fully, because of the electromagnetic skin effect. A high frequency pulse will stress the Ni surface, but it might not produce much actual strain, due to the unmoved Ni deeper in. A low frequency pulse will penetrate and strain the bulk Ni. If B in the Ni is already near saturation, you will get more magnetostriction by reducing the coil current than by increasing it. Michael J. Schaffer schaffer gav.gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4146 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 17:29:51 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA04873 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 08:54:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA04775 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 08:53:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 08:53:46 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199511221653.IAA04775 mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 8:53:02 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re:Hydrogen-Metal Expt. Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Some comments on the electrical excitation: Since the L/R time of about 0.4 ms is about 50 times smaller than the RC time of about 22 ms, only about 1/50 of the capacitor stored energy can possibly be coupled inductively to the nickel rod; the rest is dissipated in the coil. In fact, because the mutual inductive coupling coefficient of air coil systems is typically much less than unity, the energy delivered to the Ni is still less. However, the greater resistivity of the Ni over the Cu in the coil will bring the final Ni energy absorbtion up some. The final result will still be only a few percent of the capacitor energy. The only way to couple more energy is to increase the voltage. Capacitance beyond that giving RC = L/R is useless. This points to high voltage. The coil and capacitor voltage can be reduced by reducing the number of coil turns. I note that Piantelli et al in their Nuovo Cimento letter seem to have used a single layer coil. You might consider winding the heating coil on the outside of the chamber (and use a single layer of Nichrome wire, to reduce thermal mass) and put a single layer induction coil inside the chamber. Now, the induction coil has small inductance, so the capacitor and associated cabling must have even smaller inductance and resistance, to maintain good energy transfer efficiency. Cheap capacitors in the 20-30 kV class are those used in TV accel power supplies. I think they store only about a joule, so you might want to parallel a few. Use care. A 1 j shock is annoying. 10 j is nasty. The main problem I see is gaetting a high voltage switch. Spark gaps at 1 atm are too lossy for this low energy and will dissipate most of your energy. Krytrons are good switch tubes for this range; EG&G used to sell unclassified krytrons (the good ones are made for fission bomb triggers). Another approach is to use an automotive capacitor discharge system. However, I think that the energy per discharge is no more than a joule. Even if you add more storage capacitance, the ignition transformer coil will quickly be over driven and will saturate. Michael J. Schaffer schaffer gav.gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4146 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 17:30:13 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA11126 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:52:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11012 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:51:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.70]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA12413 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 13:09:44 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 10:51:58 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: youarecorrect Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >F J Sparger computes the the natural wavelength of the hydrogen plasma in a >cold >fusion electrode to be in the mid-infrared band. I have been saying the same >sort of >thing for some years now...that the disolved hydrogen plasma will directly >interact with >the zero point Fermi levels in the metal when the natural frequency of the >plasma This make no sense to me. I would think the conduction band *electron's* interaction with the adsorbed hydrogen would represent statistically a far more likely opportunity for linkage with ZPE, due to the much larger de Broglie wavelength of thermal electrons (about 60 A), plus the much greater likelyhood of electron's shedding energy via photons to drop into a very low temperature condition in the coulomb well to manifest the linkage. The only difficulty is creating conditions whereby electrons can "fall into the well". Once there in the well at low energy conditions, the electron's huge de Broglile wavelength (and consequently large SE distribution) mandates almost instant tunneling out of the well. If this is true, the relationship of the primary ZPE linkage phenomenon is only indirectly related to density by the increased likelyhood of tunneling when there is someplace to tunnel to. The main difficulty lies in maximizing the elecron's opportunity to fall into a well and accelerate to a significant velocity. The higher the velocity, the greater the acceleration near the nucleus, the higher the energy level of photons emitted by the electron while in the well, the more the net energy recovered when the electron tunnels out. The H nuclei could also be expected to emit photons in this process, but the photon energy levels from a particular event would be 3 orders of magnitude less than those issued by the electron involved in the same event. >decreases to mid-infrared wavelengths. This requires a plasma as dense as >solid matter 10 exp 27 -e /meter3. At that point genesis will occur. >Again, my mygraded paper on this subject. The last section of the paper was >modified >to explain the gensis process more clearly. > Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 17:35:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id QAA02307 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:57:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA02263 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:57:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:57:32 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199511230057.QAA02263 mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 16:57:25 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: Hydrogen-Metal Experiment Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [This is retransmission of a message sent earlier that does not seem to have been broadcast by eskimo.] Some comments on the electrical excitation: Since the L/R time of about 0.4 ms is about 50 times smaller than the RC time of about 22 ms, only about 1/50 of the capacitor stored energy can possibly be coupled inductively to the nickel rod; the rest is dissipated in the coil. In fact, because the mutual inductive coupling coefficient of air coil systems is typically much less than unity, the energy delivered to the Ni is still less. However, the greater resistivity of the Ni over the Cu in the coil will bring the final Ni energy absorbtion up some. The final result will still be only a few percent of the capacitor energy. The only way to couple more energy is to increase the voltage. Capacitance beyond that giving RC = L/R is useless. This points to high voltage. The coil and capacitor voltage can be reduced by reducing the number of coil turns. I note that Piantelli et al in their Nuovo Cimento letter seem to have used a single layer coil. You might consider winding the heating coil on the outside of the chamber (and use a single layer of Nichrome wire, to reduce thermal mass) and put a single layer induction coil inside the chamber. Now, the induction coil has small inductance, so the capacitor and associated cabling must have even smaller inductance and resistance, to maintain good energy transfer efficiency. Cheap capacitors in the 20-30 kV class are those used in TV accel power supplies. I think they store only about a joule, so you might want to parallel a few. Use care. A 1 j shock is annoying. 10 j is nasty. The main problem I see is gaetting a high voltage switch. Spark gaps at 1 atm are too lossy for this low energy and will dissipate most of your energy. Krytrons are good switch tubes for this range; EG&G used to sell unclassified krytrons (the good ones are made for fission bomb triggers). Another approach is to use an automotive capacitor discharge system. However, I think that the energy per discharge is no more than a joule. Even if you add more storage capacitance, the ignition transformer coil will quickly be over driven and will saturate. Michael J. Schaffer schaffer gav.gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4146 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 19:03:13 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA10331 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:03:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA10290 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:02:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA13351 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 20:22:13 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 18:04:19 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: hydrogen-metal report #1 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] I wrote: If the 250 uF capacitor decay was from 500 V down to 49.5 V, then it appears the added shock was only about 25 J instead of 30 J. Not an important distinction. [snip] Scott privately and courteously pointed out a slight blunder here on my part. He is right, it's about 30 J. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 19:04:16 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA10589 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:04:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA10536 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:04:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id WAA13913; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 22:02:26 -0500 Date: 22 Nov 95 22:01:27 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: What Plasma Frequency? Message-ID: <951123030127_102021.3045_EHT61-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I did not mention any plasma frequency when I stated that Einstein-Debye and others noted that sound or acoustic waves will not propagate in any material if the wavelength is less than the interatomic distance. And that it was noticed by BIG AL that this corresponded to the wavelength of an infrared frequency that was absorbed. And I further stated that a ZPE wave that may have originated in a primeval radio station is not likely to interact any differently, that is to say that if the wavelength is less that the Einstein-Debye frequency-wavelength it is not likely to interact with the lattice any more than a phonon or such. Brillouin exploited the use of acoustic waves to modulate light and Townes turned this around with the MASER-LASER to generate hypersonic waves in various materials. This synergistic interaction between acoustic and electromagnetic waves in materials is being exploited in many different applications. There's no reason to believe that ZPE shouldn't do something similar and create some thermal effects in the process. What Plasma Frequency? F.J.Sparber From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 19:17:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA14381 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:17:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA14289 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:17:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a20.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a20.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.20]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA23779 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:15:05 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511230315.OAA23779 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:17:09 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 22 Nov 95 at 11:47, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] > light speeds, but simple relative velocity. The most significant result of > this assumption is that as the realtive velocity of two particles in > proximity to each other nears zero, their mutually observed wavelengths > become arbitrarily large. This means the electric dipole moment, due to > the enormous overlap of the wave functions, approaches zero as the relative Is this "wave function" the same wave function associated with QM, or are you referring to the "de Broglie wave", or do you consider them to be the same thing? > velocities approach zero. If approach is close enough prior to the slowing > to zero, a kind of feedback effect occurs. If there is *any* magnetic What is this "kind of feedback"? (Just asking for clarification) > force due to spin, it should completely overwhelm the remaining > electrostatic force. > > This leads to an interesting but typical quantum paradox: what happens if > another fast moving particle interacts with the two body merged wave > function. It doesn't see the wave functions of the two joined particles as > being large. If it collides with the merged 2 body wave function it sees as > small, you get a 3 body collision no matter how you cut it. From the > merged particle's point of view, there has been an observation, their large > wave functions collapse at the point of interaction with the fast moving > particle. I think this idea might explain the frequent three body > collisions observed in the Kasagi experiment, for example. Proton pairs > might form via this mechanism in lattice sites, then interact with > bombarding particles. Given that the magnetic moment of an electron is 658 times that of a proton, while their charge is equal, I would expect electrons to bind much more easily than protons. That is not to say that protons cannot bind in this way, but it might explain why electrons can form large clusters, while this may be impossible for protons. I would really like to see some exact calculations done on this. > > To answer the question on this basis: > > > >Questions that I believe need answering are the following: > >1) Will even 2 electrons be bound in this manner? > > Yes, especially at a high voltage point. A thermal electron has a > wavelength of over 60 A, larger than the tip of a very fine needle. It > should be possible to force together electrons at such a point, even > without .5 MeV you get out of the process (there's your over unity) by the Please explain (at length) where the .5 MeV comes from. (Calculations would be nice, and don't just say that this is the mass of an electron, without explaining how this gets converted into energy :-) > above process. > > >2) How big would a single bound pair be? > Depends on your relative velocity! Use L=h/p to figure it out. I was sort of thinking of a pair rotating about their common centre of mass, and wondering if it would be possible to calculate the largest possible "orbit" that would still allow a net release of energy. (i.e. gain due to "magnetic energy exactly balances loss due to electrostatic repulsion + kinetic energy of rotating masses"). > > > >3) Could a third electron bind to such a pair, given that it rotates > >in the opposite direction to the direction of rotation of the pair? > > I would think they would all rotate the same way. If they all rotate the same way, then in my perhaps naive view, they would all be little magnets, lined up parallel, but with all their north poles together, and with all their south poles together. Surely in such a situation, they would magnetically repel each other, and not be bound at all. > > Many could bind, but I think tunneling probabilities would highly limit the > number. And once an electron tunneled out, it would have .5MeV times the [flame shield on] I have an awful suspicion that tunnelling is not a "magic recipe". In other words it is actually a perfectly logical, mechanical principal that will become obvious as we learn more about electromagnetic forces. And no, I don't want a QM explantion, as in my book, that is no explanation at all. Put differently, I don't believe that any change ever occurrs, without a force acting. In the QM explanation of tunneling, to the best of my knowledge, no force is evident. I believe however, that when this phenomenon is properly understood, a force will indeed be in evidence. [flame shield off] > number of remaining electrons in the bundle available for acceleration. > That's what I call an energy hill! I always thought that tunnelling only occurred where there was a net energy gain. If an electron gains energy by leaving an electron cluster, then surely there is no energy to be gained by the formation of the cluster in the first place. In short, I don't think electrons will tunnel out of a cluster. (Which sort of explains Ken Shoulder's 10^8 - 10^11 numbers). > > > >4) Could a fourth electron bind to the original pair directly, or > >would it need to form its own pair with the third electron? > > Dito as above. Ditto as above. :-) > > >5) What would the energy content of such pairs be? > > Given n electrons in a bundle, I would think it would be (.5 > MeV)(n)(n-1)/2, or proportional to n^2. Is this just based upon "mass of electron" considerations, or is it a derived formula based upon calculation of actual magnetic energy? > > >6) It may be asking a lot, but how about a general equation > >describing the energy content of a cluster of "n" electrons (or would > >this depend upon the actual configuration)? > > The energy only depends on the proximity of the charges. Yes, but what is the proximity of the charges? > > >Well even if all you get out of this is a laugh, at least it will > >have provided some entertainment value. > > > I think these are stimulating ideas and questions you have Robin, as usual! Thanks. > [snip] > > Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 > Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 19:17:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA14412 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:17:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA14346 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:17:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a20.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a20.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.20]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA23808 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:15:19 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511230315.OAA23808 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:17:09 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: hydrogen-metal report #1 Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 21 Nov 95 at 14:00, Scott Little wrote: > H-metal experiment - Vortex-L Progress Report #1 > 21NOV95 > Scott Little & Hal Puthoff, EarthTech International > > We are attempting to measure excess heat in a metal rod exposed > to hydrogen gas at specific pressures and temperatures. A > number of researchers have reported varying degrees of success > in experiments that fall into this broad category. > [snip] > Regarding the surface finish of the Ni rod, we received it in a > nearly-polished condition. On 16NOV95, after quite a few null- > result trials we disassembled the cell and found the rod to be > virtually unchanged in appearance. We then polished the rod > further with a cloth buffing wheel and polishing compound, I suspect that this is the worst thing you could have done. If my intuition is correct, then you need an extremely clean and rough surface. (You might consider dipping the rod in acid for a while to remove chemicals, and "pit" the surface lightly, then wash in distilled water, and dry rapidly in hot hydrogen wind. > reassembled the cell and performed several loading-unloading > cycles with both mechanical and electrical stimulation applied > after the rod had been soaking for several hours. > Not too long ago, I saw a protocol for preparing nickel wire, that involved heating and cooling in hydrogen and air, but can't remember exactly where. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 19:18:09 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA14460 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:18:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA14431 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:17:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a20.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a20.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.20]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA23824 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:15:25 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511230315.OAA23824 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:17:10 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: old 'steam table' message Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 21 Nov 95 at 11:18, Eaton/Cutler-Hammer Corp. wrote: > > Remember this (below) from last December? > > Fred Sparber microwave oven experiment suggests that the boil/condense > cycle mentioned below isn't needed, and that new water must be used each > time or the "loop" will close and o/u will not be displayed. (Actually, > in his phone conversation with me on Saturday he mentioned that the water > seems to "recharge" overnight, so it again displays more temp. rise on > the first cycle of heating.) [snip] > From: mdudley brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY) > Subject: Another theory for Griggs device > Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 12:14 -0500 (EST) > [snip] > non-linearity effect and therefore produce more energy than is supplied. He > does not have the foggiest idea where the excess energy could come from, but > simply that given what he knows about the non-linearities in the (corrected) > steam tables, that seems like a good place to start looking. I find the idea > intriguing, but as with so many other theories, it leaves one with as many > questions as it gives answers. > > Marshall This, and a previous post about gyroscopes has set me thinking. Somebody mentioned that gyros when free to do so, have a tendency to align themselves with the Earth's axis. Now think of a hydrogen atom as a tiny giro. This should mean that on average H atoms, (and many others too) will try to align with the Earth's axis, however the Earth's magnetic field doesn't align perfectly with its axis, so this is not going to make our H very happy. Now in my clumsy way, I am assuming that this "unhappiness" is going to manifest itself as a difference in energy, which will be different at different temperatures (wheew... hope that wasn't too many differences :-). This is because the energy difference will be small, thus the forces related to it will also be small, and thus have a larger influence on the system at low temperatures, than at higher temperatures. Now is there anyone out there that can turn my ravings into something resembling science? Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 22 21:36:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id VAA19822 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 21:13:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA19791 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 21:13:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.80 (eb1ppp16.shentel.net [204.111.1.80]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id AAA01990 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 00:14:32 -0500 Message-Id: <199511230514.AAA01990 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 00:15:54 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: What Plasma Frequency? To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <951123030127_102021.3045_EHT61-1 CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: It has been my experience that there are some frequencies in the range from 1 khz to 50 khz that can indeed produce interesting effects at (my belief only) a sub-atomic level. This frequency range could be related to mechanical waves (sound), electromagnetic waves (radio) or other energy types. Also the form of the wave, such as longitudinal or transverse as well as the many wave sub types could be part of the search for such a key. One need only take into account the many variations of the electromagnetic wave when taking odds on finding this open-says-a-me. If there is a key in this frequency range to some energy doorway, then the key could be difficult to find. If the key to the doorway were found once by chance, it could be just as hard to find on the next attempt. I for one believes that such a doorway exist. My only worry is that in finding the key, will we humans have the wisdom to use it correctly. My question. Do any of you have ideas as to why such frequencies might have such effects at the sub-atomic level? My own explanations are shaky even to me. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 01:03:32 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA15979 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 00:34:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA15955 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 00:34:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA08093; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 03:33:03 -0500 Date: 23 Nov 95 03:29:32 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: Re: vtx: What Plasma Frequency? Message-ID: <951123082931_100060.173_JHB45-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> Do any of you have ideas as to why such frequencies might have such effects at the sub-atomic level? << When I was attempting to repeat Stan Meyer's hv electrolysis with Ni tubular electrodes, the idea was to run at frequencies around 16kHz. The theory was that at this freq. the H2O molecules were "torn apart" by resonant vibration. It might well be that applying enough mechanical energy to a molecular structure at some critical freq. that disruption or even fusion is induced. Whether this applied force is mechanical, magnetic or electrical may be determined by the material used, but there is no doubt that resonance can create very large forces, but what do you cause to resonate to produce any particular action - the molecule which self-destructs due to the violent vibration, or the atoms which are forced into closer proximity, or the sub- atomic bits and pieces if you hit the right frequency. I dunno. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 01:06:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA19968 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 00:48:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA19933 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 00:48:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA04476; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 09:48:08 +0100 Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 09:48:08 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: H-metal comments, explanations #1 In-Reply-To: <199511221825.MAA19407 natashya.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 22 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: [...] > Gas diffusion rates: > > Dieter, I am puzzled by something. Is diffusion driven by > weight concentration gradients or volume concentration > gradients? If it is the latter, then H will diffuse into the Ni > only until there are the same number of atoms per cc inside the > Ni rod as there are outside the Ni rod. At 200 C and 0.5 atm > gas pressure this results in a tiny concentration in the Ni rod > amounting only to 1.7*E-4 atoms of H per atom of Ni. Strictly speaking, I guess the diffusion is driven by chemical potential gradient. There is some equilibrium loading in the Ni, corresponding to the H2 pressure in the gas phase. As long as there are loading gradients within the Ni, there will be diffusion to try to eliminate those gradients. After a long time, the whole piece of Ni will have the equilibrium loading. Calculations of the rate in terms of penetration depth, based on this SQRT(Dt) formula, are actually an overestimate, assuming a large gradient at the surface. > > Regarding the Ni diffusion rate, interpolating the data you > provided on 10NOV95 to get the diffusion rate at 200 C (i.e. 8E- > 10 m^2/sec), it looks like a few hours will suffice to load up > the first 250 microns to >70% of the saturation concentration. I find it hard to conceive of a phenomenon that requires a definite amount of bulk. Let's say that this hitherto unknown [nuclear?] reaction depends on some critical loading. Well, then, when the top few mu of the Ni are loaded that much, it should start to operate. Why would it require more loading depth? If so, how much? If so, a piece of Ni wire might be too thin. I don't believe this, which is why I have said for years that this would have to be something happening at or very near the surface. That's where loading is greatest. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 02:59:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id CAA13490 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 02:59:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA13379 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 02:58:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tIZMj-000MODC; Thu, 23 Nov 95 12:58 EET Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 12:58:53 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: vtx: hydrogen-metal Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ron, I read with interest your considerations re. the nature of the heat source in the Piantelli device. Obviously our opinions are exactly opposite and even more obviously we do not have sufficient data to answer the esential problem of the field : Nuclear or Not (only) Nuclear. We can hope the day of the answer will come soon; but will it be one answer or many? If, say in November 1996 we shall have working CF(?) devices beyond the [100 watts, one month continuous functioning, o/u greater than 10] limits e.g. the present Piantelli, Patterson, Arata, E-Quest, Griggs and Potapov devices and it will be a consensus that all these are real and good, a great question will arise: each device or system has its own source that is Ockham's razor is completely worn out? Or it exists an unique, great source, which feeds all? Now we can obtain only fragments of this answer and two important bits will come from the Patterson and the Piantelli gadgets. For Paterson- I have asked the members of this group and wrote a fax to Patterson, both w/o any answer: (shouting): DOES A PATTERSON CELL WORK WITH DEUTERIUM DEPLETED WATER??? This excludes the H + d reaction. Unfortunately, I cannot phone to Patterson or Jim Reding and ask (214-458-7620) and even I could it is questionable if they will answer to me. But you can and have great chances to get the correct answer. If it is YES, then we have to consider other reactions e.g. p + Li-7 or a non-nuclear source. But the p + Li-7 reaction is clearly impossible at Piantelli! Could you help, Ron? Scott, With all due respect for Piantelli et al, I would ignore with the maximum of energy their 1994 paper and would use only the data of the patent plus some minimum of creative ideas to try to reproduce his findings. In my thinking of chemical engineer the answer to your question ..how does Piantelli do his calorimetry ? is given in the following part of the patent. p13 " 4) Heat exchange step. Subsequent to the startup, the reaction is maintained in stationary conditions by exchanging heat by means of a thermal carrier fluid made to circulate in the tube nest 5 crossing the generation chamber of figure 1 or through jacket 15 of figure 2. The removal of heat must not exceed a level where it makes the temperature of the active core fall below Debye's constant, in which case a slow shutdown of the reaction would occur." Heat removal is implicitly the means of doing calorimetry. Exactly as the Potapov device, this one is supposed to be a heat source and therefore it needs a measurable heat sink; this is the thermal fluid circulated in the tubes. (it can be silicone oil or even better Diphyl ( a mixture of diphenyl and diphenyl oxide) or Dowtherm or some equivalent thermal transfer liquid. You have to measure temp. difference and flow. Obviously, the device has to be isolated thermally and, as far as I can understand it is really SELF-SUSTAINING. In order to prove this, the heat loss has to be really minimal,you need a very good thermal isolation. I repeat: all the data of the paper are obsolete (to not tell more) and have to be discarded. Therefore I think that your calorimetry has to changed. Can you ask the opinion of Storms and/or Cravens in this problem? Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 04:21:56 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id EAA25172 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 04:21:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA25163 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 04:21:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA06485; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 07:20:34 -0500 Date: 23 Nov 95 07:18:15 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: new Hx Message-ID: <951123121815_100060.173_JHB68-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Just read a small article in today's F.Times which might have a bearing on our problems. Mind you I'm no expert in these matters, so, if this is a load of crap please tear it up (or the equivalent). I quote: "A previously unknown form of hydrogen has been detected at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Oxfordshire. Hydrogen usually binds closely to another atom. But hydrogen ions have been detected in a "delocalised" state within manganese dioxide, a compound used in batteries. Scientists believe that this form of hydrogen has unusual electrical properties, although these have not yet been fully investigated. Potentially, they believe it could lead to the development of rechargeable dry cells, which might be cheaper, lighter and less polluting than conventional alternatives." End of quote. U.K. tel: +44 (0) 1235 821900 fax: +44 (0) 1235 446665 There you are! Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 05:11:29 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id FAA02384 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 05:11:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA02369 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 05:11:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id IAA10751; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 08:10:06 -0500 Date: 23 Nov 95 08:08:15 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Nickel surface Message-ID: <951123130814_100433.1541_BHG94-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex It's probably worth pointing out, for those who may not know, that the Piantelli patent is in one sense worthless as a source of information. The special surface treatment is omitted, and there may be other omissions. Some have said that this would never be permitted in a US patent, but I've seen a few pretty weird ones. Meyer, for but one example, has several US patents covering his gadget. Many here will be aware of the fanfare (especially in the Italian press) which accompanied the first paper from Piantelli et al. But this was followed by a long period of silence before any further news came. There appeared to be litle doubt that reproducibility was rearing its pretty head once more. At least, those were the reports I heard. Putting these things together, I feel that it would be reasonable as a working hypothesis to assume that a fair amount of Italian blood was sweated over a considerable period of time to make the thing behave. We know of other claims for Ni/H gas-phase excess heat, and it's not really such a big jump from such as the CETI device - which is essentially a Ni/H machine. Let's assume that electrolysis is one way of loading metal with H (which of course it is) and that Piantelli has another. I don't go a bundle on the shock wave notion, because it would appear to be absent from the CETI thing, but it might be the answer. Maybe those tiny H bubbles in the CETI cell do something in the nature of a shock. Or indeed it could be some electromagnetic effect. Personally, I am concerned that, if those who pioneered the thing are having all this trouble, Scott may have just as much or more. As to nuclear explanantions, personally I have little time for them in this instance. Apart from Bush's ideas on (eg) 39K + p -> 40Ca, there's precious little evidence or claim of *anything* nuclear going on in Ni/H systems. In D/Pd, everybody and his little old auntie has reported nuclear effects, ranging from the tiny to the huge. For Ni/H - virtually zero. On Piantelli's claims for p + d -> 3He, I think it's just so much hot hydrogen. He was claiming this at square one, as his basic hypothesis. Apparently this kind of idea gets a friendly reception in Italy, for whatever reason. He said that he was going to be looking for 3He, and from a nice little enclosed system like that one he should have had NO trouble getting the gas tested, considering how little 3He there is in air. But have we heard any such reports? Nope. I think it's just a useful story to go on telling. Anyway, if it were true, there would be a clear fall-off in the heat release as the last deuterons were sucked out of the gas. Were that to have happened, we'd have heard about it, no worries. I for one am sick and tired of the vast majority of CF researchers. Very few of them are willing to come out show their wares. CETI is among the few who do that, who assist Universties to replicate, who are willing to risk running their device in public - one hopes it will perform well at Anaheim, CA. As to many but not all of the rest of them, it seems that each one believes he has the friggin' Holy Grail of Science, and "It's mine! All mine! None of you can play with it!" Pathetic, I call it. Well, after such an outpouring of bile, my sincere best wishes that y'all on that side of the Pond are having a good holiday must sound odd. But I hope you do, and that a good Thanksgiving is not like a British "relatively good Christmas" - one at which none of one's relatives show up. Chris PS I just saw Norman's comment. MnO2 rings all kinds of bells with me in relation to CF. Ah - wasn't it that early Japanese D/Pd gas phase stuff by NTT? Yup, that was it. Ah. Thanks, Norman. I think you may have pointed us in an interesting direction. Any more info in there? I'll go get a copy of the FT. Close's lab, eh? Hmm. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 07:00:43 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA20842 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 07:00:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA20684 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 06:59:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tId6r-000MOGC; Thu, 23 Nov 95 16:58 EET Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 16:58:44 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: All my best wishes to our American friends for a happy Thanksgivings! Peter From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 07:55:39 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA02872 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 07:55:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA02852 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 07:55:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA08504; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 16:55:14 +0100 Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 16:55:14 +0100 From: Dieter Britz Message-Id: <9511231555.AA08504 kemi.aau.dk> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Last time: diffusion coeffs Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Still on the subject of diffusion of hydrogen in Ni, I have now had a close look at Vol.I of Voelkl and Alefeld's "Hydrogen in Metals", and it has a graph of many results, plotted as an Arrhenius plot. There are two disjoint straight lines, for below and above the Curie temperature (Tc = 625K, my reading off the graph): D = D0 * EXP(U/RT), T > Tc: D0 = 6.9*10^-3 cm^2/s, U = 0.420 eV T < Tc: D0 = 4.8*10^-3 cm^2/s, U = 0.408 eV. Reading off the graph, I get for T = 200C = 473K, D = 2 * 10^-7 cm^2/s T = 25C = 298K, D = 1 * 10^-9 cm^2/s - but I take it the above numbers will no doubt give you better D values. I promise now to drop diffusion coefficients (for the moment). But they are so nice, everyone can agree on them... -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 11:01:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA20615 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:01:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA20599; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:01:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id LAA23691; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:01:03 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:01:02 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com cc: freenrg-list mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Altering of half-lives Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Below is an interesting message regarding macroscopic electrostatics having an effect on nuclear decay rates. I can't recall if I forward this to the list last month. If there are some undiscovered "windows" of interaction with the nucleus, maybe there are many hidden routes for extracting nuclear energy, causing low-enery transmutation, breeding chicken which lay self-warming eggs with palladium-fiber yolks, etc. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 01:15:16 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: William Beaty Subject: Post this .... Dear bill, Post on Keely net and Internet. Don't put my name on it until I have done last tests. Patent numbers for Barker 5,076,931 and 4,91.880. I have a copy of the latter nd here is some form it. Firm: Skjerven, Morrill, MacPherson, Franklin and Friel. William A. Barker Aug 31, 1988 filed Date of patent Oct 9 1990 "Electrostatic Voltage Excitation Apparatus" Some stuff, in no order. missing some pages, will call it up again. Am 241 was closed 54.2 uCurie alpha emitter. Embedded in 6 mm thick plastic cylider so as to block alphas. "The radiation which penetrates the cylider is a discrete gamma spectrum consisting of nine gamma lines ranging from 11.871 to 59.5364 ke V. ....... Pre excitation counts 595 cps. 4 weeks after excitation up to 734, "and then it rose rather quickly to 1,490 cps and 2,508 cps ... 4 times its initial value I later dropped to about 1576 cps, a reasonably steady value" The source was examined by Dr. Peter Englert with an x ray spectrometer t San Jose State U., a radiation chemist. Several plots, diagrams. This is substantially what we have observed. One perfoms the excitation [ 16 hours in our case ] and then NO MORE IS NEEDED! The stuff just does its thing. "The poential energy of the Coulomb barrier, resisting particle escape, is lowered by 2 | e0 | from 2 Ze sq./r Some materials: Thallium 204 and Lead 210 Thorium 230 Polonium 210 were tested. get the patent. J. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 11:13:05 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA23802 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:13:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA23792; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:13:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id LAA24511; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:12:59 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:12:58 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com cc: freenrg-list mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: OOps! Altering of half-lives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 23 Nov 1995, William Beaty wrote: > Below is an interesting message regarding macroscopic electrostatics > having an effect on nuclear decay rates. I can't recall if I forwarded > this to the list last month. Ooops! He didn't want his name on the message so I stripped his .sig, but missed the "From:" field. Please don't bother Mr. Schnurer until I contact him, OK? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 11:32:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA28568 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:32:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA28540 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 11:32:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id OAA27793; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:30:52 -0500 Date: 23 Nov 95 14:26:18 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Results of St Pete tests Message-ID: <951123192618_100433.1541_BHG81-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Dear All, Rather than lose my supposed reputation for being diplomatic, I shall refrain at this stage from commenting publicly on these tests. I appreciate that the USA is pretty much closed until Monday, I doubt I'll be able to restrain myself until then. Chris (banging head on adjacent wall) ------------------------------------------------------------------ "AO NPO ZKTI named after I.I.Polzunov" Estimate of the efficiency of heatgenerator "Yusmar". There have been carried out the comparative tests of two methods of room warming: by Yusmar and by the electrical heater (coil) of the same power. The test data ae given below: Method of warming Parameters Yusmar El.heater Volume of the room; cubic meters | 8.33 | 8.33 Square of the room; square meters | 3.75 | 3.75 Input power; kWt | 2.12 | 2.23 Temperature of the water in the loop; Celcius degree | 87.0 | 85.0 Temperature of the air in the warmed room; Celcius degree| 33.0 | 34.0 Temperature of the air outside the room (tent); Celcius degree | 13.5 | 14.0 Manager of division of strength and resources of power equipment Dr. Sudakov A.V. Senior scientific researcher Kozlov B.M. Senior scientific researcher Kizima V.A. It is applied to this document a message from Dr. Fedorovich: "Dear Chris, I send you the results of the "Yusmar" test and would like to comment it. The power of Yusmar and electrical heaters, tent (air inside tent), temperature and other parameters have been controlled in two separate (in time) tests: Yusmar is operating and heater is operating, we tried to have for both tests the same (equal) room temperatures, and tent emperatures (or differences "tent minus room" temperatures), controllong the energy inputs. The all data have been very well repeatable; all procedures, description of the testfacility etc. are described in special report which is now nder the preparation and will be sent to you by Volodya. If we use the received data (see the enclosed table)and your expression for the coefficient of performance of Yusmar COP = {Power of heater(pump isn't in operation) - Power of Yusmar(pump is in operation)}/Power of pump we receive: calculated COP = 1.05 But we should understand that the error of the experiment is more than 5% (by our estimation is 10% approximately). So the real COP should be in the frames 0.95-1.15 and my answer to the question about the most probable amount of it is Real COP = 1 We understand also that the procedures of the experiments could be different ones. By example, as you described to us previously, both devices (Yusmar and heater) could work similtaneously. But in this case the powers of each of hem will be less and I expect the same overall result for COP. Anyway, we shall wail your comments to this results and to information in the report. I advice also to think about more detailed measurements, if you are interested in them, and testing (investigations) internal characteristics of Yusmar and/or other devices (Griggs machine etc.). I mean the temperature and velocity profiles and so on. We will be glad to see you here. If you will plan to visit us, please, inform about conenient time in advance and we shall send you the invitation letter. The experimental facility is ready for the test any day. Yours E.Fedorovich Nov.22. 1995 -------- I am waiting from you the questions. ---------------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 12:43:32 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA10123 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 12:43:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA10087 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 12:43:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-5.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-5.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.5]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id HAA01972 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 07:40:46 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511232040.HAA01972 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 07:43:24 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: H-metal comments, explanations #1 Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 23 Nov 95 at 9:48, Dieter Britz wrote: > On Wed, 22 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: [snip] > > Regarding the Ni diffusion rate, interpolating the data you > > provided on 10NOV95 to get the diffusion rate at 200 C (i.e. 8E- > > 10 m^2/sec), it looks like a few hours will suffice to load up > > the first 250 microns to >70% of the saturation concentration. > > I find it hard to conceive of a phenomenon that requires a definite amount > of bulk. Let's say that this hitherto unknown [nuclear?] reaction depends > on some critical loading. Well, then, when the top few mu of the Ni are > loaded that much, it should start to operate. Why would it require more > loading depth? If so, how much? If so, a piece of Ni wire might be too thin. > I don't believe this, which is why I have said for years that this would > have to be something happening at or very near the surface. That's where > loading is greatest. > > -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk To further state the obvious, the coating on the Patterson beads is only 2-3 microns thick. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 14:51:40 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id OAA07972 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:51:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA07962 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:51:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA01429; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 17:50:04 -0500 Date: 23 Nov 95 17:48:59 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: An exercise in bile-swallowing Message-ID: <951123224859_100433.1541_BHG68-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex (Do I need to say that I discussed the null-balance technique at considerable length, and left full written details for its implementation?) I have had enough time to cool down from reading the Fedorovitch report to compose a response to Dr Onoochin: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Volodya, Many thanks for sending the Fedorovitch report. I realise that without your own personal efforts we might have had to wait a very long time for it! Please allow me to separate my view of the report from my thanks for all your own efforts. The test may have been a good one, but it is quite impossible to know that from the figures. The most obvious problem is the lack of null-balance testing, which has a very high intrinsic accuracy. The next problem is that the error is reported as 'estimated'. If the test is fully reproducible (as the report says it is) then the error can be calculated, no estimation is required. In fact, the tests suggest that the device would have very limited commercial potential, even if the error were in favour of the Yusmar. From a scientific point of view, however, the suggestive results are very frustrating. I would very much have preferred a result which had the intrinsic accuracy of the null-balance technique, where precisely the same instruments are monitoring the same values in a single test, thus removing their potential inaccuracies. We now have a set of results which will simply increase confusion rather than settle the matter. The slightly different temperatures in the tent would be enough, I feel, to invalidate the results obtained. Please understand that I am looking for a conclusion to this matter. I have no emotional commitment to the Yusmar being over-unity, but these tests are not in any sense conclusive. That is in part due to the small difference (perhaps zero) between the Yusmar and the heater, but partly due to an unsatisfactory test. Some of these problems may disappear with the production of the full report, but I fear that the problems which are immediately apparent on reading the report will not. There are many possible problems I have not mentioned, but the ones I have listed are sufficient. As you may know, today is the main holiday of the year in America, and it is possible that I will get no response from the Vortex group for several days. I will forward their comments. Again, I must say how much I appreciate your efforts to speed the testing. I can imagine how difficult that must have been, and again I thank you! Warm regards, Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 14:57:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id OAA09471 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:57:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from anugpo.anu.edu.au (anugpo.anu.edu.au [150.203.2.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA09449 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:57:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from nimbus.anu.edu.au (nimbus.anu.edu.au [150.203.126.21]) by anugpo.anu.edu.au (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA29724 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:56:52 +1100 Received: by nimbus.anu.edu.au (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18932; Fri, 24 Nov 95 09:56:45 EST Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 09:56:45 EST From: daved nimbus.anu.edu.au (Dave DAVIES) Message-Id: <9511232256.AA18932 nimbus.anu.edu.au> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Background Fluctuations and NHE Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > ... > Dear Dave Davies, > Could you give some details about this water dissociation idea in the > context of all the systems? > Thank you, > Best regards, Peter Gluck. > > Nothing to add at the moment Peter but if I do have any ideas this group will be the first to hear. I am just doing my annual re-assessment of the field of New Hydrogen Energy - very superficially since I am in the last few weeks of my current contract. Talk of resonant effects always arouses my interest and the recent comments by Norman on 16kHz resonances for water are interesting. If the acoustic energy breaks up the water molecule with the assistance of ZPE which is given off as thermal energy when the water re-combines then we have stolen ZPE. If you look at it as a zero point oscillation then this does not make a lot of sense since it it is ZP and as such cant really be taken but if it is viewed as just background noise in the ripples of space-time that we call energy then it seems more intuitively plausible. I prefer the term Background Fluctuations. Is there a better name? Back in the solid state - has anyone looked closely at the Jahn-Teller effect of coupling between phonons and the electronic and nuclear spin energies? My initial thoughts that these couplings were far too small to be relevant but I am now not so sure. I have just got hold of a book: Cooperative Phenomena in Jahn-Teller Crystals by Michael Kaplan and Benjamin Vekhter (Plenum, 1995) That talks about transfer of phonon energy to nuclear spin and other interesting ideas. I've not had a good look at it yet - just got it yesterday. dave From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 21:43:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id VAA10561 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 21:43:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA10510 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 21:43:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-13.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-13.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.13]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA04611 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 16:41:12 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511240541.QAA04611 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 16:43:29 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 23 Nov 95 at 11:01, William Beaty wrote: > Below is an interesting message regarding macroscopic electrostatics > having an effect on nuclear decay rates. I can't recall if I forward > this to the list last month. > > If there are some undiscovered "windows" of interaction with the nucleus, > maybe there are many hidden routes for extracting nuclear energy, causing > low-enery transmutation, breeding chicken which lay self-warming eggs > with palladium-fiber yolks, etc. > > > .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. > William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 > EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ > Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 01:15:16 -0400 (EDT) > From: John Schnurer > To: William Beaty > Subject: Post this .... > > > Dear bill, > > Post on Keely net and Internet. Don't put my name on it until I > have done last tests. > > Patent numbers for Barker 5,076,931 > and 4,91.880. I have a copy of the latter nd here is some form it. Bill this last patent number doesn't quite seem to have made the grade. Can you do anything about it? > > [snip] Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 21:45:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id VAA10965 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 21:45:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA10642 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 21:44:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-13.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-13.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.13]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA04617 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 16:41:16 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511240541.QAA04617 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 16:43:28 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Results of St Pete tests Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 23 Nov 95 at 14:26, Chris Tinsley wrote: > To:Vortex > > > Dear All, > > Rather than lose my supposed reputation for being diplomatic, I shall refrain > at this stage from commenting publicly on these tests. I appreciate that the > USA is pretty much closed until Monday, I doubt I'll be able to restrain > myself until then. > > Chris (banging head on adjacent wall) > ------------------------------------------------------------------ [snip] Chris, I don't think you need to bang your head against the wall. Reading between the lines, it seems to me that this is actually a report on the preliminary testing done on the Yusmar, to see if they can get it to operate in O-U mode. Much as Scott has done. This has apparently not succeeded, and they are basically awaiting instructions before proceeding with more tests. I would suggest that at this point in time it would be appropriate to get Potapov or a rep. from the factory involved in the testing, in the role of consultant. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 22:12:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA18497 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 22:12:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA18458 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 22:12:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-135.austin.eden.com (net-1-135.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.135]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id AAA03741 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:12:10 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:12:10 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511240612.AAA03741 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: H-metal discussion #3 X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: An unofficial saying goes: "Ask and ye shall frequently find it for yourself". Right after requesting the B-H curve for Ni on Vortex, I found it in a big book on magnets by Moskowitz. The B-H curve supports Mike Schaffer's 0.6 tesla saturation induction value. Mike, P mentions magnetostriction in his patent as a method of shocking the core. >The only way to couple more energy is to increase the voltage. Capacitance >beyond that giving RC = L/R is useless. This points to high voltage. The >coil and capacitor voltage can be reduced by reducing the number of coil >turns. I note that Piantelli et al in their Nuovo Cimento letter seem to >have used a single layer coil. Good point...and this aligns well with P's account of his apparatus. He mentions 10 kV and 30 nF, I think. I can't even think of putting that kind of voltage on my present coil, though. Perhaps I'll make a coil more like P's... >It might be worth leaving the plated Ni surface in the as-plated matt >condition to increase the effective surface area. > >Norman. This sounds good as well, Norman Peter, I'm beginning to wonder if we're on the same planet... :) You said: >Heat removal is implicitly the means of doing calorimetry. >Exactly as the Potapov device, this one is supposed to be a heat source >and therefore it needs a measurable heat sink; this is the thermal fluid >circulated in the tubes. >Therefore I think that your calorimetry has to changed. I've got heat removal...just not with liquids. Further, the heat removal is the means by which I "do the calorimetry". In my present apparatus, as soon as the Ni rod begins producing at least 25 watts of excess heat, I'll be able to turn off my heater coil and the thing will be self-sustaining. Piantelli reported up to 50 watts excess heat in the patent. If I start getting that kind of performance, I'll just decrease the amount of insulation in my outer chamber so the system doesn't overheat. Now precisely what is wrong with my setup, Peter? Be specific. If you come up with a good reason for me to change things...I will. >Can you ask the opinion of Storms and/or Cravens in this problem? Yes, I know Storms reasonably well and will speak to him first thing next week. Chris said: >Personally, I am concerned that, if those who pioneered the thing are >having all this trouble, Scott may have just as much or more. Looks that way for now...but I'm determined to give this thing a thorough investigation. Latest results: Tuesday night I left the Ni rod soaking in H at ~190 C overnight. Wed morning there was no sign of excess heat so I evacuated the chamber and kept the rod pretty hot (~170 C) for 2 hours to unload the surface of the Ni. Then I admitted fresh H and raised the rod temp to around 200 C, a temp mentioned by P in the patent for loading. After about 2 hours of that, I lowered the rod temp to around 188 C and tried both the mechanical shock and the electromagnetic shock I described earlier....with no observable effect. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 22:20:16 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA20638 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 22:20:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA20615 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 22:20:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-135.austin.eden.com (net-1-135.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.135]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id AAA03958 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:20:05 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:20:05 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511240620.AAA03958 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Am 241 was closed 54.2 uCurie alpha emitter. Embedded in 6 mm >thick plastic cylider so as to block alphas. "The radiation which >penetrates the cylider is a discrete gamma spectrum consisting of nine >gamma lines ranging from 11.871 to 59.5364 ke V. ....... > > Pre excitation counts 595 cps. 4 weeks after excitation up to >734, "and then it rose rather quickly to 1,490 cps and 2,508 cps ... 4 >times its initial value I later dropped to about 1576 cps, a reasonably >steady value" If we can get a reasonable description of the "excitation", I'll replicate this experiment. I can get a suitable Am-241 source from a smoke detector...it'll only be 0.5 uCurie but that's enuf. My main qualification is that I've got a decent detector and I know how to determine whether its working properly or not (20 years experience designing x-ray fluorescence analyzers). Bill, can you get from "him" a description of his detector setup...what type was used, how did he check its stability throughout the test, etc. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 23:20:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA03693 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 23:20:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA03682 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 23:20:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.68]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA16091 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:40:07 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 22:21:46 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: H-metal comments, explanations #1 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> >> Regarding the Ni diffusion rate, interpolating the data you >> provided on 10NOV95 to get the diffusion rate at 200 C (i.e. 8E- >> 10 m^2/sec), it looks like a few hours will suffice to load up >> the first 250 microns to >70% of the saturation concentration. > >I find it hard to conceive of a phenomenon that requires a definite amount >of bulk. Let's say that this hitherto unknown [nuclear?] reaction depends >on some critical loading. Well, then, when the top few mu of the Ni are >loaded that much, it should start to operate. Why would it require more >loading depth? If so, how much? If so, a piece of Ni wire might be too thin. >I don't believe this, which is why I have said for years that this would >have to be something happening at or very near the surface. That's where >loading is greatest. > >-- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk Just a passing thought - if the NI is not fully loaded to the core, whatever the depth, that would imply the maximum internal pressure could not be yet reached, nor maximum H loading, due to the continual inward migration of the H, even on the surface. Equilibrium is required for maximal loading, even if the CF effect is a surface effect. If the CF effect involves special combinations of events, like two or more adjacent site occupied, or temporary occupation of a single site by 2 or more H nuclei, then the effect may not be likely to be seen or triggered while diffusion is in progress. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 23:38:39 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA07232 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 23:38:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07214 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 23:38:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA12234; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 08:38:35 +0100 Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 08:38:35 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Last time: diffusion coeffs In-Reply-To: <9511231555.AA08504 kemi.aau.dk> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 23 Nov 1995, Dieter Britz wrote: > Still on the subject of diffusion of hydrogen in Ni, I have now had a close > look at Vol.I of Voelkl and Alefeld's "Hydrogen in Metals", and it has a > graph of many results, plotted as an Arrhenius plot. There are two disjoint > straight lines, for below and above the Curie temperature (Tc = 625K, my > reading off the graph): > D = D0 * EXP(U/RT), I just realised this was a mistake, and it's mine, not V&A's (they don't provide this formula on the same page, just the values). Anyway, it ought to be D = D0 * EXP(U/kT). ^ So sorry. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 23 23:49:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA09422 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 23:49:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA09355 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 23:49:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.68]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA16128 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 01:09:09 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 22:50:47 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: H-metal comments, explanations #1 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On 23 Nov 95 at 9:48, Dieter Britz wrote: > >> On Wed, 22 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: >[snip] >> > Regarding the Ni diffusion rate, interpolating the data you >> > provided on 10NOV95 to get the diffusion rate at 200 C (i.e. 8E- >> > 10 m^2/sec), it looks like a few hours will suffice to load up >> > the first 250 microns to >70% of the saturation concentration. >> >> I find it hard to conceive of a phenomenon that requires a definite amount >> of bulk. Let's say that this hitherto unknown [nuclear?] reaction depends >> on some critical loading. Well, then, when the top few mu of the Ni are >> loaded that much, it should start to operate. Why would it require more >> loading depth? If so, how much? If so, a piece of Ni wire might be too thin. >> I don't believe this, which is why I have said for years that this would >> have to be something happening at or very near the surface. That's where >> loading is greatest. >> >> -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk >To further state the obvious, the coating on the Patterson beads is >only 2-3 microns thick. >Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, >Learns all his life, >And leaves knowing nothing. >Robin Feb. 1995 In the patterson cell perhaps the Ni-Pd boundary inhibits diffusion of H, permitting a fast equilibrium or near equilibrium condition? Does the H just keep on diffusing into the plastic? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 00:22:48 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA15797 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:22:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA15791 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:22:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA24136; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 03:21:25 -0500 Date: 24 Nov 95 03:19:45 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: Re: vtx: H-metal comments, explanations #1 Message-ID: <951124081945_100060.173_JHB34-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace, >> if the NI is not fully loaded to the core, whatever the depth, that would imply the maximum internal pressure could not be yet reached, nor maximum H loading, due to the continual inward migration of the H, even on the surface. Equilibrium is required for maximal loading, even if the CF effect is a surface effect. << Just a thought - why not use thin-walled tubing rather than a solid rod? This would probably maintain the internal pressure for longer, as well as giving a greater area for the H to soak through. Another thought - could you use a loosely rolled up tube of Ni foil? This would give huge area and flexibility to foil any tendency to crack. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 02:09:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id CAA02207 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 02:09:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA02201 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 02:09:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA08106; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 05:08:04 -0500 Date: 24 Nov 95 05:06:10 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: St Pete Message-ID: <951124100609_100433.1541_BHG83-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status:  To:vortex Subj:St Pete Robin writes: "I don't think you need to bang your head against the wall. Reading between the lines, it seems to me that this is actually a report on the preliminary testing done on the Yusmar, to see if they can get it to operate in O-U mode. Much as Scott has done. This has apparently not succeeded, and they are basically awaiting instructions before proceeding with more tests." And that is exactly why I'm banging my head on the wall. They've had the bloody thing for months. And they think they've done a definitive test, which infuriates me. Anybody who armwaves error bars - sheesh. Let alone that null-balance work would have have allowed for very high accuracy. "I would suggest that at this point in time it would be appropriate to get Potapov or a rep. from the factory involved in the testing, in the role of consultant." Too right. Pity we can't, eh? Dean mentions the pump used. Yes, it's been said that only the lower-grade Russian pumps work. Anything is possible in this hall of smoke and mirrors. Chris From fznidarsic gpu.com Fri Nov 24 05:40:48 1995 Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA28791 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 05:40:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA08291 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 08:40:31 -0500 Message-Id: <199511241340.AA08291 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 08:40:31 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM Subject: Re: vtx: youar Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 08:39:53 EST Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 10:51:58 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: youarecorrect Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com >F J Sparger computes the the natural wavelength of the hydrogen plasma in a >cold >fusion electrode to be in the mid-infrared band. I have been saying the same >sort of >thing for some years now...that the disolved hydrogen plasma will directly >interact with >the zero point Fermi levels in the metal when the natural frequency of the >plasma This make no sense to me. I would think the conduction band *electron's* interaction with the adsorbed hydrogen would represent statistically a far more likely opportunity for linkage with ZPE, due to the much larger de Broglie wavelength of thermal electrons (about 60 A), plus the much greater likelyhood of electron's shedding energy via photons to drop into a very low temperature condition in the coulomb well to manifest the linkage. The only difficulty is creating conditions whereby electrons can "fall into the well". Once there in the well at low energy conditions, the electron's huge de Broglile wavelength (and consequently large SE distribution) mandates almost instant tunneling out of the well. If this is true, the relationship of the primary ZPE linkage phenomenon is only indirectly related to density by the increased likelyhood of tunneling when there is someplace to tunnel to. The main difficulty lies in maximizing the elecron's opportunity to fall into a well and accelerate to a significant velocity. Horace "fall into the well" that's the problem with your idea. As an electron falls it gives up energy. This energy is transfered to the hydrogen plasma. The reaction is basically one of energy transfer. +energy transferred = force * distance -negative gravitational potential transferred = force * distance New energy is not produced, existing energy is transferred and the state of the system, that gave up the energy, is changed. If the evanescent force acts on the zero point energy level. Energy transferred = 0, the zero point state cannot drop to a lower energy level energy produced new = force * distance as - grav potential produced new = force * distance >I compute the energy of the state to be = kinetic + potential >Wavelength = energy/h You have not included the potential energy in your calculations. Regards, fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. Frank Znidarsic Johnstown Pa. 15906 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 05:57:53 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id FAA01556 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 05:57:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA01539 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 05:57:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA06278 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 08:57:33 -0500 Message-Id: <199511241357.AA06278 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 08:57:33 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Backgroun Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 08:56:55 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 09:56:45 EST From: daved nimbus.anu.edu.au (Dave DAVIES) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Background Fluctuations and NHE Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com > ... > Dear Dave Davies, > Could you give some details about this water dissociation idea in the > context of all the systems? > Thank you, > Best regards, Peter Gluck. > > Nothing to add at the moment Peter but if I do have any ideas this group will be the first to hear. I am just doing my annual re-assessment of the field of New Hydrogen Energy - very superficially since I am in the last few weeks of my current contract. Talk of resonant effects always arouses my interest and the recent comments by Norman on 16kHz resonances for water are interesting. If the acoustic energy breaks up the water molecule with the assistance of ZPE which is given off as thermal energy when the water re-combines then we have stolen ZPE. If you look at it as a zero point oscillation then this does not make a lot of sense since it it is ZP and as such cant really be taken but if it is viewed as just background noise in the ripples of space-time that we call energy then it seems more intuitively plausible. I prefer the term Background Fluctuations. Is there a better name? Dave: True the energy cannot be extracted but the fluctuations can produce a forc e. New energy results from the force. New energy = force * distance The conservation of energy forbids the single reaction and negative energy must be also be produced by the fluctuation force. from general relativity negative grav potential = (force)G/(ccr) negative energy = negative potential * distance negative energy = (force)G/ccr (distance) negative energy = force * distance Dave you just about had it figured out. Frank From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 06:18:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA04881 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:18:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA04871 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:17:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA05547 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:17:38 -0500 Message-Id: <199511241417.AA05547 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:17:38 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: What Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 09:17:01 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 00:15:54 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: What Plasma Frequency? To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <951123030127_102021.3045_EHT61-1 CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com It has been my experience that there are some frequencies in the range from 1 khz to 50 khz that can indeed produce interesting effects at (my belief only) a sub-atomic level. This frequency range could be related to mechanical waves (sound), electromagnetic waves (radio) or other energy types. Also the form of the wave, such as longitudinal or transverse as well as the many wave sub types could be part of the search for such a key. Engineers note: Longitudinal electromagnetic waves do propagate in coax cables. We know them, in the engineering world, as common mode waves. Some call them noise. Their velocity of propagation is different than the opposed mode transverse signals. A torroid placed around a transmission line blocks longitudinal waves and allows transverse waves to pass. Look on the back of you computer at the line that feeds the monitor..see the lump...that's a torroid that blocks the longitudinal waves... I believe electrons are transverse and protons and neutrons are longitudnial. I believe that neutrinos are longitudinal light. My schemes for a levitational device are based on the existance of longitudinal electromagntic waves. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 06:21:56 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA05497 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:21:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA05351 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:20:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tIyzq-000MO8C; Fri, 24 Nov 95 16:20 EET Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 16:20:58 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: vtx: hydrogen-metal, Yusmar. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, Your answer will decide if we are on the same planet. 1.- You are in contradiction with Piantelli's patent not with me in matters of heat removal/measurement. His fluid is not air. If I am saying that the info from the P. paper is lacking value, I have good reasons to do so. 2.-You are removing continuously some 25 watts heat from the device and this absolutely useless heat; the function of the coil is to heat the Ni rod to the working temperature and to maintain it there. With a minimum of expense and of effort and of energy. (engineering!) If the device is isolated, you need much less heat to perform this function(s) and all you have to do is to compensate some small heat losses. Are you contented with the coil you have to use? I feel that not. 3.- You wrote: "In my present apparatus, as soon as the Ni rod begins producing 25 watts of excess heat, I'll be able to turn off my heater coil and the thing will be self sustaining. Piantelli reported up to 50 watts excess heat in the patent. If I start getting that kind of performance, I'll just decrease the amount of insulation in my outer chamber so the system doesn't overheat" Here is the clue and the reason of isolating the system: You do not get this excess heat at once! It starts somewhere in a very limited small area and a hot-spot delivering microwatts of excess heat begins to work. Will it survive, will it trigger new active areas in the adjacent zones? Will the eventually the whole surface work at a dynamic equilibrium? Will it be extinguished from the start? Please have the kindness to compare what happens in your device where you have a great flux of heat (wasteful heat) a real blizzard, and what happens in a well isolated system in which the heat flux is similar to a slight breeze. Anyway, you are welcome on my planet even if you do not agree with this line of thinking. Chris, I am really sorry for the St. Pete result and for the fact that the researchers haven't use the correct methodology. However by changing the method we wouldn't get an exciting i.e. o/u result. The u/u performance was obvious from the rate of heat-up of the water in the small circuit 60 deg.C in 39 minutes. You and all the Vortex colleagues know that I consider that the Yusmar works by liquid/liquid cavitation and that the recirculation tube is necessary. I am focused on the effect not on the measurement. Do you consider that a "perfect" negative result with the St. Pete setup is sufficient for deciding that it doesn't work and never will? Can I help? All the best, Peter From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 06:32:02 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA07364 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:31:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA07343 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:31:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA09685 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:31:40 -0500 Message-Id: <199511241431.AA09685 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:31:40 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: What Plas Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 09:31:03 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: 22 Nov 95 22:01:27 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: What Plasma Frequency? Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com I did not mention any plasma frequency when I stated that Einstein-Debye and others noted that sound or acoustic waves will not propagate in any material if the wavelength is less than the interatomic distance. And that it was noticed by BIG AL that this corresponded to the wavelength of an infrared frequency that was absorbed. And I further stated that a ZPE wave that may have originated in a primeval radio station is not likely to interact any differently, that is to say that if the wavelength is less that the Einstein-Debye frequency-wavelength it is not likely to interact with the lattice any more than a phonon or such. Brillouin exploited the use of acoustic waves to modulate light and Townes turned this around with the MASER-LASER to generate hypersonic waves in various materials. This synergistic interaction between acoustic and electromagnetic waves in materials is being exploited in many different applications. There's no reason to believe that ZPE shouldn't do something similar and create some thermal effects in the process. What Plasma Frequency? F.J.Sparber To answer your question..the plasma frequency is the natural frequency of a plasma. It is related to the Debye wavelength. No waves, mechancial, electrical, or matter can exist in plasma that have wavelengths longer than the plasma frequency. The ionosphere, for example, is a plasma. Its plasma frequency is in the radio band. It reflects radio waves..that's why you can pick up short wave transmissions around the world. High freq television signals pass through the ionosphere. During periods of sun spots the density of the ionosphere increaces. During these periods the natural frequency of the ionosphere increases into the VHF radio spectrum. VHF waves interact with the plasma. TV is picked up over great distances. natural wavelength = K/(density)**.5 Super dense plasmas could interact with the zero point Fermi energy levels in solid matter.. That's what I'm trying to say. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 06:54:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA11861 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:54:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA11835 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:54:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca (wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca [131.136.255.106]) by dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA21315 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:47:05 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199511241447.JAA21315 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca> X-Sender: wspage dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:57:31 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: wspage ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: Re: vtx: Results of St Pete tests Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris transmitted the following report to us: >... >"AO NPO ZKTI named after I.I.Polzunov" > >Estimate of the efficiency of heatgenerator "Yusmar". > >There have been carried out the comparative tests of two methods of room >warming: by Yusmar and by the electrical heater (coil) of the same power. > ... > The power of Yusmar and electrical heaters, tent (air inside tent), >temperature and other parameters have been controlled in two separate >(in time) tests: Yusmar is operating and heater is operating, >... > If we use the received data (see the enclosed table)and your expression >for the coefficient of performance of Yusmar > >COP = {Power of heater(pump isn't in operation) - Power of Yusmar(pump is in >operation)}/Power of pump >we receive: >calculated COP = 1.05 Is this really your expression for COP, Chris? I don't understand this "calculation". Given the description of the tests, how can one determine "Power of Yusmar(pump is in operation)" separately from "Power of pump"? In any case the above definition of COP is pretty strange, but this does not really affect the interpretation of the data as given. > But we should understand that the error of the experiment is more than >5% (by our estimation is 10% approximately). >So the real COP should be in the frames 0.95-1.15 and my answer to the >question about the most probable amount of it is >Real COP = 1 Although they didn't do a full null balance measurement and it is not at all clear why, it seems to me that the tests which they did perform are sufficient to reasonably confidiently state that if any over-unity effects are present, then they are very likely less that 5%. This is obviously very much less than the claims of the inventor and several other (supposedly independent) tests. But it is consistent will all of the tests performed in the U.S. to date. Personally, I think this puts the overwhelming evidence against any putative over-unity effect and I don't seem much reason to continue to examine the Yushmar device. If we can put this one aside and conclude that nothing extraordinary is happening in this device, and get on with looking at other systems, then I think we have shown that there is nothing pathological about this research. On the other hand, continuing attempts to replicate the inventor's claims might well be construed as just wishful thinking. > We understand also that the procedures of the experiments could be >different ones. By example, as you described to us previously, both >devices (Yusmar and heater) could work similtaneously. But in this case >the powers of each of hem will be less and I expect the same overall >result for COP. > ... Again, I don't understand this comment. It demonstrates, I think, that they did not understand the null-balance measurement technique. However, again, I agree with the conclusion. Cheers, Bill Page. From fznidarsic gpu.com Fri Nov 24 07:03:03 1995 Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA13596 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 07:03:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA13686 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:02:47 -0500 Message-Id: <199511241502.AA13686 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:02:47 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM Subject: vtx: Heffner S Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 10:02:10 EST Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 From: Puthoff aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:12:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Heffner Sub-Orbital Hypothesis Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com Dear Vortexians, A few days ago H. Heffner posted a lengthy note concerning his sub-orbital hypothesis of CF. I just wanted to say that I thought it was a very ingenious proposal, well-stated, and one that I think deserves careful consideration. Here at EarthTech we have been looking at a "sibling" of Heffner's approach which, although coming at it from a different direction, is quite sympatico. In a word (more or less!), our ZPE theory of the quantum ground state of hydrogen (see Phys Rev D 35, 3266, 1987) posits that the ground state of the hydrogen atom results from a dynamic equilibrium between radiation emitted due to acceleration of the electron in its ground state orbit, and radiation absorbed from zero-point fluctuations of the background vacuum EM field. An implication, then, is that absorption of hydrogen into a metallic lattice upsets this equilibrium due to changes in the boundary conditions for the ZPE modes, resulting in orbital changes that release energy - an argument that has strong parallels to that of Heffner's. Hal Puthoff Hal...I would like to offer some comments..I hope that they are constructive e. My model is somewhat like you model turned inside out. In my model matter waves are reflected back in upon the matter, a zero point energy field does not exist. Both models yield the following results. A matter wave and its Doppler shifted reflection (in moving matter) will produce a beat note. If the matter wave is of the Comptom wavelength the beat note will be the deBrogle wavelength. Your model explains the Casimir effect well. The Casimir effect is produced by the exclusion of modes, you point out that these modes exist everywhere and the Casimir effect is thusly explained. Your model has a problem. Energy has momentum. The principle of equivalence reveals that inertial mass and gravitational mass are the same. Where is the gravitational mass of the huge sea of ZPE that you r model requires? The gravitational effect of such a huge body of grav mass would effect the cosmological constants..the age of the universe.. Hubbles constant ect. The age, expansion rate, Hubble constant suggest that the energy density of the universe = 10 protons/ mmm On Scientific American on AOL search Hubble, several good papers on the subject will be found. Discover had a good article on the subject several years ago. My model cannot explain the Casimir force. My model does not, however, have e problems with to much gravitational mass. I, in fact, state that the reflected energy produces a force. Force = 2E/c This force produces the grav mass of matter. grav = G/ccr see http://nucleus.ibg.uu.se/elektromagnum Somehow our models must be merged together so that all phenomena can be explained. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 07:38:03 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA21392 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 07:37:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA21363 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 07:37:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.68]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA16633 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 08:57:55 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:39:26 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > > Patent numbers for Barker 5,076,931 >and 4,91.880. I have a copy of the latter nd here is some form it. > > > Firm: Skjerven, Morrill, MacPherson, Franklin and Friel. > > William A. Barker Aug 31, 1988 filed Date of patent Oct 9 1990 > > "Electrostatic Voltage Excitation Apparatus" > > Some stuff, in no order. missing some pages, will call it up again. > > Am 241 was closed 54.2 uCurie alpha emitter. Embedded in 6 mm >thick plastic cylider so as to block alphas. "The radiation which >penetrates the cylider is a discrete gamma spectrum consisting of nine >gamma lines ranging from 11.871 to 59.5364 ke V. ....... > > Pre excitation counts 595 cps. 4 weeks after excitation up to >734, "and then it rose rather quickly to 1,490 cps and 2,508 cps ... 4 >times its initial value I later dropped to about 1576 cps, a reasonably >steady value" > > The source was examined by Dr. Peter Englert with an x ray >spectrometer t San Jose State U., a radiation chemist. > [snip] Question: Isn't 11-60 keV an xray range, not gamma? Comment for Scott Little: This points the way to an interresting way to stimulate electrons deep in the lattice: xrays. In my SO hypothesis I suggested tritium loading or beta source spiking of the lattice to get continual stimulation by electrons over 2keV. However, in your case it appears you are looking for a one time shock, so a good burst of xrays might be just the thing you are looking for if you have a good xray source handy. You could even leave your experimental setup untouched. Unfortunately, the xrays would have to be pretty hard to get through the casing and coil. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From fznidarsic gpu.com Fri Nov 24 07:39:51 1995 Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA21854 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 07:39:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA08805 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:39:32 -0500 Message-Id: <199511241539.AA08805 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:39:32 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM Subject: Re: vtx: FZ&FJ Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 10:38:49 EST Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:23:05 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: FZ&FJS Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com The plasma frequency at solid densities is VERY high. Taking a conservative value for the electron density, n_e, say one unbound electron per atom and low density material, we use n_e = 5e22 cm^-3 = 5e28 m^-3. The corresponding plasma frequency is 2e15 Hz. This corresponds to an electromagnetic wave of length 150 nm = 1500 angstrom, which is well into the ultra violet. Our nomenclature "UV, visible, IR" applies to electromagnetic waves. It is meaningless to use the thermal speed of an atom to calculate the wavelength from a frequency and then to identify the result with "IR". Thank you for correcting my error. I'm will have to take a look at the calculations. As per Horace H. last email he is taking the thermal speed and calculating a wavelength. I am taking the total energy and calculating a wavelength. Energy = kinetic + potential = 1/2 Mvv + potential For the ZPE energy levels, potential energy = 0 ZPE energy = 1/2M V V frequency = energy / h if the ZPE frequency < plasma frequency genesis, will occur. If plasma frequency < total energy of any state, energy will be reflected or transferred. Do you find any problems with this idea. What part of it has no meaning? Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 07:46:55 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA23462 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 07:46:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA23407 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 07:46:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.68]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA16649 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:06:44 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 06:48:14 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Background Fluctuations and NHE Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> ... >> Dear Dave Davies, >> Could you give some details about this water dissociation idea in the >> context of all the systems? >> Thank you, >> Best regards, Peter Gluck. >> >> >Nothing to add at the moment Peter but if I do have any ideas this >group will be the first to hear. I am just doing my annual re-assessment >of the field of New Hydrogen Energy - very superficially since I am in the >last few weeks of my current contract. > >Talk of resonant effects always arouses my interest and the recent comments >by Norman on 16kHz resonances for water are interesting. If the acoustic >energy breaks up the water molecule with the assistance of ZPE which is >given off as thermal energy when the water re-combines then we have stolen >ZPE. If you look at it as a zero point oscillation then this does not make >a lot of sense since it it is ZP and as such cant really be taken but if it >is viewed as just background noise in the ripples of space-time that we call >energy then it seems more intuitively plausible. I prefer the term >Background Fluctuations. Is there a better name? > >Back in the solid state - has anyone looked closely at the Jahn-Teller >effect of coupling between phonons and the electronic and nuclear spin >energies? My initial thoughts that these couplings were far too small to >be relevant but I am now not so sure. I have just got hold of a book: Sorry, I don't know anything about this. However, that there is *some* coupling seems certain. The coupling to which I refer may not be directly to spin, but rather to precession of the nucleus in a magnetc field. Practical use of this is made daily in NMR spectral analysis and MRI. > >Cooperative Phenomena in Jahn-Teller Crystals by Michael Kaplan and >Benjamin Vekhter (Plenum, 1995) > >That talks about transfer of phonon energy to nuclear spin and other >interesting ideas. I've not had a good look at it yet - just got it >yesterday. > > >dave Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 08:21:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA03181 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 08:21:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA03142 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 08:21:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA03926 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 11:21:04 -0500 Message-Id: <199511241621.AA03926 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 11:21:04 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: answer Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 11:20:26 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 I would like to address the questions of Heffener and Shaffer. Horace you are taking the thermal velocity and calculating a wavelength. Shaffer objects stating "it is meaningless" I've doing almost the same thing. I am taking the total energy and calculating a wavelength. energy = kinetic energy + potential energy = 1/2M v v + potential energy For ZPE, potential energy = 0 energy ZPE = kinetic energy frequency = energy/h Horace, you state "the electron drops" As a electron drops it gives up energy. The following equations apply. energy transferred = force * distance gravitational potential = -(force)G/(ccr) gravitational energy transferred = - Mu G/(ccr) (force) (distance) = - (force) (distance) Positive energy and neg gravitational energy are transferred. The electron dropped..the state of the system changed. Horrace your analysis has resulted in a transfer of energy. The ZPE state cannot give up any energy. It can, however, impart a fluctuation force. The following equations apply. + energy produced = (fluctuation force) (distance) Grav potential produced = -force*G/(ccr) new grav energy produced = - Mu G / (ccr) (force) (distance) = - (force) (distance) The ZP state did not give up any energy. It cannot. The fluctuation force produced by the ZP force simultaneously produces new energy and new - grav potential. Energy is conserved. In general if the: plasma wavelength < the wavelength of the total energy, energy is transferred or reflected plasma wavelength < ZPE wavelength, energy is produced through genesis Shaffer What wavelength has meaning in this analysis? Debroglie Compton The wavelength of the total energy The wavelength of the kinetic energy The wavelength of the potential energy Help Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 09:21:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA19062 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:21:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA19020 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:21:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id MAA27084; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:19:49 -0500 Date: 24 Nov 95 12:16:39 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: New Element! Message-ID: <951124171638_102021.3045_EHT40-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subj: New Element! Section: Physics To: All Thursday, November 23, 1995 11:40:01 AM From: Robert Galloway, 72162,153 #213954 If you haven't seen it, the following announcement may be of interest. I have no idea how old it is. ----------------- SCIENTISTS DISCOVER NEW ELEMENT! The heaviest element known to science was recently discovered by university physicists. The element, tentatively named "Administratium", had no protons or electrons and thus has an atomic number of 0. However, it does have one neutron, 15 assistant neutrons, 70 vice neutrons, and 161 assistant vice neutrons. This gives it an atomic mass of 247. These 247 particles are held together in the nucleus by a force that involves the continuous exchange of meson-like particles called morons. Since it has no electrons, Administratium is inert. However, it can be detected chemically as it impedes every reaction it comes in contact with. According to the discoverers, a minute amount of Administratium added to one reaction caused it to take over four days to complete. Without the Administratium, the reaction occurred in less than one second. Administratium has a normal half-life of approximately three years, at which time it does not actually decay but instead undergoes a reorganization in which assistant neutrons, vice neutrons and assistant vice neutrons exchange places. Studies seem to show the atomic number actually increasing after each reorganization. Research indicates that Administratium occurs naturally in the atmosphere. It tends to concentrate in certain locations such as government agencies, large corporations and universities. It can usually be found in the newest, best-appointed and best-maintained buildings. Scientists warn that Administratium is known to be toxic, and recommend plenty of fluids and bed rest after even low levels of exposure. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 09:59:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA00974 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:59:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA00925 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:59:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tJ2Ro-0005JcC; Fri, 24 Nov 95 12:02 CST Message-Id: Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:02:04 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" In-Reply-To: from "William Beaty" at Nov 23, 95 11:01:02 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A > Patent numbers for Barker 5,076,931 > and 4,91.880. I have a copy of the latter nd here is some form it. > > Firm: Skjerven, Morrill, MacPherson, Franklin and Friel. > > William A. Barker Aug 31, 1988 filed Date of patent Oct 9 1990 > > "Electrostatic Voltage Excitation Apparatus" > > Am 241 was closed 54.2 uCurie alpha emitter. Embedded in 6 mm > thick plastic cylider so as to block alphas. "The radiation which > penetrates the cylider is a discrete gamma spectrum consisting of nine > gamma lines ranging from 11.871 to 59.5364 ke V. ....... Hate to say this, but I smell a hoax. The patent # 5,076,931 is for a microfiltration process for seperating yeast from beer. It is not issued to a Mr. Barker. The scrambled # 4,91.880 is, of course useless, but a search for Barker, and "electrostatic" failed to turn up any likely hits in the 1990 database on the CNIDR on-line patent bibliographic database. I should note, however, that 4,9xx,xxx numbers were issued in 1990. Too many misses! Watch out. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 10:07:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA03224 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:07:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA03202 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:07:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-214.austin.eden.com (net-1-214.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.214]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id MAA23198 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:06:53 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:06:53 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511241806.MAA23198 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: H. Heffner wrote: >Question: Isn't 11-60 keV an xray range, not gamma? The distinction is one of origin, not energy. X-rays come from electron transitions, gammas come from the nucleus. True, gammas tend to be more energetic than x-rays but the energy ranges overlap heavily. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 10:14:16 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA05340 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:14:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA05280 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:14:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA01274; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 13:12:43 -0500 Date: 24 Nov 95 13:11:23 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: O-U & Thermal Risetime Message-ID: <951124181122_102021.3045_EHT62-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: One might consider that as "stimulus heat" is being applied in the ZPE-metastable-O-U experiments it is masking the heat derived from ZPE and dumping it. The microwave experiments with water where the dH/dt is rapid tends to suggest this. This suggests that the "stimulus heat" needs to be applied rapidly with very precise monitoring. The literature on skin depth for sea water for 2.45 gigahertz irradiation calculates out to 0.20 inches and an impedance of 60 ohms. This suggests that a recharge reservoir may need to be incorporated with a setup. FJS From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 10:18:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA06292 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:18:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA06237 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:17:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA16869 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 11:37:57 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:19:24 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On 22 Nov 95 at 11:47, Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >> light speeds, but simple relative velocity. The most significant result of >> this assumption is that as the realtive velocity of two particles in >> proximity to each other nears zero, their mutually observed wavelengths >> become arbitrarily large. This means the electric dipole moment, due to >> the enormous overlap of the wave functions, approaches zero as the relative > >Is this "wave function" the same wave function associated with QM, or >are you referring to the "de Broglie wave", or do you consider them >to be the same thing? My understanding is the Schroedinger Equation (SE) describes fully the wave like properties of particles, that the de Broglie wavelength of particles matches that provided bey the SE. The de Broglie wavelength L=h/p accurately characterizes wave like properties of particles (e.g. the 2 slit experiment), but lacks the total and comprehensive predictive power of the SE (e.g tunneling probabilities, orbital probabillity densities, etc), so has fallen from grace in common use. However, as a lowly uneducated amateur, I find it a very useful concept for visualization purposes. I see the de Broglie wavelength as being like a statistic, it summarizes some aspect of a probability distribution (the SE). Though the de Broglie wavelength makes no direct statement about quantities like tunneling probabilities, it is a statistic strongly correlated with such things, and thus is a useful tool for concept generation, a single number that handily points out areas for investigation. > >> velocities approach zero. If approach is close enough prior to the slowing >> to zero, a kind of feedback effect occurs. If there is *any* magnetic > >What is this "kind of feedback"? (Just asking for clarification) The electrostatic field intensity is very high at the tip of a needle. The orbitals are greatly elongated, giving a high probability for conduction band electrons being at an extended distance from the nuclei. The electrons being packed into the tip of the needle are at thermal energies, so when one becomes free it's de Broglie wavelength increases to a large amount. When a free electon is emitted, I think immediately other electrons can "pack into it" by the following "feedback" effect: As one electron approaches another at the tip of the needle it decelerates due to the Coulomb force. This increases the de Broglie wavelength of the two electrons with respect to each other, dispersing their mutually observed charge probabilities over a wider volume, decreasing the electric dipole moment, decreasing the electrostatic force, decreasing the rate of slowdown, decreasing the amount of energy required for the electrons to approach, increasing the relative strength of the magnetic moment, decreasing the distance between the electrons, thus the feedback effect. Electrons packed into a needle tip would suddenly have an escape route, a pressure relief valve at the tip of the needle. The number that could pack in together would be limited by the time required for a voltage equilization wave to propagate through the needle tip, and by the increasing outbound tunneling probability for the electrons in the cluster. > >> force due to spin, it should completely overwhelm the remaining >> electrostatic force. >> >> This leads to an interesting but typical quantum paradox: what happens if >> another fast moving particle interacts with the two body merged wave >> function. It doesn't see the wave functions of the two joined particles as >> being large. If it collides with the merged 2 body wave function it sees as >> small, you get a 3 body collision no matter how you cut it. From the >> merged particle's point of view, there has been an observation, their large >> wave functions collapse at the point of interaction with the fast moving >> particle. I think this idea might explain the frequent three body >> collisions observed in the Kasagi experiment, for example. Proton pairs >> might form via this mechanism in lattice sites, then interact with >> bombarding particles. > >Given that the magnetic moment of an electron is 658 times that of a >proton, while their charge is equal, I would expect electrons to bind >much more easily than protons. That is not to say that protons cannot >bind in this way, but it might explain why electrons can form large >clusters, while this may be impossible for protons. >I would really like to see some exact calculations done on this. > >> >> To answer the question on this basis: >> >> >> >Questions that I believe need answering are the following: >> >1) Will even 2 electrons be bound in this manner? >> >> Yes, especially at a high voltage point. A thermal electron has a >> wavelength of over 60 A, larger than the tip of a very fine needle. It >> should be possible to force together electrons at such a point, even >> without .5 MeV you get out of the process (there's your over unity) by the > >Please explain (at length) where the .5 MeV comes from. I simply used this figure because it is approximately *your* figure, so I thought it would appeal to you and increase your intuition. You used it in s.p.f. to point out the amount of energy an electron must give up when bound by electron capture (I don't recall for sure, but I think you used 1.5 femtometers as a distance). You pointed out that this would be the amount of energy required by two electrons to appraoch to that distance, which seems like more than a coincidence since it is the mass of the electron. The actual distance that would be necessary to be used to calculate an acquired energy distribution for electrons emitted from a cluster would be a function of the tunneling probabilities of electrons in the cluster. To calculate the energy distribution of electrons spewed off a cluster via tunneling I believe you would have to use the (SE) psi squared probability distribution to get a set of distances for energy calculation purposes, instead of using a constant distance like 1.5 femtometers. >(Calculations would be nice, and don't just say that this is the >mass of an electron, without explaining how this gets converted into >energy :-) > >> above process. >> >> >2) How big would a single bound pair be? >> Depends on your relative velocity! Use L=h/p to figure it out. > >I was sort of thinking of a pair rotating about their common centre >of mass, and wondering if it would be possible to calculate the >largest possible "orbit" that would still allow a net release of >energy. (i.e. gain due to "magnetic energy exactly balances loss due >to electrostatic repulsion + kinetic energy of rotating masses"). Somehow I don't see the spin this way. I see the electron as a rotating ghost like wave cloud. The concepts above involve a visualiztion of particles that can move right through each other like two ghosts. If the wave function is small the interaction appears more particle like, if large, more wave like. Therefor electrons in a cluster would all occupy the same point in a mean sense. The individual electrostatic and magnetic dipole moments might permit a very small range oscillation, but that would be all. > >> >> >> >3) Could a third electron bind to such a pair, given that it rotates >> >in the opposite direction to the direction of rotation of the pair? >> >> I would think they would all rotate the same way. > >If they all rotate the same way, then in my perhaps naive view, they >would all be little magnets, lined up parallel, but with all their >north poles together, and with all their south poles together. Surely >in such a situation, they would magnetically repel each other, and >not be bound at all. This gets back to the mental model of ghost like particles. Forgetting rotation or spin for a moment, if we visualize two axially aligned ghost like magnets in a N-S N-S orientation at a small distance, they will approach each other, move through each other to the common center, at which point there is no dipole moment, then continue on by momentum to separate, but both are still in a N-S orientation, no torque has been produced to cause any flip. But the attraction is still there because when the magnets exchanged positions the opposite poles of each magnet came into proximity, so the orientation is still N-S N-S. > >> >> Many could bind, but I think tunneling probabilities would highly limit the >> number. And once an electron tunneled out, it would have .5MeV times the > >[flame shield on] >I have an awful suspicion that tunnelling is not a "magic recipe". In >other words it is actually a perfectly logical, mechanical principal >that will become obvious as we learn more about electromagnetic >forces. And no, I don't want a QM explantion, as in my book, that is >no explanation at all. Put differently, I don't believe that any >change ever occurrs, without a force acting. In the QM explanation of >tunneling, to the best of my knowledge, no force is evident. I >believe however, that when this phenomenon is properly understood, a >force will indeed be in evidence. >[flame shield off] I didn't know you wrote a book. What is the title? I don't see tunneling as a recipe, but as an observed characteristic of matter. Particles seem to *simultaneously* (that's just one of many interpretations) exist all over the place with some volume probability, yet pardoxically, when an energy barrier is inserted in their waveform the waveform collapses and the particle "choses a side" of the barrier and a new waveform emerges. The SE is the recipe, it tells you with great accuracy the tunneling probability you can expect in a particlar circumstance, and helps in the design of tunnel diodes, for example. > >> number of remaining electrons in the bundle available for acceleration. >> That's what I call an energy hill! > >I always thought that tunnelling only occurred where there was a net >energy gain. My understanding is that tunneling occurs though an energy hill. Tunneling is just a manifestation of the extended location existence of a particle. It really *is* on both sides of a barrier at once. (That's one interpretation.) In a no energy gain situation you can look upon it as a kind of eqilibrium. The probability of tunneling back is better than the probability of remaining in the higher energy side. This is why electron shells are fuzzy. In the case of an electron cluster the hill is provided by the magnetic dipole moment. If an electron materializes outside the close influence of the magnetic force, massive electrostatic repulsion makes the electron accelerate away (and thus reduces it's waveform size) and the event is one-way. >If an electron gains energy by leaving an electron cluster, then surely >there is no >energy to be gained by the formation of the cluster in the first >place. That depends on how much energy it took to create the cluster. By the above, that amount of energy is gretly reduced by the reduced electrostatic dipole moment. >In short, I don't think electrons will tunnel out of a cluster. >(Which sort of explains Ken Shoulder's 10^8 - 10^11 numbers). There is a finite probability anything will tunnel anywhere. The problem is figuring out the probability. Sorry, I don't have any answers on that. I see no reason to believe Ken Shoulder's numbers are erroneous. > >> >> >> >4) Could a fourth electron bind to the original pair directly, or >> >would it need to form its own pair with the third electron? >> >> Dito as above. >Ditto as above. :-) >> >> >5) What would the energy content of such pairs be? >> >> Given n electrons in a bundle, I would think it would be (.5 >> MeV)(n)(n-1)/2, or proportional to n^2. > >Is this just based upon "mass of electron" considerations, or is it a >derived formula based upon calculation of actual magnetic energy? Actually, as mentioned above, the .5 MeV term would be a statistical distribution. The .5MeV would be way out on the top tail. > >> >> >6) It may be asking a lot, but how about a general equation >> >describing the energy content of a cluster of "n" electrons (or would >> >this depend upon the actual configuration)? >> >> The energy only depends on the proximity of the charges. > >Yes, but what is the proximity of the charges? For all practical purposes undefined, until tunneling occurs. It is the distance following a successful runaway condition tunneling event that determines the energy of that event. > >> >> >Well even if all you get out of this is a laugh, at least it will >> >have provided some entertainment value. >> >> >> I think these are stimulating ideas and questions you have Robin, as usual! >Thanks. >> >[snip] >> >> Regards, >> PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >> Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 >Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, >Learns all his life, >And leaves knowing nothing. >Robin Feb. 1995 Well, all these ideas may be dead wrong, but it does provide some food for thought. I think a good computer model is the best way to take a look at this stuff to try to make some quantitative predictions. The programming part is incidental to the effort. Understanding the SE and it's application is a mountain for an uneducated amateur like me. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 11:20:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA25685 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 11:20:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from oroboros.demon.co.uk (oroboros.demon.co.uk [158.152.100.96]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA25618 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 11:20:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 18:56:26 GMT From: CRSM oroboros.demon.co.uk (Chris Morriss) Message-Id: <12038 oroboros.demon.co.uk> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: What X-Mailer: PCElm 1.10 Lines: 25 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Longitudinal waves in co-ax cables? What on earth are you talking about? Sure I put common-mode chokes around my audio leads and my monitor cable, but it's got sod-all to do with longitudinal waves. These ferrite rings are to prevent common mode noise from radiating RFI all over the place. The wanted signal is in the co-ax with the current flowing in the inner and returning via the braid. The common mode signals are just what they sound like. They are unwanted signals that exist IN- PHASE on both the inner and braid of the co-ax with respect to GROUND. The clamp-on ferrite ring or common mode choke simply increases the impedance seen by the source of the unwanted noise w.r.t. ground, but has NO effect on the wanted differential signal flowing in a balanced (ish) manner in the co-ax. The situation is even more marked on unscreened twisted pair. The unwanted signal is a conventional "transverse" signal; it's just that it is being generated on both wires of the co-ax (or whatever) w.r.t. ground. There may well exist longitunidal electrical signals, but data or audio transmission cables aren't the place to look for them. I suggest that you experiment with modulating an EHT voltage on a charged sphere and investigate the signal transmission of the electric potential. (just like old Nicola T did himself I guess) -- Chris Morriss From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 11:25:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA27009 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 11:25:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA26992 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 11:25:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA04027 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 14:24:48 -0500 Message-Id: <199511241924.AA04027 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 14:24:48 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: subjective Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 14:24:11 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 One thing man can do that a computer cannot is subjective reasoning. Its a matter of intuition. My intuition tells me that something out of the ordinary must happen to capture zero point energy, otherwise, we would have known how to tap it long ago. This something is, again by intuition, is a classical/quantum violation. There are two such violations that I am aware of. 1. Tunneling, A quid tunnels through a barrier that it can not pass over. Tunneling interactions violate the conservation of energy for a short time but not for long. The electron, after tunneling, must wind up in a lower energy state. Tunneling out of a cluster requires a long term increase in potential energy. Tunneling never progresses in the direction of decreasing entropy. 2. Evanescence. A classical distribution can interact with a quantum field through an evanescent interaction. The evanescent interaction is not dependent on energy or entropy only frequency. Evanescence is the answer. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 12:05:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA09221 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:05:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA09200 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:05:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id MAA19661; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:05:02 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:05:01 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 24 Nov 1995, John Logajan wrote: > Hate to say this, but I smell a hoax. The patent # 5,076,931 is for > a microfiltration process for seperating yeast from beer. It is not > issued to a Mr. Barker. Aha! Its 1991, not 1990 as the message said. And there's a typo in the patent number. This for the 5076,971 (not as above) The CNIDR database output: _________________________________________________________________ United States Patent 5,076,971BarkerDec. 31, 1991 _________________________________________________________________ Method for enhancing alpha decay in radioactive materials Inventors: Barker; William A. (Los Altos, CA). Assignee: Altran Corporation (Sunnyvale, CA). Appl. No.: 400,180Filed: Aug. 28, 1989 Intl. Cl.:G21F 9/00; G21F 19/42; G21G 1/00; G21G 1/12; U.S. Cl.:252/626.; 252/627.; Field of Search:156;157;157;170;171;172;180;181;182;190;191;194;196;197;308 _________________________________________________________________ References Cited _________________________________________________________________ U.S. Patent Documents 2,500,223Mar., 1950Wells 376/1563,518,432Jun., 1970Uleski 376/1563,974,390Aug., 1976Morita et al. 250/2824,364,898Dec., 1982Meyer et al. 376/190 Foreign Patent Documents 71719/87May, 1987AUX 0012640Jun., 1969JPX 376/1580063588May, 1977JPX 376/1581034539Jun., 1966GBX 376/158 Other References W. E. Burcham, "Nuclear Physics", McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc., New York (1963), pp. 304-309, 568-569, and 702-703. E. Segre and C. E. Weigand, "Experiments on the Effect of Atomic Electrons on the Decay Constant on Be(^7) ", Phys. Rev., vol. 75, No. 1, Jan. 1949, pp. 39-43. H. W. Johlige, D. C. Aumann and H. J. Born, "Determination of the Relative Electron Density at the Be Nucleus in Different . . . ", Phys. Rev., vol. 2, No. 5, Nov. 1970, pp. 1616-1622. R. A. Porter and W. G. McMillen, "Effect of Compression of the Decay Rate of TC(^99m) Metal", Phys. Rev., vol. 117, No. 3, Feb. 1960, pp. 795-800. Don H. Byers and Robert Stump, "Low-Temperature Influence on the Technetium-99m Lifttime", Phys. Rev., vol. 112, No. 1, Oct. 1958, pp. 77-79. M. Neve de Mevergnies, "Perturbation of the 235mU Decay Rate by Implanatation in Transition Metals", Phys. Rev. Ltrs., vol. 29, No. 17, Oct. 1972, pp. 1188-1191. G. Gamow, "Zur Quatentheorie des Atomkernes", Zeit. f. Phys., vol. 1, 1928, pp. 204-212. R. W. Gurney and E. U. Condon, "Wave Mechanics and Radioactive Disintegration", Nature, vol. 122, 1928, p. 439. R. W. Gurney and E. U. Condon, "Quantum Mechanics and Radioactive Disintegration", Phys. Rev., vol. 33, No. 2, Feb. 1929, pp. 127-140. E. K. Hyde, I. Perlman and G. T. Seaborg, Nuclear Properties of the Heavy Elements, vol. 1, Chap. 1, Prentice Hall, 1964, pp. 16-25. I. Pearlman and J. O. Rasmussen, "Alpha Radioactivity", Handbuch der Physik, vol. 42, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1957, pp. 144-145. S. Gasiorowicz, Quantum Physics, Wiley, N.Y., 1974 ppp. 89-93. Raumfahrtforschung (5/71), pp. 208-209, Winterberg, "Rocket Propulsion by Thermonuclear Micro-Bombs Ignited with . . . ". Introduction to Modern Physics (1971), pp. 508-514, J. McGervey Academic Press, N.Y., "Nuclear Transformations". Physical Review (1/49), vol. 75, No. 1, Segre' et al., "Experiments on the Effect of Atomic Electrons on the Decay Constant . . . ". Primary Examiner: Locker; Howard J. _________________________________________________________________ Abstract _________________________________________________________________ Apparatus and method for decontaminating radioactive materials by stimulating the atomic system of radioactive materials. The stimulus is kept applied to the radioactive materials for a predetermined time. In this way, the rate of decay of the radioactivity of the materials is greatly accelerated and the materials are thereby decontaminated at a rate much faster than normal. The stimulus can be applied to the radioactive materials placing them within the sphere or terminal of a Van de Graaff generator and allowing them to be subjected to the electrical potential of the generator, such as in the range of 50 kilovolts to 500 kilovolts, for at least a period of 30 minutes or more. 5 Claims, 2 Drawing Figures _________________________________________________________________ [USPTO] [CNIDR] _________________________________________________________________ .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From fznidarsic gpu.com Fri Nov 24 12:27:22 1995 Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA15848 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:27:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA04078 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 15:27:02 -0500 Message-Id: <199511242027.AA04078 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 24 Nov 1995 15:27:02 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM Subject: Re: vtx: Alter Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 15:26:24 EST Status: RO X-Status: A -> VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:05:01 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com On Fri, 24 Nov 1995, John Logajan wrote: > Hate to say this, but I smell a hoax. The patent # 5,076,931 is for > a microfiltration process for seperating yeast from beer. It is not > issued to a Mr. Barker. Aha! Its 1991, not 1990 as the message said. And there's a typo in the patent number. This for the 5076,971 (not as above) The CNIDR database output: _________________________________________________________________ United States Patent 5,076,971BarkerDec. 31, 1991 _________________________________________________________________ Method for enhancing alpha decay in radioactive materials Inventors: Barker; William A. (Los Altos, CA). Assignee: Altran Corporation (Sunnyvale, CA). Appl. No.: 400,180Filed: Aug. 28, 1989 Intl. Cl.:G21F 9/00; G21F 19/42; G21G 1/00; G21G 1/12; U.S. Cl.:252/626.; 252/627.; Field of Search:156;157;157;170;171;172;180;181;182;190;191;194;196;197;308 _________________________________________________________________ References Cited _________________________________________________________________ U.S. Patent Documents 2,500,223Mar., 1950Wells 376/1563,518,432Jun., 1970Uleski 376/1563,974,390Aug., 1976Morita et al. 250/2824,364,898Dec., 1982Meyer et al. 376/190 Foreign Patent Documents 71719/87May, 1987AUX 0012640Jun., 1969JPX 376/1580063588May, 1977JPX 376/1581034539Jun., 1966GBX 376/158 Other References W. E. Burcham, "Nuclear Physics", McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc., New York (1963), pp. 304-309, 568-569, and 702-703. E. Segre and C. E. Weigand, "Experiments on the Effect of Atomic Electrons on the Decay Constant on Be(^7) ", Phys. Rev., vol. 75, No. 1, Jan. 1949, pp. 39-43. H. W. Johlige, D. C. Aumann and H. J. Born, "Determination of the Relative Electron Density at the Be Nucleus in Different . . . ", Phys. Rev., vol. 2, No. 5, Nov. 1970, pp. 1616-1622. R. A. Porter and W. G. McMillen, "Effect of Compression of the Decay Rate of TC(^99m) Metal", Phys. Rev., vol. 117, No. 3, Feb. 1960, pp. 795-800. Don H. Byers and Robert Stump, "Low-Temperature Influence on the Technetium-99m Lifttime", Phys. Rev., vol. 112, No. 1, Oct. 1958, pp. 77-79. M. Neve de Mevergnies, "Perturbation of the 235mU Decay Rate by Implanatation in Transition Metals", Phys. Rev. Ltrs., vol. 29, No. 17, Oct. 1972, pp. 1188-1191. G. Gamow, "Zur Quatentheorie des Atomkernes", Zeit. f. Phys., vol. 1, 1928, pp. 204-212. R. W. Gurney and E. U. Condon, "Wave Mechanics and Radioactive Disintegration", Nature, vol. 122, 1928, p. 439. R. W. Gurney and E. U. Condon, "Quantum Mechanics and Radioactive Disintegration", Phys. Rev., vol. 33, No. 2, Feb. 1929, pp. 127-140. E. K. Hyde, I. Perlman and G. T. Seaborg, Nuclear Properties of the Heavy Elements, vol. 1, Chap. 1, Prentice Hall, 1964, pp. 16-25. I. Pearlman and J. O. Rasmussen, "Alpha Radioactivity", Handbuch der Physik, vol. 42, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1957, pp. 144-145. S. Gasiorowicz, Quantum Physics, Wiley, N.Y., 1974 ppp. 89-93. Raumfahrtforschung (5/71), pp. 208-209, Winterberg, "Rocket Propulsion by Thermonuclear Micro-Bombs Ignited with . . . ". Introduction to Modern Physics (1971), pp. 508-514, J. McGervey Academic Press, N.Y., "Nuclear Transformations". Physical Review (1/49), vol. 75, No. 1, Segre' et al., "Experiments on the Effect of Atomic Electrons on the Decay Constant . . . ". Primary Examiner: Locker; Howard J. _________________________________________________________________ Abstract _________________________________________________________________ Apparatus and method for decontaminating radioactive materials by stimulating the atomic system of radioactive materials. The stimulus is kept applied to the radioactive materials for a predetermined time. In this way, the rate of decay of the radioactivity of the materials is greatly accelerated and the materials are thereby decontaminated at a rate much faster than normal. The stimulus can be applied to the radioactive materials placing them within the sphere or terminal of a Van de Graaff generator and allowing them to be subjected to the electrical potential of the generator, such as in the range of 50 kilovolts to 500 kilovolts, for at least a period of 30 minutes or more. 5 Claims, 2 Drawing Figures _________________________________________________________________ [USPTO] [CNIDR] _________________________________________________________________ .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page Radio active half life depends on the element of time. Does time change in the sphere of a Van de Graaff? I have one and could put my quartz watch in it to see. I doubt anything will happen. Paste a quartz watch on your computer screen...Let it there for a while an d see if it slows down. The 25 KV on the screen should have some effect if voltage effects time by a measurable amount. The only known nuclear effect that I know of that can be affected by electronic forces is electron capture. This patent sounds like bunk to me. Frank z From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 13:48:03 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA12402 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 13:47:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA12315 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 13:47:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.75]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA17337 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 15:06:58 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 12:48:22 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: answer Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 > > I would like to address the questions of Heffener and Shaffer. > > Horace you are taking the thermal velocity and calculating a wavelength. > Shaffer objects stating "it is meaningless" I didn't realize Shaffer was refering to me, I made no translation of thermal velocities to electromagnetic wavelengths that I know of. His message topic was "Re: vtx: FZ&FJS" so I didn't see me in the picture. Here is a quote of his post: >The plasma frequency at solid densities is VERY high. Taking a >conservative value for the electron density, n_e, say one unbound electron >per atom and low density material, we use n_e = 5e22 cm^-3 = 5e28 m^-3. >The corresponding plasma frequency is 2e15 Hz. This corresponds to an >electromagnetic wave of length 150 nm = 1500 angstrom, which is well into >the ultra violet. > >Our nomenclature "UV, visible, IR" applies to electromagnetic waves. It is >meaningless to use the thermal speed of an atom to calculate the wavelength >from a frequency and then to identify the result with "IR". > >Michael J. Schaffer >schaffer gav.gat.com The wavelegth I *do* calculate from mean thermal velocity is the corresponding quantum wavelength of the particle, which characterizes how that particle will act in various circumstances. I think maybe you and I are on different wavelengths on this. 8^) An electromagnetic wavelength I *do* refer to is in regards to photons that "fall into" the coulomb energy well of the nucleus. The kinetic energy so derived represents an upper limit on the bremsstrahlung (photons emitted due to field induced acceleration) that can be generated by the strong near nucleus electron acceleration. The spectrum of such photons is a continuous distribution of energy levels. To approach the nucleus close enough to get significant amounts of kinetic energy energy, and therefore bremsstrahlung energy, I have hypothesized that the free electron *quantum* wavelength must be less than about .32 A to gain significant energy from "falling into" an H nucleus trapped in a lattice site. If this condition is not met, then the electron's *quantum* wave will significantly overlap the nucleus, thereby reducing the electrostatic dipole moment, thereby reducing the acceleration, thereby limiting the max velocity, thereby limiting the expected bremsstrahlung production. I hope this mouthful has increased my communcication accuracy. I guess I could never cut it as a technical writer, eh? > > I've doing almost the same thing. I am taking the total energy and > calculating a wavelength. > > energy = kinetic energy + potential energy > = 1/2M v v + potential energy > > For ZPE, potential energy = 0 > energy ZPE = kinetic energy > frequency = energy/h > > Horace, you state "the electron drops" > > As a electron drops it gives up energy. The following equations apply. > > energy transferred = force * distance > > gravitational potential = -(force)G/(ccr) > gravitational energy transferred = - Mu G/(ccr) (force) (distance) > = - (force) (distance) > Positive energy and neg gravitational energy are transferred. The > electron dropped..the state of the system changed. > Horrace your analysis has resulted in a transfer of energy. > The ZPE state cannot give up any energy. It can, however, impart a > fluctuation force. > The following equations apply. > > + energy produced = (fluctuation force) (distance) > > Grav potential produced = -force*G/(ccr) > > new grav energy produced = - Mu G / (ccr) (force) (distance) > = - (force) (distance) > > The ZP state did not give up any energy. It cannot. The fluctuation >force produced by the ZP force simultaneously produces new energy and new >- grav potential. Energy is conserved. In general if the: > plasma wavelength < the wavelength of the total energy, energy is > transferred or reflected > plasma wavelength < ZPE wavelength, energy is produced through genesis > >Shaffer What wavelength has meaning in this analysis? > > Debroglie > Compton > The wavelength of the total energy > The wavelength of the kinetic energy > The wavelength of the potential energy >Help > > Frank Znidarsic My meaning is very different. What I have hypothesised is that if an electron "falls into a nucleus", which is possible for a 2 keV electron by conditions previously outlined, and it emits say a 10 keV xray, it does not have the energy to get out of the Coulomb well. It is 8 keV short. So what happens "on the way out"? What I have proposed is that, left undisturbed, the electron can get out of the well by tunneling because L=h/P, as the electron is slowed to zero, it's quantum wavelength will move toward infinity, it will spontaneously tunnel to a nearby conduction band (or even possibly to an orbital of the nucleus it "fell into") because once the electron relocates to the distant but higher energy state of the nearby conduction band the probability of tunneling back is low. I think if there is a problem with this scenario it is the question: Can an electron approach a nucleus with 2keV energy and give off a more than 2keV photon, or more that 2keV, cumulatively, in photons? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 14:27:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id OAA24569 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 14:27:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA24548 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 14:27:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 14:27:46 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199511242227.OAA24548 mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 14:27:40 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: St. Pete Test OK Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The St. Petersburg test as described by Fedorovich is indeed a valid null balance test IMHO. Although it appears that two tests were done st separate times, one with the Yusmar and one with the null balance heater, both tests weere performed at very nearly the same temperatures and powers throughout the experimental system. This meets the definition (and more importantly, the logic) for null balance calorimetry. It is immaterial thet the "power adjustment feedback" to maintain the system temperatures took place over a long period of time. Michael J. Schaffer schaffer gav.gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4146 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 19:16:39 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA08895 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 19:11:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA08822 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 19:11:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.90 (eb1ppp26.shentel.net [204.111.1.90]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id WAA07932 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:12:40 -0500 Message-Id: <199511250312.WAA07932 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 22:11:23 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: vtx: St. Pete Test To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <199511242227.OAA24548 mail.eskimo.com> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortex, I regret to say that I will be ending my participation in the St.Pete Yusmar test. I feel that we have gone as far as possible with the device at hand. The data collected at the beginning of the Yusmar operation cycle could be used to prove unity or as shown here, over unity. Soon I will furnish a complete report to Vortex, also Volodya will have additional information for Chris. So, as it stands as of now...this is it for my part in the great Yusmar hunt. I am eager to see what comes next. Let's calculate an efficiency of Yusmar at the beginning of operation, based on the data of the first test. The heat produced by Yusmar Q(y) is Q(y) = m*Cp*deltaT where m = 20 kg mass of the water in the loop; Cp = 4.2 kJ/(kg*degr) deltaT is a difference of the temperatures of the water in the loop during the test. So between 0 minutes and 5 minutes deltaT = 12 degr. Celsius and between 0 minutes and 8: deltaT = 20 degr. Therefore, Q(y1) = 20*4.2*12 = 1008 kJ Q(y2) = 20*4.2*20 = 1680 kJ Now we calculate the input energy from the el.motor E(m) = N*t, where N is the el.power and t is time between the points of measurments. N = 2.33 kWt according to the data, so E(m1) = 2.33*300 = 699 kJ E(m2) = 2.33*500 = 1165 kJ Therefore, COP or Eff1 = 1008/699 = 1.44 (i.e. over unity) Eff2 = 1680/1165 = 1.44 (i.e. over unity) Robert From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 20:13:38 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id UAA25692 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 20:13:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA25678 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 20:13:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id XAA01631; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 23:12:14 -0500 Date: 24 Nov 95 23:10:02 EST From: Dean Miller <75110.3417 compuserve.com> To: Vortex list Subject: vtx: Results of St Pete tests Message-ID: <951125041001_75110.3417_CHK39-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Chris (and all), With all the discussion of the Yusmar device and whether or not it's o-u, has anyone checked into the supposedly 'crude' centrifugal pump being used to drive it? What if the pump was so poor that it also is producing a small amount of cavitation (macro) into the water supplied to the Yusmar? Replacing the inefficient pump with a better one could destroy part of the effect, if that's the case. Dean -- from Des Moines From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 20:41:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id UAA04125 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 20:41:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA04062 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 20:41:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA17944 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:01:55 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 19:43:13 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: [snip] > >Given that the magnetic moment of an electron is 658 times that of a >proton, while their charge is equal, I would expect electrons to bind >much more easily than protons. That is not to say that protons cannot >bind in this way, but it might explain why electrons can form large >clusters, while this may be impossible for protons. >I would really like to see some exact calculations done on this. [snip] A Response: I suggested proton pairs (as opposed to clusters) because I assumed the overlapped waveforms would primarily exist during diffusion and only on a fleeting basis as an incoming H "ejected" an H from a site. I believe some current thinking on such overlapped waveforms is that the protons would be "co-located" in the waveform, i.e. not have independent probabilities of being located at the same place at the same time, i.e. if there is a measurement detecting a proton on one side of the waveform there is a large probability the other proton will be found on the other side of the waveform. This same interpretation applies to electrons. This is why application of the "many simultaneous existances" interpretation implicit in my model of the electron cluster is significant. The possibility that wave form size is realtive to mutual velocity might eliminate some possible QM interpretations. The Kasagi experiment, if valid, seems to me to indicate a tendency for the combined overlapped waveforms to collapse in the same vicinity. This would give weight to the multiple simultaneous existence interpretation. As I hypothesised in the previous post, if a sufficient force drives an overlap, at some distance the electric dipole moment will begin to wain due to overlap of the wave functions, resulting in a runaway feedback reduction of the dipole moment. Any nominal force could then hold the proton wave forms together. Note that the strong force is not normally involved, because the large proton wave forms preclude a significant probability of collapse at any particular point, unless there is a disruption from a third particle, so the probability of a strong interaction remains small. It seems like the main question is how big is the proton wave form? Given a temperature of 100 deg. C, or 373 deg. K , and 1 deg. K = 8.62E-5 eV, we have a typical energy of .0322 eV, or 5.16E-21J. So typical proton velocity v=(2(5.16E-21J)/1.673E-27)^2= 2480 m/s. Momentum p=vm=(2480 m/s)(1.673E-27 kg)= 4.15E-24 kg-m/s. So uncertainty of position is x=h/p=(6.6E-34 J-s)/(4.15E-24 kg-m/s) = 1.59E-10 = 1.59 A. This is pretty fuzzy considering the tetrahedral space in Pd is roughly radius .665, Ni is .612. The tetrahedral face holes, through which the H must migrate, are radii .308 and .289. There is clearly a significant amount of interaction between the proton wave function and the electron conduction bands. Also, if two protons occupy adjacent sites, some overlap of wave function must occur. For one proton to force another out it appears that occupation of the same site is likely, so significant wave function overlap could be expected. The likelyhood and degree of such overlap could obviously be greatly enhanced via a conduction band electron, or free electron, coming momentarily between two diffusing H nuclei. A free thermal electron, using 373 deg. K and the above method of calculation, has a positional uncertainty of 68 A. Therefore, an electron which could act in any significant way would have to either be in a conduction band, or at a higher than thermal velocity. Now, what happens if a 2 KeV electron is somehow stripped from a conduction band and heads directly towards a proton? Assuming relative motion applies, the uncertainty of the H nucleus is now reduced by a factor of (.0322eV/2000eV)^-2=0.004. So, the proton uncertainty with respect to the electron would be (.004)(1.59 A) = .006 A. The electron would similarly have a relative size of (.004)(68 A) = .272 A. This has the makings of a stong classical mechnics approach of the electron to the proton. As the electron approaches the proton, it's velocity increases, so it's wavelength decreases. Eventually one or more photons are generated, momentum is lost, and the waveform expands. Secondly, if many protons are in proximity, i.e. under pressure, and the electron goes between two (now relatively small waveform protons) the Coulomb barrier is suspended between them, and thay are free to repond to outside forces and come together towards the electron. If by chance the three particles come within strong force range, Deuterium can be formed. If not, a situation is created where the two protons have a velocity in each others direction, and the potential for a Coulomb barrier collapse exists. A decent calculation of event probabilities, spectra, etc., I belive would take a good computer simulation, and utilization of the SE predictive capabilities. End of Response to Question. An Aside: Maybe it *would* be an interresting experiment to see if proton clusters could be formed at the tip of Pd or Ni needles! And how would you verify it? Maybe a neutron beam to look for 3 or 4 body interactions? It think it would require a pretty large voltage at the tip, but maybe not. It is interresting though that whiskers form on Pd electrodes. I earlier wrote: I simply used this figure because it is approximately *your* figure, so I thought it would appeal to you and increase your intuition. You used it in s.p.f. to point out the amount of energy an electron must give up when bound by electron capture (I don't recall for sure, but I think you used 1.5 femtometers as a distance). You pointed out that this would be the amount of energy required by two electrons to appraoch to that distance, which seems like more ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ than a coincidence since it is the mass of the electron. The actual distance that would be necessary to be used to calculate an acquired energy distribution for electrons emitted from a cluster would be a function of the tunneling probabilities of electrons in the cluster. [SNIP] I meant to say required by an electron to approach a proton to that distance. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 22:19:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA29696 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:19:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA29668 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:19:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-135.austin.eden.com (net-1-135.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.135]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id AAA15022 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 00:19:11 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 00:19:11 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511250619.AAA15022 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: excerpt from the abstract: > The stimulus can be applied to the > radioactive materials placing them within the sphere or terminal of a > Van de Graaff generator and allowing them to be subjected to the > electrical potential of the generator, such as in the range of 50 > kilovolts to 500 kilovolts, for at least a period of 30 minutes or > more. This really does sound fishy now: an object placed "within" the sphere of a Van de Graff generator experiences no electric field, regardless of the charge on the sphere. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 22:20:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA00266 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:20:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA00163 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:20:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-16.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-16.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.16]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA24390 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 17:18:07 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511250618.RAA24390 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 17:20:34 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 24 Nov 95 at 6:39, Horace Heffner wrote: > [snip] > > > > Patent numbers for Barker 5,076,931 > >and 4,91.880. I have a copy of the latter nd here is some form it. > > > > > > Firm: Skjerven, Morrill, MacPherson, Franklin and Friel. > > > > William A. Barker Aug 31, 1988 filed Date of patent Oct 9 1990 > > > > "Electrostatic Voltage Excitation Apparatus" > > > > Some stuff, in no order. missing some pages, will call it up again. > > > > Am 241 was closed 54.2 uCurie alpha emitter. Embedded in 6 mm > >thick plastic cylider so as to block alphas. "The radiation which > >penetrates the cylider is a discrete gamma spectrum consisting of nine > >gamma lines ranging from 11.871 to 59.5364 ke V. ....... > > > > Pre excitation counts 595 cps. 4 weeks after excitation up to > >734, "and then it rose rather quickly to 1,490 cps and 2,508 cps ... 4 > >times its initial value I later dropped to about 1576 cps, a reasonably > >steady value" It is not clear to me from the above, whether the gammas (or x-rays as you prefer) were measured outside the plastic, or directly from the source after removal from the plastic. If outside the plastic, then doesn't the possibility exist that the alphas have over time created some new isotopes in the plastic, which in turn are responsible for the gammas? In other words, would the same thing have happened even without "excitation". [snip] Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 22:21:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA00280 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:20:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA00184 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:20:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-16.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-16.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.16]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA24419 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 17:18:13 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511250618.RAA24419 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 17:20:35 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: H-metal comments, explanations #1 Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 23 Nov 95 at 22:50, Horace Heffner wrote: > >To further state the obvious, the coating on the Patterson beads is > >only 2-3 microns thick. > >Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, > >Learns all his life, > >And leaves knowing nothing. > >Robin Feb. 1995 > > > In the patterson cell perhaps the Ni-Pd boundary inhibits diffusion of H, I rather think that it is the copper boundary that inhibits the migration of H, and that that is one reason why copper was used as the first metalic layer on the beads. > permitting a fast equilibrium or near equilibrium condition? Does the H > just keep on diffusing into the plastic? > > > Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 > Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > > Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 22:21:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA00374 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:21:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA00193 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 22:20:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-16.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-16.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.16]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA24427 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 17:18:16 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511250618.RAA24427 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 17:20:34 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: H-metal discussion #3 Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 24 Nov 95 at 0:12, Scott Little wrote: > An unofficial saying goes: "Ask and ye shall frequently find it for > yourself". Right after requesting the B-H curve for Ni on Vortex, I found So what did you think "be given" meant anyway? :-) [snip] Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 23:13:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA11815 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 23:13:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA11794 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 23:13:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id CAA07166; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 02:11:54 -0500 Date: 24 Nov 95 21:49:25 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Plasma-Debye-ZPE Resonance? Message-ID: <951125024924_102021.3045_EHT31-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Since the plasma frequency: f = (80.64*Ne)^1/2 if the hydrogen getting into the lattice and lowering the number of free electrons of the nickel (Ne), and at the same time increasing the Debye frequency, would there be a point that that ZPE fluctuations would prevail over environment heat? Could this be the mechanism of the "active sites" FJS From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Nov 24 23:41:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA17427 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 23:41:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA17416 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 23:41:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tJFH4-000585C; Sat, 25 Nov 95 01:43 CST Message-Id: Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 01:43:50 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" In-Reply-To: <199511250619.AAA15022 natashya.eden.com> from "Scott Little" at Nov 25, 95 00:19:11 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little writes: > > > The stimulus can be applied to the > > radioactive materials placing them within the sphere or terminal of a > > Van de Graaff generator and allowing them to be subjected to the > > electrical potential of the generator, such as in the range of 50 > > kilovolts to 500 kilovolts, for at least a period of 30 minutes or > > more. > > This really does sound fishy now: an object placed "within" the sphere of a > Van de Graff generator experiences no electric field, regardless of the > charge on the sphere. It is at least conceivable that there is a difference between an object within a charged sphere and an object within an uncharged sphere. In an uncharged sphere, of course, the positive and negative electrostatic influences of the sphere on the object within are all self-cancelling. In a charged sphere, the unbalanced (positive or negative) electorstatic influences of the sphere on the object within cancel because their vectors are equally from all directions. An analogy might be air pressure on the planet earth, versus vacuum on the planet earth. In the vacuum case, there is no net force because there is no force at all. In the air pressure case, there are lots of forces, but their vectors cancel, so there is no net directional force. So in the charged sphere we can imagine that there is a sort of coulombic pressure -- a pressure that doesn't manifest itself in a potential gradient, yet might nevertheless have some other influence. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 02:42:20 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id CAA12979 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 02:42:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA12972 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 02:42:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA17269; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 05:40:55 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 05:41:07 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951125104106_100433.1541_BHG45-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex I'll comment on St Pete soon, but I would like to take time out from such serious matters to ask a couple of simple questions. 1. What is the evidence for the physical existence of electric and magnetic fields? 2. What is the evidence for the physical existence of photons? Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 04:40:44 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id EAA25999 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 04:40:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA25982 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 04:40:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA21689; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 07:39:21 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 07:38:15 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: "Something Completely Different" Message-ID: <951125123815_102021.3045_EHT34-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris asks, 1,What is the physical evidence for the existence of electric and magnetic fields? 2, What is the physical evidence for the existence of photons? A compass and a flashlight? Chris, I told you not to take any "Fern" home from Austin. Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 05:12:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id FAA00226 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 05:12:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA00216 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 05:12:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id IAA20583; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:10:48 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 08:09:40 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: "Something Completely Different" Message-ID: <951125130939_102021.3045_EHT51-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, BTW. If you join Dorothy and Todo and their friends and follow the Yellow Brick Road to Oz or is it Oztin....? You will find the answer. Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 05:17:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id FAA00978 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 05:17:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA00972 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 05:17:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-101.austin.eden.com (net-1-101.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.101]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id HAA27517 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 07:17:27 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 07:17:27 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511251317.HAA27517 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robin wrote: >> >gamma lines ranging from 11.871 to 59.5364 ke V. ....... >It is not clear to me from the above, whether the gammas (or x-rays >as you prefer) were measured outside the plastic, or directly from >the source after removal from the plastic. If outside the plastic, >then doesn't the possibility exist that the alphas have over time >created some new isotopes in the plastic, which in turn are >responsible for the gammas? In other words, would the same thing have >happened even without "excitation". Those lines are always emitted by Am-241. The 11.871 is actually a Np L-alpha x-ray emitted by the excited Np atoms that result from the alpha decay. The other L's are emitted as well (~18 kev and 22kev). The 59.5 kev is a gamma from the Np nucleus and is the line we used extensively for XRF excitation. For our purposes, we ignored the alphas..they never left the incapsulation. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 06:18:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA08756 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 06:18:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA08748 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 06:18:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA22395; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 09:16:45 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 09:16:24 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951125141624_100433.1541_BHG65-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Frederick says that the proof of photons is: "A compass and a flashlight?" "Chris, I told you not to take any "Fern" home from Austin. " "BTW. If you join Dorothy and Todo and their friends and follow the Yellow Brick Road to Oz or is it Oztin....? You will find the answer. " But I was entirely serious. The first question referred to the physical existence of magnetic and electric fields. Since, unless I am sadly behind the times, such 'fields' can only be detected by their effect on matter, then is it not a clear violation of Ockham's Razor to postulate them? If the only observed effect is one of matter upon matter, then to hypothesise a 'field' between them is unnecessary - unless one simply prefers the notion of fields, which I never heard as an acceptable reason for having something. "If wishes were horses, beggars would ride." Newton was very careful not to hypothesise as to the actual mechanism of gravity, he just dscribed it. It is then perfectly fair to hypothesise a mechanism, but if that hypothesis remains untested, it is just so much hot air. On the matter of photons, again, it is well known that matter both emits and absorbs em radiation in quantised amounts. But how does that become the justification for suggesting that it must be propagated as particles? I am happy to accept that this second question is far more likely to have a satisfactory answer, but please may I see it? I appreciate that I am making myself look stupid by asking these questions, but I've frequently asked them. I've not yet had an answer except for the sort that Frederick gave, and would appreciate one. If anybody thinks I'm too stupid to comprehend, fair enough. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 06:36:09 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA10996 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 06:36:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA10946 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 06:35:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-101.austin.eden.com (net-1-155.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.155]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA28739 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:35:31 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:35:31 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511251435.IAA28739 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: H-metal experiment X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Peter, We probably are on the same planet, but perhaps on opposite sides of it.~ In one part of your comments, you suggest that I use fluids to improve the heat removal capabilities of my system. This would worsen the sensitivity. Do you think that I need the fluid system just in case I start seeing excess heat? I am content to continue without the fluid system until I see the Ni rod overheat by itself. Then, with unprecedented enthusiasm, I will construct a fluid heat removal system. After suggesting that I use fluids to remove the heat better, you suggested that I isolate the chamber to reduce the rate of heat removal...i.e. improve the sensitivity. That is an easy thing to do. I am concerned, however, about several things: 1. The coil serves two purposes. heating and magnetization. If I reduce the heating power, I also reduce the magnetization. P's estimate of 1 tesla in the rod is clearly wrong but it at least implies that we should try for a high field. Of course, I've got considerably more mmf than he did because I'm using a better conductor (Cu vs Pt) and more of it. I could go down considerably below P's heater power levels and still have the same mmf that he did. Do you think I should try using permanent magnets? 2. Can you find any mention in the patent of the total input power for P's experiments? I haven't...so I am forced to use data presented in the original paper. There, he shows typically 100 watts input to the heater. When the effect is going, his measured output is about 150 watts. The difference, 50 watts, is consistent with examples given in the patent. Also, one of the two embodiments described in the patent, the one that does not use fluid cooling, appears to be the same apparatus described in the original paper. Anyway, it does not appear to me that P has his chamber isolated better than mine is right now. In fact, I think he used 4 times as much power as I am to maintain the rod at ~200 C. My present setup has sensitivity sufficient to detect as little as 2.5 watts (i.e. 10% of the input power) excess heat. P reported typically 30-50 watts excess heat from a rod the same size and shape as mine. Therefore when my rod puts out 1/10th as much excess heat as his did, I will see it. That seems like adequate sensitivity to me. I feel that I need to work on two main areas: 1. methods of exciting the reaction I am hoping that P was not "fabricating" when he mentioned the mechanical method of excitation. It is easy to hit the end of the rod with a hammer. 2. preparation of the Ni rod I'm going to have the rod plated with Ni soon. Should I try anything else, first? How about glass-beading the rod? Acid-etching? Placing it inside the sphere of a Van de Graff for 30 minutes? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 06:36:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA10984 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 06:35:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA10951 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 06:35:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-101.austin.eden.com (net-1-155.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.155]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA28746 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:35:34 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:35:34 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511251435.IAA28746 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris said >But how does that become the >justification for suggesting that it must be propagated as particles? I am >happy to accept that this second question is far more likely to have a >satisfactory answer, but please may I see it? Informally, Chris, I find it a lot easier to recognize that there is such a thing as a single photon when the energy is MUCH higher than visible light energies. For example, take x-rays. It's no trouble at all to count individual x-rays with an x-ray detector. Each one that hits the detector, causes a relatively massive ionization and results in a big pulse whose height tells you the energy of the x-ray. Are they particles? Well they are at least localized in time and space...i.e. they are things which whiz from place to place. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 06:36:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA10993 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 06:35:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA10945 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 06:35:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-101.austin.eden.com (net-1-155.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.155]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA28742 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:35:33 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:35:33 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511251435.IAA28742 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: St. Pete Test X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert said: >Let's calculate an efficiency of Yusmar at the beginning of operation, >based on the data of the first test. >Therefore, COP or Eff1 = 1008/699 = 1.44 (i.e. over unity) >Eff2 = 1680/1165 = 1.44 (i.e. over unity) This isn't the first data that Vortex got, is it? Where did this data come from? Why are they going to issue a "unity" report with data like this? What's going on over there? Robert, I'm not trying to be harsh with you. I just feel strongly that we need to explore this situation fully. The data you presented above should not be lightly dismissed. If I had ever seen ANYTHING like that kind of performance in my tests, I'd still be on the ceiling! From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 07:04:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA15421 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 07:04:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA15413 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 07:04:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.156 (eb3ppp28.shentel.net [204.111.1.156]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id KAA26762 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:05:33 -0500 Message-Id: <199511251505.KAA26762 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 26 Nov 95 09:00:35 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: "Something Completely Different" To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <951125130939_102021.3045_EHT51-1 CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Chris, > >BTW. If you join Dorothy and Todo and their friends and follow the Yellow Brick >Road to Oz or is it Oztin....? You will find the answer. > >Frederick This is interesting hypotheses since Dorothy and Toto traveled to the land of OZ via a vortex...and returned home by way of a little magic and positive thinking. There's no place like vortex, there's no place like vortex..... Ya Durak! Robert From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 07:25:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA18876 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 07:24:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA18857 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 07:24:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.156 (eb3ppp28.shentel.net [204.111.1.156]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id KAA27882; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:26:21 -0500 Message-Id: <199511251526.KAA27882 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 26 Nov 95 10:28:02 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: St. Pete Test To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <199511251435.IAA28742 natashya.eden.com> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >Robert, I'm not trying to be harsh with you. I just feel strongly that we >need to explore this situation fully. The data you presented above should >not be lightly dismissed. If I had ever seen ANYTHING like that kind of >performance in my tests, I'd still be on the ceiling! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- This data was acquired by manually taking readings second by second at the first test. The readings were taken separately by two scientists(my associates) and later compared with the data from the institute. All collected data by all sources was in sync. One of my Associates or I will hop over to St.Pete soon. As as one or the other knows more the data will posted . From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 08:49:03 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA04530 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:48:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA04491 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:47:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.69]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA18914 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:08:26 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 07:49:31 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Plasma-Debye-ZPE Resonance? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Since the plasma frequency: f = (80.64*Ne)^1/2 if the hydrogen getting into the >lattice and lowering the number of free electrons of the nickel (Ne), and >at the >same time increasing the Debye frequency, would there be a point that that ZPE >fluctuations would prevail over environment heat? > >Could this be the mechanism of the "active sites" > >FJS The charge balance in the electrode remains a zero (per Faraday). As the hydrogen is adsorbed, the hydrogen atom's electrons mostly drop into the conduction bands. As the H diffuses through the electrode, the state alternates between an ionic bond and atomic state. I personally believe sometimes H2 exists in the lattice in covalent form. I would think free electrons in the lattice would be rare and short lived unless there is a source of kilovolt excitation. The thermal electron quantum wavelength is absolutely hugh compared to lattice sites. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 08:56:38 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA06224 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:56:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA06194 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:56:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id LAA08896; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 11:55:12 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 11:55:43 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951125165543_100433.1541_BHG42-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Scott says: "Informally, Chris, I find it a lot easier to recognize that there is such a thing as a single photon when the energy is MUCH higher than visible light energies. For example, take x-rays. It's no trouble at all to count individual x-rays with an x-ray detector. Each one that hits the detector, causes a relatively massive ionization and results in a big pulse whose height tells you the energy of the x-ray." Quite. An em wave is delivering a packet of energy. But imagine a volume of 'cold' sodium vapour. You shine light through it. And the sodium atoms pick off exactly the wavelength(s) they want, single quanta of same, and the rest passes through. Fine. You could have a water wave power generator like that, responsive to a single wavelength, and which removed a precise quantity of energy from any wave of that wavelength which came by. It is the matter which decides what to pull from the wave. The wave itself does not *need* to be quantised. Your example is just an extreme case. "Are they particles? Well they are at least localized in time and space...i.e. they are things which whiz from place to place." In the light of what I wrote above, I still don't see it. I still think that old Bill must be spinning in his crypt. The "wave/particle duality" seems to me like the flux-cutting vs flux-linking mess in electrodynamics, the sort of unnecessary problem you get if you ignore dear ol' Bill. But don't get me wrong, I'm willing to be convinced. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 09:14:21 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA10435 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 09:14:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA10428 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 09:14:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.69]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA18965 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:34:50 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:15:55 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >I appreciate that I am making myself look stupid by asking these questions, >but I've frequently asked them. I've not yet had an answer except for the >sort that Frederick gave, and would appreciate one. If anybody thinks I'm >too stupid to comprehend, fair enough. > >Chris Personally, I think if anyone can develop a difinitve test to answer your questions they deserve a Nobel prize. That field concepts are practical is no doubt, but it seems to me the true nature of reality is another question entirely. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 09:18:48 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA11350 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 09:18:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA11330 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 09:18:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tJOHj-0005LCC; Sat, 25 Nov 95 11:21 CST Message-Id: Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 11:21:07 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" In-Reply-To: from "William Beaty" at Nov 24, 95 12:05:01 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: > John Logajan wrote: > > Hate to say this, but I smell a hoax. > > Aha! Its 1991, not 1990 as the message said. And there's a typo in the > patent number. This for the 5076,971 (not as above) Thanks, Bill. I've eaten my words. :-) I just got the patent downloaded via the http://www.micropat.com/ service (25 cents per page. Usually more expensive than the $2 fixed charge of the patent office, but orders of magnitude faster! You do need a PC to run the free but proprietary patent viewer.) Wowzer! Barker sticks radioactive elements inside the sphere of a Van de Graaff generator, runs it at a negative potential for several minutes/hours/days -- and claims that the rate of radioactive decay is extremely enhanced -- with some relationship to the magnitude of the negative potential. In fact, a positive potential is said to slow the radioactive decay rate. Barker gives these numbers: Potential 350kV +or- 75kV maintained for 12 hours. After the 12 hour "treatment" three samples were monitored for their radioactivity. Depletion at Depletion at Normal Half-life three days seven days Half-life accelerated by Tl 204 1% 5.3% 3.8y 15x Po 210 7% 55.3% 138.4d 15.3x Th 230 2.6% 81.8% 80000y 48900x Note that the "treatment" was for 12 hours only, the samples continued to decay at an accelerated rate with no further exposure to the negative potential. Barker also warns, "High voltages may be hazardous. For example, 2MV predicted to convert the half-life of U238 to one second." Well anyhow, that's what the patent says. :-) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 10:22:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA26424 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:22:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA26406 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:22:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA22749; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 13:21:16 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 13:20:37 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Something Completely Different Message-ID: <951125182036_102021.3045_EHT42-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: All Dorothy had to do was click her heels three times and she was back in Kansas (Bob Dole's country). On the other hand Bob Dole is furiously clicking his heels together trying to get into the White House. Perhaps he should try the Yellow Brick Road? The Coriolis Vortices are quite large these days. Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 10:45:55 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA02695 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:45:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA02672 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:45:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA17725; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 13:43:58 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 13:44:01 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951125184401_100433.1541_BHG46-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Scott says: "Informally, Chris, I find it a lot easier to recognize that there is such a thing as a single photon when the energy is MUCH higher than visible light energies. For example, take x-rays. It's no trouble at all to count individual x-rays with an x-ray detector. Each one that hits the detector, causes a relatively massive ionization and results in a big pulse whose height tells you the energy of the x-ray." Quite. An em wave is delivering a packet of energy. But imagine a volume of 'cold' sodium vapour. You shine light through it. And the sodium atoms pick off exactly the wavelength(s) they want, single quanta of same, and the rest passes through. Fine. You could have a water wave power generator like that, responsive to a single wavelength, and which removed a precise quantity of energy from any wave of that wavelength which came by. It is the matter which decides what to pull from the wave. The wave itself does not *need* to be quantised. Your example is just an extreme case. "Are they particles? Well they are at least localized in time and space...i.e. they are things which whiz from place to place." In the light of what I wrote above, I still don't see it. I still think that old Bill must be spinning in his crypt. The "wave/particle duality" seems to me like the flux-cutting vs flux-linking mess in electrodynamics, the sort of unnecessary problem you get if you ignore dear ol' Bill. But don't get me wrong, I'm willing to be convinced. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 10:49:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA03549 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:49:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA03519 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 10:49:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA12630; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 13:45:29 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 13:44:45 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex , Gene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com>, Subject: vtx: Onoochin suggests o-u Message-ID: <951125184444_100433.1541_BHG46-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex;Gene;internet:little eden.com I was very unsure about reposting this. I feel that there has been a measure of international misunderstanding here, very much magnified by my own weakness in the mathematical treatment of fluid dynamics. Please note that Dr Onoochin is (in my opinion after a week spent largely in his company) a truly brilliant scientist, and a very persistent man. His grasp of English is not such that nuances of meaning come easily to him, I might add. My hastily composed response to him was along the lines that if he has spotted something which we have failed to recognise, then I for one could not be more delighted. I don't quite understand what he is saying here, but I strongly suggest that those with an interest in the Yusmar device study it with care. I do pass on such messages to him as seem relevant, but in this instance I would request that copies of postings here might well be sent to him - or questions to him be posted here if you see what I mean. I am also in receipt of a copy of the note to Hal Puthoff which he mentions. Essentially this is a set of theoretical questions to Hal, and I would be happy to repost it here except that I am only the secondary recipient, and do not feel that I have the authority to do so. Chris *************************************************************************** Date: 25-Nov-95 17:19 GMT From: "Vladimir V. Onoochin" > INTERNET:onoochin a33.spb.su Subj: where they appear from Dear Chris, I feel the data on the begining of Yusmar's operation made a certain harm to you. So I would like to explain where they appear from. If you remember, I asked you last October did someone from 'vortex' group make hydrodynamical calculations of Yusmar? I had no answer and decided that no one made them. When Afanas'ev was here during the first Yusmar's test I spoke to him that to understand how the device work, we must make such calculations (Potapov's patents haven't any ones). I explained to Afanas'ev how to make the calculations in simple way and he promised to do so. It was easier for him than for me because he has Yusmar's drawing (from Bobruisk plant) and worked with the similar devices some years ago. Having returned to Moscow, he asked me some data on the device and I sent him all I have, i.e. that ones I got from Dr Sudakov after the first test. The same data I sent you at the message (Nov. 4). Some of them I was said by Sudakov's co-workers (the power of the el.motor, the volume of the water in the loop and the period between the temperature measurements) and Afanas'ev can confirm it because he was there at that time. The values of the temperature of the water I took from the figure made by 'samopisetz' (self-recorder, i.e. the device recording the data on a page of paper. You saw it when you was at Polzunov institute). Two pages with that data are on my shell and I can always demonstrate them. Thus, Afanas'ev received the data, made some calculations and emailed me that it is possible OU at the begining of Yusmar's operation. He asked me to tell nothing to Fedorovich and Sudakov before checking out of that fact so UNTIL NOW they don't know about that calculations. I replied to Afanas'ev that I have some doubts and stated three questions we must know the answers. In the opposite case, we will look like Potapov who cannot explain why his device works. The questions are the following: - Why Scott Little didn't obtain such results? - Why "Vortex" group didn't carry out such calculations? - Why the efficiency drops with approach to 'steady state'? It should be noted that the efficiency of the el.motor isn't taken into account in that calculations. Because the typical efficiencies of russian el.motors are less than 0.7 taking into account of that efficency could only arise the efficiency of the device at the begining of operation. Also I emailed to Robert about that puzzling data and he asked Scott Little first question (sending the calculations too). After it that data were being known to some from the 'vortex' group. So Sudakov didn't try to find a special 'over unity' mode, however, made all to obtain 'null balance'. Now let me to make some, perhaps, unpleasant to you notes. 1. About arrangement of St.Pete test. It isn't so easy to achieve 'null balance'. I don't believe that any from the 'vortex' group make it faster because it is necessary to have the identical temperature at all 8 points inside the tent. One single test requires, at least, 5 hours. Moreover, it is too difficult to get the same temperature distribution of the heater as of Yusmar. You can see after the temperature of the water in the loop that it takes place in the tests. One more note. To achieve the full accuracy in the test, one need to use more precise measuring equipment, for example, not disc-type wattmeter. The equipment used in the test cannot supply the accuracy less than 10%. 2. About the scientific approach. I wrote it already. I red some of 'vortex' emails on it, however, they cotain only words. I am going to send to Dr Puthoff a message with the questions on ZPE (I send you a copy) but I don't believe that he answers me. 3. The engineering approach. WHY until now no one from the 'vortex' group made the thermo- and hydrodynamical calculations? Why none of the 'vortex' group but Afanas'ev, Robert and I stated about that puzzling data? Please, realize, that I know you have to arrange the test but don't perform the calculations and I separate you from any of the 'vortex' group. So, after all, what point of view do you think I, as a russian man, should have about the 'vortex' - western - group? Sorry if some my words aren't polite. I am wating for the questions on the test. Also it would be liked to me to see the replies, any replies, to this my message. With warm regard, Volodya From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 15:09:14 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id PAA12828 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 15:09:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA12800 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 15:08:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA16423; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 18:07:35 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 18:08:03 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: additional comments Message-ID: <951125230802_100433.1541_BHG47-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I had better just pass this response on to you all. Or should that be y'all? Chris --- Forwarded Message --- Date: 25-Nov-95 22:50 GMT From: "Vladimir V. Onoochin" > INTERNET:onoochin a33.spb.su Subj: additional comments Sender: onoochin a33.spb.su Received: from urcom.rcom.spb.su by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA08454; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 17:40:39 -0500 Received: from a33 by urcom.rcom.spb.su with UUCP id AA19385 (5.65.kiae-1 ); Sun, 26 Nov 1995 01:32:32 +0300 Received: by a33.spb.su (dMail for DOS v1.23, 26May94); Sun, 26 Nov 1995 01:28:59 +0300 To: 100433.1541 compuserve.com Cc: VISOR Globalcom.net Message-Id: Organization: Vladimir V. Onoochin, Private Account Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 01:28:59 +0300 (MSK) From: "Vladimir V. Onoochin" X-Mailer: dMail [Demos Mail for DOS v1.23] Subject: additional comments Lines: 48 Dear Chris, I am very glad that you answered me. Believe me, I want to find O-U too and try to do all I can in this way. Now I would like to give some cooments. I hope it helps you. 1. The most important. Sudakov and Fedorovich don't believe in O-U so it is clear that they didn't try to analyze all the data. Unfortunately, I haven't yet the full report so don't know the values of some important parameters, i.e. the efficiency of the el.motor and exact water flow. Therefore, we cannot make the calculations which may allow to estimate the extraction of the heat due to hydrodynamical resistance losses. I told you namely about such calculations. Please, see, if we separate from the total (obtained in the test) heat amount the heat amount due to hydrodynamical losses we will get the heat amount caused by other physical effects that can take place during operation of the device. Moreover, such calculations based on the tests and design of Yusmar data could be more or less simply made for all range of temperature changing. At least, we could have the answer how that mysterious O-U effect depends on the temperature and, therefore, on the other parameters changing with the temperature too. 2. I asked "- Why Scott Little didn't obtain such results?" and you answer ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 17:46:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.75] ([204.57.193.75]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA20243 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 19:07:14 -0900 X-Sender: hheffner matsu.ak.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 16:48:11 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To:Vortex > >I'll comment on St Pete soon, but I would like to take time out from such >serious matters to ask a couple of simple questions. > >1. What is the evidence for the physical existence of electric and magnetic >fields? > >2. What is the evidence for the physical existence of photons? > >Chris Some additional thoughts: If you want to make life simpler for yourself perhaps you should adopt the definition of a sufficient condition for the reality of a physical quantity defined by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) in their quest to cast out the ugly discontinuities of quantum mechanics, and restore forever the cherished principle of continuity, a quest Eisnstein pursued periodically until his death. "A sufficient condition for the reality of a physical quantity is the possibility of predicting it with certainty, without disrupting [it]." It is unfortunate, but it seems like the deeper you look for meaning the more complex and fuzzy things get, sometimes bordering on the paranormal or obsurd. Take the infinite reality interpretation of QM by Richard Fineman. It is difficult to contemplate the possibility that there are infinitely many universes, and a new one generated for every possible quantum outcome. An example of understanding reality the hard way is the concept I recently concocted that quantum wave functions are inversely proportional in size to relative velocity. This implies that every particle has not one but a huge number of wave functions, a unique wave function for every velocity vector possesed by any particle in the universe. Not only that, but any two particles anywhere in the universe moving at the same velocity on a particular axis will have infinite and overlapping waveforms because L=h/p, but p=0 (relative velocity zero, relative momentum zero). Since most free electrons and atoms oscillate, rotate, or vibrate, most particles in the universe possess a range of velocities on a periodic basis. Somewhere in their cycles many particles universe wide have exactly the same velocity vectors in the same axis, and thus form quantum wave interference patterns accross the universe. By this hypothesis we are all linked to the universe in a dramatic way. Such a concept might explain ZPE, and fields (who needs a field when matter itself can span the universe in a flash,) and maybe even less physical things like ESP. But the complexity and unity of the universe, if the concept is real, is truly mind boggeling. Just a little food for thought. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 18:28:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id SAA06266 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 18:28:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA06219 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 18:27:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-59.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-59.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.59]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA02747 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:25:28 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511260225.NAA02747 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:27:36 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 24 Nov 95 at 12:05, William Beaty wrote: > Abstract > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Apparatus and method for decontaminating radioactive materials by > stimulating the atomic system of radioactive materials. The stimulus > is kept applied to the radioactive materials for a predetermined time. > In this way, the rate of decay of the radioactivity of the materials > is greatly accelerated and the materials are thereby decontaminated at > a rate much faster than normal. The stimulus can be applied to the > radioactive materials placing them within the sphere or terminal of a > Van de Graaff generator and allowing them to be subjected to the > electrical potential of the generator, such as in the range of 50 > kilovolts to 500 kilovolts, for at least a period of 30 minutes or > more. I've been waiting for someone to push this button! This is the Aharanov-Bohm effect revealing it's first real practical application! It works because the potential of the generator affects the phase of the particles involved in the decay. If you read Sapogin's message on Bill Page's ICCF5 list (attached with apologies to Bill), and this: L.G.Sapogin. "On Unitary Quantum Mechanics." Nuovo Cimento. vol. 53A, No. 2, p. 251 (1979) then this will make much more sense. Though I must admit to being a little puzzled by the fact that it continues to work after removal from the generator. Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 18:28:16 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id SAA06322 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 18:28:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA06167 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 18:27:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-59.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-59.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.59]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA02697 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:25:06 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511260225.NAA02697 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:27:36 +0900 X-file: sapogin.txt X-finfo: DOS,"sapogin.txt",,,,Text Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: New Abstracts: Contrib physics madi.msk.su (PHYSICS) Date 95-05-24 06:22:27 EDT ON ONE OF ENERGY GENERATION MECHANISM IN UNITARY QUANTUM THEORY Copyright 1995 by Lev G. Sapogin. All rights reserved. Lev G. Sapogin Department of Physics, Technical University (MADI), Leningradsky prospect 64, A-319, 125829,Moscow,Russia It is now a well established fact that in Cold Nuclear Fusion (CNF) only a small portion of heat results from nuclear reac- tions, the rest being of a mysterious origin. In this connection Prof. Peter Hagelstain writes in [1]: "Some say that this heat can be explained easily by elementary chemical reactions, phase changes, or battery-like storage effects. I have trouble with these explanations". For instance, nickel electrolysis in light water produces the same amount of energy as that of palladium in heavy water. Besides, we have to consider a no less mysterious phenomenon of sonoluminescence, that was discovered in Russia in 1933 by S.N.Rzhevkin. At first sight these phenomena seem to bear no correlation. But Julian Schwinger, the Nobel Laureate and pro- found research worker, has drawn parallels between cold fusion and sonoluminescence in his continuous technical publication on both topics. He notes in [2]: "Like Cold Fusion, sonoluminescence "should not exist", but it does. This now well established pheno- menon occurs when ultrasonic sound, beamed into liquid, causes bubbles to oscillate stably - to expand and contract regularly - and also to emit regular pulses of light". But one is positively struck by the heat generator built by Dr.Yu.S.Potapov (Kishinev, Moldavia), which produces in water cavitation bubbles, generating 12 kWt of heat on 4 kWt of electric energy. This is achieved by the aid of a centrifugal pump that runs light water thought a tube with a number of special attachments. Similar, though less effective results, have been obtained in the USA by James Griggs [3]. The reactions taking place in the above- mentioned cases can be explained neither in chemical nor in nuc- lear terms. Moreover, Potapov's system is now in production and used for heating homes. There is no doubt that the described phe- nomena can be viewed as "new physics" and it is impossible to describe them within the laws of conventional science. Below it will be shown that Unitary Quantum Theory (UQT) allows one to explain all these seemingly unrelated effects. UQT was developed in 1970-1988 and its validity is proved by the fact that at a limited number of cases the theory results in both the Dirac's equations and the relativistic equation of Hamilton-Jacobi. Moreover, the solution of approximate UQT equation has yielded the electric charge value and that of the fine structure constant with reasonable exactness, the result being achieved for the first time in theoretical physics [6-14]. The solution allowed to formulate one more approximate equation for the oscillating charge particles model which gives promising results in dealing with the deutons interaction problem (the basic CNF problem) [4,5] . Let us consider more closely, as it was done in [4,5], the particle's behavior in a potential well. The equation describing this process can be expressed in the following way: .. . 2 . 2 (1) x = GRAD U(x) COS(t x / 2 x + x x + f0) . where U(x) is a potential and x, x, t, f0 - a coordinate, velocity, time and initial phase correspondingly. This equation manifests a number of peculiarities. Having integrated it once, we arrive at . 2 (2) x = 2W(x,t) where W(x,t) is some time-dependent complex potential not amenab- le for analytical expression even for the simplest U(x). There- fore nothing can be said about the integrals of motion. Equation (1) behaves very peculiarly in translation - invariance conditions. It doesn't exist in common case but manifests itself at translations divisible by . That means that 2 classes of solutions are available: for the first class the laws of energy and momentum conservation are valid, while for the second class they are not. Numerical computation for the parabolic well yields solu- tions of 4 types that result from different initial conditions. Similar results can also be obtained for other potentials [4]. 1.The stable standard periodic solutions are obtained only for definite discrete energy E values equal to (n+1/2)hw at n=0,1,2... and at definite values of x, x, f0. Trite solutions of the same kind are available in conventional quantum mechanics and will not be analyzed in this paper. At other initial conditions 3 more types of solutions arise: 2. The particle performs complex oscillations of a dimi- nishing amplitude. Sometimes at certain x, x, f0 values the pro- cess starts at an increasing amplitude with its consequent de- crease. At this point the particle charge and mass approach zero and after some rather long period of time the former ceases to exist altogether. This is not surprising because in UQT the par- ticle is defined as a periodically emerging and disappearing wave packet. Its complete disappearance means that the packet's harmo- nic constituents have scattered so far from each other that the packet itself ceased to exist, its energy given away to the va- cuum, smeared out throughout the entire space, manifesting itself only in the form of vacuum fluctuations. Let us call this solu- tion "a crematorium". 3.The particle performs complex oscillation with an increasing amplitude, yet sometimes the process can develop with an initial short-time decrease in the amplitude. In doing so the particle's energy can increase indefinitely, if the potential well's parameters do not change. Physically this means that the particle takes energy from vacuum fluctuations but the mechanism of this process, of how it does so can be deduced only from equation (1). Let us call this solution "a maternity home". 4.There is also a diffusion solution, in which the particles tunnel into the potential gap wall. This solution is similar to that of the particle's behavior at the potential step, whence the particle in the course of considerable period of time can penetrate deep into the step. Periodic and irregular oscillations determine the energy discrete and continuous regions, respectively. From a purely esthetic point of view it is desirable that the quantity of energy (matter) disappearing in the "crematoria" should be equal to that emerging from the "maternity homes". But I am not yet in a position either to prove or disprove it. Solutions 2 and 3 are incompatible with conventional quantum mechanics, whence solution 4 corresponds to exponentially decaying (damping out) wave function tail at large x values. If the system contains a number of identical wells, all the decisions of type one will be identical for them and that's the reason why the discrete energy levels are easily traced out in the experiment. But there will be no discrete levels for solutions of type 2 and 3 because each individual decision will possess its own peculiarities. The availability of these solutions can be perceived only through integral effect - either the energy release or drastic charge, or mass variation in the system, being in itself a very specific phenomenon. Let's take a more close look at intriguing solutions 2 and 3. I was aware of them as far as 2 years ago, which can be seen in [5, p.98]. But I was afraid to discuss the matter in my publications in the absence of reliable experimental data. Even now I am in mortal fear lest my reasoning turns out to be erroneous. But the situation has since changed and one can say now with certainty, that within UQT in quantum processes the energy and momentum conservation laws have grown from local to a global one, i.e. in individual processes the energy and momentum are not conserved, but may be taken from or given away to the vacuum. Nevertheless there exist some range of phases when the energy and momentum are preserved locally. Being summed up throughout all phases for a large number of particles the resulting energy and momentum turns out to be conserved as is shown by calculations in [5, page 93]. The experiments show, that in individual quantum processes at high energies the local energy and momentum conservation laws and conservation laws for the lepton and barion numbers are well observed. But the same is not true at small energies at least on account of ambiguity correlation [7,14]. Nevertheless the idea of global (not only local) energy conservation law is invisibly present in all quantum mechanics, it is by no means a new one. >From physical viewpoint it simply means that in steady-state solutions with fixed discrete energies, the velocity of a particle reflected at the wall is equal to that of the impinging one. If the particle speed decreases upon each reflection this corresponds to the "crematorium" solution, in case it increases we face the "maternity home" alternative. The "crematorium" solution should not be confused with the familiar phenomenon of particles' decay - it is an absolutely new and very slow process taking place at small energies. It posses- ses no analogs in conventional quantum physics. The "maternity home" solution (3) has been proved by re- liable experimental data for any small cavity in a metal or cera- mics-made sample, or likewise a water bubble with enclosed free particles and can be viewed as a well. This can explain both sonoluminescence and the emission of heat in nickel, palladium and ceramics. The theory allows for the samples to crack because of the pressure exerted on their walls due to energy growth, the energy generation being immense in the installations of Dr.Y.S.Potapov and J.Griggs. It would be extremely helpful to create an electrically isolated system emitting great amounts of heat in order to measure its charge, which is expected to vary in the course of energy generation. This would serve as an additional proof of the picture of the phenomena described above. Thus the excessive energy is taken from the vacuum, but this does not occur for nothing because in the neighboring wells some part of the matter would disappear. In other words, one is under the impression that a new mechanism for the direct conversion of matter into energy has been discovered. This energetic phenomenon is entirely pollution-free and thousand times more effective then that of nuclear reactions. It is for the future to prove it. Now let's take a bit of philosophy. The Local Energy Conservation Law (LECL) in individual processes follows directly from Newton's equations under the condition of uniformity of time. It would be naive to think that his local definition will remain unchanged. The trend in modern physics now is to treat the LECL, especially in theory, as a conclusion of secondary importance from the motion equation (integrals of motion). Some physics confine LECL within the limits of the first law of thermodynamics others as D.Blokhintsev maintain that "it is highly probable that the development of new theory will make LECL change its form" [15]. F.Engels wrote in "Nature Dialectics" "...no physicist re- gards essentially the LECL as an eternal (ever-lasting) absolute law of Nature, the law of spontaneous transformation of matter motion forms and the quantitative stability of this motion throughout all its transformations". But many research workers are of a different opinion as M.P.Bronshtein [16] who wrote; "The ECL is one of the fundamental laws of Newton mechanics. Yet, Newton himself had never ascribed to his law the uniform charac- ter, which it possesses in reality. The reasons for such erroneous treatment of the ECL on Newton's part are extremely interesting...". The idea to treat the ECL in quantum mechanics equally with the second law of thermodynamics as a static law, being true only in average cases and unsuitable to individual acts, goes back to [15] E.Schrodinger , and later to N.Bohr, H.Kramers, I.Slater and G.Gamov. L.Landau had called it "a beautiful Bohr's idea" [15]. Yet, later it was rejected by the authors themselves. It should be noted that this idea did not follow from the quantum theory equations. But the brilliant idea still remains one, even being reject by the person to whom it had occurred. In fact, it may simply turn out to be premature. Eventually,all the cosmologist's dream of having a process explaining why throughout the entire Universe there are some places where energy emerges, being extinguished in the others. It is interesting that solution 3 gives one an opportunity to set a very small initial fluctuation, which then will accumulate energy and turn into a particle. One has to accept the truth regardless of it's source. There fore I will conclude with the words of F.Engels. "But when the solar system completes its life-path and shares the fate of eve- rything finite, when it falls victim to death. What then? Thus we come to the conclusion that the heat emitted into world space should have an opportunity by some miraculous way, which it will be the task of future science to define, to turn into some other form of motion, in which it can accumulate again and start func- tioning. In this case the main difficulty becomes obsolete, the one obstructing the reverse change of dead suns into a red hot nebula". One can expect that having read this paper some high-brow theoreticians will assume attitude of persons being witness to some childish tactlessness. But in the course of physics' development it was experimentation that had always been the main judge. I'd like to express my gratitude to N.V.Famina, the attrac- tive translator of the article. I am equally thankful to Drs.V.A.Boichenko, O.I.Kasakov, I.V.Kulikov, F.Mair and Yu.G. Rudoy for taking part in the discussion and practical help in my work. References 1. P.Hagelstain. "A plethoria of 'miracles'".Cold Fusion vol.1, No.3, p.22, 1994 2. J.Schwinger. "Cold Fusion: Does it have a future?". Cold Fusion. vol.1, No.1, p.14, 1994 3 J.Rothwell, E.Mallove."The hydrosonic pump: An excess energy device?" Cold Fusion. vol.1, No.2, p.26, 1994. 4. L.G.Sapogin. "Deuteron interaction in unitary quantum theory", "On the mechanisms of cold nuclear fusion". Proceedings: Fourth International Conference on cold fusion.Vol.4:Theory and special topics papers. TR-104188-V4. July 1994 (Hawaii) 5. L.G.Sapogin. "Deuterium interaction in unitary quantum theory", "On the mechanism of cold nuclear fusion". Cold Fusion Source Book. International Symposium on Cold Fusion and Advanced energy sources. Belarusian State University. Minsk, Belarus, May 24-26, 1994 6. L.G.Sapogin. "Unitary Field and Quantum Mechanics." Investigation of systems. (in Russian, Vladivostok, Academy of Science ), No. 2, p. 54, (1973). 7. L.G.Sapogin. "On Unitary Quantum Mechanics." Nuovo Cimento. vol. 53A, No. 2, p. 251 (1979) 8. L.G.Sapogin."An Unitary Quantum Field Theory", Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie. vol. 5, No.4, 285 (1980) 9. L.G.Sapogin. "A Statistical Theory of Measurements in Unitary Quantum Mechanics." Nuovo Cimento. vol. 70B, No.1, p.80 (1982). 10. L.G.Sapogin. "A Statistical Theory of the Detector in Unitary Quantum Mechanics." Nuovo Cimento. vol. 71B, No.3, p. 246 (1982). 11. V.A.Boichenko, L.G.Sapogin."On the Equation of the Unitary Quantum Theory." Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie. vol. 9, No. 3, p.221 (1984). 12. L.G.Sapogin, V.A.Boichenko. "On the Solution of One Nonlinear Equation."Nuovo Cimento. vol. 102B, No.4, p.433 (1988). 13. L.G.Sapogin, V.A.Boichenko. "On the Charge and Mass of Particles in Unitary Quantum Theory." Nuovo Cimento.vol.104A,No.10, p.1483 (1991). 14. L.G.Sapogin. "Clear-cut picture of micro worlds".Technic for the young (in Russian) No.1, p.41 (1983). 15. D.Blokhintsev. Collection of scientific methodological works in physics.(in russian). State University of Moscow,1993. 16. M.Bronshtein. The matter structure.(in russian). Moscow,1935. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 18:28:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id SAA06397 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 18:28:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA06229 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 18:27:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-59.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-59.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.59]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA02718 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:25:20 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511260225.NAA02718 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:27:35 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A On 24 Nov 95 at 9:19, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] > has fallen from grace in common use. However, as a lowly uneducated > amateur, I find it a very useful concept for visualization purposes. I see Well you're not alone in being an amateur. [snip] > The electrostatic field intensity is very high at the tip of a needle. The > orbitals are greatly elongated, giving a high probability for conduction > band electrons being at an extended distance from the nuclei. The I was under the impression that conduction band electrons were already free to wander through the lattice, so I'm not quite sure what you mean by "extended distance from the nuclei". > electrons being packed into the tip of the needle are at thermal energies, > so when one becomes free it's de Broglie wave-length increases to a large > amount. When a free electron is emitted, I think immediately other electrons > can "pack into it" by the following "feedback" effect: As one electron > approaches another at the tip of the needle it decelerates due to the > Coulomb force. This increases the de Broglie wave-length of the two > electrons with respect to each other, dispersing their mutually observed > charge probabilities over a wider volume, decreasing the electric dipole > moment, decreasing the electrostatic force, decreasing the rate of slowdown, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Doesn't this imply negative feedback? >decreasing the amount of energy required for the electrons to > approach, increasing the relative strength of the magnetic moment, > decreasing the distance between the electrons, thus the feedback effect. So what you are saying is that the magnetic attraction will override the electrostatic repulsion, beyond a certain point. > Electrons packed into a needle tip would suddenly have an escape route, a > pressure relief valve at the tip of the needle. The number that could pack > in together would be limited by the time required for a voltage > equilization wave to propagate through the needle tip, and by the Given that such propagation travels at nearly the speed of light, while the physical electrons are only arriving at drift velocity, I would think that propagation delay would hardly allow for much growth in the number. In fact I think that this effect could probably be ignored. > increasing outbound tunneling probability for the electrons in the cluster. Given that bi-directional tunnelling is possible, but more likely (prevalent?) in the direction of energy release, doesn't this mean that such a cluster would grow until a stabilization point is reached, where the inbound tunnelling balances the outbound tunnelling? (Or is that what you were saying?) [snip] > >Please explain (at length) where the .5 MeV comes from. > > I simply used this figure because it is approximately *your* figure, so I > thought it would appeal to you and increase your intuition. You used it in > s.p.f. to point out the amount of energy an electron must give up when Actually, the figure I used was .782 MeV. (The difference in mass between a neutron and a hydrogen atom). > bound by electron capture (I don't recall for sure, but I think you used > 1.5 femtometers as a distance). You pointed out that this would be the (1.841 F) > amount of energy required by two electrons to approach to that distance, > which seems like more than a coincidence since it is the mass of the > electron. The actual distance that would be necessary to be used to As you can see from the above, I'm afraid the coincidence is not actually there. Perhaps you yourself had something in mind? [snip] > >> I would think they would all rotate the same way. > > > >If they all rotate the same way, then in my perhaps naive view, they > >would all be little magnets, lined up parallel, but with all their > >north poles together, and with all their south poles together. Surely > >in such a situation, they would magnetically repel each other, and > >not be bound at all. > > > This gets back to the mental model of ghost like particles. Forgetting > rotation or spin for a moment, if we visualize two axially aligned ghost > like magnets in a N-S N-S orientation at a small distance, they will > approach each other, move through each other to the common center, at which > point there is no dipole moment, then continue on by momentum to separate, > but both are still in a N-S orientation, no torque has been produced to > cause any flip. But the attraction is still there because when the magnets > exchanged positions the opposite poles of each magnet came into proximity, > so the orientation is still N-S N-S. When 2 magnets are free to align themselves, they don't normally align coaxially, but rather as a pair next to one another. See my web page at (specially set up for the purpose): http://server.netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa > I didn't know you wrote a book. What is the title? Sorry, this is a misunderstanding. "in my book" is an expression used here in Australia, that means "according to me" or "according to my rules". > > I don't see tunneling as a recipe, but as an observed characteristic of > matter. Particles seem to *simultaneously* (that's just one of many > interpretations) exist all over the place with some volume probability, yet > pardoxically, when an energy barrier is inserted in their waveform the > waveform collapses and the particle "choses a side" of the barrier and a > new waveform emerges. The SE is the recipe, it tells you with great > accuracy the tunneling probability you can expect in a particlar > circumstance, and helps in the design of tunnel diodes, for example. > > > > > >> number of remaining electrons in the bundle available for acceleration. > >> That's what I call an energy hill! > > > >I always thought that tunnelling only occurred where there was a net > >energy gain. > > My understanding is that tunneling occurs though an energy hill. Tunneling > is just a manifestation of the extended location existence of a particle. > It really *is* on both sides of a barrier at once. (That's one > interpretation.) In a no energy gain situation you can look upon it as a > kind of eqilibrium. The probability of tunneling back is better than the > probability of remaining in the higher energy side. This is why electron > shells are fuzzy. In the case of an electron cluster the hill is provided > by the magnetic dipole moment. If an electron materializes outside the > close influence of the magnetic force, massive electrostatic repulsion > makes the electron accelerate away (and thus reduces it's waveform size) > and the event is one-way. Nice explanation. It complements a view of the nature of matter that I am starting to form. > > >If an electron gains energy by leaving an electron cluster, then surely > >there is no > >energy to be gained by the formation of the cluster in the first > >place. > > That depends on how much energy it took to create the cluster. By the I had assumed that the cluster would only form and grow as long as this growth resulted in net energy release. I.e. this contrary to costing energy to form the cluster. This is one reason why I would like to see some calculations done (to see which it is). > above, that amount of energy is gretly reduced by the reduced electrostatic > dipole moment. > > > > >In short, I don't think electrons will tunnel out of a cluster. > >(Which sort of explains Ken Shoulder's 10^8 - 10^11 numbers). > > There is a finite probability anything will tunnel anywhere. The problem is What I really meant was that I thought that the probability of tunnelling in was greater than the probability of tunnelling out, so that there would be net growth until a certain size was reached. This is presuming that tunnelling probabilities are determined by the energy balance, and that growth (up to a point) results in net energy release. > figuring out the probability. Sorry, I don't have any answers on that. I > see no reason to believe Ken Shoulder's numbers are erroneous. > [snip] Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 22:25:55 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA06090 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:25:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA05958 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:25:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-45.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-45.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.45]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA20443 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 17:22:52 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511260622.RAA20443 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 17:25:17 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 25 Nov 95 at 11:21, John Logajan wrote: [snip] > Barker gives these numbers: > > Potential 350kV +or- 75kV maintained for 12 hours. After the 12 hour > "treatment" three samples were monitored for their radioactivity. > > Depletion at Depletion at Normal Half-life > three days seven days Half-life accelerated by > > Tl 204 1% 5.3% 3.8y 15x > Po 210 7% 55.3% 138.4d 15.3x > Th 230 2.6% 81.8% 80000y 48900x > > > Note that the "treatment" was for 12 hours only, the samples continued > to decay at an accelerated rate with no further exposure to the negative > potential. > > Barker also warns, "High voltages may be hazardous. For example, 2MV > predicted to convert the half-life of U238 to one second." > > > Well anyhow, that's what the patent says. :-) > > -- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - > - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - > - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - This leads to an interesting idea. If a metallic alpha emitter were suspended above an coil (magnetic levitation) in a vacuum, then as it emitted its alpha particles, it would become progressively more negative. Would this then have the same effect of speeding up the decay rate? Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 22:25:55 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA06068 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:25:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA05947 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:25:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-45.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-45.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.45]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA20438 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 17:22:45 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511260622.RAA20438 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 17:25:16 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: H-metal experiment Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 25 Nov 95 at 8:35, Scott Little wrote: [snip] > 1. The coil serves two purposes. heating and magnetization. If I reduce > the heating power, I also reduce the magnetization. P's estimate of 1 tesla > in the rod is clearly wrong but it at least implies that we should try for a Scott, perhaps this was a simple typo, and should have been 0.1 tesla. [snip] > 2. preparation of the Ni rod > > I'm going to have the rod plated with Ni soon. Should I try anything else, > first? How about glass-beading the rod? Acid-etching? Placing it inside > the sphere of a Van de Graff for 30 minutes? If you're going to plate the rod anyway, then you might as well try a few other things first, that you think might ruin the surface. That way any damage done can be repaired by the plating. And it you follow Jed's advice, don't touch it with your fingers! :-> Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 22:26:29 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA06294 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:26:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA05925 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:25:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-45.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-45.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.45]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA20440 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 17:22:49 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511260622.RAA20440 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 17:25:17 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 25 Nov 95 at 0:19, Scott Little wrote: > excerpt from the abstract: > > > The stimulus can be applied to the > > radioactive materials placing them within the sphere or terminal of a > > Van de Graaff generator and allowing them to be subjected to the > > electrical potential of the generator, such as in the range of 50 > > kilovolts to 500 kilovolts, for at least a period of 30 minutes or > > more. > > This really does sound fishy now: an object placed "within" the sphere of a > Van de Graff generator experiences no electric field, regardless of the > charge on the sphere. This is precisely the nature and "mystery" of the Aharanov-Bohm effect. (I.e. that it has an effect as a consequence of the potential alone, in the absence of a field). Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 22:38:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA06179 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:25:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA06093 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:25:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-45.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-45.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.45]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA20457 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 17:23:03 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511260623.RAA20457 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 17:25:17 +0900 Subject: vtx: Light speed Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If 'C' is the group velocity of light, what is the phase velocity? This is a question that I have wanted an answer to for 20 years. Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 23:56:36 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA25360 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:56:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA25345 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:56:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id XAA17662; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:56:19 -0800 Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:56:19 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters In-Reply-To: <199511260225.NAA02718 tornado.netspace.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This may have no bearing on electron clusters, but Charles Yost (I think) has a paper in the most recent ELECTRIC SPACECRAFT JOURNAL, on Scheliern photography of ion wind being emitted from charged needles. He notes the existance of great long "threads" of air with anomalous refraction, coming from the needles. The threads are on the order of a mm wide, and over 10cm long. Placing a small probe into the threads show that they carry significant current. Very weird. I woulda thunk that ion wind from a needle would have enhanced turbulence, not organized and robust laminar flow. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 23:59:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA25765 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:59:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA25689 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:58:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-2.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-2.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.2]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA26226 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 18:56:17 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511260756.SAA26226 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 18:58:48 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Either my mailer or Bill's listserv appears to have made a botch of my previous message. What I got echoed back was my text attachment as the main message, while my message itself was completely missing. So this time I will send only the message itself. For the attachment, see my previous message on this topic. ____________________________________________________________________ > Abstract > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Apparatus and method for decontaminating radioactive materials by > stimulating the atomic system of radioactive materials. The stimulus > is kept applied to the radioactive materials for a predetermined time. > In this way, the rate of decay of the radioactivity of the materials > is greatly accelerated and the materials are thereby decontaminated at > a rate much faster than normal. The stimulus can be applied to the > radioactive materials placing them within the sphere or terminal of a > Van de Graaff generator and allowing them to be subjected to the > electrical potential of the generator, such as in the range of 50 > kilovolts to 500 kilovolts, for at least a period of 30 minutes or > more. I've been waiting for someone to push this button! This is the Aharanov-Bohm effect revealing it's first real practical application! It works because the potential of the generator affects the phase of the particles involved in the decay. If you read Sapogin's message on Bill Page's ICCF5 list (attached with apologies to Bill), and this: L.G.Sapogin. "On Unitary Quantum Mechanics." Nuovo Cimento. vol. 53A, No. 2, p. 251 (1979) then this will make much more sense. Though I must admit to being a little puzzled by the fact that it continues to work after removal from the generator. Attachments: (See previous message). Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 00:28:44 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA01921 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 00:28:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA01860 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 00:28:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.65] ([204.57.193.65]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA21121 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 01:49:08 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:29:58 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A >On 24 Nov 95 at 9:19, Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >> The electrostatic field intensity is very high at the tip of a needle. The >> orbitals are greatly elongated, giving a high probability for conduction >> band electrons being at an extended distance from the nuclei. The > >I was under the impression that conduction band electrons were >already free to wander through the lattice, so I'm not quite sure >what you mean by "extended distance from the nuclei". Conduction band electrons migrate readily through the lattice, but occupy orbitals and migrate by hopping from atom to atom, thus they are at a lower energy state than free electrons, true? The effect I am talking about is the increase in separation of the average electron position (of electrons in the outer orbital) from the position of the nucleus caused by the strong electrostatic field. The atoms at the tip of the needle become elongated, with the nucleus migrated away from the tip of the needle. The outer electron orbital, where the conduction band electrons reside, is stretched far away from the nucleus (of atoms on the tip of the needle). They extend out into space beyound the tip of the needle. I would think electrons out there would be like Rydberg electrons, losing their fuzzy quantum wave like nauture and becoming more Newtonian. This is the zone I would expect the cluster to form in and then break free. > >> electrons being packed into the tip of the needle are at thermal energies, >> so when one becomes free it's de Broglie wave-length increases to a large >> amount. When a free electron is emitted, I think immediately other electrons >> can "pack into it" by the following "feedback" effect: As one electron >> approaches another at the tip of the needle it decelerates due to the >> Coulomb force. This increases the de Broglie wave-length of the two >> electrons with respect to each other, dispersing their mutually observed >> charge probabilities over a wider volume, decreasing the electric dipole >> moment, decreasing the electrostatic force, decreasing the rate of slowdown, > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Doesn't this imply negative feedback? I don't think so. If the rate of slowdown due to the repulsive force is not reduced the electron would simply be ejected back toward the needle. Maybe this kind of thing happens and sets up electron oscillations. The electron is not going to slow to zero until it reaches the center of the cluster because the external pressure will continue to compress the electron and cluster together. The closer together they become, the less force holding them apart. There is, however, clearly a possibility of overshooting and being ejected or setting up an oscillation due to the magnetic force coming into play, but that should damp down. > >>decreasing the amount of energy required for the electrons to >> approach, increasing the relative strength of the magnetic moment, >> decreasing the distance between the electrons, thus the feedback effect. > >So what you are saying is that the magnetic attraction will override >the electrostatic repulsion, beyond a certain point. Yes. > >> Electrons packed into a needle tip would suddenly have an escape route, a >> pressure relief valve at the tip of the needle. The number that could pack >> in together would be limited by the time required for a voltage >> equilization wave to propagate through the needle tip, and by the > >Given that such propagation travels at nearly the speed of light, >while the physical electrons are only arriving at drift velocity, I >would think that propagation delay would hardly allow for much growth >in the number. In fact I think that this effect could probably be >ignored. Well let's see. Using Ken Shoulder's low end of 1E8 electrons, at two electrons per conduction band that's 5E7 atoms. So that's 5E7/6E23 = 8E-17 moles of say Ni. Since Ni has an atomic volume of 6.59 cm^3/mol, that's 5.3E-16 cm^3. That's a cube of size 8.1E-6 cm. Using a cone where radius eqauls height we have .33(pi)(h^3) = 5.3E-16 cm^3, so h=(5.12E-16)^-3, so h=8E-6 cm, the longest distance to traverse is 1.1E-5 cm. Given an atomic radius of 1.62E-8 cm that's a traversal of a maximum distance of about 680 atoms. Not much, so I suppose a more important question might be current and timing. The 1E8 electrons is about 1.6E-11 Coulombs. From line 53 of US patent 5,018,180 (Ken Shoulders) in one experimant he used a negative 2kV pulse of from a few nanoseconds to dc, and for a pulse length of .1 microsecond a resistor value of 500 to 1500 ohms. If we use 1kohm we have a current of 1 amp, so .1 usec is 1E-7 Coulombs, or 6.2E11 electrons. If a 1E8 ball was ejected it would take only (.1usec)(1E8)/(6.2E11)=1.6E-11 sec., or it could be done repetitively at a rate of 62.5 Ghz. The 6.2E11 balls would be ejected at a rate of 10Mhz. These ranges do not seem out of line except for the current density at the tip of the needle, which were stated in the patent to be a problem overcome by using mercury tips with a continual supply of mercury replacing the boiled or exploded tips. Do you see a problem? > >> increasing outbound tunneling probability for the electrons in the cluster. > >Given that bi-directional tunnelling is possible, but more likely >(prevalent?) in the direction of energy release, doesn't this mean >that such a cluster would grow until a stabilization point is reached, >where the inbound tunnelling balances the outbound tunnelling? >(Or is that what you were saying?) Yes. If equilibrium is reached the ball will just sit there until something, like heat, kicks it lose. > >[snip] >> >Please explain (at length) where the .5 MeV comes from. >> >> I simply used this figure because it is approximately *your* figure, so I >> thought it would appeal to you and increase your intuition. You used it in >> s.p.f. to point out the amount of energy an electron must give up when > >Actually, the figure I used was .782 MeV. (The difference in mass >between a neutron and a hydrogen atom). > >> bound by electron capture (I don't recall for sure, but I think you used >> 1.5 femtometers as a distance). You pointed out that this would be the >(1.841 F) >> amount of energy required by two electrons to approach to that distance, >> which seems like more than a coincidence since it is the mass of the >> electron. The actual distance that would be necessary to be used to > >As you can see from the above, I'm afraid the coincidence is not >actually there. Perhaps you yourself had something in mind? Only to demonstrate the surprising amount of energy that might be generated by a 2keV electron at the right place at the right time. >[snip] >> >> I would think they would all rotate the same way. >> > >> >If they all rotate the same way, then in my perhaps naive view, they >> >would all be little magnets, lined up parallel, but with all their >> >north poles together, and with all their south poles together. Surely >> >in such a situation, they would magnetically repel each other, and >> >not be bound at all. >> >> >> This gets back to the mental model of ghost like particles. Forgetting >> rotation or spin for a moment, if we visualize two axially aligned ghost >> like magnets in a N-S N-S orientation at a small distance, they will >> approach each other, move through each other to the common center, at which >> point there is no dipole moment, then continue on by momentum to separate, >> but both are still in a N-S orientation, no torque has been produced to >> cause any flip. But the attraction is still there because when the magnets >> exchanged positions the opposite poles of each magnet came into proximity, >> so the orientation is still N-S N-S. > >When 2 magnets are free to align themselves, they don't normally align >coaxially, but rather as a pair next to one another. See my web page >at (specially set up for the purpose): > >http://server.netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa Will do. However, keep in mind the electron is a magnet with no length. > [snip] > >> >> >If an electron gains energy by leaving an electron cluster, then surely >> >there is no >> >energy to be gained by the formation of the cluster in the first >> >place. >> >> That depends on how much energy it took to create the cluster. By the > >I had assumed that the cluster would only form and grow as long as >this growth resulted in net energy release. I.e. this contrary to >costing energy to form the cluster. This is one reason why I would >like to see some calculations done (to see which it is). Yes, you are right here. An experiment might be easier to do though. > >> above, that amount of energy is gretly reduced by the reduced electrostatic >> dipole moment. >> >> >> >> >In short, I don't think electrons will tunnel out of a cluster. >> >(Which sort of explains Ken Shoulder's 10^8 - 10^11 numbers). >> >> There is a finite probability anything will tunnel anywhere. The problem is > >What I really meant was that I thought that the probability of >tunnelling in was greater than the probability of tunnelling out, so Not once the ball is away from the electrode. Then the entire surface around the ball will be at a high potential difference. Tunneling beyond the break even point in any direction is going to be a very wild one way ride. While being built at the tip of the electrode the ball would be at the end of a kind of chain of ever closer electrons scrunching their way into the ball, with the gradient in the direction of the needle not being as great as the gradient away from the needle. If true, this is maybe how the energy generating is taking place. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 07:30:43 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA24976 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 07:30:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA24942 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 07:30:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-160.austin.eden.com (net-1-160.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.160]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA10016 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 09:30:20 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 09:30:20 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511261530.JAA10016 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robin said: > >This is precisely the nature and "mystery" of the Aharanov-Bohm >effect. (I.e. that it has an effect as a consequence of the >potential alone, in the absence of a field). Isn't the Aharanov-Bohm effect something involving the existence of the magnetic vector potential, A, ...not the electric potential? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 08:11:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA02785 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 08:10:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA02751 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 08:10:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA21640 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 09:31:47 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 07:12:29 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Light speed Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >If 'C' is the group velocity of light, what is the phase velocity? >This is a question that I have wanted an answer to for 20 years. >Robin van Spaandonk > >Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, >Learns all his life, >And leaves knowing nothing. >Robin Feb. 1995 Once again taking the liberty of possibly being nonsensical, a risk I am comfortable with: Given a frequency F s^-1 we have a wavelength of (C m/s)/(F s-1) = C/F m. So we know the wavelength (C/F m) and the frequency (F s^-1), the phase velocity should be (Pi)(C/F m)(F s^-1) = (Pi)(C) m/s. Is that wierd? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 09:28:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA19231 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 09:28:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA19208 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 09:28:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id JAA06766; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 09:28:00 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 09:27:59 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 25 Nov 1995, Horace Heffner wrote: > Conduction band electrons migrate readily through the lattice, but occupy > orbitals and migrate by hopping from atom to atom, thus they are at a lower > energy state than free electrons, true? The "electron hopping" explanation of electric current is a misconception which occurs in textbooks and is often taught in early grades. See my Physics Misconceptions page for more examples of textbook-induced false beliefs, especially in regards to electricity: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/miscon/miscon.html When copper atoms combine to form solids, their outer orbitals combine into one large and complicated super-orbital (the conduction band.) You could picture it from a Classical viewpoint: thermal vibrations affect an atom's electrons, and when several atoms are in close proximity, their outer electrons are knocked loose and begin wandering among the atoms. Actually it's quantum uncertainty not thermal vibrations that do it (copper is still conductive at zero K,) Electron wave effects are important. I don't understand the complete picture, but the conduction band in metal crystals is usually treated in terms of momentum-space rather than physical space, and the moving electrons interact with the periodic voltage of the grid of positive copper nucleii. Look up "Fermi surface" and "reciprocal lattice" and "Brilloin (sp?) zone." Conduction-band electrons do have less energy than free electrons. They're free to wander inside the metal, but their energy must exceed a "work function" before they can get out into free space. I think your picture of the tip of a needle is correct: the conduction band (rather than the individual orbitals) becomes stretched out, and at a certain field-strength it extends out into free space and electrons begin to escape. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 10:07:32 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA29473 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:07:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA29455; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:07:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id KAA09977; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:07:24 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:07:23 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com cc: freenrg-list mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > The conduction band (rather than the individual orbitals) becomes > stretched out, and at a certain field-strength it extends out into free > space and electrons begin to escape. If a sudden voltage pulse was applied to a needle, perhaps the entire conduction band extends out into space, necks down and breaks off, and a glob of quantum "electric fluid" flys free. For this to occur the ZPE would have to smoothly take over the role of the copper ions as the conduction band extended, keeping the electron-matter compressed, otherwise the electrons would spray out as a 'gas' of individual particles. If the Casmir forces are strong enough to compress a cloud of electrons, then I'd expect there to be some dependance of this force on the density of electron-gas, because (I think!) a sparse cloud of free electrons would act much less condutive than a dense cloud. Or perhaps the Casmir force is stronger for a denser cloud of electrons because they act as a better shield for the higher frequencies of ZPE? If I could take a bunch of electrons and compress them into an increasingly small cloud, at some point the cloud would be so conductive that the Casmir forces would take over and continue the compression. What then would limit it? The electron-cluster would shrink to a point! Maybe unknown quantum effects limit the (presumed!) process. Or perhaps the frequency distribution of the ZPE makes the Casmir forces drop off as the electron cluster falls below a certain size. Now I see where Shoulders gets his "Jupiter" stuff. If electron clusters exist, their effects should be seen in many places, and if they conduct ZPE into the macroscopic world, maybe they play a part in chemistry, stellar physics, etc., as well as CF effects. The discovery of the century? Some wild speculation: would an electron cluster swallow up free electrons and grow? Shoulders' patent implies that the clusters are disrupted by contact with solid matter. But what would happen if they touched the plasma of an electric arc? Would they feed off its electrons? The Corum paper on ball lightning production says that the tiny 'sparks' that arise when a Tesla coil arc strikes a carbon electrode ARE THEN STRUCK BY LATER ARCS AND "INFLATED" IN SIZE. Maybe the Corum's ball lightnings are not carbon aerogels as they postulate, but are electron clusters after all. If so, then thunderstorm ball lightning would arise when a tiny charge-cluster had the opportunity to feed off of the arc plasma for quite awhile, during multiple restrikes or during "hot" long-dwell lightning strikes. If applying a pulse to a needle can produce invisibly-small charge clusters, what happens when a pulsed needle is used with an arc source or an e-field source? (Shield the needle from the arc or the e-field, and just launch charge clusters out into it?) If injected between the plates of a capacitor with air dielectric, they might grow into detectable, measurable entities. A small (conductive) charge cluster might also grow into a ball lightning if it found itself in the highly charged mist within a thunderstorm. It would then induce corona and small lightning discharges in the same way that a conductive aircraft actually induces the lightning which "strikes" it. In a thundercloud a charge cluster would essentially be sending out branching plasma filaments and using the ambient e-field to feed off the electrons of air and water. Cool image, eh? Star Trek "plasma lifeforms!" .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 10:47:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA10207 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:47:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA10182 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:47:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA01381; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:45:58 -0500 Date: 26 Nov 95 13:42:35 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Cold Fusion News Message-ID: <951126184234_102021.3045_EHT100-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Subj: Cold Fusion News Section: Physics To: Tom LeCompte-Sysop, 76711,572 Saturday, November 25, 1995 6:52:31 PM From: David Fisher, 100616,3624 #214379 Well, yes I was. I was really thinking of electrical engineers. I have this theory that all of the leading pseudoscientists are electrical engineers (I am sure that you can fill in the names as well as I can). Only electrical trade journals seem to have letters columns which contain lots of cranky ideas. I think that the reason for this state of affairs is that electrical engineers deal with radiation, electrons, some relativity, etc., and come to believe that they are physicists. However, they lack the more fundamental understanding of a physicist and therefore get caught up in these awful dead-ends. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 10:57:32 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA12913 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:57:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA12888; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:57:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id KAA13737; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:57:23 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 10:57:22 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com cc: freenrg-list mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Shielding the ZPE? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Casmir-force questions. (Actually more like Casmir force brainstorming.) Casmir forces are radiation pressure, right? All metals must be feeling this pressure to some extent. Do thicker metal plates display enhanced Casmir force effects, or is a thin metal foil as good a shield? Would polished superconductor plates work much better than thinfilm gold? If thicker is better, then a metal object inside a thick-walled shielding container would experience reduced Casmir force. Might this have a small effect on chemistry? If it affected certain electronic devices, then ZPE would be directly measurable. If the shielding alters even the short wavelengths of ZPE, might it affect radioactive decay processes? Metal shields probably would have no effect, but a great huge cloud of protons might do something. Maybe take a GM counter and a radioactive source down a mineshaft to put lots of protons between you and the sky, and see if the activity is altered? I'd think someone would have noticed such an effect, even if small. (and does the terminal of a charged VandeGraaff machine have enhanced ZPE shielding properties and cause Barker's effect?) Variable-conductivity materials should display varying Casmir force effects. Would cryo-cooled (insulating) parallel semiconductor plates have a different Casmir compression force than when heated and conductive? If the parallel-plates Casmir force experiment is continuously monitored in real time, does the force respond to the presence of shielding objects? Would this experiment constitute a ZPE telescope and detect a 24hr variation as the earth acted as a shield for various portions of the sky? Hodowanec claims that capacitor noise varies like this. A faraday cage is not the only type of electrical shield. Simple proximity to metal objects exerts a shielding effect. So, does our proximity to the Earth cause some tiny changes to the ZPE background which would not exist for a spacecraft halfway to the moon? If the ZPE spectrum could be dynamically measured (by parallel-plate forces? Howadnec's capacitors?), perhaps it would become possible to detect nearby objects by the ZPE shadows they cast. Or to send signals by flipping big flat plates of dense matter around. Or manipulating big arrays of charge-cluster material. Charged-cluster matter should make an excellent ZPE shield. A hollow sphere of condensed charge would become a ZPE camera if a hole was made in the wall and a detector array placed inside! .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 11:31:30 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA21788 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 11:31:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA21725 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 11:31:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id OAA01486; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 14:29:44 -0500 Date: 26 Nov 95 14:28:35 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism Message-ID: <951126192835_102021.3045_EHT25-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: FROM: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 TO: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 DATE: 9/28/95 7:21 PM Re: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism Peter, Here's an excerpt from; Weidner and Sells, Elementary Modern Physics, Allyn and Bacon, Inc. Boston. "The electromagnetic interaction between a pair of electrically charged particles is customarily separated into two parts: The ELECTRIC force,which always acts between any two charged particles whether each is at rest or in motion with respect to the observer, and the MAGNETIC force, which acts between them only when they are both in motion relative to the observer. It is easy to see that the magnetic force between any two charged particles Q1 and Q2 can be turned off, so to speak, merely by a proper choice of reference frame. For example, if an observer rides in a reference frame that is at rest with respect to charge Q1, he will measure no magnetic force between the two charges. First, the magnetic force on Q2 due to Q1 will be zero, because Q1 creates no magnetic field at the site of Q2 (or at any other point in space, since Q1 is at rest). Second, even if Q2 were moving with respect to the observer, there would be no magnetic force on Q1 due to Q2, because Q1 is not moving. This simple example shows us that a magnetic force between two particles may exist for observers in some inertial systems but in others. The first postulate of relativity, the invariance of the form of a physical law in all inertial frames, requires that the laws of electromagnetism be the same form in all inertial frames. Clearly, the magnetic interaction is intimately related to the choice of reference frame." I'm still hung up on the magnetic force being a function of the gamma ratio of two parallel relativistic beams going in the same direction. It is known from relativistic electrodynamics that the coulomb force between two like charges are reduced by sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) compared to the repulsive force between them when they are at rest. To me this is a manifestation of the magnetic force. Regards, Frederick Perhaps this is in the area that Chris Tinsley is looking for in his quest for in "Something Completely Different"? FJS 11/26/95 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 12:03:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA00230 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 12:02:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA00169 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 12:02:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id MAA20395; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 12:02:19 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 12:02:16 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Cold Fusion News In-Reply-To: <951126184234_102021.3045_EHT100-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 26 Nov 1995, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > Subj: Cold Fusion News Section: Physics > To: Tom LeCompte-Sysop, 76711,572 Saturday, November 25, 1995 6:52:31 PM > From: David Fisher, 100616,3624 #214379 > > Well, yes I was. I was really thinking of electrical engineers. I have this > theory that all of the leading pseudoscientists are electrical engineers (I am > sure that you can fill in the names as well as I can). Only electrical trade > journals seem to have letters columns which contain lots of cranky ideas. I > think that the reason for this state of affairs is that electrical engineers > deal with radiation, electrons, some relativity, etc., and come to believe that > they are physicists. However, they lack the more fundamental understanding of a > physicist and therefore get caught up in these awful dead-ends. ROFL! This really *is* the situation. Myself being an EE, I see the truth in David's view. But his is not the whole story. As an engineer I see that professional physics people have much more ego involvement in the current worldview than do engineers. Engineers are able to discuss extremely "crazy" ideas and indulge in unfettered creative brainstorming behavior. Physicists will be ridiculed by collegues (and accused of being pseudoscientists?!) if they do the same. Is not the questioning of belief systems and of current theoretical constructs (at least subconsciously) a great threat to a physicist's whole world? I'd expect physicists to be very good at exploring all areas of a new subject, but I'd expect the threatening character of *really* new discoveries to damp out the wild creativity needed to find them. Engineers, being outsiders, can afford to take the subject much less seriously. And engineers are accustomed to having their worlds upset on a time-scale much smaller than generations: pitch out vacuum tubes and learn transistors.. oops, transistors are now inside boxes and all you need to know is opamps and TTL.. oops, gotta learn software so you can do embedded controllers and DSP... oops... If I go into a discussion saying: "suppose that current thinking is misguided and thus-and-so idea is true," that's one thing. But if the implication is actually: "suppose thus-and-so idea is true and your whole life's work is based upon a foundation as faulty as the Phlogiston theory..." See why "cranky" discussions would not arise in science journals, but might be common in engineering journals? I'd expect a scientists's definition of cranky-ness would vary widely depending on how much of physics would be wrecked if the "crank" idea was true. Where an engineer might see an idea as an interesting speculation, a scientist would see the same idea as obvious, disgusting pseudoscience. Now that I've insulted all the physicists here with my Engineer's viewpoint, lets hear some good "engineer" jokes in retaliation. ;) .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Nov 25 02:42:20 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id CAA12979 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 02:42:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA12972 for ; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 02:42:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA17269; Sat, 25 Nov 1995 05:40:55 -0500 Date: 25 Nov 95 05:41:07 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951125104106_100433.1541_BHG45-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex I'll comment on St Pete soon, but I would like to take time out from such serious matters to ask a couple of simple questions. 1. What is the evidence for the physical existence of electric and magnetic fields? 2. What is the evidence for the physical existence of photons? Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 13:36:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA27951 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:36:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA27880 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:36:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA15217; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 16:35:14 -0500 Date: 26 Nov 95 16:33:50 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Relativistic Magnetism Message-ID: <951126213349_102021.3045_EHT95-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subj: Relativistic Magnetism Section: Physics To: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 Sunday, September 17, 1995 9:41:09 PM From: Frederick J. Sparb, 102021,3045 #202363 Peter, I went back over the doodling on the time dilation in the electron,and here's what I came up with. Assuming the wavelength of the electron equal to the Compton wavelength 2.425 x 10^-12 meters, and the apparent charge circling at very near c the current would be ef or 19.68 amperes. As a current loop this works out to 4.77 x 10^-11 ampere meters. Then a magneto static force between two electrons would be, 10^-7 (4.77 x 10^-11)^2 = 2.275 x 10^-28 nt at one meter separation with no time dilation. However the gravitational force at one meter separation is G(9.1 x 10^-31)^2 equal 5.523 x 10^-71 nt. Assuming that the relativistic gamma factor = (2.275 x 10^-28/5.523 x 10^-71)^.5 = 2.03 x 10^21. Taken another way the square root of the ratio of the electrostatic force to the gravitational force is again 2.03 x 10^21. I dunno? FJS From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 13:39:55 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA28900 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:39:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA28886 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 13:39:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA06082; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 16:38:32 -0500 Date: 26 Nov 95 16:36:57 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Relativistic Magnetism Message-ID: <951126213656_102021.3045_EHT112-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subj: Relativistic Magnetism Section: Speculative Science To: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 Thursday, October 12, 1995 8:14:05 PM From: Frederick J. Sparb, 102021,3045 #206223 Peter, Blobtron, I like that. Going back to "Big Bang" genesis for a moment. The production of Kaon pairs from a photon of about one Gev. gives the Kaons that have a lifetime of 1.23E-8 sec and a rest energy of 493.98 Mev,equal 7.05 me(alpha). However when a triad of these combine to make a proton the mass defect should work out to the binding energy divided up amongst the three, leaving the rest mass of the proton which wipes out any alpha connections. The other unit radiated away its energy to become the electron. Getting farther along, the RPM theory says that there are 4A - Z units in the nucleus, 2A UP or positive units, 2A - Z down or negative units and A - Z neutrinos. And Z external electrons. Thus for (94) Pu (239) 4A - Z is 4(239) - (94) = 956 - 94 = 862 RPM units and 145 neutrinos. A lot to pack into a "sphere of influence" of a few Fermi radii. A real Blobtron ? I worked through the spin of Pu 239 being + 1/2 and the +.203 nuclear magnetic moment says that the RPM that is giving this moment has the energy equivalent of 372.2 me or about 190 mev. I call these the odd unit out. That is to say, all the other units tend to cancel out spins and share their "relativistic" energy in a more or less stochastic fashion peculiar to the particular atom or isotope. Back to the Blobtron, is it possible that E.M. waves can occupy the same space at the same time? Sort of like a multi mode resonant cavity? And yet manifest a particulate identity like all of the E.M. frequencies on a radio antenna that can be selected by "tuning" to the desired intelligence? Intelligence is used loosely in this case based on most of the stuff on the airwaves these days. And yet we must remember that the heavier nuclei are built up from the proton, and I strongly believe that a proton-proton reaction is not likely to occur until a collision hard enough to create a positron-negatron pair occurs and the negatron "runs interference" to allow tunnelling and creation of that evasive little gremlin the neutrino, (also created in pairs?). Where to from here, Peter? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 14:27:43 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id OAA13365 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 14:27:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA13321 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 14:27:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id OAA04373; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 14:27:29 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 14:27:27 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in Electrodeless Discharges? In-Reply-To: <9511241425.AA18853 clark.dgim.doc.ca> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 24 Nov 1995, Gary Steckly wrote: > Bill, are you thinking about the discussions we had about a year ago or was > there something similar in usenet that I missed? The technology I was > referring to at that time was the Leach arc-plasma system, but it had no > tuned LC components to my knowledge. The patents show 2 embodiments, both > of which employ a heat exchange loop in the steam plasma chamber. There was > no MHD type of direct electricity production...just your conventional steam > turbine genset in the loop, although my contacts definitely had visions of OU. I think the LC version came out of discussions on Keelynet. I expect that an LC circuit connected to electrodes placed in an arc will oscillate for quite conventional reasons. But if excess energy can be extracted in this way, there is a route for direct electrical conversion and self-generating arcs. The o/u efficiency would have to be huge to counter the heat losses though, no? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 16:58:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id QAA27965 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 16:56:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from ra.cs.ohiou.edu (ac817 ra.cs.ohiou.edu [132.235.1.101]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA27933 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 16:56:44 -0800 (PST) Received: (from ac817 localhost) by ra.cs.ohiou.edu (8.7.Beta.11/8.7.Beta.11) id TAA00503 for vortex-L@eskimo.com; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 19:56:39 -0500 (EST) From: Andrew Cantino Message-Id: <199511270056.TAA00503 ra.cs.ohiou.edu> Subject: vtx: hi To: vortex-L eskimo.com (vortex-L) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 19:56:38 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: HI! I'm new on this listserve. This is going to be great! Andrew -- ((( (O,O) (-) -----oOOo-----oOOo---------------- I I I Andrew Cantino I I ac817 seorf.ohiou.edu I I I ---------------------------------- My home page is at: http://www.eskimo.com/~bilb/freenrgl/andrew.html From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 19:30:02 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA14177 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 19:28:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA14114 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 19:28:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-25.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-25.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.25]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA09158 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:26:07 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511270326.OAA09158 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:28:28 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 26 Nov 95 at 9:27, William Beaty wrote: > On Sat, 25 Nov 1995, Horace Heffner wrote: > > > Conduction band electrons migrate readily through the lattice, but occupy > > orbitals and migrate by hopping from atom to atom, thus they are at a lower > > energy state than free electrons, true? > > The "electron hopping" explanation of electric current is a misconception > which occurs in textbooks and is often taught in early grades. See my > Physics Misconceptions page for more examples of textbook-induced false > beliefs, especially in regards to electricity: > http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/miscon/miscon.html > > When copper atoms combine to form solids, their outer orbitals combine > into one large and complicated super-orbital (the conduction band.) You > could picture it from a Classical viewpoint: thermal vibrations affect an > atom's electrons, and when several atoms are in close proximity, their > outer electrons are knocked loose and begin wandering among the atoms. > Actually it's quantum uncertainty not thermal vibrations that do it So they tunnel through the small energy barriers between atoms? > (copper is still conductive at zero K,) > [snip] Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 19:30:14 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA14242 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 19:28:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA14143 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 19:28:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-25.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-25.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.25]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA09114 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:25:50 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511270325.OAA09114 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:28:28 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 26 Nov 95 at 14:28, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > FROM: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 > TO: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 > DATE: 9/28/95 7:21 PM > > Re: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism > > Peter, > > Here's an excerpt from; Weidner and Sells, Elementary Modern Physics, Allyn and > Bacon, Inc. Boston. > > "The electromagnetic interaction between a pair of electrically charged > particles is customarily separated into two parts: The ELECTRIC force,which > always acts between any two charged particles whether each is at rest or in > motion with respect to the observer, and the MAGNETIC force, which acts between > them only when they are both in motion relative to the observer. It is easy to > see that the magnetic force between any two charged particles Q1 and Q2 can be > turned off, so to speak, merely by a proper choice of reference frame. For > example, if an observer rides in a reference frame that is at rest with respect > to charge Q1, he will measure no magnetic force between the two charges. First, > the magnetic force on Q2 due to Q1 will be zero, because Q1 creates no magnetic > field at the site of Q2 (or at any other point in space, since Q1 is at rest). > Second, even if Q2 were moving with respect to the observer, there would be no > magnetic force on Q1 due to Q2, because Q1 is not moving. This simple example > shows us that a magnetic force between two particles may exist for observers in > some inertial systems but in others. The first postulate of relativity, the > invariance of the form of a physical law in all inertial frames, requires that > the laws of electromagnetism be the same form in all inertial frames. Clearly, > the magnetic interaction is intimately related to the choice of reference > frame." So for two like charged particles traveling through space parellel to one another in the same direction, an observer stationary relative to the motion of the particles, will observe a magnetic force acting on the particles and drawing them together, while an observer in the same frame as the particles will observe no force at all, and the particles will not be drawn together. Thus the particles are both drawn together, and not drawn together at the same time....obviously! :-> The only conclusion that I can draw from this apparent paradox is that the observer in the same frame as the particles will also observe a force drawing them together. This is not accounted for in our current understanding of the laws of electromagnetism. Ok, so now would someone please explain where I went wrong. > > I'm still hung up on the magnetic force being a function of the gamma ratio of > two parallel relativistic beams going in the same direction. It is known from > relativistic electrodynamics that the coulomb force between two like charges are > reduced by sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) compared to the repulsive force between them when > they are at rest. To me this is a manifestation of the magnetic force. Yes, but at rest in which frame of reference? Assume for instance that one is capable of measuring the force between two such particles, while travelling along with them, in the same frame. If the Coulomb force is reduced, as a function of the gamma ratio, then one could simply by measuring the force between the particles, and calculing "backwards" as it were, determine how fast one was travelling. Doesn't this imply an absolute velocity? > > Regards, Frederick > > > Perhaps this is in the area that Chris Tinsley is looking for in his quest for > in "Something Completely Different"? > > FJS 11/26/95 > > > Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 19:30:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA14278 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 19:28:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA14231 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 19:28:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-25.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-25.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.25]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA09168 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:26:12 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511270326.OAA09168 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:28:28 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 26 Nov 95 at 9:30, Scott Little wrote: > Robin said: > > > >This is precisely the nature and "mystery" of the Aharanov-Bohm > >effect. (I.e. that it has an effect as a consequence of the > >potential alone, in the absence of a field). > > Isn't the Aharanov-Bohm effect something involving the existence of the > magnetic vector potential, A, ...not the electric potential? No, if you read their original paper: "Significance of Electromagnetic Potentials in the Quantum Theory" by Y. Aharanov and D. Bohm, The Physical Review, Second Series, Vol 115, No. 3, August 1, 1959 (Look in the table of contents (index?) for the page number). (Thanks Charles) you will see that they actually talk about both. Personally, I find the electric potential more interesting. Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 22:06:41 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA29172 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:05:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA29145 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:05:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.64] ([204.57.193.64]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA23423 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 23:26:09 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 21:06:37 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Cold Fusion News Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Subj: Cold Fusion News Section: Physics > To: Tom LeCompte-Sysop, 76711,572 Saturday, November 25, 1995 6:52:31 PM >From: David Fisher, 100616,3624 #214379 > >Well, yes I was. I was really thinking of electrical engineers. I have this >theory that all of the leading pseudoscientists are electrical engineers (I am >sure that you can fill in the names as well as I can). Only electrical trade >journals seem to have letters columns which contain lots of cranky ideas. I >think that the reason for this state of affairs is that electrical engineers >deal with radiation, electrons, some relativity, etc., and come to believe that >they are physicists. However, they lack the more fundamental understanding of a >physicist and therefore get caught up in these awful dead-ends. Personally, I would be happy to have an engineer's education. I probably would be happy to be called a pseudoscientist also, but with a $100 a month research budget about all I can call myself is an amateur, or maybe a lunatic. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 22:15:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA01623 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:14:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA01536 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:14:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.64] ([204.57.193.64]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA23452 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 23:35:29 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 21:15:57 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >FROM: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 >TO: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 >DATE: 9/28/95 7:21 PM > >Re: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism > [snip] >I'm still hung up on the magnetic force being a function of the gamma ratio of >two parallel relativistic beams going in the same direction. It is known from >relativistic electrodynamics that the coulomb force between two like >charges are >reduced by sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) compared to the repulsive force between them when >they are at rest. To me this is a manifestation of the magnetic force. It sounds like the v applies to the frame of reference of the two particles with respect to the observer. I would think the change in apparent force would be due to time dilation. The less the observed acceleration, due to the slower clocks of the particles, the less the deduced (observed) Force. From the particles point of view that clock is ticking right along as ever and the electrostatic force remains constant. > >Regards, Frederick > > >Perhaps this is in the area that Chris Tinsley is looking for in his quest for >in "Something Completely Different"? > >FJS 11/26/95 Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 22:41:55 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA07378 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:40:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from anugpo.anu.edu.au (anugpo.anu.edu.au [150.203.2.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA07354 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:40:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from nimbus.anu.edu.au (nimbus.anu.edu.au [150.203.126.21]) by anugpo.anu.edu.au (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA07046 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 17:40:13 +1100 Received: by nimbus.anu.edu.au (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA28825; Mon, 27 Nov 95 17:40:13 EST Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 17:40:13 EST From: daved nimbus.anu.edu.au (Dave DAVIES) Message-Id: <9511270640.AA28825 nimbus.anu.edu.au> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Chris said > > >But how does that become the > >justification for suggesting that it must be propagated as particles? I am > >happy to accept that this second question is far more likely to have a > >satisfactory answer, but please may I see it? > > Informally, Chris, I find it a lot easier to recognize that there is such a > thing as a single photon when the energy is MUCH higher than visible light > energies. For example, take x-rays. It's no trouble at all to count > individual x-rays with an x-ray detector. Each one that hits the detector, > causes a relatively massive ionization and results in a big pulse whose > height tells you the energy of the x-ray. Are they particles? Well they > are at least localized in time and space...i.e. they are things which whiz > from place to place. > > Their effects can be seen as local but that does not show that they are. dave From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 22:53:56 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA10107 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:52:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA10072 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:52:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.64] ([204.57.193.64]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA23527 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 00:13:32 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 21:53:59 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On 26 Nov 95 at 14:28, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > >> FROM: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 >> TO: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 >> DATE: 9/28/95 7:21 PM >> >> Re: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism >> >> Peter, >> >> Here's an excerpt from; Weidner and Sells, Elementary Modern Physics, >>Allyn and >> Bacon, Inc. Boston. >> >> "The electromagnetic interaction between a pair of electrically charged >> particles is customarily separated into two parts: The ELECTRIC force,which >> always acts between any two charged particles whether each is at rest or in >> motion with respect to the observer, and the MAGNETIC force, which acts >>between >> them only when they are both in motion relative to the observer. It is easy ^^^^^^^^^ Shouldn't this say "each other", not "observer" here? Otherise, everything that follows is inconsistant. Motion of the observer's frame of reference only *distorts* viewed events by the magnitude of the time dilation, mass increase, Fitzgerald contraction, etc. [snip] Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sun Nov 26 23:03:44 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA12379 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 23:02:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA12351 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 23:02:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.64] ([204.57.193.64]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA23551 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 00:23:23 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:03:50 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> Chris said >> >> >But how does that become the >> >justification for suggesting that it must be propagated as particles? I am >> >happy to accept that this second question is far more likely to have a >> >satisfactory answer, but please may I see it? >> >> Informally, Chris, I find it a lot easier to recognize that there is such a >> thing as a single photon when the energy is MUCH higher than visible light >> energies. For example, take x-rays. It's no trouble at all to count >> individual x-rays with an x-ray detector. Each one that hits the detector, >> causes a relatively massive ionization and results in a big pulse whose >> height tells you the energy of the x-ray. Are they particles? Well they >> are at least localized in time and space...i.e. they are things which whiz >> from place to place. >> >> >Their effects can be seen as local but that does not show that they are. > >dave Yes. I belive that present thinking is if the x-ray originated far enough away it's quantum wave could be spread across miles. It is only when by chance an observation occurs, i.e. an encounter with your counter 8^) that the quantum waveform of the photon collapses to a point. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 00:05:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA24264 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 00:03:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA24244 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 00:03:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-12.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-12.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.12]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA03133 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 19:01:10 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511270801.TAA03133 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 19:03:50 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Relativistic Magnetism Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 26 Nov 95 at 16:33, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > Subj: Relativistic Magnetism Section: Physics > To: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 Sunday, September 17, 1995 9:41:09 PM > From: Frederick J. Sparb, 102021,3045 #202363 > > Peter, > > I went back over the doodling on the time dilation in the electron,and here's > what I came up with. > Assuming the wavelength of the electron equal to the Compton wavelength > 2.425 x 10^-12 meters, and the apparent charge circling at very near c the > current would be ef or 19.68 amperes. As a current loop this works out to 4.77 x > 10^-11 > ampere meters. Then a magneto static force between two electrons would be, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Here you calculate magneto static force.... > 10^-7 (4.77 x 10^-11)^2 = 2.275 x 10^-28 nt at one meter separation with no time > dilation. > > However the gravitational force at one meter separation is G(9.1 x 10^-31)^2 > equal 5.523 x 10^-71 nt. > And out of that: > Assuming that the relativistic gamma factor = (2.275 x 10^-28/5.523 x > 10^-71)^.5 > = 2.03 x 10^21. > Taken another way the square root of the ratio of the electrostatic force to the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ But here you are suddenly talking about electrostatic force. Is this a) intended b) a mistake c) the whole point? If the last, could you fill in the missing link? > gravitational force is again 2.03 x 10^21. > > I dunno? > > FJS > > > Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 00:05:51 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA24410 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 00:04:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA24396 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 00:04:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.92 (eb1ppp28.shentel.net [204.111.1.92]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id DAA00823 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 03:05:54 -0500 Message-Id: <199511270805.DAA00823 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 03:07:31 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <9511270640.AA28825 nimbus.anu.edu.au> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Chris, This set of questions of yours sounds like many I hear quite often on my travels in Russia. It is good from time to time to question reality and the accepted physical principals. When Einstein offered up relativity, right or wrong he questioned the very foundation of it all. As I recall he had a lot of company in the many scientists and others that together found ways to upset the apple cart. One of the modern revolutionaries in the field of meta-physics, (from your neck of the woods) may have came closest when he uttered the words "nothing is real", just before an american fan shot him dead in NYC with a gun belonging to the famous category of guns that don't kill people, people kill people . A character in a book by D.Adamms "So Long and Thanks For All The Fish" suggested that "a scientist should be like a child". I feel this meant to look at everything with an open mind without the filters of age, society or fear of ridicule. Is light waves, particles or something yet to be discovered? This is all part of the great mystery called life. I for one feel relieved when I hear such questions. There should be no "laws" of physics, only "tendencies". What is magnetism? Good question to which there are many hotly debated answers. What if the ZP is time? What if gavity is a secondary effect of matter moving through time? QUESTIONS ARE GOOD! Where am I heading with all this? Well to be honest it's three in the morning here and I had to get up to go to the WC. I can only hope that this is another of my frozen yogurt dreams. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 02:53:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id CAA21246 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 02:53:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA21235 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 02:53:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA04589; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 05:52:25 -0500 Date: 27 Nov 95 05:52:43 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951127105242_100433.1541_BHG125-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex I'd just like to thank those who've responded to my little questions. I'm still hoping to hear of any actual experimental evidence to overturn my hypothesis that magnetic and electrical fields, and maybe photons, are but figments of the imagination, created in direct violation of Ockham's Razor. Failing that, I'll now accept my own hypothesis, which is that 'some people will believe anything, regardless of the lack of evidence'. Now, if we could show that light, inertia, and the 'fields' of magnetism and electricty (and gravity, of course) are perturbations in the ZPF .... and devise ways of *testing* that ... Any chance that we might get physics back to the benchtop, some day? I feel that, were he still around, J J Thomson would have a few scathing things to say. Hey, that acceleration of nuclear decay thing - whacky as it sounds - seems pretty testable, dunnit? Chris From fznidarsic gpu.com Mon Nov 27 05:46:07 1995 Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA17072 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 05:46:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA02092 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM); Mon, 27 Nov 1995 08:45:50 -0500 Message-Id: <199511271345.AA02092 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Mon, 27 Nov 1995 08:45:50 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM Subject: vtx: Relativis Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 08:45:06 EST Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: 26 Nov 95 16:33:50 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Relativistic Magnetism Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subj: Relativistic Magnetism Section: Physics To: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 Sunday, September 17, 1995 9:41:09 PM From: Frederick J. Sparb, 102021,3045 #202363 Peter, I went back over the doodling on the time dilation in the electron,and here's what I came up with. Assuming the wavelength of the electron equal to the Compton wavelength 2.425 x 10^-12 meters, and the apparent charge circling at very near c the current would be ef or 19.68 amperes. As a current loop this works out to 4.77 x 10^-11 ampere meters. Then a magneto static force between two electrons would be, 10^-7 (4.77 x 10^-11)^2 = 2.275 x 10^-28 nt at one meter separation with no time dilation. However the gravitational force at one meter separation is G(9.1 x 10^-31)^2 equal 5.523 x 10^-71 nt. Assuming that the relativistic gamma factor = (2.275 x 10^-28/5.523 x 10^-71)^.5 = 2.03 x 10^21. Taken another way the square root of the ratio of the electrostatic force to the gravitational force is again 2.03 x 10^21. I dunno? FJS Try this...from my first book.... Calculate the capacitance of a sphere as large as our universe cap (4)(3.14)eo r = 1.41 x 10 exp 16 farads Divide this value by the sq root of the number of baryons in the universe to get a quantum of capacitance quantum of capacitance = 1.41x10exp16/(1.59x10exp79)exp.5 = 3.5x10exp-24 farads answer #1 ........................................................................ Place the compton wavelength in the formula for resonant frequency Wc = wavelength compton frequency = c/Wc = K/(6.28 (eo uo)exp.5) solve for K The quantum of capacitance = eo/K = 3.42x10exp-24 answer #2 Note the agreement of the values determined by the classical and quantum approaches. ans1 = ans 2 .......................................................................... Beat the Compton wavelength against its Doppler shifter reflection you will find that the length of the beat note is equal to the deBroglie wavelength. .......................................................................... Think about it. I have, and I came up with a lot of stuff. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 06:17:53 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA26736 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 06:17:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA26726 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 06:17:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA04240 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:17:30 -0500 Message-Id: <199511271417.AA04240 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:17:30 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Alter Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 09:16:43 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 17:25:17 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com On 25 Nov 95 at 0:19, Scott Little wrote: > excerpt from the abstract: > > > The stimulus can be applied to the > > radioactive materials placing them within the sphere or terminal of a > > Van de Graaff generator and allowing them to be subjected to the > > electrical potential of the generator, such as in the range of 50 > > kilovolts to 500 kilovolts, for at least a period of 30 minutes or > > more. > > This really does sound fishy now: an object placed "within" the sphere of a > Van de Graff generator experiences no electric field, regardless of the > charge on the sphere. This is precisely the nature and "mystery" of the Aharanov-Bohm effect. (I.e. that it has an effect as a consequence of the potential alone, in the absence of a field). try this...from my first book.... Calculate the capacitance of a sphere as large as our universe..... farads = 4(3.14) eo r = 1.41 x 10 exp 16 farads Divide this value by the square root of the number of baryons in the universe to get a quantum of capacitance. Qc = 1.41 x 10 exp 16 /(1.59 x 10 exp 79) exp .5 .......................................................................... Next put the compton wavelength into the formula for resonant frequency frequency = c/Wc = K/(6.28(eo uo) exp .5)) Qc = eo/K = 3.42 x 10 exp -24 farads Note the agreement. There is a relationship between the universe, capacit ance and the compton wavelength. .......................................................................... Next using using some trig form a beat note composed of the compton wavelen gth and its doppler shifter reflenction...You will find the length of the beat note to be the debroglie wavelength. Think about it..I have..and I came up with a lot of stuff. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 06:27:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA22445 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 06:05:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA22392 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 06:05:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA09110 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:05:13 -0500 Message-Id: <199511271405.AA09110 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:05:13 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Elect Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 09:04:33 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 From: vortex-l-owner Eskimo.com Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:29:58 -0900 To: vortex-l Eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com >On 24 Nov 95 at 9:19, Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >> The electrostatic field intensity is very high at the tip of a needle. The >> orbitals are greatly elongated, giving a high probability for conduction >> band electrons being at an extended distance from the nuclei. The > >I was under the impression that conduction band electrons were >already free to wander through the lattice, so I'm not quite sure >what you mean by "extended distance from the nuclei". Conduction band electrons migrate readily through the lattice, but occupy orbitals and migrate by hopping from atom to atom, thus they are at a lower energy state than free electrons, true? The effect I am talking about is the increase in separation of the average electron position (of electrons in the outer orbital) from the position of the nucleus caused by the strong electrostatic field. The atoms at the tip of the needle become elongated, with the nucleus migrated away from the tip of the needle. The outer electron orbital, where the conduction band electrons reside, is stretched far away from the nucleus (of atoms on the tip of the needle). They extend out into space beyound the tip of the needle. I would think electrons out there would be like Rydberg electrons, losing their fuzzy quantum wave like nauture and becoming more Newtonian. This is the zone I would expect the cluster to form in and then break free. > >> electrons being packed into the tip of the needle are at thermal energies, >> so when one becomes free it's de Broglie wave-length increases to a large >> amount. rons No No No the deBroblie wavelength depends on the electrons thermal velocity. In a plasma 5000 K this thermal velocity is quite high. The thermal velocity can be calculated as follows. PV = nrt PV = nu u = 1/2m v v own, Work with the above equations to compute the thermal velocity. > then deBroglie wavelength = h/mv I think that you will find that the wave functions are quite small at therma velocities. Add organization to make electrons move in squadrons like troops marching or aircraft flying and the relative thermal velocity between the electr ons drops below the thermal value. That's the advantage of an organized plasma. Maybe that's why the addition of sonic waves helps. Maybe that why cavitation devices work. Frank Znidarsic > >>decreasing the amount of energy required for the electrons to >> approach, increasing the relative strength of the magnetic moment, >> decreasing the distance between the electrons, thus the feedback effect. > >So what you are saying is that the magnetic attraction will override >the electrostatic repulsion, beyond a certain point. Yes. > >> Electrons packed into a needle tip would suddenly have an escape route, a >> pressure relief valve at the tip of the needle. The number that could pack >> in together would be limited by the time required for a voltage >> equilization wave to propagate through the needle tip, and by the > >Given that such propagation travels at nearly the speed of light, >while the physical electrons are only arriving at drift velocity, I >would think that propagation delay would hardly allow for much growth >in the number. In fact I think that this effect could probably be >ignored. Well let's see. Using Ken Shoulder's low end of 1E8 electrons, at two electrons per conduction band that's 5E7 atoms. So that's 5E7/6E23 = 8E-17 moles of say Ni. Since Ni has an atomic volume of 6.59 cm^3/mol, that's 5.3E-16 cm^3. That's a cube of size 8.1E-6 cm. Using a cone where radius eqauls height we have .33(pi)(h^3) = 5.3E-16 cm^3, so h=(5.12E-16)^-3, so h=8E-6 cm, the longest distance to traverse is 1.1E-5 cm. Given an atomic radius of 1.62E-8 cm that's a traversal of a maximum distance of about 680 atoms. Not much, so I suppose a more important question might be current and timing. The 1E8 electrons is about 1.6E-11 Coulombs. From line 53 of US patent 5,018,180 (Ken Shoulders) in one experimant he used a negative 2kV pulse of from a few nanoseconds to dc, and for a pulse length of .1 microsecond a resistor value of 500 to 1500 ohms. If we use 1kohm we have a current of 1 amp, so .1 usec is 1E-7 Coulombs, or 6.2E11 electrons. If a 1E8 ball was ejected it would take only (.1usec)(1E8)/(6.2E11)=1.6E-11 sec., or it could be done repetitively at a rate of 62.5 Ghz. The 6.2E11 balls would be ejected at a rate of 10Mhz. These ranges do not seem out of line except for the current density at the tip of the needle, which were stated in the patent to be a problem overcome by using mercury tips with a continual supply of mercury replacing the boiled or exploded tips. Do you see a problem? > >> increasing outbound tunneling probability for the electrons in the cluster. > >Given that bi-directional tunnelling is possible, but more likely >(prevalent?) in the direction of energy release, doesn't this mean >that such a cluster would grow until a stabilization point is reached, >where the inbound tunnelling balances the outbound tunnelling? >(Or is that what you were saying?) Yes. If equilibrium is reached the ball will just sit there until something, like heat, kicks it lose. > >[snip] >> >Please explain (at length) where the .5 MeV comes from. >> >> I simply used this figure because it is approximately *your* figure, so I >> thought it would appeal to you and increase your intuition. You used it in >> s.p.f. to point out the amount of energy an electron must give up when > >Actually, the figure I used was .782 MeV. (The difference in mass >between a neutron and a hydrogen atom). > >> bound by electron capture (I don't recall for sure, but I think you used >> 1.5 femtometers as a distance). You pointed out that this would be the >(1.841 F) >> amount of energy required by two electrons to approach to that distance, >> which seems like more than a coincidence since it is the mass of the >> electron. The actual distance that would be necessary to be used to > >As you can see from the above, I'm afraid the coincidence is not >actually there. Perhaps you yourself had something in mind? Only to demonstrate the surprising amount of energy that might be generated by a 2keV electron at the right place at the right time. >[snip] >> >> I would think they would all rotate the same way. >> > >> >If they all rotate the same way, then in my perhaps naive view, they >> >would all be little magnets, lined up parallel, but with all their >> >north poles together, and with all their south poles together. Surely >> >in such a situation, they would magnetically repel each other, and >> >not be bound at all. >> >> >> This gets back to the mental model of ghost like particles. Forgetting >> rotation or spin for a moment, if we visualize two axially aligned ghost >> like magnets in a N-S N-S orientation at a small distance, they will >> approach each other, move through each other to the common center, at which >> point there is no dipole moment, then continue on by momentum to separate, >> but both are still in a N-S orientation, no torque has been produced to >> cause any flip. But the attraction is still there because when the magnets >> exchanged positions the opposite poles of each magnet came into proximity, >> so the orientation is still N-S N-S. > >When 2 magnets are free to align themselves, they don't normally align >coaxially, but rather as a pair next to one another. See my web page >at (specially set up for the purpose): > >http://server.netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa Will do. However, keep in mind the electron is a magnet with no length. > [snip] > >> >> >If an electron gains energy by leaving an electron cluster, then surely >> >there is no >> >energy to be gained by the formation of the cluster in the first >> >place. >> >> That depends on how much energy it took to create the cluster. By the > >I had assumed that the cluster would only form and grow as long as >this growth resulted in net energy release. I.e. this contrary to >costing energy to form the cluster. This is one reason why I would >like to see some calculations done (to see which it is). Yes, you are right here. An experiment might be easier to do though. > >> above, that amount of energy is gretly reduced by the reduced electrostatic >> dipole moment. >> >> >> >> >In short, I don't think electrons will tunnel out of a cluster. >> >(Which sort of explains Ken Shoulder's 10^8 - 10^11 numbers). >> >> There is a finite probability anything will tunnel anywhere. The problem is > >What I really meant was that I thought that the probability of >tunnelling in was greater than the probability of tunnelling out, so Not once the ball is away from the electrode. Then the entire surface around the ball will be at a high potential difference. Tunneling beyond the break even point in any direction is going to be a very wild one way ride. While being built at the tip of the electrode the ball would be at the end of a kind of chain of ever closer electrons scrunching their way into the ball, with the gradient in the direction of the needle not being as great as the gradient away from the needle. If true, this is maybe how the energy generating is taking place. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 06:46:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA04346 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 06:46:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA04297 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 06:46:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA07676 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:46:06 -0500 Message-Id: <199511271446.AA07676 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:46:06 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Copy Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 09:45:24 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:28:28 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com On 26 Nov 95 at 14:28, Frederick J Sparber wrote: > FROM: Frederick J Sparber, 102021,3045 > TO: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 > DATE: 9/28/95 7:21 PM > > Re: Copy of: Relativistic Magnetism > > Peter, > > Here's an excerpt from; Weidner and Sells, Elementary Modern Physics, Allyn and > Bacon, Inc. Boston. > > "The electromagnetic interaction between a pair of electrically charged > particles is customarily separated into two parts: The ELECTRIC force,which > always acts between any two charged particles whether each is at rest or in > motion with respect to the observer, and the MAGNETIC force, which acts between > them only when they are both in motion relative to the observer. It is easy to > see that the magnetic force between any two charged particles Q1 and Q2 can be > turned off, so to speak, merely by a proper choice of reference frame. For > example, if an observer rides in a reference frame that is at rest with respect > to charge Q1, he will measure no magnetic force between the two charges. First, > the magnetic force on Q2 due to Q1 will be zero, because Q1 creates no magnetic > field at the site of Q2 (or at any other point in space, since Q1 is at rest). > Second, even if Q2 were moving with respect to the observer, there would be no > magnetic force on Q1 due to Q2, because Q1 is not moving. This simple example > shows us that a magnetic force between two particles may exist for observers in > some inertial systems but in others. The first postulate of relativity, the > invariance of the form of a physical law in all inertial frames, requires that > the laws of electromagnetism be the same form in all inertial frames. Clearly, > the magnetic interaction is intimately related to the choice of reference > frame." So for two like charged particles traveling through space parellel You are making this to hard. The only things you have to take as a given is that momentum is conserved and fields travel at luminal velocities. Take two field producing bodies (A and B) interacting at a distance. A | | | | B X The forces are equal and opposite. Momentum is conserved. Now lets quickly move body B to location X. The field of A is allready established at position X. The field of B takes time to propagate from position X back to location A. During this interval the original exchange force io of cannot conserve momentum. New local forces are required. This new from force is,in an electrical system the magnetic field,and in a gravitational system the gravitomagnetic field. The additional force produced by when induced fields conserves the momentum of the moving system. This is how it works. As body B travels to position X it develops a loc al magnetic field. As body B moves through a gradient of A field another magnetic field is induced. The force produced by the interaction of the two magnetic field conserves the momentum of the system. The magnetic field can be derived from the conservation laws. Likewise a second new force can be derived from acceleration. This second new force > v = di/dt > > g = dm/dt > conserves energy in a accelerating system. > Frank Znidarsic t for > > > FJS 11/26/95 > > > Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 07:26:46 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA15907 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 07:26:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA15865 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 07:26:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-158.austin.eden.com (net-1-158.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.158]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA28169 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:26:29 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:26:29 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511271526.JAA28169 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: O-U in St. Pete X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, Thanks for posting the Onoochin letter in which he admits the possibility of o-u. What are the "thermo- and hydrodynamical calculations" he's talking about? Is he referring to the energy balance calculations that Robert presented when he revealed the o-u data? Chris, can you suggest another test to Onoochin? It seems to me that the best way of checking out this apparent o-u performance is to replace the Yusmar with a simple restriction (i.e. a valve adjusted to provide similar back-pressure) and repeat the same "warm-up test" that provided the data that Robert presented. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 07:33:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA18150 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 07:33:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA18107 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 07:33:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA05031; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:33:20 +0100 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:33:20 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" In-Reply-To: <951127105242_100433.1541_BHG125-2 CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 27 Nov 1995, Chris Tinsley wrote: > To:vortex > > I'd just like to thank those who've responded to my little questions. I'm > still hoping to hear of any actual experimental evidence to overturn my > hypothesis that magnetic and electrical fields, and maybe photons, are but > figments of the imagination, created in direct violation of Ockham's Razor. > Failing that, I'll now accept my own hypothesis, which is that 'some people > will believe anything, regardless of the lack of evidence'. > > Now, if we could show that light, inertia, and the 'fields' of magnetism > and electricty (and gravity, of course) are perturbations in the ZPF .... > and devise ways of *testing* that ... > > Any chance that we might get physics back to the benchtop, some day? > I feel that, were he still around, J J Thomson would have a few scathing things > to say. Chris, maybe you should throw this question to sci.physics, and stand back. On the one hand, you are of course right to put such questions. I have been cranky at physicists who use what really amounts to shorthand or models, as if they are concrete reality, without telling us that they are just models or shorthand. Thus was the layman convinced that, e.g. black holes were real, rather that just an idea. This is important, and physicists ought to say so more often. On the other hand, these models are usually pretty robust. Magnetic fields, electrons and photons may not exist the way we visualise them, but they are pretty god models to explain the properties that have been observed and measured. Light can be shown to behave as waves, and as particles; charges can be measured, etc. You are free to dream about other interpretations of these models, but don't feel too free without having at least seen the evidence that drove a century of physicists to accept them in the first place, and don't start building new radical theories or imagine new properties out of ignorance of what is taken as received wisdom and why. Some of that might well be wrong and will be overthrown, but this will almost certainly be done by people who know all about that which is to be overthrown. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 08:29:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA07385 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 08:29:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mbunix.mitre.org (mbunix.mitre.org [129.83.20.100]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA07290 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 08:28:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from spectre.mitre.org (spectre.mitre.org [129.83.61.124]) by mbunix.mitre.org (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id LAA18744 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 11:27:41 -0500 Received: from localhost (eachus localhost) by spectre.mitre.org (8.6.4/8.6.4) id LAA03014; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 11:27:41 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 11:27:41 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199511271627.LAA03014 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: (jlogajan@mirage.skypoint.com) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "John Logajan" says: > Wowzer! Barker sticks radioactive elements inside the sphere of a > Van de Graaff generator, runs it at a negative potential for > several minutes/hours/days -- and claims that the rate of > radioactive decay is extremely enhanced -- with some relationship > to the magnitude of the negative potential. In fact, a positive > potential is said to slow the radioactive decay rate. Seems like what "conventional" quantum theory should predict, but the size and thickness of the dome should have an effect. Increasing the potential energy created by a beta decay should shorten the half-life. It seems counter-intuitive that where the electron goes makes a difference, but it does. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 09:39:45 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA01796 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:39:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA01729 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:38:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id MAA29586; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:37:29 -0500 Date: 27 Nov 95 12:35:51 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Relativistic Magnetism Message-ID: <951127173550_102021.3045_EHT80-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "Robin van Spaandonk" writes: >But here you are talking about electrostatic force. >Is this >a) intended >b) a mistake >c) the whole point? >If the last could you fill in the missing link? The missing link seems to be that the square root of the ratio of the electrostatic force to the gravitational force is the relativistic Gamma factor (1/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2. ie., 2.03E21. This suggests that all particles are exhibiting a time dilated magnet force which we call gravitational force. The highest achievable Gamma going right now is the 4 gev CEBAF (Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility) at Newport News Virginia. Gamma for 4 gev electrons is 8,000, a long ways from 2.03E21. This tells me that any serious consideration of coupling to the Earth's gravity field for antigravity will entail electrostatic fields simulating charge flow moving at velocities close enough to the speed of light to match the 2.03E21 Gamma interaction. This is an area that Peter Unwin and I are exploring. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 15:48:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id PAA18827 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:48:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail04.mail.aol.com (mail04.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.53]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA18721 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:48:31 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA02201 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 18:47:10 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 18:47:10 -0500 Message-ID: <951127184709_117861894 mail04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill Beatty asks: >If I could take a bunch of electrons and compress them into an >increasingly small cloud, at some point the cloud would be so >conductive that the Casmir forces would take over and >continue the compression. What then would limit it? Casimir acts as a (1/distance)^4. As an electron ball collapses, it is resisted by co-called "Schrodinger pressure," which is a combination of uncertainty principle and Pauli exclusion principle effects (see Weisskopf, "Of atoms, mountains and stars: a study in qualitativre physics," Science 187, 605, 1975). However, this resisting force is only of (1/distance)^10/3, so it won't stop it. It is stopped when the Casimir force is replaced at small distance by a (1/distance)^3 force, at which point the Schrodinger pressure can bring collapse to a halt. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 18:20:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id SAA14436 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 18:20:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA14388 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 18:20:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.91 (eb1ppp27.shentel.net [204.111.1.91]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id VAA04141 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 21:21:35 -0500 Message-Id: <199511280221.VAA04141 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 21:23:25 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: vtx: "Something not so different" To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <9511270640.AA28825 nimbus.anu.edu.au> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Chris, Sorry about the sleep writing. It seemed like a good idea to go back to a few of my old physics books and review the law of the land in the decade of the 1890's to find answers to your questions. I am amazed by my lack of understanding of pre-relativity, pre-quantum explanations of magnetism and light properties. I selected two books in my archives that gave, in my mind the best explanations. These being " Theory of Physics 1897 " and "Lehrbuch der Physik 1898". I like both because they deal in the fact of the existence of ether. At this point I got side tracked by the tremendous need there was at that time for a medium for waves. Such as: "All electric and magnetic effects are intimately associated with -ether-, that medium that conveys the waves connected with radiation, and may be well to describe briefly it's properties. It is a medium which penetrates all the space, large and small, between the portions of ordinary matter; in fact, the ether may be regarded as a universal medium in which the minute portions of ordinary matter are immersed. The ether has inertia, as is proved by the fact that waves in it travel with finite velocity; but its other properties are uncertain. I find this so interesting because I see ether poping up more and more in current text. I love stuff. If anyone is interested in information from this period just yell. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:10:13 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id PAA08590 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:23:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail02.mail.aol.com (mail02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.66]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA08353 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:22:52 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail02.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA25963 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 18:21:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 18:21:12 -0500 Message-ID: <951127182111_117832748 mail02.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Light speed Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robin asks "if C is the group velocity of light, what is its phase velocity? In free space, both group and phase velocities are C. In a material with dispersion (different phase velocity at different frequencies) then four velocities can be defined: phase, group, wavefront, and I forget the other. There is a nice book by Brillouin discussing this. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:11:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id PAA14727 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:38:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA14662 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:38:39 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA26197 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 18:36:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 18:36:38 -0500 Message-ID: <951127183626_117849589 emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott asks (re the Aharanov-Bohm effect): >Isn't the Aharanov-Bohm effect something involving the >existence of the >magnetic vector potential, A, ...not the electric potential? The Aharonov-Bohm effect has both an electric potential and a vector potential effect. Phases of electron waves traversing through different electric potentials differ so that interference can occur, just as when traversing different vector potential paths (e.g., around a solenoid). See original reference Aharonov and Bohm, "Significance of EM Potentials in the Quantum Theory," Phys Rev 115, 485 (1959). Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:15:44 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA02296 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 11:11:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mbunix.mitre.org (mbunix.mitre.org [129.83.20.100]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA02114 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 11:10:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from spectre.mitre.org (spectre.mitre.org [129.83.61.124]) by mbunix.mitre.org (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA23438 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:06:58 -0500 Received: from localhost (eachus localhost) by spectre.mitre.org (8.6.4/8.6.4) id OAA03564; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:06:58 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:06:58 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199511271906.OAA03564 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: <199511260756.SAA26226 tornado.netspace.net.au> (rvanspaa@netspace.net.au) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "Robin van Spaandonk" asks: > Though I must admit to being a little puzzled by the fact that it > continues to work after removal from the generator. Thorium especially has long decay chains with short half-life intermediates. The description of the experiment implies that these will be counted as production of enhanced radiation, and will continue well after the initial effect. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:19:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id QAA27139 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:10:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from REG.TRIUMF.CA (reg.Triumf.CA [142.90.100.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA26905 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:10:09 -0800 (PST) From: msevior triumf.ca Received: by triumf.ca (MX V4.0-1 VAX) id 13; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:02:44 PST Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:02:43 PST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-ID: <0099A06A.3FCCE320.13 triumf.ca> Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A professor at my Institution (univ of Melb.) reviewed a paper about the changing of half lives inside electrostatic generators. He bounced it. Conservation of charge requires that the electric ptotential be independent of absolute magnitude. ie The only Physical effect of the electric potential comes from changes in the potential, not it's absolute value. This is a requirement of conservation of electric charge which is on just about as firm a theoretical footing as conservation of energy. In any case, the professor in question suggested that an alternative referee be found in the same neighbourhood as the author and actually investigate this fantastic claim. Since the work never appeared in print I assume that the investigation was fruitless. We can also assume that since we have not heard anything more about this, other than the patent, that it really is not worth pursuing. This would have profound technological benefits too. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:21:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA08617 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:59:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA08274 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:58:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.92 (eb1ppp28.shentel.net [204.111.1.92]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id MAA03402 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:59:45 -0500 Message-Id: <199511271759.MAA03402 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 12:57:08 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in St. Pete To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <199511271526.JAA28169 natashya.eden.com> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Scott, Chris, Let me throw in a word or two. As for the calculations, these belong mainly to a Russian scientist that came from Moscow to help with the test. Please understand, we are renting this Yusmar which needs to be returned soon. As far as my Associates and I are concerned, if we are to do more in St.Pete then we need help from other sources. I cannot ask my Associates to work for free and we can only allocate so much funding for this project. We believe that the results from St.Pete have yielded all relevant data under the current conditions. This data needs to be studied and if there is interest a similar test can be done elsewhere. We believe we understand what is happening in the Yusmar as to O\U and can recreate it. Just a comment, Most of us feel that this effect seems to be there by accident and not design. Robert From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:23:20 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA05987 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 11:22:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA05703 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 11:22:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzrrx03678; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:20:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA22507; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 11:19:58 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 355918110095331FEPRI; 27 Nov 1995 11:18:11 PST Message-Id: Date: 27 Nov 1995 11:18:11 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/27/95 11:18:56 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/27/95 10:10 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives With regard this phenomenon, I think there is one "explanation" I can see, and that is that the substances tested are mostly Alpha emitters. Wouldn't an Alpha particle emitted in a surroundng spherical field tend to spiral inward to the source? That would cut down on the emmissions, and give a psuedo diminuation of emissions. Would that leave an impression of a decreased 1/2 life? (Of course that doesn't address the claim of having the diminished 1/2 life being observable on the outside of the sphere.) - Actually, that observation of the 1/2 life being diminished on the outside of the sphere brings us to this question: What 1/2 life substance would the new sample match up to? Does it imply that sample has been converted? What's the Alpha energy spectrum after the treatment? - Can this experiment be performed with a PC attached geiger counter, and a $150 VanDegraf from Edmund and a $1.50 Thorium Coleman lamp mantle. How long will it take someone to do that? - MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:26:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA25315 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:50:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA24952 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:49:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.66] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA24926 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:09:50 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:50:05 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > "John Logajan" says: > > > Wowzer! Barker sticks radioactive elements inside the sphere of a > > Van de Graaff generator, runs it at a negative potential for > > several minutes/hours/days -- and claims that the rate of > > radioactive decay is extremely enhanced -- with some relationship > > to the magnitude of the negative potential. In fact, a positive > > potential is said to slow the radioactive decay rate. > > Seems like what "conventional" quantum theory should predict, but >the size and thickness of the dome should have an effect. Increasing >the potential energy created by a beta decay should shorten the >half-life. It seems counter-intuitive that where the electron goes >makes a difference, but it does. > > > Robert I. Eachus > Yes, this is counter-intuitive. This makes no sense to me at all. Could you could elaborate? I can not see where any potetntial energy, due to elevated potential, is created by the beta decay that is not offset by the positive charge left behind in the nucleus after the decay, which is also at elevated potential. I can not see why these values do not cancel. Maybe you are referring to some other phenomenon I don't see? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:27:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA22924 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 13:30:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA22785 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 13:30:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA24816; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:27:22 -0500 Date: 27 Nov 95 16:24:55 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Relat. Magnetism/Gravity Message-ID: <951127212455_102021.3045_EHT38-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subj: Relat. Magnetism/Gravity Section: Speculative Science To: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 Saturday, September 30, 1995 9:34:15 AM From: Frederick J. Sparb, 102021,3045 #204211 Peter, Per my interpretation of Ryder on skin effect and penetration of e.m. fields into conductors: z = sqrt(1/f*pi*u* k) (meters). Where z is the depth into the conductor that the current density diminishes to 1/2 its value in space. Where u is the permeability of the conductor and k is its conductivity (mhos). If one can manage to get a string of unipolar pulses moving along the proposed two conductor line so close to c that an effective gamma for the manifest charge Q = CV, propagating as point charges along the line approaches 10^21,then the time dilation effect would cause the pulse frequency f to appear as a very low frequency allowing indifference to the conductive 'Faraday barrier' ? One needs the pulse frequency as high as practical to get as many "charges" ie., as much current as necessary flowing to couple to the earths gravity field. Since C is fixed at the vacuum value, V must be as high as possible. But the power dissipated in the 377 ohm load resistance is (,5V)^2/377 (watts). In order to dissipate the power developed in the load resistor make it an incandescent light bulb so that the power can be radiated away(this will result in red to white color changes of the light from the bulb as the pulse frequency or voltage is changed). Then wait for the UFO buffs in the encounters forum to make hay out of this. Just doodling. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:31:29 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA05439 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:49:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA05299 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:49:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzrrr15861; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:46:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA07916; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:45:29 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 944141090095331FEPRI; 27 Nov 1995 09:41:09 PST Message-Id: Date: 27 Nov 1995 09:41:09 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: CF Gossip To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/27/95 08:50:36 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/08/95 14:19 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: CF Gossip Anyone out there proficient at Itallian? If so I would like to cooperate with them on writing a gentlemanly letter of inquirery to Dr. Piantelli. I would like to ask Dr. Piantelli a set of questions they would run along these lines: #1. What is your flow rate in the "flow calorimetry" experiements and what is the temperature differential. #2. How many flow calorimetry experiments have you done? #3. What is your magnetic field charging protocal? #4. Your claim of .3 H atoms per Ni atom, is that based on pressure/temp. measurements, and is it for the "bulk" Ni, or a surface layer. (We need this explicitly answered.) #5. Are you willing to work with other groups, perhaps with non-disclosure agreements, for duplicating the work? #6. Do you understand the significance of your claims, and the defiant and dangerous attitudes that exist in the "real world" which will lead to your being dismissed as "crank" and a "fraud" if your are too secretive and withhold information. (I could use some help in wording that last one in a diplomatic manner. Mind you, I personally think that someone with a full professorship at a University, who is a PUBLISHED researcher should be given a modicum of credibility based on their previous work. But then we view the incredible shenanigans of the likes of Jones and Wolfe, and we have to say, "What the !!!!!") From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:34:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA22607 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 13:29:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA22329 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 13:28:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA25935; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:26:24 -0500 Date: 27 Nov 95 16:24:21 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Relativistic Magnetism Message-ID: <951127212420_102021.3045_EHT38-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subj: Relativistic Magnetism Section: Physics To: Peter Unwin, 100063,244 Monday, September 18, 1995 12:01:57 AM From: Frederick J. Sparb, 102021,3045 #202373 Peter, Doodling a bit more, I find that the gravitational constant, G , 6.67 x 10^-11 can factor out to the magneto static value of 10^-7 (.02583)^2, where .02583 is in ampere-meters per kilogram. Thus a gravitational force in terms of magneto statics forces for say the earth on a one kilogram mass is: 10^-7 x .02583 x 5.98 x 10^24 x .05283/(6.38 x 10^6)^2 nt. This kind of doodling suggests that the gravitational field is a relativistic magnetic field due to the time dilated currents in all material particles. The gamma factor is inversely proportional to the mass. The 19.68 amperes of current in the electron is dilated by a gamma factor of 2.03 x 10^21, so it acts like there is an electron passing a point about every .06 seconds. The proton by a factor of 1.1 x 10^18, or in inverse proportion to the total mass of the sub units. This is consistent with the fundamental tenet of the closer to c the less the mass. One certainly would be hard put to give an electron enough energy to get a gamma of 2 x 10^21(maybe the Supercollider could've done it). The only thing I can see is the two wire transmission line with unipolar pulses moving down it at velocities very close to c, where an incremental manifest charge of the line capacitance C and pulse voltage V might make a relativistic magnetic field.This was discussed this in a previous note in regard to whether or not such fields would couple through a Faraday Cage. I'm sure that the fields associated with a couple of masses would couple through the cage barrier. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:37:46 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA24676 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:19:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay4.UU.NET (relay4.UU.NET [192.48.96.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA24515 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:17:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay4.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzrsa02519; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:14:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA11577; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:13:58 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 602513120095331FEPRI; 27 Nov 1995 12:13:12 PST Message-Id: Date: 27 Nov 1995 12:13:12 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: A Challange to the Vorticians! To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/27/95 12:13:22 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: A Challange to the Vorticians! - All right gang, let's try this one on for size and see what you can come up with. I'm holding a 355 ML Diet Coke can in front of me. Let's use this as our "basis". Consider if you will, being given a device no bigger than said can. Consider also a 1 CM dia flow connection in the bottom and out the top. You ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH WHAT IS IN THE CAN! - Consider that there are also 2 very fine (maybe .1 mm dia) copper wires going into the can. You input <.5 watts electrical. The can is totally insulated from the surroundings. (I.e., Qdot going inwards is IMPOSSIBLE, so no "heat pump" effects are possible.) Now I'll make this easy, you are given that there are two thermocouples separated by about 3 cm along the runs of the Cu wires going into the can, and they indicate identical temps, so there is no heat flow on the Cu wire. - You are allowed to measure the flow rate of a fluid into and out of the can's volume. You are allowed to wrap a TC, thermistor, or Mercury thermometer around the outside of the flow tube(s) and insulate them. (To measure something NEAR, but conservatively less than the temperature in the flow tube.) - Question: What flow rate, what deltaT, and what length of run would you re quire to assert that there would be an energy source in the can >> than any known chemical energy source? - (You are welcome to make power density comparisons to storage batteries, and to presume the interior could contain liquified Acytalene if you want for comparison purposes.) - MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:38:53 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA24000 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:16:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA23783 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:15:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA14794; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:12:07 -0500 Date: 27 Nov 95 15:10:41 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951127201040_100433.1541_BHG112-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Thanks, Dieter, for your comments. "Magnetic fields, electrons and photons may not exist the way we visualise them, but they are pretty god models to explain the properties that have been observed and measured. Light can be shown to behave as waves, and as particles; charges can be measured, etc." I'm not suggesting that models have no purpose. What I *am* asking is for evidence for the physical existence of certain things. I regard the evidence for (for example) the electron to be perfectly satisfactory, and if people model *that*, or want to call it a 'negative twist of nothingness', that's fine by me. But I think all this "what do we really mean by real" and suchlike is for the philosophers (and, IMHO, the birds). Also, I am *not* saying that there is no evidence for these snarks and boojums, merely that whenever I ask to see it I just get patronised. One cannot but be reminded of a certain storyteller who lived not a million miles from where Dieter now is. "You are free to dream about other interpretations of these models, but don't feel too free without having at least seen the evidence that drove a century of physicists to accept them in the first place, and don't start building new radical theories or imagine new properties out of ignorance of what is taken as received wisdom and why. Some of that might well be wrong and will be overthrown, but this will almost certainly be done by people who know all about that which is to be overthrown. " I don't want to be contentious, I honestly do not. I will *never* propose a new theory for anything, but feel that I am free to ask these questions. You ask me to study the evidence, yet I have asked and asked for years what is this evidence or where it is to be found. I *want* the evidence. But it appears not to be available to anybody who wants to see it. And the last sentence ... maybe. But where is the evidence? You ask me to enquire of s.p, but I've been there and asked perfectly simple questions like, "is a revolving cylindrical conductor a hompolar generator like revolving disk?" All I got then was a load of waffle and general flak, nobody could agree except that they all agreed that I should never have asked such a naughty question. I did the experiments, and they came out different to the textbooks. Maybe I did them wrongly. Essentially you are arguing from authority, and not from evidence. That doesn't mean you are wrong - you may well be right. But you must forgive me if I now find that to an apparent breach of Ockaham's Razor is added argument from authority. None of this makes me feel any happier about conventional science as taught. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:48:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA18634 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:30:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA18469 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:29:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.66] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA24782 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 11:50:03 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:30:20 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Elect Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I wrote: > >> >>> electrons being packed into the tip of the needle are at thermal energies, >>> so when one becomes free it's de Broglie wave-length increases to a large >>> amount. Frank Znidarsic wrote: rons > No No No the deBroblie wavelength depends on the electrons thermal > velocity. In a plasma 5000 K this thermal velocity is quite high. > The thermal velocity can be calculated as follows. > PV = nrt > PV = nu > u = 1/2m v v own, > Work with the above equations to compute the thermal velocity. >> then > deBroglie wavelength = h/mv >I think that you will find that the wave functions are quite small at therma >velocities. I respond: Sorry, I guess I should have said nomal thermal enegies to be more precise. I was referring to the cold needle experiments of Ken Shoulders. The temperatures involved at the needle tip are typically less than 100 deg. C, 373 deg. K. I come up with at least 60 Angstroms. This is what I was talking about. Regarding the method of calculation, a matter of taste I suppose regarding physical concept formation, I find the relation 1 deg. K = 8.62E-5 ev = 1.38E-23 J very handy in characterizing kinetic energies of gas particles. Frank wrote: > >Add organization to make electrons move in squadrons like troops marching >or aircraft flying and the relative thermal velocity between the electr >ons drops below the thermal value. That's the advantage of an organized >plasma. Maybe that's why the addition of sonic waves helps. >Maybe that why cavitation devices work. > > Frank Znidarsic I respond: Yes. However, in the model of cluster formation I have proposed, no plasma plays a role. No high temperature condition is involved in creating the cluster. The electrons simply crunch into the cluster because their relative velocity is low (room temp thermal) making their relative quantum waveforms large, and their proximity is high due to the field gradient, so their increasingly overlapped quantum waveforms result in lower electric dipole moments resulting in less force to keep the electrons apart resulting in their getting closer together resulting in more quantum waveform overlap, etc. The major question in such a scenario is how many electrons can pack into such a cluster before it accelerates away from the tip of the needle. As the electrons quantum wave centers completely overlap the electrostatic force disppears (electric dipole moment zero) so the cluster can be held together by magnetic force of spin alone. An interresting question then becomes how long such a cluster in free space can hold together, because some rate of tunneling out of the cluster exists. An aside: if the cluster approaches a low voltage conductor the induced charge will attract the cluster until it is close enough that the tunneling rate to the conductor dissapates the cluster. It was stated by Ken Shoulders in his patent that some degree of interaction or disturbance of the cluster seemed to *increase* it's life. This seems to indicate that there must be some additional structure to the cluster that holds it together, possibly like that suggested by Robin van Spaandonk in his home page. In the scenario I have written, the cluster would definitely settle down to a unitary point. This would cause an enormous quantum waveform to form, resulting in cluster instability. Maybe controlled small stimulations of the cluster resulting from things like travelling through an R/C waveguide, as utilized by Shoulders, keeps up some relative motion in the cluster which keeps the relative QM waves small which keeps it from tunneling apart. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 20:52:06 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA23653 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:15:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA23489 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:14:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA27665; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:10:59 -0500 Date: 27 Nov 95 15:10:04 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Yusmar testing Message-ID: <951127201004_100433.1541_BHG112-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Scott writes: "What are the "thermo- and hydrodynamical calculations" he's talking about? Is he referring to the energy balance calculations that Robert presented when he revealed the o-u data?" I believe he is referring to hydrodynamics. Here is a note he sent me: -------------------------------------------------------------------- Now I would like to give some cooments. I hope it helps you. 1. The most important. Sudakov and Fedorovich don't believe in O-U so it is clear that they didn't try to analyze all the data. Unfortunately, I haven't yet the full report so don't know the values of some important parameters, i.e. the efficiency of the el.motor and exact water flow. Therefore, we cannot make the calculations which may allow to estimate the extraction of the heat due to hydrodynamical resistance losses. I told you namely about such calculations. Please, see, if we separate from the total (obtained in the test) heat amount the heat amount due to hydrodynamical losses we will get the heat amount caused by other physical effects that can take place during operation of the device. Moreover, such calculations based on the tests and design of Yusmar data could be more or less simply made for all range of temperature changing. At least, we could have the answer how that mysterious O-U effect depends on the temperature and, therefore, on the other parameters changing with the temperature too. 2. I asked "- Why Scott Little didn't obtain such results?" and you answer ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:27:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from s1c0p0.aa.net (s1c0p0.aa.net [204.157.220.164]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA00471 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:26:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:26:06 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199511271826.KAA00471 big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mwm aa.net (Michael Mandeville) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something ...different": CLASSICAL BASIS Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, I am amazed that all of the smarty pants on these lists have not given you the classical basis of the field. Go to a bookstore and pick up any work on Michael Faraday. He defined the experimental results upon which the entire field of "electricity" and "magnetism" is "classically" based. Then pick up any work on Maxwell, THE Maxwell, whose work through the transliteration of Oliver Heavyside (sp?) systematically rendered Faraday's work into the iron laws of equations which more or less form the basis of em engineerning today, with the addition of Thompson's school and the Bohr/Einstein relativity/quanta additions to explain the energy connection between "light" and "electrons". The evidence is all based on optical effects and magnetic effects - behaviour of light (colors) in various apparatus and the behaviour of magnets and wires in various arrangements. THAT'S IT. Rather than speculating about big bangs and super colliders, physicists would be well served by setting up Faraday's experimental apparatus, only much refined with better materials, in the setting of much more advanced measurement and monitoring techniques, all set up in a classical method for instruction and demonstration and viewable by all students...THIS IS THE BASE AND THERE IS NO OTHER. Then, all discussions would have the same classical basis for more fruitful discussion. The extreme mathematical abstraction of today loses everyone because the referents cannot be followed. This loss of connection is partly on purpose because there is a heavy dose of metaphysical ASSumption which is in hiding behind the math. This was initiated to duck the possibility of philosophical critique of the field from the outside. The cost of this has been the destruction of any possiblity of a critical education in the field --- outsiders simply have to permit themselves to be mesmerized and conditioned to accept and slavishly accept concepts which have no inherent comprehendibility. For this essential reason I consider modern physics as academically practiced today (in the U.S.) to be as cranky and charletan as psychiatry was proven to be. Regarding radioactivity - change of rate of decay. Elementary benchtop can cheaply verify that the rates can be altered with em fields. Check into my webpage and connect to my catalog and click onto my entry for my study on altering radioactivity. The link on the catalog entry takes you to the summary of the study, which then ought to be immediately ordered by every physicist in the world. Because whoever takes up the lead, will win a nobel prize. A nobody amateur like myself has not a chance to get published or secure the resources to take the experiments to the next stage. And no physicist by himself has a chance of getting the material published in today's corrupt academic environment. It will take at least a dozen different physicists pounding on the same publication's doors to get the debate started. DO IT SOMEBODY, THIS IS A NO BULLSHIT DIRECT SHOT FOR A NOBEL PRIZE. And I get the pleasure of facing an entire establishment down. That will be a sweet pleasure indeed. >On 27 Nov 1995, Chris Tinsley wrote: > >> To:vortex >> >> I'd just like to thank those who've responded to my little questions. I'm >> still hoping to hear of any actual experimental evidence to overturn my >> hypothesis that magnetic and electrical fields, and maybe photons, are but >> figments of the imagination, created in direct violation of Ockham's Razor. >> Failing that, I'll now accept my own hypothesis, which is that 'some people >> will believe anything, regardless of the lack of evidence'. >> >> Now, if we could show that light, inertia, and the 'fields' of magnetism >> and electricty (and gravity, of course) are perturbations in the ZPF .... >> and devise ways of *testing* that ... >> >> Any chance that we might get physics back to the benchtop, some day? >> I feel that, were he still around, J J Thomson would have a few scathing things >> to say. > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 23:38:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA26789 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:38:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA26747 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:38:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-137.austin.eden.com (net-1-164.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.164]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id BAA24036 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:38:04 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:38:04 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511280738.BAA24036 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hal wrote: >The Aharonov-Bohm effect has both an electric potential and a vector >potential effect. Thanks, Hal. Now for the important question: Does the interior of a charged conductive sphere have such an electric potential "in it"? To put it another way, can an observer located inside such a sphere tell if the sphere is charged or not? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 23:38:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA26813 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:38:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA26768 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:38:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-137.austin.eden.com (net-1-164.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.164]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id BAA24046 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:38:08 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:38:08 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511280738.BAA24046 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. - >Can this experiment be performed with a PC attached geiger counter, and >a $150 VanDegraf from Edmund and a $1.50 Thorium Coleman lamp mantle. How >long will it take someone to do that? I'd need only the Van de Graf. I've got Am-241 smoke detector sources and a NaI scintillator counting system that's perfectly suited to counting the 60 keV gamma. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Mon Nov 27 23:38:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA26804 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:38:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA26755 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:38:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-137.austin.eden.com (net-1-164.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.164]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id BAA24042 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:38:06 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:38:06 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511280738.BAA24042 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: O-U in St. Pete X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert said: >We believe we understand what is happening in the >Yusmar as to O\U and can recreate it. I've got one just taking up space in my lab, Robert. If you can tell me how to make it go o-u, I'll start testing immediately. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 00:23:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA09580 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 00:23:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA09555 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 00:23:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.68]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA27318 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:45:16 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:25:19 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >*** Reply to note of 11/27/95 10:10 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives >With regard this phenomenon, I think there is one "explanation" I can see, >and that is that the substances tested are mostly Alpha emitters. Wouldn't >an Alpha particle emitted in a surroundng spherical field tend to spiral >inward to the source? That would cut down on the emmissions, and give >a psuedo diminuation of emissions. Would that leave an impression of >a decreased 1/2 life? (Of course that doesn't address the claim of >having the diminished 1/2 life being observable on the outside of the >sphere.) >- >Actually, that observation of the 1/2 life being diminished on the outside >of the sphere brings us to this question: What 1/2 life substance would >the new sample match up to? Does it imply that sample has been converted? >What's the Alpha energy spectrum after the treatment? >- >Can this experiment be performed with a PC attached geiger counter, and >a $150 VanDegraf from Edmund and a $1.50 Thorium Coleman lamp mantle. How >long will it take someone to do that? >- >MDH This may sound silly, but aren't we riding in a big van de Graaf now? when there is a sunspot, or just solar wind, the earth traps electrons more readily than those heavy nuclei that just go on by, so we are riding on a net negatively charged sphere. This implies half lives should change right after a major sunspot. I don't think they do. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 01:10:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id BAA18965 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:10:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA18941 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:10:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA01717; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:10:30 +0100 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:10:29 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" In-Reply-To: <951127201040_100433.1541_BHG112-2 CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 27 Nov 1995, Chris Tinsley wrote: > I'm not suggesting that models have no purpose. What I *am* asking is for > evidence for the physical existence of certain things. I regard the > evidence for (for example) the electron to be perfectly satisfactory, and if > people model *that*, or want to call it a 'negative twist of nothingness', > that's fine by me. But I think all this "what do we really mean by real" and > suchlike is for the philosophers (and, IMHO, the birds). One thing we have learned the last few decades is that this "really real" stuff might really be important, and that ideas like billiard ball models of particles lead to wrong answers. I believe that a lot of QM goes against common sense, so we can't trust that. I am of course aware of the danger of getting lost in semantics if we take this too far. E.g. I could say that I have never met Chris Tinsley, or Queen Elizabeth, and how can I be sure they really exist? But I won't {:]. Actually, I have seen the Queen on two occasions, but at some distance. > I don't want to be contentious, I honestly do not. I will *never* propose a > new theory for anything, but feel that I am free to ask these questions. Well, I was extending my answer to embrace more people than you. There are what I take to be brash young people who are ready to refute Einstein etc without knowing what he said. I have never read Tinsley refuting Einstein, true. > You ask me to study the evidence, yet I have asked and asked for years what > is this evidence or where it is to be found. I *want* the evidence. But it > appears not to be available to anybody who wants to see it. Go into a good library on the history of science, and read. One possible reason for the facetious or evasive answers you get is that this is a biggish question. But the answers are there, alright. I am not an expert here myself but have read scraps of it here and there, e.g. in book reviews in (dare I say it?) Nature and New Scientist, and books my wife had at home (she is the brains in the family). > And the last sentence ... maybe. But where is the evidence? You ask me to > enquire of s.p, but I've been there and asked perfectly simple questions > like, "is a revolving cylindrical conductor a hompolar generator like > revolving disk?" All I got then was a load of waffle and general flak, > nobody could agree except that they all agreed that I should never have > asked such a naughty question. I did the experiments, and they came out > different to the textbooks. Maybe I did them wrongly. I was sort of joking. Sp seems to be as bad as spf, with several prominent cranks ready to start slugging, as well as some real experts. > Essentially you are arguing from authority, and not from evidence. That > doesn't mean you are wrong - you may well be right. But you must forgive me > if I now find that to an apparent breach of Ockaham's Razor is added argument > from authority. None of this makes me feel any happier about conventional > science as taught. Not really, quite the opposite. I did say you should familiarise yourself with the evidence that convinced those authorities. They may be wrong, undoubtedly are in some instances, but they have lived with the evidence for some time and more or less know why they believe what they believe. On the other hand, we are forced to trust authority at times, and it does carry some weight. I have said this elsewhere; when an expert like Fleischmann or Bockris makes a statement on something within his own field, years of experience and expertise go into that statement, and we lesser lights ought to take notice. They might be deluded in this case, but chances are > 0 they are not. When Joe Blow, who does not have those years of experience, makes a similar statement, it does not carry the same weight, he has to work harder to get our attention. I know this is not the image we scientists like to project and sorry, Joe. It comes down to probabilities. We don't have the time to take everything seriously. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 01:14:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id BAA19680 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:14:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from big.aa.net (root big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA19663 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:14:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from s3c3p5.aa.net (s3c0p1.aa.net [204.157.220.133]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA26169 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:14:12 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:14:12 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199511280914.BAA26169 big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mwm aa.net (Michael Mandeville) Subject: Re: vtx: hi Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >HI! I'm new on this listserve. This is going to be great! > Andrew >-- > Yeah it is fun, but you gotta watch out for Klingons. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 01:14:30 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id BAA19723 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:14:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from big.aa.net (root big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA19694 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:14:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from s3c3p5.aa.net (s3c0p1.aa.net [204.157.220.133]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA26172 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:14:14 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:14:14 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199511280914.BAA26172 big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mwm aa.net (Michael Mandeville) Subject: vtx: Accelerated Transmutation Of Radioactive Elements (altering half-lives) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thank you Bill for introducing this thread. I have reviewed all of the posts under the "altering half-lives" thead and herein I have comments directed to many of those posts. Yes, the Barker effect is in fact real. So also is the Keller effect, which is closely related. I have personally verified the phenomemon over a period of six months of experimentation and monitoring using simple methods at a cost of less than $200. I used a variety of "runs" using a variety of means, mainly I explored a set of control samples, a set of samples subjected to intense magnetic pressure, a set of samples subjected to heat, sample subjected to extreme electrochemical reaction, and a set of samples subjected to high voltages, including some at about 125,000 volts at the ungrounded end of a Tesla coil. Thermal influences had no effect as one would easily suspect. Magnetic influences likewise had no effect. It is only the electrical component which created the result. This effect could be rendered in many ways, so long as the electrical fluxflex was present. The effect is EXTREMELY INTERESTING and is quite observable with simple equipment as long as EXTREME care is taken in making properly exact measurements of all aspects of weight, measuring distances, time, background calibration, etc. Measuring radioactivity is a very subtle thing. Poking a geiger counter at it simply will not provide valid results. But with skill, the effect is easily way past the noise of random fluctuations, weight errors, distance errors, math errors, etc. Observing the effect takes time because the effect swings in what seems to be like a sinosoidal pattern over a period (for me) of about 90 days. Treat the material once, then you need to measure on a rigorous schedule daily for several weeks to describe the shifts. The effect is EXTREMELY PROVOCATIVE because it reveals than the latest in quantum electrodynamics thisorthat is FUNDAMENTALLY incomplete. It is doubly EXTREMELY PROVOCATIVE because it starkly reveals the complete corruption of philosophical comprehension in modern day physics. To wit: absolutely nowhere has anyone demonstrated or proposed a theory which purports that the decay rate of an element is an absolute independent of other em vectors. All that exists are mathematical descriptions of decay rates taken by researchers. Since they most likely all made their observations in similar laboratories (similar conditions), they all found themselves in agreement. Modern physicists ASSume that this constitutes a law of the immutable rate of decay. More, they ASSume their half-life equation, which fits the measurements, is a theory which is proven by their readings. Silly fools, they are thinking bass ackwards. When I raised these issues with two of the top university physics departments in the country, the most famous one gave me the immediate bum's rush, quite rudely. The other one was more demur in getting rid of me. Yep, I am ignorant about a lot of things, can't and won't deal with a lot of the vocabulary of post-einstein physics, but I am nobody's philsophical fool and I understand what is a logical proposition, what is scientific method, what is proper theory, and the ideal behaviour of a sincere truthseeker. This experience was the final straw in helping me realize how corrupt academic science is. Sorry, it is not science. It is national defense policy big business. So, you Vortexian and Free Energy nuts are up at bat. A thorough summary of my experiments on altering radioactive decay rates can be found at my website through my Paradigm Shift pages, titled: "Experimental Methods For Altering or Destroying Radioactivity". You can find your way to it from my web address below or precisely at: http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexmrad1.html If some of you are browserless, I can post if requested the summary in Vortex but it is lengthy. If you want hard copy of the complete study and graphs, you will find a request for $ at the bottom of the summary. Before you go off after the Barker material whole hog, I suggest you read my study. It will save you a lot of time and vastly expand your horizon of consideration. Re Barker: I have had three conversations with the man, which were somewhat stilted by his need to not disclose too much. He is attempting to publish in the conventional academic method, alas seemingly without much success. That was a year and a half ago. Perhaps he succeeded. A literature search should be conducted. Barker did reveal to me that he has revised his table of numbers and equations based on his further research. So I doubt that the numbers in his patent papers should be given much currency unless verified with him. Look at his numbers as revealing directions and approximate magnitudes...not specific quanta to be verified. Re Horace Heffner Post: x-rays are an excellent idea , forget head-hassling the statics Re MDH: how long? not long! but re measurement series above to finalize statistical curves Re Sevior: AN EXPERIMENTAL RESULT CANNOT BE REJECTED ON THEORETICAL GROUNDS, go back and tell them they are FUNDAMENTALLY STUPID AND SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY DISPLACED FROM THEIR UNIVERSITY SINECURES. Excuse me, but it is high time those of us who see through the bullshit begin to give the academics a strong dose of their own rejectionism. Re Eachus: shift of intermediate decay products yields delta energy BINGO YOU ARE THINKING CORRECTLY. We are talking the big T word here: TRANSMUTATION Re Logajam: don't take the Barker material too literally, expand horizon Re Scott Little: please get my study and set up replication on your own terms, and anyone else for that matter please feel free. Re experimental results: you can be content to simply measure the results with geiger counters but the very best study of all would employ enough samples in very small grain sizes so that they can then be periodically sampled through mass spec gear to quantize the shift in the elements. Radium is very hot so it is very easy to follow, even in extremely dilute form. Regarding further posts: I'm awful busy trying to earn a buck so I've done about as much as I can afford to do on this subject. I will answer questions based on my study. And I will read with fascination what you come up with. Probably only academic style pettifogging a priori rejectionism will rile me up enough to spontaneously post new comments. I love to hate snobs, know what I mean? Makes me feel alive. I eat em for lunch every other day just to keep in shape. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 02:03:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id CAA28399 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 02:03:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA28388 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 02:03:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA13749; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 05:01:53 -0500 Date: 28 Nov 95 05:03:34 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Further testing Message-ID: <951128100333_100433.1541_BHG107-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex Robert writes: "Please understand, we are renting this Yusmar which needs to be returned soon. As far as my Associates and I are concerned, if we are to do more in St.Pete then we need help from other sources. I cannot ask my Associates to work for free and we can only allocate so much funding for this project." Right. "We believe that the results from St.Pete have yielded all relevant data under the current conditions. This data needs to be studied and if there is interest a similar test can be done elsewhere. We believe we understand what is happening in the Yusmar as to O\U and can recreate it." Brilliant. Then there is no further need for St Pete testing. I studied the Yusmar in St Pete, and it appeared to be identical with the ones Gene Mallove and I have got. I seem to recall that Scott's had been hacked about at the output end, and the flat plate in the tube was missing. But that means we have at least two which are *apparently* identical with the St Pete one. One might hope that a motor is a motor is a motor. The obvious big differences which we *know* are there are the type of pump and the lack of a 'bypass' tube. Blocking the latter is no big deal. So, what about if we had the actual Russian *pump* and the various bits of plumbing (joints), together with the precise *parameters* from St Pete? That at least would seem to give a high probability of reproducing what was seen there? Comments please? Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 03:43:44 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id DAA17678 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 03:43:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA17658 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 03:43:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id DAA29522; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 03:43:27 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 03:43:26 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: Altering of half-lives Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here's a comment from John S. on the Barker test setup. Not as simple as the patent abstract implies. I think his advice to "get the patent" should be given great weight. The discussion here is a bit too speculative as to what Barker *might* have done to produce the effect. (Hopefully John S. will join the group) .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page Effect works. you MUST be prepared to take long term tests. You GM must be sensitive to alpha. I will try to draw ASCII picture. Inside of V d Graff &&&& < sample --------------------------- ---------------------------- Outside ^ ! ! < positive terminal, ball in air ! Put hole in side of ball, get samople AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE >>> BUT NOT PROTRUDING ..... it is the gradient from inside to outside which works the stuff. Give 14 to 16 hours at voltage .... I used ball from generator and charged it with HV supply .... bring negATIVE LEAD into the ball from tube support. The initial effects take several weeks to be seen. Get the patent. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 06:28:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA21695 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 06:28:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA21677 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 06:28:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA05101 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:27:43 -0500 Message-Id: <199511281427.AA05101 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:27:43 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: ** RECOVERY ** Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 09:26:48 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:38:04 -0600 (CST) X-Sender: little mail.eden.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com Hal wrote: >The Aharonov-Bohm effect has both an electric potential and a vector >potential effect. Thanks, Hal. Now for the important question: Does the interior of a charged conductive sphere have such an electric potential "in it"? To put it another way, can an observer located inside such a sphere tell if the sphere is charged or not? I'll try to answer that question. I like to compare fields especially the electromagnetic and the gravitational. They both enjoy similar interactions the only difference is (great difference) in the magnitude of the constants. Rephrasing the question. What happens when mass falls to the center of the earth. Answer, the potential energy of the object changes. The object will be "weightless" at the center. What happens to a charge in the center of a charged sphere. Same answer, the potential energy of the charge changes. All charges will be force free "the equivalent of weightless". In the center of a positively charged sphere. + charges gain energy - charges loose energy electrons loose energy positrons gain energy neutrons remain unchanged..if you consider that a neutron is composed of positive and negative components some asymmetry should occur. According to some of my own work something else will take place. The elastic limit (a quantum of capacitance) of free space will also change. This results in a slowing of light and time....similar to the time dialation & gravitational red shift produced at the center of a massive body. These last two effects can also considered energy effects. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 07:22:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA07875 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 07:22:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA07743 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 07:21:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tKRrX-000MO1C; Tue, 28 Nov 95 17:22 EET Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 17:22:27 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: vtx: Potapov in US. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear All, I couldn't write a few days being busy with some survival affairs that's getting funding for the next year. I got a message from Yuri Semionovich: "The answer has delayed a bit due to my travel to Ukraine. The aim of my travel to the US is to receive an international prize "Torch of Birmingham" for successful activity in the field of economical survival in the conditions of social- economic crisis. The honorary president of the committee is now President Bill Clinton. The Administration, and the Center for International Trade will arrange to us meetings with the business companies and the press after receipt of the prize (medal?) which will take place on Dec 11, 1995 in Washington. The organizing committee is in Birmingham Alabama phone 205-870-14-70, fax 205-871-30-55. They can inform you precisely about our program." Can somebody get in touch with the committee? Will discuss tomorrow morning with Yuri who called me at phone but we couldn't discuss, I was at a meeting. Chris, couldn't you give all the info re. the data of Potapov inclusive his opinion about the 4 errors of Scott to Volodya? Mark, I will answer and try to get you in touch with Piantelli. I suppose Bill Page has the address of Focardi. Peter From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 07:58:44 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA20511 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 07:58:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA20482 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 07:58:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-161.austin.eden.com (net-1-161.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.161]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA14526 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:58:01 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:58:01 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511281558.JAA14526 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Re: Altering of half-lives X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: BillB said: >Here's a comment from John S. on the Barker test setup. >.... I used ball from >generator and charged it with HV supply what voltage did he use, Bill? .... bring negATIVE LEAD into >the ball from tube support. is this a contradiction?...the sketch shows the positive terminal...? Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 09:04:48 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA14455 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:04:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay2.UU.NET (relay2.UU.NET [192.48.96.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA14422 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:04:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzrvg17869; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:03:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA29404; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:00:58 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 562859080095332FEPRI; 28 Nov 1995 08:59:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 28 Nov 1995 08:59:08 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Potapov in US. To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/28/95 08:59:26 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/28/95 07:45 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Potapov in US. Thanks to Peter G. for trying to get Piantelli's address/contact. Peter, if you are in the US and you can re-route an airline flight, VISIT MPLS! I will offer you room and board for up to two weeks! We have much to discuss and maybe we could go "snipe hunting" for used 386's. MDH (PS Note: Temp today not above -15 Centigrade, come prepared.) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 09:18:30 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA18913 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:18:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail04.mail.aol.com (mail04.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.53]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA18872 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:18:21 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA12295 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:33:25 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:33:25 -0500 Message-ID: <951128113324_118619764 mail04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Proposed van der Graff Decay Rate Exp. Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortexians, The proposed experiments with a van der Graff to accelerate decontamination of radioactive materials, at least as far as relating it to the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect, is based on a misunderstanding of the AB effect. The AB effect, as it relates to the effect of potentials (voltages), simply states that if one treats the electron as a wave instead of a particle (wave/particle duality) in an experimental arrangement (e.g., from a source providing a stream of electrons with well-defined momentum), one can send the wave through the equivalent of a two-slit arrangement whereby the potentials in the two paths are different (e.g., through two tubes with different voltages to ground applied) and obtain a quantum interference effect when the waves recombine at the output that is a measure of the difference in potential of the two paths. This is due to the fact that the magnitude of the potential advances or retards the phase of one electron wave function relative to the other, as in an experiment wherein two components of a light wave are similarly affected by sending one component through a dielectric (e.g., glass) and the other through air and letting them recombine at the other end to provide an interference pattern that depends on the refractive index of the glass used. In the proposed van der Graff experiment one would have to pass one part of an electron wave through a hole in the van der Graff and turn on the voltage while it was interior (and then turn it off before it emerged) and have it recombine with another part that did not pass through the van der Graff and, furthermore, was shielded from the van der Graff potential (to eliminate confounding electric field effects); one could then obtain a variable interference effect. However, the above has nothing to do with accelerating or retarding decay rates of atoms within the van der Graff. If that is found to occur empirically, it would not be due to the AB effect, in my opinion. BTW, changing of decay rates is predicted by ZPE effects (e.g., for lower-frequency spontaneous-emission-decay-rate changes see Sci Am, April 1993 article on Cavity QED), but to apply this process to X-ray and gammas would require constructing cavities at the appropriate (small) wavelengths to exclude ZPE fluctuations (which drive spontaneous emission) at the frequencies of interest. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 09:48:39 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA29462 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:48:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from big.aa.net (root big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA29412 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:48:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from s3c2p4.aa.net (s3c2p4.aa.net [204.157.220.152]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA09365 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:48:19 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 09:48:19 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199511281748.JAA09365 big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mwm aa.net (Michael Mandeville) Subject: Re: vtx: Re: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There are means to seeing immediate results. See below >Here's a comment from John S. on the Barker test setup. Not as simple as >the patent abstract implies. I think his advice to "get the patent" >should be given great weight. The discussion here is a bit too >speculative as to what Barker *might* have done to produce the effect. > >(Hopefully John S. will join the group) > Effect works. you MUST be prepared to take long term tests. >You GM must be sensitive to alpha. I will try to draw ASCII picture. > >Inside of V d Graff > &&&& < sample >--------------------------- ---------------------------- > >Outside ^ > ! > ! < positive terminal, ball in air > ! > > > Put hole in side of ball, get samople AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE >>> >BUT NOT PROTRUDING ..... it is the gradient from inside to outside which >works the stuff. Give 14 to 16 hours at voltage .... I used ball from >generator and charged it with HV supply .... bring negATIVE LEAD into >the ball from tube support. > > The initial effects take several weeks to be seen. >Get the patent. > ...it is the gradient... another method is to cram 100 kvolts through it for about an hour or so. I used a classic Tesla coil setup, grounded on the bottom, probably about 125 kv at the top, on top of which I created a small radiator. Between the end wire and the radiator, I placed a small plastic capsule which had holes on each end filled with a specially fitted screws. Conductance in the capsule was carried by Louisiana "norm", a euphanism for normally ocurring radioactive material from oil refinery pipes. The norm was sandy rust laced with radium. The radium had distinct mood shifts as a result of the treatment. Immediate change in radioactivity was followed by a slowly drifting delta, which did not even stablize out after three months of measurements. It was PROBABLY radium, but I was relying on other people's statements (who were qualified to know) and never verified the material myself. It was very hot in Alpha and was consistant in every way with radium. If you do some experiments, you need to do some reading and discussing with people about how to prepare the material, enclose it, and measure/monitor it. Measuring radioactivity precisely for consistant results is an unsuspected skill. Check out the following web page for more information: http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexmrad1.html ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 10:01:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA04072 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:01:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA04000 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:01:07 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA13821 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:59:37 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:59:37 -0500 Message-ID: <951128125937_36764874 emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott asked: "Does the interior of a charged conductive sphere have such an electric potential "in it"? To put it another way, can an observer located inside such a sphere tell if the sphere is charged or not?" The answer is no. Only an outsider who measures field, or, in a very-well shielded case, measures interfering electron waves passing through and around the sphere, can do so (posted elsewhere in detail). Hal From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 10:33:21 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA16124 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:33:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA16053 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:32:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA28857 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Tue, 28 Nov 1995 13:31:20 -0500 Message-Id: <199511281831.AA28857 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Tue, 28 Nov 1995 13:31:20 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: JONESSE PLASMA.BYU.EDU To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: ZPE Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 13:30:32 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> JONESSE PLASMA.BYU.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Steven Jones, I have read your criticisms of the CETI cell tests. Don't close your mind to quickly. I have a disk on the subject. If you have Windows and a open mind I can send you a copy. If you would like to read about zero point energy send me a request for my disk. I'm quite sure that you will change you mind after reading my material. If not I invite you to slam me hard before all here on vortex-L. fznidarsic gpu.com fznidarsic aol.com To slam before all post to: vortex-l eskimo.com Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 17:55:36 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id RAA01314 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 17:55:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from karloff.lanl.gov (karloff.lanl.gov [128.165.16.190]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA01152 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 17:55:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199511290155.RAA01152 mail.eskimo.com> Received: by karloff.lanl.gov (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA054980151; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 18:55:51 -0700 From: Ron McFee Subject: vtx: Potapov Visit To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 18:55:50 MST Cc: mcfee lanl.gov, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Yuri Potapov may be staying at the Holiday Inn Governor's House Motor Hotel, 1615 Rode Island Ave, 17th St NW, Washington, DC 20036; telephone 202 296-2100, December 8-13. It is a good idea to check with the Moldova embassy though. I posted the following earlier, but it seems not to have gone through: From: Ron McFee Subject: Potapov US Visit Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 17:25:31 MST Peter reports on upcoming US Potapov visit: > I couldn't write a few days being busy with some survival affairs > that's getting funding for the next year. > I got a message from Yuri Semionovich: > "The answer has delayed a bit due to my travel to Ukraine. > The aim of my travel to the US is to receive an international > prize "Torch of Birmingham" for successful activity in the > field of economical survival in the conditions of social- > economic crisis. The honorary president of the committee is > now President Bill Clinton. The Administration, and the > Center for International Trade will arrange to us meetings > with the business companies and the press after receipt > of the prize (medal?) which will take place on Dec 11, 1995 > in Washington. The organizing committee is in Birmingham > Alabama phone 205-870-14-70, fax 205-871-30-55. They can > inform you precisely about our program." > Can somebody get in touch with the committee? Thanks for the information. I called the Birmingham office of People to People organization and talked with Lee Riley. The official visit lasts from December 11 to December 16. However I believe that Yuri Semionovich will arrive in Washington December 8. The visit includes 75 Russian (and/or other Former Soviet nationalities?) and 18 Moldovan participants. The Moldovans will probably be lodging separate from the others. You should check with the Moldova embassy, 1511 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20005; telephone 202 783-3012. The following is a summary of a tentative itinerary which Mr. Riley faxed me: American People Ambassador Program Itinerary for Russian Business Leaders Delegation Washington, DC - Pennsylvania - New York December 11 - Delegation arrives on Lufthansa German Airlines at Dulles, 3:50. Sheraton Premier Hotel at Tysons Corner. 7:30 pm Welcome Dinner in hotel. December 12 - 10:00 AM Morning Cultural Program, (Washington) DC. 1:00 PM Lunch, DC 3 - 5 PM Seminar at Russian Embassy on Economic Issues with the transition taking place in Russian and focus on investment programs associated with the World Bank and Overseas Private Investment Corporation. 5 - 6 Cocktail reception for the delegation in the Reception Hall of Russian Embassy. 6:30 - Dinner December 13 - Professional program being planned in cooperation with the Economic Section of Russian Embassy. Afternoon Free 6:30 - 7:30 PM Awards Presentation at the Army & Navy Club , Farragut Square, DC. Russian and NIS persons awarded with "Torch of Birmingham Award" for their survival during the difficult economic transition taking place in Russia and other states of former Soviet Union. December 14 - 8:30 AM Depart to attend First Pennsylvania-Russian Business Opportunity Business Fair. Delegation members will be guests for lunch, take part in seminars, networking programs and visit vendor booths. Drive to New York City after. December 15 - Business Luncheon at Princeton Club with American Executives. Invited participants to include US Russian Investment Fund, Russian Partners-Paine Webber and the Russian Chamber of Commerce. 12:00- 12:30 Cocktails, 12:30-1:30 Lunch followed by presentation and question/answer session. December 16 - Cultural Programs. Farewell Dinner. December 17 - Free time until transfer to airport for return to Moscow. A program of People to People International End Itinerary Peter I don't really think that we are in disagreement with what the process in the Piantelli device is since scientifically neither of us really can be certain. Schwinger fusion is definitely a catalytic process since the Ni lattice is unconsumed by the reaction. This is analogous to the role that iron oxide plays in the Haber process which converts hydrogen and nitrogen to ammonia. I definitely consider the fusion of hydrogen isotopes to be "a source or profound energy" also. Please extend my wishes to Yuri that he have a good trip. If he ever wants his device demonstrated in the US, I will be quite happy to try and arrange a testing here at Los Alamos. Only if he is willing to cooperate that is. Regrads, Ron From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 18:03:21 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id SAA04323 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 18:03:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA04309 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 18:03:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id VAA24481; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 21:01:18 -0500 Date: 28 Nov 95 20:58:17 EST From: Peter Unwin <100063.244 compuserve.com> To: Subject: vtx: Something completely different Message-ID: <951129015816_100063.244_EHK29-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To Vortex. Just a few observations which I regret not having the time to defend at the moment. I support Chris Tinsley on photons. There is no dispute that the interactions between light and matter are quantised. But this is the very point which shows that experiments can mislead. Detectors quantise by the very process of detection. They are by definition quantum detectors, unable to detect anything but quantised packets of energy. If we use nothing but particle detectors we can hardly expect to detect anything but particles. On phase vs. group velocity: The distinction can sometimes be tricky but Feynman gives a fair definition of group velocity as the velocity that information propagates, using vortices to illustrate his point. If we were to allow that electrons were electro-magnetic vortices, the e.m. energy may rotate at c and have a phase velocity of c. If we then say that an electron only carries information if it moves in our reference frame, then it's group velocity becomes it's velocity in our reference frame. Comments ?? On extending 1/2 lives and A-B effect: Fields are no more than giving unknown effects/attributes of space a name and dodging the fundamental issue. As I understand the A-B effect, magnetic energy trapped within a torroid so that it was externally non-existant shifts an interference pattern *as if* it had mass. If the inside of a charged sphere reduces half-life then presumably time inside the sphere has run faster. Surprising, because in classical theory, the space inside the sphere is electrically unchanged or stressed in any way.... excepting rotation relative to the sideral frame which might have some significance. Comments ? Peter J. Unwin. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 19:24:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA28123 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:05:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA28088 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:05:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id OAA03895; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 14:03:53 -0500 Date: 28 Nov 95 14:01:19 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 CompuServe.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Contacted Center for International Trade Message-ID: <951128190118_72240.1256_EHB99-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I contacted the Center for International Trade in Birmingham, Alabama, which is supposedly giving Potapov a prize on December 11. The fellow who answered the phone there seemed confused. First he said they were holding an awards ceremony in New York, then he said Washington. He said they are giving prizes to 75 Russian business leaders, and additional awards to another large group from Moldova, but The Center is not handling the Moldovan group, and they do not have the names of the business leaders. Some other organization out of New York is dealing with them. He said he would fax me additional background information. I will pass it on if he does. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 19:29:20 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id TAA04140 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:29:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA04108 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:29:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id WAA13448; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 22:27:04 -0500 Date: 28 Nov 95 22:24:20 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: ABC Nightline Tonight --11/28/95 Message-ID: <951129032420_76570.2270_FHU25-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: It was brought to my attention (on the evening TV news) that tonight (11/28/95) on ABC television's Nightline, there will be a program on the CIA's and Soviet "remote viewing" -- or "Psychic Warfare" programs. These programs have recently been discussed in press in the UK and in the U.S. Should be interesting. Dr. Robert Jahn, former Dean of Engineering at Princeton University, and still a professor there - albeit no longer a dean, knows about this work -- as does our own Dr. Hal Puthoff. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 19:41:09 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA26799 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:02:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay2.UU.NET (relay2.UU.NET [192.48.96.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA26620 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:01:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzrvn07178; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 13:59:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA31235; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:58:49 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 263157100095332FEPRI; 28 Nov 1995 10:57:10 PST Message-Id: Date: 28 Nov 1995 10:57:10 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: ZPE To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/28/95 10:57:29 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/28/95 10:53 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: ZPE Frank: I don't think I'd waste too much time with Jones. He's worse than an adherant to Scientology. At least THEY can be deprogrammed. I'd recommend you research the writings of Silvanus P. Thompson, circa 1879 to figure out the "Jones" mindset. (S.P.T. was the first president of the British Royal electrical engineering society. And he wrote some rather clever, but now laughable commentary on "this fellow Edison's" attempt to "subdivide light".) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 19:41:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA25562 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:16:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA25465 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:16:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-52.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-52.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.52]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id HAA27709 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 07:13:27 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511282013.HAA27709 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 07:16:28 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 28 Nov 95 at 1:38, Scott Little wrote: > Hal wrote: > > >The Aharonov-Bohm effect has both an electric potential and a vector > >potential effect. > > Thanks, Hal. > > Now for the important question: > > Does the interior of a charged conductive sphere have such an electric > potential "in it"? > > To put it another way, can an observer located inside such a sphere tell if > the sphere is charged or not? Only if he's radioactive. :-> Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 19:51:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA25602 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:16:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA25485 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:16:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-52.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-52.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.52]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id HAA27718 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 07:13:37 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511282013.HAA27718 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 07:16:27 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 27 Nov 95 at 14:06, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > > "Robin van Spaandonk" asks: > > > Though I must admit to being a little puzzled by the fact that it > > continues to work after removal from the generator. > > Thorium especially has long decay chains with short half-life > intermediates. The description of the experiment implies that these > will be counted as production of enhanced radiation, and will continue > well after the initial effect. Of course, how stupid of me. > > > Robert I. Eachus > > with Standard_Disclaimer; > use Standard_Disclaimer; > function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... > > Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 19:53:11 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA13208 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:25:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA13048 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:24:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.69 (eb1ppp5.shentel.net [204.111.1.69]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id NAA13898 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 13:25:12 -0500 Message-Id: <199511281825.NAA13898 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 13:16:02 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: Further testing To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <951128100333_100433.1541_BHG107-1 CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >So, what about if we had the actual Russian *pump* and the various bits of >plumbing (joints), together with the precise *parameters* from St Pete? That >at least would seem to give a high probability of reproducing what was seen >there? > >Comments please? > >Chris Dear Chris, We are putting together information on the test. It will be available to you soon. It should be quite enough data for anyone to duplicate the St.Pete setup. (minus the black tea and caviar) As for as acquiring russian parts and pieces. I believe that we can arrange the acquiring of such things with very little expense. You may wish to wait a few weeks, as I am in the process of modeling a device that takes into account several factors suspected of generation excess heat. This model is a small closed loop system designed in such a way as to pinpoint the effects encountered based on a few novel hydrodynamic theories. No need to say more about this until I complete the testing of the model. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 20:00:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA26501 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:18:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA26410 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:18:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA08412; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 15:16:50 -0500 Date: 28 Nov 95 15:14:58 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045 CompuServe.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: ZPE Dipole Jiggle? Message-ID: <951128201458_102021.3045_EHT95-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A device made for detecting jiggle of water molecules might also detect ZPE effects. A thin film of mylar was silvered on both sides with a thin coat of silver (500-1,000 angstroms) which was then laminated so that the silver was accessable for electrical contact. The "detector" was placed in a vessel of water and with a suitable amplifier the effects of the presence or absence of EM fields could be studied. A similar effect can be accomplished with an ordinary disc capacitor coated with nail polish to keep out moisture. The units are also very sensitive to acoustic vibrations and thus need to be in a very "quiet" environment. The dipole moment of the water molecule is 1.85 Debye, 1 Debye equal 3.3356E-30 coulomb- meter. The potential energy of a dipole U = -uEcos 0* where u is the dipole moment and 0* is the angle between u and the electric field E. Any Takers? FJS Under quiet conditions the water dipoles will try to align to the lowest energy state through the "capacitor" which resulsts in an electrostatic potential developed on the plates ie., the silver coatings. Any jiggle of the aligned molecules will result in a variation of this electrostatic potential and give a signal that can be detected with suitable electronic apparatus. A spectrum analyzer can be used to sort through the output information. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 20:10:46 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA28931 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 13:51:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA28698 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 13:51:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca (wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca [131.136.255.106]) by dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA28698 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:43:40 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199511282143.QAA28698 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca> X-Sender: wspage dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:54:19 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: wspage ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: Re: vtx: Further testing Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris wrote: > ... >So, what about if we had the actual Russian *pump* and the various bits of >plumbing (joints), together with the precise *parameters* from St Pete? That >at least would seem to give a high probability of reproducing what was seen >there? > >Comments please? > I do not understand. Have I missed something? As far as I can tell, the only thing that was seen in St. Pete was an approximately unity C.O.P. The "calculations" that were presented by Robert (Visor) seem to me to be completely without any merit with respect to measuring the energy output of the Yushmar. The thermal model implied by Robert's calculations is much to simple to accurately represent the behaviour of the experimental setup. The only calorimetric measurements which made any sense were those which (more or less) represented a null-balance methodology. The only critism that I have of this is that their approach was simply a little less accurate that what could have been achieved with the full null-balance technique. But in any case, their method was accurate enough to rule out the claims of the original inventor as well as several other attempts a measuring the output which are not based on adequate calorimetric technique. Do you realy need yet another replication that there is no over-unity effects in the Yushmar device? Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 20:16:29 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA28959 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 13:51:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA28711 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 13:51:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca (wspage.nccts.drenet.dnd.ca [131.136.255.106]) by dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA28701 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:43:43 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199511282143.QAA28701 dgs.drenet.dnd.ca> X-Sender: wspage dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:54:22 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: wspage ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris Tinsley wrote: >To:Vortex > >Thanks, Dieter, for your comments. > > "Magnetic fields, electrons and photons may not exist the way we > visualise them, but they are pretty god models to explain the > properties that have been observed and measured. Light can be shown to > behave as waves, and as particles; charges can be measured, etc." > >I'm not suggesting that models have no purpose. What I *am* asking is for >evidence for the physical existence of certain things. I regard the >evidence for (for example) the electron to be perfectly satisfactory, and if >people model *that*, or want to call it a 'negative twist of nothingness', >that's fine by me. But I think all this "what do we really mean by real" and >suchlike is for the philosophers (and, IMHO, the birds). No Chris, I think you drastically underestimate the nature of the questions that you have asked. Correct me if I am wrong, Dieter, but I understand Dieter to be saying that the electron (of your example) *is* a model. You are splitting hairs on a bald head when you try to differentiate what you have called "physical evidence" for something versus something you have degraded as "what do we really mean by real" as a notion only appropriate to philosphers. Most of what physicists do is best seen as a type of model building. In regards to such things as electrons, its just that this a really a rather good model and widely accepted, but it is however no less a model and no more a part of "reality" than any philospher can make it out to be. > ... >Essentially you are arguing from authority, and not from evidence. That >doesn't mean you are wrong - you may well be right. But you must forgive me >if I now find that to an apparent breach of Ockaham's Razor is added argument >from authority. None of this makes me feel any happier about conventional >science as taught. > Again, no, I don't think that correctly represents Dieter's view. He is talking about the experimental results and observations and the fact that there exists an enormous body of evidence that has been collected while building the current set of physical models. I agree 100% that any new models must adequately take into account this enormous set of evidence in spite of the fact that it is such an enormous task... sorry, I am running out of adjectives. Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 20:23:45 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id UAA22573 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 20:23:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA22447 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 20:23:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.66] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA29900 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 21:45:01 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:24:44 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >I don't want to be contentious, I honestly do not. I will *never* propose a >new theory for anything, but feel that I am free to ask these questions. >You ask me to study the evidence, yet I have asked and asked for years what >is this evidence or where it is to be found. I *want* the evidence. But it >appears not to be available to anybody who wants to see it. > >And the last sentence ... maybe. But where is the evidence? You ask me to >enquire of s.p, but I've been there and asked perfectly simple questions >like, "is a revolving cylindrical conductor a hompolar generator like >revolving disk?" All I got then was a load of waffle and general flak, >nobody could agree except that they all agreed that I should never have >asked such a naughty question. I did the experiments, and they came out >different to the textbooks. Maybe I did them wrongly. > >Essentially you are arguing from authority, and not from evidence. That >doesn't mean you are wrong - you may well be right. But you must forgive me >if I now find that to an apparent breach of Ockaham's Razor is added argument >from authority. None of this makes me feel any happier about conventional >science as taught. > >Chris If you accept the definition by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR), "A sufficient condition for the reality of a physical quantity is the possibility of predicting it with certainty, without disrupting [it]," the evidence for the existence of photons, and EM fields is overwhelming. Thousands of products have been designed manufactured and used without finding a single failure of QED theory. Every transistor, LED, TV, computer, and, yes, even flashlight, ads confirmation. I don't think you need to go back to Faraday's experiments for confirmation. As with Newton's laws, the quantity of everyday edvidence is overwhelming for the predictive accuracy of the QED model. It is the special case, the Michaelson - Moorley experiment of QED, that will cause the crisis that requires extension of the model. Maybe you have one. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 20:24:53 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id OAA16730 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 14:38:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA16619 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 14:38:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA11951; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 17:34:27 -0500 Date: 28 Nov 95 17:35:31 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951128223530_100433.1541_BHG87-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Michael writes: "Go to a bookstore and pick up any work on Michael Faraday. He defined the experimental results upon which the entire field of "electricity" and "magnetism" is "classically" based." Yep. Done all that, Faraday is my big hero. And, to judge by his writing, the saviour of the British string industry. He used a lot of string. "Then pick up any work on Maxwell, THE Maxwell, whose work through the transliteration of Oliver Heavyside (sp?) systematically rendered Faraday's work into the iron laws of equations which more or less form the basis of em engineerning today, with the addition of Thompson's school and the Bohr/Einstein relativity/quanta additions to explain the energy connection between "light" and "electrons"." Been there, done all that too. Except that I'm talking about experiments, not theories. And it may be relevant that the Lorentz force law and the Ampere force law (which is pragmatic) do not agree. Experiment at least suggests that Ampere was right, certainly if the experiments had come out differently they would be taken as proof that the conflict would be resolved in favour of Lorentz. But even if it did, that says nothing about virtual photons (or real ones for that matter). They may be a useful *model*, but what I was asking for was experimental evidence for their *existence*! "Rather than speculating about big bangs and super colliders, physicists would be well served by setting up Faraday's experimental apparatus, only much refined with better materials, in the setting of much more advanced measurement and monitoring techniques, all set up in a classical method for instruction and demonstration and viewable by all students...THIS IS THE BASE AND THERE IS NO OTHER. Then, all discussions would have the same classical basis for more fruitful discussion. The extreme mathematical abstraction of today loses everyone because the referents cannot be followed. This loss of connection is partly on purpose because there is a heavy dose of metaphysical ASSumption which is in hiding behind the math." Er ... yes. I've been saying this for years. I refer to the pragmatic science of physics being replaced by 'fizzix'. Many physicists are not even aware of some of Faraday's basic experiments. Please, "pretty please with sugar on it" - I'll be prepared to settle for even just evidence for the existence of photons. Please, anybody? But I have no real interest in "facing the establishment down". I would just like to see everybody looking at reality instead of hypotheses being treated as facts. You know - all friends together, right? I used to see this in confrontational terms, but not any longer. I don't want to "in your face!" anybody. (ah, maybe there are one or two people I'd like to see that happen to, but I shouldn't really be like that) Dieter writes: "I have never read Tinsley refuting Einstein, true." Nor will you, because I would never set my meagre abilities against a genius. However, I can quite legitimately question the experimental evidence upon which Einstein rested his towering mathematics. Anybody can do that if they study the history of the evidence in question. People forget that. "Go into a good library on the history of science, and read. One possible reason for the facetious or evasive answers you get is that this is a biggish question. But the answers are there, alright." Well, I had done that already. The last time I failed to do it was with the homopolar stuff, when I couldn't understand my results and those I asked blamed my technique. It turned out that all I'd done was what Faraday had done in about 1830, and which ain't in many of the books. Yes, I have read up pretty heavily on this. Photons started (essentially) with the photoelectric effect, and on to Crompton scattering and suchlike. In every single case the photon is invoked to satisfy the interaction of em radiation with matter - unless I've missed something. It still seems to me a violation of logic. The question has to be, does it matter? Maybe not. I admit to falling prey to my bugbear (speculation), and wondering if (for example) the 'tired light' hypothesis for the galactic red-shift might be resurrected? No matter. I guess none of this matters at all. I've hunted high and low, I've asked all manner of people, and never had an answer. "When Joe Blow, who does not have those years of experience, makes a similar statement, it does not carry the same weight, he has to work harder to get our attention. I know this is not the image we scientists like to project and sorry, Joe. It comes down to probabilities. We don't have the time to take everything seriously." I may be the archetypal Joe Blow, but I would very much prefer it if you would not confuse a legitimate question with some way-out theory. It's just the same on any of these discussion groups. Ask a question, and next thing you know this kind of stuff starts. And then people in the UK wonder why they can't get anybody into their universities to study the physical sciences. I never was confrontational about science until Cambridge, where I got swatted hard every time I asked a question. And nothing has changed. It is the way scientists react when they asked legitimate questions that has caused so many to grow to detest them. I'm past that stage now, but it still rankles sometimes. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 20:30:16 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id PAA10233 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 15:38:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA10176 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 15:37:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA07577; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 18:36:18 -0500 Date: 28 Nov 95 18:33:36 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 CompuServe.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Further testing Message-ID: <951128233335_100060.173_JHB36-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> So, what about if we had the actual Russian *pump* and the various bits of plumbing (joints), together with the precise *parameters* from St Pete? That at least would seem to give a high probability of reproducing what was seen there? Comments please? << I would comment on the effect of the different pump, assuming that we don't have the St Pete one. The more efficient the pump the less heat input from the pump rotor turbulence and cavitation. So if we use a good "western" centrifugal pump, the heating of the water will have to be due mostly to the Yusmar effect, if any. The data from the St Pete tests I find slightly confusing, but as far as I can deduce, the evidence of ou is not conclusive. Too many sources of error in measurement or time or temp or flow rate or all 3, at least from what I have seen here. If we really have a twin of the St Pete job, then there should be no difficulty in replicating the results. Go for it chaps! Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 20:37:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id PAA05534 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 15:26:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA05453 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 15:25:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA14907; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 17:55:09 -0500 Date: 28 Nov 95 17:52:24 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: 900 Russians Coming Message-ID: <951128225223_72240.1256_EHB28-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Okay, I got a 7 page fax describing this Birmingham Torch business that Potapov has got himself into. It is an all expense paid tour of Places & Events You Would Rather Not Go To. This is from an organization called the American People Ambassador Program, which "arranges face-to-face professional, scientific, technical and community exchanges between Americans and their counterparts around the world." They are sponsoring ( = paying for, I presume) a gigantic delegation of Russians from all parts of the former Soviet Union. I have the "(Tentative) Itinerary For Russian Business Leaders Delegation, Washington, DC - Pennsylvania - New York." They arrive December 11 and depart December 17 after a whirlwind round of seminars, luncheons, cocktail receptions, presentations and other Time Wasting Events. It sounds like perfect hell to me. It says here: "The TORCH OF BIRMINGHAM Award will be presented to approximately 500 Russian and Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) government and business leaders representing almost every sector of the Russian economy." The number "500" is crossed out and "900" is written above. Well, well! With Potapov included they *do* have almost every sector covered. In addition, there was some kind of gala event series with a group of 200 in "the largest foreign delegation ever to visit the State of Alabama." And get this! "The award presentation is scheduled for September 29 at the Coliseum of the Birmingham-Jefferson Civic Center around a gala ceremony which will include a parade, fireworks, and appropriate pageantry. Governor Fob James [sic] has proclaimed September 29 as Russian - Alabama Friendship Day." What would constitute "appropriate pageantry" for such an earthshaking event? What a hoot! It sounds like the Olympics which are coming to Atlanta this summer, during which time I plan to take a two week vacation anyplace else. Now back to your regularly scheduled program. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 20:39:47 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id QAA04174 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:42:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA03585 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:40:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-41.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-41.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.41]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA20551 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:33:47 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511290033.LAA20551 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:37:00 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Proposed van der Graff Decay Rate Exp. Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 28 Nov 95 at 11:33, Puthoff aol.com wrote: Hal, Unlike you, I have nothing to lose, so I can afford to stick my neck out a bit, therefore here goes :-) > Dear Vortexians, > > The proposed experiments with a van der Graff to accelerate decontamination > of radioactive materials, at least as far as relating it to the Aharonov-Bohm > (AB) effect, is based on a misunderstanding of the AB effect. The AB effect, > as it relates to the effect of potentials (voltages), simply states that if > one treats the electron as a wave instead of a particle (wave/particle > duality) in an experimental arrangement (e.g., from a source providing a > stream of electrons with well-defined momentum), one can send the wave > through the equivalent of a two-slit arrangement whereby the potentials in > the two paths are different (e.g., through two tubes with different voltages > to ground applied) and obtain a quantum interference effect when the waves Presumably, one of these two could be at ground potential. > recombine at the output that is a measure of the difference in potential of > the two paths. This is due to the fact that the magnitude of the potential > advances or retards the phase of one electron wave function relative to the Or relative to nothing, if there is no second beam? I.e. the phase of the first beam would change, but it wouldn't be detectable, as there wouldn't be any reference beam. In fact this provides us with a means of phase modulation of particle beams. (And given wave/particle duality, perhaps also of x-rays, or any other form of EM radiation for that matter. Phase modulation of a laser by passing it through a charged metal tube, with the signal modulating the voltage on the tube, might make an interesting experiment). > other, as in an experiment wherein two components of a light wave are > similarly affected by sending one component through a dielectric (e.g., > glass) and the other through air and letting them recombine at the other end > to provide an interference pattern that depends on the refractive index of > the glass used. > > In the proposed van der Graff experiment one would have to pass one part of > an electron wave through a hole in the van der Graff and turn on the voltage > while it was interior (and then turn it off before it emerged) and have it > recombine with another part that did not pass through the van der Graff and, > furthermore, was shielded from the van der Graff potential (to eliminate > confounding electric field effects); one could then obtain a variable > interference effect. > > However, the above has nothing to do with accelerating or retarding decay > rates of atoms within the van der Graff. If that is found to occur > empirically, it would not be due to the AB effect, in my opinion. In my opinion, the essence of the AB effect doesn't lie in the fact that AB used a split particle beam to demonstrate it, but rather in the fact that a charge on the tube affects the phase *at all*. In other words, the important thing is that potentials have an affect on the phase of particles, even in the absence of fields. It seems to me that the ideal place to be under the influence of a *potential*, is inside the top of a VderG generator. Now if I remember correctly, in his Unitary Quantum Theory [1], Sapogin postulates a connection between particle phase and the likelihood of tunnelling taking place. Given that alpha emission is a tunnelling dependant phenomenon, it doesn't seem to me at all unlikely that this might be affected by a potential induced phase shift. > > BTW, changing of decay rates is predicted by ZPE effects (e.g., for > lower-frequency spontaneous-emission-decay-rate changes see Sci Am, April > 1993 article on Cavity QED), but to apply this process to X-ray and gammas > would require constructing cavities at the appropriate (small) wavelengths to > exclude ZPE fluctuations (which drive spontaneous emission) at the > frequencies of interest. Both frequency and phase are characteristics of waves. Therefore changing either attribute should lead to changes in the behaviour of the composite wave packet, or particle. I agree therefore that cavities of the correct dimensions should have an effect, but I believe that this is in addition to the affect that the potential alone has on the phase. In other words, there are two separate handles to pull on here folks, lets see what can be done by combining them in interesting ways! Given that voltages generally are dynamically variable over a wide range, while cavity size is not, it would seem that the most useful approach to take for experiments, would be to set up a specific cavity size first, then subject this to varying voltages. On the other hand, in cavitation experiments, the cavity size varies continuously. Has anyone checked for unusual phenomena, by subjecting cavitation experiments to high voltages? > > Hal Puthoff > Reference: 1. L.G.Sapogin. "On Unitary Quantum Mechanics." Nuovo Cimento. vol. 53A, No. 2, p. 251 (1979) Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 20:41:41 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id UAA29002 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 20:41:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA28960 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 20:41:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.119.61.107] (ip-salem2-11.teleport.com [204.119.61.107]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA21617 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:02:13 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:02:13 -0800 From: Charles Cagle Message-Id: <199511290302.TAA21617 desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: singtech mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: A-B effect Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Peter J. Unwin wrote: > As I understand the A-B effect, magnetic energy trapped within a torr= oid > so that it was externally non-existant shifts an interference pattern > *as if* it had mass. Well, perhaps as if it were a particle contributing to the overall web like connections between it and all other particles in the universe. If that is the same as having mass then I suppose that passes. Download from LANL (http://xxx.lanl.gov) quant-ph/9506038 25 Jun 1995 by J=F9n L=EDu of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, N.Y. This fellow L=EDu seems to have a good grasp of the nature of the potentials= , which closely follows my own, stating that the potentials are the media of propagation. Download this paper via the internet as a ps file then use a downloader program in your local machine to send it to your postscript printer. If this doesn't work I could send an adobe pdf file which anyone could read and print (to a postscript printer) with acrobat (freeware). Best Regards, Charles Cagle Chief Technical Officer Singularity Technologies, Inc. 1640 Oak Grove Road, N.W. Salem, OR 97304 503/362-7781 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 23:45:37 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA22272 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 23:45:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA22244 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 23:45:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA12274; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:45:42 +0100 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:45:42 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: ZPE In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 28 Nov 1995, MHUGO EPRI wrote: > *** Reply to note of 11/28/95 10:53 > From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Subject: vtx: ZPE > Frank: I don't think I'd waste too much time with Jones. He's worse than > an adherant to Scientology. At least THEY can be deprogrammed. I'd > recommend you research the writings of Silvanus P. Thompson, circa 1879 > to figure out the "Jones" mindset. (S.P.T. was the first president of > the British Royal electrical engineering society. And he wrote some rather > clever, but now laughable commentary on "this fellow Edison's" attempt > to "subdivide light".) Is this group supposed to discuss the testing of claims of over-unity devices, or is it to become a slander sheet on persons not even in it? If the latter, count me out. I was hoping that this group would remain on a rational level, discussing science. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Tue Nov 28 23:50:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id WAA07305 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 22:49:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA07250 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 22:49:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-210.austin.eden.com (net-1-210.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.210]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id AAA03596 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:49:18 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:49:18 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511290649.AAA03596 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Further testing X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill Page wrote: >The "calculations" that were presented by Robert (Visor) seem to me >to be completely without any merit with respect to measuring the >energy output of the Yushmar. Bill, I will agree immediately that said calculations would not produce an _accurate_ value for the energy output of the Yusmar but one thing seems certain to me: they could not produce an _overestimate_! For example, he's ignoring the heat capacity of the metal parts of the system, heat losses to the air and other items in the tent, etc. As to the validity of these calcs as a calorimetric method, what could be more fundamental than measuring the temperature rise of known mass of water? Joule himself would approve, I think. I recorded the same data during the warmup periods in my Yusmar testing and, using precisely the same calculation that Robert did, I only got about 75% overall efficiency. If Robert's data is not erroneous, he's found something pretty fantastic. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 00:01:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA25990 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:01:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA25899 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:00:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.66] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA30363 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 01:22:27 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 23:02:06 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >Please, "pretty please with sugar on it" - I'll be prepared to settle for even >just evidence for the existence of photons. Please, anybody? > [snip] >Chris OK, how about the photomultiplyer behind the smoked glass (or grey film) filter experiment? Do you believe in photomultiplyers? You start out with a number of filters (smoked glass or exposed film), each carefully measured with a photometer to cut light transfer by 50 percent. You then use a light source, like the sun, separated some distance from a hole of fixed size, which is the only path through which the light shines on the active portion of a photomultiplyer. You insert enough slides over the hole that the light is reduced to the top accurate range of the photomultiplyer, and measure the current. Keep reducing the light by adding more slides. You keep seeing the resulting cut in half. Eventually you see the current reduced to discrete pulses. The more filters you add, the farther apart the current pulses are, statistically. From this you know that light comes in packets, and from measuring the caloric transfer rate of sunshine, for example, you can estimate the energy in each light packet, and by using a prism, you can find out that different colors of light have more energy, and that excited gases have spectra, etc., on and on. You can exchange the order of the filters to verify their density, etc. Is this the kind of thing for which you are looking? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 00:13:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA28947 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:13:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA28930 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:13:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA12998; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:13:26 +0100 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:13:26 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" In-Reply-To: <951128223530_100433.1541_BHG87-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 28 Nov 1995, Chris Tinsley wrote: [...] > Please, "pretty please with sugar on it" - I'll be prepared to settle for even > just evidence for the existence of photons. Please, anybody? I'm the wrong person to answer this but I'll have a go anyway. People do observe the emission of definite quanta of energy, and spectra of these. So clearly there is something being emitted, with certain properties that have been measured. They have called these things photons, and whatever they are, they exist. Whether you imagine them as tiny balls or waves or whatever, is up to you. Something is certainly there, producing these effects. [...] > I may be the archetypal Joe Blow, but I would very much prefer it if you > would not confuse a legitimate question with some way-out theory. It's just > the same on any of these discussion groups. Ask a question, and next thing > you know this kind of stuff starts. And then people in the UK wonder why > they can't get anybody into their universities to study the physical > sciences. I never was confrontational about science until Cambridge, where > I got swatted hard every time I asked a question. And nothing has changed. > It is the way scientists react when they asked legitimate questions that has > caused so many to grow to detest them. I'm past that stage now, but it still > rankles sometimes. I sense some resentment here. Chris, you are not Joe Blow and if I have touched a sore spot, I apologise. What I wrote was a response to your question (or was that someone else?) of whether we should bow to authority - that's all. I am sorry they swatted you at Cambridge, I never swat anyone here - in fact, I wish we had students who ask hard questions... they are a rare breed, most of them just want to get through the easiest way they can. I have to admit that there are not too many academics asking hard questions, either. As for your questions, how about sending them to where the real physics heavies congregate, sci.physics.research? This is a moderated group, but I think the questions are sufficiently interesting that the moderator would let them through. If you do, I'd put the group into my list just to see what answers you get. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 00:41:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA05965 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:41:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA05897 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:41:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.66] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA30529 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 02:03:09 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 23:42:47 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Electron clusters Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Bill Beatty asks: > >>If I could take a bunch of electrons and compress them into an >>increasingly small cloud, at some point the cloud would be so >conductive >that the Casmir forces would take over and >continue the compression. What >then would limit it? > >Casimir acts as a (1/distance)^4. As an electron ball collapses, it is >resisted by co-called "Schrodinger pressure," which is a combination of >uncertainty principle and Pauli exclusion principle effects (see Weisskopf, >"Of atoms, mountains and stars: a study in qualitativre physics," Science >187, 605, 1975). However, this resisting force is only of (1/distance)^10/3, >so it won't stop it. It is stopped when the Casimir force is replaced at >small distance by a (1/distance)^3 force, at which point the Schrodinger >pressure can bring collapse to a halt. > >Hal Puthoff Yes, I think I mau have the general idea. The Pauli exclusion priciple is a direct result of the Schrodinger Equation applied to particles with antisymmetric state functions, i.e. non-integral spins, like the electron with spin 1/2. No two such particles can occupy the same quantum state, even outside an atom. Possibly more useful than a force interpretation in this case, it seems like a Schrodinger equation formulation, though too complex to be practical for 10^8 electrons, would inevitably lead to numerous "forbidden" zones, i.e. places in the space of the cluster where electrons would be forbidden, similar to the way quantum wave interference creates deterministic paths for Rydberg electrons. Motion around such zones would demonstrate an implied force. The SE interference interpretation implies that an electron cluster may have a very complex and voluminous QM wave structure, and that the slightest perturbence might result in massive waveform changes and electron movements, and therefore maybe photon emission. This could explain various descriptions of natural ball lightning. The big question in my mind is how to scale up the little EV's of Ken Shoulders' into ball lightning, or whether they are separate phenomena, not scaleable. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 00:58:11 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA09645 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:58:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA09609 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:57:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.66] ([204.57.193.66]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA30595 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 02:19:56 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 23:59:34 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: ZPE Dipole Jiggle? Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >A device made for detecting jiggle of water molecules might also detect ZPE >effects. >A thin film of mylar was silvered on both sides with a thin coat of silver >(500-1,000 angstroms) which was then laminated so that the silver was >accessable >for electrical contact. The "detector" was placed in a vessel of water and with >a suitable amplifier the effects of the presence or absence of EM fields could >be studied. A similar effect can be accomplished with an ordinary disc >capacitor >coated with nail polish to keep out moisture. >The units are also very sensitive to acoustic vibrations and thus need to be in >a very "quiet" environment. > >The dipole moment of the water molecule is 1.85 Debye, 1 Debye equal 3.3356E-30 >coulomb- meter. >The potential energy of a dipole U = -uEcos 0* where u is the dipole moment and >0* is the angle between u and the electric field E. > >Any Takers? > >FJS > >Under quiet conditions the water dipoles will try to align to the lowest energy >state through the "capacitor" which resulsts in an electrostatic potential >developed on the plates ie., the silver coatings. >Any jiggle of the aligned molecules will result in a variation of this >electrostatic potential and give a signal that can be detected with suitable >electronic apparatus. > >A spectrum analyzer can be used to sort through the output information. I seems like all that will happen is mostly cancelled noise. It would be wonderful to have lots of nearly atomic size very low voltage diodes exposed to the water dipoles. Then you would have a Maxwell's Demon, a way to extract useable energy from the kinetic energy of individual molecules. Nanotechnology might be significant to energy production someday. The problem today is getting lots of molecules to dance in unison, so you can overcome the diode foreward resistance. Maybe some coupling to NMR could get things in phase for extraction via an external coil. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 03:15:37 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id DAA02249 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 03:15:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA02223 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 03:15:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA08727; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 05:42:15 -0500 Date: 29 Nov 95 05:40:51 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: St Pete, "completely different" Message-ID: <951129104051_100433.1541_BHG84-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex I'm glad of all the comments. Clearly, for reasons of expense and delay, more tests at St Petersburg are not practical. I agree with Norman about the pump. The trouble - as I see it - is that this and the bypass tube being missing are the only difference between our test runs and these at St Pete. And I saw hundreds of machines in Moldova with bypass tubes. It would be a big laugh if it turned out that the pumps used in Russia cavitate so much (or whatever) that they are o-u, and the Yusmar is just a 'resistive load'. There are two basic approaches which could be taken (if we take any at all). One is to try to decide what is happening and produce the effect in other ways, and the other is to replicate and check and confirm what *appears* to be happening in St Pete. I really do think that we would be jumping the gun very badly if we took the first course before doing the other one. And to do that, we would have to duplicate as closely as diminishing returns allows - like I'd not suggest that we airfreight a few thousand gallons of water from the River Neva... This is why I'd like to see it run (initially) with the pump. As to my little escapade with the photons and fields, I'm sorry if I got a bit shrill about all this. It is all too easy to be pushed from a genuine (if somewhat sceptical) question into appearing to support a position. I thought that the comment from Horace was interesting, I'll have to study it carefully. There are a lot of things I could ask about (the behaviour of liquid metals with a high electric current passing through them, and other objections to field theory), but the flow of data through this group is now so high that I'd rather allow everyone else to have had the last words on the subjects. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 05:53:43 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id FAA03113 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 05:53:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA03100 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 05:53:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA16270 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:53:21 -0500 Message-Id: <199511291353.AA16270 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:53:21 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: ZPE Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 08:52:42 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> FRANK ZNIDARSIC -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> JONESSE PLASMA.BYU.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 14:59 MST From: JONESSE PLASMA.BYU.EDU Subject: Re: ZPE To: p8156 memo.gpuc.com X-Envelope-To: fznidarsic gpu.com X-Vms-To: IN%"fznidarsic gpu.com" I would be pleased to read what you have to say about the CETI cell tests. What is "vortex-L"? My desire is to ask the tough questions which lead to understanding, not to slam anyone. Thanks, Steven Jones From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 06:10:33 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA07760 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 06:10:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA07733 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 06:10:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA03351 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:10:11 -0500 Message-Id: <199511291410.AA03351 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:10:11 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: JONESSE PLASMA.BYU.EDU To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: ZPE Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 09:09:27 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 -> JONESSE PLASMA.BYU.EDU MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 14:59 MST From: JONESSE PLASMA.BYU.EDU Subject: Re: ZPE To: p8156 memo.gpuc.com X-Envelope-To: fznidarsic gpu.com X-Vms-To: IN%"fznidarsic gpu.com" I would be pleased to read what you have to say about the CETI cell tests. What is "vortex-L"? My desire is to ask the tough questions which lead to understanding, not to slam anyone. Thanks, Steven Jones Vortex-L is a discussion group that reviews developments in new energy technologies such as cold fusion, ZPE, and cavitation devices. Members include Hal Puthoff and M Williams of the Nuclear Eng. dept of unuc. He is testing the CETI cell. If you would like to join write to. vortex-L eskimo.com I have a Windows based program that presents some ZPE theory. Currently an add for it is in Infinite Energy July Aug 95 page 11. If you forward me your address I will mail you a copy. The last chapter in it reviews EPRI's final report and presents some information on the CETI cell. fznidarsic aol.com cc => blasar aol.com Bob you may want to join also. I sure that there is a lot of interest in your ball lightning experiments. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 06:59:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA23116 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 06:59:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from hercule.utcluj.ro (root [141.85.128.247]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA22894 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 06:58:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by hercule.utcluj.ro (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0tKnyJ-000MOPC; Wed, 29 Nov 95 16:58 EET Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:58:54 +0200 (EET) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex vortex Subject: vtx: No o/u! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends, I really don't want to make anybody unhappy but I have to let you know that the o/u effect at the startup period of the St. Pete Yusmar test is not real. I have noticed the data on Nov. 4 when Chris sent them to us but the first stage cannot be taken in consideration from a very prosaic reason. The calculation is based on a quantity of 20 kg. water recirculated. I have no doubts regarding the quantity per se, but it is not all recirculated with the same velocity, we do not have perfect mixing in the system! Why? On Nov. 9 Volodya wrote: "Dr. Sudakov assembled the installation according to the scheme you have, i.e. with the so called small loop. However the latter contains two tanks, first one is included in the water circuit (the volume of it is about 10 litres) and the second one connects with the water circuit by the pipe, the second pipe from the tank connects with air." Useless, misleading tanks, in which (at least in the second) a part of the water STAGNATES and the energy of the pump goes to less than 20 kg. water. The heating rate is increased, obviously, but cooler water remains in the "pockets". Later the system gets in equilibrium, the temperature is more uniform ,viscosity increases and the pseudo-effect vanishes. Please ignore the rest of this message! Yes, it happened, the effect was sacrificed for the sake of a method good for laboratory applied to a defenceless commercial device. One of the most efficient methods to make errors is to use methods beyond their limits of applicability. Two from three vital circuits of the device have been cut out; the operation was a great success, the patient has died. Has somebody considered thermal inertia when this calorimetric method was discussed? The effect is based on liquid/liquid cavitation and you will never obtain o/u in a Yusmar without recirculation tube and lacking good hydrodynamics. We in the industrial research try and try and try again till all the possibilities are used. How can be an action abandoned after a few trials- made in conditions which are in direct contradiction with everything we know about the YUSMAR? Peter From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 08:42:32 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA26230 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:42:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA26190 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:42:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from 204.111.1.158 (eb3ppp30.shentel.net [204.111.1.158]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id LAA11885 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:43:52 -0500 Message-Id: <199511291643.LAA11885 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 11:44:19 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: No o/u! To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >I really don't want to make anybody unhappy but I have to let you >know that the o/u effect at the startup period of the St. Pete >Yusmar test is not real. I must agree with you Peter, but then I will agree with almost anyone. It is in my nature. My purpose is not to judge, simply assist where I can. I do not believe that the Yusmar is the answer, nor that the test we ran was more that a stab in the dark. I do however feel that my Associates and I got a glimpse at something that could offer hope in the search for knowledge. Peter, as soon as all the data and other information is in I will post it to the group. I am a simple durak, but at least I admit it. Take care of yourself, and remember that if I can be of service to you please let me know. Robert From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 09:44:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA24077 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:36:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA24027 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:36:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzryw17500; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:36:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA13306; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:36:04 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 500835080095333FEPRI; 29 Nov 1995 08:35:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 29 Nov 1995 08:35:08 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: Deiter, you are right.... To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/29/95 08:35:05 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Deiter, you are right.... - Yes, I was not being considerate there in my comments on Herr Dokter Jones. I violated a fundamental rule that I normally try to live by---and I owe ....... you and Dr. Jones an apology because of that. I made a judgement on someone's character or opinions based on a "second hand source" of those opinions or sayings....NOT a good thing to do. It is one thing when you have an arguement/disagreement/discussion with someone based on things they have said DIRECTLY (such as the lively discussion with Chris T. on the "basis" of various "science" paradigms/conclusions we live with today) but another thing when you work on what someone else tells you that a third party said. ... I would hasten to say that despite the claim of "true believers" having a bias and not willing to believe "reality", there are plenty of people on the Vortex that are asking good, SOLID, questions about claims and data and results. If Dr. Jones wanted to do that too, he would be welcome. (Al- though I imagine as a U. professor he might be somewhat too busy to spend much time on this web.) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 09:44:27 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id IAA14458 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:09:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay2.UU.NET (relay2.UU.NET [192.48.96.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA14330 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:07:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzryu28180; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:02:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA24834; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:02:56 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 690602080095333FEPRI; 29 Nov 1995 08:02:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 29 Nov 1995 08:02:08 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/29/95 08:02:05 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/28/95 20:33 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Chris: The first clue that I got to "smoke and mirrors" in the scientific realm was when I was working through a Springer Verlang Quant. Mech. text a couple years ago. There was an actual "worked out" 0 to infinity integral in the text which connected with a classic solid state physics problem. As SUCH I had solved that integral with a co-worker who had taken a solid state physics course about a year previous. The solution involved integration in the complex plane and surrounding the poles with a "Bromwitch" contour and integrating around that contour. This was NOT the method of solution used in the text! The solution used in the text was to re-arrange the integral, come up with an infinite series "equivalent" and then go to a table of inf. series and look up the convergence for that series.....A weak kneed approach at best. This experience, and my experience with "Canonical Ensembles" (from Statistical Mechanics) as put forth in my Physical chemistry class----without the proper 100 pages of detailed combinatoric mathematics derivation it demands.... have taught me MUCH about the way "science" is presented in the real world. As you say fairly directly Chris, it is sometimes very informative to ask "fundamental" questions. - One of the most fundamental questions I've always asked is: What causes charge? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 11:35:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA13669 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:29:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail06.mail.aol.com (mail06.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.108]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA13612 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:29:26 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA03780 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:26:14 -0500 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:26:14 -0500 Message-ID: <951129122612_38092034 mail06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robin wrote: > To put it another way, can an observer located inside such a sphere tell if > the sphere is charged or not? >Only if he's radioactive. :-> I do not see a way (by standard physics) that being radioactive would help. What do you have in mind? Hal From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 11:35:48 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA19820 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:45:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout06.mail.aol.com (emout06.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.43]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA19757 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:45:42 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by emout06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA13592 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:43:53 -0500 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:43:53 -0500 Message-ID: <951129124349_38111228 emout06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris notes that the "evidence" for quantized photons essentially goes back to the photoelectric effect. However, it is now known in zero-point-fluctuation theory that the photoelectric effect can be accounted for on the basis of classical, unquantized fields, as shown by Boyer in an SED (stochastic electrodynamics) approach (see, e.g., Boyer, Phys Rev 186. 1304, 1969.) Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 23:08:37 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA29553 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:59:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA29461 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:58:50 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA05252 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:57:31 -0500 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:57:31 -0500 Message-ID: <951129155730_38330306 emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark Hugo asks, >One of the most fundamental questions I've always asked is: >What causes charge? I'll bet it's structure, scattering ZPE. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 23:12:45 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA10540 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:29:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA10478 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:29:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA25378; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:28:04 -0500 Date: 29 Nov 95 16:29:30 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something competely different" Message-ID: <951129212930_100433.1541_BHG56-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:vortex I should just like to express my appreciation to Dr Puthoff for the reference regarding classical (non-quantised) em radiation. It is always a nice feeling to hear that one's worries have been addressed by others who are competent to do what I cannot. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 23:21:02 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id OAA10456 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:55:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA10305 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:54:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA15998; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 17:53:26 -0500 Date: 29 Nov 95 17:52:04 EST From: Dean Miller <75110.3417 compuserve.com> To: Vortex list Subject: vtx: St Pete, "completely different" Message-ID: <951129225203_75110.3417_CHK48-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi group, Chris hints: >> It would be a big laugh if it turned out that the pumps used in Russia cavitate so much (or whatever) that they are o-u, and the Yusmar is just a 'resistive load'. << I understand that commercial centrifugal pumps are normally expected to last for 10's of years in continuous use. The pump driving the Yusmar is operated intermittently during the heating season and not at all during warm weather, so I would expect it to last 100 years or more. Is any information available regarding the frequency with which the pump must be replaced? (I seem to recall a figure of 2-3 years -- which I originally attributed to poor construction.) Dean -- from Des Moines From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 23:26:03 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA18400 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:51:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from REG.TRIUMF.CA (reg.Triumf.CA [142.90.100.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA18086 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:49:39 -0800 (PST) From: msevior triumf.ca Received: by triumf.ca (MX V4.0-1 VAX) id 7; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:44:58 PST Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:44:58 PST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-ID: <0099A1E9.56150380.7 triumf.ca> Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There is a lot of direct evidence for photons. I've personally used photomultiplier tubes that have a 25% quantum efficiency. That means they have a 25% chance of detecting a single photon. Now as Horace has said, if you continuosly reduce the intensity of light falling on a photomultiplier, what you evitually see is a series of pulses, the frequnecy of which is proportional to the light intensity falling on the device. I've personally seen this effect with a high bandwidth CRO. There are now experimental devices called Solid State Photomultipliers which have Quantum Efficiencies as high as 70%. They also have very good energy resolution so that the ENERGY of individual photons can be measured at very low light intensities. They show that individual photons do indeed have energy = (Plancks Constant) * (Speed of Light) / (wavelength) Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 23:28:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id QAA02097 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:30:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from anugpo.anu.edu.au (anugpo.anu.edu.au [150.203.2.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA02034 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:30:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from nimbus.anu.edu.au (nimbus.anu.edu.au [150.203.126.21]) by anugpo.anu.edu.au (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA13863 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:29:58 +1100 Received: by nimbus.anu.edu.au (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11345; Thu, 30 Nov 95 11:29:56 EST Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 11:29:56 EST From: daved nimbus.anu.edu.au (Dave DAVIES) Message-Id: <9511300029.AA11345 nimbus.anu.edu.au> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A > From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) > Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" ... > measure the current. Keep reducing the light by adding more slides. You > keep seeing the resulting cut in half. Eventually you see the current > reduced to discrete pulses. The more filters you add, the farther apart > the current pulses are, statistically. From this you know that light comes > in packets, ... > Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 > Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > No, this only shows that light interacts in packets. dave From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 23:33:31 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id OAA25366 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:13:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from REG.TRIUMF.CA (reg.Triumf.CA [142.90.100.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA25320 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:13:39 -0800 (PST) From: msevior triumf.ca Received: by triumf.ca (MX V4.0-1 VAX) id 37; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:11:15 PST Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:11:14 PST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-ID: <0099A1ED.01969FE0.37 triumf.ca> Subject: RE: vtx: Accelerated Transmutation Of Radioactive Elements (altering half-lives) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I've inspected the web-site http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexrad1.html. I have a few questions and comments for Mr. Mandeville. Firstly the professor in question approached the paper with an open mind. His final report was that someone geographically close to Barker be appointed to personally inspect the results. I suggest that when you slag people you know nothing about you mearly demonstrate your own prejudices. I suggest you get in touch with Brian Wallace who regularly posts in the newsgroup sci.physics.fusion under the subject "The Farce of Physics". I gather he is organizing a conference this year to discuss the issues you raise. Next how did you measure radioactivity? Finally the brief desciption of the experiment is entirely constitent with blowing the radon trapped in the sample into the atmosphere. This element is a gas formed as the radioactive daughter product of the decay of Thorium and Uranium. It is produced in minute amounts that could never be detected by weighing. On the other hand it's absence would be revealed by a decrease in the total activity of the sample. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 23:37:23 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA28052 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:55:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA27521 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:52:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzrzn01767; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:48:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA18888; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:48:58 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 213547120095333FEPRI; 29 Nov 1995 12:47:12 PST Message-Id: Date: 29 Nov 1995 12:47:12 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: Repeating the challenge: To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/29/95 12:47:33 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Repeating the challenge: - Dear Vorticians: Given a 12 oz "Coke can" control volume, presumed totally insulated from the outside, with a flow inlet and flow outlet. Given a range of 10 to 100 ml per minute and a choice of 5 to 15 degrees C deltaT for the chosen flow, and given two electrical inlet leads to the system with less than 1 watt input, what values of DeltaT, Flow rate, and length of run would you want to see to assure yourself of a non-chemical energy source within the control volume???? - If this is difficult to understand or answer, please let me know why and I will attempt to make it as clear as possible. ................................................................. - MDH (PS Chris T.---This should be PUD for some of the Vorticians, but I'm willing to bet a broad minded EE like yourself could probably do this without to much travail. I hope you can beat the rest!) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 23:39:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id NAA06786 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:20:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA06736 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:20:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA26471; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:18:32 -0500 Date: 29 Nov 95 16:15:54 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: BlindCopyReceiver:; Subject: vtx: Upcoming cold fusion events Message-ID: <951129211553_72240.1256_EHB172-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Clean Energy Technology Inc. (CETI) plans to demonstrate a working cold fusion cell at the Power-Gen '95 Americas conference in Anaheim, California, December 5 - 7, 1995. The Power-Gen conference is the world's largest electric power industry trade show, attracting more than 850 exhibitors, 14,000 attendees from 75 countries, and 250 conference paper presentations. This will be CETI's third public demonstration this year. CETI showed a 1.5 watt device at the Fifth International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF5) in April. They showed a 5-watt device at the Symposium on Fusion Engineering (SOFE '95) Oct. 1 - 5, which was sponsored by the IEEE, the American Nuclear Society, and the University of Illinois. Miley's group at the University of Illinois has replicated the CETI device from scratch, using their own thin film deposition technology, and they have tested a device fabricated by CETI. They observe excess heat in both devices. The SOFE cell output 80 times more energy than it consumed: input was 0.06 watts of electricity and output was 5 watts thermal. It is expected that the Power-Gen device will be larger and more powerful than the previous demonstration cells. In other news, Eugene Mallove will be the guest speaker at a seminar covering recent advances in the field of Cold Fusion. The seminar is being held at the Continuing Education Center on the campus of Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey on Sunday, December 10, 1995 from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. For more information contact Mallove at CompuServe 76570,2270. (From Internet: 76570.2270 Compuserve.com). I plant to attend the Power-Gen '95 conference. I will describe the demo system in detail in an upcoming issue of Infinite Energy magazine. Jed Rothwell Cold Fusion Research Advocates 2050 Peachtree Industrial Court, Suite 113-A Chamblee, Georgia 30341 Tel: 770-451-9890 Fax: 770-458-2404 Home: 770-458-8107 E-Mail: JedRothwell delphi.com From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Wed Nov 29 23:48:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id XAA26181 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 23:48:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA26165 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 23:48:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-177.austin.eden.com (net-1-137.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.137]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id BAA23838 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 01:47:55 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 01:47:55 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511300747.BAA23838 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: No o/u! X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Peter said: >a part >of the water STAGNATES and the energy of the pump goes to less than >20 kg. water. Thanks for clearing this up, Peter. That, of course, completely blows the calculation. In my case, all the water in my "loop" was stirred vigorously so the heat capacity approach to calorimetry was valid. Peter, would you mind summarizing the things you think I did wrong in my tests that prevented me from observing any detectable sign of Yusmar o-u? From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 00:03:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA00157 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:03:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA00106 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:03:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-177.austin.eden.com (net-1-137.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.137]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id CAA24357 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 02:03:05 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 02:03:05 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511300803.CAA24357 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: Re: vtx: Repeating the challenge: X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: OK, Mark. I don't have my calculation aids handy so I'll just describe the process. First you need to figure the mass of all the possible reactants. This includes the contents of the coke can AND all the electrolyte that is present in the circulation loop (you didn't specify this quantity). If you don't know the mass of the stuff in the coke can, then multiply its volume by, say, 22 gm/cm^3 which is the highest density substance (osmium) that is known to exist at STP. Then look in heat of formation tables for the compound that has the most energetic heat of formation on a per-unit-mass basis...not a per-mole basis. Assume the total mass of potential reactants is, in fact, composed of the reactants for that compound. Calculate the heat that would be evolved when that mass of those reactants reacted. From owner-PCST-L cornell.edu Thu Nov 30 00:31:35 1995 Received: from listproc.mail.cornell.edu (LISTPROC.MAIL.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.56.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA06241 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:31:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.mail.cornell.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by listproc.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA16739; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:00:29 -0500 Received: from cornell.edu (cornell.edu [132.236.56.6]) by listproc.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA06358 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:31:23 -0500 Received: (from daemon localhost) by cornell.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA06780 for PCST-L@listproc.mail.cornell.edu; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:35:08 -0500 Received: from juliet.ic.ac.uk (juliet.ic.ac.uk [155.198.5.4]) by cornell.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA06580 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:34:45 -0500 Received: from smdg2.nmsi.ac.uk by juliet.ic.ac.uk with SMTP (PP); Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:46:39 +0000 Received: from icsm64 by smdg2.nmsi.ac.uk (8.6.12/4.1) id OAA03133; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:45:40 GMT Message-Id: <199511291445.OAA03133 smdg2.nmsi.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:43:43 +0000 Reply-To: PCST-L cornell.edu Sender: owner-PCST-L cornell.edu Precedence: bulk From: a.ragnarsdottir nmsi.ac.uk (Asdis Ragnarsdottir) To: International Network on Public Communication of Science and Technology Subject: Media Monitor Archive - S&T in Britain Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: agragnar mail-server.nmsi.ac.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 X-PH: V4.1 cornell.edu (Cornell Modified) X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2(a) -- ListProcessor by CREN Status: RO X-Status: Science Museum Public Understanding of Science Research Unit Science and Technology in the British Press 1946-1990. We have the pleasure to make publicly available a major and unique resource for research in Public Understanding of Science; The Science Museum Media Monitor Archive. The archive, the offshoot of a content analysis project, will benefit anyone who is interested in studying comparatively science and technology in the post-war period. The objectives of the project are as follows: (a) to explore the pattern of science and technology coverage in British national newspapers after 1946; (b) to collect historical data from 1946 to the present, as the basis for the "Science in the Media Archive" to be used as a research and teaching resource; (c) to develop an instrument that assesses both the quantity and the quality of press coverage in form of a cultural indicator of the popular representations of science and technology; (d) to provide a basis to explore systematically the relationship between press coverage and the changing political context of science in Britain; (e) to test specific hypotheses about trends in media coverage of science and technology in the post-war period. The archives contains hard-copies of 6000 articles from a stratified random cluster sample of science and technology coverage in the British national daily press from 1946 to 1990. The stratification of the sample takes into account the changing segmentation of the British press into quality and popular press, political left and right, opinion leadership function, and total readership. The articles were selected from randomly sampled issues: - every second year from the `Daily Telegraph' and the `Daily Mirror'. - twice each decade from `The Guardian', `The Times' and the `Daily Express'. `The Sun' since 1986 and `The Independent' since 1990. Our own analysis used an elaborate coding frame of around 100 codes developed around the notion of a 'news narrative'. This analysis is computerized, and can among other things be used as an index system to trace particular material of interest. Each article has been photocopied, archive by year and newspaper, coded and entered into a SPSS database. Both the photocopies of the articles and the data base are accessible in the archive for comparative research purposes. It is envisaged that the archive will be ultimately kept up to date on a regular basis. For further details on the sampling procedure and the coding frame technical reports (Methodology, Vol II and Coding Frame, Vol IV) are available upon request. The Science Museum Library stores the complete set of 4 volumes technical reports 'Science and Technology in the British Press, 1946-1990' for consultation including, basic results (vol I), methodology (vol II), codebook (vol III) and coding frame (vol IV). The Science Page on internet: http://www.nmsi.ac.uk/researchers/mediamn.html, gives an idea of the kinds of variables we used for the analysis of science coverage. We are inviting researchers all over the world to make use of this archival material for their own quantitative or qualitative analysis and in particular for comparative purposes. For further information contact: Asdis G. Ragnarsdottir, Media Monitor Archive, Science Museum Library, Exhibition Road, London SW7 5NH tel +171 938 8237 fax +171 938 8213 e-mail: a.ragnarsdottir nmsi.ac.uk Dr. Martin Bauer, London School of Economics, Department of Social Psychology, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE tel +171 955 6864 fax +171 955 7005 e-mail: bauer lse.ac.uk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 00:40:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id AAA07916 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:40:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA07890 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:39:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA29443; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:40:11 +0100 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:40:10 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: No o/u! In-Reply-To: <199511300747.BAA23838 natashya.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Scott Little wrote: > Peter said: > > >a part > >of the water STAGNATES and the energy of the pump goes to less than > >20 kg. water. > > Thanks for clearing this up, Peter. That, of course, completely blows the > calculation. > > In my case, all the water in my "loop" was stirred vigorously so the heat > capacity approach to calorimetry was valid. > > Peter, would you mind summarizing the things you think I did wrong in my > tests that prevented me from observing any detectable sign of Yusmar o-u? I find I want to say some hard words here; this is really ridiculous. Here we have a bunch of intelligent people, going along with an incredible scenario: Potapov invents a machine. It is said that thousands have been sold in the former SU. Even if that was hundreds, or tens, this implies that Potapov has a handle on how to make the gadget work, every time. You don't sell something in numbers if there are subtle secrets, or if the device works sometimes, sometimes not. If he is selling so many, he is a businessman; at the least, he must have hired an accountant, who will be telling him to expand the business. E.g., sell outside the former SU; then they can sell ten times as many. Normally, a business will advertise to convince potential customers that the device works and is worth buying. What do we have here? We have potential customers trying to prove that it works, and they are given various devices with vital parts missing, or they are told off for not testing them under the right conditions. There are secrets, the device is hard to get to work, etc. I have to say, this smells to high heaven. The simplest interpretation is that Russians are easy to fool, but the con man knows that USAmericans (and Englishmen) are not so easy, and they must be kept away. If this were on the level, then the easiest way to make sure it is, would be either to buy a certified device and watch it perform, or make a trip to one of those thousands (hundreds, tens) of satisfied customers in the former SU, and watch it work. They must know why they are satisfied. I am sorry, Peter, that's how it looks to me. Tell me how the above is all wrong. -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 03:02:21 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id DAA01710 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 03:02:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA01702 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 03:02:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id GAA24888; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:00:59 -0500 Date: 30 Nov 95 06:02:38 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Peter's hypothesis Message-ID: <951130110237_100433.1541_BHG57-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Peter Gluck states as fact that there is static (stagnant) water in the system, and that this disproves the apparent over-unity. This is a possibility, but I would suggest that it is a hypothesis and remains unproven. Dieter points out another very plausible scenario. But we do have our reasons for pursuing this thing. Quite a number of institutes have reported o-u, including Energiya, the big booster makers for the Russian space programme. And we have the Griggs device, where the Rothwell/Mallove tests show clear o-u. It is true that I have some very harsh words to say about Potapov, but you may not appreciate the way in which 'business' operates in the CIS. Such methods for establishing the truth of the matter as Dieter suggests are not quite as simple as they would appear. The question here is whether the game is worth the candle. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 04:41:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id EAA18410 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 04:41:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA18391 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 04:40:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.69]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id GAA01417 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:03:34 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 03:42:44 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: A Challange to the Vorticians! Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I posted this yesterday, but it did not come back from vortex, so I am posting again. PLease excuse if it is duplicated. >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: A Challange to the Vorticians! >- >All right gang, let's try this one on for size and see what you can come >up with. I'm holding a 355 ML Diet Coke can in front of me. Let's use this >as our "basis". Consider if you will, being given a device no bigger than >said can. Consider also a 1 CM dia flow connection in the bottom and out >the top. You ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH WHAT IS IN THE CAN! >- >Consider that there are also 2 very fine (maybe .1 mm dia) copper wires going >into the can. You input <.5 watts electrical. The can is totally insulated >from the surroundings. (I.e., Qdot going inwards is IMPOSSIBLE, so no >"heat pump" effects are possible.) Now I'll make this easy, you are >given that there are two thermocouples separated by about 3 cm along the >runs of the Cu wires going into the can, and they indicate identical temps, >so there is no heat flow on the Cu wire. >- >You are allowed to measure the flow rate of a fluid into and out of the can's >volume. You are allowed to wrap a TC, thermistor, or Mercury thermometer >around the outside of the flow tube(s) and insulate them. (To measure >something NEAR, but conservatively less than the temperature in the >flow tube.) >- >Question: What flow rate, what deltaT, and what length of run would you re >quire to assert that there would be an energy source in the can >> than >any known chemical energy source? >- >(You are welcome to make power density comparisons to storage batteries, >and to presume the interior could contain liquified Acytalene if you want >for comparison purposes.) >- >MDH I suspect the similarity to the patterson cell, etc., is not lost on anyone. I also suspect the following are not the answers you are looking for, but let's eliminate some of the obvious possibilities. If the water pressure has an oscillating component, then bubbles or a gas bladder in the can will, through non-adiabatic expansion/contraction, transfer heat to the liquid in the can indefinitely. Accoustic waves, especially resonant with the can chamber, will transfer heat into the can. Current in the water to the can will transfer heat to the can. EM radiation (e.g. microwaves, etc.) in the water will transfer energy into the can. External EM radiation will induce a current in the can and/or water and cause heating in the can. Assuming no tricks of the above or other nature, we need to identify a chemical source of energy that maximizes J/cc. It appears from the problem definition that utilization of ambient air is OK. The most dense chemical storage I could come up with is Be (10.8 kcal/cc). Second best was pentaborane (B5H9 at 10 kcal/cc). Oxidation of Be to BeO produces 10.78 kcal/cc, so we have room in 355 ml for a max of 3834 kcal, or about 3.8 Mcal. I know this is unrealistic, because where does the ash go? Now, flow area is 3.14(.5cm)^2 = .785 cm^2. The energy delivered by the current is .5 J/s = (.5 J/s)(.239 cal/J) = .1195 cal/s. So, if we can measure temperature to .01 deg. C, as long as we maintain a flow rate of more than twice .1195 cc/s, or .152 cm/s in our tubing, we will eventually use up the energy stored in the can and measure the result to 1 percent accuracy. Our flow rate must be sufficient to prevent boiling, so it is tied to the rate at which the chemical energy is produced in the can, or vice versa. We can assume any value we want, so let's pick a number out of thin air, say ummmm, 60 watts production rate in the can. We have (60 J/s)(.239 cal/J) = 14.34 cal/sec. This, plus the .1195 cal/s current contribution adds up to a heat production of 14.46 cal/sec. At a flow rate of 3 cc/s, or 3.8 cm/s, the water should heat up about 4.8 deg. C in the can. So it will take (3.83E6 cal)/(14.34 cal/sec) = 2.67E5 sec.= 74 h = about 3 days. The mininmum possible run length would depend on how fast you could pump water through the can at a 100 deg C differential. At 10 cc/s that 1kcal/s or 3.83E3 s., or about 1 hour. The longest possible run would be at .4 cc/sec at 1 deg C rise (to get 2 percent accuracy) consuming about .2 cal/s from the can so that's 1.91E7 s = 5.32E3 h = 221 days. Does this sound right? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 05:31:17 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id FAA29999 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 05:31:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA29956 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 05:30:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.69]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id GAA01468 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:53:35 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 04:32:45 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Repeating the challenge: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Repeating the challenge: >- >Dear Vorticians: Given a 12 oz "Coke can" control volume, presumed totally >insulated from the outside, with a flow inlet and flow outlet. Given a >range of 10 to 100 ml per minute and a choice of 5 to 15 degrees C deltaT >for the chosen flow, and given two electrical inlet leads to the system >with less than 1 watt input, what values of DeltaT, Flow rate, and length >of run would you want to see to assure yourself of a non-chemical energy >source within the control volume???? >- >If this is difficult to understand or answer, please let me know why and >I will attempt to make it as clear as possible. >................................................................. >- >MDH (PS Chris T.---This should be PUD for some of the Vorticians, but >I'm willing to bet a broad minded EE like yourself could probably do this >without to much travail. I hope you can beat the rest!) Now there you go changing the problem definition! This reminds me of how things seem to happen in the *real* world! 8^) To refresh some items from the original problem definition: >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: A Challange to the Vorticians! >- >All right gang, let's try this one on for size and see what you can come >up with. I'm holding a 355 ML Diet Coke can in front of me. Let's use this >as our "basis". Consider if you will, being given a device no bigger than >said can. Consider also a 1 CM dia flow connection in the bottom and out >the top. You ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH WHAT IS IN THE CAN! >- >Consider that there are also 2 very fine (maybe .1 mm dia) copper wires going >into the can. You input <.5 watts electrical. The can is totally insulated >from the surroundings. (I.e., Qdot going inwards is IMPOSSIBLE, so no >"heat pump" effects are possible.) Now I'll make this easy, you are >given that there are two thermocouples separated by about 3 cm along the >runs of the Cu wires going into the can, and they indicate identical temps, >so there is no heat flow on the Cu wire. >- >You are allowed to measure the flow rate of a fluid into and out of the can's >volume. You are allowed to wrap a TC, thermistor, or Mercury thermometer >around the outside of the flow tube(s) and insulate them. (To measure >something NEAR, but conservatively less than the temperature in the >flow tube.) >- >Question: What flow rate, what deltaT, and what length of run would you re >quire to assert that there would be an energy source in the can >> than >any known chemical energy source? >- >(You are welcome to make power density comparisons to storage batteries, >and to presume the interior could contain liquified Acytalene if you want >for comparison purposes.) >- >MDH I responded: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I suspect the similarity to the patterson cell, etc., is not lost on anyone. I also suspect the following are not the answers you are looking for, but let's eliminate some of the obvious possibilities. If the water pressure has an oscillating component, then bubbles or a gas bladder in the can will, through non-adiabatic expansion/contraction, transfer heat to the liquid in the can indefinitely. Accoustic waves, especially resonant with the can chamber, will transfer heat into the can. Current in the water to the can will transfer heat to the can. EM radiation (e.g. microwaves, etc.) in the water will transfer energy into the can. External EM radiation will induce a current in the can and/or water and cause heating in the can. Assuming no tricks of the above or other nature, we need to identify a chemical source of energy that maximizes J/cc. It appears from the problem definition that utilization of ambient air is OK. The most dense chemical storage I could come up with is Be (10.8 kcal/cc). Second best was pentaborane (B5H9 at 10 kcal/cc). Oxidation of Be to BeO produces 10.78 kcal/cc, so we have room in 355 ml for a max of 3834 kcal, or about 3.8 Mcal. I know this is unrealistic, because where does the ash go? Now, flow area is 3.14(.5cm)^2 = .785 cm^2. The energy delivered by the current is .5 J/s = (.5 J/s)(.239 cal/J) = .1195 cal/s. So, if we can measure temperature to .01 deg. C, as long as we maintain a flow rate of more than twice .1195 cc/s, or .152 cm/s in our tubing, we will eventually use up the energy stored in the can and measure the result to 1 percent accuracy. Our flow rate must be sufficient to prevent boiling, so it is tied to the rate at which the chemical energy is produced in the can, or vice versa. We can assume any value we want, so let's pick a number out of thin air, say ummmm, 60 watts production rate in the can. We have (60 J/s)(.239 cal/J) = 14.34 cal/sec. This, plus the .1195 cal/s current contribution adds up to a heat production of 14.46 cal/sec. At a flow rate of 3 cc/s, or 3.8 cm/s, the water should heat up about 4.8 deg. C in the can. So it will take (3.83E6 cal)/(14.34 cal/sec) = 2.67E5 sec.= 74 h = about 3 days. The mininmum possible run length would depend on how fast you could pump water through the can at a 100 deg C differential. At 10 cc/s that 1kcal/s or 3.83E3 s., or about 1 hour. The longest possible run would be at .4 cc/sec at 1 deg C rise (to get 2 percent accuracy) consuming about .2 cal/s from the can so that's 1.91E7 s = 5.32E3 h = 221 days. Does this sound right? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - end of original response So now we have a 1 watt current input, or about .23 cal/s. To get the job over quickly and be as accurate as possible we want as much deltaT as possible so let's pick 15 deg. C, the new upper limit. Similarly, 100 ml/min is fastest so best. Our new power output rate is ((15 * 100) cal)(1 min/60 sec) = 25 cal/s. Of this .23 cal/s is from the electrical input, so our chemical power is 24.8 cal/s. To use up our 3.83E6 cal chemical reserve will take (3.83E6 cal)/(24.8 cal/s) = 1.54E5 s = 42.8 h. There you have it. The convenient choice (for expediency) of DeltaT, Flow rate, and length of run is 15 deg. C, 100 ml/min, and 42.8 hours plus time to give the percentage of over chemical energy you are happy with - say another 42.8 hours to get 100 percent. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 05:49:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id FAA04375 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 05:49:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA04342 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 05:49:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.69] ([204.57.193.69]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id HAA01485 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:11:41 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 04:50:50 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Repeating the challenge: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >OK, Mark. I don't have my calculation aids handy so I'll just describe the >process. > >First you need to figure the mass of all the possible reactants. This >includes the contents of the coke can AND all the electrolyte that is >present in the circulation loop (you didn't specify this quantity). If you >don't know the mass of the stuff in the coke can, then multiply its volume >by, say, 22 gm/cm^3 which is the highest density substance (osmium) that is >known to exist at STP. > >Then look in heat of formation tables for the compound that has the most >energetic heat of formation on a per-unit-mass basis...not a per-mole basis. >Assume the total mass of potential reactants is, in fact, composed of the >reactants for that compound. > >Calculate the heat that would be evolved when that mass of those reactants >reacted. Neither problem definition specified a loop, so it appears you can just assume the liquid (not necessarily electrolyte) is "going down the drain" on output. Gee, if the liquid were gasoline mixed with air bubbles, hmmmm.... It is reasonable that only an oxidizer in the liquid is implicit. Here comes problem definition #3. 8^) The problem def. specifies a can *volume*, so it seems like you want to find the highest cal/ml chemical fuel. For example, H2 provides the best cal/g, but you just can't get many g. into the can. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 06:24:43 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA14037 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:24:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA13938 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:24:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA28197 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:23:08 -0500 Message-Id: <199511301423.AA28197 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:23:08 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: charge Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 09:22:27 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 08:34:59 -0500 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem To: FRANK ZNIDARSIC Subject: Returned mail: User unknown ----- Transcript of session follows ----- While talking to mail.eskimo.com: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown 550 ... User unknown ----- Recipients of this delivery ----- ----- Unsent message follows ----- Received: from memo.gpuc.com by power.gpu.com with SMTP id AA21082 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for ); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 08:34:59 -0500 Received: from GPU1 by memo.gpuc.com (IBM MVS SMTP V3R1) with BSMTP id 1082; Thu, 30 Nov 95 08:34:08 EST From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC To: gpu.com:VORTEX@ESKIMO.COM Subject: Re: vtx: "Some Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 08:34:09 EST -> VORTEX ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 From: Puthoff aol.com Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:57:31 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mark Hugo asks, >One of the most fundamental questions I've always asked is: >What causes charge? I'll bet it's structure, scattering ZPE. Hal Puthoff I've asked myself the same question. Hal you may be right. I don't know. What I did "find out" was that structure results in the gravitational field. The gravitational field is produced by a changing momentum. See my paper on electromangum. "The Source of Gravitational Mass." http://nucleus.ibg.uu.se/elektromagnum I suspect that the electrical charge can be derived from a similar analysis but I have not been able, in the electrical case, to do the analysis. Any ideas? Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 06:33:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA16997 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:33:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA16970 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:33:05 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199511301433.GAA16970 mail.eskimo.com> Received: by power.gpu.com id (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:32:45 -0500 Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:32:45 -0500 Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-0); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:32:45 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Some Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 09:18:04 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 From: msevior triumf.ca Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:44:58 PST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com There is a lot of direct evidence for photons. I've personally used photomultiplier tubes that have a 25% quantum efficiency. That means they have a 25% chance of detecting a single photon. Now as Horace has said, if you continuosly reduce the intensity of light falling on a photomultiplier, what you evitually see is a series of pulses, the frequnecy of which is proportional to the light intensity falling on the device. I've personally seen this effect with a high bandwidth CRO. There are now experimental devices called Solid State Photomultipliers which have Quantum Efficiencies as high as 70%. They also have very good energy resolution so that the ENERGY of individual photons can be measured at very low light intensities. They show that individual photons do indeed have energy = (Plancks Constant) * (Speed of Light) / (wavelength) Martin Sevior The questions about photons have much to do with the zero point energy state. All quantum systems including the ZPE state have an amount of angular momentum = h. That's that defining property of any zero point system. Another system that conserves angular momentum is a vortex (like this web or water going down the drain in the bathtub in a whirlpool) h is the key to understanding quantum effects and photons. h is like a whirlpool formed when water goes down the drain. Let's say Niels Bohr and F. Znidarsic were taking a steamship trip. Whirlpools form all around the ship. Bohr might say, "Yikes the ocean is draining!" F. Znidarsic would say. "Look at all of the little whirlpools they conserve angular momentum." momentum = velocity * radius Let's us again say Niels Bohr and Znidarsic were looking at atoms. Bohr might say, "Each electron has an angular momentum that is an integer multiple of h" momentum = n*velocity * radius Znidarsic would say, "Yikes the universe is draining!" I did some work on this subject and found that the h is related to the expansion rate of the universe. My idea follows Desecarties argument that gravity is "whirlpools that tend to suck down towards the center" and would be quite a load to present in detail here. All of this "crap" is on my disk...It takes 1 mb to present it. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 07:01:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id GAA12109 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:18:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA11991 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:17:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-1.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-1.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.1]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id BAA21935 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 01:15:12 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199511301415.BAA21935 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 01:17:42 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 29 Nov 95 at 12:26, Puthoff aol.com wrote: > Robin wrote: > > > To put it another way, can an observer located inside such a sphere tell if > > > the sphere is charged or not? > > >Only if he's radioactive. :-> > > I do not see a way (by standard physics) that being radioactive would help. > What do you have in mind? > > Hal This was a simple reference to the putative alteration of half lives which started this thread. Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 07:38:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA07581 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:37:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA07460 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:37:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tLB3p-0005PEC; Thu, 30 Nov 95 09:38 CST Message-Id: Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:38:09 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" In-Reply-To: <9511300029.AA11345 nimbus.anu.edu.au> from "Dave DAVIES" at Nov 30, 95 11:29:56 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dave Davies writes: >> From this you know that light comes in packets, > > No, this only shows that light interacts in packets. Since light is dispatched in packets and received in packets (interacts in packets) both of these statements are correct. There is no quantum limit on the energy of a photon itself. Thermal vibrations at the instant of photon creation can doppler shift the resultant photon (as seen by the observer) so that the photon energy is randomly distributed around the "quantum" average. Motion of the emitting object itself can add to or subtract photon energy by doppler shifting. So a photon can have any energy along the energy continuum. It's just that at the point of interaction, things get done in quantas. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 09:17:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA13105 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:16:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA13013 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:15:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-133.austin.eden.com (net-1-171.austin.eden.com [199.171.21.171]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.1.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id LAA21046 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:13:27 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:13:27 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199511301713.LAA21046 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: little eden.com (Scott Little) Subject: vtx: H-metal experiment update X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Since the last report, we have tried one surface treatment on the Ni rod: etching it in HNO3 This removed about 30mg of Ni (from the ~25 gram rod) and produced a nice, matte finish. However, the heat results are precisely the same as they were before: no sign of excess heat. We have loaded the etched rod overnight at 200C and then cooled it to 188C and applied both mechanical shocks and electrical pulses to the heater coil (still the same heater coil so Ipulse is only 10X Inormal). We have performed several unload-load cycles and attempted stimulation of the effect...all without noticeable result. Once again, our present sensitivity allows us to detect as little as 2.5 watts of excess heat from the rod. I discussed the situation with Ed Storms, who has visited Piantelli in Italy. Ed confirmed that P is withholding a critical secret and that the "patent" we have seen is _not_ enabling! Ed is fairly certain that the secret is a surface treatment and he thinks it is a coating...but not a coating of pure Ni. He has no idea what it should be. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 11:19:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id LAA00339 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:18:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from roimar.imar.ro (roimar.imar.ro [193.226.4.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA00187 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:17:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by roimar (MX V3.1C) id 4903; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:24:42 0200 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:22:47 0200 From: itimc roimar.imar.ro To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Message-ID: <0099A2C8.8D0E1680.4903 roimar> Subject: vtx: weekend Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends, I have troubles with the e-mail and tomorrow is our National Day and it is possible that we cannot communicate, I'll try anyway. Short answers: Robert, Thank you for your kind offer to help me; yes you can, please send me the Potapov patents to: Peter Gluck, Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology, POBox 700, 3400 Cluj-Napoca, Romania Fax 40-64-420042 Scott, I'll prepare a complete answer during the weekend and send it as soon as I can; however do not forget that (and what) Yuri wrote to you. Dieter, I will send my scenario; just a few words now..how can the Russians be deceived by a con-man, who can oblige them to buy inefficient heaters? Years ago we had such a nice discussion about know-how why do you not use what you know? The device has to be adjusted cleverly that's all.. Chris, Please do not emphasize the roles of pumps and water and please very much judge carefully about the responsibility and guilt of Potapov in this first part of the affair, where and when exactly has he promised something and didn't kept his promises (explicit or not). Obviously from 2500 km. my explanation is a hypothesis but be so kind and ask the opinion of Volodya et al. Or find a better one. It isn't always possible to be Fabianic. Best wishes for a fine weekend to all! Peter P.S. In my message of yesterday I made a mistake, obviously viscosity is decreasing when temperature is increasing. Sorry too many troubles these days. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 12:05:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id MAA18850 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 12:04:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA18744 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 12:04:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA13031; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:01:54 -0500 Date: 30 Nov 95 15:03:49 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Piantelli effort Message-ID: <951130200348_100433.1541_BHG74-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Scott, I am truly sorry you are having this trouble. As we have said before, this damnable Piantelli patent isn't worth the paper it's printed on - because it lacks the Secret Formula. It is, in my opinion, inappropriate for a scientist to make a big public fuss about his work and then file deliberately incomplete patents, knowing that others will try to replicate it and fail. He should either put up - or bloody shut up. He appears to want to have the penny *and* the bun. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 12:48:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA06289 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 12:48:12 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA06235 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 12:48:04 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.71] ([204.57.193.71]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA02536 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:10:41 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:49:44 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Dave Davies writes: >>> From this you know that light comes in packets, >> >> No, this only shows that light interacts in packets. > >Since light is dispatched in packets and received in packets (interacts >in packets) both of these statements are correct. > >There is no quantum limit on the energy of a photon itself. Thermal >vibrations at the instant of photon creation can doppler shift the >resultant photon (as seen by the observer) so that the photon energy >is randomly distributed around the "quantum" average. Motion of >the emitting object itself can add to or subtract photon energy by >doppler shifting. > >So a photon can have any energy along the energy continuum. It's just >that at the point of interaction, things get done in quantas. > >-- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - > - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - > - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - Since I wrote the above: "From this you know that light comes in packets", I would like to say that the intent was not to consider quantized energy nor to consider relative motion but merely to point out some evidence for the existence of photons, the particle manifestation of light. I assumed that Dave Davies was pointing out the simultaneous wave nature of photons, so I did not respond to his remark because I concur, and believe there is evidence that all particles have a wave nature. Before arriving at the detector the photon could have been a huge waveform. It is mearly by laws of chance, influenced by the ratio of areas, that the individual particle that is detected experienced the wave collapse at the site of the detector. There is experimental evidence supporting this view regarding photons. It is obtained by generating interference patterns using photons from distant stars, such patterns being generated using telescope mirrors meters apart. That's some big photon. To me this is an indication that particles, even when localized to sub-nulear sizes, are wave like in nature. I think this is still consistent with a wave/particle duality and the creation of light in quantas and the possibility of red shifting and more to the point "that light comes in packets". This is a for the most part normative view, standard pablum, so I suspect there is much agreement here and this is a waste of word space on my part. Sorry. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 13:04:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA13365 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 13:04:49 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA13284 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 13:04:38 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA11565 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:03:37 -0500 Message-Id: <199511302103.AA11565 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:03:37 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Alter Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 16:02:55 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 From: vortex-l-owner Eskimo.com Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 01:17:42 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: Altering of half-lives Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com On 29 Nov 95 at 12:26, Puthoff aol.com wrote: > Robin wrote: > > > To put it another way, can an observer located inside such a sphere tell if > > > the sphere is charged or not? > > >Only if he's radioactive. :-> > > I do not see a way (by standard physics) that being radioactive would help. > What do you have in mind? > > Hal This was a simple reference to the putative alteration of half lives which started this thread. Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 ..................................................................... I still think there is a way to tell. In a positive sphere, for example, + charges gain energy by. energy = force * distance / energy = K |1/rr *dr / energy would be lost by opposite charges. Measuring the ratio of mass between a proton and a electron would give a measure of the energy lost and gained. A change in the ratio of masses tells us we are in the sphere. PS The boss just called me in...He says he can send me to Power-Gen. I would rather go to CETI. I'm to try to get a CETI cell for testing at the GPU lab. I will call CETI tomorrow. See you at power Gen or if I'm luck at CETI. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 14:43:37 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA23725 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:42:50 -0800 Received: from relay5.UU.NET (relay5.UU.NET [192.48.96.15]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA23620 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:42:28 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay5.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzsdm07610; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 17:41:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA25767; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:41:21 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 160840140095334FEPRI; 30 Nov 1995 14:40:14 PST Message-Id: Date: 30 Nov 1995 14:40:14 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Piantelli effort To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/30/95 14:40:07 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/30/95 14:28 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Piantelli effort Chris: I did a cursory search on Piantelli a couple years ago. I found like 5 Biophysics papers he had published. (Note: This was't an IN DEPTH search). I don't think he's a complete fool, but I do agree it seems as though he is holding things close in. I'm not sure just yet if there is some arravice involved, or just Italian/English communications problems. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 15:57:22 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA23284 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:57:18 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA23238 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:57:10 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA18478; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:55:51 -0500 Date: 30 Nov 95 18:54:30 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: Peter's hypothesis Message-ID: <951130235429_100060.173_JHB59-2 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> The question here is whether the game is worth the candle. << I seem to remember in the early days of this list that there were even better versions of the Yusmar giving 10 x ou. Why have we been given only half a unit to play with? In my view we have reached cut-off in this game, its put up or shut up time. Norman. From owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 15:59:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA24226 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:59:36 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA24026 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:59:08 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA01816; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:57:50 -0500 Date: 30 Nov 95 18:54:26 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: St Pete, "completely different" Message-ID: <951130235426_100060.173_JHB59-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dean, >> commercial centrifugal pumps are normally expected to last for 10's of years in continuous use. << >From personal experience, modern good quality centrifugal pumps fail mainly from grit or some foreign body damaging the end seal faces where the water has not been satisfactorily filtered. The wear of the rotor vanes or the volute casing is negligible with clean water as the design is controlled to reduce cavitation to a minimum. What happens inside a more crudely designed or manufactured pump is anybody's guess. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 16:01:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA24725 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:01:04 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA24530 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:00:31 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA19436; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:59:11 -0500 Date: 30 Nov 95 18:00:49 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951130230048_100433.1541_BHG81-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A To:Vortex I said I'd just leave it and let everybody else have the last word, but I sort of had this idea... I still don't see it that there's any evidence for particulate light. For the quantised interaction of matter with light - no question, of course. Consider the thought experiment of a wave-energy machine in the sea. It is arranged so that it will only respond by taking energy from a wave which passes if one frequency component of the wave is present, and will then remove a fixed quantity of energy from the wave. Similarly, a wave generator is made, which will add a precise quantity of energy at a given frequency, adding that energy at that frequency to a passing wave. This appears to be a reasonable analogy, for whatever an analogy is ever worth - not a lot, often, in the quantum domain. But ... I just wondered ... if one had two monochromatic beams combined, then they would surely have an effect at their beat frequency? I think I've got a trifle confused here, I was thinking that if such a beat frequency was the same as the one required by a specific atom to shift its energy state - would the atom 'see' the beat frequency? I realise that finding any two frequencies which would give *exactly* the right one are pretty slim - these atoms are rather picky eaters, no? I had a little hunt for any papers on this, but I couldn't see any. In any case I can feel a strong sensation of having missed something somewhere in that argument. After all, a prism wouldn't split the light to show the beat frequency, would it? I think I'm coming down with this notorious 'flu, head full of feathers, my LH neuron seems to be having trouble linking up with the other one (the one on the right).... Chris Hey, Christmas is coming, let's all be nice to each other? We aren't around long enough to waste any time doing much else. (sheesh, I must be getting that flu) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 16:44:02 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA11848 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:43:44 -0800 Received: from big.aa.net (root big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA11831 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:43:40 -0800 Received: from s3c1p6.aa.net (s3c1p6.aa.net [204.157.220.146]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA03557 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:43:31 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:43:31 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199512010043.QAA03557 big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mwm aa.net (Michael Mandeville) Subject: RE: vtx: Accelerated Transmutation Of Radioactive Elements (altering half-lives) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I've inspected the web-site http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexrad1.html. I have >a few questions and comments for Mr. Mandeville. Michael will do. > >Firstly the professor in question approached the paper with an open mind. His >final report was that someone geographically close to Barker be appointed >to personally inspect the results. Good. >I suggest that when you slag people you know nothing about you mearly demonstrate your own prejudices. My goodness, what on earth on you talking about? What is slag? Who did I alledgeably slag? I have nothing but respect for Barker. All I did was relay what Barker communicated to me, which was, not to take his numbers and formulas in the patents as his final word, that he had revisions. So I was advising the group, some of whom were narrowing in on the numbers, that the numbers were squishy until confirmed by Barker. >suggest you get in touch with Brian Wallace who regularly posts in the >newsgroup sci.physics.fusion under the subject "The Farce of Physics". I >gather he is organizing a conference this year to discuss the issues you >raise. Thank you for the referral. I will certainly follow it up. >Next how did you measure radioactivity? Absolutely important question. Read the experimental log for a mimute in-depth blow by blow description. > >Finally the brief desciption of the experiment is entirely constitent with >blowing the radon trapped in the sample into the atmosphere. This element is >a gas formed as the radioactive daughter product of the decay of Thorium >and Uranium. It is produced in minute amounts that could never be detected by >weighing. On the other hand it's absence would be revealed by a decrease >in the total activity of the sample. Not a bad preliminary hypothesis. Turns out not to be true, though. Radon release just won't account for it. Many experiments were performed. You get both increases and decreases. Bogle that. Why would electrical stimulation release the radon but not baking it for a couple of hours at 1500 f? Besides, the electrically stimulated samples were all SEALED IN PLASTIC CONTAINERS. Radium is HOT. Curie died of cancer from the stuff. Even her cookbooks were contaminated with the stuff. I treated the stuff as if it were THE KISS OF DEATH. All sealed to avoid dusting my lungs. So, sorry, not a chance radon leaked off into the atmosphere. >Martin Sevior > You should get my experimental log to really check it out. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 17:06:21 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA21124 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 17:06:15 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA19683 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 17:02:32 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.68]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA03132 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:25:12 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:04:10 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Piantelli effort Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To:Vortex > >Scott, > >I am truly sorry you are having this trouble. As we have said before, this >damnable Piantelli patent isn't worth the paper it's printed on - because it >lacks the Secret Formula. It is, in my opinion, inappropriate for a >scientist to make a big public fuss about his work and then file deliberately >incomplete patents, knowing that others will try to replicate it and fail. > >He should either put up - or bloody shut up. He appears to want to have the >penny *and* the bun. > >Chris Thank you for opening one of my pet subjects, and peves. I think Piantelli, or anyone, who spawns ideas so compelling that they inspire or impell research, be it benchwork, brainwork, or computerwork, deserves some bit of credit for any resulting contributions to humanity. Names like Pons and Fleishmann come to mind. True, patenting an undisclosed idea is questionable at best. On the other hand, my peve is that organized research is too busy digging under the same old rocks to turn over a lot of new ones. Be it lack of inspiration or fear of risk, the new rocks just do not usually get turned over by institutions unless major prospects appear likely. Perhaps this is an issue with me because the great probability is that the only way I can make any contribution is to give ideas to and motivate others, so I hope doing that will someday result in something of value. The odds are that my modest experiments are not likely to lead to anything significant. As for the reward for such, Edison, though not a scientist but a model rock turner, probably identified the fair price himself: "Invention is 1 percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration." If that's the value of a fully evolved idea, then, if failure to disclose critical information is a fact in the case of Piantelli, a penny on the dollar is way too much, and the bun is out of the question. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 18:10:38 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA15861 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:10:15 -0800 Received: from ra.cs.ohiou.edu (ac817 ra.cs.ohiou.edu [132.235.1.101]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA15794 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:09:59 -0800 Received: (from ac817 localhost) by ra.cs.ohiou.edu (8.7.Beta.11/8.7.Beta.11) id VAA05267 for vortex-L@eskimo.com; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 21:08:17 -0500 (EST) From: Andrew Cantino Message-Id: <199512010208.VAA05267 ra.cs.ohiou.edu> Subject: vtx: new To: vortex-L eskimo.com (vortex-L) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 21:08:15 -2900 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, I'm new on this listserve. What are we talking about? I'm getting things I do not understand. It would help if someone would tell me what the current topics are, and any other important info. I might need. Thanks. Andrew Cantino -- ((( ((( (O,O) (O,O) (-) (-) ----oOOo-----oOOo---oOOo---oOOo--- I I I Andrew Cantino I I ac817 seorf.ohiou.edu I I I ---------------------------------- My home page is at: http://www.eskimo.com/~bilb/freenrgl/andrew.html From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 18:20:10 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA19215 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:19:17 -0800 Received: from ra.cs.ohiou.edu (ac817 ra.cs.ohiou.edu [132.235.1.101]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA19065 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:18:42 -0800 Received: (from ac817 localhost) by ra.cs.ohiou.edu (8.7.Beta.11/8.7.Beta.11) id VAA05774 for vortex-L@eskimo.com; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 21:16:29 -0500 (EST) From: Andrew Cantino Message-Id: <199512010216.VAA05774 ra.cs.ohiou.edu> Subject: vtx: Forcefield To: vortex-L eskimo.com (vortex-L) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 21:16:28 -2900 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I've been thinking about forcefields. (Not like the inpenertrable walls in StarTrek.) More like a magnetic field that not only repels Iron and steel, but also every element. I'm trying to build something like this. Think about how it could be used....Space propulsion, medical, and scientific uses. What if you made a field around the earth, it would repell small meters and space junk. It would keep out subatomic space particals that cause cancer. The cancer levels would drop to a record low. I would appreciate any info on this subject. If anybody has any info of *ANY* kind, it would be usefull. Thank you. Andrew Cantino -- ((( ((( (O,O) (O,O) (-) (-) ----oOOo-----oOOo---oOOo---oOOo--- I I I Andrew Cantino I I ac817 seorf.ohiou.edu I I I ---------------------------------- My home page is at: http://www.eskimo.com/~bilb/freenrgl/andrew.html From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 18:29:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA22630 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:28:35 -0800 Received: from relay5.UU.NET (relay5.UU.NET [192.48.96.15]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA22565 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:28:19 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay5.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzsdi21751; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:36:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA18987; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 13:25:24 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 753124130095334FEPRI; 30 Nov 1995 13:24:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 30 Nov 1995 13:24:13 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 11/30/95 13:24:29 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/30/95 13:00 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Horace: A VERY important question about the nature of matter and particle physics---When an elementary particle is "delocalized" (Like an electron in a "band state") is the CHARGE delocalized also? What's your concept of that? MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 20:07:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id KAA08040 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 10:20:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA07857 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 10:19:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA20514; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 13:18:22 -0500 Date: 30 Nov 95 13:15:23 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: E-mail me questions for CETI Message-ID: <951130181522_72240.1256_EHB130-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: People who have questions they would like me to discuss with CETI should please e-mail them to me directly. I am busy preparing to leave for Anaheim. Plus, it looks like I smashed part of my automobile engine with a rock on a country road, which is another big hassle. It is a long story . . . sigh. I will report on the Power-Gen demo system here directly from Anaheim, and in greater detail in upcoming "Infinite Energy" article. Here is an important and perfectly friendly exchange from s.p.f. today, which I thought I should bring to the attention of readers here. In a discussion of helium detection Martin Sevior wrote: "Regarding the CETI cell, well lets first see if the POWERGEN demo shows excess power production substantially in excess of the SOFE demo . . ." My response: If it works at all it should be hotter than the last one. I just hope nothing gets smashed in transit. It is mighty difficult to transport and set up a thing like this! I hope everyone realizes that, just in case. I hate to get people's expectations raised too far. Regarding the detection of helium, neutrons and other nuclear products, let me say that I discussed that recently with the people at CETI, and I intend to discuss it a lot more next week, in preparation for the Infinite Energy article I am writing. As I have said here, CETI is working with a group of five other labs, including Miley's people at U. Ill. Patterson and the others at CETI do not have the equipment or the in-depth knowledge to measure helium, but their "strategic R&D partners" do, and together they are planning experiments to look for helium. ----------------------- I am nervous as a cat worrying that some vital piece of equipment might get smashed or lost by the airlines. Dennis Cravens assures me that he is bringing two of everything, and he will give himself plenty of time to set up the equipment on Saturday & Sunday. Lord knows I have done that enough times. You schlep your prototype equipment, cables and rented power supplies a million miles from the airport. You cross your fingers and hope for the best. It is always a hassle, and there is always the possibility that the Trade Show Gremlins will defeat you. Dennis sounds cool & confident. Nobody can handle it better than he can. I would be a nervous wreck! I am already, and is isn't even my demo or my company. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 20:07:50 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA13647 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:55:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA13512 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:55:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id HAA26175; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:55:18 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:55:17 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" In-Reply-To: <9511300029.AA11345 nimbus.anu.edu.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Dave DAVIES wrote: > > From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) > > measure the current. Keep reducing the light by adding more slides. You > > keep seeing the resulting cut in half. Eventually you see the current > > reduced to discrete pulses. The more filters you add, the farther apart > > the current pulses are, statistically. From this you know that light comes > > in packets, > > No, this only shows that light interacts in packets. Chris, a couple of questions. Do your doubts about the existance of fields extend to explanations of E/M waves? I always considered the two to be inseparable. The forces between two electromagnets at a distance are caused by "something," and if the current in one of the coils is suddenly changed, the distant one will respond after a time delay, implying that the "something" has a propagation speed and is not instantaneous action at a distance. I mostly understand the fields-based model for this, and I see how it makes some sense to extend the effect to light emission and absorbtion by atoms. Whether the fields or the photons "really" exist is a quantum-mechanical- weirdness question. I too distrust fields, photons, and QM to the extent that I'm confident these ideas will be replaced in future decades by concepts which explain their confusing aspects. Maybe the best view is to use fields as a model while always keeping in mind that it IS a model, while keeping a lookout for anomalies which violate the presumed behavior of the field model, and always keeping aware that we are still dealing with unknown physics. I wonder if the instructors who react badly to questioning of fundamental physics are also somewhat uncomfortable with the unknown. If an instructor LIKES the unknown, that person will see it everywhere, including in the unquestioned "truths" that compose the foundations of current understanding, and probably will have already asked the tough questions which you ask. On the other had, if a person wishes to hide from the unknown behind barriers of beliefs that modern physics is 99% solid, then any questioning of fundamental ideas will pose a threat to those barriers and will be attacked. One last thought: photons and electrons could be called "quanta" rather than "particles." The "quanta" idea implies all the strange wave/particle duality effects of QM, while "photon" implies that hard little billiard balls with real position and real velocity are racing through space. If we think in terms of "photons" and "electrons," then we emphasize the particle nature, and the wave nature of these two will seem strange. So let everyone else use these words, while yourself thinking in terms of "optical quanta" and keeping the door open for later explanations of exactly what "quanta" are. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 20:09:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id JAA28271 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:55:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA27809 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:54:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by power.gpu.com id AA26092 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 12:54:26 -0500 Message-Id: <199511301754.AA26092 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 12:54:26 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Some Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 12:53:45 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:38:09 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" In-Reply-To: <9511300029.AA11345 nimbus.anu.edu.au> from "Dave DAVIES" at Nov 30, 95 11:29:56 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com Dave Davies writes: >> From this you know that light comes in packets, > > No, this only shows that light interacts in packets. Since light is dispatched in packets and received in packets (interacts in packets) both of these statements are correct. There is no quantum limit on the energy of a photon itself. Thermal vibrations at the instant of photon creation can doppler shift the resultant photon (as seen by the observer) so that the photon energy is randomly distributed around the "quantum" average. Motion of the emitting object itself can add to or subtract photon energy by doppler shifting. So a photon can have any energy along the energy continuum. It's just that at the point of interaction, things get done in quantas. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - No! No! No! light comes in packets. There is a device called the stellar interferometer. It is used to measure the diameter of distant stars. STAR . . . . . . . | . \ ....... .|..... . / \ | / mirror screen mirror It collects light from to distant points and electronically combines the image on a screen. The measure of the distance the mirrors can be apart and still get an interference pattern is the length of the proxy wave associated with a photon. Light from distant stars has photon proxy waves that are thousands wide. The only explanatio n ion is that light comes in photons. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 20:10:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) id HAA15021 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:59:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA14732 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:58:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA06293; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 10:57:24 -0500 Date: 30 Nov 95 10:55:27 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Energy dense chemicals, Be versus gasoli Message-ID: <951130155526_72240.1256_EHB137-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner looked around to find the most potent chemical fuel. He came up with: " . . . Be (10.8 kcal/cc). Second best was pentaborane (B5H9 at 10 kcal/cc). Oxidation of Be to BeO produces 10.78 kcal/cc" That sounds like the most potent fuel per unit of volume, but I believe that common petrochemicals do better when compared by units of mass. The specific gravity of Be is 1.8, so we get 25 kilojoules per gram. (10.8 kcal * 4.2 / 1.8 . . . right?) Gasoline yields 42 or 43 MJ per kg (depending on which reference book you look in), which is 43 kilojoules per gram. Considering at Mark Hugo's coke can challenge, Horace is putting metal weighing twice as much as water in his pretend coke can, whereas I am filling mine with gasoline which weighs a little less than water (gasoline floats). The most energy dense fraction of gasoline is octane, C8H18, which yields 1,307 kilocalories per mole. That works out to be 5.4 MJ per 114 grams, or 47 KJ per gram, if I have done my arithmetic right, which is unlikely. A 355 ml coke can full of kerosene will generate 15 MJ of energy. Pour it into a kerosene lamp, light the lamp and you get roughly 100 watts of light and heat. We have to do this in Atlanta frequently, when the power fails. In September it was out for three days! The coke can full of fuel is enough to keep the lamp burning at that rate for 146,000 seconds, or 40 hours. Or, if live in the country and you light the lamp every evening for three or four hours in winter, you will go through a can of fuel every week or two. That sounds about right to me. As I pointed out over on s.p.f., a CETI cell recently ran for 7 weeks with about 1 watt input, 21 watts output. That adds up to roughly 85 MJ excess. When they start up the cell, they pour 200 ml of electrolyte into the reservoir, filling it up. The water level drops a bit as the tubes and cell fill up. Some of the water is carried away in free H2 and O2 gas, an energy deficit. That would add another megajoule I guess, but you have to replenish about 10 ml of water every week so let us ignore that complication and pretend that only 200 ml of water are used. That constitutes almost all of the mass in the cell. Essentially you get from that 200 gram mass is the amount of energy generated by burning 2 KG of gasoline or 3.4 KG of beryllium. Thus, by my rough and ready gasoline standard, the CETI cells have gone ten times beyond the limits of chemistry with *absolutely no sign of any macroscopic chemical change anywhere in the cell.* CETI and others are now running much hotter cells, at excesses larger than 20 watts, and they are still using the 200 ml Dewar reservoirs as far as I know. They will soon report runs going thousands of times beyond the limits of chemistry. To get a sense of this, imagine you light a birthday cake candle, which is a half-gram of paraffin & string. It burns down in 4 or 5 minutes, generating about 10,000 joules at about 30 watts average. (Try this! It is a good reality check.) Now imagine that you light a CF birthday cake candle and it burns at 30 watts for three days. You get tired of watching it burn, you blow it out, and you find that the wick is not a bit scorched and none of the wax has been consumed. There are *no macroscopic changes* to the candle. It looks exactly the way it did before you lit it. Could that be a chemical reaction? Nope! Absolutely not! When something similar happened in ancient Israel, everyone knew it was a miracle. Scientists today ought to have as much intuitive understanding of nature's limits as those ancient people had. I like to compare all energy devices to gasoline powered devices, because we are used to gasoline. Most people have a sense of how far you can go on a gallon (or liter) of gasoline. Japanese people know how much kerosene it takes to keep a room toasty warm in winter. This is a handy, intuitive yardstick, but beware of jumping to conclusions, because it gets complicated quickly. Internal combustion engines have to suck in fantastic quantities of air, and in order to do that they dump out hot exhaust gases. This is energy going to waste. It is a crying shame. Something like a CF heat engine could bring the temperature of the working fluid down much closer to the heat sink temperature, greatly improving Carnot efficiency. A CF cell does not require enormous infusions of air. The best automobiles on the road are only 18 to 20% efficient, according to the DoE "Hydrogen Program Plan." (That is a wonderful little reference book. It has 50 pages or so of energy pathway, efficiency diagrams, and tables. Nice graphs! That is great for people like me who are bad at arithmetic.) For computations like this, I highly recommend John Logajan's Thermodynamic Scorecard. - Jed From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 22:29:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA17161 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 22:29:34 -0800 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA17134 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 22:29:22 -0800 Received: from [204.119.61.215] (ip-salem3-23.teleport.com [204.119.61.215]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA21673 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 22:28:48 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 22:28:48 -0800 From: Charles Cagle Message-Id: <199512010628.WAA21673 desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: singtech mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vtx: What causes charge?? Here's what. Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Mark Hugo asks, > >>One of the most fundamental questions I've always asked is: >>What causes charge? Puthoff reponds: >I'll bet it's structure, scattering ZPE. Ok, guys. Here's what I have to share. First, in any investigations into the nature of the universe the right questions have to be asked. This is key. Mark Hugo up and had the guts to ask one of the right questions so I think it deserves an answer.:-). Understanding the nature of charge, however, isn't a simple question with a simple answer that answers that and only that. To comprehend the nature of charge actually leads to comprehending the nature of the universe itself. To the truly dedicated physicist gaining the solution to the universe is a metaphor for obtaining heaven. No one gets part way in the door. It's almost like a quantum state - either you are in or you are out. You don't get the whole solution by being partway in. This implies you don't build up an evidence file that eventually leads to the conclusion. Instead, you arrive at the conclusion and then spend a great deal of time trying to comprehend it (perhaps while building an evidence file to help keep you grounded in reality). Or ... you leap into the middle of it and then realize there was no logical path getting there (from the outside) but that the whole answer is perfectly logical to the point of being holy. Enough of philosophy - Let's get to the heart of the issue now and therefore to the heart of natural philosophy: What we will play with here is mapping particles to each other on a space-like hypersurface. Let the hypersurface have a topological form of a torus and consider: Daniel Pisello wrote on page 80 of his "Gravitation, Electromagnetism and Quantized Charge - The Einstein Insight" [(c) 1979 Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 78-67493, ISBN 0-250-40286-6]: (Lambda here is the electromagnetic field) "...This may be interpreted to mean that the field does no work on the charge, which is sensible since there is no real distinction between charge and field. Therefore Einstein's argument does not apply and we might have a stable electron even with Lambda = 0. Whether or not Lambda = O, the requirement that the magnetic field be nonvanishing almost everywhere must be imposed as a separate assumption. This requirement is equivalent to the assumption that any physical configuration on a given space like hypersurface is a fiber mapping. A formulation of the unified field theory which makes explicit use of this concept will doubtless be of great value." My (Cagle's) response to Pisello's suggestion is: So what is a fiber mapping? I am supposing it to be expressed by the following example in a perhaps different interpretation of fiber mapping: For a volume of n particles at a given instant we can for any given subject particle, B, within that volume, map to its surface, by means of a normal, another particle within the given volume. n-1 particles can be mapped to B's surface thusly. That mapping is incomplete if we do not know the length of each normal, its instantaneous rate of change, and whether it is increasing or decreasing in the absolute value of its linear dimensionality. Complete mapping of the particles in the volume involves ((n^2)-n)/2 such normals. This is an example of local mapping. Pisello also wrote: "It may be possible to decide among the possibilities of positive, negative and zero Lambda, on the basis of whether or not a stationary unit charge solution exists. For example, one might be able to prove that a stationary solution exists only if Lambda > O. However, it is quite possible that such a stationary solution exists for a range of Lambda which includes 0. In that case one expects that the mass and diameter of the "doughnut" depend on the precise value of Lambda, offering the possibility of connecting the cosmos with the microcosmos quantitatively. It may be that the cosmological term produces a small correction to the solution with Lambda= O." Cagle responds: It might be appropriate to see the universe itself to be a toroidal entity the mapping of n particles to the surface of which actually yields (n^2)-n normals which can exist between n particles on such a surface. This is because of the closed geometry of the torus. This is an example of global mapping because it includes both local (minimum) path and maximum path connections. There are some simple rules and wonderful ideas that can spring out of such simple geometrization. First is that we apprehend the normals to each particle from other every particle to be the vector potentials. Second, we see that for a dynamic universe that exactly n-1 normals to every particle is decreasing in linear magnitude while n-1 normals are increasing in linear magnitude (each particle has 2n-2 normals from n-1 other particles). Third, each particle is apprehended as a nexus point of either the decreasing normals or the increasing normals but not both simultaneously. (This would imply the existence of a 2nd global toroidal hypersurface which is counter oriented but coincident to the 1st.) So, a particle is apprehended either as a sink or source but not both at the same time. The exception to this is when a particle undergoes sufficient acceleration to allow a time dilation so that it gets scattered backwards through time - then we are able to momentarily 'see' both aspects of a particle simultaneously viewing its past and present (or both sides of its light cone; or both of its hypersurface mappings) - this is pair creation. The fact that we can see protons and electrons on the same hypersurface demonstrates that there are fundamental structural differences between the two vortices. (Make yourself models using toroidal currents and poloidal b-fields and v X B products which are the vector potentials to see these differences). Between the two hypersurfaces is the region of zero time. This is equivalent to a statement implying that the history (and future) of all the vector potentials can be known. This is only problematic if one perceives the universe from within the confining dogma of modern QM. Now what we are looking for here is an understanding of the fundamental nature of the electric field. What we see then is that the field is not truly continuous as implied by Maxwell's div E expression but rather consists of real discrete dynamic one dimensional links with other particles in the universe. Those links create and are the fundamental 'stuff' of the basic charged particle. The links are purely geometric. Particles propagate along those links so that we see those links (which are properly the vector potentials) as the media of propagation of light and matter. The universe from this viewpoint is a hologram web collectivity of connections between the vortical elements or entities which we call charged particles. These global connections reify the idea of the invariance of charge from unity. Each individual charged particle can be interpreted as consisting of n-1 decreasing (or increasing (in linear magnitude), depending upon the sign) links. However, there are phenomena which can upset this invariance. Here's how. Suppose that s number of leptons (electrons, in this case) were to join together into a single toroidal structure or super particle. Once they have merged into a single vortex n will decrease (globally and instantly) and be changed to n-s+1 (which is now the new n). When an event such as this occurs we find a very real local violation of the conservation of charge but we see that globally the unit charge is still n-1 vectors to a surface (albeit n has changed from its previous value). One might remark that we are yet to see these violations of conservation of charge while I would respond that superconduction is one such violation and that other violations abound around us and that ordinary electromagnetic emissions are evidence of such violations which occurs as a necessary consequence of the global regeometrization of the universe necessitated by the super-union of s number of particles. This sort of super-union occurs during normal conduction. These ideas, of course, must rely upon the concept that Coulomb's Law is, in fact, a special case and that there exists a 'general case' which describes the interaction of charged particles under all circumstances. This 'general case' mandates that when the de Broglie wavelengths of like charged particles are greater than the interparticle distance that an attractive interaction occurs contrary or exactly opposite to the expected interaction. Likewise, between oppositely charged particles we see a repulsive interaction occurring when the de Broglie wavelengths of the two charges are greater than the interparticle distance. The 'general case' would be the standard Coulomb's Law but with the addition of an extra multiplicative term, R(sub m), which has one of two possible values of 1 or -1, so thus acts as an inverting operator which is only activated as determined by the de Broglie wavelength interparticle distance relationship previously mentioned. This means that Coulomb's Law as a special case is operative only when there is relative motion between the interacting charges. In our very thermal world it is difficult (but not impossible) to observe situations where this is not true. Using: V(av)= sqrt((3kT)/m) where k = Boltzmann's constant, T= absolute temperature, and m = mass, we can see that the average velocity of a CO2 molecule (for an example) is approximately 400 m/sec. at 20 degree C. Using the same formula we can estimate an electron velocity at 115,000 m/sec at the same temperature. Indeed, at .01 Kelvin the average electron velocity is 674 m/sec. so we see that our world is very dynamic and mostly conducive to observing 'normal' (Coulomb's Law consistent) charged particle interactions. However, for a reasonably sized set of particles there exists for any selected particle B in the set, for a small increment of time, a finite number p of other particles which are in the same rest frame (as defined by having de Broglie wavelengths >= the interparticle distance) so that R(sub m)= -1. Let's look at the 'general case'. F= k((Q1*Q2)/(r^2))*R(sub m) where R(sub m)=1 if lambda < interparticle distance (d (sub p)) and R(sub m)= -1 if lambda >= interparticle distance (d (sub p)) k = contant of proportionality = 9 x 10-9 (nt-m^2)/(coul^2) (different lambda here - now as de Broglie wavelength >> lambda = h/(mv)) This 'general case' equation then can serve not only to describe charged particle interactions but also can suffice to cover superconduction, Bose-Einstein Condensates, the strong force, and gravity at the same time. Indeed the overlapping of quantum states (which not being electromagnetic in nature can propogate globally in zero time) reduces the r variable to near zero regardless of the physical distance separating interacting particles. (The fact that it is not zero implies finite geometrical size to fundamental particles). This implies that two protons, for example, that physically might be many light years apart can strongly attractively interact (with a force equivalent to the strong force interaction) if they briefly exist in the same rest frame. We could consider that there is a finite number, psi, of quantum states that the temporary members of which all overlap and can interact according to the 'general case' where R(sub m) =-1. Thus all overlapping members which are of the same charge will attractively interact while overlapping members which are of opposite charge will repulsively interact. Because protons are considerably more massive than electrons we see an asymmetry of motions within each temporary subgroup which can be seen as the asymmetry associated with gravity. For example, if a proton and an electron repulsively interact, the electron, because of momentum conservation gets a velocity boost. Overall the group will, for a short period of time, self gravitate with a force equivalent to the strong force. But the likelihood is that, in a very small increment of time, each member of the group will be perturbed to other quantum states which will repeat the process. The net effect on the universe is an overall gravitation or universal gravitation. Thus we come to a quantum gravity without large objects. However, this isn't the whole picture either. As to Puthoff's response: "I'll bet it's structure, scattering ZPE." to Hugo's query as to the cause of charge I can only concur from the viewpoint that a source or a sink is related to the dynamics of the entire universe. We can see from this analysis that it would take the square of the entire energy of the universe to absolutely co-locate a source and a sink. However, we can closely associate a source and a sink - and we see such close associations in the compound vortical toroidal particles which we refer to as neutrons. We can also see that the net energy of the universe is zero and that time must come to a complete stop in the hearts (cores) of all particles. Where there is no time there is no dimensionality likewise and from that state comes gravity itself which is expressed as the inexorable bias of the two hypersurfaces which produce everything and pull everything together. {More notes on the field: William Beaty and Chris were discussing the 'field' concept recently so I hope this supplies some fuel also for that discussion. The field is a derived concept that has outlived its usefulness. The field is actually derived from the potentials by differentiations. That mathematical process reduces the degree of the polynomial and in the process vital information is irretrievably lost. The potentials are richer in properties than the fields and should be interpreted as I have stated (dynamic one-dimensional relationships between vortices). And recall the inherent fallacy of Maxwell's div E expression as mentioned above? So forget the field - it has been replaced by something more concrete. As a concept it never served us well, but it served us right -- for believing in it!!:-)} Moreover, we can also see from the 'general case' equation as expressed above that there is implicit a means of catalyzing nuclear fusion reactions which is directly related to inducing specific non-dyanamic relationships between ionized candidate nuclear fusion fuel nuclei. Best Regards, Charles Cagle Singularity Technologies, Inc. 1640 Oak Grove Road, N.W. Salem, OR 97304 503/362-7781 From owner-vortex-l eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 23:48:54 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA24226 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:59:36 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA24026 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:59:08 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA01816; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:57:50 -0500 Date: 30 Nov 95 18:54:26 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: St Pete, "completely different" Message-ID: <951130235426_100060.173_JHB59-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dean, >> commercial centrifugal pumps are normally expected to last for 10's of years in continuous use. << >From personal experience, modern good quality centrifugal pumps fail mainly from grit or some foreign body damaging the end seal faces where the water has not been satisfactorily filtered. The wear of the rotor vanes or the volute casing is negligible with clean water as the design is controlled to reduce cavitation to a minimum. What happens inside a more crudely designed or manufactured pump is anybody's guess. Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 23:54:25 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA24725 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:01:04 -0800 Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA24530 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:00:31 -0800 Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA19436; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:59:11 -0500 Date: 30 Nov 95 18:00:49 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951130230048_100433.1541_BHG81-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex I said I'd just leave it and let everybody else have the last word, but I sort of had this idea... I still don't see it that there's any evidence for particulate light. For the quantised interaction of matter with light - no question, of course. Consider the thought experiment of a wave-energy machine in the sea. It is arranged so that it will only respond by taking energy from a wave which passes if one frequency component of the wave is present, and will then remove a fixed quantity of energy from the wave. Similarly, a wave generator is made, which will add a precise quantity of energy at a given frequency, adding that energy at that frequency to a passing wave. This appears to be a reasonable analogy, for whatever an analogy is ever worth - not a lot, often, in the quantum domain. But ... I just wondered ... if one had two monochromatic beams combined, then they would surely have an effect at their beat frequency? I think I've got a trifle confused here, I was thinking that if such a beat frequency was the same as the one required by a specific atom to shift its energy state - would the atom 'see' the beat frequency? I realise that finding any two frequencies which would give *exactly* the right one are pretty slim - these atoms are rather picky eaters, no? I had a little hunt for any papers on this, but I couldn't see any. In any case I can feel a strong sensation of having missed something somewhere in that argument. After all, a prism wouldn't split the light to show the beat frequency, would it? I think I'm coming down with this notorious 'flu, head full of feathers, my LH neuron seems to be having trouble linking up with the other one (the one on the right).... Chris Hey, Christmas is coming, let's all be nice to each other? We aren't around long enough to waste any time doing much else. (sheesh, I must be getting that flu) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Thu Nov 30 23:59:03 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA12817 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 23:59:01 -0800 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA12802 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 23:58:57 -0800 Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA04778; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:59:17 +0100 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:59:17 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, John Logajan wrote: [...] > [...] things get done in quantas. Nice of you to give a plug for the Australian airline. But John, they spell themselves Qantas - no "u". -- Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 04:18:34 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id EAA00948 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 04:18:31 -0800 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA00923 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 04:18:26 -0800 Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA15797; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:17:07 -0500 Date: 01 Dec 95 07:19:52 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951201121951_100433.1541_BHG51-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Bill asks: "Do your doubts about the existance of fields extend to explanations of E/M waves? I always considered the two to be inseparable. The forces between two electromagnets at a distance are caused by "something," and if the current in one of the coils is suddenly changed, the distant one will respond after a time delay, implying that the "something" has a propagation speed and is not instantaneous action at a distance." Of course distant action is delayed. What I'm saying (but not very loudly) is that science is fundamentally illogical. It *requires* hypotheses to be made, it erects what it knows perfectly well is a fantasy, then applies tests to it to see whether the fantasy fits well with reality. The logical, "Holmesian" approach is to gather every scrap of data and then produce a conclusion. The essential nature of science is that it requires Ockham's Razor to be violated at every turn. That's not an attack on science. What will lead you to fresh experiment if you do it any other way? Holmes could operate in a 'closed' universe, science has to work in an open one. But what happens is that people fall so much in love with a model that they see it as having objective reality. Newton by contrast refused to hypothesise, he was content to describe. In the case of the propagation of the effect of an electromagnet, it is (in logic) sufficient to say that the effect appears to propagate at light speed. It is fair to then ask if anything physical does propagate, and it is fair to ask whether it propagates through something. But it is not necessary to suggest that any model you erect for those purposes has physical reality, *unless* experiment can show that your model is *required* to explain the experiment. It's not enough to declare that 'distant action' is spooky! Once we start to hear models being taught as being physically real without showing that they are necessary, science and fantasy become confused. You know as well as I do that if you ask the average Joe Physicist what happens in a Faraday disc when the magnet spins, he will probably give the wrong answer. The theory isn't obvious, and the 1830 experiments aren't in the textbooks. Ask him whether a cylinder in a radial field is analogous to a disk in a straight one (as my textbook says it is), and he may well get very muddled. I support that idea here recently that the basic set of experiments in elctromagnetism be manufactured as a teaching aid, so as to give people a fundamental grounding in reality. You'd be good at doing that! One consequence of the physicists' lack of understanding of basic electromagnetism is that whackos with wild ideas about (eg) voltage increase on a segmented Faraday disc can get away with all kinds of nonsense. I've checked several of those whacko notions, and they are all rubbish - just as bad as the textbooks!! On propagation of waves and fields and stuff, well, the experiment I really desperately would like to see is whether c is invariant with direction well away from Earth. There are enough funny results, starting with Morley's altitude experiments, to warrant that. Even a high-altitude NASA balloon test would be great to settle that one. No chance I'll ever see it done, I suppose, but wouldn't it be fun? Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 05:11:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA10591 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 05:11:53 -0800 Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA10577 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 05:11:48 -0800 Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id IAA24790; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:10:30 -0500 Date: 01 Dec 95 08:06:34 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: INFINITE ENERGY Vol.1, No.4 Mailed Message-ID: <951201130633_76570.2270_FHU48-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Colleagues: In the last week of November, Infinite Energy Volume 1, Number 4 was sent out via bulk mail (and by first class mail to dozens of notable VIPs and cold fusion colleagues). Contents are listed below. Infinite Energy Number 5 will be mailed in early January 1996. Subscription renewals for Infinite Energy magazine's 2nd year of six-issues/year are already being accepted. (All back issues are available.) Issue #5 will feature a complete report on the CETI demonstration power cell at Power Gen '95 in Anaheim, California (December 5-7, 1995), as well as several other remarkable developments that are in the works. Though Infinite Energy is carried by many Barnes & Nobles stores and other fine book/magazine distributors, quantities available are not as large as they will be in coming months. Eugene Mallove, author of Fire from Ice: Searching for the Truth Behind the Cold Fusion Furor (John Wiley & Sons, 1991) will be giving a Cold Fusion/New Energy Seminar at Rutgers University (Continuing Education Center), Sunday, December 10, 1995, 1:00 to 4:00. (Contact Art Wagner: 908-873-8429 for details). Video tapes of working cold fusion power systems will be shown at the seminar. Sincerely, Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D., Editor-in-Chief and Publisher INFINITE ENERGY: Cold Fusion and New Energy Technnology (MAGAZINE) Cold Fusion Technology P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Fax: 603-224-5975 Phone: 603-228-4516 ***************************************************************************** INFINITE ENERGY is an international technical magazine with outreach to the general public as well. It is written at the technical level of Scientific American or Science News. To maintain the highest editorial standards, it is written and edited by scientists, engineers, and expert journalists. It is aimed at pioneering scientists, engineers, industrialists, and investors who are entering an exciting new R&D area. ****************************************************************************** Table of Contents for Infinite Energy Vol.1, No.4, Sept./Oct. 1995 Breaking Through, Editorial 3 "Ignition! We Have lift-off!" Letters 5 Pons & Fleischmann Patent to be Approved in Europe 6 80-to-1 Cold Fusion Demo at HF Meeting! Jed Rothwell 8 Dr. Mizuno's Solid-State Cold Fusion (Technical Paper) Tadahiko Mizuno, et al 9 Briefs 12 FEATURES Can Cold Fusion Be Catalyzed by Fractionally Charged Ions? Dr. Joseph L . McKibben 14 (Los Alamos National Laboratory, retired) The Piantelli Patent (The complete text) F. Piantelli, et al 24 ICCF5 Talk by Dr. Edmund Storms 32 Magnetic Motor- U.S. #5,436,518 40 Teruo Kawai, Assigned to Nihon-Riken, Tokyo New Products -Acoustic Levitation 42 Dr. David Deak Calendar 46 Washington Watch 48 COMMENTARY The New Scientific Age Dr. Brian O'Leary 49 What's All the Static? Jeffery Kooistra 51 Vision 2020 "Cold Fusion" Dr. M. Srinivasan 52 Review "Too Close to the Sun" (CBC/BBC Cold Fusion Documentary) David Moon 53 Nucleon Cluster Structures Ronald Brightsen 55 Potapov's Thermogenerator -Update Translations, Christopher Bird 56 *********************************************************** Table of Contents for INFINITE ENERGY #1 (April/May 1995) ICCF5 Program Welcome by Arthur C. Clarke 1 Breaking Through, Editorial 3 "Why 'Infinite Energy'?" Letters 5 Remembering Julian Schwinger Eugene F. Mallove 9 Cold Fusion Theory: A Brief History of Mine Julian Schwinger 10 Very Hot Cold Fusion in Japan: Jed Rothwell 14 Cell Testing at Clean Energy Technologies Bruce Klein and Dennis Cravens 18 COMMENTARY Cold Fusion: From Reasons to Doubt to Reasons to Believe Edmund Storms 23 Why Technology First Peter Glueck 26 The Energy Crisis Geoff Rohde 30 A Warm Welcome to Infinite Energy Hal Fox 31 The Dawning of the New Energy Age Andrew Rothovius 31 A "Micro-fusion" Reactor: Nuclear Reactions "in the cold" by ultrasonic cavitation Tom Benson 33 EXPERIMENTER'S CORNER >From a Sea of Water to a Sea of Energy Michael T. Huffman 38 Thermocouple Hints 45 EarthTech International Resources 45 Calendar 45 Cold Fusion in a "Ying Cell" and Probability Enhancement by Boson Stimulation Nelson Ying and Charles W. Shults III 46 Japan TV Program Magnetism Revelation 48 Washington Watch 50 ********************************************************* Table of Contents for INFINITE ENERGY #2 (May/June 1995) Breaking Through, Editorial 3 "Cold Fusion Goes Commercial..." Letters 5 The Fifth International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF5)-Highlights Jed Rothwell 7 ICCF5 Participating Organizations Akira Kawasaki 17 Flowing Electrolyte Calorimetry Dennis Cravens 18 Comments on Dr. Cravens' Work Jed Rothwell 22 A Development Approach for Cold Fusion Bruce Klein 27 Alchemy Nightmare: Skeptic Finds Heavy Element Transmutation in Experiment Eugene Mallove 30 Energy Bombshell from Moldova-SPECIAL REPORT Water Fuel Device Conquers the Marketplace Christopher P. Tinsley 33 On One of the Energy Generation Mechanisms in Unitary Quantum Mechanics Lev G. Sapogin 38 Magnetic Resonance Amplifier Controversy Norman Wootan, Hal Puthoff 40 COMMENTARY Cold Fusion in 2001 and Beyond: Lessons from High Tech Robert W. Horst 44 Proposal for Designing a Cold Fusion Reactor and its Commercialization Lev G. Sapogin 47 PATENT FILE The MIT Cold Fusion Patent #5,411,654 EXPERIMENTER'S CORNER Self-Heated Pd Wire in H2/D2: Nuclear Effects? M. Srinivasan et al 50 Briefs 52 Calendar 46 Washington Watch 54 ******************************************* Table of Contents for Infinite Energy Vol.1, No.3, July/August 1995 Breaking Through, Editorial 3 "The Tip of an Iceberg" Letters 5 Low-Energy Transmutation Conference at Texas A&M Hal Fox 8 Application of the Nucleon Cluster Model to Experimental Results Ronald A. Brightsen, Randy Davis 13 Excess Heat in Cavitation Devices: Worldwide Testing and Reports Scott Little, Jeff Driscoll, Eugene Mallove, et al 16 Recent Scientific Abstracts of Note 33 Mechanisms of a Disobedient Science David Moon 34 Briefs 42 Washington Watch 43 Calendar 44 Hypothesis for Cold Fusion of Hydrogen Isotopes Within Metal Matrices Marshall Dudley 45 COMMENTARY How to Miss the Energy Boat Hal Fox 46 NEW PRODUCTS JET Technology; Nova Resources Group 47 EXPERIMENTER'S CORNER Cold Fusion: A Study Involving the Fusion of Ions Michael Belcher 48 Table-Top Sonoluminescence Scott Little 51 REVIEW "A Dialogue on Chemically Induced Nuclear Effects" Jed Rothwell A Brief History of a Book Eugene Mallove 58 ***************************************************** From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 05:33:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA15400 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 05:33:31 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA15359 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 05:33:23 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.70]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id GAA04796 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 06:56:24 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 04:35:10 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >*** Reply to note of 11/30/95 13:00 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" >Horace: A VERY important question about the nature of matter and particle >physics---When an elementary particle is "delocalized" (Like an electron >in a "band state") is the CHARGE delocalized also? What's your concept >of that? MDH Yes, that is how I visualize it, except the *effect* of the charge is an average. The charge of an electron in a particular volume is the integral of the Schroedinger Equation (psi) function squared times the unit charge of the electron. The complete integral of an electron's psi function gives an average point location of the charge, or center of charge (like center of gravity), for use in calculating electrostatic forces. This is similarly true of other charged particles, like the proton. To me this provides some explanation for why, for example, in a ground state H atom no radiation occurs, namely that the centers of charge are co-located, there *is* no relative motion. I belive there is some support for a delocalized charge concept from solid state physics. For example, in an insulator in an electrostatic field the electron orbitals become elongated in the direction of the field. The atom's electric dipole moment grows to match the field and create balance. The dipole moment is calculated as the integral of the electrostatic force vectors over the SE (psi) function squared, i.e. the time independent phase factor, or probability amplitude. It seems to me the "particle is everywhere simultaneously" interpretation of QM is perfectly valid whenever there is a time independent solution to the SE, and approximately true when perturbations of boundary conditions are sufficiently slow to prevent quantum state changes. There are various perfectly valid interpretations of QM. Different interpretations help understanding in different situations, but reality is reality all the same, regardless of our interpretation. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 06:23:59 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA28703 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 06:23:42 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA28650 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 06:23:31 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.70]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id HAA04901 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:46:26 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 05:25:11 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Energy dense chemicals, Be versus gasoli Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Horace Heffner looked around to find the most potent chemical fuel. He came up >with: > > " . . . Be (10.8 kcal/cc). Second best was pentaborane (B5H9 at 10 > kcal/cc). Oxidation of Be to BeO produces 10.78 kcal/cc" > >That sounds like the most potent fuel per unit of volume, but I believe that >common petrochemicals do better when compared by units of mass. The specific Referee! 15 yard penalty for change of problem definition! 8^) >gravity of Be is 1.8, so we get 25 kilojoules per gram. (10.8 kcal * 4.2 / 1.8 >. . . right?) Gasoline yields 42 or 43 MJ per kg (depending on which reference >book you look in), which is 43 kilojoules per gram. Considering at Mark Hugo's >coke can challenge, Horace is putting metal weighing twice as much as water in >his pretend coke can, whereas I am filling mine with gasoline which weighs a >little less than water (gasoline floats). 10 yard penalty for inclusion of irrelevent variable in objective function! 8^) > >The most energy dense fraction of gasoline is octane, C8H18, which yields >1,307 kilocalories per mole. That works out to be 5.4 MJ per 114 grams, or 47 >KJ per gram, if I have done my arithmetic right, which is unlikely. > >A 355 ml coke can full of kerosene will generate 15 MJ of energy. Pour it into 5 yard penalty for failure to state density of .7 g/ml! 8^) That's 248.5 g. in the can. At (5470.5 kJ/mol)/(114.231 g/mol) that's 47.89 kJ/g, or 11,900 kJ in the can. That's (11,900 kJ)(.239 cal/J) = 2844 kcal in the can. My number for Be in the can was 3834 kcal, or 34 percent more than yours! 5 yard penalty for failure to recognize less energy in the can! 8^) [snip] > >For computations like this, I highly recommend John Logajan's Thermodynamic >Scorecard. I'll have to check that out. Thanks. > >- Jed Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 07:17:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA16184 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:16:53 -0800 Received: from relay2.UU.NET (relay2.UU.NET [192.48.96.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA16128 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:16:41 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzsga28327; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:14:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA21663; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:13:22 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 840612070095335FEPRI; 01 Dec 1995 07:12:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 01 Dec 1995 07:12:07 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: Repeating the challenge: To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 12/01/95 07:12:05 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/30/95 20:57 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: Repeating the challenge: Thanks Horace: Someone willing to put down some realistic numbers, and say that there are bounds. With regard the "pumping" of energy, I think I should have m ade clear we evaluate this control volume to be within a "perfect" insulator. I would also note that the Patterson devices have been run inside of Dewars, which should be fairly good "Faraday" cages, because of the silvering on the inside. I like that 221 day number too! I.e., let's take the most RIDICULAS senerio and work it out! If they run it for a year, with some sort of "quality assured" observation, then we get into a "impossible to rationalize realm. It may be silly, but I had an old engineering prof. who always said, "Stretch the bounds of the situation to where it gets silly/stupid, and you've found your ultimate limits, work backwards from that!" From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 07:27:52 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA19511 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:27:27 -0800 Received: from relay2.UU.NET (relay2.UU.NET [192.48.96.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA19381 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:27:01 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzsgb00319; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:25:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA26164; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:25:47 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 012524070095335FEPRI; 01 Dec 1995 07:24:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 01 Dec 1995 07:24:07 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: Energy dense chemicals, Be versus gasoli To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 12/01/95 07:24:23 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/30/95 20:21 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Energy dense chemicals, Be versus gasoli Thanks Jed R. I'm not so sure as to the levels you are claiming CETI has, just yet. But the analysis is similar to what I have figured. I.e., you get into a 5 to 20 watt output, and you start running it for 10 to 40 days at a time, you start going far beyond chemical. I think the problem here is the classic one of people understanding that it doesn't matter if the the energ y comes out at a 5 degree C rise on a mass flow of 100 ml of water per hour, for 1000 hours, or if it comes from a candle heating air with a 500 degree C rise for 1/2 an hour---- that the same ENERGY may be involved. And, as you say, in the heated water flow comparison, when you get a long enough run from the "test cell", you get to the point where you really have to "burn the candle at both ends" to get the effect from chemistry. (Please excuse the loose language here, and the fun with the play on words.) From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 07:34:01 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA21439 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:33:48 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA21292 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:33:19 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.75]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA05029 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:55:19 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 06:34:02 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>*** Reply to note of 11/30/95 13:00 >>From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >>Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" >>Horace: A VERY important question about the nature of matter and particle >>physics---When an elementary particle is "delocalized" (Like an electron >>in a "band state") is the CHARGE delocalized also? What's your concept >>of that? MDH > >Yes, that is how I visualize it, except the *effect* of the charge is an >average. The charge of an electron in a particular volume is the integral >of the Schroedinger Equation (psi) function squared times the unit charge >of the electron. The complete integral of an electron's psi function gives >an average point location of the charge, or center of charge (like center >of gravity), for use in calculating electrostatic forces. This is similarly >true of other charged particles, like the proton. To me this provides some >explanation for why, for example, in a ground state H atom no radiation >occurs, namely that the centers of charge are co-located, there *is* no >relative motion. > >I belive there is some support for a delocalized charge concept from solid >state physics. For example, in an insulator in an electrostatic field the >electron orbitals become elongated in the direction of the field. The >atom's electric dipole moment grows to match the field and create balance. >The dipole moment is calculated as the integral of the electrostatic force >vectors over the SE (psi) function squared, i.e. the time independent phase >factor, or probability amplitude. It seems to me the "particle is >everywhere simultaneously" interpretation of QM is perfectly valid whenever >there is a time independent solution to the SE, and approximately true when >perturbations of boundary conditions are sufficiently slow to prevent >quantum state changes. There are various perfectly valid interpretations >of QM. Different interpretations help understanding in different >situations, but reality is reality all the same, regardless of our >interpretation. > One point of clarification. As quantum waveforms overlap, I see the resulting magnitude of the net force reducing. This is because the volume integral of force begins to include significant negative components from the part of the particle wave function "on the other side" of the interacting particle. The faster an electron begins it's approach to a nucleus, the less the waveform overlap, the closer it can approach. If quantum waveform overlap effects were not real, then point sized electrons, at near zero initial velocity, falling into a nucleus, would unleash extreme amounts of high energy xrays, an effect we don't see. This overlap effect is the basis for the ball lighning formation and sub-orbital concepts posted here earlier. Is that why you asked me? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 07:58:35 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA29758 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:58:24 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA29709 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:58:13 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.75]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA05094 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 09:21:12 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 06:59:55 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Repeating the challenge: Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >*** Reply to note of 11/30/95 20:57 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Re: vtx: Repeating the challenge: >Thanks Horace: Someone willing to put down some realistic numbers, and say that > there are bounds. With regard the "pumping" of energy, I think I should have m >ade clear we evaluate this control volume to be within a "perfect" insulator. I > would also note that the Patterson devices have been run inside of Dewars, >which should be fairly good "Faraday" cages, because of the silvering on the >inside. I like that 221 day number too! I.e., let's take the most RIDICULAS >senerio and work it out! If they run it for a year, with some sort of "quality >assured" observation, then we get into a "impossible to rationalize realm. It >may be silly, but I had an old engineering prof. who always said, "Stretch the > >bounds of the situation to where it gets silly/stupid, and you've found your >ultimate limits, work backwards from that!" I just want to be on record that I don't see the 221 days as meaningful. If the can were bigger, or the flow rate less, that number might vary several orders of magnitude. The criteria that is established (if all assumptions & calculations are correct) is 10.78 kcal/cc, assuming required the oxidizer is supplied in the fluid and sufficient volume is available for the ash. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 08:36:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA12692 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:36:02 -0800 Received: from mail04.mail.aol.com (mail04.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.53]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA12641 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:35:52 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Received: by mail04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA10774 for vortex-l eskimo.com; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:34:33 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:34:33 -0500 Message-ID: <951201113432_62263143 mail04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark Hugo asks: "If the wavefunction of a charged particle (e.g., electron) is spread out, is its charge also?" My two cents worth: From the vacuum-fluctuation model (ZPE) the wave function is spread out because it represents the uncertainty of just where the particle is, but wherever it is, its charge is located there as a point. Hal Puthoff From fznidarsic gpu.com Fri Dec 1 11:39:21 1995 Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA19897 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:39:11 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA10510 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 1 Dec 1995 14:37:48 -0500 Message-Id: <199512011937.AA10510 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 1 Dec 1995 14:37:48 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM Subject: Re: vtx: "Some Date: Fri, 01 Dec 95 14:35:57 EST Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L-OWNER ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 From: vortex-l-owner Eskimo.com From: Pothook Al.com Date: Fir, 1 Dec 1995 11:34:33 -0500 To: vortex-l Eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vt.: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l Eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l Eskimo.com Mark Hug asks: "If the wave function of a charged particle (e.g., electron) is spread out, is its charge also?" My two cents worth: From the vacuum-fluctuation model (PE) the wave function is spread out because it represents the uncertainty of just where the particle is, but wherever it is, its charge is located there as a point. Hal Puthoff .......................................................................... I agree...the only thing I am saying is that a point has a quantum of capacitance associated with it...otherwise the electrical charge would possess in infinite amount of energy. sphere -------------- Due to capacitative linkages | | / | a point is coupled to the sphere. | \|/ | Likewise a point is coupled to the | *point | rest of the universe by a the same | /| \ | capacitive interaction. | \ | --------------- Ps I got an invite from Jim Reading to a private showing of the CETI cell next Wednesday at the Hilton...I hope I can get tickets in time and that nothing prevents me from going.... Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 11:52:57 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA25489 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:52:52 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA25125 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:52:04 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.75] ([204.57.193.75]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA05800 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 13:15:08 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:53:47 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Mark Hugo asks: "If the wavefunction of a charged particle (e.g., electron) >is spread out, is its charge also?" > >My two cents worth: From the vacuum-fluctuation model (ZPE) the wave >function is spread out because it represents the uncertainty of just where >the particle is, but wherever it is, its charge is located there as a point. > >Hal Puthoff If this model were correct, if low energy electrons always maintain a point nature but we just can't tell where they are, wouldn't a low voltage arc, or flourescent light, produce a significant amount of high voltage x-rays, especially in hydrogen? It seems like the top end of the spectrum is just not there to support the idea that a large force is maintained as the electron closely approaches the nucleus. It is only when an electron begins an approach to the nucleus with high energies that scattering information provides meaning regarding the nucleus, and high energy x-rays are emitted, true? A computer simulation would be a good way to esitmate predictions I would think, so predictions can be compared to experimental data and used for experimental design. I would be interrested in writing a simple stochastic computer model of free electron interaction with a free proton. From a sampled distribution of electron velocities and directions at a specified starting distance (of say 2 A) from the proton, to simulate the expected interaction by calculating approach paths, photon emissions, and final electron velocities. From such a simulation, repeated a sufficient number of times, it should be possible to predict electron energy distribution changes and spectra of photon emissions. A simplified (no magnetic effects, but including relativistic mass) newtonian approach would be trivial to do, except for the photon emission part. I just don't know how to simulate when a photon will be emitted and what wavelength will be emitted. A QM simulation would be a lot more difficult. There probably is computer code around to do this kind of thing, or at least subprogram libraries for SE evaluation, etc. Doing a QM simulation has problems right off because the starting conditons would have to be fuzzy, or can you use the interpretation that measuring is what precludes knowing position and momentum, etc., so go ahead and do lots of simulations and the fuzziness requirement can be derived/satisfied from the sampled starting distributions? I would be willing to post code and results, etc. I am using a Mac PowerPC, and the only language I have at the moment is SYMANTEC C++, a language with which I am just getting familiar. I have BASIC on a Mac Classic also. My main handicap is lack of math and physics background to do a sufficient analysis. My approaching this is Quixotic, but a year ago I didn't know much of anything about any of this stuff. Any journey requires a first step, even a journey of blunders. Any suggestions anyone? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 14:57:53 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA14343 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 14:56:35 -0800 Received: from mbunix.mitre.org (mbunix.mitre.org [129.83.20.100]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA14277 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 14:56:22 -0800 Received: from spectre.mitre.org (spectre.mitre.org [129.83.61.124]) by mbunix.mitre.org (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id RAA26710 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 17:55:09 -0500 Received: from localhost (eachus localhost) by spectre.mitre.org (8.6.4/8.6.4) id RAA10942; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 17:55:09 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 17:55:09 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199512012255.RAA10942 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: (hheffner@anc.ak.net) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner writes: > If this model were correct, if low energy electrons always > maintain a point nature but we just can't tell where they are, > wouldn't a low voltage arc, or flourescent light, produce a > significant amount of high voltage x-rays, especially in hydrogen? Of course, and it does. But there are two factors that reduce the output substantially. First, plasmas are very opaque, especially at their own emission lines. At 1 atmosphere, I've measured extinctions in the core of arcs at greater than 90% per mm in the visible, and higher in the ultraviolet. The models I used for calculating emission patterns were very close to treating the surface of the plasma as the effective source. Second when radation is absorbed and reemitted in a plasma, it is preferentially reradiated in the emission lines. So unless you have a VERY hot and very low density plasma, all you see is the surface temperature. The same effect happens in the sun, and how many million years does it take for the photons to get out? (Of course the neutrinos get through immediately, which is why the neutrino deficit is so troubling.) Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 19:23:15 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA25606 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 19:22:40 -0800 Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA25589 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 19:22:37 -0800 Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tLiZK-0004vbC; Fri, 1 Dec 95 21:24 CST Message-Id: Subject: vtx: Archive lost To: vortex-l eskimo.com (vortex-l) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 21:24:54 -0600 (CST) From: "John Logajan" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 489 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A disk crash on our web server wiped out the vortex-l archive for all of last month up to the present. At over 1 megabytes per month the enterprise was exceeding my limit for disk space anyway, so I have offloaded the previous three months worth and will no longer keep the vortex-l archive. Sorry. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 21:19:04 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA02915 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 13:34:29 -0800 Received: from relay6.UU.NET (relay6.UU.NET [192.48.96.16]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA02624 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 13:33:45 -0800 Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay6.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzsha10440; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 16:33:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA12038; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 13:33:37 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 774132130095335FEPRI; 01 Dec 1995 13:32:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 01 Dec 1995 13:32:13 PST From: "MHUGO EPRI" Subject: vtx: weekend To: vortex-l eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 12/01/95 13:32:40 SMTP Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 11/30/95 20:06 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: weekend Actually, this should be called "after the weekend". After this weekend Frank Z. from our web is going to Anaheim to watch the CETI and others. I suggested bringing 3 VOM's from RS, two with RTD capability, one capable of doing .1mV and some TC wire to do a diff. T measurement. I also suggested that he have a scope with him to check cleanliness of power supplies. Any other suggestions for him? (I also suggested 3 disposable cameras, one 3-D, one close up, one regular. Video tape...what else? Ideas?) - MDH From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 21:22:18 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA06588 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 15:55:13 -0800 Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA06267 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 15:54:26 -0800 Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA07573; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 18:53:04 -0500 Date: 01 Dec 95 18:55:40 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: More news from St Pete. Message-ID: <951201235539_100433.1541_BHG50-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Visor I just had a note from Dr Onoochin. I do 'note a tendency' (as they say) for Russians to strip all the data out of a set of results and then produce a 'bottom line' report. I'm only glad that we've had Volodya there to try to pull them into line. Honest, it fair mikes yer weep - it really does. You gotta face it. For a theoretician, Volodya sure understands about how *not* to do experiments and write up reports on them ... I remain mystified as to what these 'calculations' of his are that show the thing should go over-unity? As Dr Puthoff says (often) there is no o-u in Ohm's Law. So there is in fluid dynamics? Hey? My own feeling on o-u (leaving aside 'proper' o-u like nuclear fission and burning things) is that you need a system which goes non-linear, one which slides an ace from up its sleeve or pulls an egg out of your ear. Even conventional energy-*producing* systems like chemical or nuclear have to form bonds or split atoms or do something which is a non-linear event. I suppose something might happen in the 'chaos' within cavitation or turbulence? To Dr Onoochin's comments I would add that the thermal mass of the iron and the thermal losses are, while not large, not zero by any means. Nor is it likely that there has been zero mixing of the two tanks. --------------------------------------------------------------- Unfortunately, the experimentators have carried out the further tests in such a way that it is impossible to check out O\U because to accelerate achieving of 'steady state', they switched on both Yusmar and the heater so the data on the begining of Yusmar's operation are lost. Secondly, they presented me the full report in bad form, i.e. only the data averaged over all the tests. I explained them who needs in the data that cannot be used for further analysis? So I returned the full report. Thirdly, I don't agree with their errors calculations. I am sure you propose the test that should have very good accuracy. They told me none of thermodynamical experiments has an accuracy less that 5%. Why, asked I, please, prove me! Tomorrow, after my call to Fedorovich I send you some my calculations and you can estimate them. The calculations predict 1.036 of O\U. It is really small value but maybe... The answer to your question: the volume of the additional tank is 4 litre and Dr. Gluck is right that this volume should be excluded from the calculations. However, even that volume of the water isn't mixing with the other volume we can assume that the total volume is about 16 litre. So the possible O\U reduces to 1.15, or taking into account the efficiency of the el.motor to 1.35 Please, say to Dr Puthoff that I am grateful for his reply. I hope to connect with him after reading his papers. Hope to email you tomorrow. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Note that Dr Onoochin's email address is onoochin a33.spb.su - if anyone wishes to write to him direct. Chris From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 21:27:02 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA11253 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:12:20 -0800 Received: from Erich.Triumf.CA (ftp.Triumf.CA [142.90.100.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA10972 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:10:56 -0800 From: msevior triumf.ca Received: by triumf.ca (MX V4.0-1 VAX) id 90; Fri, 01 Dec 1995 11:08:35 PST Date: Fri, 01 Dec 1995 11:08:25 PST To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-ID: <0099A365.CC59EC40.90 triumf.ca> Subject: RE: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Chris, it sounds like you haven't yet acquired the "Double-think" thought processes required to live with and use wave-particle duality. Don't worry, lots of physicists spend their working lives trying to find a better way of explaining why quantum Mechanics works and what it really means. To throw lots of petrol on the fire it's my opinion that no one has succeeded and that this will eventually be viewed as the modern version of scholars debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. A totally useless effort. So don't worry, just use the equations! Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 21:28:12 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA02547 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:12:17 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA02302 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:11:30 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA04715 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 1 Dec 1995 15:10:54 -0500 Message-Id: <199512012010.AA04715 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 1 Dec 1995 15:10:54 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: NONDISC Date: Fri, 01 Dec 95 15:10:10 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Looks like I'm going to power Gen. Staying in the Hilton phone 714-750-4321..that's where the cells going to be demoed. I'm required to sign a non-disclosure agreement...will not be to say anything when I come back. If you are there look me up.. anyone...we will have lunch...Will post were I am at after the reservations are confirmed. Let's go to disney!!! Frank Z From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 21:30:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA10139 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:29:00 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (bilb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA08532; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:24:08 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id IAA22116; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:21:39 -0800 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:21:38 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: freenrg-list mail.eskimo.com cc: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: fnrg: EM waves In-Reply-To: <199512010155.RAA13286 ix8.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Richard Wayne Wall wrote: > In EM transverse transmission both the electric & magnetic wave are _in > phase_, so there are points where both vanish together. But in this > case, where is the energy stored for the wave to keep propagating? > Could it appear in a hyperspatial demension OR perhaps transiently > become longitudnal scalar transmission? This has always bugged me too. In mecanical waves, the potential energy and kinetic energy are out of phase, and the energy flux is continuous, not chopped up into half-wave segments. Why does EM not act the same? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Fri Dec 1 21:31:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA20258 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:40:04 -0800 Received: from power.gpu.com ([206.215.92.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA19900 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:39:11 -0800 Received: by power.gpu.com id AA30001 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM); Fri, 1 Dec 1995 14:38:54 -0500 Message-Id: <199512011938.AA30001 power.gpu.com> Received: by power.gpu.com (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 1 Dec 1995 14:38:54 -0500 From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser To: VORTEX-L eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Undeliverable Date: Fri, 01 Dec 95 14:36:57 EST Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO.COM MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 Date: Fri, 01 Dec 95 11:55:21 EST From: To: Subject: Undeliverable Mail memo.gpuc.com unable to deliver following mail to recipient(s): 550 Host 'ESKIMO' Unknown ** Text of Mail follows ** Received: from GPU1 by memo.gpuc.com (IBM MVS SMTP V3R1) with BSMTP id 0986; Fri, 01 Dec 95 11:55:15 EST From: FRANK ZNIDARSIC To: VORTEX-L ESKIMO.gpuc.com Subject: elecharge Date: Fri, 01 Dec 95 11:55:16 EST -> VORTEX-L ESKIMO MAIL TO EXTERNAL MAIL SYSTEM IO50C3 I have also studies the localization of electric charge an electron. I came up with a quite different answer. Charge is related to voltage. q = Cv Assuming that "C" capacitance is the capacitance of a sphere. C = 4*3.14 eo r As C goes to zero, v goes to infinity. Infinite answers are really bad. Energy = 1/2 C vv Energy = 1/2 q/v vv = 1/2 qv If the voltage goes infinite so does the energy associated with the charge. Again another. Mr. Yuck...Very bad indeed. That conclusion that I came to was that capacitance has a quantum limit. In equations of motion C = 1/k where K is the spring constant. A quantum of capacitance corresponds to a free space material elastic limit. Good Good Good...no infinities...natural limits I put the elastic limit into the formula for resonant frequency and got the Compton wavelength. I beat the Compton wavelength against it Doppler shifted reflection and got the Debroglie wavelength. I divided the capacitance associated with a sphere 15 billion light years in diameter (the r of the universe) by the square root of the number of particles in the universe and I got the same answer. C(quantum) = 3.42 x 10 exp -24 Farads If you like you can calculate the radius of a sphere with that value of capacitance. I found the energy associated with the electric = (mass -e)/137 What else could I do??...I am an electrical engineer. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 01:34:38 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA28401 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 00:13:29 -0800 Received: from anc.ak.net (root anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA26965 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 00:09:50 -0800 Received: from [204.57.193.68] ([204.57.193.68]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA07920 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 01:32:51 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 23:11:18 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>*** Reply to note of 11/30/95 13:00 >>From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >>Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" >>Horace: A VERY important question about the nature of matter and particle >>physics---When an elementary particle is "delocalized" (Like an electron >>in a "band state") is the CHARGE delocalized also? What's your concept >>of that? MDH > >Yes, that is how I visualize it, except the *effect* of the charge is an >average. The charge of an electron in a particular volume is the integral >of the Schroedinger Equation (psi) function squared times the unit charge >of the electron. The complete integral of an electron's psi function gives >an average point location of the charge, or center of charge (like center >of gravity), for use in calculating electrostatic forces. This is similarly >true of other charged particles, like the proton. To me this provides some >explanation for why, for example, in a ground state H atom no radiation >occurs, namely that the centers of charge are co-located, there *is* no >relative motion. > >I belive there is some support for a delocalized charge concept from solid >state physics. For example, in an insulator in an electrostatic field the >electron orbitals become elongated in the direction of the field. The >atom's electric dipole moment grows to match the field and create balance. >The dipole moment is calculated as the integral of the electrostatic force >vectors over the SE (psi) function squared, i.e. the time independent phase >factor, or probability amplitude. It seems to me the "particle is >everywhere simultaneously" interpretation of QM is perfectly valid whenever >there is a time independent solution to the SE, and approximately true when >perturbations of boundary conditions are sufficiently slow to prevent >quantum state changes. There are various perfectly valid interpretations >of QM. Different interpretations help understanding in different >situations, but reality is reality all the same, regardless of our >interpretation. > One point of clarification. As quantum waveforms overlap, I see the resulting magnitude of the net force reducing. This is because the volume integral of force begins to include significant negative components from the part of the particle wave function "on the other side" of the interacting particle. The faster an electron begins it's approach to a nucleus, the less the waveform overlap, the closer it can approach. If quantum waveform overlap effects were not real, then point sized electrons, at near zero initial velocity, falling into a nucleus, would unleash extreme amounts of high energy xrays, an effect we don't see. This overlap effect is the basis for the ball lighning formation and sub-orbital concepts posted here earlier. Is that why you asked me? Another point about conduction band electrons: I would not imagine an electron delocalized over more than two or three atoms at a time, certainly not throughout an entire crystal. Electrons in conduction bands, though mobile, are in a bound state, so are tied to atoms. They are not free, for that requires replacing the energy that was given up when the electrons became bound into the conduction band, but they move with great ease from atom to atom. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 01:35:36 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA26799 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 01:35:34 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA26779 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 01:35:28 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA18113; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 04:34:09 -0500 Date: 02 Dec 95 04:32:46 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: vortex-l group Subject: vtx: "Something completely different" Message-ID: <951202093246_100060.173_JHB72-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Just to jump in here, >> Bill asks: "Do your doubts about the existance of fields extend to explanations of E/M waves? I always considered the two to be inseparable. The forces between two electromagnets at a distance are caused by "something," and if the current in one of the coils is suddenly changed, the distant one will respond after a time delay, implying that the "something" has a propagation speed and is not instantaneous action at a distance." << I don't like the analogy - The effect of a sudden change in the current through a coil will always be subject to a delay due to self inductance, so wherever you sense the change will react to that delay anyway. This measured delay need have nothing to do with the intervening matter. I can verify Chris's comments re: Faraday's rotating magnets and homopolar cylinders. I made up a good model to test the theory in colaboration with him a year or so ago, and I still have the scars to show for it. (The ferrocious magnets have sharp edges and they bite!) Norman. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 02:21:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA02795 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 02:20:49 -0800 Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA02768 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 02:20:34 -0800 Received: from dialup-a1-9.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-9.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.9]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA25822 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:18:17 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199512021018.VAA25822 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:21:07 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 30 Nov 95 at 18:00, Chris Tinsley wrote: > To:Vortex > > I said I'd just leave it and let everybody else have the last word, but I sort > of had this idea... > > I still don't see it that there's any evidence for particulate light. For the > quantised interaction of matter with light - no question, of course. > > Consider the thought experiment of a wave-energy machine in the sea. It is > arranged so that it will only respond by taking energy from a wave which passes > if one frequency component of the wave is present, and will then remove a fixed > quantity of energy from the wave. Similarly, a wave generator is made, which > will add a precise quantity of energy at a given frequency, adding that energy > at that frequency to a passing wave. This appears to be a reasonable analogy, > for whatever an analogy is ever worth - not a lot, often, in the quantum > domain. > > But ... I just wondered ... if one had two monochromatic beams combined, then I think the problem with this one lies in the word "combined". Every method that I can think of for combining two beams, relies on their interaction with matter (e.g. mirrors etc.) At the point of that interaction, it is conceivable that the "beat frequency" is in fact generated by an atom absorbing energy (a photon?) at the higher frequency, and emitting 2 photons, 1 at the lower frequency, and 1 at the beat frequency. Thus nothing is gained in the way of proof. > they would surely have an effect at their beat frequency? I think I've got a > trifle confused here, I was thinking that if such a beat frequency was the same > as the one required by a specific atom to shift its energy state - would the > atom 'see' the beat frequency? I realise that finding any two frequencies > which would give *exactly* the right one are pretty slim - these atoms are > rather picky eaters, no? > > I had a little hunt for any papers on this, but I couldn't see any. In any > case I can feel a strong sensation of having missed something somewhere in that > argument. After all, a prism wouldn't split the light to show the beat > frequency, would it? I think I'm coming down with this notorious 'flu, head > full of feathers, my LH neuron seems to be having trouble linking up with the > other one (the one on the right).... > > Chris > > Hey, Christmas is coming, let's all be nice to each other? We aren't around > long enough to waste any time doing much else. (sheesh, I must be getting that > flu) > > > Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 02:21:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA02778 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 02:20:43 -0800 Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA02727 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 02:20:23 -0800 Received: from dialup-a1-9.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-9.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.9]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA25801 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:17:58 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199512021017.VAA25801 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:21:06 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: charge Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 30 Nov 95 at 9:22, FRANK ZNIDARSIC guser wrote: [snip] > I've asked myself the same question. Hal you may be right. I don't know. > What I did "find out" was that structure results in the gravitational > field. The gravitational field is produced by a changing momentum. > See my paper on electromangum. "The Source of Gravitational Mass." > > http://nucleus.ibg.uu.se/elektromagnum > > I suspect that the electrical charge can be derived from a similar > analysis but I have not been able, in the electrical case, to do the > analysis. Any ideas? > > Frank Znidarsic Suppose for a moment the GR is correct, and that masses distort spacetime creating the illusion of a force, that we call gravity. Now assume by analogy, that charges also distort spacetime, but much more strongly, and much more localized, i.e. with a much stronger gradient, in the process creating the illusion of a field, that we call an electric field. In other words, perhaps the equations of GR can be adapted with suitable substitutions, to demonstrate the existence of the electrical field. I would then expect them to result in Maxwell's equations. (You can tell how ignorant I am can't you? :-) Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 02:21:26 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA02739 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 02:20:26 -0800 Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA02722 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 02:20:20 -0800 Received: from dialup-a1-9.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-9.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.9]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA25806 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:18:04 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199512021018.VAA25806 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:21:06 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: H-metal experiment update Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 30 Nov 95 at 11:13, Scott Little wrote: [snip] > I discussed the situation with Ed Storms, who has visited Piantelli in > Italy. Ed confirmed that P is withholding a critical secret and that the > "patent" we have seen is _not_ enabling! Ed is fairly certain that the > secret is a surface treatment and he thinks it is a coating...but not a > coating of pure Ni. He has no idea what it should be. Scott, Considering that the Patterson beads have several (thin) layers of different metals, and Piantelli has a "surface treatment", it may be something as simple as electroplating the rod with one or more thin layers of different metals. Perhaps the boundary layer between two different metals provides the special conditions required. If this is so, then I would expect results to improve as the number of layers increased. Another variation on this theme may be a boundary layer between the body of the metal, and a surface oxide layer. Such boundaries may contain sites where deuterium or protium are positioned closer than they normally would be in a plain metal lattice. [snip] Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 04:19:39 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id EAA12328 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 04:19:26 -0800 Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA12312 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 04:19:12 -0800 Received: from dialup-a2-1.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-1.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.1]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA02170 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 23:16:54 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <199512021216.XAA02170 tornado.netspace.net.au> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Organization: Improving To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 23:20:09 +0900 Subject: Re: vtx: More news from St Pete. Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB3) Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 1 Dec 95 at 18:55, Chris Tinsley wrote: [snip] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Note that Dr Onoochin's email address is onoochin a33.spb.su - if anyone wishes > to write to him direct. > > Chris > > > Chris, It continues to puzzle me that Dr Onoochin doesn't simply join this list. Have you suggested it to him? Robin van Spaandonk Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. Robin Feb. 1995 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 05:39:21 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA05452 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 05:39:19 -0800 Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA05436 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 05:39:14 -0800 Received: from 204.111.1.80 (eb1ppp16.shentel.net [204.111.1.80]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id IAA17455 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 08:40:46 -0500 Message-Id: <199512021340.IAA17455 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 03 Dec 95 08:42:46 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <199512021018.VAA25822 tornado.netspace.net.au> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: One of the most interesting facts about humans is that they rarely agree on anything. Olaf Roemer thought he had a great idea. Around 1675, while observing the eclipses of the moons of jupiter decided that light did not travel instantaneously through space. The most amazing thing here was a lot of people from then to now keep "agreeing" with his idea. Wave particle duality, what about triality? The more we know, the more we know we do not know. Electromagnetic energy leaving an isotropic source heads into space-time. Space-time, what is it, what is it made of, where is it and so on? (phase conjunctive optics anyone?) How well muti-dimensional cosmology can muck up things in applied physics, so we take a step back and form the great divide, macro verses micro. (Well everything is relative, isn't it?) Yes, we can come up with things to make it all fit. Electroweak unification energy and grand unification energy. (Sounds good to me.) Classical to Quantum, the great leap! The jury is still out as to whether the leap is forward, backward or sideways. (give me that old black magic.) Since a great deal of my research has been in feild of electromagnetic propagation, James Clerk Maxwell has been a constant companion. (the maxwell constant?) Maxwell was a great thinker, most of the electromagnetic theory today is based on his work. I find it most interesting that much of this theory revolved around a belief in ether. This fact is left out of many modern text books, but quite evident in his original works. Science is good about that, separating the parts that fit and sweeping those that don't under the rug. Science, the great ivory tower of one thing built on another thing, and another thing built on another thing and so on. For this reason many scientists get offensive when new data or theories come along that go against the grain. If we topple one piece, well the whole thing can come tumbling down. (greed is good!) All this is to suggest that scientific conversation is great, but childish criticism isn't called for. let they that know for sure what they speak, cast the first insult. (did I get that right?) My only problem with this forum is that some people beleive "they" have "the" answer. Face it, there is no "the answer", just a lot more questions. (42) Atomic theory, it's all greek to me. Robert From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 05:49:48 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA06398 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 05:49:45 -0800 Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA06393 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 05:49:41 -0800 Received: from 204.111.1.80 (eb1ppp16.shentel.net [204.111.1.80]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id IAA17838 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 08:51:13 -0500 Message-Id: <199512021351.IAA17838 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 03 Dec 95 08:48:03 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: More news from St Pete. To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <199512021216.XAA02170 tornado.netspace.net.au> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Robin, We have to pay dearly for every kilobit that comes into our email box in russia, the cost of the vortex mail alone would be more than most russians make in a year. So, please if you write Vladimir, keep it short and to the point. Robert >It continues to puzzle me that Dr Onoochin doesn't simply join this >list. Have you suggested it to him? >Robin van Spaandonk > From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 11:20:42 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA05996 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:20:36 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA05947; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:20:29 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id LAA17843; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:20:23 -0800 Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:20:23 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: VISOR globalcom.net cc: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: ATTN. VORTEX USERS In-Reply-To: <199512021351.IAA17838 head.globalcom.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 3 Dec 1995 VISOR globalcom.net wrote: > Dear Robin, We have to pay dearly for every kilobit that comes into our > email box in russia, the cost of the vortex mail alone would be more than > most russians make in a year. So, please if you write Vladimir, keep it > short and to the point. This is a very good point. I'd like to strongly suggest to all the Vortex-oids that, when including quoted messages in your replies, ALWAYS DELETE SOMETHING! Don't just include the whole quoted message in unaltered form (which may have quotes of quotes and large 'signature' blocks at the bottom.) I found that when I myself developed this habit, I was often tempted to do some appropriate editing on the message to which I was responding. My messages then seemed very much more readable when I later received the copy back through vortex-L, so I suspect that everyone else found them improved as well. I don't think its necessary to avoid writing long messages. ( Files over 40K should go to a web page for distribution, not to vortex-L.) I don't think its necessary to edit the quote if you are making a detailed reply to numerous points raised in the orginal. And it's not necessary to ALWAYS do a time-consuming editing job. But if one develops the habit of *always deleting something,* if only the redundant signature block at the end of the quote, one is usually tempted to delete even more, and to vastly improve message quality and traffic size. It's often a good idea to mark the presence of deleted sections so the remaining parts of the quote are less in danger of being taken out of context. is the standard way of marking. I usually use "..." to mark deleted sections. I've also seen others use as a deletion mark. One of the functions of the message quoting facility is to remind the recipient of their original message when days have passed between send and receive. So, if you're responding to a vortex-L message that's a few hours old, you can probably delete almost the entire quote, and the recepients will still extract the context of your reply from memories triggered by the small piece of the original you did include. But if you are responding to a message that's many days old, you probably should include the entire message as a quote. But these are all suggestions, and they're really too many to follow rigorously. So just make it a habit to always delete something from the quote. And always keep in mind that many subscribers must pay by the kilobyte in order to receive vortex-L, so any elimination of redundancy is a big help. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 11:37:07 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA09914 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:37:05 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA09888 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:36:57 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id LAA19175; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:36:55 -0800 Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:36:54 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: SHOULD VORTEX-L SPLIT? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Something I'm still thinking about: Vortex-L message traffic is too high for some subscribers, and some may be interested only in vortex anomaly research. Is this true for many of you? If so, it wouldn't be hard for me to start a second discussion group (vortexonly-L?) and have its users stricly adhere to Potapov (etc.) topics. The original vortex-L could go on as now, with a wide variety of topics discussed. I could even manually subscribe everyone to both groups. Then those who want to discuss only Potapov or non-potopov subjects could unsubscribe as desired, and the rest need take no action. On the other hand, the vortex physics discussions stimulate many offtopic discussions, and the offtopic discussions inspire new insights into the vortex discussions. The effect is to combine the dynamics of an ongoing collaborative experiment with those of a physics symposium cocktail party. Putting an artificial split between these areas and allowing many users to subscribe only to one group or the other might put a big damper on the beneficial synergy. What say ye? Should vortex-L split? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 11:43:24 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA11426 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:43:22 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA11370 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:43:12 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id LAA19563; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:43:10 -0800 Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:43:09 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: MORE THOUGHTS ON SPLIT Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: One thing I've seen done: manual forwarding of messages on a general discussion list to a more specialized list. A volunteer could read vortex-L every day and manually forward all vortex-physics discussions to a second vortex-only list. I myself couldn't even THINK of taking on extra work right now, but maybe some other kind soul on vortex-L has the time? Or is high message traffic not such an issue currently? I still cringe when I remember the week I subscribed to the Electric Vehicles discussion. 150 MESSAGES PER DAY! I used up most of my daily email-reading time just in deleting unread messages! .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 13:42:58 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA12569 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:42:51 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA12561 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:42:49 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id NAA00404; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:42:46 -0800 Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:42:45 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" In-Reply-To: <951130230048_100433.1541_BHG81-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 30 Nov 1995, Chris Tinsley wrote: > I said I'd just leave it and let everybody else have the last word, but I sort > of had this idea... > > I still don't see it that there's any evidence for particulate light. For the > quantised interaction of matter with light - no question, of course. I think the word "photon" was originally used to designate the quantization. One photon was one quantized energy step. This was similar to the coining of the name "electron" by Stoney in 1902 or so. He intended the term to be applied to quantized charge, and when everyone started discussing a *particle* called "electron" he was pissed, since he seemed not to believe that quantization automatically implies the existance of particles. > Consider the thought experiment of a wave-energy machine in the sea. It is > arranged so that it will only respond by taking energy from a wave which passes > if one frequency component of the wave is present, and will then remove a fixed > quantity of energy from the wave. The trouble with this is that tiny energy packets should have the broadband energy of an impulse waveform, not the single-frequency energy of a very long wave train. This is contradictory. If an atom can steal energy from a very long wave train, then the atom should slowly build up internal energy. Or, if an atom suddenly grabs energy out of a wave train, it should leave a tiny hole, and the energy spectrum of this hole will be complicated and spread-spectrum, and definitely NOT a single frequency. And so the quantized EM is not logical. Its almost as if an atom is reaching all the way through space back to the emitting source and shaving a little energy off the *entire wave train*. And probably also reaching past itself and stealing energy from the entire wave train which has already passed it. This all boils down to: how can something happen during an instant in time, yet behave like a long-term wave that has been oscillating for thousands of cycles? The answer: "yet it moves." EM does behave like this, even though no one has come up with a good visual explanation of how such a thing is possible. Wheelers many-worlds stuff comes close, with the universe splitting into parallel copies for every quantized interaction. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 13:55:08 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA15937 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:55:07 -0800 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA15901 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:55:01 -0800 Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA27175; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 16:53:43 -0500 Date: 02 Dec 95 16:58:02 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: More St Pete data Message-ID: <951202215801_100433.1541_BHG66-1 CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A To:Vortex Could I ask if Neal Graneau is on this list? I saw his name mentioned recently, can anybody help me with this matter of bibliography? The names would be Dr Peter Graneau and Dr Neal Graneau. My own feeling is that enough evidence has been picked up (especially in the 'start-up' part of the test) that I personally would very much like to replicate exactly what these people have done. If anyone thinks such an effort would be utterly worthless, please could they explain why they feel that. Admittedly, in view of the (we hope) bigger and better CETI demo expected next week, this is all pretty small beer. Mostly it is residual intellectual curiosity, I suppose. Chris >From Dr Onoochin: --------------------------------------------------------------------- I cannot call to Fedorovich so I will discuss with him the error calculations later. However, I would like to send you my calculations now. I should say that the energy conservation law must be fulfilled, however, O\U could caused by ZPE or CF. It is interesting that the input power of Yusmar is lower than of the el.heater in all the Polzunov tests. However, it still doesn't allow us to claim about O\U because the difference between the temperatures inside and outside the tent aren't identical in that tests. So I proposed to Dr Fedorovich the following analysis: (he is agreed that this one is correct except, to his point of view, my error estiomation) Let's analyze the 'steady state' data: | Yusmar | El.heater | Power, kWt | 2.12 | 2.23 | Temperature of the water in the loop, degree C | 87.0 | 85.0 | Temperature of air inside the tent, degr.C | 33.0 | 34.0 | Temperature of air outside the tent, degr.C | 13.5 | 14.0 | In this test, the temperature is measured by each thermopair with accuracy 1 degree Celcius, however, because it is done at 8 points the temperature error reduce in (8 -1) times, i.e. is about 0.15 degrees. The power is measured with accuracy 1%. Finally the temperature outside the tent is measured, according to the report, with accuracy 0.1%. Now we consider the balance equation P = Q/t = C(T1 - T2) ; (1) where P is the input power of the system, Q/t is the losses of the heat through the walls of the tent per unit time, C is an empirical coefficient (Joule/(sec*degree)) and T1 and T2 are the temperatures inside and outside the tent, correspondingly. The same equation is written in the Polzunov report. It is important that the value of the coefficient C is identical for both Yusmar's and el.heater tests because C can depend only on the properties of the film of the tent and, perhaps, on the temperature distribution inside the tent. However, you can see from the data that the latters are very close one to another (and it is an achievement of Polzunov experimentators). So we assume C is actually identical with good accuracy. Let's write two balance equations: P(Y) = C(T'(1) - T'(2)) ; Yusmar is in operation; (2) P(H) = C(T"(1) - T"(2)) ; the heater is in operation; (3) besides the power of Yusmar separates onto two parts: the heat from el.motor and the heat due to the device itself. So P(Y) = P(Y, exp)*(1-e) + P(Y,exp)*e* ; (4) where e is efficiency of the el.motor e = 0.7 and I note the COP of Yusmar as . Solving the system of three equations (2)-(4), we obtain: = 1.036 according to the above data. Now we should estimate possible error of the tests. Obviously, the error for the equation (1) cannot exceed 1.5%. Therefore, 1.036 = 103.6% is out of the errors range. Yes, 103.6% is very small O\U and I didn't insist on this result that should be checked out experimentally. Of course, it is too naive to expect that Yusmar yields O\U for all values of the parameters (in the Polzunov tests, the water flow is 7 cub.meters/hour and the pressure is 18 meters). Maybe there is a 'tail' of O\U mode for such values of the parameters. Please, discuss my analyzis with your group and send me the comments. One more request. I returned to the LEW project now. Because the LEW could display in Graneaus experiments, please, can you send me which journals that experiments have been described in? I know some referencies but some don't. From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 16:09:38 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA18437 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 16:09:05 -0800 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA18421 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 16:09:03 -0800 Received: from [204.119.61.121] (ip-salem2-25.teleport.com [204.119.61.121]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA05585 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 16:08:55 -0800 Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 16:08:55 -0800 From: Charles Cagle Message-Id: <199512030008.QAA05585 desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: singtech mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >One of the most interesting facts about humans is that they rarely agree >on anything. > >Olaf Roemer thought he had a great idea. >Around 1675, while observing the eclipses of the moons of jupiter decided >that light did not travel instantaneously through space. The most amazing >thing here was a lot of people from then to now keep "agreeing" with his >idea. > >Wave particle duality, what about triality? The more we know, the more we >know we do not know. > >Electromagnetic energy leaving an isotropic source heads into space-time. > >Space-time, what is it, what is it made of, where is it and so on? (phase >conjunctive optics anyone?) > >How well muti-dimensional cosmology can muck up things in applied physics, >so we take a step back and form the great divide, macro verses micro. >(Well everything is relative, isn't it?) > >Yes, we can come up with things to make it all fit. Electroweak >unification energy and grand unification energy. (Sounds good to me.) > >Classical to Quantum, the great leap! The jury is still out as to whether >the leap is forward, backward or sideways. (give me that old black magic.) > > > >Since a great deal of my research has been in feild of electromagnetic >propagation, James Clerk Maxwell has been a constant companion. (the >maxwell constant?) > >Maxwell was a great thinker, most of the electromagnetic theory today is >based on his work. I find it most interesting that much of this theory >revolved around a belief in ether. This fact is left out of many modern >text books, but quite evident in his original works. Science is good about >that, separating the parts that fit and sweeping those that don't under >the rug. > >Science, the great ivory tower of one thing built on another thing, and >another thing built on another thing and so on. For this reason many >scientists get offensive when new data or theories come along that go >against the grain. If we topple one piece, well the whole thing can come >tumbling down. (greed is good!) > >All this is to suggest that scientific conversation is great, but childish >criticism isn't called for. let they that know for sure what they speak, >cast the first insult. (did I get that right?) > >My only problem with this forum is that some people beleive "they" have >"the" answer. Face it, there is no "the answer", just a lot more >questions. (42) > >Atomic theory, it's all greek to me. > > > >Robert > Robert, your belief that there is no "the answer" is merely a fine way of your stating your lack of belief in progress. Just because you have intellectually given up does not mean that any other members of this group are so disposed. Get a grip man and help. Don't give up. Best Regards, Charles Cagle Singularity Technologies, Inc. 1640 Oak Grove Road, N.W. Salem, OR 97304 503/362-7781 From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 18:14:19 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA19758 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 18:14:18 -0800 Received: from eskimo.com (billb eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA19746 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 18:14:15 -0800 Received: by eskimo.com (8.6.12) id SAA22876; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 18:14:13 -0800 Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 18:14:12 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" In-Reply-To: <951202093246_100060.173_JHB72-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 2 Dec 1995, Norman Horwood wrote: > >> Bill asks: > > The forces between two electromagnets at a distance are > > caused by "something," and if the current in one of the coils is > > suddenly changed, the distant one will respond after a time delay, > > implying that the "something" has a propagation speed and is not > > instantaneous action at a distance." > > I don't like the analogy - The effect of a sudden change in the current > through a coil will always be subject to a delay due to self inductance, so > wherever you sense the change will react to that delay anyway. To minimize the inductive timeconstant effects, put the coils far apart to give long time delay compared to the coil risetime, wind them with a couple of turns only, and once everything is working, change the distance between coils and watch the timedelay change in proportion to distance, as if the "something" had velocity C. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-owner eskimo.com Sat Dec 2 18:31:56 1995 Received: (from majordom localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA24393 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 18:31:56 -0800 Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA24381 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 18:31:52 -0800 Received: from 204.111.1.76 (eb1ppp12.shentel.net [204.111.1.76]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id VAA16409 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:33:25 -0500 Message-Id: <199512030233.VAA16409 head.globalcom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 03 Dec 95 21:36:08 -0500 From: VISOR globalcom.net Subject: Re: vtx: "Something completely different" To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <199512030008.QAA05585 desiree.teleport.com> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17 Sender: owner-vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Snip >Robert, your belief that there is no "the answer" is merely a fine way of >your stating your lack of belief in progress. Just because you have >intellectually given up does not mean that any other members of this group >are so disposed. Get a grip man and help. Don't give up. > >Best Regards, > > >Charles Cagle Dear Charles, The meaning of my sleep writing was intended to express just the opposite. I was, in all that ranting and raving simply trying to say that there is no single answer, no "the answer". We live in an evolving universe of knowledge, sooner or later we may find that we have to pull out a few of the basic pillows of the scientific ivory tower. I mainly wanted to point out that just because someone post something that may not seem logical or even scientific, that the best path is to converse, not try and humiliate. That person may have hit upon another, far better answer and if we scare them away we all could forfeit being part of something grand. I am constantly amazed at the greatness of the folks that surface on this list server. It is my pleasure to have the privilege of being in a small way, part of this exploration. The "greek to me" part was a not so funny pun.- Atom n. greek for indivisible.- I promise never to get up in the wee hours of the morning and input text before I input coffee. Thank you Charles for being understanding. Robert