From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Thu Feb 29 17:59:15 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id RAA03170 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:33:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from big.aa.net (root@big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA03129 for ; Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:32:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from s1c2p3.aa.net (s1c2p3.aa.net [204.157.220.183]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA29414 for ; Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:31:24 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199603010131.RAA29414@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 01 Mar 1996 17:31:49 +0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: vtx: hugo Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 06:06 PM 2/29/96 -0500, you wrote: >I looked at Hugo's results..It looks to me like power in = power out > > >Frank Z > > not even close, Frank. It is bizaarely anomolous...an ou reaction full of instability which peters out to unity, maybe. Hard to say with the data present with no understanding of the experimental setup and just what is being measured. We are being teased, except I don't think Hugo is pulling our leg. Hugo, are you just practicing up on us for April 1? ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 1 08:37:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA08696 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 08:17:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA08656 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 08:17:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA031137042; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 11:17:22 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 11:17:29 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: vtx: Testing for negative potential energy Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Just a few comments on addressing the problem of embedded negative potential energy in the Paterson cell outflow. If there is something there then if one simulates all the effects that go on in the path from cell outlet to cell inlet then it should vanish or diminish to the level present in the cell inlet. So what goes on? Not too much. The electrolyte sloshes around a bit, sits around a bit (time about equal to total volume / flow rate), and goes through a filter. You just have to take a sample of cell outflow and do these things to it. Since it must sit around for a time it must be stored in an insulated container. Jed Rothwell thinks he has already done this test. He took a sample in a graduated cylinder, mixed it up and reported 100% of the heat still there. If 100% of the heat was still there it did not sit around long enough, otherwise it would have lost more heat to the ambient air. He did some mixing but came up short on time and filtering. It is not hard to do this test properly and it is well worth it. If some skeptic says that there is some negative potential energy salt or chemical in the cell outflow that accounts for the excess heat, then you can say "but I took a sample of the cell outflow, did to it everything that goes on in the rest of the flow circuit, measured the temperature and the heat did not go away". Then the skeptic must explain how this salt or chemical diminishes as it goes through the flow loop but did not do so in your test. This should put the salt and chemical people out of business. Also it is important to do the heat transfer to ambient test that Jed has been pushing. His argument is valid and should be used. The approach is to transfer and measure heat to the ambient air such that the power out exceeds the total of the electrolysis and pump power in. Then, by conservation of energy, some other section of the system must extract heat from the ambient air and it must be cold. If it is not cold then all heat pump related arguments fail. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 04:24:54 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA24533 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 09:45:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA24499 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 09:44:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQafek16421; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 12:44:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA03174; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 08:59:09 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 822158080096061FEPRI; 01 Mar 1996 08:58:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 01 Mar 1996 08:58:08 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: Holding off on details... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/01/96 08:58:20 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: Holding off on details... - Sorry gang, I KNOW I'm being somewhat of a jerk here. But Mr. Champion, who has been so kind as to post my data, is actually going to be "in town" (i.e., MY town!) in a day or so. What I'm waiting for is to have him go over the details of the experiment and help write up a good, solid, OBSERVED BY SOMEONE ELSE besides me, description. - As several of you know---Gene, Peter G., Chris T., when I promise something, I keep my word. So be patient! Keep track of the important news of the day---like Princess Di breaking up with Charlie... Say, Chris, how long do you think I could afford the beautiful Di for? A day? Two? Would I have to be able to ride a polo pony? I've been to Oxford (Feb. 4, 1996), and got my "school tie".(From "The Bear", Chris will know what that is!) I'm sauve, debonaire, and only belch occassionally. What-do-ya think my chances are? (About the same as winning the lottery & getting a CF patent out of the US patent office?) MDH :) :) :) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 1 11:57:45 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA05868 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 10:42:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA05815 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 10:42:26 -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 JAA11840 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 09:41:09 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 09:47:26 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Testing for negative potential energy Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Also it is important to do the heat transfer to ambient test that Jed >has been pushing. His argument is valid and should be used. The approach >is to transfer and measure heat to the ambient air such that the power out >exceeds the total of the electrolysis and pump power in. Then, by >conservation of energy, some other section of the system must extract heat >from the ambient air and it must be cold. If it is not cold then all heat >pump related arguments fail. > >Lawrence E. Wharton Yes. I think the exteremely well insulated 2 loop calorimeter I am building will do the job also. There is nowhere for net heat to go but out of the big foam box via the distilled water loop. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 1 13:40:36 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA19945 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 11:58:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA19856 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 11:57:43 -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 KAA12217 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 10:56:26 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 11:02:42 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Wed, 28 Feb 1996, Larry Wharton wrote: > >> A candidate chemical product of the Paterson cell could be: >> >> Li2SO4 + 2(H2O) -> 2(LiOH) + H2SO4 >> >> The energy balance would have to be worked out. There should not be any > >No, it wouldn't. Before posting chemical reaction scenarios, you ought to >wave them past a chemist. You have the arrow pointing the wrong way; i.e. >the reaction system has its equilibrium on the left hand side. In fact, even >that is a simplification but I don't have time or inclination to go into >detail. >Please forget these simplistic chemical schemes, they are good for nothing. > > >-- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk Dieter, I have the greatest repect for your expertise, and know I have almost none, especially in the realm of chemistry. However, the folowing seemingly paradoxical conditions really bother me, so maybe you can help. Maybe it is complicated because there is more involved than just the chemical energy balance. The figure below shows the anode portion of the "Fluid van de Graff" cell I suggested earlier. This intended to help illustrate some of the effects I was attributing to the Patterson Power cell, but highlights them by making them the only effects to carry current. I hope it also may lead the way to a much more efficient method for electrolysis. VAN DE GRAFF ELECTROLYSIS CELL - GROUNDED CATHODE STRUCTURE (GCS) To Electrolysis Anode (at ground potential) ^ I I Electrolyte (charged negatively) Flow I I I I ------I c I------ I c c I I cc c I I c c c c cI <------- insulating walls of cathode cell I c c cc I +I cc cc I+ +I cc ccI+ +Ic ........... cI+ c - cations +I .ooooooooo. I+ +Ic .ooooooooo. cI+ +I .ooooooooo. I+ ooo - Ni Beads +Ic .ooooooooo. cI+ +I .ooooooooo. I+ +Ic .ooooooooo. cI+ +I .ooooooooo. I+ +I .ooooooooo. I+++++ High voltage DC anode insulated from electrolyte I .ooIxxxIoo. I ------I I------ I I xxx - Pt screen connected to electrolysis cathode I I (note - at ground potential) I I ... - electically non-conductive mesh screen ^ I I Electrolyte Flow The following scenario suggests a mechanism which achieves the desired effects of the design. Other effects and reactions must be present in such a device. (1) As the electrolyte enters the cell, the cations, SO4- and OH- radicals, are attracted to toward the insulated anode, the anions, Li+ and OH- radicals, are repelled toward the grounded beads. (2) At the bead surface: (Li+) + (e-) -> Li + (5.39172 ev) (exothermic) This provides the electrolysis current and voltage. Note that no electrical energy need be supplied. The energy from the Li+ ions dropping to ground state drives the electrolysis current through a wire connecting the (grounded) anode and cathode, producing heat. No minimum electrolysis voltage need be supplied to the electrolysis cathode (beads). (3) A similar effect could occur to a much lessor extent (due to lower H+ concentration) for H: 2(H+) + 2(e-) -> H2 (exothermic) (4) The Li would quickly result in: 2(Li) + 2(H2O) -> 2(LiOH) + H2 (exothermic) which is also exothermic, plus produces free H2. (5) The cations concentrate toward the downstream end of the insulated anode in the electrolysis grounded cathode structure (GCS). At this point the energy of the fluid flow must separate the cations from the anode. (endotheric to the overall balance) This results in a reduced fluid flow rate and heat in the electrolyte. The enrgy to achieve this is somewhat reduced by a shielding effect. The cations closest to the insulated anode reduce the apparent voltage to (shield) those cations further away. (6) The cations produce a net charge into the electrolyte flowing to the grounded anode structure (GAS) where the following takes place: 2(OH-) - 2(e-) -> H2O2 (exothermic plus assists production of current) (7) Followed by: 2(H2O2) -> 2(H2O) + O2 (exothermic) (8) or a net effect of: 2(OH-) -> 2(H2O) + O2 + 2(e-) (exothermic) Unless I have erred, a frequent event, all the above reactions are exothermic. Every step is exothermic except (5), which to some extent trades fluid kinetic energy for heat, in addition to providng the energy for charge separation. The amont of energy required for the separation can be reduced by placing the grounded anode structure (GAS) close to the GCS. In effect, this is what the Patterson Cell represents, a combined GAS/GCS in a tube. I think the geometery is a little wrong and confusing as to what is causing the effect and what the heat balance is, and can be improved as per the above. What do you think? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 1 12:48:22 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id MAA24027 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 12:19:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA24008 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 12:19:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQafev16623; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 15:17:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA21266; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 12:15:10 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 923814120096061FEPRI; 01 Mar 1996 12:14:12 PST Message-Id: Date: 01 Mar 1996 12:14:12 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: Action in the Midwest--- To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/01/96 12:14:38 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: Action in the Midwest--- Well the Coppers arrived and encircled the boys at the Poly-sulfone/poly- styrene corral. Plans are now for the boys to go down to the NICOLODIAN and see if they can have a good time all round, although some think it should be the PALADIUM (London) that should be the stop after that. Next week will take care of that bit of partying. However, I still think the LAST thing will be a taxing effort to NICKEL and dime the boys to death. From that point, where the boys go depends upon their friends, and who will take good care of them. - They like to live on a saturated diet, and get depressed without their Lithium treatments. - But they are proud to say that the are, to begin with, BORN FREE! And, unlike some other IMITATION groups, they are the real McCoy....! From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 1 12:41:09 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id MAA24539 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 12:23:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA24504 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 12:22:49 -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 LAA12371 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 11:21:37 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 11:27:53 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I sent the following yesterday, but it never showed up so I'm sending it again, I hope it is not duplicated: Since we have been delving into many varied ideas for heat generation and balance in the PPC, how about yet another: an ion brake effect. The hypothesized effect can not account for heat in excess of electrolysis plus pump energy, but is a way heat can be generated in the PPC by the pump. The idea is that following the cathode, positive ions are attracted to the cathode so create a differential velocity with respoect to neutral H2O and other atoms in the electrolyte, thus create a drag or braking effect. A similar braking effect must occur just after to anode, but for cations. The PPC is an electric fluid brake which converts a pressure differential into heat. There should also be accelerating effects as well, especially in the neutral area prior to the cathode and following the anode. The accellerating ions reduce the breaking effect but increase the differential velocities of the fluid particles, and therefore the heat generated. To check the hypothesis simply measure pressure differential accross the cell while cycling the electrolysis current. A small current should be capable of generating a large delta p, thus increasing the current draw on the pump motor, a fact which should also be checked. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 04:11:36 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id NAA10862 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 13:53:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA10812 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 13:53:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-074.austin.eden.com (net-7-194.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.194]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id PAA02826 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 15:53:09 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 15:53:09 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603012153.PAA02826@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: ersatz beads away! X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Our ersatz beads arrived today and they look really nice...resembling closely silver cake decorator beads. The coating is relatively smooth and homogeneous in appearance. The fabricator indicates that the layer thicknesses are very close to 1 micron each. We have already dispatched each participating lab's allotment. U.S. locations should arrive by mid-week. International locations should expect 2-3 week delivery. Gentlemen, start your cells! Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 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 Mar 2 04:25:51 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA15662 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 14:21:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA15614 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 14:21:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.70] ([204.57.193.72]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA12834 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 13:20:11 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 13:26:25 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Radiometer Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I would like to thank Robin van Spaandonk for taking the time to help me find my blunder of inverting the unit conversion factors, and for finding the metric constant was wrong: >> >>I wrote: >> >>(3.2 mv) (0.8522 g.cal/cm^2)/hr/mv (3600s/hr)(4.19J/g.cal) (1/100 cm^2)= >>(3.2) (128.55 W) = 411 W >> Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Hi Horace, > >First, I think that you should have divided by 3600 and multiplied by >100. Even then, the answer comes out at a fraction of a watt. I tried >this first, and came up with what appears to be a ridiculous answer. I >then plugged the same numbers into the other device constant that was >supplied, and came up with a reasonable answer. >Consequently, I suspect that there is also something wrong with the >first of the given constants (i.e. 0.8522 GM.CAL/cm^2/Hr/MV). >I tried dividing the other one by all the conversion factors, and come >up with a number of 51.12 i.s.o. .8522, so I suspect that there is a >"5" missing from the front of the supplied constant, which should be >50.8522 (close enough to 51.1). > I guess the rule "If you don't like the answer invert the unit conversion factors and try again" is not so good! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 1 16:16:09 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id PAA29574 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 15:44:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA29544 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 15:43:51 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA24062 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 18:42:32 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 18:42:32 -0500 Message-ID: <960301184232_157744548@emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: plasma Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I going to try to build more plasma devices. Wish me luck. So far nothing I have tried has worked. Frank Z From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 1 17:29:09 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id RAA15776 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 17:17:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA15743 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 17:17:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-8.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-8.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.8]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA21776 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 12:14:47 +1100 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Potential for explosion of Patterson Cells Date: Sat, 02 Mar 1996 02:19:18 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <31369844.28422808@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <9602290735.AA08447@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > In-Reply-To: <9602290735.AA08447@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 28 Feb 96 23:35:08 -0800, Barry Merriman wrote: > >Any comment on the potential for explosion in a closed > >Patterson cell? > > >It seems to me that its not a significant danger for shorter >runs, since at the proscribed current levels there is > >only around at most 0.1 W going into creation of H2 + O2 gas. Thus >even explosive recombination of the entire evolute from > >24 hour run is only around 10,000 J of energy, which is a > >rather small bang. > >For longer runs, I suppose one should make an effort to bleed > >off the evolved gases.... > > An added word of caution here. Just suppose that these cells produce short range ionising radiation, such as UV or low energy x-rays. This might not escape the cell at a level sufficient to be measured, but could well result in the production of more H2 and O2 than one might expect based on the amount of current consumed. So the "bang" might be bigger than one would otherwise expect. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 1 17:45:55 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id RAA15844 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 17:17:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA15809 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 17:17:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-8.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-8.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.8]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA21786 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 12:14:52 +1100 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: hugo Date: Sat, 02 Mar 1996 02:19:23 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <31369ebd.30079841@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199603010131.RAA29414@big.aa.net> In-Reply-To: <199603010131.RAA29414@big.aa.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 01 Mar 1996 17:31:49 +0800, Michael Mandeville wrote: [snip] >not even close, Frank. It is bizaarely anomolous...an ou reaction full of >instability which peters out to unity, maybe. Hard to say with the data >present with no understanding of the experimental setup and just what is >being measured. We are being teased, except I don't think Hugo is pulling >our leg. Hugo, are you just practicing up on us for April 1? [snip] I did notice that the output power tends toward the average temperature. Mark, is this a sign that you to have chosen flow calorimeter parameters such that the power can be measured by looking at the temperature rise? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 1 22:34:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id WAA29835 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 22:23:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA29821 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 1996 22:23:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tskic-000EeMC; Sat, 2 Mar 96 00:23 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: vtx: Champion & Hugo To: vortex-l@eskimo.com (vortex-l) Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 00:23:02 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Regarding Joe Champion's and Mark Hugo's ongoing experiment: There is no narrative given with the graphs on-line at the web site, but taking the 2/27/96 #1 graph, we see a case that shows an apparent non- anomalous warm up. This is a good baseline case. It seems to take 2.5 hours to reach equilibrium, for about a 30 minute time constant. Right off the bat, then, we have a rather massive apparent energy storage effect. So the previous graphs (which supposedly indicate the most anomalous energy) apparently have the start-up portion of the graph missing. The following graphs all have instant heat, indicating that the start-up portion is not included: 2/24/96 #1 2/24/96 #4 2/25/96 #3 2/25/96 #4 2/26/96 #2 Previous energy storage, as indicated by the magnitude in the first above mentioned graph (2/27/96 #1) easily accounts for the above five cases of anomalous energy output -- if the suspected first portion of the graphs were shown. You cannot time average over only half the data and expect to come up with valid conclusions. -- - 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 Mar 2 05:26:29 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA08352 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 05:18:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA08329 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 05:18:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-3-119.austin.eden.com (net-3-119.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.119]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id HAA18143 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 07:18:30 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 07:18:30 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603021318.HAA18143@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: hyperfine vs sledgehammer X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mike Schaffer said, in regard to his environment temp control: >Fianlly, a (probably obvious) clarification to my post yesterday: >>>We use a 20 W resistor inside the box with a muffin fan >>>blowing air past it and circulating the air around the box. >AS YOU CAN GUESS, WE USED A VARIABLE VOLTAGE SUPPLY WITH THIS RESISTER, >ADJUSTING THE POWER TO GET THE DESIRED BOX AIR TEMPERATURE. There's an absolutely wonderful family of temp controllers available from Omega in little "1/16 DIN" packages with full PID capabilities, solid-state AC relay outputs, and yr choice of TC input (front panel selectable). I use one around the lab for general temp control and you essentially never have to tune it...the default settings are OK for "small stuff". Right now, I have the TC (homefused by me) clipped to a hotplate with a clothespin and the controller switches the power on/off to the hotplate. It holds temp to about +/- 0.1C! This one cost $185 (recently). From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 11:20:22 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA26163 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 11:13:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA26127 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 11:13:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from dacha (eb4ppp30.shentel.net [204.111.1.190]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id OAA17654 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 14:12:57 -0500 Date: Sat, 2 Mar 96 14:05:14 From: dacha@shentel.net Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning?! To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon B95_14, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. 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, 29 Feb 1996 14:56:21 +0800 Michael Mandeville wrote: At 12:30 PM 2/28/96 -0800, you wrote: > > A glowing orange ball floats in through the bathroom window, drifts > along a hallway and bounces off the walls. > -----------------End of Original Message----------------- Dear Vortex, Did this turn out to be a HOAX? Many years ago in an experiment I had a "blob" of plasma like material seeped through the wall of a pyrex beaker. This ball had similar properties to the described sighting. I would be interesting in hearing more if additional information exist. Robert ------------------------------------- Name: dacha E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 3/2/96 Time: 2:05:14 PM http://www.visor.com/info ------------------------------------- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 09:04:51 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA03451 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 08:57:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA03384 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 08:56:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.73] ([204.57.193.73]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id HAA16540 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 07:55:25 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 08:01:20 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Radiometer Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Horace, > > >> 0.8522 GM.CAL/cm^2/Hr/MV << > ^^^^^ >Sorry - my error its "/min/MV" in the metric version not "/Hr/MV" as in the >Imperial units. > >So your calc .8522 x 3600 x 4.19 / 100 should have been > .8522 x 60 x 4.19 / 100 = 2.14 W/mV > >Which is very low as it uses the "with fan" reading of 3.2 mv. The lamp is >rated at 50W at 240v but as Chris Morriss noted the power should be factored >by 230/240 ^2 + 0.918 x 240 = 45.9W which should give a meter reading of >21.45mv. However assuming that only 80% of the heat from the lamp reached the >sensor due to radiation from the reflector outwards, and that the sensor was >only 90% efficient, we have only 0.8 x 0.9 x 45.9 = 33W to activate the >sensor. I'm not even sure that the light energy would add to the sensed >radiation, so we must deduct say another 30% from the 45.9 for the light >portion, giving us 32.13W x .8 x .9 = 23.1W tickling the sensor. > >Anyway, if we can screen it so that we know more accurately the area of sensor >being heated, and blacken the sensor properly we might just have a means of >comparing heat generating devices with some accuracy. > >Norman. Thanks for the info. Norman. It appears a major email logjam has broken here. I am suddenly getting 3 and 4 day old email, including your email date Feb. 28 (Today is March 2). I suspect that the logjam has been caused by great masses of people trying to download a couple megabytes of Netscape 2.0 because their old version just expired (as mine did.) The servers were putting out packets at less than 100 bytes/sec/user! It took me several days of trying all hours of the day to get a new copy downloaded before getting bumped off. Using correct unit conversion factors I get: .8522 / 60 x 4.19 x 100 = 5.952 W/mv 3.2 mV x 5.952 W/mV = 19.05 W (not too far from your 23.1W) This means the absorbtion factor is 82.5 percent of normal due to loss of lamp black. Not bad. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 09:58:45 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA12370 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 09:51:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA12344 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 09:51:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.73] ([204.57.193.73]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA16713 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 08:50:07 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 08:56:01 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: hyperfine vs sledgehammer Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Little said: >> >> >>Sounds real good, Mike. Before you had the extra enclosure, did you >>generally see LOWER results with hot electrolyte like I have? > >We always see Tout lower than expected right after raising inlet >temperature. We attribute this to the need to heat up the components of >the cell. > >At temperatures higher than ambient, there is some heat leak out of the >calorimeter. Depending on geometry of the given setep, the effects can >vary. We do a long run without electrolysis to let the temperatures >stabilize; this bives us a baseline Tout-Tin. We have to do this anyway, >to check the thermocouples, since all thermocouples differ a bit from >absolute calibration. After all this, we take the baseline Tout-Tin as the >delta-T zero point. When operating at 50 C and running low currents, >especially 50-100 mA, these corrections can be larger than the electrolysis >delta-T. We now prefer to avoid such large relative corrections by heating >the cell ambient as closely as possible to the electrolyte Tin. > >Fianlly, a (probably obvious) clarification to my post yesterday: >>>We use a 20 W resistor inside the box with a muffin fan >>>blowing air past it and circulating the air around the box. >AS YOU CAN GUESS, WE USED A VARIABLE VOLTAGE SUPPLY WITH THIS RESISTER, >ADJUSTING THE POWER TO GET THE DESIRED BOX AIR TEMPERATURE. > >Michael J. Schaffer michael.schaffer@gat.com >Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 >General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA I was thinking about active heating control for the wells cut into a large (14" x 24" x 48 ") foam block for the dewars that make up the measuring and component stations of my calorimeter. To avoid lots of calibrations they all would have to be heated to separate individual temperatures. However, I realized that the fluid itself is carrying watts of heat, at least 14 watts from the pump motors, hopefully enough to massively overwhelm any heat loss through 2" or more of R 10.8 foam. The wells should be sufficiently close to the temperature of the dewars within a day or so that no noticible heat loss from the dewars is occuring. Resistance heaters, if in the wells, would seldom be "on". It will be clear if this is true after the calibration runs. Regarding the beads shipping, yikes! I'm not ready! I've still got parts shipping to me. My main jobs - cook, chauffeur, snow shoveller, property manager, handyman, etc., altogether known as stay-at-home-dad, are taking a real abusing along with my budget 10-times-over-what-it-can-stand! I owe much to my wife and family for their extreme patience and understanding through all this. It is fun, fun, fun, though. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 11:39:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA29370 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 11:33:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout05.mail.aol.com (emout05.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.37]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA29359 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 11:32:57 -0800 (PST) From: RMCarrell@aol.com Received: by emout05.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA04350 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 14:31:38 -0500 Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 14:31:38 -0500 Message-ID: <960302143137_436343476@emout05.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Updated review of CF from Dr. Storms Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have at hand an excellent review of the CF effect by Edmund Storms, updated to 1996. It reviews over 190 studies, including the Patterson and Griggs devices, in 43 pages with 19 pages of references. The various types of devices, criticisms, end products, etc. are systematically discussed. Anyone lately on the scene who sees the discussion of the Patterson cell out of context will get up to speed fast with this paper. Serious lurkers and others who quibble about the PowerGen demonstration should retire to a quiet corner and study this document. The "Review of the 'Cold Fusion' Effect" is scheduled for publication in Journal of Scientific Exploration in 1996. Dr. Storms informs me that he will make copies of the manuscript available for $10 to cover his reporduction, handling and mailing costs. Requests may be sent to: Dr. Edmund Storms 270 Hyde Park Estates Santa Fe, NM 87501 -Mike Carrell It is in the cracks between assumptions that new things grow. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 15:04:44 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA01295 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 14:56:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA01266 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 14:56:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA25628; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 17:54:50 -0500 Date: 02 Mar 96 17:53:11 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Re: vtx: Radiometer Message-ID: <960302225311_100060.173_JHB64-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace, >> >"5" missing from the front of the supplied constant, which should be >50.8522 (close enough to 51.1). << Not according to the printed data-plate which hasn't even got a zero before the decimal point. Its very dangerous IMO to assume that just because an answer looks reasonable it must therefore be the correct one. In this case we are sure that the lamp can't output 50W heat to the sensor for at least some of the reasons I quoted in my last post, i.e. radiation backwards, light proportion at freq. not capable of activating the sensor, lower voltage than that listed on plate, sensor not in good condition due to wear and scuffing. So any result in excess of 35-40W must be suspect. I'm still not satisfied with the effect of the fan at lower energy levels, as the with-and-without-fan readings are so different by a factor of 2. That's why I prefer to look at this instrument as an energy comparator at this stage. Norman. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 15:04:59 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA01271 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 14:56:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA01256 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 14:56:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA25636; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 17:54:51 -0500 Date: 02 Mar 96 17:53:14 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Re: vtx: Radiometer Message-ID: <960302225313_100060.173_JHB64-2@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace, >> 19.05 W (not too far from your 23.1W) This means the absorbtion factor is 82.5 percent of normal due to loss of lamp black. Not bad. << V.Good, but see my comments in previous post to you!! As you comment, the mail system seems to have gone gaga, so some double posting might be happening. Hope things get sorted soon. Thanks for all your help and ideas. Norman. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 17:03:38 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id QAA20102 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 16:56:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA20093 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 16:56:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id QAA18869; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 16:56:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 16:56:10 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: 11.6 does not equal 16.1... 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: From: CldFusion@aol.com Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 13:01:06 -0500 To: VORTEX-L@eskimo.com Subject: 11.6 does not equal 16.1... Or more precisely, 16.3ml/min. the number previously posted for my current experiment. - On day 8 here, I have finally gotten the chance to double check the flow rate. Alas, parameters do seem to have changed for my "positive displacement pump", and I am pumping 11.6 ml/min., not 16.3 as previously noted. (This checked by the classic and proper ml buret and a timed (by the data gathering system) 5 minute run. 58 ml in 5 minutes. - I'm still interested in this system, as it does seem to have an interesting current density effect on the overall "effeciency" of my calorimetry. And I plan to run some re-cals on my calorimetry right now with joule heating. - I hope that the postings of Mr. Champion have been correct on the Web (I have not been able to access them yet) in stating the potential (and indeed extant) errors in this work. I hope that I did not post anything where I claimed definitive results. However, as the saying goes, this does serve as a "good" bad example---and that where there is data, there is not always excess...! - As Huxley put it: "An elegant hypothesis, slain by an ugly fact..." MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 19:19:49 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA08409 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 19:10:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA08386 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 19:10:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-3-117.austin.eden.com (net-3-117.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.117]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id VAA25885 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:10:03 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:10:03 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603030310.VAA25885@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: 11.6 does not equal 16.1... X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark said: >Alas, parameters do seem to have changed for my "positive displacement >pump", and I am pumping 11.6 ml/min., not 16.3 as previously noted. Is this a peristaltic pump, Mark? If so, what type of tubing are you running? I've noticed a slight reduction in the flow rate of my system over a 2 week period from 23.5ml/min to about 23 ml/min. I'm using Norprene...a black relatively stiff rubber that's advertised as having maximum life and maximum resistance to "set". From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 21:40:56 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id VAA25467 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:29:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA25438 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:29:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id VAA09941; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:29:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:29:39 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: lithium sulphate et al. 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: --- FORWARDED --- Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 14:09:58 -0800 From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: lithium sulphate et al. >A) The solubility of Li2SO4 in water (in grams per 100 ml) is 26.1 >at 0 deg C and 23 at 100 deg C. In the Patterson Cell one mol, i.e. >110 grams goes in a liter. It cannot crystallize. Nothing and nobody >can convince it to get out from the solution. I'm not so sure about that---I'm no chemist, but I would suspect tha a catalytic surface like Ni can trigger reactions that would not likely happen in the free system. In other words, the minimimum energy of the salt + water system may be a completely dissolved state, but the minimum energy of salt + water + Ni surface may be a salt crystalized onto the surface. Once this breaks off, it takes a while for it to go back into solution....perhaps it has passed the T checkpoint before this occurs. From billb@mail.eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 21:59:09 1996 Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA29186 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:59:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id VAA12013; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:59:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:59:03 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning?! In-Reply-To: <199602282245.OAA23247@mail.eskimo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: > Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 14:31:48 -0800 > From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: vtx: Ball lightning?! > > Bill, you are in luck: > > Through a lucky coincidence, Dr. Peter Handel > > (U of Missouri, St. Louis) sits in an office 30 > > feet away from mine at UCSD---he's a visitor there > for the next 8 months. > > I've been loosely collaborating with him on cold fusion, > since he has done prior work in the field and I am working > on replicating the Patterson cell, in which he has great > interest as well. Unfortunately, the "orange ball of light" was actually a tiny *red* dot of light made by some neighborhood kids with a laser. The family's teenage son was in on the prank, and apparently talked his parents up into a great state of upset. Very strange that even in a brightly lit room they couldn't see that it was a spot of light projected on the wall. > Yesterday I was discussing the Patterson stuff with him, > and it somehow came up that he is actually a group leader on > a rather large effort to study ball lightening (he has > 9 scientists working under him at the Kurachev Institute > in the USSR)---he goes there every three months to monitor > the collaboration, and he has also done theoretical work on possible > mechanisms for ball lightening. He says his soviet colleagues > are close to being able to unambiguosly generate ball > lightening in the lab. Hooray! This subject has been needing a leap forward for quite awhile. Ask him if he's familiar with the sucess of a Dr. Corum in replicating the original Nikola Tesla experiment which creates small 1cm fireballs, some of which explode rather than fade away. Once long ago when I mentioned the Ball Lightning problem to a friend, she swore that ball lightning was easily replicated and the mechanism long known! It turned out that she made this assumption because some group in the lab where she worked needed a large EM pulse, so they borrowed the Ball Lightning generator that was stored in some other lab in the building. WHAT!!?? But she was a labtech on a laser project for SDI, so I asked if the device could possibly be some secret military hardware? Oh. Yes it was, that whole part of the building was high security black project stuff. Wonderful. .....................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 Feb 28 12:45:52 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id MAA29888 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 12:30:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA29820; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 12:30:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id MAA18463; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 12:30:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 12:30:25 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: list physics teaching cc: tap-l@listserv.appstate.edu, freenrg-list@mail.eskimo.com, vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Ball lightning?! 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 friend at the U of W called me last night. He's in CSICOP, and the UW forwards to him its calls from the public involving paranormal stuff. He just got a call from a woman in Bellingham, WA who's family is scared to death by a continuing nightly occurrence: A glowing orange ball floats in through the bathroom window, drifts along a hallway and bounces off the walls. This has happened over the past several nights. At least one of the events was preceded by a bright flash outside the house. No thunderstorm activity locally. The family has managed to videotape it. Anyway, does anyone here have contact with someone who's interested in ball lightning? I've heard of a Dr. Berry and Dr. Vonnegut, but have no further contact info. So far no one at the UW here in Seattle has expressed interest. This is a golden opportunity to do spectro- photography, RF and e-field studies, etc. That is, if the phenomena continues for much longer. Also, if this event continues into the weekend, I'm going to try to go up and observe. I'll take a 35mm camera and diff. grating, an AM radio and tape recorder for crude RF detection, a little GM counter, a compass, and a simple electrometer. Any suggestions for other things I should be bringing? Yes, I know that ball lightning has been known to explode with a deafening sound. And I *am* going to avoid being the first person to be electrocuted by poking a ball lightning with a bent coathanger! ********************************************************************** William J. Beaty DESIGN ENGINEER beatywj@grtpa01.grt.ch.etn.com INDUSTRIAL PHOTOCONTROLS EATON/CUTLER-HAMMER Everett, WA 206-353-0900 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 2 03:49:20 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA25066 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 14:56:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout06.mail.aol.com (emout06.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.43]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA24977 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 14:55:41 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by emout06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA17680 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 17:39:10 -0500 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 17:39:10 -0500 Message-ID: <960228173910_434002696@emout06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.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: Frank Stenger from NASA is interested in ball lightning.1-216-224-0121 Frank Z From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 3 05:57:20 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA11400 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 05:48:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix10.ix.netcom.com (ix10.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA11394 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 05:48:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix10.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id FAA13713; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 05:47:25 -0800 Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 05:47:25 -0800 Message-Id: <199603031347.FAA13713@ix10.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: vtx: ersatz beads away! To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: You wrote: > >Our ersatz beads arrived today and they look really nice...resembling >closely silver cake decorator beads. The coating is relatively smooth and >homogeneous in appearance. The fabricator indicates that the layer >thicknesses are very close to 1 micron each. > Dear Scott, Whatever Patterson beads that were shown on TV coverage of the Patterson Cell show a black bead. Doesn't this indicate a coating much thinner than 1 micron? I wonder what effects would be shown with the 'ersatz' beads' thicker coating. Can the fabricator make beads with thinner coatings if needed? Or to fabricate beads with just Pd, Ni, or Ti coatings for simultaneous comparator cells along with a control cell? How about a bead surface initial preparatory coating of silver instead of copper? How about other bead materials beside borosilicate glass like pure quartz or some ceramics as mentioned privately by a vortex subscriber? The early Patterson cell displayed, I think, uses a glass cylinder capped on each end with bolts tying down sealing end plates. Their cell diagram also displays a peforated plate type Pd. cathode and anode electrode. Their current cell used at the Power-Gen seems to depart from this contruction in that the hidden cell does not have a bulky configutation. Rather, the hidden cell looks rather like a modified compacted resin column with the perforated plate Pd. electrodes on each end. Ideally, the 'ersatz' beads should show excess energy. If there is active heating expected, why are you using plastic for your column? Wouldn't the heat tend to warp? And is there to be a perforated Pd plate for additional electrode area? So far I see a removabel Pd. wire going into a cell. I am asking these questions because if I had the necessary resources I would be doing it all. That not being the case --- I ask. Are additional bead availbale in the future? Sincerely, -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 3 06:42:02 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id GAA15669 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 06:32:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA15664 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 06:32:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-7-203.austin.eden.com (net-7-203.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.203]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA29802 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 08:32:46 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 08:32:46 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603031432.IAA29802@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: lithium sulphate et al. X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) >I'm not so sure about that---I'm no chemist, but I would suspect tha >a catalytic surface like Ni can trigger reactions that would not >likely happen in the free system. In other words, the >minimimum energy of the salt + water system may be a completely >dissolved state, but the minimum energy of salt + water + Ni surface >may be a salt crystalized onto the surface. Once this breaks off, >it takes a while for it to go back into solution....perhaps it has >passed the T checkpoint before this occurs. OK, anything's "possible"...but, remember, the solution would separate into COOLER water + crystals...not HOTTER water and crystals...because the dissolution of Li2SO4 in water is exothermic. Thus, if this were happening AND the cell was still showing a positive delta-T indicating excess heat, it would mean that the actual excess heat was GREATER than the face value of the measurement. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 3 06:48:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id GAA16195 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 06:41:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA16179 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 06:41:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-7-203.austin.eden.com (net-7-203.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.203]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA00100 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 08:41:17 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 08:41:17 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603031441.IAA00100@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: ersatz beads away! X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Akira says: >Whatever Patterson beads that were shown on TV coverage of the >Patterson Cell show a black bead. Doesn't this indicate a coating much >thinner than 1 micron? I don't know...but I don't think so. I believe that the coating can turn blackish due to chemical action during electrolysis. >wonder what effects would be shown with the >'ersatz' beads' thicker coating. Our coating thickness was chosen because of various reports received indirectly (or possibly directly) from Patterson. There's a little sketch showing the cross section of one bead (it's on Logajan's web page) that shows the layer thicknesses as 1 micron. >Can the fabricator make beads with >thinner coatings if needed? Yes. >Or to fabricate beads with just Pd, Ni, or >Ti coatings for simultaneous comparator cells along with a control >cell? Yes, anything. >How about a bead surface initial preparatory coating of silver >instead of copper? These don't have Cu...instead he uses a Sn/Pd monolayer. >How about other bead materials beside borosilicate >glass like pure quartz or some ceramics as mentioned privately by a >vortex subscriber? I'll inquire. >The early Patterson cell displayed, I think, uses a glass cylinder >capped on each end with bolts tying down sealing end plates. Their cell >diagram also displays a peforated plate type Pd. cathode and anode >electrode. Their current cell used at the Power-Gen seems to depart >from this contruction in that the hidden cell does not have a bulky >configutation. Rather, the hidden cell looks rather like a modified >compacted resin column with the perforated plate Pd. electrodes on each >end. > >Ideally, the 'ersatz' beads should show excess energy. If there is >active heating expected, why are you using plastic for your column? I've switched to glass...the plastic cracks after extended exposure to the electrolyte. >Wouldn't the heat tend to warp? And is there to be a perforated Pd >plate for additional electrode area? So far I see a removabel Pd. wire >going into a cell. I am asking these questions because if I had the >necessary resources I would be doing it all. That not being the case >--- I ask. Fine. No, All I have is a Pt screen for additional area...not Pd. >Are additional bead availbale in the future? Yes. we have a limited supply...and we can order more. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 3 09:11:40 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA03077 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 09:03:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA03054 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 09:03:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.77] ([204.57.193.77]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA21322 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 08:02:41 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 08:08:12 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: vtx: Protocol, etc. Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > >Our coating thickness was chosen because of various reports received >indirectly (or possibly directly) from Patterson. There's a little sketch >showing the cross section of one bead (it's on Logajan's web page) that >shows the layer thicknesses as 1 micron. > Just a few disjoint comments: Hopefully the primary source for the bead structure is US Patent 5,036,031. Regarding protocol: I feel like we still don't have one, and maybe can't? It seems like charging current and voltage must be a function of the individual cell designs. Maybe we could agree on a 12 hrs. charging time. Is it possible to agree on a voltage instead of a current? I still am concerned about the discrepancies in the data: >From I.E. V.1 No.2 pp.18-22: BEAD LOADING INFORMATION Fresh beads: 12 hrs Pre-loaded beads: 1 hr. Loading current: .2 to .5 A A constant current supply was used. APPLIES TO: Cell resistance: 135 going up to 160 ohms. Number of beads: 1200 DEDUCTIONS: V=IR, so to calculate the possible range of voltages used for loading: I R V .5 135 67.5 .2 160 32 .5 160 80 .2 135 27 >From the above it appears the loading voltage is about 30V or more. This makes no sense in view of the data shown for 4/9/95 and subsequent days: T V A 21:10 3.29 0.7 9:45 3.8 0.12 18:50 3.43 0.09 12:00 4.15 0.21 It appears there is an error somewhere in the data, or I have a misunderstanding, or the beads weren't loaded in the cell used at ICCF5 to which the above data applies. Maybe we should look to US Patent 5,372,688 for a protocol. I am not "skilled in the art", but if others who are, legally speaking, i.e. PE or PHD, follow the treachings of the patents, and do not get results, it could invalidate the patents. This would be stong leverage for a little cooperation. Regarding the decreasing flow rate in Scott Little's system: It seems reasonable the tubing would relax, not shrink, unless there is a chemical reaction going on with the tubing. The increased internal diameter would increase the friction factor (reduce flow resistance). It is possible, though, the tubing has absorbed water or sulpher or something and expanded, reducing ID. Rubber might be especially prone to absorbing sulpher. Maybe gunk is ablating off the inside of the tubing and clogging the filter or other things in the system? Maybe the Li2SO4 electrolyte concentration has increased or chemical content changed, thus increasing viscosity? Maybe the filter has compressed, increasing flow resistance. Maybe a heat/cool cycle has caused tension on a tight bend in the tubing to result in flattening and thus a slight restriction? Maybe the motor or pump heating up reduces it's pumping capacity? Whatever it is, I will probably have the same problem shortly. One thing that I hope will give a clue is pressure. I have a pressure guage that goes up to 300 mm Hg. Maybe I should put it just following the pump in the electrolyte loop. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 3 09:33:12 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA06058 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 09:25:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA06047 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 09:25:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id MAA28201; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 12:25:21 -0500 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA01918; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 12:23:53 -0500 Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 12:23:53 -0500 From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) Message-Id: <199603031723.AA01918@world.std.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Champion & Hugo Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To Mark Hugo and Joe Champion: Nice postings and effort at generating experimental data. It was difficult for me to identify the controls, or to determine the presence of adequate baseline. Could not determine why the output in some segments began greater than the input. Were the averages over only part of the curves? if so, why not identify which portions? What was done in the experiment anyway? Light water, some other systems? Also, you might try putting up the integrals to the right axis, or other method, so the reader can rule out energy storage. As one example of what is meant by these suggestions, have put an experimental group of curves on a web page presently being constructed and not available generally as yet. However, because it is important to share ideas (and criticism) in this scientific field, then if either one of you, or any other serious vortex reader is interested in that example, then send me e-mail (mica@world.std.com) with the subject header as "power" for the URL to the page. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 3 10:45:45 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA16218 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 10:36:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from nz1.netzone.com (root@netzone.com [206.43.36.70]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA16203 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 10:36:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from phx-ip-48.netzone.com (phx-ip-48.netzone.com [206.43.37.48]) by nz1.netzone.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA21279 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 11:36:06 -0700 Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 11:36:06 -0700 Message-Id: <199603031836.LAA21279@nz1.netzone.com> X-Sender: discpub@netzone.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Joe Champion Subject: Re: vtx: 11.6 does not equal 16.1... Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:56 PM 3/2/96 -0800, you wrote: >From: CldFusion@aol.com >Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 13:01:06 -0500 >To: VORTEX-L@eskimo.com >Subject: 11.6 does not equal 16.1... > >Or more precisely, 16.3ml/min. the number previously posted for my current >experiment. >- >On day 8 here, I have finally gotten the chance to double check the flow >rate. Alas, parameters do seem to have changed for my "positive displacement >pump", and I am pumping 11.6 ml/min., not 16.3 as previously noted. (This >checked by the classic and proper ml buret and a timed (by the data gathering >system) 5 minute run. 58 ml in 5 minutes. >- >I'm still interested in this system, as it does seem to have an interesting >current density effect on the overall "effeciency" of my calorimetry. And I >plan to run some re-cals on my calorimetry right now with joule heating. >- >I hope that the postings of Mr. Champion have been correct on the Web (I have >not been able to access them yet) in stating the potential (and indeed >extant) errors in this work. I hope that I did not post anything where I >claimed definitive results. However, as the saying goes, this does serve as a >"good" bad example---and that where there is data, there is not always >excess...! >- >As Huxley put it: "An elegant hypothesis, slain by an ugly fact..." MDH > > Since I have been traveling, I have not had a chance to speak to Mark directly on the difference in flow rate. An explanation as to the presentation of data is straight forward. Mark collected several data sets from the cell. Each set of data contained approximately 600 readings of power in (E,I) and power out in the form of millivolts from a thermocouple. This data was forwarded to me via e-mail. In presenting the data I did so by displaying Pin as (E*I) and Pout as (deltaT*1.138) for the flow rate of 16.3 ml/min. No other calculations were presented, for the members of vtx can make their own determinations. As we are all aware, it is easy to "inflate" results. After I converse with Mark on the exact details of change in flow rates, I will make the changes from the power.html page. It may take a few days to do so, for I am traveling once again, and will be in the Twin Cities with MArk this week. Joe Champion email discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 3 12:59:11 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id MAA08092 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 12:39:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA07945 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 12:39:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-084.austin.eden.com (net-2-084.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.84]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id OAA15126 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 14:38:31 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 14:38:31 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603032038.OAA15126@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: Protocol, etc. X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: HH says: >Hopefully the primary source for the bead structure is US Patent 5,036,031. We sure studied this but it doesn't specify much. For example, it states a very wide range of coating thicknesses. >Regarding protocol: I feel like we still don't have one, and maybe can't? >It seems like charging current and voltage must be a function of the >individual cell designs. Maybe we could agree on a 12 hrs. charging time. >Is it possible to agree on a voltage instead of a current? Yeah, I don't understand the CFer's fascination for constant current yet....of course I'm not an electrochemist. >>From the above it appears the loading voltage is about 30V or more. My experience has been towards 100-200 ohms for the cell. Perhaps this is because I've steadfastly used 1 molar Li2SO4 soln instead of going to higher concs....which I understand Cravens sometimes used. >Regarding the decreasing flow rate in Scott Little's system: It seems >reasonable the tubing would relax... It's even simpler: The pump's displacement is directly dependant upon the "rebound" of the rubber after the roller passes. The tubing eventually takes a permanet set and thus does not rebound as much as it did when it was new. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 06:38:02 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id NAA28708 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 13:20:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA28573 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 13:19:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQafmj13003; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 16:15:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA26104; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 13:15:21 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 562114130096063FEPRI; 03 Mar 1996 13:14:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 03 Mar 1996 13:14:13 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: 11.6 does not equal 16.1... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/03/96 13:14:16 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 03/02/96 19:19 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: 11.6 does not equal 16.1... No, my pump is a Liquid Metronics chemical metering pump. It is positive displacement. And its stroke rate is controlled by the computer. But the volume per stroke, obviously can vary over long periods of time, or perhaps with the solution. I did my calibrations with DI water. The current solution has a stronge electrolyte in it, and I suspect has changed the viscosity. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 06:43:18 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA25120 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 19:14:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA25074 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 19:14:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.67] ([204.57.193.67]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA24312 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 18:13:39 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 18:19:00 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Protocol, etc. Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >Yeah, I don't understand the CFer's fascination for constant current >yet....of course I'm not an electrochemist. > I think it is to avoid having to integrate the current to determine the mol. flow. For our (loading) case, we only have a range of amps specified, but we are using different bead areas and cell resistances (maybe) so a constant voltage is more likely to give similar results, though it might be more difficult or inaccurate to estimate the volume of hydrogen loaded. I think estimating the amount of H loaded is guesswork anyway due to a lack of uniform voltage gradient in the cells, unknown or different Faradaic efficiencies, amount of released H2, etc. Maybe the best estimate of loading is a ratio of cell resistance prior to loading and resistance after loading. This would probably be a very useful statistic to verify similar results from loading. Did you say you have a 2cc, cell? If so, maybe I should go for broke and use all 2cc of beads. Was your cell .7" dia? On the other hand, if lots of us get similar results with all different protocols and devices that would be pretty meaningful. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 3 19:03:02 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA14976 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 18:51:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA14964 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 18:51:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-7-209.austin.eden.com (net-7-209.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.209]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id UAA06907 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 20:51:49 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 20:51:49 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603040251.UAA06907@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: US Patent 5,036,031 X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Another thing about this patent...it never mentions the Ni/Pd/Ni layering....only simple Pd coatings. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 00:04:01 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id XAA15784 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 23:50:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA15773 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 23:50:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA30190; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 08:50:15 +0100 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 08:50:15 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC 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, 1 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: [...] > Since we have been delving into many varied ideas for heat generation and > balance in the PPC, how about yet another: an ion brake effect. > > The hypothesized effect can not account for heat in excess of electrolysis > plus pump energy, but is a way heat can be generated in the PPC by the > pump. The idea is that following the cathode, positive ions are attracted > to the cathode so create a differential velocity with respoect to neutral > H2O and other atoms in the electrolyte, thus create a drag or braking > effect. A similar braking effect must occur just after to anode, but for > cations. The PPC is an electric fluid brake which converts a pressure > differential into heat. There should also be accelerating effects as well, [... etc ...] My role seems to be to pour cold water on schemes to explain XS heat by conventional physics... A similar idea was proposed in spf a few years ago; it was suggested that deuterons plowing through PdD in response to potential gradients would generate Ohmic heat of sorts. Both that scheme and this one fail on the simple fact that for this heat to appear, the particles causing it (deuterons, ions) must first be given that much energy, and the only source for that is the input power. You get out what you put in. The effect would be that the total cell voltage would increase sufficiently to provide that power. You have in fact described the mechanism for Ohmic heating of an electrolyte carrying a current. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 00:44:24 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id AAA21949 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 00:36:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA21935 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 00:36:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA30680; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:36:55 +0100 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:36:54 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry 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, 1 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: [...] > VAN DE GRAFF ELECTROLYSIS CELL - GROUNDED CATHODE STRUCTURE (GCS) [............] > What do you think? Horace, it's nice that you are trying to work out how things work here but you really ought to read an elementary chapter in a chemistry book on electrochemistry. There are so many things wrong with your scheme that I don't have the time to go into every point. Some of the reactions you reckon are exothermic are in fact endo (e.g. reduction of Li+ to Li) and there are no large voltages in the CETI cell. What is more, electrons do not freely float around and arise anywhere. The essentials of what you have is this: an electrolyte in water, containing Li+ ions and SO4= ions. These ions serve only as carriers of ionic current, they do not enter into any electrochemical reactions. Although it is true that you can reduce Li+ to Li metal at a cathode, you need such large negative potentials to do it that other substances in the solution, such as water, will grab the electrons before you get to such potentials. Similarly with SO4= at the anode. What happens is: at the cathode (the beads, never mind that they are a dispersed heap, that serves only to increase the area), water is reduced: H2O + e- ==> H + OH- the electron being supplied by the bead, ultimately by the power supply. The atomic hydrogen is initially in an adsorbed state and can either enter the cathode metal or pair up with another hydrogen atom to make dihydrogen H2 gas. At the anode, water is oxidised: H2O ==> 1/2 O2 + 2H+ + 2e- (you need two cathodics to balance this one) I have written these reactions as I have because in this case the solution is neutral and there is very little H+ or OH- around, only water. In "classical" cold fusion, using strong LiOD, the cathodic reaction is the same but the anodic one uses OD- ions rather than water itself: OD- ==> 1/2 O2 + H+ + 2e-. Note that the electrolyte around the cathode gets a bit basic, around the anode a bit acidic. Somewhere in between, the OH- and H+ neutralise each other again. This is all that happens, plus the migration of ions so as to carry the current through the cell. The electrons in the two equations respectively come out of the cathode, and go into the anode, which are further connected to the power supply. As I say, peroxide is never formed; people have checked and found none. Li is not deposited, sulphate does not enter into any reaction. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 01:33:14 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id BAA25497 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 01:22:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA25486 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 01:22:48 -0800 (PST) Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id UAA29251; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:22:34 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199603040922.UAA29251@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:22:34 +1100 (EST) Cc: msevior@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (Martin Edmund Sevior) In-Reply-To: from "Dieter Britz" at Mar 4, 96 08:50:15 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter Britz wrote: > > My role seems to be to pour cold water on schemes to explain XS heat by > conventional physics... Well mate now that I've joined the ranks of the white coated welfare Queens does this mean you've become a Starry eyed True Believer :-)? Martin From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 03:32:08 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id DAA11955 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 03:22:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA11949 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 03:22:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id GAA21438; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 06:21:15 -0500 Date: 04 Mar 96 06:18:30 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: True Believers Message-ID: <960304111830_100433.1541_BHG78-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Actually, I don't think Dieter is planning to join the TB ranks at all. What is so pleasant about this group is that, whereas on many discussion forums the whole thing is so damned contentious that people feel it necessary to take sides, here people like Dieter can happily trash 'conventional explanations' for excess heat, while Jed and I can happily trash the unconventionalists for their problems with inventors' disease, and dismiss those who expect us to subscribe to unfounded claims or claims which they are unwilling to allow us to investigate. Essentially, we are all on the same side. There is bunk, and its close relative, debunk. Then there is scepticism, replication, validation and investigation. The true sceptic tries very hard not to allow his own wishes and opinions to confuse his thinking, he sits on the fence until forced to move to one side or the other. Personally, I like the sceptics who are willing to get off their bottoms and do their own checking - and I am sure that Dieter (who is probably not in a position to do that so easily as some others) approves of those of us who go out and do the actual work of investigation and validation. If nobody did this, we'd have little to discuss here. Not that I'm at all opposed to armchair work - not even to some of the wilder 'feather vs sledgehammer' discussions we've seen here. But I sometimes wish that everybody would consider the phrase "order of magnitude" and see whether it applies to their notions. So far, there are three explanations (so far) for the CETI cell: fraud - involving some very reputable people like Miley; error (ditto); and an anomalous energy source. Those seeking 'conventional' explanations should by all means continue to seek them, but let us not kid ourselves that they've had any luck so far. Meanwhile, Jed has "kindly" sent me some 'feather' stuff from somebody, so that *I* can respond to it. I think he's getting a bit tetchy. I suspect that Dieter could dispose of it better than I can, but I'll just do my best, eh? Chris From msevior Mon Mar 4 23:27:01 1996 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199603041227.XAA32720@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: Skeptisim. (fwd) To: vortex-l Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:27:00 +1100 (EST) Cc: msevior (Martin Edmund Sevior) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 2130 Status: RO X-Status: When I first checked out spf a year ago I found the level of Physics knowledge displayed quite low, especially among the vocal "skeptics". The more I looked the harder it was to find out what was wrong with various experiments. If the claims didn't go against so much very well known Physics the issue would be settled by now. Regarding the Patterson Cell, it is by no means obvious that all the various cross checks that must be performed, have been done. When making a claim of a momentus discovery it is essential to use as many independent checks of the evidence as possible. The discovery of the top quark is a classic example. The quark was found via 3 independent analysis techniques by two different experiments. All six combinations found evidence for the top quark. I find it very frustrating that all the "independent verifications" of the Patterson Cell all use exactly the same flowing electrolyte measurement technique. Sure it is a good method to establish that something interesting is happening but after that why not use a little creativity? How about simultanous static calorimetry (Scott will try this if his cell works)? Another possibility is a second cooling loop using distilled water to remove the heat dumped in by the cell? I believe Horace Heffner will use this. The PowerGen scale cell offers even more scope for cross checks that are really easy to make. How about measuring the temperature of the output air flow? Combine it with a measurement of the air flow and you've got an independent measurement of the power output of the cell. Finally how about a well documented measurement of the reservoir temperature with the pump running, the fan on but no electrolysis current. Then measure temperature with electrolysis current flowing. It has been hinted that people who have access to working Patterson Cells subscribe to this listserver. How about doing some cross checks like these guys? Do you want to be upstaged by us amauters working without cooperation? Let me repeat. It is essential that cross checks of the performance of the Cells be made and that they agree. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 04:41:38 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id EAA16984 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 04:28:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA16966 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 04:28:07 -0800 (PST) Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id XAA07629 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:28:03 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199603041228.XAA07629@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: Skeptisim. To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:28:03 +1100 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: D Forwarded message: From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 06:24:38 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA21236 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 05:13:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA21230 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 05:13:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA02662; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:13:28 +0100 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:13:28 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: True Believers In-Reply-To: <960304111830_100433.1541_BHG78-1@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 4 Mar 1996, Chris Tinsley wrote: > Actually, I don't think Dieter is planning to join the TB ranks at all. True, I'm not. > What is so pleasant about this group is that, whereas on many discussion > forums the whole thing is so damned contentious that people feel it > necessary to take sides, here people like Dieter can happily trash > 'conventional explanations' for excess heat, while Jed and I can happily > trash the unconventionalists for their problems with inventors' disease, and > dismiss those who expect us to subscribe to unfounded claims or claims which > they are unwilling to allow us to investigate. I get as frustrated at nonsense from skeptics as from TB's. Nonsense is nonsense. [...] > that Dieter (who is probably not in a position to do that so easily as > some others) approves of those of us who go out and do the actual work of > investigation and validation. If nobody did this, we'd have little to > discuss here. I certainly do approve. But I will not hide behind your kind thought in the above, Chris: I would possibly find it easier than a lot of "white coated welfare queens" in the USA, to do cnf experiments here. We have pretty liberal funding policies here, if a bit modest. I.e. it is only largish projects for which I have to get external grants. I could have got grad students to try some cnf work, and done some myself. To do that, however, you have to be sufficiently convinced that there might just be something in it - or sufficiently interested in debunking it. Well, I did get one grad student to spend a few weeks looking at fluctuations in a galvanostat as (mis)used by F&P, and we published a paper about it. There were indeed fluctuations but nowhere near enough to explain anything. Beyond that, I have not initiated any work in the area here and do not intend to - even though I could. I am kept busy doing the research I do care about, and my grad students are busy with stuff that really interests us. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 06:23:35 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA26506 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 05:57:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA26476 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 05:57:40 -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 EAA26694 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 04:57:31 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 05:02:42 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Fri, 1 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > >[...] >> Since we have been delving into many varied ideas for heat generation and >> balance in the PPC, how about yet another: an ion brake effect. >> >> The hypothesized effect can not account for heat in excess of electrolysis >> plus pump energy, but is a way heat can be generated in the PPC by the >> pump. The idea is that following the cathode, positive ions are attracted >> to the cathode so create a differential velocity with respoect to neutral >> H2O and other atoms in the electrolyte, thus create a drag or braking >> effect. A similar braking effect must occur just after to anode, but for >> cations. The PPC is an electric fluid brake which converts a pressure >> differential into heat. There should also be accelerating effects as well, >[... etc ...] > >My role seems to be to pour cold water on schemes to explain XS heat by >conventional physics... A similar idea was proposed in spf a few years ago; >it was suggested that deuterons plowing through PdD in response to potential >gradients would generate Ohmic heat of sorts. Both that scheme and this one >fail on the simple fact that for this heat to appear, the particles causing it >(deuterons, ions) must first be given that much energy, and the only source >for that is the input power. You get out what you put in. The effect would be >that the total cell voltage would increase sufficiently to provide that >power. You have in fact described the mechanism for Ohmic heating of an >electrolyte carrying a current. > >-- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk What I am suggesting here is an effect to be accounted for experimentally by measuring the pressure drop accross the cell under electolysis conditions vs. no electrolysis current, and also by carefully accounting for where the pump energy goes. The important part of what I am saying is that no energy need be supplied by the potential - all the proposed heating comes from the pump due to the fluid motion. Yes, you get out what you put in, but what you put in comes from the pump. This is not ohmic heating due to ion motion induced by an electrical current. No current need be present between the electrodes to create this effect, however small it may be. The proposed effect is 100 percent due to moving ion response to a potential gradient. A simple way to check for the existance of this effect might be to wrap two wires around a piece of plastic tubing a small distance (1 cm) apart. Pump electrolyte through and apply a large potential difference and measure the pressure drop change. The wires are insulated from the electrolyte. No electrical energy would be applied. I will try this when I get time. (I am very busy reworking my calorimeter design). I expect the effect to be very small, but it should still be accounted for. It would mean using kV voltages at a 1 cm distance to get much of an effect. I would think a small voltage at very short distances could have a nearly equal effect. It is the gradient that causes the ion retardaion and thus heat. This effect could not invalidate the Powergen experiment, but could be a consideration in looking for ou effects in new materials, etc. - just another correction factor. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 06:46:46 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id GAA01517 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 06:34:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA01503 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 06:34:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA202130066; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:34:26 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:34:38 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Since we have been delving into many varied ideas for heat generation in >the PPC, how about yet another: an ion brake effect. > >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 Horace, Your thinking is the same as mine as the source of power for the PPC. I have also added a polarization effect where the energy, U, of an electric dipole, p, placed in an electric field, E, is given by: U = E dot p A high enough value of U may shift the Gibb's potential enough to cause chemical transformations and the force, F, given as: F = (p dot gradient) E can play the role of the qE force in your ion brake theory. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 03:58:05 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id DAA13752 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 03:49:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from giasone.teseo.it (giasone.teseo.it [194.21.136.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA13736 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 03:49:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from cappa.teseo.it by giasone.teseo.it; (5.65/1.1.8.2/03Oct95-0808PM) id AA22846; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 12:49:28 +0100 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 12:49:28 +0100 Message-Id: <9603041149.AA22846@giasone.teseo.it> X-Sender: conte@teseo.it Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To all the components of vortex-l. I inform you that my book on Biquaternion Quantum Mechanics(as we know,this theory predices the cold fusion of a proton and an electron to form a=20 neutron) is now available. The price of the book has been fixed by the Publishers in 22-23 US dollars= (one must see in the change) and the book also contains a diskette explaining in detail the theory and the experiments to verify the formation of the neutron= =20 by p and e . You may send your orders directly to me by E-mail and I will inform= consequently my Publishers to send you the copy or the copies. Excuse me for this message:I do not intend to perform an action of promotion= as an advertising campaign;I am strongly convinced that it is very important to= =20 read this book. Yours Sincerely Elio Conte --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 06:55:40 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id RAA29241 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 17:58:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from borg.mindspring.com (root@borg.mindspring.com [204.180.128.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA28952 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 17:57:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from griggs.mindspring.com [168.121.32.133] by borg.mindspring.com with SMTP id UAA01708 for ; Sun, 3 Mar 1996 20:56:42 -0500 Message-Id: <199603040156.UAA01708@borg.mindspring.com> X-Sender: griggs@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 03 Mar 1996 22:09:07 -0600 To: Vortex-l@eskimo.com From: griggs@mindspring.com (Jim Griggs) Subject: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gentlemen I have a question that requires the expertise of this group. For the past few months we have been doing experiment trying to reduce BOD and COD counts in waste water streams from a local factory with varied sucess. We had been told by an associate in the water purification business that if we could create hydroxial radicals with the pump we could probablly remove the BOD's. Two weeks ago we radically changed our pump configuration and operating condition to run a new series of test. Upon start up of the system we noticed that the water leaving the pump was a white milky color instead of being clear. It appeared to look like hot water from a faucet with millions of bubbles in the water, however the water was not hot and we were operating with a very low delta tee across the pump. As we watched the water run ( going down a floor drain ) we noticed that there appeared to be a foam on top of the flow. We collected some samples in a clear mason fruit jar and noticed that the foam would go to the top of the jar and the water would eventually clear up leaving a layer of foam ( about 3/4 to 1 inch thick ) on the top of the water. The lab tech collecting the test samples made a comment that the foam looked like hydrogen peroxide. Now here is my question. Is it possible to make hydrogen peroxide from plain tap water using cavitation. ( We have found that simply by changing the operating pressures we can make this foam appear or disappear using the same flow rate ) If it is possible is there any simple down and dirty test we can run to confirm whether in fact we do have peroxide. I know Jed will ask about the energy balance, but we have not had time to connect this system to our test pad for a complete balance but we will do that very soon since electrical reading indicate that this is a very efficient unit. Any help would be greatly appreciated since this is a very important project for us and our customer who is presently paying $30,000.00 per month in fines for dumping to high a BOD count into city sewers. Thanks again Jim Griggs From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 07:16:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA06651 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:07:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA06614 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:07:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA212102012; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:06:53 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:07:04 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter, In reference to: >As I say, peroxide is never formed; people have checked and found none. Li is >not deposited, sulphate does not enter into any reaction. > > >-- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk how do you know sulfate does not enter to any reaction in the PPC? It is quite different from other CF cells, you would have to make measurments on the PPC and this has not been done. I would expect SO4-- + H2O -> HO- + HSO4- to be nonexistant in other CF cells but quite possible in the PPC. Also note that this reaction is in the direction of increasing Gibb's potential and increasing entropy. This is exactly what is needed to explain the thermodynamics of the PPC cell outflow as opposed to Lithium Sulfate salt crystals which have a sign problem. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 07:27:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA08692 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:18:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA08665 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:18:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQafpd10037; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:17:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA07153; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:17:56 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 702117070096064FEPRI; 04 Mar 1996 07:17:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 04 Mar 1996 07:17:07 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/04/96 07:17:20 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 03/04/96 06:36 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC Thanks Deiter for keeping your hand on things. I think you are a skeptic, who (like me---only I am working diligently experimentally towards this) needs/want s to see something in the 10:1 or higher range, with delta T's in the 10 to 100 degree C range, and flows in the 100 ml/min range so that you can "put your hands in the wounds, etc" of the claims... (sorry about the literary reference.) As far as I'm concerned, keep demanding that... MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 07:39:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA10663 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:27:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA10630 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:27:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA08293; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 16:27:38 +0100 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 16:27:36 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide In-Reply-To: <199603040156.UAA01708@borg.mindspring.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 Sun, 3 Mar 1996, Jim Griggs wrote: > Gentlemen I have a question that requires the expertise of this group. > For the past few months we have been doing experiment trying to reduce BOD > and COD counts in waste water streams from a local factory with varied > sucess. We had been told by an associate in the water purification business > that if we could create hydroxial radicals with the pump we could probablly > remove the BOD's. I don't know what a BOD is but you won't find it easy to make OH radicals. If you mean OH- ions, all you need is to add some alkali, but I doubt whether you really should do that. > Two weeks ago we radically changed our pump configuration and operating > condition to run a new series of test. Upon start up of the system we > noticed that the water leaving the pump was a white milky color instead of > being clear. It appeared to look like hot water from a faucet with millions > of bubbles in the water, however the water was not hot and we were operating > with a very low delta tee across the pump. As we watched the water run ( > going down a floor drain ) we noticed that there appeared to be a foam on > top of the flow. We collected some samples in a clear mason fruit jar and > noticed that the foam would go to the top of the jar and the water would > eventually clear up leaving a layer of foam ( about 3/4 to 1 inch thick ) on > the top of the water. The lab tech collecting the test samples made a > comment that the foam looked like hydrogen peroxide. > Now here is my question. > Is it possible to make hydrogen peroxide from plain tap water using > cavitation. ( We have found that simply by changing the operating pressures > we can make this foam appear or disappear using the same flow rate ) If it > is possible is there any simple down and dirty test we can run to confirm > whether in fact we do have peroxide. > I know Jed will ask about the energy balance, but we have not had time to > connect this system to our test pad for a complete balance but we will do > that very soon since electrical reading indicate that this is a very > efficient unit. > Any help would be greatly appreciated since this is a very important project > for us and our customer who is presently paying $30,000.00 per month in > fines for dumping to high a BOD count into city sewers. I strongly doubt that cavitation can make peroxide; why should it? However, if you must check for peroxide, good old Standard Methods of Chemical Analysis has a recipe. I'd start by simply checking for the presence of H2O2, rather than accurately assaying for it: Dissolve 1 g KI in 100 ml water, add a few drops sulphuric acid, stir. Add a couple drops of 1M ammonium molybdate. Add also a few drops of a starch indicator solution used for iodine titration. Now add a ml or so of your scummy water. If you have H2O2, you will oxidise some of the iodide to iodine, and the solution will go blue. If it does, you might want to do the titration to find out how much, but my guess is you won't find any. Note that if you leave the solution standing, it will go blue anyway from slow iodide oxidation by oxygen. If you want the full recipe, email me your fax number. My guess is that this scum is foam due to a surfactant in the feed water, or the mechanical action of your pump is precipitating out something. I favour the surfactant scenario. If this is as important to you as it seems to be, you should probably get onto a chemical lab in your city, rather than ask for advice at a distance, as here. Good luck cracking this problem! -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 07:46:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA11850 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:33:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA11807 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:33:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQafpe26203; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:30:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA15703; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:29:56 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 500729070096064FEPRI; 04 Mar 1996 07:29:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 04 Mar 1996 07:29:07 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: vtx: Joint Nuclear Project To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/04/96 07:29:06 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 03/02/96 04:34 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Joint Nuclear Project Good to review my posting. I said "apparently" a lot, and did make it clear I was counting previous calibration. (Which turned out to have drifted.) Calibrat ion work has been the order of the day for this weekend, and will continue this week. MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 07:48:45 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA12343 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:35:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from sunny.bahnhof.se (root@sunny.bahnhof.se [193.44.91.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA12233 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:35:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from [193.44.91.100] (pppnode0 [193.44.91.100]) by sunny.bahnhof.se (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA23488; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 15:54:45 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: david@sunny.bahnhof.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 15:54:28 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: david@bahnhof.se (David Jonsson) Subject: Re: vtx: Bernoullis theorem vs. Principle of Relativity Cc: gravitics@aol.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Some time ago I wrote the following: >The Bernoulli's theorem states that pressure is lower in a moving medium >relative to a stationary but this is contradictory to the Principle of >Relativity. Does fluiddynamics require an absolute room? How is this room >chosen? > >Help me someone. I am feeling lost. I have not made any good progress but I begin to reason along the following lines: 1. Absolute room has to be chosen. Relativity is not applicable. 2. "Majority rules". Choose the room so that you get the lowest meanvalue on the speed for every particle. Problem: How does a piece of the fluid know that it belongs to a specific group? There has to be some kind of size of the groups? Turbulence can be described as the case when two relatively moving fluidparts is in either low or high pressure depending on time, location and surrounding. I am currently studying absoulte room theory by Paul A. LaViolette's in his book Subquantum Kinetics. Interested people can buy his book by contacting him at Gravitics@aol.com David -- David Jonsson Phone +46-18-24 51 52 Postgiro 499 40 54-7 Kantorsgatan 30:390 Cellular Phone +46-707-21 25 19 S-754 24 Uppsala E-mail: david@bahnhof.se Sweden Web http://bahnhof.se/~david/ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 08:02:36 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA13136 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:39:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA13103 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:39:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA04972; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 16:39:52 +0100 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 16:39:52 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry 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 Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Larry Wharton wrote: > how do you know sulfate does not enter to any reaction in the PPC? It is > quite different from other CF cells, you would have to make measurments on > the PPC and this has not been done. I would expect > > SO4-- + H2O -> HO- + HSO4- This is the reverse of the reaction HSO4- <==> H+ + SO4= which has a pK of -3, i.e. an equilibrium constant of 1000. This mean that SO4= likes to stay as is. Your reaction will not run. Entropy is not enough, you need the whole Gibbs energy change, and it disfavours your scheme. This is why a solution of, say, Li2SO4 in water is neutral, not (as you would have it) basic. What you suggest goes for weak acids like HCO3-, the hydrogen carbonate anion, but not for this one. > thermodynamics of the PPC cell outflow as opposed to Lithium Sulfate salt > crystals which have a sign problem. What is this sign problem?? Crystal formation is another no-no. Even if the whole content of Li2SO4 in one CETI cell, in crystallising out, could supply a lot of heat (I have no idea at the moment what the thermodynamics of this is), you can't keep supplying it, you'd soon be out of salt, your cell voltage would go up, and someone Would Notice. But there is no reason at all why there should be any crystallisation. Does anybody see lots of crystals building up? -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 08:06:04 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA15951 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:55:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA15931 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:55:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQafpf18613; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:55:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA07430; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:42:56 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 132442070096064FEPRI; 04 Mar 1996 07:42:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 04 Mar 1996 07:42:07 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: vtx: Champion & Hugo To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/04/96 07:42:23 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 03/01/96 22:34 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Champion & Hugo John's comment about "carry over" from previous power levels is very good. And something that I am aware of. Typically you CAN tell if this is happening, as the CC power source maintains a lower voltage to start, and then, as the overall system cools, the voltage gradually creeps up. Good observing John! MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 09:07:21 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA04565 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 08:55:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA04514 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 08:55:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 08:55:12 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199603041655.IAA04514@mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 8:54:57 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Protocol, etc. Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: >I still am concerned about the discrepancies in the data: > >From I.E. V.1 No.2 pp.18-22: > >BEAD LOADING INFORMATION > >Fresh beads: 12 hrs >Pre-loaded beads: 1 hr. >Loading current: .2 to .5 A >A constant current supply was used. > >APPLIES TO: > >Cell resistance: 135 going up to 160 ohms. >Number of beads: 1200 > > >DEDUCTIONS: > >V=IR, so to calculate the possible range of voltages used for loading: > I R V >.5 135 67.5 >.2 160 32 >.5 160 80 >.2 135 27 > > >From the above it appears the loading voltage is about 30V or more. This >makes no sense in view of the data shown for 4/9/95 and subsequent days: > >T V A >21:10 3.29 0.7 >9:45 3.8 0.12 >18:50 3.43 0.09 >12:00 4.15 0.21 Resistance of a given electrolytic cell is not a constant. It varies strongly with current, generally decreasing as current increases. Resistance also depends on other factors, some of which I still do not understand. The data in the table just above show R ranging from about 5 to almost 40 ohm. We have seen resistances from a few tens to a few hundred ohm in our own cells. I strongly suspect that CETI statements do not all refer a single cell, but to widely differing cells. So I am not sure what we can learn from CETI statements, but I welcome help from anyone who might have clearer information. Re Horace's thick foam insulation: The heat leaks will be small if the foam is thick enough. However, thick foam takes a long time to adjust to temperature changes. If a component's temperature increases (or decreases), then heat will flow from it to the foam (or vice versa) until a new steady state is attained. This can take a few hours with very thick foam. Most affected will be your low power elements, for which this heat reservoir in the foam is a big factor. Michael J. Schaffer michael.schaffer@gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 09:22:56 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA06455 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:05:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA06419 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:05:03 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:05:03 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199603041705.JAA06419@mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 9:04:41 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Protocol, etc. Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Heffner and Little were discussing...> >Yeah, I don't understand the CFer's fascination for constant current >yet....of course I'm not an electrochemist. > I think is derives from the fact that current increases much more rapidly than linearly with voltage. Therefore, if you apply constant voltage and there is some small change in the cell, like number and distribution of bubbles, the current will vary substantially. But if instead you apply constant current and the same change takes place in the cell, the resulting voltage change will be proportionately smaller. In practice, at constant applied voltage you will see a very "noisy" current trace, while at constant applied current you will see a slightly noisy voltage trace. This makes data taking and interpretation a bit easier. Michael J. Schaffer michael.schaffer@gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 10:34:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA21840 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:08:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA21826 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:08:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.83] ([204.57.193.83]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA27725 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:08:40 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:13:46 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Bernoullis theorem vs. Principle of Relativity Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Some time ago I wrote the following: > >>The Bernoulli's theorem states that pressure is lower in a moving medium >>relative to a stationary but this is contradictory to the Principle of >>Relativity. Does fluiddynamics require an absolute room? How is this room >>chosen? >> >>Help me someone. I am feeling lost. > >I have not made any good progress [snip] > >-- >David Jonsson Phone +46-18-24 51 52 Postgiro 499 40 54-7 The relative motion is between the fluid medium and a surface at which the pressure is measured. (The surface can be either real or imaginary. The imaginary surface can be between fluids of different velocities, even though this could not happen in reality. Maybe that is the part that is confusing.) Pressure is a force due to collisions of particles of the fluid with the surface. The pressure drop is due to the fact a fluid particle will impact a specific length of surface less times as it moves faster relative to that surface laterally. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 11:54:29 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA14550 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 11:38:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from borg.mindspring.com (root@borg.mindspring.com [204.180.128.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA14506 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 11:38:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from griggs.mindspring.com [168.121.32.133] by borg.mindspring.com with SMTP id OAA27925 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:38:02 -0500 Message-Id: <199603041938.OAA27925@borg.mindspring.com> X-Sender: griggs@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 04 Mar 1996 14:33:17 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: griggs@mindspring.com (Jim Griggs) Subject: Re: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Sun, 3 Mar 1996, Jim Griggs wrote: > >> Gentlemen I have a question that requires the expertise of this group. >> For the past few months we have been doing experiment trying to reduce BOD >> and COD counts in waste water streams from a local factory with varied >> sucess. We had been told by an associate in the water purification business >> that if we could create hydroxial radicals with the pump we could probablly >> remove the BOD's. > >I don't know what a BOD is but you won't find it easy to make OH radicals. If >you mean OH- ions, all you need is to add some alkali, but I doubt whether >you really should do that. > >> BOD is Biological Oxygen Demand Maybe I wasn't very clear about where the foam is coming from. It is produced from regular city tap water going through the system. This happened before we started the test of the bad water and we can make it appear or disappear by changing pressure in the unit. The same results happened with the bad water on these particular runs. We had run numerous other test and this did not happen with the old configuration. We have been able to reduce the BOD count simply by runing the bad water through the system and rasing the temperature, but there are companies who are doing the same process through cavitation only, with no temperature rise and this was what we were looking for when we changed the system design. Since we operate on a limited budget we were hoping to find a simple and inexpensive means for checking H2O2. Thank you for your input and we will try to find a local lab to assist us if preliminary test warrant. > From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 12:42:10 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA11085 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 11:25:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from giasone.teseo.it (giasone.teseo.it [194.21.136.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11046 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 11:25:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from gamma.teseo.it by giasone.teseo.it; (5.65/1.1.8.2/03Oct95-0808PM) id AA27515; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:24:50 +0100 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:24:50 +0100 Message-Id: <9603041924.AA27515@giasone.teseo.it> X-Sender: conte@teseo.it (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) Subject: vtx: Relativity and Bernoulli theorem X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Again I have seen today that according to some of us,the relativity should= enter in conflict with Bernoulli theorem? I do not know the terms of the discussion very well,however we must remember that,if in the case under discussion,some physical processes of fusion of= matter are involved ,the medium in which this physical processes happen,cannot be considered to be the vacuum and thus the special relativity is no more= valid. This is in accord with biquaternion quantum mechanics where in effect new relativistic invariants are introduced (and it is shown that are physically= =20 possible) in consideration of the possible different physical media.As example,when= the electron penetrates into the proton to form the neutron,the medium of the= proton defines a new space-time that is different from the vacuum.Here the old= special relativity is nomore valid and a new relativistic invariant with entirely=20 new relativistic rules is required. =20 Sincerely Elio Conte = =20 =20 --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 12:44:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id MAA23864 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 12:25:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay6.UU.NET (relay6.UU.NET [192.48.96.16]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA23853 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 12:25:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay6.UU.NET with SMTP id QQafpx02853; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 15:25:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA21098; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 12:25:05 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 675823120096064FEPRI; 04 Mar 1996 12:23:12 PST Message-Id: Date: 04 Mar 1996 12:23:12 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: Interpretation of Positron Annihilation Results To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/04/96 12:23:57 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: Interpretation of Positron Annihilation Results - I have a 1963 Solid State Physics for Metallurgists book. Let me quote: - The annihilation process depends on the positron finding an electron near it and thus depends upon the overlap of the positron and electron wave functions. One of the difficulties is that the wave functions of all electrons near the positron are seriously altered by the positron's attractive potential. (In rela tion to the electrons.) Thus we have a classic QM situation where our measuring device disturbs the system which we are attempting to measure. - In trying to get around this limitation, there has been a "discouraging" result from Lang and de Benedetti. They have measured the angular distribution of Xray s from positron annihilation in both pure Palladium and PALLADIUM SATURATED WITH SUFFICIEN HYDROGEN (.7 H per Pd atom) so that most of the interstitial sites are filled. Since the positron and the proton exert an identical attractive Coulomb potential, it is expected that their positions in the lattice would be similar even though their masses differ. And it is also expected they would effect the electron distributions in similar manners. Within the limits of experimental error, however, no difference in positron a. Xray emmision was observed. The curves from either pure Pd, or H saturated Pd resembling those of other metals tested in a similar man- ner. - The above is the quote. Is is simplistic to say that the results make it seem like the H in the Pd in effect "dissapears" when in the Pd? Some analysis of this please??? MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 14:47:57 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA26136 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:34:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA26121 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:34:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA101028869; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 17:34:29 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 17:34:43 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter, In reference to your posting: >> SO4-- + H2O -> HO- + HSO4- > >This is the reverse of the reaction > >HSO4- <==> H+ + SO4= >which has a pK of -3, i.e. an equilibrium constant of 1000. This mean that >SO4= likes to stay as is. Your reaction will not run. Entropy is not enough, >you need the whole Gibbs energy change, and it disfavours your scheme. This I know that something must supply the Gibbs energy change. I purpose that the Paterson cell supplies this energy through exposure of the electrolyte to a high electric field. The effect of a high electric field is known in chemistry as having the property of changing the chemical activity. I think it is more physical to ascribe this effect to the energy of an electric dipole, in an electric field, being added to the Gibb's potential but the end effect will be the same. If we set the maximum electric field, Emax to : Emax = Electrolysis Potential / Debye legnth I think one could supply the necessary energy, although I need to get the dipole moments of all the chemicals involved and I haven't found them all yet. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 02:16:44 1996 Received: from kilkenny.tip.net (kilkenny.tip.net [192.36.73.16]) by agora.stm.it (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id CAA19819 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 02:16:35 GMT Received: from mail.eskimo.com (majordom@mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by kilkenny.tip.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA00318 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 00:06:57 +0100 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA26136 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:34:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA26121 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:34:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA101028869; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 17:34:29 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 17:34:43 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry Sender: owner-vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter, In reference to your posting: >> SO4-- + H2O -> HO- + HSO4- > >This is the reverse of the reaction > >HSO4- <==> H+ + SO4= >which has a pK of -3, i.e. an equilibrium constant of 1000. This mean that >SO4= likes to stay as is. Your reaction will not run. Entropy is not enough, >you need the whole Gibbs energy change, and it disfavours your scheme. This I know that something must supply the Gibbs energy change. I purpose that the Paterson cell supplies this energy through exposure of the electrolyte to a high electric field. The effect of a high electric field is known in chemistry as having the property of changing the chemical activity. I think it is more physical to ascribe this effect to the energy of an electric dipole, in an electric field, being added to the Gibb's potential but the end effect will be the same. If we set the maximum electric field, Emax to : Emax = Electrolysis Potential / Debye legnth I think one could supply the necessary energy, although I need to get the dipole moments of all the chemicals involved and I haven't found them all yet. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 17:52:42 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id RAA02219 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 17:41:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA02122 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 17:40:52 -0800 (PST) Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id MAA04696 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 12:40:41 +1100 Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id KAA32263; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:56:52 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199603042356.KAA32263@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: vtx: Re: Skeptisim. To: 72240.1256@compuserve.com (Jed Rothwell) Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:56:52 +1100 (EST) Cc: msevior@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (Martin Edmund Sevior) In-Reply-To: <960304173501_72240.1256_EHB33-4@CompuServe.COM> from "Jed Rothwell" at Mar 4, 96 12:35:01 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed, you have technical objections to doing cross checks based on the lack of precision compared to flow calorimetry. These are challenges to be overcome not absolute roadblocks. Scott's system promises to give simultanous static calorimetry to about the 0.1 watt level. The second loop of distilled water cooling could be implemented in Horace's heavily insulated system. The advantage of distilled water is that the sort of chemical heat pump hypothesis proposed as an explanation is clearly impossible. Other schemes are like the temperature of the electrolyte originally used by Patterson could be dreamed up. The point is that people doing replications should make these cross checks. The comparison to other Ni-H systems is not valid. The issue under discussion is whether the Patterson Cell produces anomulus heat. I certainly agree that the PowerGen demo was nowhere near the level of sophistication it could have achieved BUT having produced cells that produce in excess of 200 watts of heat, it is easy to build systems that utilize a variety of schemes to measure their heat output at many many sigma. These cross checks must be done. Regarding High Energy Physics, I agree that 19th Century Science could have said little about the matter. However that doesn't the fact that the "evidence" for the W and Z bosons are now at the several thousand sigma level and have now been observed at 10 different experiments plus have corroborating evidence from literally thousands of low energy experiments. Now that PowerGen level cells are available one would hope that the Patterson Cell will soon be in a similar situation. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 03:30:38 1996 Received: from mail.eskimo.com (mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by agora.stm.it (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id DAA24549 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 03:30:36 GMT Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id RAA02219 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 17:41:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA02122 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 17:40:52 -0800 (PST) Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id MAA04696 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 12:40:41 +1100 Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id KAA32263; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:56:52 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199603042356.KAA32263@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: vtx: Re: Skeptisim. To: 72240.1256@compuserve.com (Jed Rothwell) Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:56:52 +1100 (EST) Cc: msevior@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (Martin Edmund Sevior) In-Reply-To: <960304173501_72240.1256_EHB33-4@CompuServe.COM> from "Jed Rothwell" at Mar 4, 96 12:35:01 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed, you have technical objections to doing cross checks based on the lack of precision compared to flow calorimetry. These are challenges to be overcome not absolute roadblocks. Scott's system promises to give simultanous static calorimetry to about the 0.1 watt level. The second loop of distilled water cooling could be implemented in Horace's heavily insulated system. The advantage of distilled water is that the sort of chemical heat pump hypothesis proposed as an explanation is clearly impossible. Other schemes are like the temperature of the electrolyte originally used by Patterson could be dreamed up. The point is that people doing replications should make these cross checks. The comparison to other Ni-H systems is not valid. The issue under discussion is whether the Patterson Cell produces anomulus heat. I certainly agree that the PowerGen demo was nowhere near the level of sophistication it could have achieved BUT having produced cells that produce in excess of 200 watts of heat, it is easy to build systems that utilize a variety of schemes to measure their heat output at many many sigma. These cross checks must be done. Regarding High Energy Physics, I agree that 19th Century Science could have said little about the matter. However that doesn't the fact that the "evidence" for the W and Z bosons are now at the several thousand sigma level and have now been observed at 10 different experiments plus have corroborating evidence from literally thousands of low energy experiments. Now that PowerGen level cells are available one would hope that the Patterson Cell will soon be in a similar situation. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 20:10:51 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA27814 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:56:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA27730 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:56:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-29.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-29.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.29]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA26929 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:53:17 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Protocol, etc. Date: Tue, 05 Mar 1996 04:55:13 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <313a9c4e.35452549@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199603032038.OAA15126@natashya.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199603032038.OAA15126@natashya.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 3 Mar 1996 14:38:31 -0600 (CST), Scott Little wrote: >HH says: > >>Hopefully the primary source for the bead structure is US Patent 5,036,031. > >We sure studied this but it doesn't specify much. For example, it states a >very wide range of coating thicknesses. > >>Regarding protocol: I feel like we still don't have one, and maybe can't? >>It seems like charging current and voltage must be a function of the >>individual cell designs. Maybe we could agree on a 12 hrs. charging time. >>Is it possible to agree on a voltage instead of a current? > >Yeah, I don't understand the CFer's fascination for constant current >yet....of course I'm not an electrochemist. > Surely this is simply because a constant current results in a constant reaction rate, making it easy to calculate how much hydrogen has been produced. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 20:18:38 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA29005 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:03:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA28977 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:03:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id XAA11278; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:01:55 -0500 Date: 04 Mar 96 23:00:03 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide Message-ID: <960305040003_76570.2270_FHU44-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter Britz writes: "I strongly doubt that cavitation can make peroxide; why should it?" If Dieter had been subscribing to Infinite Energy and read Volume 1, No.1, he might have seen this reference in the ICCF4 lecture by Julian Schwinger (read by yours truly in his absence) -- "Cold Fusion: A Brief History of Mine": " During World War I, the growing need to detect enemy submarines led to the development of what was then called (by the British, anyway) subaqueous sound-ranging. The consequent improvement in strong acoustic sources found no scientific applications until 1927. It was then discovered that, when a high intensity sound field produced cavitation in water, hydrogen peroxide was formed...." While I'm on this forum let me mention that Infinite Energy -- a Special Double Issue (about 120 pages, Issues #5 & #6 combined) is on track for printing and distribution later this month (March). Since we have had a significant increase in the readership, and because this is a special issue, we are printing 5,000 of this issue rather than the usual 3,000. MOst folks want all the back issues. Our "typical" reader is an engineer or scientist who has been following CF out of the corner of his or her eye, but there are also lots of "ordinary citizens" who hear about us and want to subscribe immediately. We have about 10% of our subscribers in countries other than the U.S. Also, orders for the tape ($49.95 (US/Canada), $64.95 elsewhere) of my December 1995 Rutgers University CF/New Energy lecture are now being shipped. And, copies of the tape set of the the Cold Fusion/New Energy Symposium on January 20, 1996 at the Cambridge Marriott will be ready in the next few days ($99.95 (US/Canada), $124.95 elsewhere). Many orders received already. Thanks! Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D., Editor-in-Chief INFINITE ENERGY: Cold Fusion and New Energy Technnology Cold Fusion Technology P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Fax: 603-224-5975 Phone: 603-228-4516 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 05:48:19 1996 Received: from mail.eskimo.com (mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by agora.stm.it (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id FAA02656 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 05:48:17 GMT Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA27814 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:56:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA27730 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:56:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-29.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-29.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.29]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA26929 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:53:17 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Protocol, etc. Date: Tue, 05 Mar 1996 04:55:13 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <313a9c4e.35452549@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199603032038.OAA15126@natashya.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199603032038.OAA15126@natashya.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 3 Mar 1996 14:38:31 -0600 (CST), Scott Little wrote: >HH says: > >>Hopefully the primary source for the bead structure is US Patent 5,036,031. > >We sure studied this but it doesn't specify much. For example, it states a >very wide range of coating thicknesses. > >>Regarding protocol: I feel like we still don't have one, and maybe can't? >>It seems like charging current and voltage must be a function of the >>individual cell designs. Maybe we could agree on a 12 hrs. charging time. >>Is it possible to agree on a voltage instead of a current? > >Yeah, I don't understand the CFer's fascination for constant current >yet....of course I'm not an electrochemist. > Surely this is simply because a constant current results in a constant reaction rate, making it easy to calculate how much hydrogen has been produced. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 05:54:32 1996 Received: from mail.eskimo.com (mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by agora.stm.it (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id FAA02978 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 05:54:28 GMT Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA29005 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:03:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA28977 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:03:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id XAA11278; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:01:55 -0500 Date: 04 Mar 96 23:00:03 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide Message-ID: <960305040003_76570.2270_FHU44-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter Britz writes: "I strongly doubt that cavitation can make peroxide; why should it?" If Dieter had been subscribing to Infinite Energy and read Volume 1, No.1, he might have seen this reference in the ICCF4 lecture by Julian Schwinger (read by yours truly in his absence) -- "Cold Fusion: A Brief History of Mine": " During World War I, the growing need to detect enemy submarines led to the development of what was then called (by the British, anyway) subaqueous sound-ranging. The consequent improvement in strong acoustic sources found no scientific applications until 1927. It was then discovered that, when a high intensity sound field produced cavitation in water, hydrogen peroxide was formed...." While I'm on this forum let me mention that Infinite Energy -- a Special Double Issue (about 120 pages, Issues #5 & #6 combined) is on track for printing and distribution later this month (March). Since we have had a significant increase in the readership, and because this is a special issue, we are printing 5,000 of this issue rather than the usual 3,000. MOst folks want all the back issues. Our "typical" reader is an engineer or scientist who has been following CF out of the corner of his or her eye, but there are also lots of "ordinary citizens" who hear about us and want to subscribe immediately. We have about 10% of our subscribers in countries other than the U.S. Also, orders for the tape ($49.95 (US/Canada), $64.95 elsewhere) of my December 1995 Rutgers University CF/New Energy lecture are now being shipped. And, copies of the tape set of the the Cold Fusion/New Energy Symposium on January 20, 1996 at the Cambridge Marriott will be ready in the next few days ($99.95 (US/Canada), $124.95 elsewhere). Many orders received already. Thanks! Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D., Editor-in-Chief INFINITE ENERGY: Cold Fusion and New Energy Technnology Cold Fusion Technology P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Fax: 603-224-5975 Phone: 603-228-4516 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 4 23:54:10 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id XAA03953 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:44:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA03931 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:44:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA11349; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:44:43 +0100 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:44:43 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide In-Reply-To: <199603041938.OAA27925@borg.mindspring.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, 4 Mar 1996, Jim Griggs wrote: [...] > >> BOD is Biological Oxygen Demand If that means what I think it does, i.e. that your soup will absorb some amount of oxygen (demand it), then H2O2 would only help, as it is an oxidiser that would do the job of oxygen. So the presence of H2O2 would give you a negative BOD. My guess is still that your water has both dissovled gas (air) plus surfactant. The milky look suggests gas to me, you often see that when you heat up water, as the dissolved gases are expelled and form bubbles. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 03:03:36 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id CAA23311 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 02:53:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA23191 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 02:51:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-3.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-3.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.3]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA03633 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:51:47 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: Date: Tue, 05 Mar 1996 11:53:50 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <313bcfcf.13294486@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <9603041149.AA22846@giasone.teseo.it> In-Reply-To: <9603041149.AA22846@giasone.teseo.it> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 4 Mar 1996 12:49:28 +0100, Elio Conte wrote: >To all the components of vortex-l. >I inform you that my book on Biquaternion Quantum Mechanics(as we know,this >theory predices the cold fusion of a proton and an electron to form a=20 >neutron) is >now available. [snip] I presume this is in English? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 03:03:42 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id CAA23193 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 02:51:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA23184 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 02:51:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-3.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-3.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.3]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA03640 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:51:50 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Joint Nuclear Project Date: Tue, 05 Mar 1996 11:53:54 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <313bd96f.15758696@mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 04 Mar 1996 07:29:07 PST, MHUGO@EPRI wrote: >*** Reply to note of 03/02/96 04:34 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: vtx: Joint Nuclear Project >Good to review my posting. I said "apparently" a lot, and did make it clear I >was counting previous calibration. (Which turned out to have drifted.) Calibrat >ion work has been the order of the day for this weekend, and will continue this >week. MDH > > Mark, Wouldn't it be possible to measure flow rate continuously with a flow meter and log it automatically? This way instantaneous power ratings can be calculated and logged, making overall integration of power production/consumtion much easier (and far more accurate than basing them on a calculation using a variable known to wander considerably). You could even keep a running total of energy use/supply. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 05:44:30 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA06070 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 05:34:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from giasone.teseo.it (giasone.teseo.it [194.21.136.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA06009 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 05:34:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from nu.teseo.it by giasone.teseo.it; (5.65/1.1.8.2/03Oct95-0808PM) id AA28884; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:34:24 +0100 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:34:24 +0100 Message-Id: <9603051334.AA28884@giasone.teseo.it> X-Sender: conte@teseo.it (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) Subject: Re: vtx: Relativity and Bernoulli theorem X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Date: Mon, 04 Mar 1996 20:13:47 -0500 >From: Danny and Terry Hamilton >To: conte@teseo.it >Subject: Re: vtx: Relativity and Bernoulli theorem >References: <9603041924.AA27515@giasone.teseo.it> > >Prof Elio Conte, > Sir, apologize for the intrusion. From your discussion in vortex-l =20 >you wrote:=20 > >>"Again I have seen today that according to some of us,the relativity=20 should enter in conflict with Bernoulli theorem? I do not know the=20 >terms of the discussion very well,however we must remember that,if in=20 >the case under discussion,some physical processes of fusion of matter >are involved ,the medium in which this physical processes happen,cannot=20 >be considered to be the vacuum and thus the special relativity is no=20 >more valid. This is in accord with biquaternion quantum mechanics where=20 >in effect new relativistic invariants are introduced (and it is shown=20 >that are physically possible)in consideration of the possible different=20 >physical media.As example,when the electron penetrates into the proton=20 >to form the neutron,the medium of the proton defines a new space-time=20 >that is different from the vacuum.Here the old special relativity is=20 >nomore valid and a new relativistic invariant with entirely new=20 >relativistic rules is required." >> > >How do you relate your discussion to wave theory. Assume electron flow=20 >is actually a wave action through a "media" and electron->proton=3Dneutron= =20 >is absorbtion/interaction of the wave, does this agree or disagree with=20 >your statements? Do you think a wave construct of electron flow is=20 >valid, or pertinent for CF? >--=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Danny and=20 Terry Hamilton >hamltndt@cais.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >Yes,the electron flow is actually a wave action through the media if I am understanding the problem.If electron-->proton=3Dneutron means electron+ proton=3Dneutron,we have an interaction at distances less of 10^-13 cm that= is not the usual interaction that we consider in physics.According to= biquaternion quantum mechanics it is a new kind of interaction due to the OVERLAPPING of the wavepackets of the two colliding or interacting particles.At this= stage=20 the special relativity nomore holds since the medium of the proton(and its= =20 defining wavepackets)characterize a medium where the old invariants of the special=20 relativity do not hold.Einstein's special relativity is valid for=20 electromagnetic interactions only in particle physics.Only in this case the particles can be= =20 effectively approximated as pointlike. All the hadrons are constituted by wavepackets:for CF they are pertinent only interactions due to the mutual penetration and overlapping of= wavepackets .Sincerely.Elio Conte --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 05:46:17 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA05978 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 05:34:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from giasone.teseo.it (giasone.teseo.it [194.21.136.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA05950 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 05:34:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from nu.teseo.it by giasone.teseo.it; (5.65/1.1.8.2/03Oct95-0808PM) id AA30044; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:34:10 +0100 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:34:10 +0100 Message-Id: <9603051334.AA30044@giasone.teseo.it> X-Sender: conte@teseo.it (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) Subject: vtx: Re:The book of Biquaternion Quantum Mechanics X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The book is written in italian and the diskette (about 32 pages) in english. The diskette also enables the reading of the book. Yours Sincerely Elio Conte --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 06:14:17 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id GAA10223 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 06:07:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA10218 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 06:07:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA16278; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 09:05:55 -0500 Date: 05 Mar 96 09:03:39 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Skeptisim. Message-ID: <960305140339_72240.1256_EHB48-3@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Martin Sevior writes: "The second loop of distilled water cooling could be implemented in Horace's heavily insulated system." Fine, if it works, but I doubt it will unless there is tremendous power, like 20 watts. Anything lower will be lost in the noise. "The comparison to other Ni-H systems is not valid. The issue under discussion is whether the Patterson Cell produces anomalous heat." The comparison is perfectly valid. The other systems use the same metal and the same electrolyte. The Patterson cell is a minor variation of previous work. The only differences are that Patterson has more surface area and better absorption. Saying it is not valid is like saying that Hitachi's replication of IBM high temperature superconductor is not valid. Same material, same recipe, same results. That's how science is supposed to work. The fact that this is a replication of published work adds to its credibility. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 06:51:20 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id GAA14066 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 06:39:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA14047 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 06:39:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-045.austin.eden.com (net-1-045.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.45]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id IAA10927 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:39:32 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:39:32 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603051439.IAA10927@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: Griggs BOD problem X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello Jim, Scott here. Since the BOD "content" of water is actually a measure of the oxygen deficit that the water has, I wonder (naively) if simply admitting air into your pump would help? Perhaps the combination of cavitation and elevated temperatures and aeration would rapidly "oxidize" the organic stuff in the water that's causing the BOD. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 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 Mar 5 08:28:59 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA00592 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:17:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA00561 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:17:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-045.austin.eden.com (net-6-187.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.187]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id KAA17487 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:17:06 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:17:06 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603051617.KAA17487@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: prelim bead test report X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is not intended to be a complete report...just something to satisfy curiosities and possibly aid the participating labs. We've been running our test cell continuously for 4 days now (it was started less than 1 hour after the beads arrived!) without any noticeable sign of excess heat. Our sensitivity is much better now but, in our headlong rush to see massive excess heat, we have not exhaustively characterized the offset between our Tin and Tout probes. As a result, we have a 0.05-0.1 watt uncertainty in our heat output power measurements. BTW, for now we are only running the flow calorimeter part of our new dual-method calorimeter. We started off with 1M Li2SO4 and our cell had a resistance of about 200 ohms. The resistance is not a strong function of the axial compression of the bead bead in our cell. We started out with 20 mA current (4.6v) and, over the 4 day period, have explored a range of electrolyte temperatures up to about 55C and electrolysis currents up to 140mA. After 3 days of operation, we switched to 2M Li2SO4 and the cell resistance dropped to 100 ohms. We continue to run at about 40mA with no sign of excess heat. Typical measured power out/in ratios are 0.8-1.1 but typical input power levels are only .1-.3 watts so our uncertainty is a big factor. PARTICIPATING LAB ALERT: 3 days into the experiment, after running at 140 mA for 8 hours, we noticed that some of the beads (about 20% of them) are losing their coating! It appears to be splitting open, separating cleanly from the smooth glass bead and just falling off. We are now starting an experiment to determine if lower operating currents (say 20 mA maximum) will prevent the coating from coming off and we will report on this in about a week. Despite our negative results thus far we are eagerly continuing our own experimentation and we remain extremely interested in seeing what happens at the participating labs. In an experiment like this there are hundreds of parameters which may or may not turn out to be important. Each separate experiment that is performed incorporates a new combination of these parameters. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 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 Mar 5 08:45:04 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA03416 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:33:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA03395 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:32:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0ttzfP-0005JgC; Tue, 5 Mar 96 10:32 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide To: vortex-l@eskimo.com (vortex-l) Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:32:51 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: One quick test to see if something has hydrogen peroxide in it is to place some platinum in the solution. The platinum will spontaneously decompose the H2O2 and it will bubble. In a test, pharmacy grade H2O2 was decomposed at temperture ranges from just below boiling to just above freezing. Naturally, it decomposes faster the warmer it is. If you don't have platinum handy, I've seen sewing and craft specialty stores that carry platinum plated sewing needles. -- - 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 Tue Mar 5 11:32:28 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA06118 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 11:19:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA06083 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 11:18:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id OAA15514; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:17:16 -0500 Date: 05 Mar 96 14:15:57 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: prelim bead test report Message-ID: <960305191556_72240.1256_EHB89-2@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 Little reports that beads have not worked after four days. That is a long time for this experiment, so I predict they never will work. Unfortunately, this may be a dud batch. They have the same problem many of Patterson's earlier beads had: the thin film is shedding, as seen in some of the photos I showed at the MIT Symposium. I hate to say this, but people may be underestimating the difficulty of reproducing this experiment. Let me I repeat what I said earlier. George Miley told me it was not easy to do, and he needed the help he got from Patterson. Patterson himself worked for many years before he got excess heat. I do not know enough about thin film devices to judge, but if they are anything like computer chips or Pd-D cathodes, you may have to work for years before replicating this experiment. CETI has told me on many occasions that they want to "control the development process" and limit the number of labs working with these cells to no more than 5 or 6. Why they want to do that is a deep mystery to me. As a businessman I would want to encourage customer interest and excitement, but CETI has some other inexplicable strategy, and they want to keep a lid on it, so I do not think they will cooperate with people like Scott. It may be a few years before anyone can replicate them without their cooperation. I hope that in a few years CETI's process will be of no interest to anyone. I think the gas loading Ni-H techniques now being developed by Piantelli and Mills are inherently better than liquid electrolysis from an engineering point of view, and I hope that in a few years they can be widely reproduced. Unfortunately, they are even more difficult to reproduce than Ni-H liquid electrolysis, because the techniques are being kept secret by both Piantelli and Mills. I cannot fathom their motivations either. All of these people seem to be infected with the "Inventor's Disease" as far as I can make out. Thank goodness we do not run the computer industry the way these people want to run the cold fusion business. We would still be using vacuum tube technology; everything else would be "secret" and eternally "under development;" nothing would ever be "for sale" which is the only Condition of Grace known to business. I am reminded of General George B. McClellan, that great military genius -- the Young Napoleon (as he liked to call himself) -- who did everything to win the war except actually fighting the enemy. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 12:36:10 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA06521 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 11:21:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA06432 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 11:20:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.81] ([204.57.193.81]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA01096 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:21:02 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:25:43 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Skeptisim. Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex > >Martin Sevior writes: > > "The second loop of distilled water cooling could be implemented in > Horace's heavily insulated system." > >Fine, if it works, but I doubt it will unless there is tremendous power, like >20 watts. Anything lower will be lost in the noise. > [snip] > >- Jed Jed - on what basis do you say this? I have not even posted what I have done, nor what I plan to do in detail. I haven't posted my updated plans, but expected to do that with preliminary results. Perhaps I should go ahead and repost. I have months of trial and error work ahead. I'll readily admit things don't always work as planned, but I have plenty of fallback positions, and plan to progressively improve the design, especially the electronics. I have gone to unusual measures to produce a highly redundant, stable, and cross verifyable calorimeter which is completely free of electrical noise. If this calorimeter can do anything well, it is thermal noise averaging. If the measures I have already taken are insufficient, based on planned future weeks of calibration activities, I can go to the further extra-ordinay measures of actively heating the dewar nacelles to completely eliminate heat loss. This I plan to do by utilizing ratiometric heat control using matched thermistors inside and outside the dewar - a method capable of controlling the differential to well under 0.1C. The calorimeter is in a 14" x 24" x 48" laminated foam box. When I can afford it I hope to put it, and the external apparatus, into a larger temperature controlled box. I have temperature measuring stations (TMS's) at nine points. Five of the points will be redundantly monitored and cross verified using an Omega DP531R (Cole-Parmer H-08502-12) 5 probe thermistor thermometer and YSI 401 probes (Cole Parmer H-08430-00) which combined produce temperature readings with .2 C accuracy and .02 C resolution. When it arrived I checked the probes by tying them together and stuffing them into a large box of rice for an hour. They stabilized within .03 C absolute of their average. The probes were near the bottom of the box. The thermometer appeared to be able to measure a temperature change due to my left leg being under the table under the box within less than a minute. It also tracks max and min temps, so I can get some sleep and still know there were no big events, that the system remained stable. The pumps are peristaltic and driven by synchronous gearmotors, and yes, I have a 100 cc. graduated cylider handy. The flow rate is .4 ml./sec.If necesary, I can drop that rate by buying a new pump head or motor. More importantly, the calorimetric flow rate is independent from the cell flow rate! The calorimetery from the cell differential is only of cross-validation use. At .4 ml/s that's 1.665 Watt/deg. C for the calorimeter. I should be able to resolve .02 x 1.665 = .033 Watts with the most crude of initial calibrations. I just don't see where you see the need for a 20 W cell output, or where the noise is going to come from. I can get even better differential heat measurement by using matched calibrated thermistors and by using a completely ratiometric method - eliminating the need for a calibrated voltage source. I have figured out a way to do differential heat measurements to better than .01 C for less than $20 a station, including the TMS - more to come on that later. Much of what I am doing is for the purpose of proving there is no need to go to extremes. This is with the aim of being able to produce a very cheap kit that will verify the effect, and simultaneously eliminate all the rediculous critisisms raised on spf. I'm busy dreaming up even more wild-eyed hypotheses to help me build a bullet proof design. I guess this is all just a lot of words. The proof will be in the doing. The things I am uncertain about are things that will have to be rebuilt if there is too *much* heat, like the heat exchanger, or tubing size changes mandated by too great a flow resistance in the system. Then there is the cell I built for a couple bucks using a syringe. It will probably leak, but it is just to get something ready for now. So far, everything is like a big erector set. I can readily adapt to problems, and rearrange things to calibrate and cross-check. To get some results on the ersatz beads early enough for anybody to still be interrested I can just use the Omega and 5 points - prior to joule heater, post joule heater, post cell, prior to heat exchanger in de-ionized water loop, and post heat exchanger in the de-ionized loop. (My local store stopped selling distilled water recently.) Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 14:42:31 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA12503 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:32:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA12461 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:32:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id RAA21639; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:32:08 -0500 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA13074; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:31:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:31:11 -0500 From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) Message-Id: <199603052231.AA13074@world.std.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: peroxide decomposes rapidly with Fenton's reagent which are ferrous salts. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 15:06:32 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA15794 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:48:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA15773 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:48:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA15437; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:47:16 -0500 Date: 05 Mar 96 17:42:24 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: It sounds complicated! Message-ID: <960305224223_72240.1256_EHB42-1@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 expressed doubts about "a second loop of distilled water in a heavily insulated system" as a way of doing static calorimetry. I don't think it will work unless the signal is gigantic. As I understand it, this calls for transferring heat from one place to another, two flows, two pumps, two flowmeters, and -- in short -- too many things that can go wrong, and too many holes for the heat to hide in. It is just my gut feeling. Perhaps I am wrong, and I hope I am. Horace Heffner writes: "Jed - on what basis do you say this? I have not even posted what I have done, nor what I plan to do in detail." Like I said, it is just a gut feeling based on previous, incomplete descriptions. It sounds complicated and I hate complications. It is a matter of taste. "I have gone to unusual measures to produce a highly redundant, stable, and cross verifiable calorimeter which is completely free of electrical noise. . . . I can go to the further extra-ordinary measures of actively heating the Dewar nacelles to completely eliminate heat loss." Hmm. . . it sounds like you have a cheaper version of SRI's famous White Elephant Calorimeter. It is a magnificent instrument indeed, but I don't like it, and neither does the scientist who worked with it all summer once and christened it the White Elephant. There is such thing as being too good & too precise for the job. Never use an electron microscope where a magnifying glass works well. Look, this is just my design philosophy -- don't take it personally and ignore it if you like -- but I feel that if you have to go to unusual measures you are doing something wrong. I like standard, simple, off-the-shelf solutions. This sounds odd, and contradictory, but I feel that to some extent SRI has harmed the field of cold fusion by devising such complex instruments. They have set a standard that seems to imply you cannot detect cold fusion heat unless you spend millions on your calorimeter. If cold fusion heat only occurred on the milliwatt level, and if the ratio of input to output never exceeded 1:1.001, then SRI's approach would be necessary. But, since most CF reactions range from 1 to 20 watts, and you can detect those levels without elaborate equipment, the instruments at SRI, IMRA and elsewhere are overkill. The only use I can think of for such high precision would be to study the onset of the reaction. SRI's unreasonably high standards can play into the hands of irrational skeptical opposition, by implying that other calorimeters, like those used by Storms or Arata, are somehow flawed, or inadequate. The people at SRI sometimes get this idea themselves, acting as if they are the standard setters, and equipment that does not measure up to theirs just isn't good enough, which is nonsense. "Good enough" is defined by objective standards for instrument design, signal to noise ratio, stability and so on. "Good enough" always depends on what you are measuring, and why you are measuring it. Is a 65 cent wooden ruler good enough to measure something? Well, that depends on what you are measuring and why you are measuring it. When I am on the phone to the printer ordering a brochure, and I want her to move the text a quarter inch, my wooden ruler works fine. On the other hand I could never use it to check machine tool alignment. "I have temperature measuring stations (TMS's) at nine points. Five of the points will be redundantly monitored and cross verified using an Omega DP531R (Cole-Parmer H-08502-12) 5 probe thermistor thermometer and YSI 401 probes (Cole Parmer H-08430-00) which combined produce temperature readings with .2 C accuracy and .02 C resolution." That sounds great. I sure hope it works. But I fear too many things that can go wrong, and it may take too much checking. "Much of what I am doing is for the purpose of proving there is no need to go to extremes." Ah, but you *are* going to extremes! There is a contradiction here. I feel the same contradiction in the SRI work. "This is with the aim of being able to produce a very cheap kit that will verify the effect, and simultaneously eliminate all the ridiculous criticisms raised on spf." Well, I feel that you should not address ridiculous criticisms in the first place. Ignore them. Pay attention to legitimate, interesting criticism. No experiment can ever address irrational, ridiculous or unreasonable demands. When you design an experiment that you hope can eliminate these ridiculous criticisms, in a sense you give them legitimacy, as if acknowledging they are worthwhile science. In fact, you are embarked on a hopeless quest. You can *never* eliminate them. Every time you eliminate 10 ridiculous criticisms, the spf authors will invent 20 new ones. They can dream up absurd ideas faster than you or anyone else can test them. We could all spend the rest of our lives racing to disprove nutty ideas, and we will never make any headway towards solving the problems of cold fusion. Unfortunately, many researchers are stuck on that very treadmill, devising ever more complex experiments to address ever more absurd objections. I have seen the same kind of R&D quicksand in other fields, like programming telephone switch design. People go off on a tangent. They lose track of the reason they are doing the work in the first place. They work their butts off to develop products that nobody wants; or industry standards for industries that will soon evaporate; elaborate, time wasting Windows interfaces; programing tools to solve programs that no computer should ever be used for in the first place. Think of the artificial intelligence boom in the 1980s, and these hand-held pen-based computers that Apple and Tandy blew a fortune on a few years ago. These products required enormous effort and budget, yet they served no market and no purpose. A designer must begin each day by asking himself: Why Am I Doing This? "I'm busy dreaming up even more wild-eyed hypotheses to help me build a bullet proof design." I fear that such wild-eyed hypothesis may lead to wild-eyed designs that address wild-eyed concerns. There are plenty of prosaic, non-wild-eyed problems in calorimetry. Lots of things go wrong. Instruments drift, cells leak, components rust, pumps break, tubes get clogged up. That is the sort of thing you must watch out for, circumvent, and invent around. The best way to circumvent such problems is not to have them in the first place. Keep the design simple, keep the number of tubes and pumps down to a minimum, and you have fewer things that can go wrong. Hence, my love of simplicity, and the famous KISS rule: Keep It Simple Stupid. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 16:15:52 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id QAA00721 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 16:05:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA00693 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 16:05:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tu6jF-0004wMC; Tue, 5 Mar 96 18:05 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: vtx: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek To: vortex-l@eskimo.com (vortex-l) Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:05:17 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: An anonymous source has sent me photos of some CETI beads, close up. I'm not sure how much technical info can be gleened from them, but I've put up a representative scan on my web page. You will note that there is a mix of clear beads and coated beads. -- - 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 Tue Mar 5 18:25:32 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA23792 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:15:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA23774 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:14:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-3-102.austin.eden.com (net-3-102.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.102]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id UAA08597 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 20:14:46 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 20:14:46 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603060214.UAA08597@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com (Unverified) 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: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Logajan said: >An anonymous source has sent me photos of some CETI beads, close up. Wow! so much for them all being precisely the same diameter (something that one of the Patterson patents goes on and on about). Looking only at the uncoated ones, there is apparently quite a range of diameters present. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 18:26:31 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA22492 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:07:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA22408 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:06:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.72] ([204.57.193.72]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA03160 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:07:01 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:11:36 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Skeptisim. Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here is an update: A TWO LOOP CALORIMETER WITH TEMPERATURE MEASURING STATIONS (TMS's) I have built the beginnings of a calorimeter to test a Patterson Power Cell (PPC) containing 1 cc. of beads. A schematic follows this section (FIG. 1). The line for calorimetry (Loop1), carrying distilled water, is electrically and chemically isolated from the line carrying the Li2SO4 electrolyte solution (Loop2). Main objectives of the design were to avoid electrolyte electrical or chemical contact with any metal except the anode, cathode and beads, and to provide a calorimetric loop, using distilled water, cross-validated by the electrolyte loop. Every component in Loop1 and Loop2, except a constant temperature bath in Loop1, used as the heat dump, are enclosed in cells cut into a 14" x 24"x 48" prism of blueboard insulation made by laminating or stacking 1" and 2" pieces. Every component (station) other than the pump/motors (Pn), filter (FF), and heat exchanger (HE) are also enclosed in dewars. All fluid connections between components are via short 1/8" ID vinyl tubing insulated from other components by 1" foam board. All components, except for the heat dump, are insulated in all directions by at least 2" of foam from ambient conditions. The heat generated in Loop2 is transferred to Loop1 by using a heat exchanger (HE) made of concentric layers of vinyl tubing. The overall concept for the calorimeter was developed to facilitate use of temperature measuring stations (TMS's designated Tn in the schematic) which, when the apparatus is in steady state, provide the opportunity to accurately measure the fluid temperature at a single point by various types of thermometers which are electrically isolated from the fluids, other calorimeter components, and each other. FIG. 1 - SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF TWO LOOP CALORIMETER I<---Loop1----- Distilled Water Flow ----------------------- I ^ I I V I --->B1--T1--P1--T2--P2--T3-----------------------HE---T4-->I : : : : ----Loop2---------->P2--FF--T5--JH--T6--PPC--T7--HE---T8-->I ^ I I I I V I<--- Electrolyte Flow -----T9-------DG<-------------------- Key: B1 - constant temperature bath (either 31 C or 0 C) DG - degassing chamber HE - heat exchanger (two coils in water in Thermos) JH - Joule Heater (calibration resistor station) Tn - temperature measuring station n Pn - 110 V peristaltic pump n cooled by Loop1 tubing coils PPC - Patterson Power Cell The dotted lines (:) denote stations where both Loop1 and Loop2 tubing are in proximity (no mixing occurs, only thermal exchanges.) It is necessary to provide cooling to the pumps with Loop1 water, which is cool. Otherwise, the temperature in P1 and P2 would continually increase. HEAT EXCHANGER The heat exchanger is made of a 60 feet of 1/8" ID 3/16 OD vinyl tubing inserted in 60 feet of 3/8" ID 1/2" OD vinyl tube, the ends of which are sealed using fabric laminated with Eclectic Products Inc. Automotive Goop. Each end of the 3/8" ID tubing has two pieces of 1/8" ID tubing protruding from it, one piece of which carries the Li2SO4 electrolyte and goes all the way through the 60'of 3/8 ID tubing, the other being about 6" long, which permits Loop2 distilled water through the 3/8" ID tubing which acts as a water jacket. CALIBRATION THERMOMETER Five of the points will be redundantly monitored and cross verified using an Omega DP531R (Cole-Parmer H-08502-12) 5 probe thermistor thermometer and YSI 401 probes (Cole Parmer H-08430-00) which combined produce temperature readings with .2 C accuracy and .02 C resolution. The thermometer and probes are certified traceable to an NIST standard. When it arrived I checked the probes by tying them together and stuffing them into a large box of rice for an hour. They stabilized within .03 C absolute of their average. The probes were near the bottom of the box. The thermometer appeared to be able to measure a temperature change due to my left leg being under the table under the box within less than a minute. It also tracks max. and min. temperatures, so I can get some sleep and still know there were no big events, that the system remained stable. The DP531R will also be used to calibrate and cross-check various thermistors, thermocouples, and thermometers prior to and after data acquisition. TEMPERATURE MEASURING STATIONS Thermos Food Jars (10 oz., wide mouth model 7021, glass vacuum insulation) were used for temperature measuring station (Tn) housings. Fluid is pumped through a coil consisting of 120 cm. of 1/4" ID 3/16 OD vinyl tubing within the 10 oz. food jars (dewars) used as temperature measuring stations (TMS's). The food jar screw top lids consist of two thin layers of plastic separated by about 3 cm. of air and the plastic sides molded into threads. The top plastic layer of the lid will is removed, except for a strip used for fastening the lid to a suspending block of insulating foam. Holes are cut in the plastic lid of the dewar for entry and exit of the vinyl tubing and for a glass thermometer or thermistor probe and for thermocouple or thermistor leads for those devices mounted inside the dewar. For the final device a urethane foam will be sprayed into the lid for a better insulation and seal. Inside the dewar is a 65 mm long, 39 mm ID, 41 mm OD, 1 mm wall thickness, copper pipe wound with 9 turns (133 cm) of the vinyl tubing. The total tubing length is 157 cm. The tubing is adhered to the pipe with silicone seal to reduce thermal resistance. The copper pipe was cut an extra 9 mm long so that 7 cm. tabs could be cut from the pipe and folded outwards at 90 degrees. To the tabs a 57 mm dia., 1 mm thick, copper plate is bolted using 3/8" long No. 6 machine screws, 32 threads per inch, and nuts. The copper plate is used to attach thermocouples or thermistors. Through the copper plate there is a 1/2" hole cut so that a 3/8" ID, 1/2" OD piece of vinyl tubing attached to the inner wall of the copper pipe, can extend through it and on up through the lid. The 1/2" OD tubing is used as a thermometer well. The tubing is bent flat at the lower end, and bolted to the copper pipe. The end is sealed with Eclectic Inc.'s Automotive Goop to permit use of a small amount of distilled water in the well (if desired) for use with a mercury thermometer. The plastic tubing interconnecting the various stations in the calorimeter is insulated by placing each connecting tubing piece in a covered channel cut into the foam block surrounding and supporting the calorimeter components. The TMS dewar can be filled with distilled water to various levels to increase the TMS time constant. The TMS method achieves several things. It permits the use of numerous thermometers in a cell at one uniform temperature. It permits electrical and chemical isolation of the temperature measuring devices from the power cell and pumps. Also, it provides a large time constant to a running average temperature. This should provide smooth curves for verification purposes, and reduce the number of measurements necessary for an experiment. For a system running at equilibrium it should also permit very accurate and consistent temperature measurements. The temperatures are all measured at the same elevation eliminating debate about convection. Extensive time in the loop (about 25 sec.) avoids problems with hot spots and laminar flow, as well as providing a large time constant to even out minor fluctuations. At some point it is hoped to use diode strings, and thermocouples in addition to thermometers and thermistors in the temperature measuring stations. The TMS concept was originally tested without the use of copper, by putting two TMS's, containing 120 cm. 1/8" ID 3/6" OD tubing immersed in water baths inside the TMS, in series with a constant temperature bath in which some of the tubing was coiled. The bath was started at 25 C and gradually was heated by a 75 W aquarium heater to 30 C. The two TMS's gradually followed the bath temperature upward, but lagged behind due to the large inertia of the TMS baths and the high R value of the 120 cm. lengths of vinyl tubing. Equilibrium was reached and all the temperature values matched, even though no insulation was used for the connecting vinyl tubing. It is interesting that two temperature measuring stations in series can be used as a kind of temperature differentiometer, to track change rates of temperature. This is because the second cell always lags the first cell in following temperature changes, due to the removal of heat from the water stream caused by the first cell as it brings it's bath to the new temperature. CONNECTING TUBING The connecting tubing used was 1/8" ID 3/16 OD flexible vinyl tubing from ACE Hardware, and Eagle Hardware. The tubing in Loop2 is chemical resistant 1/8" ID 3/16 OD flexible vinyl tubing from Cadillac Plastics. The tubing supports a flow rate of .4 cc./s. The tubing is connected with 1/8 ID barbed tubing connectors from Eagle Hardware. COMPONENT INSULATION AND SEPARATION A separate station (dewar or other highly insulated enclosure) is used for each component or component set (e.g. pump and filter) of the system. Every component except pump/motors (Pn), filter (FF), and heat exchanger (HE) is also further enclosed in a dewar. A TMS is placed between each component station. Panels of 1" blueboard insulation two layers thick is used as a kind of fluid equivalent of an electronic printed circuit board connecting the tops of the stations. Small groves are cut for the tubing in the top surface of the level 1 (lower) board and connect through holes down to the Thermos tops attached to the bottom of the level 1 board. A 1" foam board (level 2 board) is simply placed on top of the grooved level 1 board to achieve insulated flow lines on level 1. Connections right to left flow through the level 1 board groves, connections (both wiring and fluid) running front to back flow through the level 2 board grooves. The level 1 and 2 boards are cut from a single 1" x 24" x 48" board, the cuts being made between stations, so each station can be removed individually. The level 2 boards are capped by a 2" x 24" x 48" top board. Each dewar assembly and the level 1 board for each station is suspended by laying it on top of a laminated block of foam over a compartment cut into the block for the station. The level 1 board supports the dewar which hangs down from the level 1 board for the station, and the dewar is suspended within the station's foam insulating compartment. CONSTANT TEMPERATURE BATH OR HEAT SINK For current preliminary tests a large jar with a Fritz 75 W 8 inch thermostatic aquarium heater was used for a constant temperature bath (31 C). This will be replaced with a large ice chest filled with ice and water if heat output of the PPC demands. For longer running tests a barrel in a refrigerator may eventually be used for the heat sink bath. The heat sink bath temperature regulation is only important to achieve system stabilization, adequate cooling for the motors, and sufficiently warm input temperature for the PPC to be effective. PUMPS Two Cole Parmer H-07016-00 "long-shaft cold-rolled steel rotor, polycarbonate standard pump head for tubing size 16" peristaltic pumps are used to drive both the distilled water for calorimetry Loop2 and the electrolyte solution Loop1. The pumps have a displacement of .8 ml/rev. The pumps are driven by 30 RPM Grainger synchronous gear motors, part number 6Z134. The pump throughput is therefore (.8 ml.rev)(30 RPM) = 24 ml/m = .4 ml/s. This gives a heat transfer of (4.1629 J/ml/C)(.4 ml.s) = 1.665 W/deg. C. This flow rate can only comfortably handle 50 watts (166/2=83 max. theoretical), so I hope it is high enough to handle the enormous excess heat to be generated by the PPC! The pump and motor of each pump assembly are mounted on 1 x 13 x 13 cm. plywood plates glued 7 cm apart to 5 x 15 x 36 cm. foam block, one foam block per pump/motor assembly. They are connected with 1/2" and 3/8" plastic tubing connected to each other and the shafts with cotter pins. For motor cooling (the assemblies are in a fully insulated nacelle) a 1 mm thick 3 cm wide copper band was bolted around the sealed motor housing. Bolted to the band a 1 mm x 3 cm. x 12 cm copper strap extends out toward the rear of the motor housing and is wrapped and and bolted to a copper cooling tube. The cooling tube is 105 mm long, 39 mm ID, 41 mm OD, 1 mm wall thickness copper pipe wound with 11 turns (160 cm) of the vinyl tubing. The total tubing length is 184 cm. The tubing is adhered to the pipe with silicone seal to reduce thermal resistance. The bolting was done with 3/8" long No. 6 machine screws, 32 threads per inch, and nuts. A 1/2 " length of a 3/8" ID, 1/2" OD piece of vinyl tubing is attached to the top, below the band, and bottom of copper pipe, to hold the 1/8 ID tubing in place in coils around the copper pipe. The flow rate in Loop2 is far less critical to calorimetry, and may be very important to the PPC operation optimization, so I might eventually try a variable rate pump/valve there. Unfortunately, since the pumps are A/C, a digital scope or data acquisition system may be necessary to accurately measure electrical energy input, although this can be deduced from null and calibration runs to some degree of accuracy. The A/C pumps have the advantage of a very accurate and consistent flow rate. HEAT FLOW This system hopefully provides many cross checks of heat flows, and can answer many of the objections raised regarding previous tests. The heat flow from T1 to T4 should equal the sum of all electrical inputs if there is no excess heat. The heat flow from T6 to T7 should be equivalent to the electrolysis current plus any energy from fluid pressure drop. T6 and T7 are similar to the measuring points of various prior experiments. If the T7 - T6 differential indicates excess heat, and the T4 - T1 differential does not, then an unknown heat pump mechanism is indicated. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION, STATUS AND PLANS Everything is not complete as documented above, but is in a state of redesign, testing and change. All the materials have not yet arrived. I haven't applied foam or silicone seal to anything and hope I don't have to use silicone seal. I have gone to unusual measures to produce a highly redundant, stable, and cross verifiable calorimeter which is completely free of electrical noise. If this calorimeter can do anything well, it is thermal noise averaging. If the measures I have already taken are insufficient, based on planned future weeks of calibration activities, I can go to the further extraordinary measures of actively heating the dewar nacelles to completely eliminate heat loss. This I plan to do by utilizing ratiometric heat control using matched thermistors inside and outside the dewar - a method capable of controlling the differential to well under 0.1 C. The calorimeter is in a 14" x 24" x 48" laminated foam box. Eventually I hope to put it, and the external apparatus, into a larger temperature controlled box. At .4 ml/s that's 1.665 Watt/deg. C for the calorimeter. It should be able to resolve .02 x 1.665 = .033 Watts with the most crude of initial calibrations. Much better differential heat measurement will be obtained by using matched calibrated thermistors and by using a completely ratiometric method - eliminating the need for a calibrated voltage source. Differential heat measurements can be done with this method to better than .01 C for less than $20 a station, including the TMS. Much of what I am doing is for the purpose of proving there is no need to go to extremes. This is with the aim of being able to produce a very cheap kit that will verify the effect, and simultaneously eliminate all the ridiculous criticisms raised on sci.physics.fusion. I'm busy dreaming up even more wild-eyed hypotheses to build a more bullet proof design. The things I am uncertain about are things that will have to be rebuilt if there is too *much* heat, like the heat exchanger. Tubing size changes may be mandated by too great a flow resistance in the system. Then there is the Patterson Power Cell I built for a couple bucks using a syringe. It will probably leak, but it is just to get something ready for now. So far, everything is like a big erector set. I can readily adapt to problems, and rearrange things to calibrate and cross-check. To get some results on the ersatz beads early enough for anybody to still be interested I can just use the Omega and 5 points - prior to joule heater in Loop2, post joule heater in Loop2, post cell in Loop2, prior to heat exchanger in Loop1, and post heat exchanger in Loop1: T6, T7, T8, T3 and T4 respectively. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:58:53 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA08334 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:16:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA08287 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:16:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQafpd24701; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:15:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA15297; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:14:56 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 400114070096064FEPRI; 04 Mar 1996 07:14:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 04 Mar 1996 07:14:07 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/04/96 07:14:00 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 03/04/96 06:55 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide Jim G. --- See if the material will readily oxidize a biological sample of some sort. Actually, bleaching is one of the effects of Hydrogen Peroxide. You could put a colored cloth in it and see if it bleaches. MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:29:49 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA28640 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 08:35:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA28354 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 08:34:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.83] ([204.57.193.83]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id HAA27206 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:31:06 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 07:36:14 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >Horace, > Your thinking is the same as mine as the source of power for the PPC. I >have also added a polarization effect where the energy, U, of an electric >dipole, p, placed in an electric field, E, is given by: > > U = E dot p > >A high enough value of U may shift the Gibb's potential enough to cause >chemical transformations and the force, F, given as: > > F = (p dot gradient) E > >can play the role of the qE force in your ion brake theory. > >Lawrence E. Wharton I think this could play a role in the reduction of Li+ to Li. As Dieter mentions, this is endothermic, which is contrary to common sense because Li+ is not in ground state. The "onion skin layers" of H2O dipoles around the Li+, and the net proximity of corresponding cations is what makes the reaction endothermic. Possibly a field gradient of sufficient strength can realign the dipoles and create separation of the Li+ from the cations, or at least motion toward the cathode, so contact with the cathode can eventually be made and the Li can then rapidly catalize the production of the H, and via production of LiOH, which quickly becomes Li+ and OH- to complete the circle. The polarization effect could play a similar role at the anode. As Chris points out, there is no calculation to even an order of magnitude to suggest the hypothesized effects are significant. The ideas do suggest some very simple and cheap experiments. I suppose I should do experiments first, then talk, but discussion is interresting and maybe could avoid the need for some experiments or improve them. I'll try to lean more toward experimentation first, talk later though. This discussion has given me some ideas for some fairly bizarre experiments. I do think there will not be a very large unbalanced charge in an electrolye. If large numbers of cations are generated, then large numbers of anions must be generated or will move around to balance the charge distribution. I think our understanding of what is really happening on a nano-scale is very limited. I feal the electrolyte plays more of an intermediate role than just a charge carrier. Prior to and after the "carrying" the charge must be passed When a charge is passed, something happens chemically and physically. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:13:02 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA01787 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 08:44:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA01595 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 08:43:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA252987824; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 11:43:44 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 11:43:57 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter, In reference to your posting: >> SO4-- + H2O -> HO- + HSO4- > >This is the reverse of the reaction > >HSO4- <==> H+ + SO4= >which has a pK of -3, i.e. an equilibrium constant of 1000. This mean that >SO4= likes to stay as is. Your reaction will not run. Entropy is not enough, >you need the whole Gibbs energy change, and it disfavours your scheme. This I know that something must supply the Gibbs energy change. I purpose that the Paterson cell supplies this energy through exposure of the electrolyte to a high electric field. The effect of a high electric field is known in chemistry as having the property of changing the chemical activity. I think it is more physical to ascribe this effect to the energy of an electric dipole, in an electric field, being added to the Gibb's potential but the end effect will be the same. If we set the maximum electric field, Emax to : Emax = Electrolysis Potential / Debye legnth I think one could supply the necessary energy, although I need to get the dipole moments of all the chemicals involved and I haven't found them all yet. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:10:23 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA13072 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:39:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA13008 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:39:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id MAA09826; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 12:37:31 -0500 Date: 04 Mar 96 12:34:39 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Was galvanostat used in error? Message-ID: <960304173438_72240.1256_EHB33-3@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Dieter writes: "Well, I did get one grad student to spend a few weeks looking at fluctuations in a galvanostat as (mis)used by F&P, and we published a paper about it. There were indeed fluctuations but nowhere near enough to explain anything." I do not understand this use of English. You write "a galvanostat as (mis)used . . ." Was it or was it not misused? I gather you mean the fluctuations were much too small to be a significant problem. In that case, why do you imply the instrument was misused? How can an insignificant fluctuation be construed as a problem? I was under the impression that your tests resolved this issue once and for all. Is there any ambiguity or lingering doubt about this error in the Pons and Fleischmann paper that calls for this odd use of parenthesis? - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:37:55 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA13391 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:41:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA13317 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:41:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id MAA09856; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 12:37:36 -0500 Date: 04 Mar 96 12:35:01 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: BlindCopyReceiver:; Subject: vtx: Skeptisim. Message-ID: <960304173501_72240.1256_EHB33-4@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:msevior@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU Martin Sevior writes: "I find it very frustrating that all the "independent verifications" of the Patterson Cell all use exactly the same flowing electrolyte measurement technique." That is incorrect, as I noted here earlier. I listed two examples of other techniques. First, Patterson himself originally used a kind of static calorimetry, where he measured only the cell temperature, compared it to the temperatures reached with joule heating and null electrolysis. His flow rate was a fraction of a ml per minute, which is too low for flow calorimetry. In these experiments his cell temperature rose about three times higher during the excess heat runs than the calibration runs. Second, in the large calorimeters like the one at Power-Gen, I noted that the calibration runs showed the pump alone (or the pump plus 1-watt of electrolysis) is not sufficient to raise the reservoir temperature significantly. Cravens reported that when the pump circulates the fluid and the heat exchanger is running, the reservoir temperature did not rise measurably. Therefore, the ~15 deg C temperature rise I observed proves there is massive excess heat. Mitchell Jones has run some tests that call this assertion into question, but I do not think he has replicated the Cravens setup, so I do not think we can draw any conclusions from his observations. I am certainly not ready to discount Cravens on this basis alone, because he has an excellent track record and because, after all, this is an easy calibration, so I don't see how he could blow it. Let me point out a third independent verification of the Patterson work that has been overlooked in this discussion. Patterson is by no means the only person to observe excess heat with Ni-H cold fusion. Mills reported it long ago, and he uses static calorimeters. This work was independently confirmed by Thermacore, Inc. The calorimetry is described in their July 1993 paper in Fusion Technology. I am not aware of any errors in this calorimetry. Srinivasan retracted some (but not all) of his Ni-H excess heat data. Mills has since switched to gas loaded Ni cells, which produce much higher power density than his gigantic electrochemical cells. Piantelli has also reported excess heat from gas loaded Ni-H systems. We should not take the Patterson work out of context and ignore these other reports. As I see it, the Patterson work is an improved version of Mills', it is not a totally new branch of CF. The data from Cravens' ICCF5 report strongly supports Mills. I consider that data more convincing than my observations at Power-Gen. Power-Gen was only interesting because it proved the reaction can be scaled up easily. It did not break any new ground, and it did not prove anything Mills did not already prove back in 1993. The ICCF5 data and Power-Gen together constitute independent replication of Mills, which is very welcome of course, and which does add to our confidence in Mills' work, and Piantelli's. Martin writes: "How about simultaneous static calorimetry (Scott will try this if his cell works)?" That's a good idea, but don't expect any miracles of precision. You cannot do both good flow and good static calorimetry with the same experimental setup. Pick one technique, and let the other act as a crude back up, or a reality check. "Another possibility is a second cooling loop using distilled water to remove the heat dumped in by the cell?" That is too complicated, I think, and too noisy. Unless the beads produce a gigantic excess at a high power level, the heat taken out by the second loop will be lost in the noise. "The PowerGen scale cell offers even more scope for cross checks that are really easy to make. How about measuring the temperature of the output air flow?" Too complicated and difficult, I think. I have been trying to measure air temperature from a hair dryer and a small electric heater with fan. It varies all over the place, because the air is not well mixed. I conclude that air flow calorimetry is a can of worms. "Combine it with a measurement of the air flow and you've got an independent measurement of the power output of the cell." Frankly, I think it makes more sense to concentrate on tightening up and double checking the flow calorimetry. There are only four parameters: input electricity; inlet temperature; outlet temperature; and flow. If you use two methods to measure these four parameters, and you get a large enough signal, and you make darn sure there are no mistakes like unmixed water then you are home free. I see no advantage to proving it again with another type of calorimeter. A spot check on the cell wall temperature might not be a bad idea. This is a crude method of doing static calorimetry, and with this cell, which is kept at low temperature because of the flow, these results will not be very significant, but they will provide a "reality check" as I said. "Finally how about a well documented measurement of the reservoir temperature with the pump running, the fan on but no electrolysis current." Well, this is not necessary. Nobody should be using air cooled calorimetry in a laboratory setting. Just use a standard water cooled heat exchanger. You use a long return hose back to the reservoir, you coil it up and dump it into a constant temperature bath. Voila! Guaranteed 100% heat removal. This is much better than Power-Gen because the inlet temperature does not wander around, and you can pre-heat the electrolyte to any level you like just by dialing up a new cooler setting. As far as I know the only reason Dennis brought that air cooled thing to Power-Gen was because a laboratory constant temperature cooler bath gadget weighs a lot, costs a lot, and when you look at one sideways it breaks. I wouldn't want to schlep one onto an airplane. I suppose it might be better to coil up the inlet hose, and preheat (or cool) the electrolyte between reservoir and cell. That would give you more precise control over inlet temperature. The reservoir temperature would bounce around freely. The only disadvantage is that you could not verify the inlet temperature by measuring reservoir temp. "Let me repeat. It is essential that cross checks of the performance of the Cells be made and that they agree." Let me repeat. I think the ICCF5 data shows such cross checks in spades, and of course everything agrees or I would have said it doesn't, months ago. Dennis did much better cross checking and more different calibration methods than most CF studies I am familiar with. Furthermore, Mills, Thermacore and other using the same materials have demonstrated excess heat in static calorimeters. Taken as a whole, in context with other experiment from other workers, the Patterson claims are quite strong in this regard. Martin points to "the discovery of the top quark" as a "classic example." He says the quark was found via 3 independent analysis techniques by two different experiments. Ni-H CF is has been seen by five or six different analysis techniques (counting various combinations of flow & static plus gas & liquid calorimeters), in hundreds of different experiments, by at least ten different independent laboratories. Furthermore I believe the signal to noise ratio from the high heat Ni-H experiments is several orders of magnitude better than the top quark data. All in all, I would say the evidence for Ni-H CF is *far* better than the evidence for top quarks, *far* more convincing, and when you look at this evidence in the context of the other work with Pd-D and Ti-D CF you have a much stronger case than the high energy physics gang can ever hope to come up with. Our proof is a lot more "classic" than theirs in every sense, since we depend on classic, 18th and 19th century techniques, and we measure a gigantic effect at a S/N ratio that no 19th century scientist could have missed. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:55:56 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA26937 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:20:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA26865 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:19:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:19:45 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199603041819.KAA26865@mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:18:15 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Let me add: The net electric charge in the solution is virtually zero; there are 2 Li+ for each SO4--. The electric force on 2 Li+ is equal and opposite to the force on SO4--. The 2 Li+ transfer their electric force to the background water by collisions. The SO4-- do the same. The net force to the water is zero. Michael J. Schaffer michael.schaffer@gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:04:06 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA27018 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:20:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA26956 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:20:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.83] ([204.57.193.83]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA27780 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:18:40 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 09:23:46 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Protocol, etc. Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >In practice, at constant applied voltage you will see a very "noisy" >current trace, while at constant applied current you will see a slightly >noisy voltage trace. This makes data taking and interpretation a bit >easier. > >Michael J. Schaffer michael.schaffer@gat.com It sounds like a filter to average out the wrinkles would be a good idea in either case. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:14:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA00384 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:32:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from vaxk.gat.com (GAK.GAT.COM [192.5.166.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA00358 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:31:56 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:31:56 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199603041831.KAA00358@mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:31:50 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner writes: >What I am suggesting here is an effect to be accounted for experimentally >by measuring the pressure drop accross the cell under electolysis >conditions vs. no electrolysis current, and also by carefully accounting >for where the pump energy goes. The important part of what I am saying is >that no energy need be supplied by the potential - all the proposed heating >comes from the pump due to the fluid motion. This issue of pump power keeps coming up. Pump power is P = p*V', where P = power, p = pressure difference (outlet - inlet) and V' = volumetric flow. Put in some order of magnitude numbers. In consistnet mks units, p = 1 bar = 10^5 newton/m^2 V' = 1 mL/s = 10^-6 m^3/s Then one calculates P = 0.1 watt. Note that pressure drop is much, much less than 1 bar in Patterson cells, and V' is about 10 times smaller (in ICCF5 and SOFE cells), so that the actual pump power is a few mW at most. It is negligible. Michael J. Schaffer michael.schaffer@gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:03:48 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA03472 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:47:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from vaxk.gat.com (GAK.GAT.COM [192.5.166.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA03398 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:47:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:47:00 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199603041847.KAA03398@mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:46:50 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Bernoullis theorem vs. Principle of Relativity Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Some time ago I wrote the following: > >>The Bernoulli's theorem states that pressure is lower in a moving medium >>relative to a stationary but this is contradictory to the Principle of >>Relativity. Does fluiddynamics require an absolute room? How is this room >>chosen? Bernoulli's theorem applies to DIFFERENCES in pressure and DIFFERENCES in velocity. Special relativity deals perfectly well with DIFFERENCES. No absolute reference is necessary. Michael J. Schaffer michael.schaffer@gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:10:42 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id NAA17775 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 13:54:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay6.UU.NET (relay6.UU.NET [192.48.96.16]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA17275 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 13:53:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay6.UU.NET with SMTP id QQafqd15875; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 16:53:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA08633; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 13:53:05 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 864351130096064FEPRI; 04 Mar 1996 13:51:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 04 Mar 1996 13:51:13 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: Has Anyone Heard More about Mr. Lee??? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/04/96 13:51:42 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: Has Anyone Heard More about Mr. Lee??? - I understand there is a "con-artist" named Lee doing the perpetual motion "V8" engine bit again. Supposed "public" demonstration on the 5th of March, "Grand Central Station" Wash. D.C. I hope he gets creamed with reality and that 20/20 , 48 hours, AND 60 minutes have a field day. - MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:51:12 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA00171 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:56:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix7.ix.netcom.com (ix7.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA00107 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:56:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix7.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id OAA09756; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:54:20 -0800 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 14:54:20 -0800 Message-Id: <199603042254.OAA09756@ix7.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > > >Since we operate on a limited budget we were hoping to find a simple >and inexpensive means for checking H2O2. Dear Jim Griggs, If you assume that H2O2 comes from the water itself, then wouldn't you have an excess of hyrogen which appears as those "millions of bubbles'? And if this is the case, those bubbles may be flammable and if it burns, then wouldn't this point to H2O2 having been formed? -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:21:55 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA02742 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:23:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA02624 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:22:52 -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 TAA30411 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:22:15 -0900 X-Sender: hheffner@matsu.ak.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:27:11 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Fri, 1 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > >[...] >> VAN DE GRAFF ELECTROLYSIS CELL - GROUNDED CATHODE STRUCTURE (GCS) >[............] >> What do you think? > >Horace, it's nice that you are trying to work out how things work here but >you really ought to read an elementary chapter in a chemistry book on >electrochemistry. Dieter, Thanks for taking the time to answer my wild eyed speculations. Yes, you are right, I should get an electrochemistry text ( and chemistry text also.) I would really like to go back to school, but I have two very bright teenagers who will do that before I. I should note that the reactions you mention are the same that were taught in my high school chemistry class regarding electrolysis. I have always found it hard to believe that the electrolyte salt ions are not involved in the reactions, but maybe that's just my unfounded quirk. I'll try to keep more to the experiments and less to the speculation. One last chemistry item for anyone: I have Li2SO4*(H2O) and I want to make up a 1 mol. solution. To double check that's: 2 LI 6.941 13.882 1 S 32.06 32.06 5 O 15.9994 79.997 2 H 1.0079 2.0158 Total: 127.95 gm. right? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:21:55 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA02742 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:23:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA02624 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 20:22:52 -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 TAA30411 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:22:15 -0900 X-Sender: hheffner@matsu.ak.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:27:11 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: D >On Fri, 1 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > >[...] >> VAN DE GRAFF ELECTROLYSIS CELL - GROUNDED CATHODE STRUCTURE (GCS) >[............] >> What do you think? > >Horace, it's nice that you are trying to work out how things work here but >you really ought to read an elementary chapter in a chemistry book on >electrochemistry. Dieter, Thanks for taking the time to answer my wild eyed speculations. Yes, you are right, I should get an electrochemistry text ( and chemistry text also.) I would really like to go back to school, but I have two very bright teenagers who will do that before I. I should note that the reactions you mention are the same that were taught in my high school chemistry class regarding electrolysis. I have always found it hard to believe that the electrolyte salt ions are not involved in the reactions, but maybe that's just my unfounded quirk. I'll try to keep more to the experiments and less to the speculation. One last chemistry item for anyone: I have Li2SO4*(H2O) and I want to make up a 1 mol. solution. To double check that's: 2 LI 6.941 13.882 1 S 32.06 32.06 5 O 15.9994 79.997 2 H 1.0079 2.0158 Total: 127.95 gm. right? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:28:52 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA27314 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:53:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA27269 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 19:53:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-29.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-29.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.29]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA26921 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:53:12 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: ersatz beads away! Date: Tue, 05 Mar 1996 04:55:07 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <313a9972.34721168@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199603031441.IAA00100@natashya.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199603031441.IAA00100@natashya.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 3 Mar 1996 08:41:17 -0600 (CST), Scott Little wrote: >Akira says: > >>Whatever Patterson beads that were shown on TV coverage of the >>Patterson Cell show a black bead. Doesn't this indicate a coating much >>thinner than 1 micron? [snip] >>How about a bead surface initial preparatory coating of silver >>instead of copper? > >These don't have Cu...instead he uses a Sn/Pd monolayer. I have always suspected that one purpose of the initial copper mono-layer may have been to prevent hydrogen from diffusing into the body of the bead itself, and thus reducing the concentration in the surface layers. If this is true, then one should be careful about replacing the copper with other metals (such as Pd) that may be much better at transporting hydrogen. Glass contains relatively large inter molecular spaces, thus hydrogen should diffuse relatively easily into it. The bottom line is that your beads may "leak". [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:37:03 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id XAA04984 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:52:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA04965 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:52:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA10066; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:52:32 +0100 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 08:52:32 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry 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 Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Larry Wharton wrote: [...] > I know that something must supply the Gibbs energy change. I purpose that > the Paterson cell supplies this energy through exposure of the electrolyte > to a high electric field. The effect of a high electric field is known in > chemistry as having the property of changing the chemical activity. I Before you start complex calculations, please be clear about what you mean. Who is it that knows the above? Do not confuse high electric field (by which I think you mean potential gradient) with potential itself. In a CETI cell, where only < 10 V is applied, there will be no high potentials anywhere. You are in good company, though: Bockris's dendrite theory of CNF is based on the same error. I hate to let this out - it might start yet another burst of theory from you fellows - but in the electrical double layer that sets itself up at electrodes, you do get huge potential gradients, up to 10^6 V/cm. But the actual voltage across it is only of the order of 1 V or so, so you can't get much from that (except all those electrochemical reactions!). -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:39:53 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id MAA24848 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 12:56:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA24732 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 12:56:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.81] ([204.57.193.81]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA01607 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 11:56:41 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 12:01:21 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex > [snip] As a businessman I would want to encourage customer interest and >excitement, but CETI has some other inexplicable strategy, and they want to >keep a lid on it, so I do not think they will cooperate with people like >Scott. It may be a few years before anyone can replicate them without their >cooperation. > [snip] >- Jed This, if true, would completely incapacitate their patents in the US. True, their claims are broad, but that is meaningles if they did not disclose all, or disclose enough so one "skilled in the art" could independently make use of the patent's teachings. No useful teaching, no utility, no winning lawsuits. End of story. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:42:52 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA14786 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:43:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA14741 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:43:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id RAA08834; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:42:13 -0500 Date: 05 Mar 96 17:17:09 EST From: Dean Miller <75110.3417@compuserve.com> To: vortex list Subject: vtx: Patterson's search Message-ID: <960305221708_75110.3417_CHK57-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Jed, You said: >> Patterson himself worked for many years before he got excess heat. << I've heard this mentioned before, and it's always puzzled me. Did Patterson expect to get excess heat? If so, what caused him to think so? Had he noticed excess heat from other processes involving beads having differing characteristics? My understanding is that Patterson was looking for excess heat before the P&F announcement. That's why I'm puzzled. Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.00.2G) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:38:27 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA13941 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:39:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout06.mail.aol.com (emout06.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.43]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA13900 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:39:30 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by emout06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA21435 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:37:54 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:37:54 -0500 Message-ID: <960305173753_238353005@emout06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: pheonix Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I will be in Pheonix Az from the 16th through the 22d of March 1996. I will be staying at the Wyndham Garden Hotel, 2641 W. Union Hills Drive Phone 602-978-2222 I hope to meet with Reed Huish while I am there. There is also a magnet motor being developed in North Pheonix. I will try to see it if I can figure out who to contact. Perhaps Reed knows the company. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 18:26:31 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA22492 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:07:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA22408 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:06:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.72] ([204.57.193.72]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA03160 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:07:01 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:11:36 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Skeptisim. Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: D Here is an update: A TWO LOOP CALORIMETER WITH TEMPERATURE MEASURING STATIONS (TMS's) I have built the beginnings of a calorimeter to test a Patterson Power Cell (PPC) containing 1 cc. of beads. A schematic follows this section (FIG. 1). The line for calorimetry (Loop1), carrying distilled water, is electrically and chemically isolated from the line carrying the Li2SO4 electrolyte solution (Loop2). Main objectives of the design were to avoid electrolyte electrical or chemical contact with any metal except the anode, cathode and beads, and to provide a calorimetric loop, using distilled water, cross-validated by the electrolyte loop. Every component in Loop1 and Loop2, except a constant temperature bath in Loop1, used as the heat dump, are enclosed in cells cut into a 14" x 24"x 48" prism of blueboard insulation made by laminating or stacking 1" and 2" pieces. Every component (station) other than the pump/motors (Pn), filter (FF), and heat exchanger (HE) are also enclosed in dewars. All fluid connections between components are via short 1/8" ID vinyl tubing insulated from other components by 1" foam board. All components, except for the heat dump, are insulated in all directions by at least 2" of foam from ambient conditions. The heat generated in Loop2 is transferred to Loop1 by using a heat exchanger (HE) made of concentric layers of vinyl tubing. The overall concept for the calorimeter was developed to facilitate use of temperature measuring stations (TMS's designated Tn in the schematic) which, when the apparatus is in steady state, provide the opportunity to accurately measure the fluid temperature at a single point by various types of thermometers which are electrically isolated from the fluids, other calorimeter components, and each other. FIG. 1 - SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF TWO LOOP CALORIMETER I<---Loop1----- Distilled Water Flow ----------------------- I ^ I I V I --->B1--T1--P1--T2--P2--T3-----------------------HE---T4-->I : : : : ----Loop2---------->P2--FF--T5--JH--T6--PPC--T7--HE---T8-->I ^ I I I I V I<--- Electrolyte Flow -----T9-------DG<-------------------- Key: B1 - constant temperature bath (either 31 C or 0 C) DG - degassing chamber HE - heat exchanger (two coils in water in Thermos) JH - Joule Heater (calibration resistor station) Tn - temperature measuring station n Pn - 110 V peristaltic pump n cooled by Loop1 tubing coils PPC - Patterson Power Cell The dotted lines (:) denote stations where both Loop1 and Loop2 tubing are in proximity (no mixing occurs, only thermal exchanges.) It is necessary to provide cooling to the pumps with Loop1 water, which is cool. Otherwise, the temperature in P1 and P2 would continually increase. HEAT EXCHANGER The heat exchanger is made of a 60 feet of 1/8" ID 3/16 OD vinyl tubing inserted in 60 feet of 3/8" ID 1/2" OD vinyl tube, the ends of which are sealed using fabric laminated with Eclectic Products Inc. Automotive Goop. Each end of the 3/8" ID tubing has two pieces of 1/8" ID tubing protruding from it, one piece of which carries the Li2SO4 electrolyte and goes all the way through the 60'of 3/8 ID tubing, the other being about 6" long, which permits Loop2 distilled water through the 3/8" ID tubing which acts as a water jacket. CALIBRATION THERMOMETER Five of the points will be redundantly monitored and cross verified using an Omega DP531R (Cole-Parmer H-08502-12) 5 probe thermistor thermometer and YSI 401 probes (Cole Parmer H-08430-00) which combined produce temperature readings with .2 C accuracy and .02 C resolution. The thermometer and probes are certified traceable to an NIST standard. When it arrived I checked the probes by tying them together and stuffing them into a large box of rice for an hour. They stabilized within .03 C absolute of their average. The probes were near the bottom of the box. The thermometer appeared to be able to measure a temperature change due to my left leg being under the table under the box within less than a minute. It also tracks max. and min. temperatures, so I can get some sleep and still know there were no big events, that the system remained stable. The DP531R will also be used to calibrate and cross-check various thermistors, thermocouples, and thermometers prior to and after data acquisition. TEMPERATURE MEASURING STATIONS Thermos Food Jars (10 oz., wide mouth model 7021, glass vacuum insulation) were used for temperature measuring station (Tn) housings. Fluid is pumped through a coil consisting of 120 cm. of 1/4" ID 3/16 OD vinyl tubing within the 10 oz. food jars (dewars) used as temperature measuring stations (TMS's). The food jar screw top lids consist of two thin layers of plastic separated by about 3 cm. of air and the plastic sides molded into threads. The top plastic layer of the lid will is removed, except for a strip used for fastening the lid to a suspending block of insulating foam. Holes are cut in the plastic lid of the dewar for entry and exit of the vinyl tubing and for a glass thermometer or thermistor probe and for thermocouple or thermistor leads for those devices mounted inside the dewar. For the final device a urethane foam will be sprayed into the lid for a better insulation and seal. Inside the dewar is a 65 mm long, 39 mm ID, 41 mm OD, 1 mm wall thickness, copper pipe wound with 9 turns (133 cm) of the vinyl tubing. The total tubing length is 157 cm. The tubing is adhered to the pipe with silicone seal to reduce thermal resistance. The copper pipe was cut an extra 9 mm long so that 7 cm. tabs could be cut from the pipe and folded outwards at 90 degrees. To the tabs a 57 mm dia., 1 mm thick, copper plate is bolted using 3/8" long No. 6 machine screws, 32 threads per inch, and nuts. The copper plate is used to attach thermocouples or thermistors. Through the copper plate there is a 1/2" hole cut so that a 3/8" ID, 1/2" OD piece of vinyl tubing attached to the inner wall of the copper pipe, can extend through it and on up through the lid. The 1/2" OD tubing is used as a thermometer well. The tubing is bent flat at the lower end, and bolted to the copper pipe. The end is sealed with Eclectic Inc.'s Automotive Goop to permit use of a small amount of distilled water in the well (if desired) for use with a mercury thermometer. The plastic tubing interconnecting the various stations in the calorimeter is insulated by placing each connecting tubing piece in a covered channel cut into the foam block surrounding and supporting the calorimeter components. The TMS dewar can be filled with distilled water to various levels to increase the TMS time constant. The TMS method achieves several things. It permits the use of numerous thermometers in a cell at one uniform temperature. It permits electrical and chemical isolation of the temperature measuring devices from the power cell and pumps. Also, it provides a large time constant to a running average temperature. This should provide smooth curves for verification purposes, and reduce the number of measurements necessary for an experiment. For a system running at equilibrium it should also permit very accurate and consistent temperature measurements. The temperatures are all measured at the same elevation eliminating debate about convection. Extensive time in the loop (about 25 sec.) avoids problems with hot spots and laminar flow, as well as providing a large time constant to even out minor fluctuations. At some point it is hoped to use diode strings, and thermocouples in addition to thermometers and thermistors in the temperature measuring stations. The TMS concept was originally tested without the use of copper, by putting two TMS's, containing 120 cm. 1/8" ID 3/6" OD tubing immersed in water baths inside the TMS, in series with a constant temperature bath in which some of the tubing was coiled. The bath was started at 25 C and gradually was heated by a 75 W aquarium heater to 30 C. The two TMS's gradually followed the bath temperature upward, but lagged behind due to the large inertia of the TMS baths and the high R value of the 120 cm. lengths of vinyl tubing. Equilibrium was reached and all the temperature values matched, even though no insulation was used for the connecting vinyl tubing. It is interesting that two temperature measuring stations in series can be used as a kind of temperature differentiometer, to track change rates of temperature. This is because the second cell always lags the first cell in following temperature changes, due to the removal of heat from the water stream caused by the first cell as it brings it's bath to the new temperature. CONNECTING TUBING The connecting tubing used was 1/8" ID 3/16 OD flexible vinyl tubing from ACE Hardware, and Eagle Hardware. The tubing in Loop2 is chemical resistant 1/8" ID 3/16 OD flexible vinyl tubing from Cadillac Plastics. The tubing supports a flow rate of .4 cc./s. The tubing is connected with 1/8 ID barbed tubing connectors from Eagle Hardware. COMPONENT INSULATION AND SEPARATION A separate station (dewar or other highly insulated enclosure) is used for each component or component set (e.g. pump and filter) of the system. Every component except pump/motors (Pn), filter (FF), and heat exchanger (HE) is also further enclosed in a dewar. A TMS is placed between each component station. Panels of 1" blueboard insulation two layers thick is used as a kind of fluid equivalent of an electronic printed circuit board connecting the tops of the stations. Small groves are cut for the tubing in the top surface of the level 1 (lower) board and connect through holes down to the Thermos tops attached to the bottom of the level 1 board. A 1" foam board (level 2 board) is simply placed on top of the grooved level 1 board to achieve insulated flow lines on level 1. Connections right to left flow through the level 1 board groves, connections (both wiring and fluid) running front to back flow through the level 2 board grooves. The level 1 and 2 boards are cut from a single 1" x 24" x 48" board, the cuts being made between stations, so each station can be removed individually. The level 2 boards are capped by a 2" x 24" x 48" top board. Each dewar assembly and the level 1 board for each station is suspended by laying it on top of a laminated block of foam over a compartment cut into the block for the station. The level 1 board supports the dewar which hangs down from the level 1 board for the station, and the dewar is suspended within the station's foam insulating compartment. CONSTANT TEMPERATURE BATH OR HEAT SINK For current preliminary tests a large jar with a Fritz 75 W 8 inch thermostatic aquarium heater was used for a constant temperature bath (31 C). This will be replaced with a large ice chest filled with ice and water if heat output of the PPC demands. For longer running tests a barrel in a refrigerator may eventually be used for the heat sink bath. The heat sink bath temperature regulation is only important to achieve system stabilization, adequate cooling for the motors, and sufficiently warm input temperature for the PPC to be effective. PUMPS Two Cole Parmer H-07016-00 "long-shaft cold-rolled steel rotor, polycarbonate standard pump head for tubing size 16" peristaltic pumps are used to drive both the distilled water for calorimetry Loop2 and the electrolyte solution Loop1. The pumps have a displacement of .8 ml/rev. The pumps are driven by 30 RPM Grainger synchronous gear motors, part number 6Z134. The pump throughput is therefore (.8 ml.rev)(30 RPM) = 24 ml/m = .4 ml/s. This gives a heat transfer of (4.1629 J/ml/C)(.4 ml.s) = 1.665 W/deg. C. This flow rate can only comfortably handle 50 watts (166/2=83 max. theoretical), so I hope it is high enough to handle the enormous excess heat to be generated by the PPC! The pump and motor of each pump assembly are mounted on 1 x 13 x 13 cm. plywood plates glued 7 cm apart to 5 x 15 x 36 cm. foam block, one foam block per pump/motor assembly. They are connected with 1/2" and 3/8" plastic tubing connected to each other and the shafts with cotter pins. For motor cooling (the assemblies are in a fully insulated nacelle) a 1 mm thick 3 cm wide copper band was bolted around the sealed motor housing. Bolted to the band a 1 mm x 3 cm. x 12 cm copper strap extends out toward the rear of the motor housing and is wrapped and and bolted to a copper cooling tube. The cooling tube is 105 mm long, 39 mm ID, 41 mm OD, 1 mm wall thickness copper pipe wound with 11 turns (160 cm) of the vinyl tubing. The total tubing length is 184 cm. The tubing is adhered to the pipe with silicone seal to reduce thermal resistance. The bolting was done with 3/8" long No. 6 machine screws, 32 threads per inch, and nuts. A 1/2 " length of a 3/8" ID, 1/2" OD piece of vinyl tubing is attached to the top, below the band, and bottom of copper pipe, to hold the 1/8 ID tubing in place in coils around the copper pipe. The flow rate in Loop2 is far less critical to calorimetry, and may be very important to the PPC operation optimization, so I might eventually try a variable rate pump/valve there. Unfortunately, since the pumps are A/C, a digital scope or data acquisition system may be necessary to accurately measure electrical energy input, although this can be deduced from null and calibration runs to some degree of accuracy. The A/C pumps have the advantage of a very accurate and consistent flow rate. HEAT FLOW This system hopefully provides many cross checks of heat flows, and can answer many of the objections raised regarding previous tests. The heat flow from T1 to T4 should equal the sum of all electrical inputs if there is no excess heat. The heat flow from T6 to T7 should be equivalent to the electrolysis current plus any energy from fluid pressure drop. T6 and T7 are similar to the measuring points of various prior experiments. If the T7 - T6 differential indicates excess heat, and the T4 - T1 differential does not, then an unknown heat pump mechanism is indicated. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION, STATUS AND PLANS Everything is not complete as documented above, but is in a state of redesign, testing and change. All the materials have not yet arrived. I haven't applied foam or silicone seal to anything and hope I don't have to use silicone seal. I have gone to unusual measures to produce a highly redundant, stable, and cross verifiable calorimeter which is completely free of electrical noise. If this calorimeter can do anything well, it is thermal noise averaging. If the measures I have already taken are insufficient, based on planned future weeks of calibration activities, I can go to the further extraordinary measures of actively heating the dewar nacelles to completely eliminate heat loss. This I plan to do by utilizing ratiometric heat control using matched thermistors inside and outside the dewar - a method capable of controlling the differential to well under 0.1 C. The calorimeter is in a 14" x 24" x 48" laminated foam box. Eventually I hope to put it, and the external apparatus, into a larger temperature controlled box. At .4 ml/s that's 1.665 Watt/deg. C for the calorimeter. It should be able to resolve .02 x 1.665 = .033 Watts with the most crude of initial calibrations. Much better differential heat measurement will be obtained by using matched calibrated thermistors and by using a completely ratiometric method - eliminating the need for a calibrated voltage source. Differential heat measurements can be done with this method to better than .01 C for less than $20 a station, including the TMS. Much of what I am doing is for the purpose of proving there is no need to go to extremes. This is with the aim of being able to produce a very cheap kit that will verify the effect, and simultaneously eliminate all the ridiculous criticisms raised on sci.physics.fusion. I'm busy dreaming up even more wild-eyed hypotheses to build a more bullet proof design. The things I am uncertain about are things that will have to be rebuilt if there is too *much* heat, like the heat exchanger. Tubing size changes may be mandated by too great a flow resistance in the system. Then there is the Patterson Power Cell I built for a couple bucks using a syringe. It will probably leak, but it is just to get something ready for now. So far, everything is like a big erector set. I can readily adapt to problems, and rearrange things to calibrate and cross-check. To get some results on the ersatz beads early enough for anybody to still be interested I can just use the Omega and 5 points - prior to joule heater in Loop2, post joule heater in Loop2, post cell in Loop2, prior to heat exchanger in Loop1, and post heat exchanger in Loop1: T6, T7, T8, T3 and T4 respectively. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:43:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA26857 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:32:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA26817 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:32:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.72] ([204.57.193.72]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA03418 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:32:48 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 17:37:22 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: It sounds complicated! Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >Ah, but you *are* going to extremes! There is a contradiction here. I feel the >same contradiction in the SRI work. > > > "This is with the aim of being able to produce a very cheap kit that > will verify the effect, and simultaneously eliminate all the ridiculous > criticisms raised on spf." > [snip] The best way to >circumvent such problems is not to have them in the first place. Keep the >design simple, keep the number of tubes and pumps down to a minimum, and you >have fewer things that can go wrong. Hence, my love of simplicity, and the >famous KISS rule: Keep It Simple Stupid. > >- Jed Having worked with computers most of my life, I wholeheartedly agree! This amateur effort is my first shot at calorimetry. Since I am "going to extremes" now, perhaps I will truly appreciate the simplicity if and when it develops. Assuming the TMS concept works, at least I have a modular design to accomodate some of the more unusual ideas I have in mind for later. Thanks for taking the time for a lengthy answer. I have printed all correspondence on the subject for later review. Like a parent's words, I feel certain yours will ring especially true after some of life's experiences! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 19:29:47 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA04966 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 19:17:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from julia.math.ucla.edu (root@julia.math.ucla.edu [128.97.4.254]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA04914 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 19:17:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (arnold.math.ucla.edu) by julia.math.ucla.edu (Sendmail 4.1/1.13) id AA21612; Tue, 5 Mar 96 19:17:31 PST Received: by arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (NX5.67d/NeXT-2.0) id AA11752; Tue, 5 Mar 96 19:09:47 -0800 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 96 19:09:47 -0800 From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) Message-Id: <9603060309.AA11752@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.95) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.95) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >3 days into the experiment, after running at 140 mA for 8 hours, we >noticed that some of the beads (about 20% of them) are losing their >coating! ... now starting an experiment to determine if lower >operating currents (say 20 mA maximum) will prevent the coating from >coming off Just to be clear, how many ml of beads are in your cell? As for shedding the coating, I can imagine two possible causes: thermal expansion/contraction, or water seeping through cracks in the surface via capillary action, and separating the coating. I think the best bet would be to discuss this with the bead vendor---they surely have plenty of experience with shedding of coatings. By the way....are these beads under warrantee? it would be nice if they would replace such``defective beads'' (hint, hint...:-) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 20:10:41 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA12249 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 20:01:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA12230 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 20:01:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id UAA08635; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 20:01:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 20:01:41 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Mysterious long message delays 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 eskimo.com staff has finally discovered one of the causes of the on/off message delays on vortex-L. The fault is the Majordomo software which runs all the email lists. Whenever a remote site gets clogged and starts postponing incoming vortex-L messages, Majordomo keeps re-trying until it gets through. So, if some site remains overloaded continuously for days, Majordomo will send no other vortex-L mail until it suceeds in getting through. This has only recently become a problem on internet because of huge increases in message traffic. This explains the periodic stoppages followed by inunndations. There still is no explanation for long delays in individual messages. Eskimo has been working on replacing Majordomo with Listproc, which is a less-buggy package and has many more features. But this is weeks away, so until then the crazy delays will unfortunately continue. .....................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 Mar 5 21:54:21 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id VAA05896 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:46:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA05809 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:46:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id VAA16974; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:45:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:45:53 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide 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: --- FORWARDED --- Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 11:29:00 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide > My guess is that this scum is foam due to a surfactant in the feed > water, or the mechanical action of your pump is precipitating out > something. I favour the surfactant scenario. If this is as > important to you as it seems to be, you should probably get onto a > chemical lab in your city, rather than ask for advice at a > distance, as here. Good luck cracking this problem! Right on... BOD is the amount of oxygen required to oxidize the (presumably biological hence Biological Oxygen Demand) pollutants in the water. If the pollution is that bad, then thoroughly mixing air into the water is likely to cause foam. But this is not bad...If the pollutants are edible by the bacteria in the water, mixing in air will speed up the process. But you would need a holding pond. Another alternative is to skim the foam and put it in a smaller holding tank or pond. Even if you end up with a lot of sludge to be carted away, tipping fees are often much lower than water pollution fines. But if there is a specific pollutant in the water, and you can concentrate it in the foam, look into real recycling. If you can put 90% of the solids back into the manufacturing process, you can probably pay for the cost of the equipment. What can I say, I used to work for a fabric converting firm. My "real" job was to get their accounting system into the 20th century, but I did a few rate of return analyses on pollution control alternatives. Once we recycled enough NaOH, aerating pumps in the old mill pond were enough to get the eventual effluent to tolerable BOD levels. (However, we had to play stupid games with the flow. During the spring we could get too much flow for the process to have time to work before being measured. But we could run at at high flow rate on some days--diluting things enough--and a low rate in between. At a moderate flow, we would get docked, but in any case the net pollution was the same...) 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 Mar 5 19:34:17 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA06159 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 19:24:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA06140 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 19:24:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id VAA00348; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:53:21 -0500 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA19520; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:51:39 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:51:39 -0500 From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) Message-Id: <199603060251.AA19520@world.std.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: and a distribution of types. any guess what that red-orange stuff is covering small portions of some of the surfaces? From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 21:55:20 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id VAA05660 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:46:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA05578 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:46:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tuC33-0004vjC; Tue, 5 Mar 96 23:46 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 23:46:04 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199603060251.AA19520@world.std.com> from "mitchell swartz" at Mar 5, 96 09:51:39 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Mitchell Swartz writes: > any guess what that red-orange stuff is covering small portions of some > of the surfaces? I thought it was also just on the surface, but Mr. X insists that those red spots you see in the clear beads really are in the clear beads. To me it appeared that the red spots might be on the surface, but by optical illusion appear to be in the bead. Mr. X assured me that some red spots are really imbedded in the beads. There are also red spots visible on the surface of the coated beads. Are they the same material? What is the purpose? I have no answers. -- - 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 Tue Mar 5 22:04:45 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id VAA10067 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:57:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA10021 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:57:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tuCDj-0005LaC; Tue, 5 Mar 96 23:57 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 23:57:07 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199603060214.UAA08597@natashya.eden.com> from "Scott Little" at Mar 5, 96 08:14:46 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: > Wow! so much for them all being precisely the same diameter (something that > one of the Patterson patents goes on and on about). Looking only at the > uncoated ones, there is apparently quite a range of diameters present. The patent seems to indicate that uniform size is obtained by post selection. Scott, does the cracking of your beads appear similar to the cracking of the beads in the CETI photo? -- - 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 Mar 6 05:50:19 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA25964 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:27:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA25383 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:24:20 -0800 (PST) Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id NAA09557 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 13:23:55 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199603060223.NAA09557@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 13:23:55 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <199603051617.KAA17487@natashya.eden.com> from "Scott Little" at Mar 5, 96 10:17:06 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > Despite our negative results thus far we are eagerly continuing our own > experimentation and we remain extremely interested in seeing what happens at > the participating labs. In an experiment like this there are hundreds of > parameters which may or may not turn out to be important. Each separate > experiment that is performed incorporates a new combination of these > parameters. > Is anybody on Vortex-l planning to attend George Miley's seminar? Is appears we could learn a lot from someone experienced in using these cells. Regarding the flaking of the metal plates I think we're up against two main problems. One is the expansion of the metal layers as they absorb hydrogen. The other is differential temperature expansion rates of the metal layers and the glass substrate. It may well be best to try to keep these two problems seperate by loading at room temperature and increasing the temperature during later runs. Regarding the loading phase, here's what Cravens says in his paper on the CETI home page: Paraphrasing; "The initial loading period lasted for 12 hours with a constant current power supply set at 0.2 to 0.5 amps. The cells resistance gradually changes from 135 to 150 ohms." So I guess you need to see this increase in cell resistance to be sure the cell is loaded. This paper also describes that all measurements were taken with 1 Molar concentration of Li2SO4. The other point about this is that the beads should be packed in such a way as to give an initial cell resistance of 135 Ohms in a 1 molar concentration of Li2SO4. Unfortunately the concept of resistance isn't too useful for these cells since the current voltage relationship is so non-linear. For example in the next paragraph he states that a typical data point has V=3.80 volts, I = 0.12 Amps which implies R = 31.7 ohms! Scott, I think it might be worth a phone call to Cravens to ask him what cell resistance means. On specific issues like these he may well be co operative on a one on one basis. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 19:19:05 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA03399 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 19:08:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA03379 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 19:08:43 -0800 (PST) Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id OAA16670; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:08:28 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199603060308.OAA16670@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:08:27 +1100 (EST) Cc: msevior@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (Martin Edmund Sevior) In-Reply-To: <199603051617.KAA17487@natashya.eden.com> from "Scott Little" at Mar 5, 96 10:17:06 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > We started off with 1M Li2SO4 and our cell had a resistance of about 200 > ohms. The resistance is not a strong function of the axial compression of > the bead bead in our cell. We started out with 20 mA current (4.6v) and, > over the 4 day period, have explored a range of electrolyte temperatures up > to about 55C and electrolysis currents up to 140mA. After 3 days of > operation, we switched to 2M Li2SO4 and the cell resistance dropped to 100 > ohms. We continue to run at about 40mA with no sign of excess heat. > Typical measured power out/in ratios are 0.8-1.1 but typical input power > levels are only .1-.3 watts so our uncertainty is a big factor. > Cravens reports loading currents in the range 0.2 - 0.5 Amps. That's well above what you're running now. Can you up your input current and stick with 1 M Li2SO4? Look for an increase in resistance as a sign of correct loading. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 5 23:57:16 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id XAA24963 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 23:49:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA24582 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 23:47:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA26328; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 08:47:11 +0100 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 08:47:11 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide 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, 5 Mar 1996, John Logajan wrote: > One quick test to see if something has hydrogen peroxide in it is to > place some platinum in the solution. The platinum will spontaneously > decompose the H2O2 and it will bubble. In a test, pharmacy grade > H2O2 was decomposed at temperture ranges from just below boiling to > just above freezing. Naturally, it decomposes faster the warmer it > is. This ought maybe to be tried - can't hurt - but I didn't suggest it because I think the sort of levels Griggs is worrying about wouldn't be enough to make bubbles. I still say, though, that H2O2 would mean negative BOD. The way I understand this BOD, it's an expression of the presence of organic substances in the water, that take oxygen out of it. H2O2 puts it in, as it were. Not that I believe there will be any in there to speak of. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 00:04:09 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id XAA25902 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 23:57:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA25881 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 23:57:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA27055; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 08:57:30 +0100 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 08:57:28 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report In-Reply-To: <199603060308.OAA16670@liszt.ph.unimelb.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 Wed, 6 Mar 1996, Martin Edmund Sevior wrote: > Scott Little wrote: [...] > Cravens reports loading currents in the range > 0.2 - 0.5 Amps. That's well above what you're running now. Can you up your > input current and stick with 1 M Li2SO4? Look for an increase in > resistance as a sign of correct loading. Scott reported that his cell resistance halved when he doubled the electrolyte concentration. That tells me that the resistance is mostly in the electrolyte, not in the heap of beads (noone has yet tried my simple suggestion of sticking ohmmeter probes into such a heap). You seem to be referring to the function of Ni resistance vs loading with hydrogen, which may, as in Pd, go through a maximum (with Pd and D, it's 1.8 that of Pd itself). As I see it, Scott would never see this effect. Measuring hydrogen load is a nontrivial problem. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 00:12:19 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id AAA26683 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 00:03:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA26674 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 00:03:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA27833; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:03:49 +0100 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:03:49 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek 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, 5 Mar 1996, John Logajan wrote: > Mitchell Swartz writes: > > any guess what that red-orange stuff is covering small portions of some > > of the surfaces? > > I thought it was also just on the surface, but Mr. X insists that those > red spots you see in the clear beads really are in the clear beads. To > me it appeared that the red spots might be on the surface, but by optical > illusion appear to be in the bead. Mr. X assured me that some red spots > are really imbedded in the beads. > > There are also red spots visible on the surface of the coated beads. > > Are they the same material? What is the purpose? I have no answers. My God! Can it be ... it must be... RED MERCURY!!! Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 04:53:01 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id EAA20656 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 04:46:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA20646 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 04:46:11 -0800 (PST) Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id XAA07872; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 23:45:53 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199603061245.XAA07872@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 23:45:53 +1100 (EST) Cc: msevior@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (Martin Edmund Sevior) In-Reply-To: from "Dieter Britz" at Mar 6, 96 08:57:28 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter Britz wrote: > > Scott reported that his cell resistance halved when he doubled the > electrolyte concentration. That tells me that the resistance is mostly in the > electrolyte, not in the heap of beads (noone has yet tried my simple > suggestion of sticking ohmmeter probes into such a heap). You seem to be > referring to the function of Ni resistance vs loading with hydrogen, which > may, as in Pd, go through a maximum (with Pd and D, it's 1.8 that of Pd > itself). As I see it, Scott would never see this effect. Measuring hydrogen > load is a nontrivial problem. > For some reason my other post on the matter didn't get distributed. Cravens reported that during loading his cell resistance increased from 135 to 150 Ohms. In the next paragraph though he gives some demonstration data of a typical excess heat data point, V= 3.8 Volts and I=0.12 Amps which implies a cell resistance of 35 Ohms. What gives? This report is listed on the CETI home and I think was published in Infinite Energy. I suggest that Scott should phone Dennis and ask him about this apparent contradiction. May be slip in some questions regarding the loading protocol too. It might work, you may get some valuable help. Dieter has a good point. If the Cell resistance is defined by the Li2SO4 concentration then this resistance change will not be noticed. It sounds like a cell redesign is called for. The bed o' beads has got to be responsible for some fraction of the cell resistance. This would also have the desirable effect of destributing the electrolysis effect throughout the bed. By the same token the electrical resistance through the electrolyte should be reduced to get into the reported operating range of Cravens. Scott do you have a porus membrane between the anode and cathode? Is it feasible to remove it? Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:03:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id EAA21593 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 04:55:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA21584 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 04:55:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-080.austin.eden.com (net-2-080.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.80]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id GAA26227 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:55:18 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:55:18 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603061255.GAA26227@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: prelim bead test report X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Scott Little wrote: >> >> We started off with 1M Li2SO4 and our cell had a resistance of about 200 >> ohms. Martin Sevior wrote: >Cravens reports loading currents in the range >0.2 - 0.5 Amps. That's well above what you're running now. Can you up your >input current and stick with 1 M Li2SO4? This is the "problem" we've been talking about, Martin. At 200 ohms, you'd need 40-100 volts to get .2-.5 amps. Cravens never reported such high voltages....that I am aware of. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:03:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id EAA21593 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 04:55:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA21584 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 04:55:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-080.austin.eden.com (net-2-080.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.80]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id GAA26227 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:55:18 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:55:18 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603061255.GAA26227@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: prelim bead test report X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: D >Scott Little wrote: >> >> We started off with 1M Li2SO4 and our cell had a resistance of about 200 >> ohms. Martin Sevior wrote: >Cravens reports loading currents in the range >0.2 - 0.5 Amps. That's well above what you're running now. Can you up your >input current and stick with 1 M Li2SO4? This is the "problem" we've been talking about, Martin. At 200 ohms, you'd need 40-100 volts to get .2-.5 amps. Cravens never reported such high voltages....that I am aware of. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:09:46 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id EAA22094 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 04:59:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA22087 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 04:59:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-080.austin.eden.com (net-2-080.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.80]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id GAA26387 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:59:33 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:59:33 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603061259.GAA26387@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: prelim bead test report X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry wrote: >Just to be clear, how many ml of beads are in your cell? 2 ml. >I think the best bet would be to discuss this with the bead >vendor---they surely have plenty of experience with shedding >of coatings. I already am doing so. >By the way....are these beads under warrantee? it would >be nice if they would replace such``defective beads'' > >(hint, hint...:-) Sorry, no warranty...BUT, we have a limited excess supply and may be in a position to supply small replacement quantities free of charge to participating labs who destroy their allotment AND have shown good progress in their measurement efforts AND want to continue their investigation. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:11:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA22459 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:02:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA22449 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:02:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-080.austin.eden.com (net-2-080.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.80]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id HAA26535 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:02:48 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:02:48 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603061302.HAA26535@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: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A John L writes: > >Scott, does the cracking of your beads appear similar to the cracking of >the beads in the CETI photo? Come to think of it, yes. Splitting open as if the coating shrank...or the substrate expanded, neither of which, in the case of our glass substrate, would I expect to be happening. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:12:10 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA22582 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:04:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA22566 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:03:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA30310; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:04:08 +0100 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:04:08 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report In-Reply-To: <199603061245.XAA07872@liszt.ph.unimelb.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 Wed, 6 Mar 1996, Martin Edmund Sevior wrote: [...] > Dieter has a good point. If the Cell resistance is defined by the Li2SO4 > concentration then this resistance change will not be noticed. It sounds > like a cell redesign is called for. The bed o' beads has got to be > responsible for some fraction of the cell resistance. This would also > have the desirable effect of destributing the electrolysis effect throughout > the bed. As I have said before, that fraction is likely to be very small; metals, even as thinnish films, conduct a lot better than electrolytes. But the effect you ask for above is in fact UNdesirable; it would distribute the metal/solution interface potential, and lead to uneven hydrogen absorption through the b-o-b. The one thing that speaks against my feeling that the b-o-b conducts so well, is that people apply pressure to their beds to make them conduct better. This implies poor contact conductance between beads. I still doubt it, though. Why doesn't SOMEONE stick resistance probes into such a bed?? We are debating the horse's age, instead of looking into its mouth. Easy to do. > By the same token > the electrical resistance through the electrolyte should be reduced to get > into the reported operating range of Cravens. Scott do you have a porus > membrane between the anode and cathode? Is it feasible to remove it? He has to have something to keep beads away from the anode. It could be a very coarse mesh though, that wouldn't add to the resistance significantly. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:16:15 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA22928 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:07:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA22921 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:07:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-080.austin.eden.com (net-2-080.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.80]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id HAA26718 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:07:34 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:07:34 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603061307.HAA26718@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: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter said: >> There are also red spots visible on the surface of the coated beads. >> >> Are they the same material? What is the purpose? I have no answers. > >My God! Can it be ... it must be... RED MERCURY!!! Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Ha, Ha, Ha! That was a scam if there ever was one! But, seriously Dieter. Since I watched that boring PBS documentary on Red Mercury a few years ago, I've noticed that Omega et al sell glass thermometers filled with RED MERCURY!? What is this stuff? I always thought the red liquid in glass thermometers was dyed alcohol...but the catalog cleary states "red mercury" and the photo shows a glass thermometer filled with red liquid? From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:22:42 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA23252 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:11:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA23238 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:11:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-080.austin.eden.com (net-2-080.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.80]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id HAA26891 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:11:04 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:11:04 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603061311.HAA26891@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: prelim bead test report X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Marin said: >I suggest that >Scott should phone Dennis and ask him about this apparent contradiction. >May be slip in some questions regarding the loading protocol too. It might >work, you may get some valuable help. I will try this approach. >By the same token >the electrical resistance through the electrolyte should be reduced to get >into the reported operating range of Cravens. Scott do you have a porus >membrane between the anode and cathode? Is it feasible to remove it? Why, yes. I have a 3 micron TFE filter in that location...just to make sure that no particulates exit the bead bed...I could remove it and replace it with a substantially more open screen. What effect might this filter be having? From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:23:31 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA23458 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:12:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA23449 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:12:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-080.austin.eden.com (net-2-080.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.80]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id HAA26962 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:12:42 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:12:42 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603061312.HAA26962@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: vacation X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I'm signing off for a few days, guys (BTW, are there ANY females on Vortex?). Puthoff will be around, though. See ya later. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 05:54:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA27080 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:45:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA27063 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:45:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA02728; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:45:41 +0100 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:45:40 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek In-Reply-To: <199603061307.HAA26718@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, 6 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: > Ha, Ha, Ha! That was a scam if there ever was one! But, seriously Dieter. > Since I watched that boring PBS documentary on Red Mercury a few years ago, > I've noticed that Omega et al sell glass thermometers filled with RED > MERCURY!? What is this stuff? I always thought the red liquid in glass > thermometers was dyed alcohol...but the catalog cleary states "red mercury" > and the photo shows a glass thermometer filled with red liquid? Hmm, must be it, they do say that Red Mercury is liquid, don't they? And very very dense... Better not drop that thermometer or it'll go off! In serious mode again, it is indeed dyed alcohol, and they presumably call it mercury in a generic sense, i.e. the stuff you put into a thermometer bulb, like the "lead" in a pencil. And we say "cold fusion" when noone now is willing to say categorically that fusion is in fact what does it (if anything is being done). I hesitate to start a long thread about red mercury here but the stuff is pure urban myth. Except in thermometers. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:05:16 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA27384 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:48:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA27363 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:47:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA02739; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:47:52 +0100 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:47:52 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report In-Reply-To: <199603061311.HAA26891@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, 6 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: [...] > Why, yes. I have a 3 micron TFE filter in that location...just to make sure > that no particulates exit the bead bed...I could remove it and replace it > with a substantially more open screen. What effect might this filter be having? Increasing your total resistance, that's what. Those are pretty small holes you are squeezing your current through. By all means, replace that. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 06:00:13 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA27725 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:50:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA27707 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 05:50:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id IAA07445; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 08:49:09 -0500 Date: 06 Mar 96 08:48:12 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: CETI-beads, an unauthorized peek Message-ID: <960306134812_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: To: Vortex Notes on photo: The clear beads were not part of the cathode pack. Those are separators. I do not know what the orange spots are, but I believe the green spots are copper flashing showing through. I observed the irregular shapes and sizes with brand new unused beads as well. This can even be seen in the ABC film clip, if you freeze frame and look carefully. Miley's sputtering vapor deposition technique produces a more even coating, which Miley thinks enhances performance. Incidently, new beads are dark grey in color. Scott Little writes: "Splitting open as if the coating shrank...or the substrate expanded, neither of which, in the case of our glass substrate, would I expect to be happening." I think the coating is absorbing hydrogen, swelling up and then splitting off. It is too big, not too small. Ed Storms thinks this caused the rapid failure of Miley's think film cathodes. Also, you should find out the coefficient of thermal expansion of the glass substrate material. Repeated heating and cooling may be the problem. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 07:00:50 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id GAA05777 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:48:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA05753 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:48:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id GAA21550; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:48:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 06:48:19 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek In-Reply-To: <199603061302.HAA26535@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, 6 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: > John L writes: > > > >Scott, does the cracking of your beads appear similar to the cracking of > >the beads in the CETI photo? > > Come to think of it, yes. Splitting open as if the coating shrank...or the > substrate expanded, neither of which, in the case of our glass substrate, > would I expect to be happening. Hmm. If the coating ALWAYS shrinks, maybe the solution is to use flexible beads which contain gas pockets, so the bead will shrink in diameter and relieve the stress on the coating. Could the red spots be some sort of very fine-cell foam? If the CETI beads are styrene, and presuming the red spots are air filled, would this allow the beads to shrink enough? .....................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 Mar 6 08:11:50 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA13973 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:44:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA13946 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:44:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA04285; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 16:44:23 +0100 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 16:44:23 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Was galvanostat used in error? In-Reply-To: <960304173438_72240.1256_EHB33-3@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 4 Mar 1996, Jed Rothwell wrote: [...] > Dieter writes: > > "Well, I did get one grad student to spend a few weeks looking at > fluctuations in a galvanostat as (mis)used by F&P, and we published a > paper about it. There were indeed fluctuations but nowhere near enough > to explain anything." > > I do not understand this use of English. You write "a galvanostat as (mis)used > . . ." Was it or was it not misused? I gather you mean the fluctuations were > much too small to be a significant problem. In that case, why do you imply the > instrument was misused? How can an insignificant fluctuation be construed as a > problem? I was under the impression that your tests resolved this issue once > and for all. Is there any ambiguity or lingering doubt about this error in the > Pons and Fleischmann paper that calls for this odd use of parenthesis? The "(mis)" got in there because they configured their galvanostat in such a way as to guarantee current instabilities and thus oscillations. So they misused their galvanostat. There was a deal of discussion on spf about the role of current oscillations in maybe mimicking excess power. I never did believe in this, knowing that a galvanostat does indeed hold the current steady, but I could see that that "filter" they put in was in fact a tickler. So we had a look at it, and you are right, we resolved the issue once and for all; the effect is there but it is negligible. This leaves unanswered the question of why someone as experienced as (at least) Fleischmann, who has done pioneer work in potentiostats (and therefore galvano-ditto) would do such a thing. I still don't know. In the paper they say they put in the filter to eliminate oscillations - which it does not, it causes them. I have also worked with potentiostat theory and building over the years and this looked like something interesting, and it taught my student some useful things. It was only a small part of his work, which was on a completely different topic. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:59:45 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA15253 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:51:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA15224 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 07:51:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA04357; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 16:51:29 +0100 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 16:51:29 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry 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 Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > >Horace, it's nice that you are trying to work out how things work here but > >you really ought to read an elementary chapter in a chemistry book on > >electrochemistry. > > Dieter, > > Thanks for taking the time to answer my wild eyed speculations. Yes, you > are right, I should get an electrochemistry text ( and chemistry text > also.) I would really like to go back to school, but I have two very > bright teenagers who will do that before I. Horace, my apologies for my near-rudeness. I was a bit too busy for a few days and got a bit cranky. Thanks for not getting huffy. [...] > One last chemistry item for anyone: > > I have Li2SO4*(H2O) and I want to make up a 1 mol. solution. To double > check that's: > > 2 LI 6.941 13.882 > 1 S 32.06 32.06 > 5 O 15.9994 79.997 > 2 H 1.0079 2.0158 > > Total: 127.95 gm. right? You're very close. The Merck Index has it as 127.96 g/mol. Often, the figure is written somewhere on the label of the bottle - I show this to students *after* they have done the calculations. Must be my mean streak. -- Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:59:07 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA19450 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 08:21:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.indirect.com (root@ns1.indirect.com [165.247.1.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA19383 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 08:20:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from 165.247.24.33 (s33.phxslip4.indirect.com [165.247.24.33]) by ns1.indirect.com (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id JAA07612 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:00:25 -0700 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:00:25 -0700 Message-Id: <199603061600.JAA07612@ns1.indirect.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Reed Huish Subject: Re: vtx: pheonix To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <960305173753_238353005@emout06.mail.aol.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 Tue, 5 Mar 1996, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: >I hope to meet with Reed Huish while I am there. >There is also a magnet motor being developed in North Pheonix. I will try to >see it if I can figure out who to contact. Perhaps Reed knows the company. > Actually there is a public traded company in Mesa who has demonstrated & independently verified a motor at 150% overunity. They are actually publishing nice looking brochures to that effect. I also know an inventor in Scottsdale who claims to have had a over-unity motor running for about 4 years, based on the work of Ed Gray, I believe. However, I don't know of anyone in North Phoenix. - Reed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:59:09 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA01861 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:28:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix8.ix.netcom.com (ix8.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA01818 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:28:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix8.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id JAA28900; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:27:15 -0800 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:27:15 -0800 Message-Id: <199603061727.JAA28900@ix8.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: vtx: CETI-beads, an unathorized peek To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > >John L writes: >> >>Scott, does the cracking of your beads appear similar to the cracking of >>the beads in the CETI photo? > >Come to think of it, yes. Splitting open as if the coating shrank...or the >substrate expanded, neither of which, in the case of our glass substrate, >would I expect to be happening. > In your 'Ersatz Beads Away!' response to my question on the preparatory plating, you mentioned Sn, Pd coatings. At the Power-Gen report made by Jed posted on John Logajan's Web Page, Ceti's control cell was packed with Sn coated beads which flaked-off causing a short and failure in the cell. This may suggest that the Sn coating on the beads rather than regular coating of copper is a contributory cause to your Ersatz beads' flaking. The reason I asked about using silver was that it seems to have enough bonding and conducting capacity to glass (used in mirrors) to replace copper and being very close to Pd on the Table to also have affinity to Pd. In fact Ag seems to be one of the transmuted products found by Wolf in his findings revealed at ICCF-5 by Passel. -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 10:16:24 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA08804 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:07:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix14.ix.netcom.com (ix14.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA08775 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:07:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix14.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id KAA10298; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:06:03 -0800 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:06:03 -0800 Message-Id: <199603061806.KAA10298@ix14.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: vtx: Patterson's search To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: >My understanding is that Patterson was looking for excess heat before >the P&F announcement. That's why I'm puzzled. > If you look at the Patent dates, you will find that his patent for beads was years before the cold fusion was announced. And his beads were for applications nothing to do with cold fusion. His subsequent patents on his beads' Cu-Ni-Pd coatings were obtained well AFTER Pons and Fleischman's Cold Fusion announcement. I am sure that his motivation to coat the beads with Pd came from his knowledge that his beads' prime function in its uses was to present a large surface area. In this case to encourage the P&F cold fusion effect in an P&F cell --- which the Patterson Cell is a derivative of. -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 10:39:04 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA12478 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:27:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA12445 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:27:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA13510; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 13:25:56 -0500 Date: 06 Mar 96 13:23:18 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Was galvanostat used in error? Message-ID: <960306182318_72240.1256_EHB95-2@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Deiter explains: "[Pons and Fleischmann] configured their galvanostat in such a way as to guarantee current instabilities and thus oscillations. So they misused their galvanostat. There was a deal of discussion on spf about the role of current oscillations in maybe mimicking excess power. I never did believe in this, knowing that a galvanostat does indeed hold the current steady, but I could see that that "filter" they put in was in fact a tickler. So we had a look at it, and you are right, we resolved the issue once and for all; the effect is there but it is negligible. This leaves unanswered the question of why someone as experienced as (at least) Fleischmann, who has done pioneer work in potentiostats (and therefore galvano-ditto) would do such a thing. I still don't know." How interesting! Yes, I recall the discussion on spf, but I did not appreciate the implications of your results. Well, Martin never does anything by accident (except for that time he used a BF3 counter to look for neutrons). Of course I have no idea why he picked this configuration, but perhaps it has something to do with the technique they use to trigger a high heat reaction. They give a fully loaded cathode a jolt of power. As I understand it, the trick is to raise the temperature of the cathode to between 180 deg C and 200 deg C, and then hold it there for a brief period, of less than 3 minutes. This pushes a low level Pd-D CF reaction into high gear; as far as I know it does not do any good if you do not have a measurable CF reaction in the first place. At ICCF3 Martin referred to this cryptically as 'our version of the Takahashi technique.' Maybe they need this galvanostat configuration to facilitate the jolt? - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:50:18 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA13089 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:30:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA12438 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:27:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA13522; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 13:25:57 -0500 Date: 06 Mar 96 13:23:31 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Patterson's search Message-ID: <960306182330_72240.1256_EHB95-3@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex My, my, there have been a lot of messages here lately! Just imagine how it will be if we ever get good working CF gadgets into the hands of researchers and businessmen who are 100% open about sharing results and techniques. Just imagine how much progress we will make. Alas, everyone I know who finds a way to make a good CF device immediately clams up, goes underground, and files a patent. It is like a gigantic game of sardines, which is like reverse hide-and-go-seek. The person who is "it" (Martin Fleischmann in this case) goes and hides in a closet somewhere. The other children fan out and go searching for him. A kid who finds the hiding place joins Martin. The last kid wandering around is "it" for the next round. It gets crowded in that closet, and you hear a lot of giggling. We hear much giggling in cold fusion too, and whispering about host metal transmutation and the like. It never occurs to these children that companies like Ford, Intel and Microsoft did not make a success by keeping marketable products secret. CETI disagrees with me when I say their product is marketable in its present state. They think it needs a few more years of work. I think I could sell millions of dollars worth starting this afternoon. I think the E-Quest gadgets would also sell like hotcakes, but alas E-Quest is trying to keep them secret instead of advertising them in the Wall Street Journal. Dean Miller writes: "My understanding is that Patterson was looking for excess heat before the P&F announcement. That's why I'm puzzled." I have never heard *that* before! If true, I am puzzled too. But I doubt it. I meant that Patterson has been working for years since the famous 1989 announcement. I mentioned that I think it may be a few years before anyone can replicate Patterson without CETI's cooperation. Horace Heffner responded: "This, if true, would completely incapacitate their patents in the US. True, their claims are broad, but that is meaningless if they did not disclose all, or disclose enough so one "skilled in the art" could independently make use of the patent's teachings. No useful teaching, no utility, no winning lawsuits. End of story." No, I do not think it would be the End of Story. In these circumstances, the patent holder says: well, the people who have tried it up until now are not skilled enough in art, just wait, a Mr. PSITA (Person Skilled In The Art) will come along any minute now. CETI could make a strong case for this claim if scientists at universities and corporations like Motorola have replicated with a little hand holding. The rule is that you must reveal all information about the best techniques you know on the date of the filing, such that skilled people can replicate. It does not say that a skilled person must be able to do it quickly or easily, in less than six months, or two years, or whatever. And what constitutes a "skilled person" can be argued back and forth for a long time. This is a brand new technology, you cannot expect to find many people skilled in it. Incidentally, I heard that CETI has been granted a new patent. I do not have the number yet. I will report it when I get it. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:38:36 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA17265 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:53:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA17200 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:53:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.77] ([204.57.193.77]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA07182 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:53:20 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 09:57:38 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: > >By the way....are these beads under warrantee? it would >be nice if they would replace such``defective beads'' > >(hint, hint...:-) Yes, it would be nice, especially if we could expect a free supply untill they show over unity! 8^) On a more earnest note, I think we are all in this risk taking business together. This is a great opportunity to thank Scott Little and Earthtech for all the work, plus going out on a limb to collect the money and do the distribution, plus throwing in the glass beads and postage. This was obviously an endeavour of devotion and not for profit. I am deeply greatful for all the generous help Scott has given me via public and private email, and feel somewhat indebted to him, and this group also. I am especially greatful to Scott for getting me away from computer and books and into the lab. When the beads arrived yesterday I thought how they were like a little vial of idea seeds. Their expense is now completely incidental to what I have spent expanding my lab, and monthly budget. Testing the ersatz beads is now only one of many experiments of interest. It is of no great concern to me if they disintegrate, but I am glad to get warning they might. I'll put some aside to mount in a momento. If the opportunity comes to buy an order of new and improved beads, count me in for $250 worth, minimum. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:24:24 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA20196 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:09:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA20134 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:08:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.77] ([204.57.193.77]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA07230 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:09:19 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:13:37 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If the bubbles are coming from bubbles from the public water system, you should easily and freely get results of the water systems testing from the water utility, and find out what additives are used. I would call the utility. The water system probably chlorinates. It is possible the system failed a lead and copper test recently, and thus have chosen to begin adding sulfates to reduce corrosivity. When this happens, carbonate build-up in the water mains begins to dissolve. You could easily have bubbles consisting of a mixture of air, CO2, Cl, and SO2 being generated by your machine. The mixture of Cl and a small amount of SO2 might be hard to identify. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 11:41:31 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA24229 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:29:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA24182 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:29:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.77] ([204.57.193.77]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA07293 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:29:51 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:34:08 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >By the same token >the electrical resistance through the electrolyte should be reduced to get >into the reported operating range of Cravens. Scott do you have a porus >membrane between the anode and cathode? Is it feasible to remove it? > > >Martin Sevior This is the problem of bead quantity and cell geometry I was referring to when talking about using a constant voltage instead of current. If the quantity of beads is less then the resistance will be higher unless the geometry is not symmetric. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 11:41:31 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA24229 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:29:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA24182 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:29:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.77] ([204.57.193.77]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA07293 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:29:51 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:34:08 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: D [snip] > >By the same token >the electrical resistance through the electrolyte should be reduced to get >into the reported operating range of Cravens. Scott do you have a porus >membrane between the anode and cathode? Is it feasible to remove it? > > >Martin Sevior This is the problem of bead quantity and cell geometry I was referring to when talking about using a constant voltage instead of current. If the quantity of beads is less then the resistance will be higher unless the geometry is not symmetric. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:49:27 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id MAA06614 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 12:34:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA06537 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 12:34:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.77] ([204.57.193.77]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA07533 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:35:23 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:39:39 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >This issue of pump power keeps coming up. Pump power is P = p*V', where P >= power, p = pressure difference (outlet - inlet) and V' = volumetric flow. >Put in some order of magnitude numbers. In consistnet mks units, > > p = 1 bar = 10^5 newton/m^2 > V' = 1 mL/s = 10^-6 m^3/s > >Then one calculates P = 0.1 watt. > >Note that pressure drop is much, much less than 1 bar in Patterson cells, >and V' is about 10 times smaller (in ICCF5 and SOFE cells), so that the >actual pump power is a few mW at most. It is negligible. > >Michael J. Schaffer michael.schaffer@gat.com Thanks for a beautifully concise and convincing reply. My pump is 7 W. and the flow rate is .4 ml/s = 4x10_7 m^3/s. So at 1 bar my pump should require .04 W. Assuming it is 10 percent efficient I should be able to pump at .7 W or 17.5 bar. The pump can not do this, so I assume it must be much less that 10 percent efficient, and I will see almost all the electrical energy supplied to the pump converted to heat. Suppose the pressure drop is .1 bar accross the cell normally, i.e. when it is measured, but undetected increases to .5 bar with application of current. Suppose I am interrested in doing electrolysis at 2 volts in a cell with 200 ohms resistance, or a current of 10 ma., or .02 W. I measure a delta t corresponding to .022 W thinking I am about 10 percent ou., but in reality all I am measuring is the contibution of .02 W from the undetected pressure drop. Agreed this is a micro-problem, not applicable to the CETI results, but it sure was beat to death once before. It is nice to be able to account for the objection so readily, but it does require an ongoing pressure measurement to provide the data. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:59:08 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id MAA08560 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 12:46:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA08469 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 12:45:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.77] ([204.57.193.77]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA07600 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:44:45 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 11:49:01 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: ersatz beads away! Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > Glass contains relatively large inter >molecular spaces, thus hydrogen should diffuse relatively easily into >it. The bottom line is that your beads may "leak". >[snip] > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk Yes! Adding a layer of copper is a great idea for another batch. Even if the Sn/Pd layer is required to bond to the glass, the Cu could be coated over it, giving a 5 layer bead. By preventing H2 from forming at the Cu/Ni boundary, forcing the H to remain ionically bonded, may prevent bubble formation. The conductivity of the Cu at the core of the bead might play a role also. About the red dots, are there any common radioactive red compounds? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 13:30:51 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id NAA14504 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 13:21:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA14470 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 13:20:49 -0800 (PST) From: RMCarrell@aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA24736 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 16:19:28 -0500 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 16:19:28 -0500 Message-ID: <960306161927_439722515@emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed's points about the difficulty of replication of what looks easy are well taken and offer the opportunity for another of my cautionary tales from the history of the electronics industry. It was decades from the cats-whisker detector of the 10's and 20's (point contact on an active zone of a galena -- lead sulphide -- crystal) to diodes for radar detectors in WW2 to the point contact transistor in the late 40's. The US government poured large gobs of money into developing transistors and integrated circuits. Present day integrated circuit technology represents an investment of tens of thousands of man-years -- no kidding. The lack of patent protection for CF isn't helping. Now a point contact transistor looked easy too -- get a bit of germanium, two sharpened wires and go at it. So did the P&F cell. So does a thermionic cathode in any vacuum tube (80 years later there are reliable recipies but no really good theory). The developers Jed mentioned - Piantelli, Mills, Patterson - are farther out into the unknown and haven't a shadow of the resources poured into the above examples. You can overturn established physics with a well-established 1.01 over unity, but to change the world you need reliable, reproduceable, cookbook power and it might not be as easy as it looks -- yet. Jed's inventor's diseases (why not post them here, Jed?) are well put. But a business man has enough problems making products whose basic theory is reasonably well understood, without tackling something that isn't. The path of careful, coorperative development may be a proper one. At this point I see little fear of outright suppression. Thanks to the Internet, there are too many hints too widely known. Despite all the efforts at secrecy in the Manhattan project, the only real secret was that an atomic bomb was possible. Now the construction of an implosion bomb is well known, but the details to make a high yield one is a very difficult engineering problem -- fortunately. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:20:01 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id QAA22262 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 16:45:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from bos1e.delphi.com (SYSTEM@bos1e.delphi.com [192.80.63.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA22121 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 16:45:10 -0800 (PST) From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com Received: from delphi.com by delphi.com (PMDF V5.0-6 #10880) id <01I213FM114W95N2KL@delphi.com> for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Wed, 06 Mar 1996 19:44:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 06 Mar 1996 19:44:37 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01I213FM114Y95N2KL@delphi.com> X-VMS-To: IN%"vortex-l@eskimo.com" 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: What is "skilled in the art" concerning CF? From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 19:27:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA16836 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 19:18:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA16799 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 19:18:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tuWDr-000Ei1C; Wed, 6 Mar 96 21:18 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 21:18:34 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Horace Heffner" at Mar 4, 96 07:27:11 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: > One last chemistry item for anyone: > > I have Li2SO4*(H2O) and I want to make up a 1 mol. solution. To double > check that's: > > Total: 127.95 gm. right? Yes, so mix 128 grams with 1 liter of water (or proportional equivalent.) It should increase the volume by about 5%. You should note about a 4C temperature rise. -- - 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 Mar 6 21:06:41 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA01868 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 20:58:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA01838 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 20:58:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-30.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-30.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.30]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA06454 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 15:58:26 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Re:The book of Biquaternion Quantum Mechanics Date: Thu, 07 Mar 1996 06:00:34 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <313d2de8.29657687@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <9603051334.AA30044@giasone.teseo.it> In-Reply-To: <9603051334.AA30044@giasone.teseo.it> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:34:10 +0100, Elio Conte wrote: >The book is written in italian and the diskette (about 32 pages) in english. >The diskette also enables the reading of the book. > Yours Sincerely > Elio Conte >--- >Prof Elio Conte >Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia >Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia > > Dear Professor, I fear you won't get many orders from an English speaking list for a book in Italian. Is there a translation planned? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 6 22:37:48 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id WAA15910 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 22:25:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA15889 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 22:25:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tuZ8Y-0000OwC; Thu, 7 Mar 96 00:25 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Skeptisim. To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 00:25:18 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <960304173501_72240.1256_EHB33-4@CompuServe.COM> from "Jed Rothwell" at Mar 4, 96 12:35:01 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Jed writes: > person to observe excess heat with Ni-H cold fusion. Mills reported it long > ago, and he uses static calorimeters. This work was independently confirmed by > Thermacore, Inc. The calorimetry is described in their July 1993 paper in > Fusion Technology. I am not aware of any errors in this calorimetry. I don't have my records handy, but three of us independently tried to verify the Thermacore calibration on the specified 10 gallon Nalgene tank. Criddle and another gentleman (who's name escapes me at the momemnt, but who paid for my Nalgene tank) from Canada and I all saw that the calorimetry constant of the control tank was actually nearly twice as high as what Thermacore reported. This did not account for all the reported excess heat, but it accounted for most of it, and the discrepency was never understood. -- - 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 Mar 7 05:12:05 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id EAA07303 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 04:56:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA07294 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 04:56:51 -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 DAA11468 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 03:58:09 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 04:02:09 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Ion Brake Hypothesis for PPC Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Some thoughts: 1. Removal of a single charge from a neutral body of water charges the water. Removal of lots of charges causes a massive voltage gradient build-up. The energy required to remove the charges, even a single charge, requires conservation of energy. Anyone in doubt should try the Lord Kelvin Water Drop Experiment. 2. Ions in soulution in an electrolysis device, even if not directly involved in a reaction, can play a role of charge balance by realigning (being realigned) so their concentrations match and counteract a charge imbalance created or mandated by other physical processes. Such a realignment to match a voltage gradient would cause a corresponding ph gradient. Though the concept of a fluid van de Graff generator as a voltage gradient generator in a contiguous conducting electrolyte solution is nonsense, such an effect as a ph gradient generator is maybe not. 3. A ph gradient has potential energy in the form of chemical, i.e.battery, energy. Electrons appear to "spring form nowhere" in a battery. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Thu Mar 7 12:01:22 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA22331 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 11:41:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA22269 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 11:41:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from dacha (eb4ppp23.shentel.net [204.111.1.183]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id OAA27708 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 14:41:30 -0500 Date: Thu, 7 Mar 96 14:41:39 From: dacha@shentel.net Subject: RE: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon B95_14, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. 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 04 Mar 1996 07:14:07 PST "MHUGO@EPRI" wrote: *** Reply to note of 03/04/96 06:55 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Hydrogen Peroxide Jim G. --- See if the material will readily oxidize a biological sample of some sort. Actually, bleaching is one of the effects of Hydrogen Peroxide. >Boy, wheres M.Monroe when you need her!< -----------------End of Original Message----------------- ------------------------------------- Name: dacha E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 3/7/96 Time: 2:41:39 PM No matter where you go, there you are. ------------------------------------- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Thu Mar 7 08:00:40 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA28267 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 07:32:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA28242 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 07:31:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA18675; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 10:30:34 -0500 Date: 07 Mar 96 10:24:28 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Logajan's Nalgene tank test Message-ID: <960307152427_72240.1256_EHB88-2@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex John Logajan writes: "I don't have my records handy, but three of us independently tried to verify the Thermacore calibration on the specified 10 gallon Nalgene tank. Criddle and another gentleman (who's name escapes me at the moment, but who paid for my Nalgene tank) from Canada and I all saw that the calorimetry constant of the control tank was actually nearly twice as high as what Thermacore reported. This did not account for all the reported excess heat, but it accounted for most of it, and the discrepancy was never understood. I forgot about that incident! Very strange. It reminds me of these tests Mitchell Jones is doing, where he cannot seem to replicate the performance of the air cooled heat exchanger. Well, well, I don't have John's reports handy either, but I have the material from Thermacore including the report and some calibration curves from a talk they gave at MIT. Let's review this. First, a question for John: Did you contact Thermacore, and run your numbers by them? What did they say? Okay, I presume John refers to the arrangement described in the article "Dihydrino Molecule Identification," Fusion Technology Vol. 25, January 1994, "cell assembly for experiments 4 through 14." This is carefully described on page 111. Unlike some authors, they list all components including that Nalgene tank with lid (model 54100-0010). They did some good calibrations here, including recalibration on the fly with 20 watts of heater power every 72 hours. This is such a big cell that it took 24 hours to be sure it was at a steady state. Hmm. . . . The biggest weakness I see is that it is air cooled, by ambient air. Unless you put it in a location with high-quality heating and airconditioning, changes in ambient temperature and humidity will play hob with precision. I described this in my paper "A Simple Calorimeter." Reviewing this data, I think they must have placed the cell in a properly regulated environment, because the sample data looks quiet to me, and they can detect things like the heat from the mixer. The calibration curves look straight to me. They checked for positional variation "throughout the tank" and found no measurable problem. The only stupid mistake I see here is this famous statement "the cell temperature rise above ambient ... and heater power were recorded daily." That's ridiculous, but in other tests they recorded it on computers and strip chart recorders. The heating coefficient was 0.17 +/- 0.01 deg C/W. In experiment #4, excess was 48.2 watts, which caused an 8.2 deg C temperature rise above the level it would have reached with electrolysis power alone. That is quite a large temperature rise. The calibration constant (or heating coefficient as they call it) would have to wander around to an amazing, unprecedented extent for this to be an error. Even my toothbrush tube simple calorimeter never performed that badly! Experiment # 14 is the real killer. Input is 4.98 watts (VI) or 1.87 watts adjusted for electrolysis; output is 41.0. Therefore, the temperature rise would have been . . . 0.3 deg C, but it was 7.0 deg C instead. I don't see how you can argue with that. It's a gigantic difference. Stray air currents and fluctuations from the air conditioner thermostat can cause problems with this kind of calorimetry, but they cannot cause that much of a problem. I mean, a person would notice if the air conditioner was fluctuating 7 deg C (14 deg F). You couldn't miss it! I do not recall that John saw huge fluctuations in his calibration constant when he left conditions undisturbed. Naturally, when you move the Naglene tank from a wooden surface to a metal surface, or set a fan to blow on it, that will change the performance profoundly. That is the big weakness of this technique. But the folks at Thermacore are professional thermal engineers. They have an established reputation as one of the top firms in the country, so I cannot imagine they would make such a dumb mistake. And, as I said, the data looks quiet, the calibration curves look splendidly straight, there is no evidence of that kind of error. There must be a difference between John's environment and the environment at Thermacore. What it might be I could not say. But I see discrepancies of this nature often. To me, this demonstrates why you must calibrate static calorimeter carefully and repeatedly. Similar materials in slightly different configurations can perform wildly differently, and it is difficult to understand why. One particular setup, at one location, will perform reliably for an indefinite period of time, but when you build one ostensibly just like it at another location it performs differently (because it isn't "just like it" but nobody knows why). When you make a minor change it can have a large effect on the calibration constant, and you must start all over again with calibration, which takes a month or two if you do it right. I have heard reports of water, gas, and thermoelectric static calorimeters acting like this. These are some of the reasons I prefer flow calorimeters. Incidentally, the most predictable and stable performance I have seen in a static calorimeter, and the most sublime design, was that of Pons and Fleischmann, with the half-silvered test tubes. When you see data from other people you begin to realize how good they are. Let me natter on about aviation history for just a second. This whole business of reminds me of the travails of Wrights with their wind tunnel. They ended up marking the floor to make sure that not a single chair or box was moved, and the machine operator had to stand in the same spot hour after hour every day to ensure consistent performance over two months. You wouldn't think that furniture could disturb air flow inside a wooden box, but it did. This is the kind of black magic Intel must deal with increasingly these days, as their circuit density goes ever higher. The New York Times reports that vendors who sell Intel test and production equipment now have to get formal, written clearance before using a different brand of screw to hold the face plates on! The tiniest changes in environment will play hob with Intel's production, and nobody knows why, so they must go to extraordinary lengths to ensure a stable, unchanging environment. In any case, getting back to Thermacore and Mills for a second, the power density of these early experiments was, as noted here, very low. 41 watts in a 10 gallon tank should be a cinch to detect, unless you make a stupid mistake, but on the other hand that power density has no practical, commercial value. Fortunately, they have made great progress over there and they report that power density is much higher, just as it is for CETI and Piantelli. I hope they publish these results soon. Another question for John: Did you simulate the experiment? Did you attempt to detect the difference between 1.87 watts and 41.0 watts? If so, did you have any trouble distinguishing between them? I cannot imagine why anyone would. 41 watts is a heck of a large heat flux, even in a 10 gallon container. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:48:48 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA19623 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 11:27:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from giasone.teseo.it (giasone.teseo.it [194.21.136.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA19586 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 11:27:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mu.teseo.it by giasone.teseo.it; (5.65/1.1.8.2/03Oct95-0808PM) id AA32203; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 20:27:19 +0100 Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 20:27:19 +0100 Message-Id: <9603071927.AA32203@giasone.teseo.it> X-Sender: conte@teseo.it (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) Subject: vtx: Re to R.van Spaandonk X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I do not intend to make a business of the book;only I hope that 10 ^ 10 copies will be selled! On the other hand,it is abook of physics and not a novel! I repeat that all the great part on the cold fusion in biquaternion quantum mechanics is in english by the diskette,it also contains a general formulation that hepls considerably the understanding of the italian text.I am sure that there will not be great difficulties.Think to my effort:I study on textbooks in english from thirthy two years,I was eighteen years old when,for the= first time,I took a book of physics in english.And my elnglish is very evident! Yes,we are planning a new version of the book in english but this ,in my opinion,will require more time and effort. =20 After all,you have not problems! Are you not one of the "creatures that comes into this world knowing everything...."? --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Thu Mar 7 15:07:19 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id NAA15836 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 13:48:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA15764 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 13:47:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA19683; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 16:46:37 -0500 Date: 07 Mar 96 16:41:16 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Latest Patterson patent Message-ID: <960307214115_72240.1256_EHB88-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The British Library computer lists the latest Patterson patent as U.S. 5,372,688. I have not got a copy yet. I ordered one for $6 from The Library Connection, in Virginia: Tel: 804-758-3311 Fax: 800-325-2221 This is a branch office (or subsidiary, or something) of the British Library. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:28:07 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id PAA28951 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 15:01:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from julia.math.ucla.edu (root@julia.math.ucla.edu [128.97.4.254]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA28910 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 15:01:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (arnold.math.ucla.edu) by julia.math.ucla.edu (Sendmail 4.1/1.13) id AA07418; Thu, 7 Mar 96 14:10:41 PST Received: by arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (NX5.67d/NeXT-2.0) id AA12954; Thu, 7 Mar 96 14:02:57 -0800 Date: Thu, 7 Mar 96 14:02:57 -0800 From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) Message-Id: <9603072202.AA12954@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.95) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.95) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> I want to make up a 1 mol. solution. >> >> Total (mol weight): 127.95 gm. right? >Yes, so mix 128 grams with 1 liter of water Close enough for government work, but not chemistry :-). a 1 Molar solution has 1 mole of solute per liter of _solution_, not per liter of solvent (H2O here). So, just mix 127.9(5) grams of solute with, say, 500 ml of H20. Mix it well, and then add additional water to make exactly 1000 ml of solution. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:21:52 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA27009 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 14:51:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA26961 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 14:51:27 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA17466 for vortex-L@eskimo.com; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 17:48:52 -0500 Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 17:48:52 -0500 Message-ID: <960307174851_240194394@emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Import/business Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thank's to the help of Mark Hugo I was able to contact Potapov's son. I am also incontact with severial business people, including a group that owns a steel company. I am trying to form a business to import and sell YASMIRS's. Potapov's son tells me that the latest machines are running under their own power. Only start-up power is needed. A US patent is currently being drawn up. Information is on the way to me. I want to import, install, and sell-sell-sell. I have the plan, now to get all the pieces to come together. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:27:21 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id RAA28779 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 17:33:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA28587 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 17:33:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.74] ([204.57.193.74]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA14954 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 16:34:05 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 16:37:53 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: The Joe Newman Challenge Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >Are you honest and man enough to accept this golden challenge? You invited >me to a carnival wrestling match which would have accomplished very little. >I have invited you to a decisive end to your struggle for acceptance. How >say you, Joe Newman? [snip] >Michael Mandeville, publisher When reading the opening invective, the potentially litigious slurr and contentiousness in the above message, for the first time I was ready to scream referee and plead for a change of venue. Fortunately, I read to the end and now say bravo Michael Mandeville! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Thu Mar 7 19:25:42 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA09202 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 19:15:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from julia.math.ucla.edu (root@julia.math.ucla.edu [128.97.4.254]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA09186 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 19:15:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (arnold.math.ucla.edu) by julia.math.ucla.edu (Sendmail 4.1/1.13) id AA19377; Thu, 7 Mar 96 19:15:06 PST Received: by arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (NX5.67d/NeXT-2.0) id AA13134; Thu, 7 Mar 96 19:07:22 -0800 Date: Thu, 7 Mar 96 19:07:22 -0800 From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) Message-Id: <9603080307.AA13134@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.95) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.95) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Logajan's Nalgene tank test Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > I cannot imagine why anyone would. > 41 watts is a heck of a large heat flux, even in a 10 gallon > container. - Jed I don't see much difference in significance between 41 watts in a 10 gallon = 38 liter tank and 0.32 watts in a 300 ml tank---so one wonders why they chose to build such a large apparatus. In my mind, it just opens one up to greater potenital error due to spatial gradients in the system and surroundings. I find this suspicious. I mean, if I had a 10,000 gallon swimming pool-sized CF cell with cathodes the size of spring queen sized matresses, that generated 40 kW, would that be impressive? So, I am less than enthused about Thermacore's published results...but I have not carefully gone over al the details of their report, either.... As for Pattersons 200---500 Watt cell. I too am a little bit suspicious about that. In one simple test I did, pumping ~ 800 ml of H20 around in standard 3/8'' vinal tubing ~ 2 meters long, with an open-to-the-air reservoir (about 3 '' diam plastic cylinder) , at a rate of ~3 Liter/min, with a plastic patterson-ish shaped cell containing reisitive heater running at 34 watts in the loop, I got about a 20 degree temp rise in the working fluid in less than an hours running time. Such systems don;t dissipate heat too well.... But, on the other hand, 18 feet of 3/8'' tygon tubing presents a surface area of approx. 0.3 meter^2, and given a typical themral conductivity of plastic around 0.2 W/m.K, and a tubing thickness of 1/16'' = 0.0015 meter, we get a heat transfer rate of 0.3 * 0.2/ 0.0015 W/K = 38 Watts per degreee K temperature difference (from the electrolyte to the environment). This is the best that could be achieved, no matter what sort of fans you blow on it. Thus, to dissipate 400 watts requires a 10 degree temp increase, under the best of circumstances....that, I guess, is reasonable, so I see no real contradiction there. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:47:49 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA20774 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 20:23:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA20722 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 20:23:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tuthY-0005axC; Thu, 7 Mar 96 22:22 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Logajan's Nalgene tank test To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 22:22:48 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <960307152427_72240.1256_EHB88-2@CompuServe.COM> from "Jed Rothwell" at Mar 7, 96 10:24:28 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Jed writes: > First, a question for John: Did you contact Thermacore, and run your numbers > by them? What did they say? Actually, I talked to Bob Schaubach (sp?). He was very helpful. But by the time I contacted him, the published experiment was over a year old, so there was little he could do to reconstruct the chain of events. So the discrepency between our three independent results and Thermacore's results will just have to remain an unsolved mystery. Thermacore had gone on to pressurized gas systems and were still claiming to see anomalous heat, so the problems in the earlier calorimetry weren't particularly relevent. Last I talked to Bob was probably close to a year and half ago. Back then he was still unhappy at the large mass of nickle needed to produce usable power levels. > This is such a big cell that it took 24 hours to be sure it was at a > steady state. It has a direct relationship to the calorimetry constant. Again I don't have my records handy, but I believe at the higher calorimetry constants we saw, 24 hours wasn't even enough. > The biggest weakness I see is that it is air cooled, by ambient air. Yeah, fans and cold floor drafts varied the constant over a 4:1 range. > I do not recall that John saw huge fluctuations in his calibration constant > when he left conditions undisturbed. That's correct. Though I could vary it over the range of 4:1, it tended to stay in that mode unless I varied room placement or pointed a fan at it, etc. > There must be a difference between John's environment and the environment > at Thermacore. It's a mystery. Our three independent results were in the 0.28-0.30 range compared to Thermacore's 0.17. > Another question for John: Did you simulate the experiment? Did you attempt > to detect the difference between 1.87 watts and 41.0 watts? If so, did you > have any trouble distinguishing between them? I cannot imagine why anyone > would. 41 watts is a heck of a large heat flux, even in a 10 gallon container. We all ran tests at different power levels and different conditions. We saw non-linear effects from vapor/condensation cycles, evaporation loss, etc. After characterizing the device, you could be pretty confident of what it was producing. That is why it is such a mystery as to why our three independent tests came to a conclusion different than Thermacore's. Recall, though, that our results didn't explain all the excess heat, just a large portion of it. But the discrpency remains troubling and I don't know what to make of it. -- - 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 Mar 7 13:19:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id NAA07805 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 13:05:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from big.aa.net (root@big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA07590; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 13:03:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from s1c1p0.aa.net (s1c1p0.aa.net [204.157.220.172]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA16656; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 12:50:36 -0800 Message-Id: <199603072050.MAA16656@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 08 Mar 1996 12:50:07 +0800 To: josephnewman@earthlink.net (Evan Soule), freenrg-list@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: vtx: The Joe Newman Challenge Cc: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:21 PM 3/6/96 -0800, you wrote: >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm@aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm > >Dear Mr. Mandeville: > >Having received email from an overseas "bulletin board," with the following >message above your name, I am going to assume that you wrote the following >words: [If you did not write these words, then this message does not apply >to you, and I apologize if this is the case. However, for the purposes of >this letter, I am going to assume that you did write these words and that >it does therefore apply to you.] > >The message (supposedly above your signature) states: > > snip > > >Well, Mr. Mandeville, since --- as Joseph Newman would say --- you like to >"run your mouth off," I speak very little. When I speak, I speak with certainty. People who make gratuitous, patronizing comments like "you like to run your mouth off" are in fact simply running their mouth off as a part of their dominance assertion. >let's see if you have the courage to "put your money >where your mouth is" and accept Joseph Newman's challenge --- and he also, >"does not use his words lightly." > >Evan Soule > Evan, I would very much like to see if Mr. Newman has the courage of his convinctions. I fail to see what money has to do with it. > >THIS IS THE CHALLENGE, MR. MANDEVILLE: > > >To: Michael Mandeville: > >I, Joseph Westley Newman (601) 947-7147, challenge Michael Mandeville to >"put your money where your mouth is." > >We will each put up $10,000.00 cash and pick a time and place that will be >publicly attended by the newsmedia and all other interested parties. > >An oscilloscope will be used to determine if there is a battery voltage >rise on the battery pack of 6-volt dry cell batteries connected to my >Motor/Generator system while it operates a 42-inch fan blade attached to >the shaft of my Motor/Generator. > >Objective people (including scientists of my choosing and your choosing) >will be asked to observe and present their findings on the oscilloscope >readings as my Motor/Generator produces mechanical torque. > >If it is demonstrated that there is no battery voltage rise in the battery >connected to my Motor/Generator system, then I will immediately pay you >$10,000.00 cash. If it is demonstrated that there is a battery voltage >rise in the battery connected to my Motor/Generator system, then you will >immediately pay me $10,000.00 cash. > I do not consider these terms to be worthy of my time. See below for my counter-challenge. >In fact, Jacob Rabinow -- a so-called "expert" with the National Bureau of >Standards -- has already set the standards of judging my technology when he >once said, "The Newman invention working as a motor would be highly >inefficient -- less than 10% efficient." The results of the >above-described test totally proves the opposite! I totally fail to comprehend the logical structure of this paragraph. >If you do not accept these terms, then you are either a coward and a liar >or a plant by the power brokers. > This is awfully juvinile. People who use either/or logic to straightjacket a dare are playing the same games 13 year olds play when they are first testing their concept of macho. I can think of about 100 additional possibilities. Possibly I am stupid. Possibly I have superior technology. Possibly I am ignorant. Possibly I just don't give a damn. Possibly you are crazy. Etc. Etc. Etc. Let's grow up here, and deal with the real world. > >Joseph Westley Newman > > >Route 1, Box 52, Lucedale, Mississippi 39452 >(601) 947-7147 > > The challenge you send me is a penny-ante huckster's game. Let me invite you into the real world and give you a challenge to meet which will make you a multi-billionaire within two years, if you can meet the challenge. Are you man enough to put your integrity on the line and put up your invention for scientific verification or shut up? If you can do what you claim to do in a manner which can be trully verified by people who are objective and/or are quite accepting of the theoretical potential of over-unity, you will create news of world importance and many power brokers of the planet will beat a path to your door and pay homage and ply you with multi-billion dollar deals. That is the real world. This reality is flowing right now for other people. It is a true reality. This reality does not flow from claims. It flows from DO. Just damn DO it. The best methodolgy I can recommend to you from my own knowledge is this: Vortex-L is an invitational, private listserv on the InterNet which has many scientists, engineers, experimenters, inventors, technicians, and others of some considerable talent. This private listserv exists precisely to assist and test radical new claims which fly in the face of traditional theories in physics and energy. This group does not function like a newsgroup. It has certain rules of conduct and expectations. The primary rules are integrity and open-mindedness. This group in the past twelve months has delved into many things. Few have panned out. Some things are cooking, such as the Patterson Cell. The collective ability of this group is pretty awesome. Many of the members of this group are actively "in the hunt" for over unity principles. Those in the hunt are eager to find stuff which they can prove to work. Others are curious in one way or another and lend their expertise. The intellectual level of this group is very high but not condescending. They are not stuffy. Critical, very critical, yes. But not stuffy, condescending, or determined to prove you wrong just because they have a stick you know where. The group will have some initial strong doubts because you have already unknowingly dealt with one or more of them pretty shabbily. But even so, you could overcome that. This group has the ability to decisively prove you right or wrong. If you are proven right, clearly and scientifically, you will find access to many keys to many superlative doors...to fame and money. Since you are clearly and undeniably on record for establishing the priority of your claims, at this point you can freely and clearly divulge your invention. It is your only course of action to achieve the proof and recognition you say you deserve. If you have the goods, you have to lay them on the table and allow other people to pick them up and examine them. That is the real world. The world does not in any manner operate in any other way. Inventors who do not understand this spend their lives in frustration. My challenge to you is to relay the electrical/magnetic specifics of your motor principles in posts to this group. Define what it does. Define how you think you know that. Then, ask the group to define how your device should be properly rigged with sensors and probes to measure it operations. Answer their questions. They will debate it for a while and a course of acceptable action will emerge. If it proves out, the doors will begin to open...and your struggle will be over (if you have good business/legal advisors). Are you honest and man enough to accept this golden challenge? You invited me to a carnival wrestling match which would have accomplished very little. I have invited you to a decisive end to your struggle for acceptance. How say you, Joe Newman? ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 00:28:31 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id AAA25851 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 00:20:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA25840 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 00:20:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-6.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-6.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.6]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA10604 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 19:20:20 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Beads Date: Fri, 08 Mar 1996 09:22:23 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <313e866c.27738772@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <960304173501_72240.1256_EHB33-4@CompuServe.COM> In-Reply-To: <960304173501_72240.1256_EHB33-4@CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, What physical process was used to deposit the metal coatings on your beads? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 04:34:30 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id EAA17856 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 04:26:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from bos1g.delphi.com (SYSTEM@bos1g.delphi.com [192.80.63.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA17847 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 04:26:31 -0800 (PST) From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com Received: from delphi.com by delphi.com (PMDF V5.0-6 #10880) id <01I236927GMO9BW077@delphi.com> for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Fri, 08 Mar 1996 07:26:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 08 Mar 1996 07:26:27 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: vtx: The Joe Newman Challenge To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01I236927GMQ9BW077@delphi.com> X-VMS-To: IN%"vortex-l@eskimo.com" 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: I have a complete dynometer setup and power analyzer, both calibrated to NIST, IEE to Magtrol INC. software, etc. This is the industry standard for testing motor efficiency. Depending on the size of the Newman motor, "Torque", and with board approval of my company, I might be willing to test a Newman Motor. Power In vs. Power out. Joe Flynn Flynn Research E-Mail Joe Flynn@delphi P.O. Box 11657 Kansas City, Mo. 64138 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 07:07:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id GAA09522 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 06:39:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA09459 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 06:39:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA21115; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:37:34 -0500 Date: 08 Mar 96 09:35:13 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Logajan's Nalgene tank test Message-ID: <960308143512_72240.1256_EHB113-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Barry Merriman writes: "I don't see much difference in significance between 41 watts in a 10 gallon = 38 liter tank and 0.32 watts in a 300 ml tank . . . I don't either, but that is not what they reported. With the 350 ml tanks they report 0.003 to 0.145 watts, so the larger cell had twice as much power density. It was still not enough for practical purposes, but it was much easier to detect. The absolute power level is 300 times greater. It is like the body heat from a cat versus a person: power density per cc of body is roughly the same, but we are bigger, we generate more absolute heat, so we are easier to detect. "In my mind, it just opens one up to greater potential error due to spatial gradients in the system and surroundings." No, they checked for spatial gradients in the system, as I reported yesterday. Quote from paper: "To eliminate the possibility of temperature gradients, the temperature was measured throughout the tank. No position variation was found to within the detection of the thermocouple (+/-0.1 deg C)." They made sure there were no changes in the surroundings by doing on-the-fly calibration during the run. That's the best method I know of. "I find this suspicious." Nothing suspicious about it. It is much easier to detect because, as I said, absolute power is 300 times greater, and power density was 2.2 times greater. "I mean, if I had a 10,000 gallon swimming pool-sized CF cell with cathodes the size of spring queen sized mattresses, that generated 40 kW, would that be impressive?" Yes, that would be extremely impressive. I would be enough to heat a large house in the dead of winter, with only 1 or 2 KW of input (assuming they achieved the same performance as in experiment # 14). Such a demonstration would convince any sane person the excess heat is real. That is what I call the "heroic measures" technique, where you prove that a technology can work in principle, even though the implementation is impractical and not cost effective. I wish that Mills, or CETI, or Pons and Fleischmann had done something like that years ago. However, that is now totally unnecessary. They have greatly improved power density with the gas loading systems, to the point where they could build a 40 KW space heater as compact as a conventional gas fired 40 KW unit. I believe that CETI could also build one, if they chose to. (The Space Shuttle is an example of an heroic measure. It is too heroic, I am afraid. It is so impractical and so hideously expensive it has persuaded many people that manned space exploration can never be practical. It was supposed to demonstrate the opposite principle). "So, I am less than enthused about Thermacore's published results...but I have not carefully gone over all the details of their report, either...." Well, I think you ought to go over all details carefully before judging them. I do not see how anyone could be enthused or unenthused without first going over the details. "As for Pattersons 200---500 Watt cell. I too am a little bit suspicious about that. In one simple test I did, pumping ~ 800 ml of H20 around in standard 3/8'' vinyl tubing ~ 2 meters long, with an open-to-the-air reservoir (about 3 '' diam plastic cylinder) , at a rate of ~3 Liter/min, with a plastic patterson-ish shaped cell containing reisitive heater running at 34 watts in the loop, I got about a 20 degree temp rise in the working fluid in less than an hours running time. Such systems don't dissipate heat too well...." No, they do not dissipate heat well. Mitchell Jones demonstrated the same thing. You have to design an air cooled heat exchanger for maximum efficiency. But what does that have to do with the calorimetry? The heat is measured by the Delta T temperature of the cell, not by measuring the reservoir temperature rise. The reservoir temperature is irrelevant. Other people using different types of calorimeters, in which nobody questions the heat-loss mechanism, have run smaller cells between 3 and 20 watts. They have observed the same reaction at the same power density using much better calorimeters, so I do not see why anyone questions the scaled up version. Frankly, I consider the air-cooled heat exchanger debate a canard. If that had been the only demonstration in history, I would be a bit suspicious too, but it was not the only demonstration, it wasn't even the most impressive or convincing demonstration. The only thing it demonstrated was that the effect can be scaled up easily. "Thus, to dissipate 400 watts requires a 10 degree temp increase, under the best of circumstances....that, I guess, is reasonable, so I see no real contradiction there." Yes, Gene Mallove has been doing some air flow calorimetry for an unrelated project, and he confirms that. The warm air I felt coming from the heat exchanger must have been at least 10 deg C. I have tried detecting the heat from a 200 watt reaction with a similar small fan (with thermometers, not just by hand), and I confirm that in order to see feel any elevated temperature at all you have to have quite a large heat flux. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 07:00:53 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id GAA08698 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 06:37:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from giasone.teseo.it (giasone.teseo.it [194.21.136.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA08621 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 06:37:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from omicron.teseo.it by giasone.teseo.it; (5.65/1.1.8.2/03Oct95-0808PM) id AA26987; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 15:37:17 +0100 Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 15:37:17 +0100 Message-Id: <9603081437.AA26987@giasone.teseo.it> X-Sender: conte@teseo.it Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) Subject: vtx: Re to R.van Spaandonk X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) >Subject: Re to R.van Spaandonk > >I do not intend to make a business of the book;only I hope that >10 ^ 10 copies will be selled! >On the other hand,it is abook of physics and not a novel! I repeat that >all the great part on the cold fusion in biquaternion quantum mechanics >is in english by the diskette,it also contains a general formulation that >hepls considerably the understanding of the italian text.I am sure that >there will not be great difficulties.Think to my effort:I study on= textbooks >in english from thirthy two years,I was eighteen years old when,for the= first >time,I took a book of physics in english.And my elnglish is very evident! >Yes,we are planning a new version of the book in english but this ,in >my opinion,will require more time and effort. > =20 >After all,you have not problems! Are you not one of the >"creatures that comes into this world knowing everything...."? >Sincerely Elio Conte --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 07:08:25 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id GAA15165 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 06:56:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-7.compuserve.com (dub-img-7.compuserve.com [198.4.9.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA15130 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 06:56:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-7.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA09340; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:55:27 -0500 Date: 08 Mar 96 09:50:13 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Anti-scale magnets Message-ID: <960308145013_100433.1541_BHG31-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex The story that magnets can stop the formation of limescale in water has been around for a long time. In today's Financial Times, Cranfield University's School of Water Sciences confirms (to their own great surprise) that "by applying a strong magnetic field at right angles to the flow under specific conditions of acidity, temperature and water quality, you can affect the properties of the solution. If you get the conditions right, scale deposition is reduced by 50%, and the scale produced is powdery. It can almost be brushed off." Apparently, the cost of limescale to British industry is estimated at L1bn (about $1.6bn), and to treat a typical N Sea oil platform costs L0.5m/year. Quote an oil industry consultant, Alan Hunton: "The reason why the technology is not more widely used is that we have not yet found a really good explanation of how it works." Thus he proves that being as daft as a brush is no bar to becoming an "oil industry consultant". Sheesh. Chris From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:54:27 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA20495 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 07:25:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA20447 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 07:24:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA05632; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 10:23:23 -0500 Date: 08 Mar 96 10:20:23 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Text from ICCF6 Announcement Message-ID: <960308152023_72240.1256_EHB129-4@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 Huggins asked me for the ICCF6 announcement. Here it is, thanks to the magic of Omni Page OCR (the plagiarist's delight!) I corrected some spelling mistakes including "Feburaly 1996," which proved the announcement originated in Japan.] First Announcement INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COLD FUSION - ICCF6 GENERAL INFORMATION Date: October 13 (Sun.)- 18 (Fri.), 1996 Venue: Hotel Apex Toya, Hokkaido Official Language: English Sponsored by: New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) PRE-REGISTRATION Participants are kindly requested to indicate their interest by filling out the attached pre-registration form. Further information concerning the ICCF-6 will be sent to those who have expressed their interest by completing the pre-registration form. REGISTRATION FEE The registration fee of 40,000 Yen includes a banquet and proceedings. ORGANIZATION COMMITTEES International Advisory Committee: Prof. H. Ikegami (NIFS, Japan) Dr. F. Scaramuzzi (ENEA, Italy) Dr. K. McKubre (SRI Interal, USA) Mr. F. Jaeger (Eneco, USA) Prof. S. Pons (IMRA Europe, France) Prof. M. Fleischmann (IMRA Europe, UK) Prof. C. Sanchez (Univ. Autonoma, Spain) Prof. Li-Xing Zhong (Tsinghua Univ., China) Dr. M. Srinivasan (BARC, India) Prof. N. Samsonenko (PFUR, Russia) Prof. M. Okamoto (Tokyo Inst. of Tech., Japan) Local Organization Committee: Prof. M. Okamoto (Chairman) Dr. N. Asami (Vice-chairman, NHE Sapporo) Prof. H. Ikegami (NIFS) Prof. K. Ota (Yokohama National Univ.) Prof. A. Takahashi (Osaka Univ.) Director H. Kasai (NEDO) SCOPE OF THE CONFERENCE The object of the conference is to stimulate discussions on subjects related to the so-called [COLD FUSION] phenomenon. The conference has a scope to provide an international forum for the discussion of the most recent and academic aspects of the research. TOPICS The conference will consist of invited (oral sessions) and contributed papers (poster sessions) on the following topics. * Excess Energy Phenomena in Deuterium/Metal Systems (Experiments and Theory) * Correlation Between Excess Energy and Nuclear Products (Experiments and Theory) * Nuclear Physics Approaches (Experiments and Theory) * Material Science Studies (Experiments and Theory) * Innovative Approaches (Miscellaneous Phenomena) PAPERS and PROCEEDINGS The ICCF-6 will include contributed and invited papers which will be presented in plenary oral and poster sessions. Papers to be presented will be from peers of the Program Committee and selected on the basis of submitted extended abstracts. The details on the extended abstract will be informed in the second announcement; call for paper. The final manuscripts will be published after a review by peers. FURTHER SCHEDULE Issue 2nd Announcement: February 1996 Dead Line for Abstract: May 1996 CONFERENCE LOCATION The conference will be held at Hotel Apex, TOYA, Hokkaido which is located in an ideal position in Sikotsu-Toya National Park. The hotel provides a magnificient, 360xround view including Lake Toya. At Hotel Apex Toya, you can enjoy many hot springs, tennis courts and good golf courses. It will take about 1.5 hours by train from Shin-Chitose International Airport to the hotel. The participants shall stay in the hotel throughout the conference period CORRESPONDENCE Please address all correspondence to: ICCF-6 Mr. K. Matsui / NHE-Center, IAE Nishi-Shinbashi TS Building 1-22-5 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105, Japan. Tel: +81-3-3508-8901 Fax: +81-3-3508-8902 International E-mail: mac@iae.or.jp From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 07:31:58 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA20022 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 07:22:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA20008 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 07:22:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQagdx10347; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 10:22:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA27261; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 07:22:24 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L400P1) id 420421070096068FEPRI; 08 Mar 1996 07:21:07 PST Message-Id: Date: 08 Mar 1996 07:21:07 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: vtx: Anti-scale magnets To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/08/96 07:21:03 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 03/08/96 07:08 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Anti-scale magnets Dear Chris and company----I can explain WHY strong magnets influence the deposition of lime scale. It is very simple. The reason why is because water FLOWING by a strong magnetic field has the "Zeta Potential" of the suspended COLLOIDS changed. I have a 1938 text on "Colloid chemistry" and although it does not mention using a magnetic field and flowing water to change a "zeta potential", when you read the material it isn't too hard to figure that this probably is the case. (In point of fact, "zeta potential" can be measured, but it takes a clever device to do it---a tube with a standard colloid suspention, a high voltage field, and a microscope, a scale and a stopwatch...!) As the "zeta potential" changes, the propensity of colloids to aggregate or stay suspended changes. The FUNDEMENTAL problem here is the ASSUMPTION that the source of the "lime scale" is ELEMENTALLY dissolved Ca, which is not the case. The Ca is probably in some sort of aggregate particle form, i.e. an accumulation of atoms, held together by "van Der Vaals" type attractions. And this aggregate follows the properties of colloids, not dissolved solids. - MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:39:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA15613 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:41:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix10.ix.netcom.com (ix10.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA15545 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:40:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix10.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id JAA08434; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:37:45 -0800 Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:37:45 -0800 Message-Id: <199603081737.JAA08434@ix10.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: vtx: Anti-scale magnets To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > >To:Vortex > >The story that magnets can stop the formation of limescale in water >has been around for a long time. In today's Financial Times, >Cranfield University's School of Water Sciences confirms (to their own >great surprise) that "by applying a strong magnetic field at right >angles to the flow under specific conditions of acidity, temperature >and water quality, you can affect the properties of the solution. If >you get the conditions right, scale deposition is reduced by 50%, and >the scale produced is powdery. It can almost be brushed off." > For the past several years, there have been an still are about two radio talk show sponsors locally that has been touting the benefits of reducing or knocking out pipeline scaling by clamping on Their strong magnet on the water pipeline. They do not say whether that pipe has to be copper or iron but one of the talk show host stands by their effectiveness since he lives in an area with very hard water. The results are guaranteed-or-your-money-back. The installation costs close to $700.00. First thing I thought about was using those magnetron magnets I had for a try. It takes about six months for the effects to show up. Last night (thursday), somebody mentioned the same article you mentioned on one of the (national) talk shows to back the claims for the magnet treatment. Nice to know there is an explanation for the effect. -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:20:58 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id OAA07942 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 14:58:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA07919 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 14:58:45 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA08314 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 17:57:29 -0500 Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 17:57:29 -0500 Message-ID: <960308175727_345404284@emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Kansas Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Flynn, you are in Kansas City. You may want to look up Chuck Ross at Kansas City Power and Light. He is having a high pressure (400 PSI) Patterson cell built. He is also funding Q. Bowles work. I spoke with him a while back. He is a nice guy. Why don't you see if you can pay him a visit. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:24:25 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id PAA09860 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 15:08:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns2.indirect.com (root@ns2.indirect.com [165.247.1.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA09461; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 15:06:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from 165.247.24.113 (s113.phxslip4.indirect.com [165.247.24.113]) by ns2.indirect.com (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id QAA03356; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 16:06:04 -0700 Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 16:06:04 -0700 Message-Id: <199603082306.QAA03356@ns2.indirect.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Reed Huish Subject: vtx: Re: "Super Fuel" To: freenrg-list@eskimo.com, vortex-l@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: FYI... wrote: > What is Mr. Gunnerman's phone number? Can you tell us where the article on > this new fuel appeared? A55 (limited partnership) Rudolph W. Gunnerman 210 Gentry Way Reno, Nevada Voice (702) 826-8300 Fax 826-8383 I've been following this story for about five years now and speak with him or his son about twice a year. He's going to be a very rich man. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:24:25 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id PAA09860 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 15:08:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns2.indirect.com (root@ns2.indirect.com [165.247.1.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA09461; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 15:06:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from 165.247.24.113 (s113.phxslip4.indirect.com [165.247.24.113]) by ns2.indirect.com (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id QAA03356; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 16:06:04 -0700 Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 16:06:04 -0700 Message-Id: <199603082306.QAA03356@ns2.indirect.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Reed Huish Subject: vtx: Re: "Super Fuel" To: freenrg-list@eskimo.com, vortex-l@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: D FYI... wrote: > What is Mr. Gunnerman's phone number? Can you tell us where the article on > this new fuel appeared? A55 (limited partnership) Rudolph W. Gunnerman 210 Gentry Way Reno, Nevada Voice (702) 826-8300 Fax 826-8383 I've been following this story for about five years now and speak with him or his son about twice a year. He's going to be a very rich man. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 17:33:47 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id RAA03826 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 17:24:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from julia.math.ucla.edu (root@julia.math.ucla.edu [128.97.4.254]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA03783 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 17:23:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (arnold.math.ucla.edu) by julia.math.ucla.edu (Sendmail 4.1/1.13) id AA04264; Fri, 8 Mar 96 17:23:41 PST Received: by arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (NX5.67d/NeXT-2.0) id AA13620; Fri, 8 Mar 96 17:15:58 -0800 Date: Fri, 8 Mar 96 17:15:58 -0800 From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) Message-Id: <9603090115.AA13620@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.95) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.95) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Beads: to wash or not to wash Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The question comes up as to whether one should ``wash'' the Ni-Pd-Ni beads prior to using them. There are obvious pluses and minuses: minus: washing exposes them to at least some amount of mechanical agitation, and also exposes them to the detergent chemicals. plus: the beads have an uncontrolled history, so there is no way to tell what surface dirt may be attached to them now, potentially impeding their function. Cleaning would likely remove this. I intend to try it both ways, but I am curious as to whether there is any objection, from a chemistry point of view, to exposure to detergent. I would use Alconox(TM) laboratory glassware cleaning detergent, which is a phosphorous based detergent intended for cleaning all manner of laboratory equipment. (Mills used this same detergent to cleanse their apparatus.) Any reason that brief (few minutes) exposure to a weak phosphorous containing solution (the cleaning solution is about 0.0007% phosphorous by weight) would impair the surface coating? (assuming a thorough rinsing with purified H20 , of course). Alconox leaves no residues, by design. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 06:28:07 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id QAA23494 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 16:25:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA23444 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 16:24:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id TAA23025; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 19:22:12 -0500 Date: 08 Mar 96 19:21:24 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Anti-scale magnets Message-ID: <960309002124_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: Mark said, >> The FUNDEMENTAL problem here is the ASSUMPTION that the source of the "lime scale" is ELEMENTALLY dissolved Ca, which is not the case. The Ca is probably in some sort of aggregate particle form, i.e. an accumulation of atoms, held together by "van Der Vaals" type attractions. And this aggregate follows the properties of colloids, not dissolved solids. << Could this be why the magnetic modification of the limescale deposition sometimes works and sometimes doesn't? It depends on the form of the Ca in the water. If its pseudo-colloidal the magnetism has the desired effect, if its dissolved it doesn't. A few years ago I surveyed about a dozen commercial users of various forms of this treatment and found that about 1/3rd were satisfied with the performance. The others saw no improvement. So it seems to support Mark's explanation. Unless someone knows better! Norman. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 20:29:27 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA27131 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 19:54:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA27108 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 19:54:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id TAA21839; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 19:54:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 19:54:06 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: ersatz beads, know-how 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: --- FORWARDED --- Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 15:47:48 +0200 (GMT+0200) From: Mihai JALOBEANU To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: ersatz beads, know-how Dear Scott, Obviously Vortex is a type of brotherhood and both the successes and the failures of every vortex-fellow are, respectively, my successes and failures too. In any case I have the highest degree of empathy for the work of all of you. The problems with the ersatz beads have are very embarrassing and in order to continue, I think some questions of the realm of the know-how has to be addressed: -the nature of the glass used; (is soda lime as mentioned by you the optimum of taking in account dilatation and adherence?) There are many, many varieties of glass. -full beads or microspheres? -surface treatment of the glass prior to metallization, mechanical, chemical (alkaline, acidic- e.g HF based recipe)? -thermal treatment after metallization ,to increase the adherence of metal to glass; -was this first layer copper or an other metal e.g tin which can have a better adherence in some cases or for some glasses; -METHOD FOR COATING WITH NICKEL: -with or without seeding (e.g. with PdCl2 + SnCl2 as mentioned in your postings) -electrochemical vs. chemical coating; -type of recipe, temperature, use of pulsed current (a la Celani's cell- a usual galvanotechnical trick); -if chemical, what was the reducer-hypophosphite, natrium borohydride hydrazine, other? The electrochemical layers are of much higher purity as the chemical ones but some additives can change the situation. The same questions repeated for layer no.3 METHOD FOR COATING WITH PALLADIUM. -electrochemical vs. chemical? My most recent review ("Galvanic coatings with palladium and palladium alloys", Galvanotechnik 84, 7 2247-2252; 8, 2585-2579 ) describes 5 main types of recipees- nitrite, chloride, sulphate, nitrate and sulphite based- and is difficullt to guess which one is the best for our application The patent literature describes other combinations too. There are more than 50 patents for pure palladium, but alloys with Ni (replacing gold in electronics) and with silver are interesting too. Chemical coatings are of less purity again. What information is available on the genuine Patterson beads? It can be seen that it is a lot of know-how in these beads, as Jed and other colleagues have emphasized. The patent cannot describe all these features and I want to repeat that repeatability by those "skilled in art" is sometimes a semantic trap, if you cannot repeat it, you are not skilled enough. And surface finishing is more an art than a science. Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 20:41:01 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA28333 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:04:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA28297; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:04:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id UAA22543; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:04:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:04:43 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: freenrg-list@mail.eskimo.com, vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Comments from Weird Science (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: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:23:42 -0800 (PST) From: Barry Bowser To: billb@eskimo.com Subject: Comments from Weird Science The UPS truck has just droped off a 55 lb carboy of Pyrox Red Grit from Reade Materials. Very soo, some zinc to Perrault specifications will be unloaded. I am willing to ship by the pound, for $5.00 per pound provided S&H is added. If anyone is interested including yourself, please inform me and I will ship. Reade materials will not ship in lower increments, so I decided to spend lots of dough and need some help getting rid of this stuff. 901 Anna Stree, Norfolk, VA 23502. (About $6.00 shipping will suffice). From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 20:44:36 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA29495 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:14:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA29468 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:13:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id UAA22990; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:13:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:13:47 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Anti-scale magnets In-Reply-To: <199603090221.UAA02677@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, 8 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: > >To:Vortex > > > >The story that magnets can stop the formation of limescale in water has been > >around for a long time. In today's Financial Times, Cranfield University's > >School of Water Sciences confirms (to their own great surprise) that "by > >applying a strong magnetic field at right angles to the flow under specific > >conditions of acidity, temperature and water quality, you can affect the > >properties of the solution. > > This is really amazing news to me. I have looked (and laughed) at these > devices for years now. One reason I have laughed is that the recommended > installation of these magnets is such that like poles are positioned > opposite each other across the pipe. This configuration "feels" nice to the > uninitiated because the magnets "fight" being placed like that...but it > results in a very low field strength inside the pipe. In fact, the field > strength in the center of the pipe is zero with the poles opposing. The field gradient is max in the center of the pipe in this config, no? Perhaps the effect is proportional to grad rather than to field strength. .....................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 Mar 8 18:32:10 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA13439 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 18:21:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA13431 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 18:21:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-067.austin.eden.com (net-2-067.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.67]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id UAA02664 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:21:03 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:21:03 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603090221.UAA02664@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: Beads X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Scott, > >What physical process was used to deposit the metal coatings on your >beads? >Regards, It's called "electroless plating". It's a process whereby the beads are submerged into a solution that has metals "wanting" to precipitate. With some pH magic or something, you can cause Pd to plate onto Ni...and then, in a different bath, Ni to plate onto the Pd. The guy that did them specializes in metal-coated glass beads for a variety of applications. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 18:27:37 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA13470 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 18:21:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA13447 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 18:21:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-067.austin.eden.com (net-2-067.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.67]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id UAA02677 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:21:05 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:21:05 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603090221.UAA02677@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: Anti-scale magnets X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A >To:Vortex > >The story that magnets can stop the formation of limescale in water has been >around for a long time. In today's Financial Times, Cranfield University's >School of Water Sciences confirms (to their own great surprise) that "by >applying a strong magnetic field at right angles to the flow under specific >conditions of acidity, temperature and water quality, you can affect the >properties of the solution. This is really amazing news to me. I have looked (and laughed) at these devices for years now. One reason I have laughed is that the recommended installation of these magnets is such that like poles are positioned opposite each other across the pipe. This configuration "feels" nice to the uninitiated because the magnets "fight" being placed like that...but it results in a very low field strength inside the pipe. In fact, the field strength in the center of the pipe is zero with the poles opposing. Dieter, this is possibly your turf. Have you heard of these devices? Do you know of ANY possible beneficial effect they might have on water hardness and/or pipe scaling problems? From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 18:27:37 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA13471 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 18:21:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA13450 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 18:21:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-067.austin.eden.com (net-2-067.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.67]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id UAA02684 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:21:07 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:21:07 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603090221.UAA02684@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: Beads: to wash or not to wash X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >The question comes up as to whether one should > >``wash'' the Ni-Pd-Ni beads prior to using them. The bead coatings seem quite strong enough to survive such treatment, Barry. I will try it on some soon and report here. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 20:42:05 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA28142 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:03:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA28109 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:03:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-4-134.austin.eden.com (net-4-134.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.134]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id WAA08399 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 22:02:52 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 22:02:52 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603090402.WAA08399@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: skilled in the arts X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed said: >>...It may be a few years before anyone can replicate them without their >>cooperation. then HH said: >This, if true, would completely incapacitate their patents in the US. Two points: 1. If nobody can replicate the CETI effect independently...but it still works when they build the cell, then they don't really need the patent now...they've got a "trade secret". 2. I believe that it is possible for them to defend their patents almost indefinitely in court by simply claiming that unsuccessful replicators are not "sufficiently skilled". From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 20:46:45 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA29827 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:16:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA29786 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:16:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-4-134.austin.eden.com (net-4-134.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.134]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id WAA09189 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 22:15:55 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 22:15:55 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603090415.WAA09189@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: HH's TMS calorimeter X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks, Horace for your recent, detailed description of your TMS calorimeter. That is precisely the kind of detail I like to see in an experiment report. Only with such detail it is really possible to thoroughly evaluate the experiment and draw meaningful conclusions about the validity of the results. I do not grasp all the nuances of your system yet but I wonder if it would not be better (improved signal/noise ratio) to place the pump motors outside of your big foam block and run non-conductive shafts into the block to drive the pumps. I'm using 1/4" dia solid fiberglass shafting (salvaged from a tall bicycle reflector) for my pump and it works fine. You still need to know how much mechanical power is being delivered to the pump but you can either (1) measure it on a zero run and assume it stays constant, or (2) mount the drive motors on cradles and measure the reaction torque...which, with the RPM, allows you to calculate the mechanical input power. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 21:02:21 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA00861 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:23:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA00822 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:23:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-4-134.austin.eden.com (net-4-134.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.134]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id WAA09639 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 22:23:10 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 22:23:10 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603090423.WAA09639@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: ersatz beads, know-how X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Peter said: >The problems with the ersatz beads have are very embarrassing and >in order to continue, I think some questions of the realm of the >know-how has to be addressed: Peter, you are right! Now that we are beginning to encounter some problems, I will investigate every subject you mentioned and report here soon. If we are to succeed in this endeavor it will probably be necessary to have a complete and detailed understanding of what we are working with. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 8 23:29:05 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id XAA24931 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 23:20:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA24901 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 23:20:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [199.165.120.36] ([199.165.120.36]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA22746 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 22:20:54 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 22:24:21 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: HH's TMS calorimeter Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: [snip] > >I do not grasp all the nuances of your system yet but I wonder if it would >not be better (improved signal/noise ratio) to place the pump motors outside >of your big foam block and run non-conductive shafts into the block to drive >the pumps. I'm using 1/4" dia solid fiberglass shafting (salvaged from a >tall bicycle reflector) for my pump and it works fine. You still need to >know how much mechanical power is being delivered to the pump but you can >either (1) measure it on a zero run and assume it stays constant, or (2) >mount the drive motors on cradles and measure the reaction torque...which, >with the RPM, allows you to calculate the mechanical input power. This is a good idea, and one I considered, but after the pump assemblies were already built. I connected the pump/motors with vinyl tubing stuffed with faom with the idea of insulating them with a partition. When I calculated that the heat inside the motor chambers could rise above 150 F with the cooling I provided, I decided to keep the pump/motor housings separate from the main block. There was not much room in the main block anyway. I also determined that I need a third pump/motor set to cool the motors eventually, in a new water loop separate from Loop1 or Loop2 - should I want to run the electrolyte loop, and therefor the water loop also, at a high temperature. The present design is pretty much good for room temperature runs at low yields. The design is flexible, so a little time and a little money later all will work out easily. For now, I should be able to roughly determine energy delivered to the pump as watts in minus (delta T)* flow + (delta P)*flow. This should roughly cross-check with heat out of the heat exchanger during a null run. It would be nice to get dynamometer data but it will ahve to be later. For now I am maxed out financially and time wise. Since most of the motor's 7 watts should come out as heat, it will be just that much easier to prove over unity should it occur. The main problem I have at the moment is finding a good place to get Pt wire, .1 mm. or bigger, at a reasonable cost. I tried to buy about $130 worth from Aldrich Chemical, and the guy said they'd ship 2 weeks ago, but I'd have to answer some questions about my company to become a regular customer. Well, the Pt didn't show up and I found out some clerk held it up because I my company address is a residential address and they won't ship to residential addresses - only businesses with qualified labs and chemists. She gave me a bunch of questions to answer in written form, most of the answers to which they won't approve of I am sure. Any ideas for a good place to get .1 mm Pt wire or bigger? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 00:26:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id AAA11616 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 00:20:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA11606 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 00:19:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA06527; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 03:18:39 -0500 Date: 09 Mar 96 03:17:12 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Magnet descaling. Message-ID: <960309081712_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 Scott writes: "This is really amazing news to me. I have looked (and laughed) at these devices for years now. One reason I have laughed is that the recommended installation of these magnets is such that like poles are positioned opposite each other across the pipe. This configuration "feels" nice to the uninitiated because the magnets "fight" being placed like that...but it results in a very low field strength inside the pipe. In fact, the field strength in the center of the pipe is zero with the poles opposing." I have no idea whether or not they use 'like poles opposing', but I would comment that the field in such cases looks remarkably like two water jets hitting head-on and spraying out sideways. The fields certainly do *not* cancel in any meaningful sense. Chris From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 03:10:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id DAA25016 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 03:03:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA25001 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 03:03:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-11.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-11.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.11]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA27985 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 22:03:36 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Beads: to wash or not to wash Date: Sat, 09 Mar 1996 12:05:48 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <3141291a.7951711@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <9603090115.AA13620@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > In-Reply-To: <9603090115.AA13620@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 8 Mar 96 17:15:58 -0800, Barry Merriman wrote: >The question comes up as to whether one should > >``wash'' the Ni-Pd-Ni beads prior to using them. > > >There are obvious pluses and minuses: > >minus: washing exposes them to at least > some amount of mechanical agitation, > and also exposes them to the detergent > chemicals. > >plus: the beads have an uncontrolled history, > > so there is no way to tell what surface > dirt may be attached to them now, potentially > impeding their function. Cleaning would > likely remove this. > >I intend to try it both ways, but I am curious > >as to whether there is any objection, from a > >chemistry point of view, to exposure to detergent. >I would use Alconox(TM) laboratory glassware cleaning >detergent, which is a phosphorous based detergent >intended for cleaning all manner of laboratory equipment. >(Mills used this same detergent to cleanse their apparatus.) > >Any reason that brief (few minutes) exposure to a weak >phosphorous containing solution (the cleaning >solution is about 0.0007% phosphorous by weight) would >impair the surface coating? (assuming a thorough rinsing >with purified H20 , of course). Alconox leaves no > >residues, by design. So far as I know, the primary purpose of detergents, is as a de-greasing agent. It seems to me that LiOH being a strong base, should work fairly well in this regard. It has the added advantage, that nothing is being added that will not eventually be present in the electrolyte anyway. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 03:10:01 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id DAA25059 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 03:03:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA25035 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 03:03:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-11.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-11.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.11]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA27990 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 22:03:40 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Beads Date: Sat, 09 Mar 1996 12:05:52 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <31412aa3.8344260@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199603090221.UAA02664@natashya.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199603090221.UAA02664@natashya.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 8 Mar 1996 20:21:03 -0600 (CST), Scott Little wrote: >>Scott, >> >>What physical process was used to deposit the metal coatings on your >>beads? >>Regards, > >It's called "electroless plating". It's a process whereby the beads are >submerged into a solution that has metals "wanting" to precipitate. With >some pH magic or something, you can cause Pd to plate onto Ni...and then, in >a different bath, Ni to plate onto the Pd. The guy that did them >specializes in metal-coated glass beads for a variety of applications. > > This is approximately what I suspected. You might get him to try heating a batch of beads after application of the Sn/Pd layer, to the point where the metal actually starts to fuse to the glass. This should produce a much stronger bond, and be far less likely to shed when in use. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 07:36:27 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA21837 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:31:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA21826 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:31:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-4-149.austin.eden.com (net-4-149.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.149]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA25523 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:31:00 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:31:00 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603091531.JAA25523@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: Pt wire source X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: HH said: >The main problem I have at the moment is finding a good place to get Pt >wire, .1 mm. or bigger, at a reasonable cost. I meant to tell you about a "find" I made last week but forgot. OMEGA sells pure Pt wire for the purpose of making Pt-Pt/Rh thermocouples and it appears to be a full order of magnitude cheaper than the wire in the chemical company catalogs. For example, 0.005" dia wire (close to .1mm) is 42 cents/inch, 60" (5') minimum order = $25! It is catalog number SPPL-005. Other gauges are SPPL-nnn where nnn is the dia in mils. They have: 003 $0.33/inch 005 $0.42/inch 008 $1.00/inch 010 $1.20/inch 015 $3.00/inch And, best of all, they don't put you through an "attitude inspection" before accepting your order. Call them at 800-826-6342. Request their full set of catalogs (Heaters, Ph & Conductivity, FLow & Level, Pressure & Strain, Data Acquisition, and Temperature). It's a wonderful technology resource. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 07:39:32 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA22215 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:33:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA22200 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:33:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-4-149.austin.eden.com (net-4-149.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.149]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA25616 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:33:46 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:33:46 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603091533.JAA25616@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: Beads 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 approximately what I suspected. You might get him to try >heating a batch of beads after application of the Sn/Pd layer, to the >point where the metal actually starts to fuse to the glass. This >should produce a much stronger bond, and be far less likely to shed >when in use. I'll certainly explore this with him....thanks. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 07:43:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA22540 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:37:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA22534 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:37:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tvQhe-000CI5C; Sat, 9 Mar 96 09:37 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Paterson cell chemistry To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:37:06 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <9603072202.AA12954@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > from "Barry Merriman" at Mar 7, 96 02:02:57 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Barry writes: > >> I want to make up a 1 mol. solution. > >> Total (mol weight): 127.95 gm. right? > >Yes, so mix 128 grams with 1 liter of water > > Close enough for government work, but not chemistry :-). > > a 1 Molar solution has 1 mole of solute per liter > of _solution_, not per liter of solvent (H2O here). > So, just mix 127.9(5) grams of solute with, say, > 500 ml of H20. Mix it well, and then add additional water > to make exactly 1000 ml of solution. Thanks for the correction. I always wondered if that might be the case. I read my college chemistry book on the subject several times, but could not resolve the ambiguity. -- - 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 Mar 9 07:44:08 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA22800 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:39:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA22786 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:39:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-4-149.austin.eden.com (net-4-149.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.149]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA25779 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:39:02 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:39:02 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603091539.JAA25779@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: Import/business X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank said: >I am trying to form a business to import and sell YASMIRS's. >I want to import, install, and >sell-sell-sell. You might like to have a written testimonial from EarthTech Intl, signed by Puthoff & myself as a sales aid, Frank. Such is readily available, free of charge, if you will provide a working unit to us for a short while for testing. We already have much/all of the necessary equipment on hand. In fact, if possible, I suggest that you avail yourself of this service before investing much of your own money in the project. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 07:51:19 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA23502 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:44:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA23495 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:44:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-4-149.austin.eden.com (net-4-149.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.149]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA25970 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:44:51 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:44:51 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603091544.JAA25970@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: prelim bead test report X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace said: >When the beads arrived yesterday I thought how they were like a little vial >of idea seeds. Their expense is now completely incidental to what I have >spent expanding my lab, and monthly budget. Testing the ersatz beads is >now only one of many experiments of interest. It is of no great concern to >me if they disintegrate, but I am glad to get warning they might. I'll put >some aside to mount in a momento. Horace, you're a jewel in the rough...:-) May your "disease" spread to everyone you touch! From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 07:55:48 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA23929 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:48:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA23923 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 07:48:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tvQsT-000CHtC; Sat, 9 Mar 96 09:48 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: HH's TMS calorimeter To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:48:17 -0600 (CST) Cc: hheffner@anc.ak.net In-Reply-To: from "Horace Heffner" at Mar 8, 96 10:24:21 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Horace Heffner wrote: > The main problem I have at the moment is finding a good place to get Pt > wire, .1 mm. or bigger, at a reasonable cost. I tried to buy about $130 > worth from Aldrich Chemical, and the guy said they'd ship 2 weeks ago, but > I'd have to answer some questions about my company to become a regular > customer. Well, the Pt didn't show up and I found out some clerk held it > up because I my company address is a residential address and they won't > ship to residential addresses - only businesses with qualified labs and > chemists. She gave me a bunch of questions to answer in written form, most > of the answers to which they won't approve of I am sure. Any ideas for a > good place to get .1 mm Pt wire or bigger? I don't know if this is a good company, or if the problems will be similar, but I have a catalog from Strem Chemicals and they mention no such restriction (maybe it is assumed?) 78-0082 1.0 mm Pt wire -- 5cm $80, 25cm $305, 100cm $915 78-0085 0.5 mm Pt wire -- 25cm $80, 100cm $250 78-0075 0.254mm Pt wire -- 25cm $30, 100cm $250 78-0080 0.127mm Pt wire -- 1m $36, 5m $125 They also have other forms of Pt and Pd and various metals and chemicals. Call 1-800-647-8736 or fax 1-800-517-8736 -- - 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 Mar 9 09:15:48 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA06801 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:10:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA06765 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:10:16 -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 IAA24437 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 08:12:32 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 08:15:40 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >What is "skilled in the art" concerning CF? In the case of the Patterson Patents the field is not CF, but electrochemistry. In the US it should be sufficient to have been qualified in court as an expert witness in matters electrochemical. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 09:25:19 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA08410 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:20:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from bos1d.delphi.com (SYSTEM@bos1d.delphi.com [192.80.63.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA08394 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:20:25 -0800 (PST) From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com Received: from delphi.com by delphi.com (PMDF V5.0-6 #10880) id <01I24USS0FPS9ANMD1@delphi.com> for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Sat, 09 Mar 1996 12:20:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 09 Mar 1996 12:20:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: vtx: Re: Kansas To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01I24USS0FPU9ANMD1@delphi.com> X-VMS-To: INTERNET"vortex-l@eskimo.com" 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: >Flynn, you are in Kansas City. You may want to look up Chuck Ross at Kansas >City Power and Light. He is having a high pressure (400 PSI) Patterson cell >built. He is also funding Q. Bowles work. I spoke with him a while back. >He is a nice guy. Why don't you see if you can pay him a visit. >Frank Znidarsic I have been discussing an unrelated project with David Greg at KCPL's generating station in La Cygne, Ks. I will see if I can contact Mr. Ross. If anything interesting regarding their Patterson cell project, comes from this, I will post it. Joe Flynn Flynn Research, Inc. P.O. Box 11657 Kansas City, Mo. 64138 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 10:23:43 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA16885 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 10:17:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from bos1g.delphi.com (SYSTEM@bos1g.delphi.com [192.80.63.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA16854 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 10:16:50 -0800 (PST) From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com Received: from delphi.com by delphi.com (PMDF V5.0-6 #10880) id <01I24WROTUC0985FAY@delphi.com> for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Sat, 09 Mar 1996 13:16:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 09 Mar 1996 13:16:43 -0500 (EST) Subject: vtx: Re: tests To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01I24WROU3Z6985FAY@delphi.com> X-VMS-To: INTERNET"vortex-l@eskimo.com" 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 I have a simple experiment that will demonstrate why I think very high efficiences, and possibly OU might be possible with the magnetic control methods I am using. I think you will find it interesting, and will explain alot in a short time. I will fax it to you this weekend so you will have it to view at your convience. I think it will help determine the next step in testing. Let me know what you think. JF From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 11:26:00 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA27035 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 11:20:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-7.compuserve.com (dub-img-7.compuserve.com [198.4.9.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA27000 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 11:20:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-7.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id OAA17600; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 14:19:08 -0500 Date: 09 Mar 96 14:16:09 EST From: Dean Miller <75110.3417@compuserve.com> To: Vortexians Subject: vtx: Anti-scale magnets Message-ID: <960309191608_75110.3417_CHK31-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Norman, >> A few years ago I surveyed about a dozen commercial users of various forms of this treatment and found that about 1/3rd were satisfied with the performance. The others saw no improvement. So it seems to support Mark's explanation. Unless someone knows better! << And nobody has looked for whatever makes the difference? Must not cost them too much money. Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.00) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 16:32:41 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id QAA22429 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 16:24:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-7.compuserve.com (arl-img-7.compuserve.com [198.4.7.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA22410 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 16:24:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-7.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id TAA23224; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 19:23:03 -0500 Date: 09 Mar 96 19:21:34 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Anti-scale magnets Message-ID: <960310002134_100060.173_JHB95-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dean said, >> And nobody has looked for whatever makes the difference? Must not cost them too much money. << The users were mainly good old greasy plant Engineers or hotel managers who were only interested in getting rid of the limescale in their boilers. If the gizmo failed to work they simply threw it away, or at the supplier! The industrial versions were electro-magnets coiled around the water pipes and pulsed. All types had the magnets located at different points around the water circuit, it being considered that the effect wore off after a certain distance. The ones which worked were very good, and even removed old thick scale from the system as a powder. I am not sure about the effectiveness of the perm. magnets, but they were supplied in a clip-on plastic casing to fit the diameter of the pipe. The usual config. was opposite poles facing each other across the diameter. I never saw them the other way around. Norman From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 20:09:54 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id UAA28491 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 20:03:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA28482 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 20:03:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id UAA26476; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 20:03:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 20:03:01 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Griggs, water, H2O2 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: --- FORWARDED --- Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 12:56:06 +0200 (GMT+0200) From: Mihai JALOBEANU To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Griggs, water, H2O2 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Re: treatment of residual water by cavitation, Jim Griggs. Sorry, I have lost the original message but I understand that Jim has problems with foaming and with the efficiency of the distruction of the impurities organic and inorganic from bad water. a) foaming is sometimes very difficult to master and it's compulsory to use defoamers as siliconic (e.g. from Dow Corning) or non-siliconic (e.g. Pluronic from BASF). These are very efficient if well chosen- some p.p.m 's are sufficient. b)Dr. Yuri Potapov is also using his YUSMARS for destruction of impurities, bacteria and viruses from waste waters. As I told in my report after my visit to him (Feb.9-10), Potapov wants to collaborate and has some very practical ideas for increasing the efficiency of the Hydrosonic Pump. You can get in touch with him at fax 3732-233318, I also can convey your message to him. Please send me your questions re. waste water- composition, analysis, etc. I will compare your task/performances with one of the best US companies in this field- "BRINECELL' from Utah. There are very sensitive methods for determination of H2O2, but according to Yuri, ozone is also present. Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 18:35:29 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA13174 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 18:29:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA13160 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 18:29:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-038.austin.eden.com (net-1-038.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.38]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id UAA26157 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 20:29:21 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 20:29:21 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603100229.UAA26157@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com (Unverified) 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: Patterson's new patent X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: OK sports fans, it's 5494559, dated Feb 27th 1996. Get it from MicroPatent on the Web. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 21:54:55 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id VAA13775 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 21:49:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA13763; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 21:49:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id VAA04453; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 21:49:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 21:49:45 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com cc: neotech@xbn.shore.net Subject: vtx: Newman question 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: To: Evan Soule Hi again Evan. I have a question about Mr. Newman's challenge. What happens if a charged capacitor bank is used to power the Newman Motor? I ask because battery voltage is a poor measure of stored energy, and speaking as a technical person, I suspect that a rise in battery voltage will not convince technical people. Will the Newman Motor operate continuously from a capacitor bank? Or will it at least perform far more work than the total work initially present in the capacitor? ..............................freenrg-list................................ Moderator: FREENRG-LIST VORTEX-L TAOSHUM-L WEBHEAD-L William Beaty bilb@eskimo.com EE/Programmer/exhibit-designer/science-nerd http://www.eskimo.com/~bilb/freenrgl/flist.html Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com voice:206-781-3320 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 21:29:12 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id VAA10129 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 21:22:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA10114 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 21:22:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tvdaj-000EeXC; Sat, 9 Mar 96 23:22 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: vtx: Patterson's thin skin To: vortex-l@eskimo.com (vortex-l) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 23:22:49 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Patterson's latest patent (5,494,559) suggests the outer layer of Ni on the beads is in the range of 1-60 angstroms. In the past we thought it was supposed to be on the order of 1 micron (there are 10,000 angstroms in a micron (micrometer.)) I forget what Scott's outer layer thickness is, but its closer to a micron than 60 angstroms? No? So it is 150 times thicker than Patterson's outer layer? An Ni atom has a diameter of 2.5 angstroms. So 60 Angstroms is only about 25 atoms deep. -- - 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 Mar 9 18:15:08 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id SAA08970 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 18:08:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA08954 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 18:08:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-21.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-21.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.21]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA13150 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 13:08:24 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Import/business Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 03:10:35 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <314227c5.4802092@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199603091539.JAA25779@natashya.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199603091539.JAA25779@natashya.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:39:02 -0600 (CST), Scott Little wrote: >Frank said: > >>I am trying to form a business to import and sell YASMIRS's. >>I want to import, install, and >>sell-sell-sell. > >You might like to have a written testimonial from EarthTech Intl, signed by >Puthoff & myself as a sales aid, Frank. Such is readily available, free of >charge, if you will provide a working unit to us for a short while for >testing. We already have much/all of the necessary equipment on hand. In >fact, if possible, I suggest that you avail yourself of this service before >investing much of your own money in the project. > > There's more than one way to skin a cat as the saying goes :-) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From mwm@aa.net Sat Mar 9 15:02:49 1996 Received: from big.aa.net (root@big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA11532 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 15:02:46 -0800 (PST) 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 PAA29856; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 15:01:52 -0800 Message-Id: <199603092301.PAA29856@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 15:01:27 +0800 To: hheffner@anc.ak.net, billb@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: vtx: The Joe Newman Challenge Status: RO X-Status: At 04:37 PM 3/7/96 -0900, you wrote: >[snip] >> >>Are you honest and man enough to accept this golden challenge? You invited >>me to a carnival wrestling match which would have accomplished very little. >>I have invited you to a decisive end to your struggle for acceptance. How >>say you, Joe Newman? >[snip] >>Michael Mandeville, publisher > >When reading the opening invective, the potentially litigious slurr and >contentiousness in the above message, for the first time I was ready to >scream referee and plead for a change of venue. > >Fortunately, I read to the end and now say bravo Michael Mandeville! > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > As far as what is litiginous, let me worry about it. I am very very good at avoiding slander. And one can play it very close to the line when a guy sets himself up as a public personality, which Newman clearly has... courts will not protect public personalities because they pragmatically figure that gross exaggeration and gross mistakes of facts in public/political debate is "common law" free speech. Only private individuals who chose to remain private, or companies with a product can seek protection from the courts and even then it is tuff, because you have to prove a malicious intent. Having said that, I do not believe that a single word I wrote is slanderous. I think it is a fair assessment. I know I really slammed him hard with a verbal 2x4 alongside the head. This guy is like a mule and has been irritating the hell out of people for years with his strange antics, such as incorporating Patterson's success into his strange, twisted polemic. I thought the only way of smoking the guy out was with a total broadside. Interestingly enough, they may have set-up a stand-in to do it for them...i.e. his group has not responded directly, but a possible stand-in is asking for permission for the coordinates to Vortex, so that he can submit important information (without even mentioning Newman's name) so I am going to submit a copy of that request (below) herewith to Bill Beaty and let him decide what to do. Bill: given the above, you decide what you want to do, whether to subscribe in the following individual. He is I initially suspect, given the timing, a stand-in for Newman. On the other hand, he may just be flapping in from a completely different vector. X-POP3-Rcpt: mwm@big Return-Path: glird@gnn.com X-Intended-For: Date: Fri, 08 Mar 1996 10:57:58 From: glird@gnn.com () To: mwm@aa.net Subject: Re: fnrg: The Joe Newman Challenge I would like to contact the group >Vortex-L you mentioned. The purpose is to submit to them a comprehensive physical theory that differs from present concepts; plus an in depth analysis that shows where and why present concepts are incorrect. I'd appreciate it if you could send me an address (email or overland) where I can do this. Thank you, Dr. G. Lebau ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 15:54:56 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id PAA17585 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 15:45:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix11.ix.netcom.com (ix11.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAB17564 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 15:44:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix11.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id PAA12745; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 15:43:33 -0800 Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 15:43:33 -0800 Message-Id: <199603092343.PAA12745@ix11.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Yusmir OU Pumps (was Re: vtx: Import/business) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > > Potapov's son tells me that the latest machines are running under >their own power. Only start-up power is needed. A US patent is >currently being drawn up. Information is on the way to me. I want >to import, install, and sell-sell-sell. I have the plan, now to get >all the pieces to come together. > I wonder what makes the latest Yusmir devices so convincing to you as compared to the Yusmir pumps that Little and Mallove teams independantly, very intensively tested last summer of 1995 with negative 'inconclusive' results (with not much help from Potapov). If the tests done back then was positive, the move to "import, install, and sell-sell-sell" would already have been started with fervor. In contrast, the U.S. Griggs Hydrosonic Pump already has a running track record that has been positive. It would seem more positive to help sell, sell, sell and export whatever Griggs machines that you may help expand production on. And what about the Huffman device? And the Schaeffer machine? All U.S., all seem promising as compared to far off Moldova. Even the Chinese could not find OU in the device. -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 9 17:51:43 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id RAA05548 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 17:45:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA05538 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 17:45:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from dacha (eb2ppp3.shentel.net [204.111.1.99]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id UAA22115 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 20:45:31 -0500 Date: Sat, 9 Mar 96 20:28:33 From: dacha@shentel.net Subject: RE: Yusmir OU Pumps (was Re: vtx: Import/business) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon B95_14, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. 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: You wrote: > > Potapov's son tells me that the latest machines are running under their own power >snip >to import, install, and sell-sell-sell. I have the plan, now to get >all the pieces to come together. > >snip >>Even the Chinese could not find OU in the device. >-AK- I would be happy to see this work out. I spent a great deal of money and time chasing the YUSMAR, and learned a lot about human nature in the process. I was told by a journalist of an article in a Moldovan newspaper. This recent article suggested the government was about to shut down Potopov's operations in that country because of promises made and not delivered. I feel the YUSMAR will sell very well in the US. I have observed that with the right advertising Americans will buy almost anything. I hope this works out for you, but please check carefully before you leap. I hope the YUSMAR is real, it would make me feel better to know that my investment wasn't a total waste. Robert ------------------------------------- Name: dacha E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 3/9/96 Time: 8:28:33 PM http://www.visor.com/info ------------------------------------- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 00:45:51 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id AAA10690 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 00:39:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.7.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA10684 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 00:39:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA10681; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 03:38:27 -0500 Date: 10 Mar 96 03:35:41 EST From: Dean Miller <75110.3417@compuserve.com> To: Vortexians Subject: Yusmir OU Pumps (was Re: vtx: Import/business) Message-ID: <960310083540_75110.3417_CHK31-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Akira, >> Even the Chinese could not find OU in the device. << I hadn't heard that. Where did you come across this info about the Yusmar? Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.00) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 03:32:57 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA10687 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:36:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from bos1g.delphi.com (SYSTEM@bos1g.delphi.com [192.80.63.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA10639 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 09:36:00 -0800 (PST) From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com Received: from delphi.com by delphi.com (PMDF V5.0-6 #10880) id <01I24VC2BUXY9ANMD1@delphi.com> for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Sat, 09 Mar 1996 12:35:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 09 Mar 1996 12:35:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: vtx: prelim bead test report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01I24VC2BUY09ANMD1@delphi.com> X-VMS-To: IN%"vortex-l@eskimo.com" 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: Yes this is correct, but to judge whether or not the electrochemistry is correct regarding making beads, you MUST consider their end use- *CF*. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 03:38:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA21973 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 10:48:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA21953 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 10:48:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id NAA01350; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 13:46:53 -0500 Date: 09 Mar 96 13:45:17 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: skilled in the arts Message-ID: <960309184517_72240.1256_EHB43-1@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 remarked: "1. If nobody can replicate the CETI effect independently...but it still works when they build the cell, then they don't really need the patent now...they've got a 'trade secret'." Right! That is what Patterson told me. He said there are lots of patents like that in the catalysis business. "2. I believe that it is possible for them to defend their patents almost indefinitely in court by simply claiming that unsuccessful replicators are not 'sufficiently skilled'." It could go either way, I think. It would depend on which side hires the better lawyer. :-} - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 03:46:04 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id MAA03869 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 12:03:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA03852 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 12:03:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tvUrk-0005AwC; Sat, 9 Mar 96 14:03 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: vtx: Latest Patterson patent To: vortex-l@eskimo.com (vortex-l) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 14:03:47 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: With Jed's heads up, I searched recent patent releases and found that Patterson's latest patent was just issued 2/27/96. It is # 5,494,559 It was filed back on June 8, 1995. As far as I can tell, this is incremental to the previous patents. The major differences are: 1.) The Cu/Ni/Pd/Ni multi-layer is explicitly called out and advanced as an improved embodiement. This particular patent is on the whole device, and references a filed co-application that deals with the techniques of the multi-layer -- that application has apparently not completed the process yet. 2.) Bold as brass over-unity claims are in the body of the patent language. Cold fusion is mentioned. 3.) As an improvement in the case of boiloff, the non-conducting microsphere seperators are replaced with "non-metallic spherical cation ion exchange polymer conductive microbeads preferably made of cross-linked styrene divinyl bensene which have fully sulfonated surfaces which have been ion exchanged with a lithium salt. This preferred non-metallic conductive microbead structure will thus form a salt bridge between the anode and the conductive microspheres." Said also to reduce cell resistance. Li2SO4 is still mentioned as preferred, and the molar solution is still called out as 2.0. Some ranges are given for microsphere layer thicknesses: Cu flash coat: 1-10 angstroms Ni underlayer: 10 angstroms to 1 micron Pd layer: 10 angstroms to 2 micron Ni overlayer: 1-60 angstroms Microsphere diameter, 1 mm or less. -- - 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 Mar 10 01:24:52 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id BAA13359 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 01:19:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from bavaria.utcluj.ro (itimc@[193.226.5.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA13336 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 01:18:41 -0800 (PST) Received: (from itimc@localhost) by bavaria.utcluj.ro (8.6.12/8.6.9) id LAA19065; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 11:24:30 +0200 Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 11:24:30 +0200 (GMT+0200) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Antiscale magnets 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: Antiscale magnets. The effect of magnetic field on the properties of water has more applications, besides antiscaling (actually you obtain an amorphous scale of low adherence and not crystals) as: enhancement of biological activity (e.g. grow of yeast and microbes producing antibiotics), hardening accelerator for concrete, in irrigation. I have met the first antiscaling device installed in a factory in my native town, Timisoara in 1959. They have bought it but didn't knew how it works. It was a hexagonal-shaped fitting installed on the water-feed pipe of the steam boiler. A Belgian patent number was written on it, and starting from this info, I have discovered that it was a permanent -magnet device produced by a company called CEPI. The factory people have found it efficient. This was my very first consulting activity. Later, we had here some crooks claiming that magnetic water can cure cancer and other diseases. A lot of papers have been published in the Soviet and East-German literature; the last review I have seen on this subject was published in Chemische Technik, I believe in 1985. The title of it was "Errors and Confusion regarding Magnetic Water". The conclusion of this clever paper was that the effects are bound to some meta-stable associations formed in water, are very dependent from some p.p.m or p.p.b. level impurities- e.g. iron and are ( to use a word I've learned here) too "finicky" to be completely (and quantitatively reliable) used. The effect is real in any case. I have worked some years ago with a similar stuff, electrolytically ionized water (see e.g. the Japanese patent of Kobe Steel 7/171,571 abstract in Platinum Metal Review 1996, 1, 46) the water of the cathodic compartment is alkaline and reducing, the water from the anodic space is oxydising and acidic) and have tried to enhance the activity of dispergents used in polymerisation. The foaming test made with cathodic water , performed at room temperature has shown clearly that a strong positive effect measured as height and collapsing rate of the foam layer does exist but in the actual polymerisations, at 50-60 deg. Celsius the effect was not reproducible. Have tried some biological applications too, with success. Anodic water is a good disinfectant, cathodic water is an antioxidant. An interesting information re. such associates in water- tetramers and pentamers was published in Chemical Engineering News, &4, 2 Jan 8 1996 p 7. In the antiscaling devices (just as in the YUSMARs), hydrodynamics is essential. Being a swimmer, I like water and I am using this seemingly trivial stuff to illustrate my "functional theory" of products in the frame of my course of Management of Technological Innovation. The possible functions of water: drinking water, construction materials for igloos, high-pressure water for cleaning, supercritical water (nor liquid,neither gas) as reaction medium, superpure water for the electronics industry, magnetic water, wastewaters of many kinds, cooling water in miles-long circuits and high towers, desperately fighting corrosion, scaling and biofouling, water for transport and generation of energy (Griggs,Potapov) etc., encompasses a large area from the maximum positive i.e.esthetical enchantment to the maximum negative- catastrophic (floods, tsunamies, explosions) function. Most cases of functions are bound to my industrial/research experience. The difficult reproducibility encountered in my research with activated (electrically not magnetically) water has helped me to understand the case of Cold Fusion. It is possible that by using Takahashi magnets reproducible effects could be obtained for antiscaling. Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 02:07:58 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id BAA16337 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 01:59:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from bavaria.utcluj.ro (itimc@[193.226.5.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA16306 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 01:59:38 -0800 (PST) Received: (from itimc@localhost) by bavaria.utcluj.ro (8.6.12/8.6.9) id MAA19133; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 12:05:36 +0200 Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 12:05:36 +0200 (GMT+0200) From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: The YUSMAR in CHINA 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: the YUSMAR in China. I don't know what was the information source of Akira, but according to Yuri Potapov, China is buying a lot of Yusmars some ten thousands in the present and in the next future. Akira, what's your opinion about the Japanese experiment? Have you asked the opinion of President KAZUTOSHI KOBAYASHI of FIELD Co. Ltd.- I repeat the address HEAD OFFICE, 1401-221 MAEHAMA SHINBEPPU-CHO, MIYAZAKI-CITY JAPAN TEL: 001-81-985-24-1960; FAX: 001-81-985-24-1891. It is a privilege to use the direct sources and a great help for our Vortex brothers. Following the request of Yuri, I am trying to organize a direct change of experience and collaboration between him and Jim Griggs. Who can help? Jim, are you here? Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 07:27:58 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id HAA13796 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 07:18:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA13789 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 07:18:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-037.austin.eden.com (net-1-037.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.37]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA05111 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 09:18:50 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 09:18:50 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603101518.JAA05111@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: 5494559 X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Logajan said: >Patterson's latest patent (5,494,559) suggests the outer layer of >Ni on the beads is in the range of 1-60 angstroms. In the past >we thought it was supposed to be on the order of 1 micron (there >are 10,000 angstroms in a micron (micrometer.)) John, I think you're misreading the patent (damned legalese!). The last layer of Ni is called the "support plating" in Claim 1. In Claim 11, it and the first layer of Ni are said to have thickness ranging from 10 A to 1 micron. In Claim 10, they mention an optional 5th coating called a "metallic stabilizer plating" which is placed "atop said support plating". Later in Claim 12 they say the 5th layer may be Cr, Fe, Co or Ni. Jed, have you ever heard of this 5th coating? From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 08:06:47 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA19664 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:01:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA19650 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:01:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tvnYo-0004s6C; Sun, 10 Mar 96 10:01 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: 5494559 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:01:30 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199603101518.JAA05111@natashya.eden.com> from "Scott Little" at Mar 10, 96 09:18:50 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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 writes: > John, I think you're misreading the patent (damned legalese!). The last > layer of Ni is called the "support plating" in Claim 1. In Claim 11, it > and the first layer of Ni are said to have thickness ranging from 10 A to > 1 micron. In Claim 10, they mention an optional 5th coating called a > "metallic stabilizer plating" which is placed "atop said support plating". > Later in Claim 12 they say the 5th layer may be Cr, Fe, Co or Ni. Yep, I was (and still am) confused. What sense does it make to plate 60 angstroms of Ni on top of 10000 angstroms of Ni?? (Not asking Scott!) As you say, claim 10 clearly differentiates between the support plate and the stabilizer plate. Yet claim 1 says the support plate is "having a relatively high hydrogen diffusion rate and a relatively low hydride formation ratio." Claim 10 says the stabilizer plate likewise is "having a relatively hige rate of hydrogen diffusion and a relatively low hydride formation ratio." Well, anyhow, the support plate range of thickness is given as from 10 angstroms to 1 micron. So perhaps 1 micron being at the extreme is still too thick even if 60 angstroms is not really the upper extreme. -- - 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 Mar 10 09:05:59 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA27811 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:57:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix13.ix.netcom.com (ix13.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA27783 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:57:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix-hou8-14.ix.netcom.com by ix13.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id IAA20505; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:56:31 -0800 Received: by ix-hou8-14.ix.netcom.com with Microsoft Mail id <01BB0E6F.F97D0760@ix-hou8-14.ix.netcom.com>; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:54:37 -0600 Message-ID: <01BB0E6F.F97D0760@ix-hou8-14.ix.netcom.com> From: Craig Haynie To: "'vortex-l@eskimo.com'" Subject: vtx: RE: Latest Patterson patent Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:26:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BB0E6F.F9AF6200" Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB0E6F.F9AF6200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >---------- >From: John Logajan[SMTP:jlogajan@skypoint.com] >Sent: Saturday, March 09, 1996 8:03 AM >To: vortex-l >Subject: vtx: Latest Patterson patent >Li2SO4 is still mentioned as preferred, and the molar solution is still >called out as 2.0. Wait! Hasn't it always been 1.0 molar solution? Craig Haynie ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB0E6F.F9AF6200 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IiYQAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAENgAQAAgAAAAIAAgABBJAG ABwBAAABAAAADAAAAAMAADADAAAACwAPDgAAAAACAf8PAQAAAEUAAAAAAAAAgSsfpL6jEBmdbgDd AQ9UAgAAAAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAFNNVFAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQAAAAAe AAIwAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AAzABAAAAFAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20AAwAVDAEA AAADAP4PBgAAAB4AATABAAAAFgAAACd2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tJwAAAAIBCzABAAAAGQAA AFNNVFA6Vk9SVEVYLUxARVNLSU1PLkNPTQAAAAADAAA5AAAAAAsAQDoBAAAAAgH2DwEAAAAEAAAA AAAAAzIzAQiABwAYAAAASVBNLk1pY3Jvc29mdCBNYWlsLk5vdGUAMQgBBIABABwAAABSRTogTGF0 ZXN0IFBhdHRlcnNvbiBwYXRlbnQA6gkBBYADAA4AAADMBwMACgAKABoACAAAAAwBASCAAwAOAAAA zAcDAAoACgAYADIAAAA0AQEJgAEAIQAAADgyRkIxRTI4NUQ3QUNGMTFCQUNFNDQ0NTUzNTQwMDAw ABsHAQOQBgBQAwAAEAAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAmAAAAAAALACkAAAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5AEDSWEme DrsBHgBwAAEAAAAcAAAAUkU6IExhdGVzdCBQYXR0ZXJzb24gcGF0ZW50AAIBcQABAAAAFgAAAAG7 Dp5JSCge+4N6XRHPus5ERVNUAAAAAAMABhATlBEMAwAHEPgAAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAAAtLS0tLS0t LS0tRlJPTTpKT0hOTE9HQUpBTlNNVFA6SkxPR0FKQU5AU0tZUE9JTlRDT01TRU5UOlNBVFVSREFZ LE1BUkNIMDksMTk5Njg6MDNBTVRPOlZPUlRFWC1MU1VCSkVDAAAAAAIBCRABAAAABgIAAAICAAB7 BAAATFpGdRcKGpv/AAoBDwIVAqgF6wKDAFAC8gkCAGNoCsBzZXQyNwYABsMCgzIDxQIAcHJCcRHi c3RlbQKDM3cC5AcTAoB9CoAIzwnZO/EWDzI1NQKACoENsQtg4G5nMTAzFFALChRRNQvyYwBAIAqF CotsaQgxODAC0WktMTSeNA3wDNAc0xnfID4LSlwxNgqgA2AT0GMFQC2/IDcKhx2vHr4MMB+2RgNh DjohNx9NDIIgSm9oQQOgTG9nYWoAcFvAU01UUDpqFaAmo0BAc2t5cG8LgHTyLgWgbV0g3yHvIv8G US8CMCRfJWsGEHQIcGRhHHksBdAKwBFwIDA5AS6QMTk5NiA4OjsZQBSwTSi/Kc8q3yBUFm8sPyVr dhWxZXgtHmwwHzEvMj8GAHViat8f8TN/NIwM0DmATC4gB5C9BUBQLiAT0BGgAiAgCrDPE9ACMBr/ HAMzNh1+H7YHNd827z8uTGkyU0/0NCAEACATwAMQAyAHgM0CMGkCIAmAIGEEIBNQPw3ABJAWES6Q AHBEwHRo/mVEMAbwCsE8gApARHJDp9dAL0E/Py5jB0BsRLEIYMMFQEThMi4wLj0vPj8JC9MgVwtw dCEgSDlE4G4nBUBOkETQbHfrLnAEIGIJ4SAvQEvARj1SP0v8Q3ILcGdOwXldAwBlS/wKhRUxAFSg AAADABAQAQAAAAMAERAAAAAAQAAHMEA+YRueDrsBQAAIMEA+YRueDrsBHgA9AAEAAAAFAAAAUkU6 IAAAAACu2g== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB0E6F.F9AF6200-- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 08:55:56 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA25969 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:49:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix2.ix.netcom.com (ix2.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA25954 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:49:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id IAA05392; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:47:52 -0800 Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:47:52 -0800 Message-Id: <199603101647.IAA05392@ix2.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: Yusmir OU Pumps (was Re: vtx: Import/business) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > >I hadn't heard that. Where did you come across this info about the >Yusmar? > Though not involved in Yusmar, I had occasion to help translate a very early chinese test report (yes it was hand written in chinese, and not Russian) sent by Prof. Lev. G. Sapogin. You can see him and and extensive report on the Yusmar device in Volume 1, issue #2 and later of Infinite Energy Magazine by Eugene Mallove. Anyway, the results did not indicate anything spectacular --- in line with what was being found by Little and Mallove's groups. And nothing I have seen recently has improved on the status. I hope it success if it is an OU device but there is a very poor line of public information (data and details)on Yusmar. -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 09:05:58 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id IAA28011 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:58:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix4.ix.netcom.com (ix4.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA27999 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:58:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix4.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id IAA15457; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:57:25 -0800 Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 08:57:25 -0800 Message-Id: <199603101657.IAA15457@ix4.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: vtx: Patterson's thin skin To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > >Patterson's latest patent (5,494,559) suggests the outer layer of >Ni on the beads is in the range of 1-60 angstroms. In the past >we thought it was supposed to be on the order of 1 micron (there >are 10,000 angstroms in a micron (micrometer.)) > >I forget what Scott's outer layer thickness is, but its closer >to a micron than 60 angstroms? No? So it is 150 times thicker >than Patterson's outer layer? > >An Ni atom has a diameter of 2.5 angstroms. So 60 Angstroms is >only about 25 atoms deep. > I guess this helps explain the question of Scott's shiny beads vesus Patterson's black (or grey) beads. With the thiness of the Patterson layer, wouldn't that also help in increasing the surface area of the coating way beyond that of a simple bead area surface? -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 09:27:02 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA01423 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 09:21:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA01401 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 09:21:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tvonu-000Eh7C; Sun, 10 Mar 96 11:21 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Patterson's thin skin To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 11:21:10 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199603101657.IAA15457@ix4.ix.netcom.com> from "Akira Kawasaki" at Mar 10, 96 08:57:25 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Akira writes: > I guess this helps explain the question of Scott's shiny beads vesus > Patterson's black (or grey) beads. Speaking of black, the new patent mentions that the former beads with the Pd outercoat had a problem of turning the electrolyte black. They said that analysis showed that the black was Pd. That apparently is one of the reasons for putting the additional Ni outer layer on top of the Pd. By the way, my Ni electrodes turned black after long electrolysis using K2CO3 electrolyte. -- - 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 Mar 10 09:36:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA02509 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 09:29:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA02489 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 09:29:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tvowK-000EhBC; Sun, 10 Mar 96 11:29 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: RE: Latest Patterson patent To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 11:29:51 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <01BB0E6F.F97D0760@ix-hou8-14.ix.netcom.com> from "Craig Haynie" at Mar 10, 96 10:26:08 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Craig Haynie writes: > >Li2SO4 is still mentioned as preferred, and the molar solution is still > >called out as 2.0. > > Wait! Hasn't it always been 1.0 molar solution? The previous patent called out 2.0 molar. Cravens himself seems to favor 1.0 molar. From what I gather, 3.0 molar is about saturation at room temperature. Apparently it isn't a critical parameter, thought it may have an optimal range. -- - 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 Mar 10 10:15:47 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id KAA07929 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:07:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from oroboros.demon.co.uk (oroboros.demon.co.uk [158.152.100.96]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA07891 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:07:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 17:58:51 GMT From: CRSM@oroboros.demon.co.uk (Chris Morriss) Message-Id: <17468@oroboros.demon.co.uk> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: The Joe Newman Challenge X-Mailer: PCElm 1.10 Lines: 16 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In the hope that Joe newman sees this. Joe, forget your ranting and raving and do this simple test. CHARGE UP A LARGE CAPACITOR AND DEMONSTRATE YOUR 'MOTOR' RUNNING FROM THIS. If the capacitor shows a voltage increase then I'll be well on the way to believing that you might have something. Measuring the voltage across one battery in an array of many in series is meaningless. REMEMBER, ONE CAPACITOR ONLY. -- Chris Morriss From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 11:59:44 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id LAA23386 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 11:48:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix12.ix.netcom.com (ix12.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.12]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA23373 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 11:48:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix12.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id LAA27147; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 11:47:25 -0800 Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 11:47:25 -0800 Message-Id: <199603101947.LAA27147@ix12.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: vtx: Patterson's thin skin To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > >Speaking of black, the new patent mentions that the former beads with >the Pd outercoat had a problem of turning the electrolyte black. They >said that analysis showed that the black was Pd. That apparently is >one of the reasons for putting the additional Ni outer layer on top >of the Pd. But did they say that that was the reason for the Ni outerlayer? I will get a copy of the patent to see what they are exactly saying. Nothing about what CF effects Ni had in light water versus what was expected from Pd in heavy water? I wonder what results would be obtained if the electrolyte had a mixture of heavy and light water 50-50 in a one molar solution. Would the excess heat output would be different than from a straight light water solution run and a straight heavy water solution run? > >By the way, my Ni electrodes turned black after long electrolysis >using K2CO3 electrolyte. > Did the eletrolyte itself turn black? The Ni electrode turning black may be the case with a K2CO3 electrolyte and some electro-chemical action (Miles type light water cell?) but the Patterson bead starts out being black-grey and the electrolyte is LiSO4. Their electrolyte turning black may just be a matter of the outer layer of any coating flaking off the beads over a period of time. This seems possible considering the beat-up pictures of the beads you have on your web page. The beads that Patterson show rolling into his hands from his bead container in a TV segment on ABC was already black-grey and I assume these are his latest Ni-Pd-Ni beads. I wonder if Scott could give a quote on the minimum order of the glass beads coated to another specification? And I wonder if an alloy of 50-50 Ni and Pd can be plated on one layer? -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 16:17:21 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id QAA10021 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:09:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA10004 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:08:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQagmq11723; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 19:08:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA14307; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:07:30 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L40P1A) id 272506160096070FEPRI; 10 Mar 1996 16:06:16 PST Message-Id: Date: 10 Mar 1996 16:06:16 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: vtx: HH's TMS calorimeter To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/10/96 16:06:24 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 03/10/96 03:42 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: vtx: HH's TMS calorimeter There is also a Mowery company in St. Paul MN that does nothing but precious metals. They will sell you Pt, no questions asked. Let me know if I should look up their phone for you, or go over and make a buy for you. MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 05:14:43 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id FAA01866 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 05:04:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.50.83]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA01861 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 05:04:31 -0800 (PST) Received: (from msevior@localhost) by liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.6.10/8.6.10) id AAA18549; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 00:04:24 +1100 From: Martin Edmund Sevior Message-Id: <199603101304.AAA18549@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: vtx: Here is a question for Jed. To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 00:04:24 +1100 (EST) Cc: msevior@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU (Martin Edmund Sevior) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here is a question for Jed. This just occurred to me days after reading a comment you made about the PowerGen demo. The ways of the mind are mysterious.. You made the comment that temperature in the reservoir at the PowerGen demo was trending upwards. Is there any way you can quantify that? The rate of temperature increase would be a lower bound on the power input into the electrolyte. Actually if you have detailed measurements at regular time intervals we might also be able to independently deduce the power dissapation rate of the heat exchanger. I'll have to think through the maths. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 16:39:12 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id QAA13059 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:29:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay2.UU.NET (relay2.UU.NET [192.48.96.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA13053 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:29:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQagmr03209; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 19:29:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA05789; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:29:30 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L40P1A) id 575528160096070FEPRI; 10 Mar 1996 16:28:16 PST Message-Id: Date: 10 Mar 1996 16:28:16 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: vtx: Anti-scale magnets To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/10/96 16:28:54 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 03/09/96 06:30 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Anti-scale magnets Absolutely Norman...I can quite imagine that some sources are "truely dissolved Ca" and others are coloidal forms. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 16:17:34 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id QAA09987 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:08:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA09980 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:08:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-4-133.austin.eden.com (net-4-133.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.133]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id SAA29615 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 18:08:42 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 18:08:42 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603110008.SAA29615@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: Patterson's thin skin X-Mailer: Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Akira said: >I wonder if Scott could give a quote on the minimum order of the glass >beads coated to another specification? And I wonder if an alloy of >50-50 Ni and Pd can be plated on one layer? I believe the minimum order for a new specification is $500 for 10cc of beads...at least that is what is was before the present batch was made. I will ask if we can possibly get a range of thicknesses in one order. BTW, the new patent does mention both light water and heavy water extensively. Perhaps I'll try heavy water next. BTW2, the new patent appears to include only polymer beads...not other non-conductive substrates such as glass. This could be very important. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 10 19:24:02 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA10411 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 19:13:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA10379 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 19:13:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.4) id TAA08197; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 19:13:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 19:13:40 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Alchemy and Superheavies 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: Some files on transmutation at http://www.imaginet.fr/~art/art.html .....................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 Mar 10 19:23:25 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id TAA10446 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 19:14:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail02.mail.aol.com (mail02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.66]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA10436 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 19:13:59 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by mail02.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA27486 for vortex-L@eskimo.com; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 22:12:44 -0500 Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 22:12:44 -0500 Message-ID: <960310221243_165419439@mail02.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: mot Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This week the market is taking a beating. MOT may drop below $52.00 another good buying opportunity for thouse of you who have an interest. Frank Z From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 11 00:59:43 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id AAA00577 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 00:52:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA00569 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 00:51:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tw3Kd-000EdqC; Mon, 11 Mar 96 02:51 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Patterson's thin skin To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 02:51:55 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199603110008.SAA29615@natashya.eden.com> from "Scott Little" at Mar 10, 96 06:08:42 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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 says: > the new patent appears to include only polymer beads...not other > non-conductive substrates such as glass. This could be very important. Note that the polymer beads are the evolutionary product of Patterson's long career. Brick layers tend to build their own homes out of brick, carpenters use wood. Patterson uses polymer. -- - 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 Mar 11 01:15:27 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id BAA01864 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 01:05:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA01848 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 01:05:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tw3Y3-000EePC; Mon, 11 Mar 96 03:05 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Patterson's thin skin To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 03:05:47 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199603101947.LAA27147@ix12.ix.netcom.com> from "Akira Kawasaki" at Mar 10, 96 11:47:25 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Akira writes: > Nothing about what CF effects Ni had in light water versus what was > expected from Pd in heavy water? This patent just has a few incremental differences from earlier patents. It incorporates most of the stuff in the earlier patents by reference. It continues to mention the use of both heavy and light water, but gives no particulars. Let me suggest that the alleged new cell configuration that caused the PowerGen cell to be covered by foam to prevent viewing was *not* covered in this latest patent, and therefore, is obviously in yet another patent application not yet issued. > >By the way, my Ni electrodes turned black after long electrolysis > >using K2CO3 electrolyte. > > Did the eletrolyte itself turn black? No, just the electrode. The electrolyte was always crystal clear. > bead container in a TV segment on ABC was already black-grey and I > assume these are his latest Ni-Pd-Ni beads. I always worry about that stuff. You never know what the reporter was actually shown and what explanation was given versus what ended up on the program -- even the accompanying sound can be from a different source. Were those real live active CETI effect beads? Or were they just something handy that Patterson could show the TV camera? -- - 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 Mar 11 01:19:48 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) id BAB02457 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 01:13:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.7.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA02448 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 01:13:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA20860; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 04:12:39 -0500 Date: 11 Mar 96 04:11:28 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Anti-scale magnets Message-ID: <960311091127_100060.173_JHB66-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark, >> I can quite imagine that some sources are "truely dissolved Ca" and others are coloidal forms. << Or even different proportions of each type - thus accounting for varying degrees of success with different sources of water. Can you say what causes the different type of Ca in solution, is it pH or something else? Norman.Norman From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 11 08:29:56 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id IAA19584 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 08:15:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA19573 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 08:15:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQagpd03601; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 11:15:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA05803; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 08:15:33 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L40P1A) id 293414080096071FEPRI; 11 Mar 1996 08:14:08 PST Message-Id: Date: 11 Mar 1996 08:14:08 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: vtx: Pt wire source To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/11/96 08:14:33 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 03/10/96 03:39 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Pt wire source W.E. Mowrey Co. 1495 University Av. W, St. Paul, MN 55108, phone 612-646-1894,1895 (two phones). Pt, Au, Pd, consignment/buy/sell, etc. Turn of the century firm, in "turn of the century building". Cute place... MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 13 05:28:34 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id KAA26114 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 10:38:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA26037 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 10:38:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA264889501; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 13:38:21 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 13:38:45 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: vtx: Joe Newman challange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I would not recommend doing any betting on the voltage change of a battery hooked up to a Joe Newman motor. The voltage likely will increase. This is because his device generates a very high voltage back emf spike that has the effect of conditioning the battery such that it actually performs better. The idea of running the device off of a capacitor has been suggested over the past decade and you can forget about it. It doesn't work. The claim that the device puts more energy back into the battery than it takes out rest upon measurements with instruments that cannot properly deal with the back emf spike. One measurement that I find possibly valid is the diverting of his motor output into resistors where the energy is dissipated as heat. Simple calculation of the heat using Power = Resistance * current * current indicates heat output exceeding the motor power input. Joe got a raw deal from the patent office when they tried to cover up and stonewall this fact. I could not accept the actions of the patent office and at the time I did what I could to support Joe's side. This current has been measured with a rms current meter which should have properly dealt with the emf spike. So let's write out the power equation as P = R * rms( I ) **2 where rms( I ) stands for the root mean squared value of the current I. The rms value was properly measured and the only question resides in the value of the resistance, R, to be used. My guess was that the emf spike caused some arcing in the resistor and that the actual resistance was actually much lower when the spike was passing through. A competent electrical engineer could rig up a wire resistor such that the wire windings are far enough apart so that no arcing would be possible. This would be a conclusive experiment but has not been done because Joe is so restrictive in allowing access to his device. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 13 05:22:07 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id OAA13249 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 14:20:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA13141 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 14:19:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.67] ([204.57.193.67]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA03396 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 1996 13:22:08 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 13:24:24 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Pt wire source Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >*** Reply to note of 03/10/96 03:39 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: vtx: Pt wire source >W.E. Mowrey Co. 1495 University Av. W, St. Paul, MN 55108, phone >612-646-1894,1895 (two phones). Pt, Au, Pd, consignment/buy/sell, etc. >Turn of the century firm, in "turn of the century building". Cute >place... MDH Thanks for the help. This is such a resourceful group! I ordered 60" of .015" wire from Omega. When the guy quoted a price 25 percent less than Scott posted I thought it must be a pretty good deal. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 12 02:36:13 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id CAA11179 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 02:22:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA11162 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 02:22:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a1-3.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a1-3.mel.netspace.net.au [203.12.52.3]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA19661 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 21:23:04 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: 5494559 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 11:25:17 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <3143bd71.18738872@mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:01:30 -0600 (CST), John Logajan wrote: >Scott writes: >> John, I think you're misreading the patent (damned legalese!). The last >> layer of Ni is called the "support plating" in Claim 1. In Claim 11, it >> and the first layer of Ni are said to have thickness ranging from 10 A to >> 1 micron. In Claim 10, they mention an optional 5th coating called a >> "metallic stabilizer plating" which is placed "atop said support plating". >> Later in Claim 12 they say the 5th layer may be Cr, Fe, Co or Ni. > >Yep, I was (and still am) confused. > >What sense does it make to plate 60 angstroms of Ni on top of 10000 >angstroms of Ni?? (Not asking Scott!) If I may hazard a guess: Suppose the beads were exposed to the air for a short time before application of the final layer. This would result in the formation of a very thin oxide layer before the fifth layer is attached. At the very least this would ensure that there was a misalignment between the atoms of the fifth layer, and those of the fourth layer. And if I am not mistaken, such misalignments are critical to the operation of the device. > [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 12 06:18:24 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id GAA03438 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:01:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA03411 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:01:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA164939294; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 09:01:34 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 09:01:59 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: vtx: Joe Newman challange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A I would not recommend doing any betting on the voltage change of a battery hooked up to a Joe Newman motor. The voltage likely will increase. This is because his device generates a very high voltage back emf spike that has the effect of conditioning the battery such that it actually performs better. The idea of running the device off of a capacitor has been suggested over the past decade and you can forget about it. It doesn't work. The claim that the device puts more energy back into the battery than it takes out rest upon measurements with instruments that cannot properly deal with the back emf spike. One measurement that I find possibly valid is the diverting of his motor output into resistors where the energy is dissipated as heat. Simple calculation of the heat using Power = Resistance * current * current indicates heat output exceeding the motor power input. Joe got a raw deal from the patent office when they tried to cover up and stonewall this fact. I could not accept the actions of the patent office and at the time I did what I could to support Joe's side. This current has been measured with a rms current meter which should have properly dealt with the emf spike. So let's write out the power equation as P = R * rms( I ) **2 where rms( I ) stands for the root mean squared value of the current I. The rms value was properly measured and the only question resides in the value of the resistance, R, to be used. My guess was that the emf spike caused some arcing in the resistor and that the actual resistance was actually much lower when the spike was passing through. A competent electrical engineer could rig up a wire resistor such that the wire windings are far enough apart so that no arcing would be possible. This would be a conclusive experiment but has not been done because Joe is so restrictive in allowing access to his device. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 12 06:24:03 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id GAA05170 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:15:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.ptd.net (root@ns1.ptd.net [198.80.46.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA05152 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:15:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from cs1-03.con.ptd.net (cs1-03.con.ptd.net [204.186.22.3]) by ns1.ptd.net (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA14692 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 09:14:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 09:14:15 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199603121414.JAA14692@ns1.ptd.net> X-Sender: revtec@postoffice.ptd.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: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net (Jeff Fink) Subject: Re: vtx: Alchemy and Superheavies Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A > >Some files on transmutation at >http://www.imaginet.fr/~art/art.html > >This adress did not work for me (404 not on this server) On another subject, my marks handbook lists the electomotive force series of some elements from most active to least active as follows: magnesium berylium aluminum manganese zinc chromium iron cadmium nickel tin lead hydrogen (zero) copper mercury silver palladium platinum gold Could someone fit titanium into this sequence for me and fill in the potentials? > > jeff fink PE From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 13 05:18:55 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id GAA12088 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:59:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA12010 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:59:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id JAA00630; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 09:58:47 -0500 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA13700; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 09:55:19 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 09:55:19 -0500 From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) Message-Id: <199603121455.AA13700@world.std.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Alchemy and Superheavies Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net (Jeff Fink) writes: Subject: Re: vtx: Alchemy and Superheavies "On another subject, my marks handbook lists the electomotive force series of some elements from most active to least active as follows: magnesium berylium aluminum manganese zinc chromium iron cadmium nickel tin lead hydrogen (zero) copper mercury silver palladium platinum gold Could someone fit titanium into this sequence for me and fill in the potentials?" Jeff: magnesium 2.37 (@25C, standard ox potential) berylium 1.85 TITANIUM 1.63 iron 0.44 hydrogen (zero) platinum ~-1.2 Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 13 05:32:35 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id GAA11588 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:56:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA11486 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:55:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.83] ([204.57.193.83]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id FAA07746 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 05:59:07 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:01:06 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Joe Newman challange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] >The rms value was properly measured and the only question resides in the >value of the resistance, R, to be used. My guess was that the emf spike >caused some arcing in the resistor and that the actual resistance was >actually much lower when the spike was passing through. A competent >electrical engineer could rig up a wire resistor such that the wire >windings are far enough apart so that no arcing would be possible. This >would be a conclusive experiment but has not been done because Joe is so >restrictive in allowing access to his device. > >Lawrence E. Wharton Another strategy is to pass the DC output through a zenier controlled voltage regulator, with the excess dumped to a load resistor for calorimetry. I had a similar suggestion for Alex Frolov (I wonder if he is involved in this behind the scenes?) in Sept. 1995, regarding his ideas for putting current and voltage out of phase in a primary to create "negative power", and thus reduce the input to a transformer. The suggestion follows: If you have a device that creates extra electrical energy that is actually useable, that energy should be capable of being conditioned to be fed back into the original device. Here is a suggested circuit: D1 D2 --R1-|<|--------<----------|<|----------<--->---- I I ^ I I I I I + v v x I v B----->SW1---|>|------SW2---->D< - - ->T<---->PS LD ^ I ^ I I D3 I DR I I I v I v ------------<------------------------->---------<---- Device D is your special device that produces excess electrical energy. Somehow you need a link at x that transmits the excess energy plus any leftover input energy a device T which transforms the energy into useable a/c that can be fed into a conditioning power supply PS. This power is then available to supply the input load after passing through diode D2 and SW2. If the voltage coming out of D2 is slightly higher than that supplied by the battery B, then diode D3 has a reverse voltage and no current flows through it, the battery no longer supplies current to the circuit D at all. Further, current would be free to flow through D1 and then resistor R1 back through battery B to provide a trickle charge to keep B fully charged. Resistor R is chosen to provide the proper trickle charge current. Now, lets assume your device is started by closing switch SW1, which allows current to flow from a battery B through diode D3 through switch SW2 (closed) to power your device D. The input current flows out of D at DR and back to battery B to complete the supply circuit. Your device D starts up and creates negative power greatly reducing demand from battery B. Meanwhile, the still full power from D is available to be transmitted across x to device T which converts this full power back into useable form for feedback through SW2. Now we potentially have a runaway circuit, so we put a load at LD that automatically shunts excess power (now conditioned DC) to avoid the feedback loop. LD might include a shunting LED to show that power is available. To check that the device is running in automatic feedback mode, it is only necessary to open switch SW1. If the LED remains on, it is working. SW2 is included to turn it off. It would also be a good idea to put a fuse in series with Sw2. If it runs for weeks, wow! If it doesn't work, there are only two possible reasons. Either D doesn't create extra power or there is no way to transmit the extra power to a place T where it is useable, thus the device is not practical. Now you have a definitive test. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 13 05:29:19 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id HAA17587 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 07:37:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA17506 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 07:36:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id HAA01972; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 07:36:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 07:36:15 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Joe Newman challange 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, 12 Mar 1996, Larry Wharton wrote: > I would not recommend doing any betting on the voltage change of a > battery hooked up to a Joe Newman motor. The voltage likely will increase. > This is because his device generates a very high voltage back emf spike > that has the effect of conditioning the battery such that it actually > performs better. The idea of running the device off of a capacitor has > been suggested over the past decade and you can forget about it. It > doesn't work. The claim that the device puts more energy back into the > battery than it takes out rest upon measurements with instruments that > cannot properly deal with the back emf spike. > One measurement that I find possibly valid is the diverting of his motor > output into resistors where the energy is dissipated as heat. Simple > calculation of the heat using So there is o/u, but it's in the form of RF spikes? Or do you mean that his motor drives a conventional generator, and the output of the conventional generator is applied to the resistors? ... > The rms value was properly measured and the only question resides in the > value of the resistance, R, to be used. My guess was that the emf spike > caused some arcing in the resistor and that the actual resistance was > actually much lower when the spike was passing through. A competent > electrical engineer could rig up a wire resistor such that the wire > windings are far enough apart so that no arcing would be possible. This > would be a conclusive experiment but has not been done because Joe is so > restrictive in allowing access to his device. ^ ^ ^ ^ It's the "inventors disease" again! *Fear of theft* of inventions is the destroyer of inventions, not actual theft. .....................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 Mar 13 05:25:40 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id HAA17737 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 07:38:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA17645 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 07:37:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id HAA02049; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 07:37:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 07:37:19 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Alchemy and Superheavies In-Reply-To: <199603121414.JAA14692@ns1.ptd.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 Tue, 12 Mar 1996, Jeff Fink wrote: > > > >Some files on transmutation at > >http://www.imaginet.fr/~art/art.html > > > >This adress did not work for me (404 not on this server) Oops, I think it's actually http://www.imaginet.fr/~art/art.htm I put the link on Weird Science, under OTHER WEBSITES, VARIOUS W.S. PAGES > > On another subject, my marks handbook lists the electomotive force series of > some elements from most active to least active as follows: > magnesium > berylium > aluminum > manganese > zinc > chromium > iron > cadmium > nickel > tin > lead > hydrogen (zero) > copper > mercury > silver > palladium > platinum > gold > > Could someone fit titanium into this sequence for me and fill in the potentials? > > > > > jeff fink PE > > .....................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 Mar 13 05:34:59 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id MAA12306 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 12:04:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA12265 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 12:04:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from scott.dsis.dnd.ca (scott.dsis.dnd.ca [131.136.15.26]) by dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA24503 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 15:04:07 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199603122004.PAA24503@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: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 15:01:11 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Logajan wrote: >... >3.) As an improvement in the case of boiloff, the non-conducting microsphere >seperators are replaced with "non-metallic spherical cation ion exchange >polymer conductive microbeads preferably made of cross-linked styrene >divinyl bensene which have fully sulfonated surfaces which have been >ion exchanged with a lithium salt. This preferred non-metallic >conductive microbead structure will thus form a salt bridge between the >anode and the conductive microspheres." Said also to reduce cell >resistance. >... So! I was not imagining what I had heard at ICCF5. There apparently is such a thing as "anode beads". Does this still not make any sense to you Dieter? What might be the purpose of such a "salt bridge"? John, any idea what is meant here by "in the case of boiloff"? Scott (and other experimenters), will you be trying to duplicate this aspect of the CETI cell? Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 12 14:44:17 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id OAA08018 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 14:26:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from julia.math.ucla.edu (root@julia.math.ucla.edu [128.97.4.254]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA07971 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 14:26:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (arnold.math.ucla.edu) by julia.math.ucla.edu (Sendmail 4.1/1.13) id AA25245; Tue, 12 Mar 96 14:26:34 PST Received: by arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (NX5.67d/NeXT-2.0) id AA16111; Tue, 12 Mar 96 14:18:49 -0800 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 96 14:18:49 -0800 From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) Message-Id: <9603122218.AA16111@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.95) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.95) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: Pumping power Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >This issue of pump power keeps coming up. >Pump power is P = p*V', where P = power, >p = pressure difference (outlet - inlet) and V' = volumetric flow. >...It is negligible. ---Michael J. Schaffer Well, actually that is just the *minimum necessary* pumping power to sustain a steady flow with pressure drop p and flow rate V'. A pumping process could in reality add *arbitrarily more* power than that as heat (or other internal energy). This is easy to see if you simply pinch off the flow line...the p*V' drops to zero, but the pump is still agitating and thus heating the fluid. Conceptually, think of it this way: imagine you, the ``pump'', need to push a chunk of material down a pipe---for simplicity, imagine its solid chuck, like a brick. So, you start pushing on it, sliding it along. The rate at which you do work on the brick is F*v, F = force you apply, v = velocity it moves at (in the fluid case, F = pressure diff * area, and area * v = mass flow rate, so one has F*v = (pressure diff) * (area * v) = p*V' above). However, in addition to this minimal energy needed to push the brick at a given constant velocity (in that case, F is determined as precisely that needed to overcome friction) you, the pump, are free to add more energy to the brick by banging on it, rubbing it, rotating it around like a screw, breaking or making chemical bonds in it, etc, as you push. You can add as much energy as you like this way. Of course, if you are a highly efficient pump, with a compatible material to push, you will minimize these extra additions. But, in general, if you have, say, an ability to generate 10 W of power yourself, you could put all this energy into the brick, and not move it at all, if you so conspired. (That corresponds to the case of a submersed pump, with the outflows all blocked off). Many pumps do produce considerable agitation, such as centrifugal pumps, and so they do dump much more energy than P*V' into the segment of the flow that contains this agitation. In the segments of the flow where the fluid motion is vey laminar and ''nice'', the energy input will be close to the P*V' minimum required. In segments of the flow where there is some form of obstruction that could produce an agitated flow, there is again the potential to dissipate more than P*V'. In water, this is usually not an issue, because the frictional effects (viscocity) are pretty small no matter how you cut it. But a pump could also, as noted above, dump energy into chemical potential, if there were a reaction that could receive it. So, bottom line: the only thing that can be said for certain about a pump is that if it is drawing a certain amount of power, then no more than that could possibly show up in the flow. Some small fraction of this power is dissipated by the pumps resistive motor itself, and so also will not show up in the flow (assuming its not submerged, and is air cooled). Some of the power is used to overcome frictional and gravitational forces that tend to act against the mass flow and it is these that will show up in the P*V'. But there could in general be additional losses from turbulent (i.e. agitated flow) viscous heating effects or in exotic case, chemcial reactions. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 13 05:42:19 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id RAA14306 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 17:34:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from julia.math.ucla.edu (root@julia.math.ucla.edu [128.97.4.254]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA14239 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 17:34:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (arnold.math.ucla.edu) by julia.math.ucla.edu (Sendmail 4.1/1.13) id AA02214; Tue, 12 Mar 96 17:33:38 PST Received: by arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (NX5.67d/NeXT-2.0) id AA16266; Tue, 12 Mar 96 17:25:14 -0800 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 96 17:25:14 -0800 From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) Message-Id: <9603130125.AA16266@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.95) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.95) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Re: Pumping power Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I wrote: >So, bottom line: the only thing that can be said for certain about >a pump is that if it is drawing a certain amount of power... >Some of the power is used to overcome frictional and gravitational >forces that tend to act against the mass flow and it is these that >will show up in the P*V'. But there could in general be additional >losses Just to be clear, I should point out that things like heating due to resistance to the fluid flow from the bead bed in the cell are included into the (pressure drop across the cell)*(flow rate), and this is quit small. Also, since the flow speed and length scales are small in this problem (flows of speed cm/sec, length scales of order 1 mm in the cell), there is not any induced turbulence in the cell (Reynolds number is one the order of 10 in there), and so there will not be any pumping power going into turbulent agitation (and subsequent dissipation as heat) in the cell (though this sort of thing does happen inside the cavity of a centrifugal pump). Thus the only way the pump could possibly deliver significant thermal energy to the cell is via some chemical delivery mechanism, by pumping reactants into the cell which react there, releasing energy. In this case, for example, if the reactants included the bead surface, the pump would supply the work necessary to break the precipitated reactants off the surface and bring them back into solution. Alternativy, the pump could produce some high energy state chemical state via its internal agitation, which is catalyzed to drop down to a low energy state (and release heat) by the bead bed. Its not hard to imagine such systems in the abstrasct, and perhaps even to construct such systems---a supersaturated solution that would precipitate and release heat when agitated would provide a very crude example, but getting an oscilating reaction would be trickier...---but whether such could possibly occur in the patterson setup seems unlikely, though it remain to be clearly tested. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 13 05:37:21 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id WAA06000 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 22:18:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA05973 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 22:18:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0twjtA-0009lgC; Wed, 13 Mar 96 00:18 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Re: Pumping power To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 00:18:24 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <9603122218.AA16111@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > from "Barry Merriman" at Mar 12, 96 02:18:49 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Barry writes: > >Pump power is P = p*V', where P = power, > >p = pressure difference (outlet - inlet) and V' = volumetric flow. > > > Well, actually that is just the *minimum necessary* > pumping power to sustain a steady flow with pressure drop > p and flow rate V'. A pumping process could in reality add > *arbitrarily more* power than that as heat (or other internal > energy). This is easy to see if you simply pinch off the > flow line...the p*V' drops to zero, but the pump is still agitating > and thus heating the fluid. The pump can only add power by methods of energy transport other than deltaP*flowrate. For instance, the pump could locally heat the water by agitation. A deltaT measurement nullifies that method of transport, however. The other suggested transport mechanism is phase change (or some other temporary chemical storage.) Here, of course, we need some chemical reaction to volunteer for this duty -- not just anything freely undergoes such bi-directional changes. Note, of course, that a phase change induced remotely by p*V cannot have more energy than p*V. Since p*V is so small in most cases, the phase change of interest has to be generated in the pump itself where excess sloshing is available beyond p*V. > push the brick at a given constant velocity (in that case, > F is determined as precisely that needed to overcome friction) > you, the pump, are free to add more energy to the brick by > banging on it, rubbing it, rotating it around like a screw, The question is how you can remotely deliver such energy other than by means of pressure and flow -- and therefore how do you avoid the p*V limit? With "AC" flow, that is vibrational or oscillating flow, you could fool a flowmeter designed only to detect unidirection flow, but in reality the energy delivered remotely is still limited by p*V. -- - 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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Fri Mar 15 14:10:25 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA18194; Fri, 15 Mar 1996 14:10:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 14:10:21 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603152200.PAA29498@natashya.eden.com> Errors-To: billb@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: bubble problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: My cell has fine-mesh Pt screens at both ends of the chamber. The lower screen is the cathode contact screen and directly touches the coated beads. The upper screen is the anode and touches only non-conductive stuff (I've used coarse plastic screens in the past...I'm trying uncoated beads now). In tests I made with no beads in the cell...only a thin-walled plastic tube to space the two Pt screens apart the typical distance, I discovered that under electrolysis conditions, the produced gasses can collect in a large bubble under the anode screen that REMAINS there indefinitely! This bubble takes most of the Pt screen out of contact with the electrolyte and raises the apparent cell resistance accordingly. This problem would presumably disappear at higher flow rates but then so would the calorimeter's sensitivity. For now, I have removed the top Pt screen from my cell leaving only the Pt lead-in wire which enters the chamber from above and makes a full loop whose diameter is about 2/3 the chamber diameter. Seems to work about as well as it did with the screen before the big bubble formed. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Fri Mar 15 14:11:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA18453; Fri, 15 Mar 1996 14:11:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 14:11:29 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603152159.PAA29491@natashya.eden.com> Errors-To: billb@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: bead fab details X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In response to the good questions Peter Gluck posed, Dr H says: 1. He uses soda lime glass because it works well for other applications (electrically conductive adhesives, metal/ceramics joints, thermoelectrical elements, ablative coatings, etc.). Typically his coatings cannot be removed easily and can only be scraped off with a sharp edge. He did mention that some folks like to etch the glass with HF first then apply the coating but he does not typically do this and did not do it to our beads. He could use other materials besides soda lime glass if we wanted him to. He used an acidic (HCl) treatment before applying the coatings. No thermal treatment was applied after coating the beads A Pd/Sn monolayer was applied to "seed" the surface for subsequent coating. For all layers, an electroless or chemical coating technique was used. No electrical current was used at all. A hypophosphite reducer was used at least for the Ni layers. Thus the Ni layer contains some P.... Could this be bad? The Pd coating was not a "replacement" coating but a direct deposition coating performed in a basic solution. He would only say that they started with PdCl2 but "changed" it to a "complex" form that is basic. The last Ni layer was presumably (he didn't mention it) applied like the first one. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Fri Mar 15 20:53:33 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA27594; Fri, 15 Mar 1996 20:53:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 20:53:32 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603152324.PAA18113@big.aa.net> Errors-To: billb@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: bead fab details X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 02:11 PM 3/15/96 -0800, you wrote: >In response to the good questions Peter Gluck posed, Dr H says: > >1. He uses soda lime glass because it works well for other applications >(electrically conductive adhesives, metal/ceramics joints, thermoelectrical >elements, ablative coatings, etc.). Typically his coatings cannot be >removed easily and can only be scraped off with a sharp edge. He did >mention that some folks like to etch the glass with HF first then apply the >coating but he does not typically do this and did not do it to our beads. >He could use other materials besides soda lime glass if we wanted him to. > >He used an acidic (HCl) treatment before applying the coatings. > >No thermal treatment was applied after coating the beads > >A Pd/Sn monolayer was applied to "seed" the surface for subsequent coating. > >For all layers, an electroless or chemical coating technique was used. No >electrical current was used at all. > >A hypophosphite reducer was used at least for the Ni layers. Thus the Ni >layer contains some P.... Could this be bad? > >The Pd coating was not a "replacement" coating but a direct deposition >coating performed in a basic solution. He would only say that they started >with PdCl2 but "changed" it to a "complex" form that is basic. > >The last Ni layer was presumably (he didn't mention it) applied like the >first one. > > >Scott Little >EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA >512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) > > > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Fri Mar 15 23:27:03 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA29544; Fri, 15 Mar 1996 23:27:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 23:27:02 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603160547.WAA01164@nz1.netzone.com> Errors-To: billb@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Hugo/Champion Reactor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: During a two week period, Mark was able to aquire some interesting data. After determining the flow rate problem (or, lack there of) the measured rate through the vessel was ~17.0 ml/min. This is still a weak point in the system which is being corrected now with a new pump and an in-line flow meter. The experiment will be duplicated again to determine if the results are similar. After several days of what appears to be successful runs, Mark deliberately kill the nuclear"?" portion of the reaction by changing the configuration. This change did not in any way affect the calibration of the system. So we now have a experiment that has evolved its full cycle (birth to death). The data is posted at http://www.netzone.com/~discpub/power.html Mark and I are simpatico on presenting the data to the group in an attempt to find our mistakes. Joe Champion email discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 00:51:20 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA16055 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 00:51:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 00:51:18 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960316083422_100060.173_JHB67-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:6] Just Plain Luck? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Having studied the power.html from Joe's web page I am in some difficulty. Power in as ExI is Ok - Watts Is the power out in the first group (up to the mechanical failure) supposed to be incorporating the 0.67 "efficiency" factor or not? It looks like a straight test run using a heating element. What changed the performance after the re-start following the repairs, or are the second group power out figures simply the result of the 0.67 factor? The last group look like a refrigeration run! On the face of it, and if the 3 groups are reported consistently as far as the power out data is concerned, then the 2nd group reports 3:1 ou. But I am confused by the presentation of the data. Sorry maybe my late night on the town has left my brain addled. Norman From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 07:25:05 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA01982 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 07:25:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 07:25:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960316102105_247513268@emout07.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:7] Pheonix/Potapov X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I am off to Pheonix today. I hope to meet Reed while I am there. My dealings with Potapov's son Vladimir seem to have generated quite an sturr. Jed dealing's with Potapov in the past have not produced any results. Now Potapov is coming to the US to have one of his devices tested at LANL. I am trying to get a test report. I am hoping that all is well with Potapov and the troubles that resulted were produced by the language barrier. Potapov does not speek English, however, his son Vlad does. I am not stupid and will move carefully. Miley took a vacation out of the country. God knows he needs it. I spoke with Jim Reding. His latest devices are producing may thousnads of watts of power. The Wright Patterson air force people have a developed and interest. Contact John Zetts at zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil. I have put together, with the help of Dr. Ron Madison Johnstown Pa, A group of investors from the Pittsburgh area. We are trying to determime it there is a profitable method to bring the new energy technologys to market. The $1,000,000 for the "unproven" CETI technology is proving to be a roadblock. The bad press over the Potapov devices is another roadblock. The economy has heated up. Interest rates have bottomed. I expect MOT stock to go up in price from here. Frank Znidarsic Frank Z From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 08:41:30 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA14807 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 08:41:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 08:41:28 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603161628.KAA02255@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:8] Re: Pheonix/Potapov X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 07:25 AM 3/16/96 -0800, Frank wrote: >The economy has heated up. Interest rates have bottomed. I expect MOT stock >to go up in price from here. Frank, do you think MOT is still looking at CETI?...or that perhaps they've even sealed some kind of deal already? I got the vague impression from the NightLine report that CETI wasn't playing ball with MOT. From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 08:43:33 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA15277 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 08:43:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 08:43:32 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603161630.KAA02343@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:9] Re: Pheonix/Potapov X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 07:25 AM 3/16/96 -0800, Frank wrote: > Now Potapov is coming to the US to have one of his devices tested at >LANL. Frank, is this a done deal...or is it still just an invite that has been extended to Potapov? If only the latter, don't hold your breath until Potapov comes over here...:-) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 09:14:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA23198 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 09:14:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 09:14:06 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:10] My first post here X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I tried to post to vortex-l that Scott Little had sent me a scanning electron microscope image of a cross-section of his duplicate CETI-type beads. It is on my web page, url below. -- - 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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 11:30:44 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA18887 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 11:30:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 11:30:43 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603161920.NAA09558@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:11] specific heat of Li2SO4 soln X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: John Logajan: did you arrive at a value for the specific heat of a Li2SO4 solution in your recent experiments? If so what was it and what was the concentration of your solution? Does anyone know what kind of apparatus is typically used to measure the specific heat of a solution? From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 12:02:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA27310 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 12:02:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 12:02:28 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:12] Re: specific heat of Li2SO4 soln X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > John Logajan: did you arrive at a value for the specific heat of a Li2SO4 > solution in your recent experiments? If so what was it and what was the > concentration of your solution? My calorimetry was of insufficient resolution to note a difference. So I have no measured value. Cravens' suggestion that it is 95% of water seems reasonable (that is 1.0 molar solution) because I did note that a 1.0 molar solution increase in volume about 5% over pure water. Hence if water's molar heat capacity is very large with respect to solid Li2SO4, then the volume expansion of the water by adding the Li2SO4 will act to reduce the molar heat capacity more than the Li2SO4 will add its capacity to the system. If Li2SO4 didn't displace the water but managed to instead fall between the molecules, then the specific heat would have likely increased slightly. By the way, I would guess that the specific heat of a solution can easily be compared to water. Simply inject a fixed amount of energy into a container of pure water and measure its temperature. Then using the same container and same stirring, inject the same fixed amount of energy into the solution under test and measure its temperature. That should get you a water/solution ratio. -- - 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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 17:05:13 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA20781 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 17:05:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 17:05:11 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:13] John Logajan's Thermodynamic Scorecard X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Greetings Vortcorians! I posted this on vortex, but it appears it will never show up, so I am repeating it, slightly corrected, here. I have been doing lots of thermoynamic calulations lately and happened to note what appears to be a discrepancy on John Logajan's Thermodynamic Scorecard. It shows: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thermal conductivity coefficients (k) @ 100C k's = milliwatt/centimeter/degree Celsius/seconds heat = k*area*(temp.hot-temp.cold)*time/thickness --------------------------- Diamond 17,000 Ag 4,260 Cu 3,950 Al 2,400 brass 1,000 Ni 920 Pd 730 Pt 720 steel 460 Glass (typ) 7 H2O (liquid) 6.8 D2 2.72 @ 300C He 2.26 H2 2.13 D2 1.66 Glass wool insul 0.4 N2, O2 0.306 Ar 0.27 H2O (gas) 0.239 Kr 0.1145 Xe 0.0695 Rn 0.0445 Vacuum low (energy radiated increases with Temp^4, degrees K.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . end of quoted table. If you use the units in the title above you are given: (1) heat = k*area*(temp.hot-temp.cold)*time/thickness (2) k's = milliwatt/centimeter/degree Celsius/seconds This means: (3) k = mW/((cm.)(deg. k)(s)) (restating (2)) (4) heat = k*(cm^2)(deg. C)*(sec.)/(cm) (restating (1)) Subs (3) into (4): (5) heat = [mW/((cm.)(deg. k)(s))]*(cm^2)(deg. C)*(sec.)/(cm) Cancelling we get: (6) heat = mW but this is a heat flow rate, not heat, which is energy, e.g. Cal. or BTU, so should be in mJ, right? Shouldn't it be: k's = milliwatt/centimeter/degree Celsius, i.e. k = mW/((cm.)(Deg. C))? Or maybe k's = milli-Joules/centimeter/degree Celsius/seconds? Maybe the above numbers are in mW/(cm.*Deg.K)? I have used Mitchell Jone's posted values from the "Handbook of Applied Thermal Design", by Guyer, of thermal conductivities of plastics being .05 to .2 BTU's/hr-ft-Deg.F. From this I calculate .865 to 3.46 mW/(cm.*Deg.K), which seems to fit nicely into the above table right before water. Does this sound right? Are the above table values really mW/(cm.*Deg.K), or have I made another blunder? BTW, nice SEM photo of the beads on John Logajan's home page! Perhaps there is now a good priliminay test for adherence to the core which can be used prior to applying the final layers: just prepare for the SEM and see if the metal layer separates from the ceramic. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 17:06:48 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA21174 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 17:06:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 17:06:47 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:14] An urgent request of help! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Has anyone been intensly busy lately responding, as I have, to an urgent request of help sent by private email? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 21:34:34 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA01929 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 21:34:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 21:34:34 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603170513.XAA05585@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:15] Re: John Logajan's Thermodynamic Scorecard X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Horace, the units of k are indeed as you surmise: power thermal conductivity = ----------- delta-T * length BTW, nobody's asking me urgently for help....? - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 22:09:48 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA06948 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 22:09:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 22:09:47 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:16] RE: An urgent request of help! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: A Wow, I think a request like that would get anyone's curiosity up! I was just put on the list so this is more of a hello again. The snow here on the mountain has kept me out of the lab, but I will have several interesting bits of information soon about my work in Russia and surrounding areas. I will mention that I found a very interesting power generating device used experimentally on one of the soviet military satellites. It is based on electrical stimulation of deuterium (gas). I will provide details if anyone is interested. Just a comment,I have also not been so satisfied with the software that I used for (GS) PS Abstacts that I have been pulling down from LANL. I now download the files into WINZIP in a DVI + (.gz) format and then view them with DVIscope from personaltex, Inc.. Much better. You can get both files from the net for a free trial. I also hope to put the New-science conference in St.Petersburg (17-22 June) on the net on a live IRC channel. I will also try and have a few other scientific locations on at the same time from around the old (and if the communist have their way) the new soviet union.:-( Anyway....thanks for allowing me in, and as always, if I can be of help please let me know. Things are about to happen, I can feel it! Robert ------------------------------------- Name: Robert E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 3/17/96 Time: 12:19:35 AM No matter where you go, there you are. http://www.visor.com/info ------------------------------------- From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 16 23:35:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA23051 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 23:35:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 23:35:17 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:17] Re: An urgent request of help! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner > Has anyone been intensly busy lately responding, as I have, to an urgent > request of help sent by private email? Sounds pretty cryptic. But no. No urgent requests in my mailbox. -- - 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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 17 02:21:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA12546 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 1996 02:21:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1996 02:21:05 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:18] new paper X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Thank you Bill for starting Vortcor! It is working fine, and the messages are numbered what's essential for people fighting bad e-mail connections. I have sent this on VORTEX but it seems it has been lost in the Cyberspace. In Current Contents 11/1996 the following paper was announced: WC Moss, DB Blake, JW White, DA Young "Sonoluminescence and the prospects for table-top micro-thermonuclear fusion" Physics Letters A211:2, (FEB 5 1996) 69-74 WC MOSS, Lawrence Livermore Natl. Lab, POB 808, Livermore, CA 94550 Has somebody seen this paper? Does it consider the work of Roger Stringham and Russ George? Thank you in advance for any information, Peter Gluck From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 17 08:12:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA23730 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 1996 08:12:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1996 08:12:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603171603.KAA08465@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:19] Energy from D gas X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 10:09 PM 3/16/96 -0800, Robert wrote: >I will mention that I found a very interesting power >generating device used experimentally on one of the soviet >military satellites. It is based on electrical stimulation >of deuterium (gas). I will provide details if anyone is >interested. Yes, let's hear about it! - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 17 08:12:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA23730 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 1996 08:12:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1996 08:12:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603171603.KAA08465@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:19] Energy from D gas X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: D At 10:09 PM 3/16/96 -0800, Robert wrote: >I will mention that I found a very interesting power >generating device used experimentally on one of the soviet >military satellites. It is based on electrical stimulation >of deuterium (gas). I will provide details if anyone is >interested. Yes, let's hear about it! - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 17 09:28:18 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA03316 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 1996 09:28:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1996 09:28:18 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: William Beaty To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@mail.eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:20] Soviet satellite D2 device X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 16 Mar 1996 dacha@shentel.net wrote: > I will mention that I found a very interesting power > generating device used experimentally on one of the soviet > military satellites. It is based on electrical stimulation > of deuterium (gas). I will provide details if anyone is > interested. VERY interested! I'm only familar with a couple of direct-conversion radioactive electrical energy sources: tritium/phosphor/photocell, and collection of charged particles upon electrodes. Is this D2 device a a new type? Some inventors base their overunity claims on extraction of energy from radioactive wire... ....................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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 17 11:45:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA25639 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 1996 11:45:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1996 11:45:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:21] RE: An urgent request of help! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >I will mention that I found a very interesting power >generating device used experimentally on one of the soviet >military satellites. It is based on electrical stimulation >of deuterium (gas). I will provide details if anyone is >interested. [snip] > >Robert > It is hard to imagine that anyone is *not* interrested! This sounds phenominal. Is this one of those things the US bought from the former USSR that is conical in shape, and was delivered to Louisiana (for testing by NASA) in one of those big white Ilyusian (?) jets? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 17 12:37:48 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA03667 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 1996 12:37:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1996 12:37:46 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:22] deuterium cell X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear folks, I spoke with my associate in Moscow today and asked for an update on the project. The group is now in the process of designing a commercial unit from the original satellite power cell design. This device will simply be used to generate heat. My associate asked me to wait a little before I release information on the original device, since the communist are now asking the KGB to crack down on people and groups dealing in "state secrets". The commercial heating device is not in this category and he is faxing me an update which I will translate and pass on to the group. The commercial device is called: "A calorific heater on the basis of nuclear reaction technologies in condensed media". Basic technical specifications of the prototype: (improvements are expected) Input voltage: 220vdc Input power: 0.1-1kW Output Heat power: .2-10kW Fuel-deuterium (gas): 20 cubic decimeters Operational temperature: 340-400K Time before overhaul(before refuel): over 10000 hours I know of a number of government to government exchanges with NASA and the Russians, this was not one of them. Now that I know there is interest I will dig a bit deeper. I am working hard to get as much information out as possible before the elections. I hope for the best, but plan for the worst. Thanks, Robert ------------------------------------- Name: robert E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 3/17/96 Time: 2:56:02 PM No matter where you go, there you are. http://www.visor.com/info ------------------------------------- From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 17 14:40:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA26534 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 1996 14:39:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1996 14:39:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:23] A bit more on the nuclear cell X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Hello again, I just got an email from Moscow ahead of the fax. My associate wanted to make two points about the cell. >This time I firmly know that: >- the presence of tritium in the output products of the >nuclear cell has been checked out in (independent) Moscow >institute named after Karpov >- this is a fusion reaction, quite different from that >proposed by Fleishman and Ponds, i.e. it occurs in >moderately hot gas atmosphere." Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled programming. Robert ------------------------------------- Name: robert E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 3/17/96 Time: 5:20:32 PM No matter where you go, there you are. http://www.visor.com/info ------------------------------------- From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Mon Mar 18 00:22:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA21006 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 00:22:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 00:22:53 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603180723.XAA07665@mail.eskimo.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Mark Jurich" To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:24] Re: new paper X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Greetings to all Vortcorians and possibly Vortexians! :-) Peter Gluck writes [with name correction Blake --> Clarke]: > In Current Contents 11/1996 the following paper was announced: > > WC Moss, DB Clarke, JW White, DA Young > "Sonoluminescence and the prospects for table-top micro-thermonuclear > fusion" > Physics Letters A211:2, (FEB 5 1996) 69-74 > > WC MOSS, Lawrence Livermore Natl. Lab, POB 808, Livermore, CA 94550 > > Has somebody seen this paper? Does it consider the work of Roger > Stringham and Russ George? The work of Stringham and George is not mentioned. However, Russ is aware of some of this work, due to conversations I exchanged with him last year... .. This letter is a write-up of earlier work by the LLNL group. The latest info I had before this paper, was a talk I hosted by Willy Moss, given here at the IBM Almaden Research Center, in San Jose, CA. I posted a summary on sci.physics.fusion about a year ago. You can find it in the spf archives... Back then, the fusion estimate for deuterium single bubble sonoluminescence was approximately 1 neutron/hour. The current paper (with better calcs) conservatively estimates 0.1 neutron/hour. An interesting point not revealed at the talk last year: pure D2 gas cannot exhibit picosecond sonoluminescence, due to the inherently larger sound speed... D2O vapor is a good thing because it allows the bubble to go into shock, due to sound speed reduction. Even though the fusion estimate is low, the group feels that it should be measurable. I think they are in the process of trying it ... Regards, Mark Jurich jurich@almaden.ibm.com http://www.almaden.ibm.com/st/people/jurich From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Mon Mar 18 00:24:44 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA21418 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 00:24:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 00:24:44 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:25] Re: specific heat of Li2SO4 soln X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 16 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: > John Logajan: did you arrive at a value for the specific heat of a Li2SO4 > solution in your recent experiments? If so what was it and what was the > concentration of your solution? > > Does anyone know what kind of apparatus is typically used to measure the > specific heat of a solution? A calorimeter! This is likely to be somewhat easier than the sort of calori- metry we have talked about here, because you can do it in a sealed Dewar; no leads (to speak of), no gases. If I were you, Scott, I'd check the CAS data base, looking for "specific heat", and probably ANDing with "electrolyte" if there are too many hits. If you only have the paper version handy, look at an annual index issue. I'd tend to do it like this: Use a closed Dewar with a calibration heater and thermistor going in through well sealed holes, plus a magnetic stirrer bar. Put in some amount of pure water, give it some no. of Joules while stirring, watch the temp. rise. Some of the heat goes into the Dewar itself. Then repeat this with the same amount (by weight) of your electrolyte. The difference will be pretty close to the actual difference between the two sp. heats. I don't reckon you need 5 decimals. The assumption is that the error (the heat going into the Dewar) is the same in both cases. But if you find some papers in CAS, you'll no doubt find a less primitive way to do this. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 18 02:25:05 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id CAA15231 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 02:19:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA15181 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 02:18:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA08066; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:18:58 +0100 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:18:58 +0100 From: Dieter Britz Message-Id: <9603181018.AA08066@kemi.aau.dk> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Test message from Vortex-L Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Yes, you got through with that one. But does this mean we're going to have two lists going? db From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 18 06:39:34 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id GAA00543 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 06:28:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA00511 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 06:28:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA185959285; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 09:28:05 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 09:28:40 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: Re: vtx: Joe Newman challange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >So there is o/u, but it's in the form of RF spikes? Or do you mean that >his motor drives a conventional generator, and the output of the >conventional generator is applied to the resistors? > .......,............................. >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 The energy is just in the form of the RF spikes. It is hard to do much with it except heating which is easy. His motor also provides mechanical power but in the heating tests the motor is just allowed to turn with no load and the power of the back emf spike is used to produce the heat. There often was a problem with the resistors burning up. Then Joe used power resistors which had a power rating that exceeded the power input to his motor and he still had a problem with them burning up. That said something to me but no one else seemed to pay any attention to it. His motor is worth looking into, it is simple to build, and I could post the plans to it if anyone is interested. I have a copy of his patent application. Since it was presented as evidence in his lawsuite it should be in the public domain. Then again, that didn't seem to help out the guy who posted the secret incantations of some religious sect. First I will see if someone would like to build a Joe Newman machine and if so, I will think about the legal questions. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Mon Mar 18 06:54:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA05783 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 06:54:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 06:54:37 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603181438.IAA25767@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:26] bead fab details X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In response to the good questions Peter Gluck posed, Dr H says: 1. He uses soda lime glass because it works well for other applications (electrically conductive adhesives, metal/ceramics joints, thermoelectrical elements, ablative coatings, etc.). Typically his coatings cannot be removed easily and can only be scraped off with a sharp edge. He did mention that some folks like to etch the glass with HF first then apply the coating but he does not typically do this and did not do it to our beads. He could use other materials besides soda lime glass if we wanted him to. He used an acidic (HCl) treatment before applying the coatings. No thermal treatment was applied after coating the beads A Pd/Sn monolayer was applied to "seed" the surface for subsequent coating. For all layers, an electroless or chemical coating technique was used. No electrical current was used at all. A hypophosphite reducer was used at least for the Ni layers. Thus the Ni layer contains some P.... Could this be bad? The Pd coating was not a "replacement" coating but a direct deposition coating performed in a basic solution. He would only say that they started with PdCl2 but "changed" it to a "complex" form that is basic. The last Ni layer was presumably (he didn't mention it) applied like the first one. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Mon Mar 18 06:58:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA06550 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 06:58:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 06:58:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603181439.IAA25813@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:27] bubble problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: My cell has fine-mesh Pt screens at both ends of the chamber. The lower screen is the cathode contact screen and directly touches the coated beads. The upper screen is the anode and touches only non-conductive stuff (I've used coarse plastic screens in the past...I'm trying uncoated beads now). In tests I made with no beads in the cell...only a thin-walled plastic tube to space the two Pt screens apart the typical distance, I discovered that under electrolysis conditions, the produced gasses can collect in a large bubble under the anode screen that REMAINS there indefinitely! This bubble takes most of the Pt screen out of contact with the electrolyte and raises the apparent cell resistance accordingly. This problem would presumably disappear at higher flow rates but then so would the calorimeter's sensitivity. For now, I have removed the top Pt screen from my cell leaving only the Pt lead-in wire which enters the chamber from above and makes a full loop whose diameter is about 2/3 the chamber diameter. Seems to work about as well as it did with the screen before the big bubble formed. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 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 Mar 18 13:13:52 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id MAA23735 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 12:58:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from big.aa.net (root@big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA23714 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 12:58:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from s1c0p4.aa.net (s1c0p4.aa.net [204.157.220.168]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA00266 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 12:58:08 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199603182058.MAA00266@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 12:57:35 +0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: vtx: Joe Newman challange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:28 AM 3/18/96 -0500, you wrote: > >>So there is o/u, but it's in the form of RF spikes? Or do you mean that >>his motor drives a conventional generator, and the output of the >>conventional generator is applied to the resistors? >> >.......,............................. >>William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 > > >The energy is just in the form of the RF spikes. It is hard to do much >with it except heating which is easy. His motor also provides mechanical >power but in the heating tests the motor is just allowed to turn with no >load and the power of the back emf spike is used to produce the heat. >There often was a problem with the resistors burning up. Then Joe used >power resistors which had a power rating that exceeded the power input to >his motor and he still had a problem with them burning up. That said >something to me but no one else seemed to pay any attention to it. > His motor is worth looking into, it is simple to build, and I could post >the plans to it if anyone is interested. I have a copy of his patent >application. Since it was presented as evidence in his lawsuite it should >be in the public domain. Then again, that didn't seem to help out the guy >who posted the secret incantations of some religious sect. First I will >see if someone would like to build a Joe Newman machine and if so, I will >think about the legal questions. > >Lawrence E. Wharton >NASA/GSFC code 913 >Greenbelt MD 20771 >(301) 286-3486 > > > simply ask Evan Soule for permission to so post, that will decisively settle the legal issues, he might even help you make sure you have the latest and best: josephnewman@earthlink.net (Evan Soule) ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 18 13:34:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id NAA25993 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 13:08:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA25939; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 13:07:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-041.austin.eden.com (net-2-083.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.83]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id PAA25900; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 15:06:49 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 15:06:49 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603182106.PAA25900@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortcor-list@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: vtx: new beads! Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dr. H (the anonymous fabricator of our ersatz beads) has caught the fever! Unbidden by me, but apparently in response to my explanations of the goals of this project and the problems we are encountering, he has produced a new very small batch of beads in which the glass surface was first etched with HF to produce a fresh matte finish for better bonding of the metal layers. He's sending 3cc of these new beads to me and I will try 1.5cc of them ASAP. BTW, I am finally performing a semi-proper investigation into the exact causes of the coating delamination. I ran my cell, with new beads, at 0.020 amps from Friday noon until 8AM this morning with the electrolyte at room temperature and there is no sign of delamination. At that time, I started warming the electrolyte so the cell would reach about 50C. As of this moment (3PM) there is still no sign of delamination. More tomorrow.... Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 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 Mar 19 00:09:07 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id AAA24637 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 00:01:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA24588 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 00:01:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA00898; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 09:01:17 +0100 Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 09:01:16 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange In-Reply-To: <199603181548.KAA17759@dgs.drenet.dnd.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 Mon, 18 Mar 1996, Bill Page wrote: > >3.) As an improvement in the case of boiloff, the non-conducting microsphere > >seperators are replaced with "non-metallic spherical cation ion exchange > >polymer conductive microbeads preferably made of cross-linked styrene > >divinyl bensene which have fully sulfonated surfaces which have been > >ion exchanged with a lithium salt. This preferred non-metallic > >conductive microbead structure will thus form a salt bridge between the > >anode and the conductive microspheres." Said also to reduce cell > >resistance. > >... > > So! I was not imagining what I had heard at ICCF5. There apparently is > such a thing as "anode beads". Does this still not make any sense to > you Dieter? What might be the purpose of such a "salt bridge"? "Anode beads" in the sense of beads near the anode, yes? No, it doesn't make much sense to me. These beads can only serve to separate the metallic beads from the anode, and a plastic screen or two, or a slice of a very coarse glass frit can do that better. They would add to the cell resistance (as a screen would, but less so). If you must have them, then OK, ion exchange, saltbridge-like beads would add less resistance than totally inert ones, which would simply take out that much conducting path. In other words, the volume occupied by these ionic beads would not be totally insulating. Not much use, I'd say, because the conductance would likely be a fair bit less than that of the Li2SO4 solution itself. Don't get mesmerised too much by what the "experts" do; experts all have ideas they try out and later realise weren't much good anyway. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 19 03:41:08 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id JAA06506 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 09:19:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA06426; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 09:19:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-041.austin.eden.com (net-4-141.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.141]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id LAA07476; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:18:56 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:18:56 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603181718.LAA07476@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortcor-list@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: vtx: anode beads Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:45 3/18/96 -0500, Bill Page wrote: >[I am a little confused now about how to address email to vortex since >there are now apparently two functioning lists... If Vortex is fixed now, I'd say go back to it and abandon Vortcor. The problems that made us want Vortcor have largely disappeared. >So! I was not imagining what I had heard at ICCF5. There apparently is >such a thing as "anode beads". Does this still not make any sense to >you Dieter? What might be the purpose of such a "salt bridge"? > >John, any idea what is meant here by "in the case of boiloff"? > >Scott (and other experimenters), will you be trying to duplicate this >aspect of the CETI cell? I'm now using uncoated beads between my coated beads and the anode wire..but they are not conductive as the patent suggests. Seems like any kind of "bridge" in the cell would be detrimental. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 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 Mar 19 03:41:20 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id OAA15743 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 14:08:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA15605 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 14:08:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQahpw00971; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 17:06:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA77371; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 14:05:38 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L40P1A) id 201105140096078FEPRI; 18 Mar 1996 14:05:14 PST Message-Id: Date: 18 Mar 1996 14:05:14 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: vtx: new beads! To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/18/96 14:05:10 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 03/18/96 14:00 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: new beads! Scott: I'm sorry, but your obstenance with regard the "ersatz" beads absolutely flabergasts me. Am I missing something here? We have a process which we do not fully understand. Somewhere along the line, in varying the cookbook formula, you have decided to substitute flour for eggwhite... (Glass for the polymer...) If it is so DAMNED difficult to fabricate the glass beads, then WHY NOT PUT THAT EFFORT into an attempt to duplicate "the real thing"? (Actually, with the right "professional" help, the "Coke" version /i.e. REAL THING/ may not be that hard...) - Yours, genuinely disgruntled, upset, and bothered...without trying to hide behind "Minnesota Nice", Mark Hugo... From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 19 03:41:29 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id NAA07914 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 13:46:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA07801 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 13:45:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQahpv24868; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 16:46:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA73292; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 13:45:38 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L40P1A) id 115644130096078FEPRI; 18 Mar 1996 13:44:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 18 Mar 1996 13:44:13 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: Just a double check....What the Heck! To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/18/96 13:44:55 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: Just a double check....What the Heck! - Since the L vortex seems to be working---another commentary about Mark Hugo's "Cold Fusion" work. My regular day time employer, the local electric power utility, neither encourages nor discourages my Cold Fusion work which is accomplished on my own time, and with my own funds. - I regard my employer to have as much interest, and/or as much connection with this work as would Walt Disney productions, or Steve Spielberg films. - MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 19 03:50:58 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id PAA06810 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 15:21:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA06718 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 15:21:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from [199.165.120.33] ([199.165.120.33]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA22537 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 16:51:18 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 14:26:00 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Joe Newman challange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >The energy is just in the form of the RF spikes. It is hard to do much >with it except heating which is easy. His motor also provides mechanical >power but in the heating tests the motor is just allowed to turn with no >load and the power of the back emf spike is used to produce the heat. >There often was a problem with the resistors burning up. Then Joe used >power resistors which had a power rating that exceeded the power input to >his motor and he still had a problem with them burning up. That said >something to me but no one else seemed to pay any attention to it. > His motor is worth looking into, it is simple to build, and I could post >the plans to it if anyone is interested. I have a copy of his patent >application. Since it was presented as evidence in his lawsuite it should >be in the public domain. Then again, that didn't seem to help out the guy >who posted the secret incantations of some religious sect. First I will >see if someone would like to build a Joe Newman machine and if so, I will >think about the legal questions. > >Lawrence E. Wharton It sounds like one or more good fast response damping diodes as needed plus an appropriate sized capacitor would help make those spikes manageable, useful, and very measurable. BTW, just because the resistors are rated at the required power levels (normally sized at twice the max power level expected) does not mean thay can handle that much RF power(all the load goes to the surface) or the spike voltage (momentary excess voltage can case a permanent short or reduction in resistance, or an open circuit). If it actually works ou I would definitely build one, but I just blew a years budget on an infernal calorimeter. It would have to be comparatively cheap and next month at the earliest! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 19 03:51:24 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id NAA29843 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 13:24:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from julia.math.ucla.edu (root@julia.math.ucla.edu [128.97.4.254]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA29798 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 13:23:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (arnold.math.ucla.edu) by julia.math.ucla.edu (Sendmail 4.1/1.13) id AA18371; Mon, 18 Mar 96 13:23:39 PST Received: by arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu (NX5.67d/NeXT-2.0) id AA19148; Mon, 18 Mar 96 13:15:51 -0800 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 96 13:15:51 -0800 From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) Message-Id: <9603182115.AA19148@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.95) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.95) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: J logajan, summarizing the Patterson Patent, wrote: >the non-conducting microsphere >seperators are replaced with [a] conductive microbead >structure [that] will thus form a salt bridge between the >anode and the conductive microspheres. Bill Page wrote: -- What might be the purpose of such a "salt bridge"? -- any idea what is meant here by "in the case of boiloff"? -- will you be trying to duplicate this aspect of the CETI cell? To me this looks like a totally nonessential aspect of the configuration for scientific purposes. It seems to be simply a backup measure in case there is an accidental loss of electrolyte, which should not happen under any proper experimental conditions. The qoute from JL does not appear to be verbatim from the patent, which in fact spells it out pretty clearly. None of the points cited seem to have any significant impact on my cell design: I qoute: Should the system 10 boil off or otherwise inadvertently lose all liquid electrolyte within the cell 12, a means of preventing system shut-down is preferred which replaces the non-conductive microspheres 42 with non-metallic spherical cation ion exchange polymer conductive microbeads preferably made of cross-linked styrene divinyl benzene which have fully sulfonated surfaces which have been ion exchanged with a lithium salt. This preferred non-metallic conductive microbead structure will thus form a salt bridge between the anode 44 and the conductive microspheres 36, the non-conductive mesh 40 having apertures sufficiently large to permit contact between the conductive microspheres 36 and the conductive non-metallic microbeads. The mesh size of mesh 40 is 200-500 micrometers. This preferred embodiment also prevents melting of the replaced non-conductive microbeads 42 while reducing cell resistance during high loading and normal operation. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 19 03:54:12 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id JAA14464 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 09:58:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA14336; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 09:57:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-1-041.austin.eden.com (net-4-149.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.149]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id LAA10544; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:57:01 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:57:01 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603181757.LAA10544@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: vtx: FIELD Co. Yusmar Test Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At Peter's excellent suggestion we asked Field Co, Ltd in Japan about their Yusmar tests. They responded very promptly and here's what they said (literally): DATE: 18 March 1996 TO: Dr. Harold Puthoff, President, EarthTech International FROM: Kazutshi Kobayashi, President. Field Co., Ltd SUBJECT: YUSMAR/Potapov Device Testing Dear Dr. Harold Puthoff: We have received the fax you sent us on the March 15th. Thank you very much. We are also very interested in YUSMARs, and we have tested it in Japan. However, on the result of our tests, we could not confirm that the output/input energy ratio was great, either. Our test shows that an output/input energy ratio is from 0.8 times to 1.03 times. But, the radiation of heat for the device is not included when an output/input energy ratio is 0.8 times. Our test was based on three-phase. We sent one of the results from our tests. Considering YUSMARs, although we are interested in the radiation of heat, we do not think that it is a good idea to make it practicable yet. Because in comparison with the efficiency of other energy, the present efficiency did not change from others so much. However, we are still very interested in it and we would like to know about your testing data. We wish to keep in touch with you to bE able to coopolate each other. Moreover, do you have any data on a quantum generator? If you have, we would like you to provide it for us. We are very interested in a quantum generator also, and we wish to import it. However, we haven't gatten an device itself, an detailed data, or any details about the products. Therefore, we can not import it at this time. We would be very glad, if you can provide the information about them to us. We are looking forward to hearing from you soon. Also, I have a plan to go to the U.S. in this summer or falls. I shall be very please to see you then. With best regards, Kazutoshi Kobayashi President Field Co., Ltd BTW, the Field Co. Ltd letterhead bears the company slogan: "TOTAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN-PLAN AND TRADING". They did send a rather complete-looking test report which is virtually all in Japanese. I'm sending a copy of it to Akira Kawasaki, who generously volunteered to translate it for us. Jed, do you want a copy too? Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 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 Mar 19 07:51:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id HAA11659 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 07:38:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA11601 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 07:38:02 -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 JAA27200 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 09:10:24 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 06:43:43 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill Page wrote: "Scott (and other experimenters), will you be trying to duplicate this aspect of the CETI cell?" This is way down in priority for me. I really don't believe the conductivty contribution is significant. An ion exchange resin in the cell may be a very different matter in regard to purely chemical effects, e.g. the much debated heat pump effects. If I could get my hands on the actual beads used, maybe, but I don't see going to any extremes to get them or replicate them as worthwhile at this time. In reading the patents I discovered I have a much bigger problem at the moment - a filter. In 5,372,688 it says: "The purity of all components is of utmost importance. The water ... must have a minimum resistance of one megohm and turbidity of less than 0.2 n.t.u. This turbidity is controlled by ultra membrane filtration. The preferred salt solution is lithium sulfate (L2SO4) in a 2-molar mixture with water. In general, although lithium sulfate is preferred, other conductive salts chosen from the group that contain boron, aluminum, gallium, and thallium, as well as lithium, may be utilized. The preferred ph is 9.0." I was thinking in terms of a filter to remove flaked bead parts, etc. This "ultra membrane" filtration sounds extreme, and unlike anything Cravens is doing, true? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 19 11:35:41 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id LAA28704 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 11:24:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA28684 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 11:24:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0tz70k-0005TOC; Tue, 19 Mar 96 13:24 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 13:24:02 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Horace Heffner" at Mar 19, 96 06:43:43 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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 > I was thinking in terms of a filter to remove flaked bead parts, etc. This > "ultra membrane" filtration sounds extreme, and unlike anything Cravens is > doing, true? My luck with vortcor-list seems to have run out, so I'll try vortex-l agian. Cravens used a filter at ICCF5, and I think there might be a filter of sorts internal to the reservoir in the PowerGen demo. -- - 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 Tue Mar 19 21:54:06 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id VAB10563 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 21:47:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA10500 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 21:46:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-27.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-27.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.27]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA04630 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 16:46:41 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 06:46:32 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <314f9d6d.26723319@mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99e/16.194 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 19 Mar 1996 06:43:43 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >sulfate (L2SO4) in a 2-molar mixture with water. In general, although >lithium sulfate is preferred, other conductive salts chosen from the group >that contain boron, aluminum, gallium, and thallium, as well as lithium, >may be utilized. The preferred ph is 9.0." Interestingly all the metals of this group would result in the liberation of energy from the fusion of hydrogen, and the fission of helium. I have only checked for the most common isotope of each metal, but here are two such examples: Al27 + H -> Mg24 + He4 + 1.6 MeV Ga69 + H -> Zn66 + He4 + 4.5 MeV In all cases, both begin and end isotopes are stable. Presumably most of the energy would be carried by the energetic alpha particle. See - no neutrons.:) There are as far as I can tell no other fusion reactions that the resulting energetic helium nucleus could undergo, hence all energy would be lost as x-rays etc. The question is if such were generated within a reaction vessel, would this be detectable on the outside, under normal circumstances, without very careful measurements? Or would we just see heat? Hint - what would we see if an alpha emitter were placed inside such a container? > >I was thinking in terms of a filter to remove flaked bead parts, etc. This >"ultra membrane" filtration sounds extreme, and unlike anything Cravens is >doing, true? Perhaps, this is intended to remove any doubt that the effect might be caused by some salt phase change reaction. Such a fine filter would catch any salt crystals. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://www.inett.com/himac Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 19 23:27:57 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id XAA02310 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 23:22:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA02191 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 23:22:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.82] ([204.57.193.82]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA31809 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:54:40 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 22:27:44 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Tue, 19 Mar 1996 06:43:43 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >>sulfate (L2SO4) in a 2-molar mixture with water. In general, although >>lithium sulfate is preferred, other conductive salts chosen from the group >>that contain boron, aluminum, gallium, and thallium, as well as lithium, >>may be utilized. The preferred ph is 9.0." >Interestingly all the metals of this group would result in the >liberation of energy from the fusion of hydrogen, and the fission of >helium. I have only checked for the most common isotope of each metal, >but here are two such examples: > >Al27 + H -> Mg24 + He4 + 1.6 MeV > >Ga69 + H -> Zn66 + He4 + 4.5 MeV > >In all cases, both begin and end isotopes are stable. Presumably most >of the energy would be carried by the energetic alpha particle. See - >no neutrons.:) There are as far as I can tell no other fusion >reactions that the resulting energetic helium nucleus could undergo, >hence all energy would be lost as x-rays etc. The question is if such >were generated within a reaction vessel, would this be detectable on >the outside, under normal circumstances, without very careful >measurements? Or would we just see heat? Hint - what would we see if >an alpha emitter were placed inside such a container? [snip] >Robin van Spaandonk Curiously, on a similar note, I just posted the following earlier today: Begin Quote: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > >Originally-From: jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr) >Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion >Subject: Re: cold fusion theory (simple) >Date: 18 Mar 1996 13:10:09 -0500 >Organization: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute > >I wrote (regarding transfer reactions): >: >: where a large fraction of the projectile or target is transferred. >: e.g. p + Pd-106 ==> t + Pd-104 or p + Li-6 ==> He-3 + He-4 >: >: If the reaction in a CF cell does not required deuterium, then fusion >: is out of the question (since pp fusion is a weak process) and one is >: led to consider proton-induced reactions. Any higher Z combination is >: probably out of the question because of the coulomb barrier. > [snip] > James A. Carr | Follow the Florida Legislature at Regarding: p + Li-6 ==> He-3 + He-4 Wouldn't the following be more likely: p + Li-6 ==> Be-7 Be-7 + e ==> Li-7 (53.28 d half-life for the electron capture) All the above reactions have high yields so should have clear signatures which are not available, thus do not represent an explanation for CF, but are interresting anyway, because they are aneutronic. Even the electron capture provides 0.861 MeV. Does anyone know the branching ratio for Li-6 ==> He-3 + He-4 and p + Li-6 ==> Be-7, or the cross section for p + Li6 fusion? This could make a very interresting fusion reactor. Has anyone tried injecting Li6 into a tokamak? End Quote. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p 1.007947 Li-6 6.015121 -------- + 7.023068 Be-7 7.016928 -------- - 0.00614 AMU energy released x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 5.719 MeV The Be-7 + e ==> Li-7 reaction issues .4776 MeV gammas, fairly detectable I would think. And look at that "heat after death" half life: 53.28 days! It doesn't fit, but is interresting. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 00:20:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA15409 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:19:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:19:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603181548.KAA17759@dgs.drenet.dnd.ca> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:29] Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: [I am a little confused now about how to address email to vortex since there are now apparently two functioning lists... Bill Beaty: your advice. However, before the recent failure of vortex-l I posted the following message and was hoping for some discussion. Did I miss it or did my message not get distributed? WSP] John Logajan wrote: >... >3.) As an improvement in the case of boiloff, the non-conducting microsphere >seperators are replaced with "non-metallic spherical cation ion exchange >polymer conductive microbeads preferably made of cross-linked styrene >divinyl bensene which have fully sulfonated surfaces which have been >ion exchanged with a lithium salt. This preferred non-metallic >conductive microbead structure will thus form a salt bridge between the >anode and the conductive microspheres." Said also to reduce cell >resistance. >... So! I was not imagining what I had heard at ICCF5. There apparently is such a thing as "anode beads". Does this still not make any sense to you Dieter? What might be the purpose of such a "salt bridge"? John, any idea what is meant here by "in the case of boiloff"? Scott (and other experimenters), will you be trying to duplicate this aspect of the CETI cell? Cheers, Bill Page. From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 00:26:59 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA17197 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:26:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:26:58 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:33] Re: bubble problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > > >My cell has fine-mesh Pt screens at both ends of the chamber. The lower >screen is the cathode contact screen and directly touches the coated beads. >The upper screen is the anode and touches only non-conductive stuff (I've >used coarse plastic screens in the past...I'm trying uncoated beads now). > >In tests I made with no beads in the cell...only a thin-walled plastic tube >to space the two Pt screens apart the typical distance, I discovered that >under electrolysis conditions, the produced gasses can collect in a large >bubble under the anode screen that REMAINS there indefinitely! This bubble >takes most of the Pt screen out of contact with the electrolyte and raises >the apparent cell resistance accordingly. This problem would presumably >disappear at higher flow rates but then so would the calorimeter's sensitivity. > >For now, I have removed the top Pt screen from my cell leaving only the Pt >lead-in wire which enters the chamber from above and makes a full loop whose >diameter is about 2/3 the chamber diameter. Seems to work about as well as >it did with the screen before the big bubble formed. > >Scott Little I was too cheap to buy the mesh, but I have lots of other places to hang up bubbles, including nylon mesh and filter paper. I may have to do some reworking also. I just can't seem to get ready to test due to interruptions, redesigning, etc. Maybe you'll have all the wrinkles worked out of the beads before I get the Blue Elephant working! A write-up of my somewhat amateurish effort to date on cell construction follows: PATTERSON POWER CELL (PPC) The casing of the PPC was made from a 7/8" long piece of 5/8 " ID 7/8" OD vinyl tubing. The end members were made by cutting the ends off of 10 ml B-D disposable syringes, Boreal Labs (1-800-828-7777) catalog number 63123-10F. The barrels of the 10 cc syringes are 5/8" OD and 9/16 ID plastic tubing. The anode end member was cut off at the 2 cc mark (about 5/8" from taper) on a syringe, the cathode end member was cut at the 1 cc mark (about 5/16" to taper) on a syringe. The syringe caps (tips which replace needles that do not come with the syringes) were removed and the small tips cut off. Then part of about a 1" of 1/8" ID Tygon tubing was slid over the caps to make easily removable but tight fitting connectors between the tubing and the end members. The 1" pieces of tubing were then connected to 1/8" ID T connectors. To the 90 degree branches about a 1 foot length of 1/8" ID tubing is connected to carry the electrolyte. On the straight through legs a 1" length of 1/8" ID Tygon tubing is attached, and closed off with two 7/8" x 7/16" x 1/16" aluminum plates bolted together with two 3/8" no 6 machine screws to form a tubing clamp that seals the tubing and an enclosed but protruding platinum wire together. Two compression plates were made of 1" BY 2" by 5/6" pieces of plexiglass with 7/16" holes bored in the centers to mate with the end members of the cell. Two 3/16" holes were bored roughly 3/8" from both ends of the compression plates to accept 1 1/2" no. 8 plastic machine screws, which are tightened to provide tension on the beads. The cathode end member was glued to the casing with Automotive Goop. The anode end moves with some difficulty due to the the tightness of fit. It is hoped the anode end member seal will be waterproof under pressure, but if not the plan is to use segments of vinyl tubing and a pipe clamp to tighten the seal. The cathode and anode electrode plates were made from Vectorboard 1/16" thick punch board with .042" dia. holes (170H48WE) punch board, normally used for electronic circuit prototyping. This was cut into roughly 1/2" discs for supporting platinum wire and filter material to create the electrodes. The conductive part of the electrodes was made entirely from .015" platinum wire from Omega Engineering Inc. (catalog no. SPPL-015). The anode is comprised of 20" and the cathode 12" of wire. Both wires extend through the end members by about 4", and extend beyond the Tygon tubing by about 1" where they are attached to the aluminum tubing clamps. The wire passes through the end members, then through two pieces of filter paper, then through a piece of plastic mesh made of ladies' nylon stocking. The cathode electrode was made by simply threading the platinum wire through the various holes many times, and the inserting it in the cathode end of the PPC and covering it with about 1.8 cc of ersatz beads. The anode electrode was formed from two plates separated by a 3/16" long ring of 1/2" OD plastic tubing inserted between two plastic electrode plates. The 20" of platinum wire was the threaded back and forth through the plates to obtain a kind of 3D electrode effect. (I won't do this again because it will be a nightmare to unwind. Maybe some kind of coil would be better. I am also intending to simply try a "stretched anode" by using a straight piece of platinum wire extended through the Li2SO4 exit tubing by about 15", no plate at the end, hoping this will improve recombination.) The majority of the platinum wire was wrapped only through the plate closest to the cathode. An additional plastic electrode plate was placed between the anode platinum wire and the cathode beads. The entire anode assembly of three plates was wrapped in plastic mesh (stocking) which was pinned at the back by the platinum wire protruding through it, followed by the two pieces of filter paper. The anode assembly was then inserted into the 2 cc of syringe which is the anode end member, completely filling it up flush to the 2 cc line. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 00:28:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA17574 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:28:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:28:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:34] Reply to Bill Page X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Bill Page wrote: .. following message and was hoping for some discussion. Did I miss it or did my message not get distributed? WSP] Here's what I tried to post a few days ago to vortex-l in reply: > John, any idea what is meant here by "in the case of boiloff"? Well, here is the preceeding sentence: "Should the system boil off or otherwise inadvertently lose all liquid electrolyte within the cell, a means of preventing system shutdown is preferred which replaces the the non-conducting microspheres with non-metallic spherical cation ion exchange polymer conductive microbeads preferably made of cross-linked styrene divinyl benzene which have fully sulfonated surfaces which have been ion exchanged with a lithium salt. This preferred non-metallic conductive microbead structure will thus form a salt bridge between the anode and the conductive microspheres." I believe this relates to the following paragraph which appears in the page previous to the above paragraph: "It is another object of this invention to provide an electrolytic cell for electrolysizing water and/or producing heat which is fault tolerant and having a long mean operating time to failure, if at all." -- - 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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 00:30:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA18019 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:30:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:30:18 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:35] Field results X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Scott, Thank you for asking the report of FIELD. We all need a complete vision of the Yusmars.I'm waiting for Akira's translation. Are the numeric data the same as I have sent on Vortex in February? What could be this "radiation of heat" which they don't want to make practicable? At a first sight it is a very disappointing result, at least for me. I am waiting for the complete data. The quantum generator is Potapov's new self-sustaining device. Please continue this discussion with FIELD. Why are they interested in the YUSMARs? I am just preparing my lecture about technological creativity for my students..and creativity implies a low need for clarity..but this is too much. All the best wishes, Peter Gluck From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 00:32:12 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA18558 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:32:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:32:11 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:36] Re: bubble problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: The following was emailed at 5:37 PM AST (6:37 PST) on 3/18/96 and did not come back to me via vortcore, as of 5:48 AM AST 3/19/96, so I am reposting. Please excuse the duplication if the other one shows up. > > >My cell has fine-mesh Pt screens at both ends of the chamber. The lower >screen is the cathode contact screen and directly touches the coated beads. >The upper screen is the anode and touches only non-conductive stuff (I've >used coarse plastic screens in the past...I'm trying uncoated beads now). > >In tests I made with no beads in the cell...only a thin-walled plastic tube >to space the two Pt screens apart the typical distance, I discovered that >under electrolysis conditions, the produced gasses can collect in a large >bubble under the anode screen that REMAINS there indefinitely! This bubble >takes most of the Pt screen out of contact with the electrolyte and raises >the apparent cell resistance accordingly. This problem would presumably >disappear at higher flow rates but then so would the calorimeter's sensitivity. > >For now, I have removed the top Pt screen from my cell leaving only the Pt >lead-in wire which enters the chamber from above and makes a full loop whose >diameter is about 2/3 the chamber diameter. Seems to work about as well as >it did with the screen before the big bubble formed. > >Scott Little I was too cheap to buy the mesh, but I have lots of other places to hang up bubbles, including nylon mesh and filter paper. I may have to do some reworking also. I just can't seem to get ready to test due to interruptions, redesigning, etc. Maybe you'll have all the wrinkles worked out of the beads before I get the Blue Elephant working! A write-up of my somewhat amateurish effort to date on cell construction follows: PATTERSON POWER CELL (PPC) The casing of the PPC was made from a 7/8" long piece of 5/8 " ID 7/8" OD vinyl tubing. The end members were made by cutting the ends off of 10 ml B-D disposable syringes, Boreal Labs (1-800-828-7777) catalog number 63123-10F. The barrels of the 10 cc syringes are 5/8" OD and 9/16 ID plastic tubing. The anode end member was cut off at the 2 cc mark (about 5/8" from taper) on a syringe, the cathode end member was cut at the 1 cc mark (about 5/16" to taper) on a syringe. The syringe caps (tips which replace needles that do not come with the syringes) were removed and the small tips cut off. Then part of about a 1" of 1/8" ID Tygon tubing was slid over the caps to make easily removable but tight fitting connectors between the tubing and the end members. The 1" pieces of tubing were then connected to 1/8" ID T connectors. To the 90 degree branches about a 1 foot length of 1/8" ID tubing is connected to carry the electrolyte. On the straight through legs a 1" length of 1/8" ID Tygon tubing is attached, and closed off with two 7/8" x 7/16" x 1/16" aluminum plates bolted together with two 3/8" no 6 machine screws to form a tubing clamp that seals the tubing and an enclosed but protruding platinum wire together. Two compression plates were made of 1" BY 2" by 5/6" pieces of plexiglass with 7/16" holes bored in the centers to mate with the end members of the cell. Two 3/16" holes were bored roughly 3/8" from both ends of the compression plates to accept 1 1/2" no. 8 plastic machine screws, which are tightened to provide tension on the beads. The cathode end member was glued to the casing with Automotive Goop. The anode end moves with some difficulty due to the the tightness of fit. It is hoped the anode end member seal will be waterproof under pressure, but if not the plan is to use segments of vinyl tubing and a pipe clamp to tighten the seal. The cathode and anode electrode plates were made from Vectorboard 1/16" thick punch board with .042" dia. holes (170H48WE) punch board, normally used for electronic circuit prototyping. This was cut into roughly 1/2" discs for supporting platinum wire and filter material to create the electrodes. The conductive part of the electrodes was made entirely from .015" platinum wire from Omega Engineering Inc. (catalog no. SPPL-015). The anode is comprised of 20" and the cathode 12" of wire. Both wires extend through the end members by about 4", and extend beyond the Tygon tubing by about 1" where they are attached to the aluminum tubing clamps. The wire passes through the end members, then through two pieces of filter paper, then through a piece of plastic mesh made of ladies' nylon stocking. The cathode electrode was made by simply threading the platinum wire through the various holes many times, and the inserting it in the cathode end of the PPC and covering it with about 1.8 cc of ersatz beads. The anode electrode was formed from two plates separated by a 3/16" long ring of 1/2" OD plastic tubing inserted between two plastic electrode plates. The 20" of platinum wire was the threaded back and forth through the plates to obtain a kind of 3D electrode effect. (I won't do this again because it will be a nightmare to unwind. Maybe some kind of coil would be better. I am also intending to simply try a "stretched anode" by using a straight piece of platinum wire extended through the Li2SO4 exit tubing by about 15", no plate at the end, hoping this will improve recombination.) The majority of the platinum wire was wrapped only through the plate closest to the cathode. An additional plastic electrode plate was placed between the anode platinum wire and the cathode beads. The entire anode assembly of three plates was wrapped in plastic mesh (stocking) which was pinned at the back by the platinum wire protruding through it, followed by the two pieces of filter paper. The anode assembly was then inserted into the 2 cc of syringe which is the anode end member, completely filling it up flush to the 2 cc line. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 00:33:40 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA18954 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:33:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:33:40 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:37] Missing Posts from Vortcor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: A Vortcor is fantasticallly better for me. The posted version of emails seem to come back very quiclky (a few hours), or not at all, and the numbering scheme is terrific. It showed me I am missing posts, unless there has been lots of censorship. I missed 1-9 (wasn't signed up) and 16-17, 19, 20 and 25, and anything over 27. Is there an archive for Vortcore or any way I can get these missed posts? I was under the impression internet email transmission is a store and forward protocol. If my service provider is down, isn't the email supposed to be queued for a while? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 01:57:08 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id BAA05294 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 01:48:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA05271 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 01:48:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA13023; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 10:48:38 +0100 Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 10:48:38 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST:30] anode beads In-Reply-To: <199603181718.LAA07476@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: A On Wed, 20 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: > At 10:45 3/18/96 -0500, Bill Page wrote: > >[I am a little confused now about how to address email to vortex since > >there are now apparently two functioning lists... > > If Vortex is fixed now, I'd say go back to it and abandon Vortcor. The > problems that made us want Vortcor have largely disappeared. I agree, and I seem to have seen the same postings several times as a result of there being 2 lists. So let's reduce the list to one. Can we rely on vortex-l now? I'm sending this to that old list. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Mon Mar 18 07:59:11 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id HAA17670 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 07:49:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA17597; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 07:48:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from scott.dsis.dnd.ca (scott.dsis.dnd.ca [131.136.15.26]) by dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA17759; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 10:48:42 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199603181548.KAA17759@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: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 10:45:35 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortcor-list@eskimo.com From: wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [I am a little confused now about how to address email to vortex since there are now apparently two functioning lists... Bill Beaty: your advice. However, before the recent failure of vortex-l I posted the following message and was hoping for some discussion. Did I miss it or did my message not get distributed? WSP] John Logajan wrote: >... >3.) As an improvement in the case of boiloff, the non-conducting microsphere >seperators are replaced with "non-metallic spherical cation ion exchange >polymer conductive microbeads preferably made of cross-linked styrene >divinyl bensene which have fully sulfonated surfaces which have been >ion exchanged with a lithium salt. This preferred non-metallic >conductive microbead structure will thus form a salt bridge between the >anode and the conductive microspheres." Said also to reduce cell >resistance. >... So! I was not imagining what I had heard at ICCF5. There apparently is such a thing as "anode beads". Does this still not make any sense to you Dieter? What might be the purpose of such a "salt bridge"? John, any idea what is meant here by "in the case of boiloff"? Scott (and other experimenters), will you be trying to duplicate this aspect of the CETI cell? Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 04:43:04 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id EAA11798 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 04:32:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA11775 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 04:32:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id EAA01739; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 04:32:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 04:32:16 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Test message from Vortex-L In-Reply-To: <9603181018.AA08066@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 Mon, 18 Mar 1996, Dieter Britz wrote: > Yes, you got through with that one. But does this mean we're going to have > two lists going? > db > Yep, that was the original intent of long ago. Since vortex-L has heavy traffic, I started setting up Vortcor-list for "announcement"- type messages. That way, if some users only wanted the important stuff and not the conversations, they could subscribe to vortcor-list. Now that vortex-L seems alive again, we should start using it (vortex-L) for general conversation. Vortcor-list can be used for announcement of experiment results, etc. Anything that the non-vortex-L-subscribers should be seeing. We'll see how this works out. The original problem was that some users couldn't handle the large traffic on vortex-L. But I suspect that vortcor-list will suffer from the opposite problem, and will have no traffic at all. I'll try to forward the "important" messages to vortcor-list so the low-traffic users can see them. But everyone remember, if you have a message which needs to be heard by the people who subscribe only to vortcor-list, you should send to both lists. The message archive for both lists (mixed together!) is at: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wvort.html .....................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 Mar 20 05:00:31 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id EAA16233 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 04:50:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA16201 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 04:50:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id EAA02203; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 04:50:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 04:50:00 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Vortex-L is changing to vortex-list 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 Wed, 20 Mar 1996, Dieter Britz wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: > > At 10:45 3/18/96 -0500, Bill Page wrote: > > >[I am a little confused now about how to address email to vortex since > > >there are now apparently two functioning lists... > > > > If Vortex is fixed now, I'd say go back to it and abandon Vortcor. The > > problems that made us want Vortcor have largely disappeared. > > I agree, and I seem to have seen the same postings several times as a result > of there being 2 lists. So let's reduce the list to one. Can we rely on > vortex-l now? I'm sending this to that old list. Vortex-L seems OK now, and should be used instead of vortcor-list. Since vortcor-list seems less prone to long delays that vortex-L, and since the "majordomo" software is being discontinued here, I'm going to switch vortex-L over to the new listproc software. Subscribers to vortex-L should need to do no work during the changeover. Unfortunately, the "-list" designation is standard for listproc. And so, vortex-L will change into "vortex-list." I suspect that the net-wide standards change has something to do with lower-case "L" being interpreted as a one (1) by new users. The change should come through in about a week or two. Again, vortex-L subscribers won't need to subscribe themselves. So far I haven't had a response from the sysop about the message headers. It would be convenient if the header could still say "vtx:" instead of saying "vortex-list." .....................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 Mar 20 05:14:43 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id FAA19718 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 05:03:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA19695 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 05:03:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id FAA03098; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 05:03:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 05:03:39 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Oops! Vortex-L is NOT changing to vortex-list 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: > Unfortunately, the "-list" designation is standard for listproc. And so, > vortex-L will change into "vortex-list." I suspect that the net-wide > standards change has something to do with lower-case "L" being interpreted > as a one (1) by new users. Arrg! I found a recent message from the eskimo.com listserver guru announcing that the "-list" standard will NOT be required. So, though vortex-L will soon change over to the listproc software, the name will stay the same: vortex-L Yay! .....................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 Mar 20 06:36:01 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id GAA07658 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 06:23:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA07601 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 06:23:23 -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 HAA00581 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 07:56:04 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 05:29:01 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: new beads! Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Scott: I'm sorry, but your obstenance with regard the "ersatz" beads >absolutely flabergasts me. Am I missing something here? We have a process >which we do not fully understand. Somewhere along the line, in varying >the cookbook formula, you have decided to substitute flour for eggwhite... >(Glass for the polymer...) If it is so DAMNED difficult to fabricate the >glass beads, then WHY NOT PUT THAT EFFORT into an attempt to duplicate >"the real thing"? (Actually, with the right "professional" help, the >"Coke" version /i.e. REAL THING/ may not be that hard...) >- >Yours, genuinely disgruntled, upset, and bothered...without trying to >hide behind "Minnesota Nice", Mark Hugo... There are several good reasons to proceed: 1. The Patterson patents do not mention any operational function to the plastic cores, as far as I know. If so, using glass should not violate the teachings of the patents. 2. Having a higher melting point, glass is superior - if it works. 3. Having *any* beads to test is good, it is research motivating and therefore thought motivating. There is at least one more experimental set-up due to the ersatz beads. If lots of people have cells and test equipment, experimental confirmations should proceed quickly if the Patterson beads, or any other claimed ou beads, etc., are released. 4. The only thing that is really "coke" is the real thing 8^) released, tested, and certified by Patterson. 5. The patent specified apparatus and test condition specifications themselves require a pretty significant effort to replicate. I'll bet there are no two independently built cells and test benches alike. The advantage of this, if there is confirmation, is obvious. The problem only comes if there is no ou observed by anyone. If there is a mixed result, that is a chance to home in on the significant variables. 6. The Patterson beads will be available sooner or later. Let's keep going! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 09:14:12 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id JAA12726 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 09:00:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA12625 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 08:59:58 -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 KAA01256 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 10:32:08 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 08:05:03 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Latest Patterson patent: ion exchange Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >Originally-From: jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr) (on sci.physics.fusion) [snip] >: where a large fraction of the projectile or target is transferred. >: e.g. p + Pd-106 ==> t + Pd-104 or p + Li-6 ==> He-3 + He-4 >: [snip] About: p + Pd-106 ==> t + Pd-104 This maybe should include also the branch: p + Pd-106 ==> Ag-107* Ag-107* ==> Ag107 + 93 keV (by 44.2 sec. half life isomeric transition) Regarding: p + Li-6 ==> He-3 + He-4 Wouldn't the following be more likely: p + Li-6 ==> Be-7 Be-7 + e ==> Li-7 (53.28 d half-life for the electron capture) All the above reactions have high yields so should have clear signatures which are not available, thus do not represent an explanation for CF, but are interresting anyway, because they are aneutronic. Even the electron capture provides 0.861 MeV. Does anyone know the branching ratio for Li-6 ==> He-3 + He-4 and p + Li-6 ==> Be-7, or the cross section for p + Li6 fusion? This could make a very interresting fusion reactor. Has anyone tried injecting Li6 into a tokamak? Of all the above, the following gives the best potential explanation of "heat after death" and the low energy yields: Ag-107* ==> Ag107 + 93 keV Also, Ag would be already present in Pd electrodes in minor quantities and thus new Ag-107 would be difficult to detect. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 13:46:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id NAA10370 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 13:29:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA10341 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 13:29:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQahxe22655; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 16:30:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA122927; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 13:29:02 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L40P1A) id 145328130096080FEPRI; 20 Mar 1996 13:28:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 20 Mar 1996 13:28:13 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: Missing message that someone has been looking for... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/20/96 13:28:51 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: Missing message that someone has been looking for... - I'm afraid the vagarities of the Email system, and making a slight error in addressing, ended up "self censoring" a message I wanted to post about my work in co-operation with Joe Champion. I think we need to take this opportunity to thank all those people who have called me to "warn" me about Joe C. Your advice has been taken in stride. I may or may not believe Joe's claims to frabricate precious metals from his transmutation methods. However, in discussing the various claims that Joe has, he did reveal to me some information from some "electrolysis" based experiments he has performed over the years. In discussing these anecdotal observations, about a month ago I suggested that some of his electrochemical systems might be "excess heat" generators. That led me to set up the ONE test so far which appears to have yielded 50 to 100% excess on top of a 10 watt input (i.e., 15 to 20 watts out for 10 watts in.) This test still requires repeating. What is interesting is that the test was made with electrolyte and cathode material available at the average grocery/hardware store--- - Joe has told me I can give people a "laundry list"---in case some bold person wants to try combinatorics before any details are revealed. - To whit, the following items could act as cathodes and be bought at the aforementioned supply houses: - Aluminum foil Copper scrub pads Steel Wool Metalized plastic Chrome Plated Plastic Chrome Plated Brass Brass Copper Mercury coated substances Graphite Zinc Copper tubing Galvanized iron tubing - Among the choices for electrolytes: - NaCl KCl Sodium Hydroxide Mallic Acid HCl Sodium Bisulfite Tri-sodium Phosphate Acetic Acid with an addition EDTA and Kersosene Sodium Bicarbonate It should be noted that I did add some Li metal to the mix at a point to stabalize conductivity. Good luck IM force! From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 13:48:35 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id NAA11789 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 13:36:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA11744 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 13:36:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP id QQahxe24334; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 16:37:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA95388; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 13:36:02 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L40P1A) id 512735130096080FEPRI; 20 Mar 1996 13:35:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 20 Mar 1996 13:35:13 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: On last note about transmutation of materials... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/20/96 13:35:26 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: On last note about transmutation of materials... - Again, I may or may not believe Joe C's claims about transmutation of materials and fabrication of precious metals. HOWEVER, this does not mean that Mr. Champion is blind...and it should be noted he has solicted NO money from me, only asked that I co-operate in searching for "excess energy" which he felt might come from some of the same principles he uses in his "transmutation" theories. - His not being "blind" means that he has observed some interesting effects over the years in his experiments with "transmutation". Not having a firm grasp on measurement techniques in the "calorimetry" realm, he has been keenly interested in having someone with some experience check out some concepts. That is all I have been doing for Mr. Champion. Whatever bricks various people wish to throw at Joe for his transmutation claims do not effect me. I have not been asked to evaluate these claims, and indeed have told Mr. Champion from the beginning: "ALL I am interested in is ENERGY...and solving Cold Fusion, everything else is secondary..." - MDH From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 22:00:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA22213 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:00:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:00:51 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603201211.EAA02005@ix.ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:39] LANL's formal invitation to Potapov X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I feel that: INASMUCH as we DO have a native son making and sellin O/U pumps in Gorgia USA, LANL should also extend the recognition and same formal invitation to Griggs of Hydrosonic Pump that they did to Potapov (with his commercial Yusmar pumps). It could be set up on different dates. Also, the demonstration (tests?) of the O?U pumps should be witnessed or ideally participated in by Edmund Storms, Scott Little, and Eugene Mallove (or designated representatives) at the very least in addition to the staff of LANL. -AK- This is a second post --- the first being to vortex which hasn't appeared yet. From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 22:03:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA22736 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:02:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:02:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603201259.GAA07706@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:40] Re: Field results X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 12:30 AM 3/20/96 -0800, Peter wrote: > > Dear Scott, >Thank you for asking the report of FIELD. We all need a complete >vision of the Yusmars.I'm waiting for Akira's translation. Are >the numeric data the same as I have sent on Vortex in February? No the numeric part is voluminous, several pages of stuff. I had to mail the "original" to Akira so he would have a chance of deciphering the detailed Japanese characters. He should have it by tomorrow. >What could be this "radiation of heat" which they don't >want to make practicable? At a first sight it is a very disappointing >result, at least for me. I am waiting for the complete data. >The quantum generator is Potapov's new self-sustaining device. >Please continue this discussion with FIELD. Why are they interested >in the YUSMARs? Judging by their slogan, they are technology importers. Thus they want to make money with Yusmars. >I am just preparing my lecture about technological >creativity for my students..and creativity implies a low need for >clarity..but this is too much. Ha! you're right. Best wishes to you, Peter. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 20 22:05:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA23318 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:05:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:05:26 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:41] Re: bubble problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner writes: > The cathode and anode electrode plates were made from Vectorboard 1/16" > thick punch board with .042" dia. holes (170H48WE) punch board, I was never able to verify whether it was the vectorboard or the steel nut, but something discolored my lithium sulfate -- the color looked like the vectorboard (brownish) but it could have been rust. Anyhow, just something to watch for. [I used the vectorboard as a "paddle" and the steel nut as a weight, to construct a stirrer mechanism in a thermal dynamics experiment I performed on LiSO4 1.0 molar in H2O, last December.] -- - 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 Mar 21 17:11:29 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id RAA10327 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:04:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from sunny.bahnhof.se (root@sunny.bahnhof.se [193.44.91.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA10183; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:03:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from [193.44.91.108] (pppnode8 [193.44.91.108]) by sunny.bahnhof.se (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id CAA08553; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 02:02:19 +0100 (MET) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 02:02:19 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: david@sunny.bahnhof.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, freenrg-list@eskimo.com From: david@bahnhof.se (David Jonsson) Subject: vtx: Falling electrons Cc: rognerud@sirius.com, gravitics@aol.com, ERAOTG@era2.ericsson.se, bt@irfu.se, bg@astro.uu.se, david@ibg.uu.se, beaulieu@magi.com, robert@wwa.com, newphys@epact.se, hzetterstrom@sto.foa.se Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a "Gedankenexperiment" =E1 la Einstein. Assume an electron falling toward the earth from outer space. It is accelerating relative the surface of the earth. Does the electron radiate away energy or is the electron in a non-radiating inertial rest-frame? Consider the two alternatives. 1. In a rest frame and not radiating. This means that that another electron in rest relative the surface is "accelerating" and thus radiating. Where does the energy come from in this case? (The Searl and the Biefield-Brown experiments supports this case.) 2. Accelerating and radiating. Assume this electron to be inside a sealed spaceship. The electron would fall slower than the ship. Not in compliance with the principle of equivalence. This would require some absolute reference. An ether? Maybe your alternative Paul? I vote in favour of alternative one. I have difficulties in imagine alternative 2. Anyone willing to do an experiment with a higly charged object and look for radiation (free energy) and forces in vertical direction? David -- David Jonsson Phone +46-18-24 51 52 Postgiro 499 40 54-7 Kantorsgatan 30:390 Cellular Phone +46-707-21 25 19 S-754 24 Uppsala E-mail: david@bahnhof.se Sweden Web http://bahnhof.se/~david/ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Thu Mar 21 17:14:15 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id RAA10013 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:02:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from sunny.bahnhof.se (root@sunny.bahnhof.se [193.44.91.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA09986 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:02:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [193.44.91.108] (pppnode8 [193.44.91.108]) by sunny.bahnhof.se (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id CAA08541 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 02:01:53 +0100 (MET) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 02:01:53 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: david@sunny.bahnhof.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: david@bahnhof.se (David Jonsson) Subject: vtx: Interpret my dream Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Tonight i dreamed about a small metall ball about one cm in diameter. This little ball could not be at rest. It moved all the time. It was surrounded by blue sparks. I took the ball in the middle of my palm and put it in a bowl. When the ball left my hand the blue sparks contiunued in my hand. When the ball landed in the bowl it started to spin around the wall faster and faster. What was this? David -- David Jonsson Phone +46-18-24 51 52 Postgiro 499 40 54-7 Kantorsgatan 30:390 Cellular Phone +46-707-21 25 19 S-754 24 Uppsala E-mail: david@bahnhof.se Sweden Web http://bahnhof.se/~david/ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Thu Mar 21 17:31:29 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id RAA12347 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:17:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA12327; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:17:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id RAA24451; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:16:56 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:16:54 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L@mail.eskimo.com, vortcor-list@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: It's too quiet 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: Now what. Are BOTH lists going silent? .....................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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Thu Mar 21 20:53:48 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA03680 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 20:53:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 20:53:47 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:42] Re: bubble problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: [snip] >I was never able to verify whether it was the vectorboard or the >steel nut, but something discolored my lithium sulfate [snip] > >-- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - Thanks for the warning. I'll test some aside before loading the cell with Li2SO4 electrolyte. If it is the Vectorboard I will not be looking forward to unwrapping that Pt wire! Oh well, experience has its cost. But wait a minute, suppose that yellow stuff is the serendipitous CF catalyst? It will just have to wait for someone elese to discover. 8) Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Thu Mar 21 21:11:00 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id UAA00296 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 20:24:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from big.aa.net (root@big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA00284 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 20:24:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from Default (s1c3p3.aa.net [204.157.220.191]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA17388 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 20:24:22 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199603220424.UAA17388@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 20:23:54 +0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: vtx: It's too quiet Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 05:16 PM 3/21/96 -0800, you wrote: > >Now what. Are BOTH lists going silent? > >.....................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 > > tis the quiet before the storm, he wispered bemusedly whilst reflecting upon a dozen fond secrets... ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From little@mail.eden.com Thu Mar 21 21:45:17 1996 Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA10126; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 21:36:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-6-181.austin.eden.com (net-6-181.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.181]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id XAA14622; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 23:36:19 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 23:36:19 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603220536.XAA14622@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: vtx: It's too quiet Cc: William Beaty Status: RO X-Status: A At 05:16 PM 3/21/96 -0800, BillB wrote: > >Now what. Are BOTH lists going silent? OK, Bill I got this but nothing I've sent to Vortex has echoed lately...for three days, now!. I've cc'd this message directly to you so you can maybe figure out what's happening....? - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 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 Mar 21 23:28:25 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id XAA28128 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 23:20:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix14.ix.netcom.com (ix14.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA28106 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 23:20:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from by ix14.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id XAA20470; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 23:19:00 -0800 Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 23:19:00 -0800 Message-Id: <199603220719.XAA20470@ix14.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: vtx: It's too quiet To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > > >Now what. Are BOTH lists going silent? > Well, for me, there were three vtx postings received. The last one was your post and the two other ones were from the same person. None were received from Vortcor. I did receive one non-vtx or vortcor mail in between. The time now is 23:00 PST March 21, 1996. A virus attack? -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 22 00:26:17 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id AAA08015 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:17:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA07999 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:17:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id AAA03869; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:17:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:17:24 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: It's too quiet In-Reply-To: <199603220424.UAA17388@big.aa.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 Thu, 21 Mar 1996, Michael Mandeville wrote: > At 05:16 PM 3/21/96 -0800, you wrote: > > > >Now what. Are BOTH lists going silent? > > > >.....................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 > > > > > tis the quiet before the storm, he wispered bemusedly whilst reflecting upon > a dozen fond secrets... No, tis the SPRINTLINK router whispering no packets while eskimo.com staffers rage to Sprint managers about major loss of internet service. .....................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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Fri Mar 22 05:42:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA24271; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 05:41:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 05:41:58 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603221319.HAA17119@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:45] Re: Bubbles X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 09:53 PM 3/21/96 -0800, Kirk wrote: >...derived an expected >5 degree C temperature rise in the PPC. The explicit cause is frictional >heating. >Please check my calculations for yourself. I'm not perfect (darn!) and >certainly could have made a mistake. Kirk, you forgot to mention that a 5 degree frictional heating delta-T, at 1200cc/min represents some 400 watts of power actually being dissipated in the cell and that would require about a 3000psi pressure drop across the cell (power = flow rate * pressure). Clearly this is not the case...I think they were using an aquarium pump. >Some experimental comments/questions. Scott, do you have measures of your >cell resistance just after assembly (and before any electrolysis) I've only observed the effective R under electrolysis-level voltages. I starts off at 150 ohms and climbs slowly to 170 ohms after 24 hours or so. SOme of the increase may be bubble accumulation...some may be due to hydriding the beads. I'll attempt to study the R vs bubble size more and report later...right now I'm trying to find out exactly what operating parameters cause the bead coatings to split off so I can test the new beads properly. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Fri Mar 22 05:43:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA24240; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 05:41:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 05:41:41 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Mihai Jalobeanu (ITIM)" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:44] Two papers X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Re: Current Contents Info. I have found two papers of potential interest for VORT(COR)/(EX) in Current Contents no. 12/1996: a) T Chou, EG Blackman " Magnetic field diagnostic for sonoluminescence". Physical Review Letters 76:9 (FEB 26 1996) pp 1549-1552 ( T CHOU, Cornell Univ, Atom & Solid State Phys Lab, Ithaca, NY 14853) My attention was caught by the KeyWords: CASIMIR ENERGY, GAS BUBBLE, DIELECTRICS Is this something interesting, friends? Hal, Mark Jurich? b)K Okitsu, H Bandow, Y Maeda, Y Nagata "Sonochemical preparation of ultrafine palladium particles" Chemistry of Materials 8:2 (FEB 1996) p 315 (K OKITSU, Univ Osaka Prefecture, Coll Engn, Dept Appl Mat Sci Gakuen Cho 1-1, Sakai, Osaka 593, Japan This material could be used in Arata Cell. Thank you in advance for any information! Peter Gluck From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 22 05:48:04 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id FAA21194 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 05:21:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA21152 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 05:21:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-2-088.austin.eden.com (net-2-088.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.88]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id HAA17185 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 07:21:00 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 07:21:00 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603221321.HAA17185@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST:43] Bubbles Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:53 PM 3/21/96 -0800, Kirk S. wrote on VortCOR: >...[I] derived an expected >5 degree C temperature rise in the PPC. The explicit cause is frictional >heating. >Please check my calculations for yourself. I'm not perfect (darn!) and >certainly could have made a mistake. Kirk, you forgot to mention that a 5 degree frictional heating delta-T, at 1200cc/min represents some 400 watts of power actually being dissipated in the cell and that would require about a 3000psi pressure drop across the cell (power = flow rate * pressure). Clearly this is not the case...I think they were using an aquarium pump. >Some experimental comments/questions. Scott, do you have measures of your >cell resistance just after assembly (and before any electrolysis) I've only observed the effective R under electrolysis-level voltages. I starts off at 150 ohms and climbs slowly to 170 ohms after 24 hours or so. SOme of the increase may be bubble accumulation...some may be due to hydriding the beads. I'll attempt to study the R vs bubble size more and report later...right now I'm trying to find out exactly what operating parameters cause the bead coatings to split off so I can test the new beads properly. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Thu Mar 21 21:53:34 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA12135 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 21:53:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 21:53:33 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603211731.AA09355@gateway1.srs.gov> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Kirk L. Shanahan" To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Cc: billb@eskimo.com Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST:43] Bubbles X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Hello everyone, {{Note: I originally tried to post this to VORTEX on Tuesday morning, but it apparently hasn't come across yet. I am trying this post to vortcor-list@eskimo.com. Hope it makes it...apologies if I somehow end up double posting.}} I just subscribed to VORTEX. Some of you may recognize my name from spf, and may perhaps remember my posts on the effects of bubbles in the PPC. I was pleased to see Scott Little's reports on his version of the Patterson Power Cell (PPC). His observation of a trapped bubble in the interelectrode region supports my contention that such things do happen in the PPC, and I have previously attempted to calculate what that implies. I thought some of you might want to see where I ended up. The short version is that I have used a chemical engineering equation for flow through a packed bed (which is what the PPC electrode bead bed is), under the assumption of a large bubble content, and under the general conditions of the Power Generation Conference demo, and derived an expected 5 degree C temperature rise in the PPC. The explicit cause is frictional heating. The equation I used is known as the Ergun equation, and seems to be a standard part of most chemical engineering texts on transport phenomena. The Ergun equation has two terms, which each are 'named' equations as well, one for laminar flow and one for turbulent flow. The laminar flow conditions do not produce significant heating, so I will discuss only the turbulent flow term, AKA the Burke-Plummer equation. To get turbulent flow in the PPC a significant flow restriction is required, as illustrated in the calculation below. The Burke-Plummer eq. is: lw(f) = 1.75 * L * u(bs)**2 * (1-e) / g(c) * D * e**3 where lw(f) is the frictional lost work 1.75 is an empirical constant L is the bed length D is the effective particle diameter u(bs) is the superficial velocity =(volumetric flow/cross-sectional area) e is the void fraction (should be between .3 and .6) g(c) is a dimensional conversion factor = 1 gm*cm/dyne*sec**2 in the cgs system I am primarily using as a reference "Momentum, Heat, and Mass Transfer", Bennet and Myers, 3rd Ed., chap 14. Above is a rearranged version of equation 14-23 from that text. The Patterson Power Cell demoed at PowerGen had 40 mls of beads and a diameter of 1" as I recall. This gives a nominal cross-sectional area of about 5 sq.cm. The bed length comes out to about 8 cm, but recall we also have an inter-electrode spacer. I have seen no info anywhere on it's size, so I assume 1 cm. The D is 1 mm, and I used e=.3, which is for very good packing. High particle uniformity is what Patterson claims, and that implies it should be easier to pack it better. I am using 1000 cc/min flow rate. The units of lwf are such that to calculate the expected delta T one simply divides by the heat capacity of the material, i.e. deltaT= lwf/Cp. Plugging all that in gives an expected deltaT of 1e-3 degreesC, not much. Since area works in as a square in the equation, a reduction by a factor of 100 in available cross-sectional area is required to produce a 10 degreeC heating. Using Skoog and West, "Principles of Instrumental Analysis", chapter 19, I can calculate the expected resistance of an electrochemical cell using 1M Li2SO4. The equation is: R = (1000/ C*lamba) * L/A where R is the resistance in ohms C is the concentration in equivalents per liter (2 for 1M Li2SO4) L and A are as before and lamda = the sum of the ion mobilities of all ions in solution. I used infinite dilution numbers for Li+ as 38.7 and 1/2SO4-2 as 80.0 (the one-half reminds you to use equivalents). The other trick, and I'm doing this on my own, it's not in the texts, is to account for the dead space occupied by the beads. If we have a void fraction of .3 then I think the correct thing to do is multiply the equivalents per liter by that number. So C=.3*2=.6. Again assuming 1 cm separation and 5 sq.cm. area, we calculate the resistance as (1000/.6*118.7)* 1/5 = 2.8 ohms. But the Power Gen electrolysis conditions imply resistances of 44 and 195. The ICCF5 data Cravens put up on the web also give around 40 ohms. Back-calculating the area gives a cross-sectional area of about .3 cm**2 for the 44 ohm case and .072 cm**2 for the 195 ohm case. Plugging that into the deltaT calculation gives deltaT's of 0.3 degrees and 5.2 degrees respectively. (BTW, the new conductive spacer beads make this kind of analysis impossible.) Considering all we don't know about the parameters of the cell (at least on spf, maybe you all on VORTEX know more), that is suggestive to me. We are more-or-less in the ballpark. Some trends leading to higher delta T: - higher flow (the '16' degree deltaT at PowerGen was supposedly done with 1200 cc/min) - lower available area (the essence of the bubble effect, also by cell geometry) - lower Cp (.95 vs 1...not too big) - larger interelectrode distance (a big unknown!) - smaller effective particle size - lower void fraction (not likely) All of those work on the factors controlling frictional heating. Another way is to work on the actual resistance term by decreasing ion mobilities. Interestingly, of the ion mobilities listed in Skoog and West, Li2SO4 is one of the lowest mobility pairs you can choose. Decreasing mobility always occurs as concentration increases from infinite dilution, but it can also be done by increasing electrolyte concentration and perhaps by altering the flow (higher flow means ion mobility in that direction is reduced (more than increased in other direction??)). Furthermore, the constant term in the B-P equation is empirically derived. The ChemE's have fit a large bunch of data and that constant gives the 'middle' values. I find it easy to believe that the CETI experimenters have optimized the heating effect, and a multiplicative factor of 2 or 3X wouldn't be out of line I would guess (but that is just a guess). (The most common range of values reported for deltaT lie between 1 and 5 degrees C. The 16 degree deltaT observed in the first PowerGen demo seems to have been caused by a much lower flow rate than was believed present at the time.) This analysis presumes reasonably high flows. Using a 10 ml/min flow didn't produce much heating for equivalent conditions in the calculation. (However, a lower flow could also lead to larger bubble content in the steady state...) But the data I have seen on lower flow rates also have lower deltaTs, in the region of 1 degree. DeltaTs that low are subject to other errors as well. And of course, there is always the electrolysis current which could be heating the cell as well. I guess the point of all this is to show that the "Power In" equation used by CETI to show 'over-unity' behavior is flawed by not including the pump energy. The Ergun equation is a direct attempt to calculate one term of the mechanical energy balance of a pumped system. The true "power in" equation should be: Pin = I*V + nW(s) where n = eta = pump efficiency and W(s) is known as the shaft work (after Bennett and Myers). (Note that there are other terms in the full mechanical energy balance equation as well, which would have to be included if significant.) Putting the pump energy term into the equation will probably reduce the Pout/Pin ratio to 1 or less. Please check my calculations for yourself. I'm not perfect (darn!) and certainly could have made a mistake. I have used this investigation as a learning experience, and I would certainly appreciate any corrections you may see. Some experimental comments/questions. Scott, do you have measures of your cell resistance just after assembly (and before any electrolysis) (also make sure no air is trapped in the bead bed) and during a run? Can you comment on how the resistance change is/isn't correlated to the bubble size? The Ergun equation is predicated on that fact that no channeling occurs in the bed. Channeling (where low flow resistance paths develop through the bed) would be expected if the packing and compressive forces on the bed were inadequate to prevent bead movement. Those of you assembling cells may want to worry about that a little. On the other hand, if I am right, you just won't see the 'excess heat' in the cell... --- Kirk Shanahan (My opinions ... noone else's) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 22 06:04:07 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id FAA25516 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 05:51:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA25505 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 05:51:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA288762677; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 08:51:17 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 08:51:24 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: Re: vtx: Falling electrons Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >This is a "Gedankenexperiment" =E1 la Einstein. > >Assume an electron falling toward the earth from outer space. It is >accelerating relative the surface of the earth. Does the electron radiate >away energy or is the electron in a non-radiating inertial rest-frame? > David, I believe the electron would not radiate. The surprising thing is that the electron would radiate if it is at rest on the Earth's surface. Many people refuse to believe this but when the electron is at rest is is acting as it is accelerating because of the gravatational field. The 1/r electric field, E, is given by: E =3D -a/r - (a dot r)(r/r^3) where the acceleration, a, and the spatial displacement, r, are vectors, and the charge has been set to unity. By the equivalence principal we set a to a =3D -g where g is the gravitational acceleration. There are a number of way to show that this field must exist. See if you can figure them out and if not get back to me. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486=20 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Fri Mar 22 06:28:01 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id GAA27616 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 06:06:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA27602 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 06:06:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA12304; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 09:05:02 -0500 Date: 22 Mar 96 09:03:20 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Shanahan hypothesis Message-ID: <960322140319_72240.1256_EHB30-2@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Kirk L. Shanahan believes that the excess heat observed during Power-Gen was caused by frictional warming of the water by the pump. He writes: "I guess the point of all this is to show that the "Power In" equation used by CETI to show 'over-unity' behavior is flawed by not including the pump energy. The Ergun equation is a direct attempt to calculate one term of the mechanical energy balance of a pumped system. The true "power in" equation should be: Pin = I*V + nW(s) where n = eta = pump efficiency and W(s) is known as the shaft work (after Bennett and Myers)." This is incorrect. The true power in equation is I*V; the electrical energy input into the pump. Some of this electrical energy is converted to nW(s), but you cannot *add* that mechanical power to the electrical power. That is like saying that the total amount of energy I exert on my bicycle is leg power + crank power + wheel power. No, the energy goes from legs, to cranks, to wheels, degrading a little at each step because of friction. You do not add them together. In the case of the pump, the energy goes from electricity to mechanical shaft work. You do not add the two up. In fact, much of the electrical energy does *not* go to the shaft work. It is lost as waste heat from the pump. Shanahan's hypothesis is wrong for three main reasons: 1. He has added mechanical power to electrical power, when in fact there is a conversion and a loss of power. 2. The Power-Gen demo produced roughly 40 times more power than the total power input to the pump, and 16 times more power than the total input to all components, including the inefficient power supplies. The Shanahan hypothesis is a violation of the First Law. 3. Other cells have been run in other calorimeters and configurations that have no circulation pump, and in some cases no liquid at all (in gas loading experiments). These other experiments also showed massive excess heat. - Jed From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 23 01:34:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA08356; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 01:34:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 01:34:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603221738.JAA02662@ix2.ix.netcom.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: Two papers X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > > >Re: Current Contents Info. >I have found two papers of potential interest for >VORT(COR)/(EX) in Current Contents no. 12/1996: >b)K Okitsu, H Bandow, Y Maeda, Y Nagata >"Sonochemical preparation of ultrafine palladium particles" >Chemistry of Materials 8:2 (FEB 1996) p 315 >(K OKITSU, Univ Osaka Prefecture, Coll Engn, Dept Appl Mat >Sci Gakuen Cho 1-1, Sakai, Osaka 593, Japan > >This material could be used in Arata Cell. > In the acknowledgments section of Arata & Zhang's paper of May 31, 1994 "New Energy From A Double Structured Cathode (DSC) Using Palladium Black" which was translated, they give thanks to the Daiichi Meteco Company, Ltd. for their help. I am guessing that company helped out in the fabrication of the DSC with its Palladium Black. -AK- From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 23 01:34:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA08394; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 01:34:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 01:34:19 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960322211122_72240.1256_EHB73-1@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Shanahan hypothesis II X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:VORTCOR-LIST@ESKIMO.COM [This may be a duplicate posting because I sent it to Vortex-L this morning. I want to get this message through soon because I think I misunderstood Shanahan's message and I want to post a correction before misunderstandings multiply. Vortex-L appears to be having conniptions again. Some poor telco technician is probably at his wit's end trying to trouble shoot the problem. Internet is marvelous but it is still in the pioneering stage. The World Wide Web is so slow it drives me crazy!] In my previous message I wrote: "The true power in equation is I*V; the electrical energy input into the pump. Some of this electrical energy is converted to nW(s), but you cannot *add* that mechanical power to the electrical power." Perhaps Shanahan had in mind the I*V electrochemical input. This is a negligible power level, a thousand times too small to explain the heat, so I assumed he meant the pump electrical input, which is the only thing that even begins to explain the heat, to within an order of magnitude. Scott Little listed another reason the hypothesis is wrong, which I should have included as point number 4. There would have to be a 3000 psi pressure drop across the cell, which is many orders of magnitude out of the question. Scott did not specify the reason this is so impossible. It is because the materials would not stand such high pressure. The tubes would pop off, the glass container would shatter. You could not even pump up the cell to 30 psi. If Mr. Shanahan wishes to continue this discussion of his hypothesis in this forum, I hope that he addresses the points raised by Little and by me. I believe we have pointed out gross errors in his arguments. I do not wish to be unkind or dismissive, but I think that Shanahan's arguments fall in the category of "handwaving" (highly speculative, incomplete, and unlikely physics). A person simply cannot ignore the fact that his hypothesis calls for a 3000 psi pump, or the fact that it is gross violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics because it requires the system to generate 40 times more energy out than the hypothetical mechanism puts in. I think that if we are going to have a fruitful, scientifically rewarding discussion here, we must ask members to try to maintain a certain level of rigor, and we must ask them to address what appear to be gross errors in their ideas if they wish to continue posting messages about those ideas. Otherwise the discussion will not progress, and the exchanges will become sterile. In previous e-mail discussion with Shanahan, I raised these same points that Scott and I listed here, but unfortunately he ignored them. I fear he might do the same thing here, as others have done lately, in which case this forum may degenerate into a polite version of s.p.f. If Shanahan disagrees with Scott and I, and he sees no problem with the fact that his hypothesis calls for a 3000 p.s.i. 35 watt pump that supplies 1300 watts of mechanical power, then I suppose we must politely agree to disagree. I shall not post any more messages about the subject if that is his claim. I will not press the issue. But I hope, in that case, that neither will he. Let us settle the issue quickly, and say that this hypothesis might be true under thus and such circumstances, and leave it at that. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:17:18 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id IAA05848 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 08:20:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout10.mail.aol.com (emout10.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.25]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA05804; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 08:20:36 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by emout10.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA26949; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 11:19:28 -0500 Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 11:19:28 -0500 Message-ID: <960323111928_359616416@emout10.mail.aol.com> To: GeorgeHM@aol.com, williams@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu, CldFusion@aol.com, david@vesicle.ibg.uu.se, vortex-l@eskimo.com, jbarron@gpu.com, Puthoff@aol.com, 75013.613@compuserve.com, tkepple@thirdwav.com, 72240.1256@compuserve.com, ross@pacificnet.net, fznidarsic@gpu.com, billb@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: TheEnergyGroup Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Phoenix & The Energy Group. I'm back from Phoenix. The climate is very nice there now. High's of 80 deg F in the day and warm nights. North Phoenix, where I stayed, is a very nice. One thing I noticed was that there was no spray paint on any of the concrete walls that I saw, not much junk along the roads, and the people seemed very friendly. I climbed to the top of the Cammelback mountain trail. That was rough. Phoenix is unique in that it has mountains in the middle of town. A public park consisting of a trail winds to the top of the mountain. Cammelback is the steepest. Health minded people climb to the top of the mountain. I made it to the top of Cammelback mountain. I saw some very healthy young ladies on my way to the top. It was a rough climb. It took me awhile. I came home to find my car buried in a foot of snow at the airport parking lot. I had to clean it off in a 20 deg F windstorm. Yuck. While in Phoenix I met Reed Huish. We had supper at Bennigans. I was impressed by Reed. He is a young man in his late 20 who has already started two companies. His first company is a computer software business. His second venture is The Energy Group. The Energy Group is a consulting and development company that partners with commercial establishments to reduce their energy usage. The group is doing quite well. It has a cash flow approaching $1,000,000/ year and is growing. Good job Reed. Reed intends to bring several new energy technologies to market. He has contracts with the inventors and sources of funding. Scott Little is going to Phoenix to test one of these devices. Have a nice time Scott...Can you make it to the top of Cammelback? Reed has a vision for the future. He expects his new energy venture to grow exponentially. I cautioned Reed that this line of development is wrought with setbacks and difficulties. I also went from early optimism to the point of giving up. Puthoff has been there to. Puthoff, who has been in this business for years, knows how difficult it can be. Reed and I discussed possible partnering arrangements. If Scott's tests are good, I may be able to help Reed. I expect that he may find a snag this time but, given a little more time, Reed may just do what he says he is going to to. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:17:23 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id NAA00492 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 13:56:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay6.UU.NET (relay6.UU.NET [192.48.96.16]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA00467 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 13:56:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay6.UU.NET with SMTP id QQaiih05094; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 16:56:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA67596; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 13:56:33 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L40P1A) id 350156130096083FEPRI; 23 Mar 1996 13:56:13 PST Message-Id: Date: 23 Mar 1996 13:56:13 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: vtx: Comet! To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/23/96 13:56:00 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 03/23/96 01:23 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: vtx: Comet! Much less exciting in Minneapolis area. White "smudge" in eastern sky. Since I live in western suburbs Mpls lights interfering. Maybe it has gotten better tha n two days ago. But, alas, we are "overcast" now. Since comets are speculated as iceballs, and fusion energy from the Sun makes them brilliant, would they be applied "Cold Fusion". MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 23 15:06:56 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id OAA10910 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 14:58:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA10895 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 14:58:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-6.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-6.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.6]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA02723 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 09:58:28 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Potapov Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 23:58:29 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <31548f8b.4045885@mail.netspace.net.au> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99e/16.194 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have been thinking about the Potapov device again, slowly putting together the pieces of the puzzle in my mind, and this is what I came up with. Suppose that the ZPE were tapped when tiny spherical water droplets grow from vapour. Because it contains a vortex in the centre, the YUSMAR(sp?) would probably contain a partial vacuum in the centre. If the main water flow through the device consists of cold water swirling around the outside, then a small amount of hot water injected into the partial vacuum at the centre of the device (at the beginning) would flash into steam. As this is drawn through the tube, it would cool and condense, forming small droplets that would grow with passage through the tube. If the ZPE were being tapped during growth of the droplets, then one might expect their temperature not drop as much as would otherwise be expected. Or in the extreme, they might even rise in temperature, if the pressure increased fast enough through the tube. This pressure increase is just another way of saying that the partial vacuum at the beginning of the tube dies away toward the end. This in turn is achieved by adapting the shape of the device, and the velocity of the water as it enters the device. If this theory is correct, then the following conditions should optimise the capture of ZPE energy. 1) The return tube is absolutely necessary, as it is used to inject hot water from the outflow, as a tiny jet into the heart of the partial vacuum created at the input to the device. 2) This return flow should be so small as to allow complete flash evaporation upon entry into the vortex. You don't want to flood the partial vacuum. 3) The pressure differential over the length of the device needs to be maximised. This can be achieved by injecting the cold water at as high a velocity as possible, at the beginning, yet ensuring that its angular velocity drops of rapidly in the rest of the tube. To this end, it may even be useful to place small "spoilers" inside the last half(?) of the tube, to disrupt the remains of the vortex at the outflow end. 4) The radiator in the return path is also necessary to ensure that a temperature differential exists across the device. This cools the hot outflow water, so that it can be reused as cold water at the beginning of the device. 5) It may be necessary to add a small auxiliary heater to get the thing started. This would be used to initially heat the return flow so that it can flash into steam. However once the device has reached normal operational status, it should be possible to turn this off. Then again, if the partial vacuum is strong enough, this may not be needed. Conclusion: The ZPE is tapped, because just a few large droplets of water flash evaporate, costing very little ZPE energy to remove molecules from the surface of large spheres, while condensation occurs in the form of millions of tiny droplets, each of which yields considerable energy as molecules are added to the surface of tiny spheres. BTW this also explains why there are anomolies in the steam tables. Now if I have made a complete fool of myself, it wouldn't be the first time, and probably won't be the last. :-)}}} Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://www.inett.com/himac Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:14:36 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id RAA00822 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 17:23:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from bos1b.delphi.com (SYSTEM@bos1b.delphi.com [192.80.63.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA00725 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 17:22:50 -0800 (PST) From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com Received: from delphi.com by delphi.com (PMDF V5.0-6 #10880) id <01I2OVPBWK4G988HDW@delphi.com> for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 20:22:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 20:22:24 -0500 (EST) Subject: vtx: ZPE: what is it? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01I2OVPBWTRM988HDW@delphi.com> X-VMS-To: INTERNET"vortex-l@eskimo.com" 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: Anyone willing to give me a brief definition of Zero Point Energy? From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:40:35 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id MAA21853 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:24:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay6.UU.NET (relay6.UU.NET [192.48.96.16]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA21823 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:24:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from prod1.epri.com by relay6.UU.NET with SMTP id QQailt17537; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 15:24:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from epri.epri.com by prod1.epri.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA65115; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:24:08 -0800 Received: by EPRINET.EPRI.COM (Soft*Switch Central V4L40P1A) id 535223120096084FEPRI; 24 Mar 1996 12:23:12 PST Message-Id: Date: 24 Mar 1996 12:23:12 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: vtx: Can I put out an unsolicited recommendation? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 03/24/96 12:23:51 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: Can I put out an unsolicited recommendation? - For any of the Cold Fusion/Free Energy folks doing real experimental work, and wanting to get into the 20th Century (21st cent?) economically could I recommend LabTech Notebook? The operating program cost $500. The beauty of this product is that they will send you FREE the Demo version with which you can set up the processing you desire, before you buy the product. You can then use the "demo" created file and as soon as you buy the product, turn it on and attach it to your data gathering board(s). Now the data gathering boards range from about $300 to $3000 these days, depending on the various features you want. Much of the type of work we would be doing can be done with boards in the $400 to $600 range, which will work in any 386,486 or Pentium type IBM Compatible. - I have recently aquired the "compeditors" demos for LabTech (I'll NOT mention those names, as I think that is uncouth....) Suffice it to say, as I have observed with two other SUPERIOR software products, I.e. MathSofts' "MathCad" (a fluid and easy calculational system that works with the symbology you already ARE familiar with, on the screen) and ALGOR's Finite Element Software (Pittsburg, PA), LabTech Notebook offers a totaly "intuitive" enviroment which is natural and easy to use.. - (Oh, I forgot two other products, "Visual Simulation", out of Groton Mass, a linear/nonlinear signal/systems analysis and Working Model of Knowledge Revolution) - If there are others who have the great distain for anything that harks of line by line, classical "programing" techniques (such as Mathematica, there, I violated my promise....sorry Tungsten Res.!)Then you will like the above products.... (All under $1000) and especially the LabTech for getting into the "state of the art" in data gathering/processing for experimental work. - MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:21:16 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id MAA22568 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:29:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA22480 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:28:24 -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 OAA01280 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 14:02:40 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 11:26:49 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Potapov Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The only post from either vtx or vortcor-list I have received since 3/22/96 was the very interresting post "Re: vtx: Potapov" by Robin van Spaandonk. I hope the logjam will break soon. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:28:28 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id MAA26972 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:58:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAB26921; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:58:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id MAA21121; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:58:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:58:06 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortcor-list@mail.eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Vortex-L versus vortcor-list 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: Working? To send messages to the VORTEX group, reply to this message. (So, if this message came from vortex-L, then vortex-L must be alive, and if you reply, your message might just make it through!) .....................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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 24 16:02:32 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA24901; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 16:01:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 16:01:23 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: bubble problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >Horace Heffner writes: >> The cathode and anode electrode plates were made from Vectorboard 1/16" >> thick punch board with .042" dia. holes (170H48WE) punch board, > >I was never able to verify whether it was the vectorboard or the >steel nut, but something discolored my lithium sulfate -- the color >looked like the vectorboard (brownish) but it could have been rust. >Anyhow, just something to watch for. [I used the vectorboard as >a "paddle" and the steel nut as a weight, to construct a stirrer >mechanism in a thermal dynamics experiment I performed on LiSO4 >1.0 molar in H2O, last December.] > >-- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - I put a roughly 2 cm x 4 cm piece into 50 ml of 1 m Li2SO4 for several days, and shook it up now and then, and there is no sign of discoloration in the electrolyte. The Vectorboard I am using is green though. It could be the brown you got in your electrolyte was rust though. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Mon Mar 25 02:34:22 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA16761; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 02:30:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 02:30:29 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: bubble problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 24 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > >Horace Heffner writes: > >> The cathode and anode electrode plates were made from Vectorboard 1/16" > >> thick punch board with .042" dia. holes (170H48WE) punch board, > > > >I was never able to verify whether it was the vectorboard or the > >steel nut, but something discolored my lithium sulfate -- the color > >looked like the vectorboard (brownish) but it could have been rust. > >Anyhow, just something to watch for. [I used the vectorboard as > >a "paddle" and the steel nut as a weight, to construct a stirrer > >mechanism in a thermal dynamics experiment I performed on LiSO4 > >1.0 molar in H2O, last December.] > > > >-- > > - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - > > > I put a roughly 2 cm x 4 cm piece into 50 ml of 1 m Li2SO4 for several > days, and shook it up now and then, and there is no sign of discoloration > in the electrolyte. The Vectorboard I am using is green though. It could > be the brown you got in your electrolyte was rust though. Gentlemen, please. This kind of discussion makes an electrochemist shudder. Generally, and especially if you want to do long-term electrolysis, you need a clean cell, clean electrodes, clean solutions. You use only inert materials and certainly keep away from plastics other than, say, PTFE. Even glass is suspect, quartz is to be preferred. If you must stir, use a glass paddle or a PTFE magnetic stirrer bar. A home-made paddle from a handy bit of plastic is just not on. Rust - there just should not be any, there should not be any metals in contact with the electrolyte, other than those you decide should be the cathode and anode. Certainly you need to make a connection to these - you wuill not generally run a long Pt wire all the way to your current supply, etc; but the connection must be made outside the cell, well away from the electrolyte. The pump, too, should not have metal parts in contact with the stuff being pumped; there are glass pumps or peristaltic ones (OK, you'll need plastic tubing, and PVC is just about on). Needless to say, the water should be distilled and the chemicals PA grade. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Mon Mar 25 07:18:17 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA19275; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 07:11:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 07:11:51 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: bubble problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 03/25/96 02:34 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: bubble problem Dieter is quite right. Although I have been using a lot of plastics in contact with my solutions recently---but the solutions are highly basic... No LiSO4 right now. NO discoloration of electrolyte, and my non-noble metals being CATHODIC, no decay on their part...Anodic metal being Pt, no problem with that either...MDH From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:46:43 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id LAA27902 for vortex-l-outgoing; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 11:00:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA27820; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 10:59:52 -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 NAA04735; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 13:59:43 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199603251859.NAA04735@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, 25 Mar 1996 14:06:51 -0500 To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com, vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com From: wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: vtx: anode beads, salt bridge, current and loading Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks for the replies regarding the possible role of conductive "anode beads" in the Patterson cell. I guess the general consensus is that the use of such beads is unnecessary and motivated (according to the new patent) by a desire to produce a "fail-proof" system. But I remain unconvinced. First, I do recall that this type of "anode bead" was used in the demo at ICCF5 last year. I don't know whether they were used in the SOFE and POWERGEN demos, but I think we can assume so. I also recall that at ICCF5, CETI would only say that these "ion-exchange resin beads" were "proprietary" - presumably because their new patent had not yet been approved. Second, It seems to me that in a patterson cell without conductive anode beads, the overpotential at the anode would likely be the limiting factor in determining the overall current density on the cathode side. In simple terms: the anode is too small. Please correct me if I am wrong, Dieter, but I think the current in the cell must consist primarily of protons generated at the anode by something like H2O -> 2H+ + O + 2e O2 bubbles off and the electrons (e) complete the (electron)ic circuit driven by the power supply. The H+ (probably as H3O+ or higher "hydrated ion") plus some Li+ ions (much less mobile than H+) form a (proton)ic or ionic current in the electrolyte. Protons arriving at the cathode undergo 2H+ + 2e -> H2 and H2 bubbles off (or H is adsorbed onto and absorbed into the cathode material) completing the ionic circuit. Notice that the electronic and ionic circuits are connected in "series". Therefore the total cell resistance is the sum of the resistances of each segment. But the "resistance" in the ionic circuit is the resistance to the flow of protons while the "resistance" in the electronic portion is to the flow of electrons. Where the meet, a chemical reaction mediates the interchange of the current carrying species. If the anode is too small (or if it is made of some unfavourable material) the rate at which "free protons" are formed might be the limiting factor in the total current (electronic and ionic). After some point, increasing the cell voltage does not proportionately increase the current because the anode reaction cannot take place at a faster rate. An "over potential" and a corresponding higher resistance develops at the interface between the anode and the electrolyte. In trying to encourage hydrogen absorption at the cathode, it seems reasonable to try to achieve a high ion current density. In order to avoid the limiting effects at the anode, the anode should be made as large as possible relative to the cathode - larger if possible. It seems to me that conductive anode beads would help to address this. The nature of the conduction in the anode bead bed is also important. The use of the turn "salt bridge", to me implies that the current here would be predominantly ionic but perhaps to exclusively so. I would like to hear more about would might be occuring here. Deiter, your comments? Third, the text of the new patent seems to suggest that the cell might continue to pass a current even after the cell has boiled "dry" because the conductive anode beads _are_ in electrical contact with the cathode beads. At first blush this may not seem to make any sense. Surely such an arrangement constitutes a kind of "short circuit" of the electrolysis in the cell! To me, the patent text is not clear on why this is desireable - suggesting only that this is a method to ensure reliable performance in the extreme situation of "boil-off". I think the "real" reason may be a little deeper. There were several papers presented at ICCF4 and a few more at ICCF5 that claimed to have measured the so called "Coehn effect" (see for example the paper "High power micro-second pulsed electrolysis ..." by Celani, et al. in the ICCF5 proceedings). The Coehn effect is the apparent ability of a palladium cathode which is carrying a high electrical current (which may be of either electrolysis or non-electrolysis in origin) to reach and maintain a higher loading ratio (H/Pd atom) than is possible with no "excess current" present. So I propose that this "short circuit", which is created when the conductive anode beads are in direct (but limited due to the presence of a coarse nylon screen) contact with the cathode beads, actually may play a significant role - especial during the initial loading stage. I can imagine that it may be a little tricky to get just the right balance between the "short circuit" current and the electrolysis current. Introducing a few non-conductive beads might help as would changing the physical compression applied to the cell. And of course the exact nature of the anode beads, themselves, would be highly significant. This suggests to me that it is important to pay close attention to what Dennis Cravens has said about the resistance measurements in these cells. Already, Scott has observed that it is difficult for him to reproduce these conditions with his present cell configuration (sans conductive anode beads). This might be more of a problem that he thinks. Cheers, Bill Page. From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 00:13:25 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA01777; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:09:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:09:50 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603251930.NAA11923@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] XRF analysis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I have performed a semi-quantitative XRF analysis on the ersatz beads AND on some real CETI beads obtained from an anonymous source. Both types of beads show about the same Ni signal. The ersatz beads show about 2x more Pd signal than the real beads. This could be misleading since the Pd signal is measured through the Ni layer but, since the Ni signals were similar, it is probably representative of the actual Pd thicknesses on these beads. The real beads have a trace of As...none showing in the ersatz beads. The ersatz beads show traces of Zn and Zr...none of these show in the real beads. Could these be enabling differences? Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 00:14:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA01825; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:10:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:10:16 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603251931.NAA11981@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] WPAFB & Ceti X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Recently it was suggested that Wright-Patterson AFB was looking at the CETI technology. I contacted the guy and here's what he said: >Scott: > Sorry to inform you, but rumor about us testing Patterson >cell devices is NOT TRUE. To my knowledge, no one on base here >is testing these devices. > I have had a short e-mail exchange with George Miley at U >of Ill. and have told him that I would try to put him in >contact with someone from our Power & Propulsion lab who would >have a direct interest in these cells. Miley has been very >busy traveling and I have not had a response from my latest >message of last week. I have been very interested in seeing if >he could supply me with specific & detailed information >regarding the performance of these cells. > I find it interesting that you have constructed cells of >very similar design, but have gotten only negative results >thusfar. > If contact is finally made between George Miley and the >people in Power & Propulsion, I will let you know in case they >could use your calorimetry expertise. > >Thanks >John Zetts > Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 00:14:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA01861; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:10:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:10:24 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603251932.NAA12093@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] bead report X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Interesting observation about the splitting of the bead coatings: 1. Fresh beads were started loading at 1000 on 15MAR96 at room temp and 20 mA constant current. 2. At 0815 18MAR96 they were still in perfect shape (no sign of splitting) and the electrolyte heater was turned on. 3. By 0944 18MAR96 the cell was at about 50C and the beads still looked fine. The cell stayed at 20mA and about 50C all day. 4. At 1807 18MAR96 the beads still looked fine and the heater was turned off. Electrolysis current was maintained at 20mA overnight. 5. At 0815 19MAR96 (this morning) about HALF of the beads in the cell have split-open coatings! Hypotheses anyone? Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 00:15:23 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA01896; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:10:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:10:33 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] anode beads, salt bridge, current and loading X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 25 Mar 1996, Bill Page wrote: > Thanks for the replies regarding the possible role of conductive > "anode beads" in the Patterson cell. I guess the general consensus > is that the use of such beads is unnecessary and motivated (according > to the new patent) by a desire to produce a "fail-proof" system. > > But I remain unconvinced. > > First, I do recall that this type of "anode bead" was used in the > demo at ICCF5 last year. I don't know whether they were used in the > SOFE and POWERGEN demos, but I think we can assume so. I also recall > that at ICCF5, CETI would only say that these "ion-exchange resin > beads" were "proprietary" - presumably because their new patent had > not yet been approved. I have the impression that "conductive beads" means ion-exchange beads, not metal beads. Correct me if I am wrong. > Second, It seems to me that in a patterson cell without conductive > anode beads, the overpotential at the anode would likely be the > limiting factor in determining the overall current density on the > cathode side. In simple terms: the anode is too small. Please > correct me if I am wrong, Dieter, but I think the current in the cell [...] > chemical reaction mediates the interchange of the current carrying > species. Pretty good description of what goes on! And you are right, except that here we seem to have the opposite: a large-area dispersed cathode (the coated beads) and a smaller-area anode. As well, there can be transport effects limiting the current, in this case transport of gas products away from the electrodes. [...] > The nature of the conduction in the anode bead bed is also important. > The use of the turn "salt bridge", to me implies that the current > here would be predominantly ionic but perhaps to exclusively so. > I would like to hear more about would might be occuring here. > Deiter, your comments? Well, if these extra beads are, as I think, ion exchange resin, then they would simply act as chunks of electrolyte sitting there, acting as somewhat poorer ionic conductors than the electrolyte they replace. They would be a kind of salt bridge, but, if you like, a very narrow and rickety bridge, going alongside a wide and comfortable path. If they are metallic, then I could imagine them as a way to disperse the anode as well, to increase its surface area. [...] > I think the "real" reason may be a little deeper. There were several > papers presented at ICCF4 and a few more at ICCF5 that claimed to > have measured the so called "Coehn effect" (see for example the > paper "High power micro-second pulsed electrolysis ..." by Celani, > et al. in the ICCF5 proceedings). The Coehn effect is the apparent > ability of a palladium cathode which is carrying a high electrical > current (which may be of either electrolysis or non-electrolysis in > origin) to reach and maintain a higher loading ratio (H/Pd atom) > than is possible with no "excess current" present. I reckon this Coehn effect is window dressing. I have read the Coehn et al papers, and what they did was simply to establish that in PdH, the hydrogen exists as mobile protons. This establishes what we, in 1989, already knew. Well , most of us knew it; there is SOME evidence that in SOME metals, the hydrogen exists as H- ions; my reading of experts like Baranowski and others tells me that this is much less likely for Pd, that in Pd you do indeed get protons moving about. > So I propose that this "short circuit", which is created when the > conductive anode beads are in direct (but limited due to the > presence of a coarse nylon screen) contact with the cathode beads, > actually may play a significant role - especial during the initial > loading stage. I can imagine that it may be a little tricky to > get just the right balance between the "short circuit" current > and the electrolysis current. Introducing a few non-conductive > beads might help as would changing the physical compression applied > to the cell. And of course the exact nature of the anode beads, > themselves, would be highly significant. "Short circuit" is like calling that narrow bridge a faster way to get across. It isn't. Unless... the beads are metallic. I suppose I should admit to a tiny doubt: I don't know any numbers on the ionic conductance of ion exchange resin beads; in principle, because the ions are rather closely packed in such resin, the conductance could be a lot better than that of a, say, 1M Li2SO4 solution. I doubt it, but I can't be sure without checking. It would then be a clumsy way to increase your electrolyte conductance, the extra beads would indeed act as salt bridges - a wide bridge going alongside a less wide path. Next time I'm in the library I'll see if I can find any info on this. One possible scenario is this: They used, at first, a layer of insulating beads to physically separate the bed-o-beads cathode from the anode. They found high cell resistance, and to bring that down, someone said hey, let's use ionically conducting beads instead. A normal electrochemist would design this cell in a different way, as a coaxial cylindrical arrangement, or parallel plates, instead of a linear sequence of electrodes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 04:55:42 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id DAA13646 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:45:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA13505; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:44:02 -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 GAA15035; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 06:43:43 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199603261143.GAA15035@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: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 06:50:52 -0500 To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com, vortcor-list@eskimo.com From: wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] XRF analysis Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >... >I have performed a semi-quantitative XRF analysis on the ersatz beads AND on >some real CETI beads obtained from an anonymous source. >... >The real beads have a trace of As...none showing in the ersatz beads. > >The ersatz beads show traces of Zn and Zr...none of these show in the real >beads. > >Could these be enabling differences? I think the As (Arsenic) in the real beads could be *very* significant. Arsenic is a very well known and effective electrochemical "poison" - even at quite low concentrations (< 1 ppm). It tends to kill the recombination of H to H2 at the cathode surface - presumably enhancing the absorption of H into the metal. You might be able to obtain a similar effect by the deliberate addition of trace amounts of As to the electrolyte. But reliably dealing with such low concentrations requires extremely clean and pure materials. Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 05:08:54 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id DAA15253 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:57:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA15231; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:57:41 -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 GAA15089; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 06:57:37 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199603261157.GAA15089@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: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 07:04:45 -0500 To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com, vortcor-list@eskimo.com From: wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] anode beads, salt bridge, current and loading Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dieter Britz wrote: >... >I reckon this Coehn effect is window dressing. I have read the Coehn et al >papers, and what they did was simply to establish that in PdH, the hydrogen >exists as mobile protons. ... It is true that what the Coehn experiments were attempting to do was to establish the nature of the mobile conductive species in PdHx - in particular he measured the electromigration of protons. This electromigration apparently has some interesting features - some of which were described in the Pons and Fleischmann paper at ICCF4. Since ICCF4, however, the term "Coehn effect" seems to have been used slightly differently. As I said, it now refers to the apparent ability of Pd to load and maintain a higher H/Pd ratio while the Pd is carrying a significant electrical current. I suppose that there is a direct connection, since electromigration can obviously modify the H/Pd distribution within the cathode. Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 07:31:46 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id GAA09313 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 06:21:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA09248 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 06:21:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id JAA02516; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:21:21 -0500 Received: from @world.std.com (world.std.com) by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA12961; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:18:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:18:44 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960326092532.413f69be@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] anode beads, salt bridge, current and loading Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Good point. It is even more complicated. The coupling of phonons to the H-isotope migration also has a role as discussed in my ICCF-4 paper "Catastrophic Active Media Theory of Cold Fusion". and then there are the anharmonic effects. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz At 07:04 AM 3/26/96 -0500, you wrote: >>I reckon this Coehn effect is window dressing. I have read the Coehn et al >>papers, and what they did was simply to establish that in PdH, the hydrogen >>exists as mobile protons. ... >>It is true that what the Coehn experiments were attempting to do was to >establish the nature of the mobile conductive species in PdHx - in particular >he measured the electromigration of protons. This electromigration >apparently has some interesting features - some of which were described >in the Pons and Fleischmann paper at ICCF4. >>Since ICCF4, however, the term "Coehn effect" seems to have been used >slightly differently. As I said, it now refers to the apparent ability >of Pd to load and maintain a higher H/Pd ratio while the Pd is carrying >a significant electrical current. I suppose that there is a direct >connection, since electromigration can obviously modify the H/Pd >distribution within the cathode. >>Cheers,>Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:40:07 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id HAA24510 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 07:42:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA24458 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 07:41:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA00632; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:41:29 +0100 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:41:29 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] anode beads, salt bridge, current and , loading In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19960326092532.413f69be@world.std.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 Tue, 26 Mar 1996, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Good point. It is even more complicated. > > The coupling of phonons to the H-isotope migration also has > a role as discussed in my ICCF-4 paper "Catastrophic Active > Media Theory of Cold Fusion". and then there are the > anharmonic effects. > > Best wishes. > Mitchell Swartz > > > At 07:04 AM 3/26/96 -0500, you wrote: > [...] > >>Since ICCF4, however, the term "Coehn effect" seems to have been used > >slightly differently. As I said, it now refers to the apparent ability > >of Pd to load and maintain a higher H/Pd ratio while the Pd is carrying > >a significant electrical current. I suppose that there is a direct > >connection, since electromigration can obviously modify the H/Pd > >distribution within the cathode. > >>Cheers,>Bill Page. That's strange, though (unless I am missing some conf-procs): the people who have achieved high loadings didn't do this. Those who put large currents through their cathode, hoping for some nonequilibrium effect, didn't get anything out of that either. I take the point, though and it does make some sense. Shake up those protons (or deuterons) and they might diffuse a bit faster, make way for more to get in there. In the case of very thin metal layers, you don't have this problem of course, diffusion is fast, loading must be fast. All this would be fascinating if only someone other than the CETI mob were to see some excess heat, or whatever. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 07:57:14 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA26302; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 07:53:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 07:53:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960326131403_72240.1256_EHB97-2@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Mizuno on line X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:VORTCOR-LIST@ESKIMO.COM; >INTERNET:billb@eskimo.com I am happy to report that Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno of Hokkaido University just got an e-mail address. He is one of my favorite CF scientists. I am busy editing the English in yet another paper from Mizuno, Enyo et al. This will make it a lot easier for me. He sent me the following inagural message: Date: 25-Mar-96 19:46 EST From: Mizuno Tadahiko > INTERNET:mizuno@athena.hune.hokudai.ac.jp Subj: E-mail open Thank you, I reseived your mail. Another news;you know Dr. Oriani,professor of Minnesota univ., he have replicated my proton conductor experiment and he finished to make a paper that is sent to Fusion Technology. He comfirmed excess heat evolution during one week in a few of my sample which were I have sent; almost 300 % of input power that means several 10 mW. Anyway that is very good news for me. sincerely Tadahiko mizuno Tadahiko Mizuno Department of Nuclear Energy, Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, Kita-ku, North 13, West-8, Sapporo 060 JAPAN Tel:1-11-706-6689, Fax:1-11-706-7835 E-mail:mizuno@hone.hokudai.ac.jp Now the question is: will Vortex work? I have been bombarding this address with messages to no avail. I tried to correct a mistake in one of my previous postings in two attempts, one to the old vortex address, one to the new one. Neither of them got through. I figure the Internet Gods don't want me to admit I was wrong, so I won't try to send that one again. I am off the hook! - Jed From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 07:38:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA26335; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 07:53:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 07:53:15 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960326092444.413f0b72@world.std.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Mitchell Swartz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] bead report- splittings and fugacity X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: The generated fugacities are enormous, more than enough to split open the coatings. And that exists even if they do not match the humongous theoretical Nernst-type fugacity calculations. In addition thermal inhomogeneities may play a role. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz ============================================ At 12:10 AM 3/26/96 -0800, you wrote: >this problem is being learned here as we read/write> > >Interesting observation about the splitting of the bead coatings: > >1. Fresh beads were started loading at 1000 on 15MAR96 at room temp and 20 >mA constant current. > >2. At 0815 18MAR96 th ..... was maintained at 20mA overnight. > >5. At 0815 19MAR96 (this morning) about HALF of the beads in the cell have >split-open coatings! > >Hypotheses anyone? >Scott Little >EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 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 Mar 30 05:22:45 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id JAA19426 for vortex-l-outgoing; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:57:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from amauta.rcp.net.pe (amauta.rcp.net.pe [161.132.5.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA19007; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:54:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from kamisato by amauta.rcp.net.pe with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #2) id m0u1cBq-00066hC; Tue, 26 Mar 96 12:05 EST Message-ID: <3158141B.4781@amauta.rcp.net.pe> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:58:19 -0500 From: kamisato X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com CC: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Hyperdimensional Physics 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: Perhaps there is link between the Cold Fusion and something called Tetrahedral Hyperdimensional Physics by science writer Richard C. Hoagland. http://www.maxinet.com/ufonews/plananom.htm. I want to know if anybody have more information about Richard C. Hoagland and his Hyperdimensional Physics. Eduardo Kamisato Lima, Peru. From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 14:04:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA01917; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:57:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:57:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603261700.AA24214@gateway1.srs.gov> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Kirk L. Shanahan" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Response to Scott Little X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > Kirk, you forgot to mention that a 5 degree frictional heating delta-T, at > 1200cc/min represents some 400 watts of power actually being dissipated in > the cell and that would require about a 3000psi pressure drop across the > cell (power = flow rate * pressure). Clearly this is not the case...I think > they were using an aquarium pump. Mea culpea! Yes, I missed that. After looking it over I agree that the Ergun equation seems to be incorrect in this instance. However, one good reason may be what Bill Page subsequently reported, that CETI has used conductive spacer beads all along. As I noted, I can't use resistance to extract free cross-sectional area in that case, and I can't do the calculation without some estimate of area. What kind of pressure drops across the cell are observed? Particularly in your setup, but any other info is welcome too, I haven't seen any such data yet. Scott also wrote: > Interesting observation about the splitting of the bead coatings: > > 1. Fresh beads were started loading at 1000 on 15MAR96 at room temp and 20 > mA constant current. > > 2. At 0815 18MAR96 they were still in perfect shape (no sign of splitting) > and the electrolyte heater was turned on. > > 3. By 0944 18MAR96 the cell was at about 50C and the beads still looked > fine. The cell stayed at 20mA and about 50C all day. > > 4. At 1807 18MAR96 the beads still looked fine and the heater was turned > off. Electrolysis current was maintained at 20mA overnight. > > 5. At 0815 19MAR96 (this morning) about HALF of the beads in the cell have > split-open coatings! > > Hypotheses anyone? First guess in unequal thermal contraction when you turned off the heater. If the temp of the electrolyte dropped, the metal coating, being in close contact with it and of higher thermal conductivity, would cool about as fast. The underlying glass bead wound not necessarily. With the metal cooling and contracting and the glass not, splitting would seem to be indicated. Also, the adhesion of the films to the glass may not be as good as to the Cu-flashed plastic. This could be aggravated by the hydriding as well. When you hydride a metal, you normally get a 10-20% lattice expansion. This leads to particle pulverization, and film splitting in thicker films. You noted that the XRF indicated that you had more Pd in your beads. If you crossed the 'magic line' your beads may not be able to absorb that expansion as the Patterson beads seem able to do. Further, I suspect that the Patterson beads are very high surface area. Reports on spf give Patterson a 30-year history in catalyst synthesis, and in that game surface area is of paramount importance. I recall one reference on spf to SEM photos of CETI's and Miley's beads, with CETI's being "mountainous" and Miley's being very smooth. (Unfortunately, I don't seem to have saved that, can anyone confirm this?) Distributing the Pd in a hill-and-valley structure should also allow the expansion stress to be absorbed more easily. One other note. I read some discussion in the most recent archive about what effect the use of glass vs plastic beads would have. One immediate difference is the density. Glass is more dense than plastic of course. In my further readings upon you pointing out my error, I discovered that there may be reason to believe the CETI bead bed is fluidized. There is an equation used to calculate the mass flow velocity needed to fluidize a bed of particles. It is: G = .005 * D**2 * e**3 * (rhop - rhof) * rhof * g / sf**2 * (1-e) * mu where G is the reduced mass flow rate (gm/sec/cm**2) D is the equivalent particle diameter e is the void fraction rhop is the particle's density rhof is the fluid's density g is the acceleration due to gravity sf is a shape factor, defined as the quotient of the equivalent sphere's surface area divided by the actual surface area (i.e. sf is 1 or less) mu is the fluid viscosity (ref. "Fluidization" D. Othmer ed., Reinhold 1956, p. 13) I don't know the density of the plastic beads, but the density of styrene is about .9 gm/cc, and we know the electrolyte has a density of .95 gm/cc. In that case the styrene would float, and the bed would be naturally fluidized I think. Assuming the Patterson beads don't float, their density is probably not too far from the electrolyte's, leading to a small delta-rho term and easier fluidization. If the surface area is large as I suggested above, that will counteract that, buy making the sf smaller, and the G larger. I tried a quick calculation using a delta-rho of .1, a sf of 1/4, an e of .3, and a mu of .8 centipoise, and got .2625 gm/sec/cm**2 as G. That translates in the Power Gen configuration (~5 cm**2 area) to a flow rate of ~80 ml/min. With the more dense glass substrate, it will be more difficult to fluidize the bed. Does this make any difference? I don't know. Interestingly, the point of incipient fluidization defined by G above marks the end of the valid range of the Ergun equation. Apparently there are ways to modify the equation to account for the new state, but I haven't tracked that down yet. However, for an ideal unconstrained bed (no grid on top) the pressure drop ceases to increase and flattens out. For a constrained bed, there is a significant change in slope of the pressure drop vs. flow velocity curve. How this applies to the Patterson Power Cell, where the bed is not only constrained but compressed, I don't know. Lots of "I don't know"s aren't there. I guess that's why I am still interested... --- Kirk Shanahan (My opinion's...Noone else's) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 14:08:35 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA02417; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:59:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:59:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603261702.AA24458@gateway1.srs.gov> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Kirk L. Shanahan" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Response to Jed X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: A Recalling that I wrote: > The true "power in" equation should be: > > Pin = I*V + nW(s) > > where n = eta = pump efficiency and W(s) is known as the shaft work > (after Bennett and Myers)." Jed responded: > This is incorrect. The true power in equation is I*V; the electrical energy > input into the pump. No Jed, The I*V referred to in my message was the electrolysis IV power, as normally included in the CETI calculation of excess heat. The first such attempt to include pump energy was the PowerGen demo, where the total current/voltage to the system was reported and measured. In this I follow Cravens himself. Quoting from his paper: " FLOWING ELECTROLYTE CALORIMETRY PROFESSOR DENNIS CRAVENS May 1, 1995 A simplified demonstration system was present at ICCF-5. The following data set is one that was taken immediately prior to this authors presentation: V=3.80 V, I= 0.12 A, F=10.30 ml/min., T1=24.3 C, T2=26.9 C, f=1.2 ml/min. (average). This and similar data sets were witnessed by some ICCF-5 participants. This specific data point represents an input power of: P=VI = 0.46 W. It represents a thermal output of: d[mc(T2-T1)]/dt = 1.77 W. " > Some of this electrical energy is converted to nW(s), but > you cannot *add* that mechanical power to the electrical power. Why not? It is the correct thing to do... The pump energy is converted to heat, and the PPC measures heat doesn't it? You do have to get the units on the two terms to agree of course. > That is like > saying that the total amount of energy I exert on my bicycle is leg power + > crank power + wheel power. No, the energy goes from legs, to cranks, to > wheels, degrading a little at each step because of friction. You do not add > them together. Sorry, the analogy is incorrect. > In the case of the pump, the energy goes from electricity to > mechanical shaft work. You do not add the two up. In fact, much of the > electrical energy does *not* go to the shaft work. It is lost as waste heat > from the pump. Hmmm, recognizing that the I*V power I was referring to was the electrolysis power, the eta (efficiency) takes into account the electrical motor losses I believe. Following the CETI ceonservative approach to energy balance however, the entire electrical input should be included, as was done for the Power Gen demo. > Shanahan's hypothesis is wrong for three main reasons: > > 1. He has added mechanical power to electrical power, when in fact there is a > conversion and a loss of power. > See above. > 2. The Power-Gen demo produced roughly 40 times more power than the total > power input to the pump, and 16 times more power than the total input to all > components, including the inefficient power supplies. The Shanahan hypothesis > is a violation of the First Law. > No. The Power Gen demo is *allegeded* to have produced those levels. In fact the bulk of the data suggests the demo was seriously flawed, and that all Power-out calculations are irrelevant because of an irrelevant flow measurement. Values regarding resistance, cell geometry, and probably temperature might be considered useable though (which in fact I did). > 3. Other cells have been run in other calorimeters and configurations that > have no circulation pump, and in some cases no liquid at all (in gas loading > experiments). These other experiments also showed massive excess heat. > Misdirection, Jed? My comments refer specifically to the Patterson Power Cell, no other. I believe I have seen what data is available on the Internet. I have seen no other. In fact, that data was all qualitatively consistent with my proposal that entrapped bubbles were somehow responsible for the observed excess heat. >- Jed Later, Jed wrote: > In my previous message I wrote: > "The true power in equation is I*V; the electrical energy input into the > pump. Some of this electrical energy is converted to nW(s), but you > cannot *add* that mechanical power to the electrical power." > > Perhaps Shanahan had in mind the I*V electrochemical input. Yes, as explained above. > This is a > negligible power level, a thousand times too small to explain the heat, so I > assumed he meant the pump electrical input, which is the only thing that even > begins to explain the heat, to within an order of magnitude. > Basically correct. However, even a miniscule power input will eventually heat up a non-flowing cell, which is what I believe to have happened at Power Gen. The Power Gen demo allegedly used much higher flows and obtained equivalent or higher temperature increases to prior reports. However, the electrolyte flow rate in the closed loop was essentially unknown, and thus the power output was as well. Therefore we must retreat to SOFE and ICCF5, where substantially less excess heat was claimed, and where no measure of the pump energy was included. Patterson's patents refer to a positive displacement pump. That pump is capable of depositing a lot of energy in the fluid. It cannot be ignored in the power-in equation. (In fact if the PPC bed is 'just' a packed bed, and *if* the cross-sectional area was what my calculation assumed, the positive displacement pump *would* produce 200 atm and the cell would rupture.) Presumably, Miley, Bowles, and CETI have pressure data such as this, which will settle the issue of whether the PPC is an o/u device. However, I at least haven't seen that data yet. (And I always reserve the right to change my opinion in the face of good data and/or technical argument.) > Scott Little listed another reason the hypothesis is wrong, which I should > have included as point number 4. There would have to be a 3000 psi pressure > drop across the cell, which is many orders of magnitude out of the question. > Scott did not specify the reason this is so impossible. It is because the > materials would not stand such high pressure. The tubes would pop off, the > glass container would shatter. You could not even pump up the cell to 30 psi. > In a separate message, I have agreed that the pressure implied by the Ergun equation is too large to fit the data. However, based on things I have learned since I made the original Vortex post, I have at least two reasons why the equation is unusable. Mea culpea! I made a mistake applying it here. I do not feel I made a mistake when I indicated, prior to any published reports of the Power Gen demo, several steps that could be taken to optimize the excess heat output. Please note: EXCEPT FOR THE INCORRECT APPLICATION OF THE ERGUN EQUATION, ALL DATA I HAVE SEEN IS CONSISTENT WITH SOME EFFECT ASSOCIATED WITH BUBBLE ENTRAPMENT IN THE PPC BEAD BED. What details we had about design changes were consitent with my predictions. Several other observations that were nominally 'unexplained' were also consistent with that picture. In applying the Ergun equation I was trying to quantify a qualitative model. I made the mistake of jumping to the conclusion that the Ergun equation was correct here, and I was corrected, as should happen in any scientific discussion. > If Mr. Shanahan wishes to continue this discussion of his hypothesis in this > forum, I hope that he addresses the points raised by Little and by me. I > believe we have pointed out gross errors in his arguments. I do not wish to be > unkind or dismissive, but I think that Shanahan's arguments fall in the > category of "handwaving" (highly speculative, incomplete, and unlikely > physics). Correct me if I am wrong, but at this stage, don't you think *all* postulates about how excess heat is generated are speculative? What qualifies mine as the one to ignore and denigrate? > A person simply cannot ignore the fact that his hypothesis calls for > a 3000 psi pump, Perhaps you have noted that I haven't ignored it. > or the fact that it is gross violation of the First Law of > Thermodynamics because it requires the system to generate 40 times more energy > out than the hypothetical mechanism puts in. > Actually, ignoring the pump enrgy input is the violation here. > I think that if we are going to have a fruitful, scientifically rewarding > discussion here, we must ask members to try to maintain a certain level of > rigor, Agreed. May I ask the same of you? > and we must ask them to address what appear to be gross errors in their > ideas if they wish to continue posting messages about those ideas. {Apologies to the rest of Vortex} Your statement here is patently unfair. You criticize my post, then criticize me for not reponding to the criticism. That's really dirty pool, Jed. > Otherwise > the discussion will not progress, and the exchanges will become sterile. In > previous e-mail discussion with Shanahan, I raised these same points that > Scott and I listed here, but unfortunately he ignored them. I fear he might do > the same thing here, as others have done lately, in which case this forum may > degenerate into a polite version of s.p.f. > > If Shanahan disagrees with Scott and I, and he sees no problem with the fact > that his hypothesis calls for a 3000 p.s.i. 35 watt pump that supplies 1300 > watts of mechanical power, then I suppose we must politely agree to disagree. > I shall not post any more messages about the subject if that is his claim. I > will not press the issue. But I hope, in that case, that neither will he. Let > us settle the issue quickly, and say that this hypothesis might be true under > thus and such circumstances, and leave it at that. > > - Jed The remaining paragraphs above are principally Jed's personal philosophy. His reference to email in fact were his simply restating the case presented by John Logajan, where he calculated a 666 atm pressure drop for the 16 degree temp rise observed at the Power Gen demo under the assumption of a 1200 ml/min flow rate. This all occured before I found the Ergun equation, and as I have stated, I calculated the temperature rise in the PPC from that equation without checking the pressure drop. Once again, I was wrong in that and John and Scott were right. What I find so interesting/distressing is that it seems to be so hard to get anyone to listen to me. I believe I have a qualitative explanation that somehow relates to the way excess heat is produced in the PPC. I successfully predicted design/operating parameter changes with that paradigm, yet when I posted to spf I was ignored. Do you know of any other predictive theory, qualitative or quantitative, that actually seems to work in explaining excess heat generation? Could it be I was ignored because I am seeking to explain the PPC in terms of "mundane" chemical engineering? Anyway, enough of *my* philosophizing. Here's an offer. I am new on this list, and perhaps I don't belong. I did presume you all would want to discuss things freely. Anyway, let me know. One word, or 20 pages I don't care. Send me an email at kirk.shanahan@srs.gov telling me to go or stay. After two weeks, on April 10, I will count up the votes (one man, one vote please). Simple majority rules. If there are more messages to leave than to stay, I'll go. Otherwise I stay and participate. That means 1 vote to go, and nothing else, means I go. In either case, I'll post the count. And I will particpate until that time. (Unless the moderator makes the decision for you...) -- Kirk Shanahan (My opinion's ... Noone else's) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 07:29:15 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA02891; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:02:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:02:35 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603261758.LAA22830@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] XRF analysis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 06:50 3/26/96 -0500, Bill Page wrote: >I think the As (Arsenic) in the real beads could be *very* significant. >Arsenic is a very well known and effective electrochemical "poison" - >even at quite low concentrations (< 1 ppm). It tends to kill the >recombination of H to H2 at the cathode surface - presumably enhancing >the absorption of H into the metal. THIS IS MOST INTERESTING, Bill! Exactly the kind of little trick that would explain why the ersatz beads haven't "ginned" yet. However, I don't think there is any mention of this ingredient in the patents! I'm virtually certain that the patent doesn't list it as a required element. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 14:12:25 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA03558; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:05:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:05:43 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603261851.MAA27331@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] another bead report X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I may have found a protocol that prevents the bead coatings from splitting open. Here is the latest history: 20MAR96 1132 - Load a fresh batch of beads into the cell, start electolyte flowing, electrolysis current OFF. 1220 - turn on electrolyte heater (takes about 30 minutes to reach 50C). 1447 - turn off electrolyte heater 1710 - turn on electrolyte heater 1810 - turn off electrolyte heater 21MAR96 0822 - note some darkening of the beads...no splitting. Heater on. 1045 - heater off 1346 - beads look fine. Begin 20mA electrolysis current, heater off. 22MAR96 0821 - beads still look fine. Heater on. 1610 - Heater off. 25MAR96 0824 - under electrolysis power at room temp all wknd...beads look fine. 0900 - start heating electrolyte 1806 - heater off 26MAR96 0832 - beads are still in good shape! Heater on. 1230 i.e. now - beads are now hot and still look fine. Total run time under electrolysis power for this batch of beads is now about 169 hours. Previous batches have typically split in half this time. At this point, it looks like cycling the temp up and down a few times before applying electrolysis current is what does the trick. Of course, it could be something else... Any other hypotheses? Any suggestions on how to confirm my hypothesis with the minimum number of experimental runs? Oh, by the way...no sign of excess heat throughout my experimentation thus far. However, I have just now gotten my data collection system working fairly reliably and I have yet to capture a bead-splitting event with it. Perhaps the beads split open in response to a massive excess heat burst... Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 18:47:35 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA29815; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:42:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:42:30 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960327020457_72240.1256_EHB57-1@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Important resources outside Internet X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:VORTCOR-LIST@ESKIMO.COM I wrote: "Other cells have been run in other calorimeters and configurations that have no circulation pump, and in some cases no liquid at all (in gas loading experiments). These other experiments also showed massive excess heat." Kirk L. Shanahan replied: "Misdirection, Jed? My comments refer specifically to the Patterson Power Cell, no other." I meant that the Patterson cells have been run in calorimeters without pumps. The gas loaded examples are primarily from Mills and Piantelli. I do not know if Patterson has tried gas loading. (But if he hasn't, he should!) "I believe I have seen what data is available on the Internet. I have seen no other." I think it is a mistake to limit one's information to the data available on the Internet. There are hundreds of important published papers with data that has never appeared on Internet. Furthermore, most of what has appeared has been anecdotal and incomplete. When discussing Ni-H CF, I think it is essential you read Mills, who is peculiar in some ways but darn good. "{Apologies to the rest of Vortex} Your statement here is patently unfair. You criticize my post, then criticize me for not responding to the criticism. That's really dirty pool, Jed." I was referring to previous criticism that you did not respond to in other forums and in private e-mail, but let the matter drop. "Anyway, enough of *my* philosophizing. Here's an offer. I am new on this list, and perhaps I don't belong. I did presume you all would want to discuss things freely. Anyway, let me know. One word, or 20 pages I don't care. Send me an email at kirk.shanahan@srs.gov telling me to go or stay. After two weeks, on April 10, I will count up the votes (one man, one vote please). Simple majority rules. If there are more messages to leave than to stay, I'll go. Otherwise I stay and participate. That means 1 vote to go, and nothing else, means I go. In either case, I'll post the count. And I will participate until that time. (Unless the moderator makes the decision for you...)" How maudlin! There is no moderator. Stay or go as you like. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:00:36 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id OAA08926 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 14:46:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from big.aa.net (root@big.aa.net [204.157.220.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA08841; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 14:45:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from Default (s3c1p5.aa.net [204.157.220.145]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA18352; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 14:44:15 -0800 Message-Id: <199603272244.OAA18352@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 14:43:45 +0800 To: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com>, vortcor-list@eskimo.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: vtx: The Muller GenMotor Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris commented about experiencing "mundane fatigue". that is about right...in all of my departments, except one: I have a new thread to introduce, namely, the Muller Magnetic Motor. I am in the process of structuring a website for this topic to provide grounding and points of common reference. Apparantly, Bill Muller's work is the base from which the Takahashi and the Kawai magnetic motors were developed. This is my observation, based on issues of timing and the interpretation of events from the mid 1980's. >From Muller, I now understand why the Takahashi motor scooter performed the way it did. Muller's final "paradigm prototype" is very nearly ready for tire kicking. It may or may not be over-unity in the "classical" sense. That pronouncement will be left to observers and evaluators. What is clear is that Muller has developed a "classically" new device - a genmotor. It performs either function, and does so simultaneously. Feed it juice, it rotates a shaft. Rotate its shaft, it produces juice. And it will do so simultaneously. It behaves like a motor and a generator and like neither. This is NOT a generator circuit cudgled into a motor setup or vice verse. Nearly all of it's operating characteristics are highly paradoxial within the framework of conventional theories of motors and generators. The rotor of a 450 hp genmotor can be freely rotated with one hand to generate electricity, and that's with eight to sixteen supermagnets on the rotor rotating through ferrite stators. It is easily controlled to be fully variable in speed and it can probably (this has not been tried) be induced to speed up to the point of catastrophic failure of the rotor/bearings. Its self apparent value lies in its lightness (25% of the weight of conventional devices) and its elimination (useful channeling) of nearly all back emf and substantial elimination of resistive losses, creating a motor or generator which runs cold for a WHOLE LOT LONGER on a given charge of electrical energy. >From the point of view of the Vortex/Free Energy Community, the negative in this device is that it is not going to be possible to replicate its function with commonly available materials. There are no "tricky" mechanical arrangements of materials and wires which result in this genmotor. Muller achieved his breakthrough partly by re-engineering the base materials to eliminate losses. The magnets are in the superclass and the cores have to be made out of a special metglass compound (de rigor) with the coils custom wound. It also requires a pretty sophisticated solid state switching circuit. One of Muller's unique discoveries (which has been patented alongside other unique discoveries by Muller) is that not all ferrites are created equal... For the moment, the question I leave you is whether or not Muller's motor is suitable for discussion on Vortex or Free Energy. Give the difficulty of replication of the device, those who get involved with it are going to have to go to the device. Please address this question. FYI: My role is communication. I am not an engineer/scientist/inventor on this subject. I have no personal claims which I am making about Muller's technology. Technical issues will be relayed to Muller Magnetic, but it may be a few weeks before these can be addressed. The issue raised by this post is: is Vortex OR Free Energy OR neither an appropriate channel for discussions and announcements related to the Muller Magnetic Motor? PS, sorry for multiple posting, I am quite uncertain of whether the software gods at Eskimo are favorably inclined to process the vortex mail at this moment. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Tue Mar 26 23:20:42 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA15780; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 23:15:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 23:15:37 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960327064727_100060.173_JHB35-1@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] [VORTCOR-LIST] another bead report X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott, >> it looks like cycling the temp up and down a few times before applying electrolysis current is what does the trick. Of course, it could be something else... << Perhaps the gentle cycling of temp gradually peels off the metallic coating from the bead surface so that all the metal is freed. This would allow differential thermal expansion between the bead material and the coating when you apply electrolysis or other more intense heating later on. If the coating is not fully bonded to the bead surface initially then differential expansion would create splits where the bond ends during rapid heating. Your gradual easing by alternating heating and cooling homogenizes the freedom of the coating and eliminates the stress raising discontinuities. Or not! Norman From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 00:28:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA26179; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 00:23:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 00:23:07 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] anode beads, salt bridge, current and loading X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: A On Tue, 26 Mar 1996, Bill Page wrote: > Dieter Britz wrote: > >... > >I reckon this Coehn effect is window dressing. I have read the Coehn et al > >papers, and what they did was simply to establish that in PdH, the hydrogen > >exists as mobile protons. ... > > It is true that what the Coehn experiments were attempting to do was to > establish the nature of the mobile conductive species in PdHx - in particular I seem to have seen this very same message yesterday, perhaps on the other list. Bill B, I think the two lists are not a good idea, we are not clear what their respective purposes are and are sending at random, or to both. How about tidying this situation up? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 00:30:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA26318; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 00:24:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 00:24:24 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] XRF analysis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 26 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: > At 06:50 3/26/96 -0500, Bill Page wrote: > > >I think the As (Arsenic) in the real beads could be *very* significant. > >Arsenic is a very well known and effective electrochemical "poison" - > >even at quite low concentrations (< 1 ppm). It tends to kill the > >recombination of H to H2 at the cathode surface - presumably enhancing > >the absorption of H into the metal. > > THIS IS MOST INTERESTING, Bill! Exactly the kind of little trick that would > explain why the ersatz beads haven't "ginned" yet. However, I don't think > there is any mention of this ingredient in the patents! I'm virtually > certain that the patent doesn't list it as a required element. They may not have known about it - electrochemistry is full of anecdotes of that sort. If you have access to Chuck Harris' Wais data base, get in there and check for "poison". There have been several papers in which poisons of various sorts were used to promote the ingress of hydrogen into metal, by inhibiting surface combination of mono- to dihydrogen. If my memory serves, McKubre et al tried it as well, but I think they used silicate, Al and borate to do it. Others have used As2O3 and (mostly) thiourea, both strongly adsorbed. This is a big area, or I'd suggest you experiment a bit, with classical adsorbates like Triton X100 or triphenyl phosphine. Don't just chuck in a bit of As2O3, the amount needed is likely to be tiny. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 05:44:07 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id FAA27241 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:30:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA27230; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:30:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id FAA02053; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:30:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:30:10 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L@mail.eskimo.com, vortcor-list@mail.eskimo.com 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 Wed, 27 Mar 1996, Dieter Britz wrote: > I seem to have seen this very same message yesterday, perhaps on the other > list. Bill B, I think the two lists are not a good idea, we are not clear > what their respective purposes are and are sending at random, or to both. How > about tidying this situation up? > Yes, right now the hardware situation has been fixed, and pipelined messages are spewing out. Earlier on the double-messages problem had only one cure: no messages at all. I assumed that subscribers would rather tolerate crazy delays and double messages than have the list turned off until the problems were resolved. Eskimo.com is still overloaded with a queue of days-old messages which are slowly being sent. It might be OK to go with vortex-L for now. First let's see how fast the turnaround time is for this message. The purpose of Vortcor-list is as we discussed a few months back: a low-traffic announcements list for subscribers who can't handle the large weekly traffic of vortex-L. Any message is permissible on vortcor-list, but replies and conversations should be directed only to vortex-L. We'll see how this works out. .....................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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 05:39:57 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA27832; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:34:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:34:11 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960327085810_100433.1541_BHG123-2@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Shanahan's comments X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To:vortcor-list@eskimo.com Kirk writes: "No. The Power Gen demo is *allegeded* to have produced those levels. In fact the bulk of the data suggests the demo was seriously flawed, and that all Power-out calculations are irrelevant because of an irrelevant flow measurement." I think you really have to show what was sufficiently bad about Jed's use of a measuring vessel and timer, that would account for so gross an error. We all agree that the PowerGen demo was 'seriously flawed' as a scientific experiment, but there is pretty general agreement that it is highly 'interesting', especially when placed in the context of other Ni/H system results and the reports of Miley et al and Bowles et al - who have been willing to go on national TV to say that their PPCs always produce excess energy. The three measurements at Anaheim: power in (to everything taking power), flow rate, and delta-T, are sufficient - in an ideal system, which we all agree this was not - to compute the energy balance. This calculation indicates over-unity. To show that it was not o-u, one must show where the measurement errors occurred. Basically you say that the flow measurement was all wrong, but I can't see how you justify that statement. "What I find so interesting/distressing is that it seems to be so hard to get anyone to listen to me." I'm sorry you find that distressing, but it's a fact that on these lists people discuss what interests them. If you don't attract comment, that proves nothing except lack of interest. I have often posted on these lists and nobody has responded. That distresses me not one little bit. "Could it be I was ignored because I am seeking to explain the PPC in terms of "mundane" chemical engineering?" I think it is more that we've covered all this ground so exhaustively over several months, and been unable to produce a 'mundane' explanation which is satisfactory to anybody. We are all in terminal "mundane-fatigue". In fact, our resident 'strong sceptic' - Dr Britz, who certainly doesn't accept the PPC as anomalous - has occasionally become a trifle testy with the mundane 'explanations'. I don't want to put words into his mouth, but I think his position is not so very different from that of many here - we have a set of results from various PPC experiments, and we want an explanation for them, or we want the thing working for us in our own labs, where we can rip into this thing and find out what is happening in there. "I am new on this list, and perhaps I don't belong. I did presume you all would want to discuss things freely. Anyway, let me know. One word, or 20 pages I don't care. Send me an email at kirk.shanahan@srs.gov telling me to go or stay. After two weeks, on April 10, I will count up the votes (one man, one vote please). Simple majority rules. If there are more messages to leave than to stay, I'll go. Otherwise I stay and participate. That means 1 vote to go, and nothing else, means I go. In either case, I'll post the count. And I will particpate until that time. (Unless the moderator makes the decision for you...)" This is very silly. You cannot expect that nobody will make robust responses to your comments. We are not a bunch of dewy-eyed true-believers here; there are people from a variety of countries, with a variety of views. Some are extremely competent experimentailsts, and some of those have shown themselves willing to work extremely hard - often in extremely difficult funding situations - on these projects. It is against that background that your messages appear here. You seem to be implying that Bill Beaty, who has all our gratitude for his labour of love in maintaining these critically-important lists, is going to chuck you off if you don't conform to some true-believer notions. If I have that right, then you owe him an apology. In essence, my message to you is: Get real. Warm regards, Chris From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 05:41:15 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA27962; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:35:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:35:35 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603271249.GAA21600@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: another bead report X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 11:15 PM 3/26/96 -0800, Norman wrote: >Scott, >Perhaps the gentle cycling of temp gradually peels off the metallic coating from >the bead surface so that all the metal is freed. I should be able to check this out by peeling a few of these "treated" beads. But I'll have to stop the experiment and open the cell to do that... - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 05:55:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA28104; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:37:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:37:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603271255.GAA21802@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: XRF analysis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 12:24 AM 3/27/96 -0800, Dieter wrote: >This is a big area, or I'd suggest you experiment a bit, with classical >adsorbates like Triton X100 or triphenyl phosphine. Don't just chuck in a bit >of As2O3, the amount needed is likely to be tiny. Thanks, Dieter...but remember, I'm a chemistry neophyte (a little book learning...not much actual experience). Please tell me a little about Triton X100 (is that a trade name for triphenyl phosphine?). Is it a commonly available "reagent"? Do I soak the beads in it or dissolve it in the electrolyte? What concentration should I try first? etc. I do have a milligram balance. Should I try a small amount of As2O3 first, since that would appear to be what "they" are using? - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 05:44:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA28349; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:38:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:38:46 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603271313.HAA22436@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] pressure drop across cell X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Kirk asked what the pressure drop actually is across the Patterson cell. In the case of the little cells, like the one I'm trying to get running, it is tiny. The flow rate is a measly 20ml/min which is only "drip, drip, drip" out the outlet hose. I'd guess the drop is around 1" of water column at the most. The PowerGen demo was a different animal. They ran about 1000ml/min thru that one but still I'd expect a rather low pressure drop, say 1 psi at the most. The flow work represented by 1 psi at 1000 ml/min is only 0.115 watts. PS. Don't let Jed scare you off, Kirk, you've apparently got some good analytical capabilites...welcome to the group! - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 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 Wed Mar 27 06:45:52 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id GAA06467 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 06:35:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA06460 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 06:35:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id GAA17852; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 06:35:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 06:35:26 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: vtx: 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 Wed, 27 Mar 1996, William Beaty wrote: > Eskimo.com is still overloaded with a queue of days-old messages which are > slowly being sent. It might be OK to go with vortex-L for now. First > let's see how fast the turnaround time is for this message. Turnaround time was a few minutes! Let's try moving the discussion back to vortex-L again. Vortcor-list has been having delays because of unknown software problems. .....................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 britz@kemi.aau.dk Wed Mar 27 06:46:41 1996 Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA08057; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 06:46:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA14342; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:46:06 +0100 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:46:06 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: William Beaty Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 27 Mar 1996, William Beaty wrote: [...] > The purpose of Vortcor-list is as we discussed a few months back: a > low-traffic announcements list for subscribers who can't handle the large > weekly traffic of vortex-L. Any message is permissible on vortcor-list, > but replies and conversations should be directed only to vortex-L. We'll > see how this works out. Maybe there are others like me. I use pine, and the easiest thing for me is to hit the r key for reply, and let pine sort out where to send it. I CAN, if I want to get complicated, change the address - but it's easiest to edit the message (remove some of the quoted stuff) and let pine take over again. So if something appears on vortcor, I'd tend to send a response there, just out of laziness. Just to prove that I can do it if I want to, I changed the address for this to vortex-l. {:] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 07:01:46 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id GAA09523 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 06:55:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from kemi.aau.dk (kemi.aau.dk [130.225.22.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA09496 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 06:55:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by kemi.aau.dk; id AA14136; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:55:47 +0100 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:55:47 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: Scott Little Cc: Multiple recipients of list Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST--> vortex-l] Re: XRF analysis In-Reply-To: <199603271255.GAA21802@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, 27 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: [...] > Thanks, Dieter...but remember, I'm a chemistry neophyte (a little book > learning...not much actual experience). Please tell me a little about > Triton X100 (is that a trade name for triphenyl phosphine?). Is it a > commonly available "reagent"? Do I soak the beads in it or dissolve it in > the electrolyte? What concentration should I try first? etc. I do have a > milligram balance. Should I try a small amount of As2O3 first, since that > would appear to be what "they" are using? That should have been triphenyl phosphine oxide, and yes, Triton X100 is a trade name for a surfactant. I wouldn't like to name a concentration, it'd be better to read a paper of someone who has used, say, As2O3. On the other hand, what the hell, 10^-5 M, there, I've said it. For TX100, well, maybe a 0.1% solution. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:01:33 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id IAA23990 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 08:23:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from gateway1.srs.gov (gateway1.srs.gov [192.33.240.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA23573 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 08:18:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by gateway1.srs.gov id AA14115 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for vortex-l@eskimo.com); Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:17:06 -0500 Message-Id: <199603271617.AA14115@gateway1.srs.gov> Received: by gateway1.srs.gov (Internal Mail Agent-2); Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:17:06 -0500 Received: by gateway1.srs.gov (Internal Mail Agent-1); Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:17:06 -0500 Alternate-Recipient: prohibited Disclose-Recipients: prohibited Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:12:00 -0400 (EDT) From: "Kirk L. Shanahan" Subject: vtx: Response to Chris To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:13:00 -0400 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal A1-Type: MAIL Hop-Count: 2 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris writes: > I think you really have to show what was sufficiently bad about Jed's use of > a measuring vessel and timer, that would account for so gross an error. Not at all. What I have to show is why the flow measurements he did are irrelevant. Or at least why I believe so, in the absence of accurate flow measurements, all of the following is mere "hand-waving", and I recognize it as such. I personally would call them "suggested explanations" though. Previously I have posted on spf that I went to a pet store and found a Magnum 350 pump and read its manual. The manual made several references to the fact that kinks, bends, and loops in the tubing were to be avoided. No numerical data was presented, and the manual was co-written for the Magnum 220 as well. The 350 and 220 are gallons/hr maximum flowrates by the way. Next to the Magnum pump was a line of pumps called "Powerhead". In those pumps' manual were actual pressure head data on the various models. The 200 gallon/hr pump had either a 1.3 or a 1.4 meter of water pressure head. available. Given that the apparent marketing feature chosen for this line of pumps was its "powerful head" of pressure, I will make the conservative assumption that the Magnum 220 can produce 1.4 mH2O pressure in a no-flow condtion. (I suspect this is *very* conservative, based on the work of Mitchell Jones reported in spf.) Now, 220 gallons/hr equals approximately 14 l/min or 14000 ml/min flow. But the total flow in the PowerGen demo was about 1400 ml/min, a 90% reduction. Note that this is the flow as measured by Mr. Rothwell et al, and it *is* the flow without any additional flow resistance from the remainder of the closed loop circuit. On page 6-7 of Perry's Chemical Engineer's Handbook is Figure 6-7, the 'characteristic curve' of a centrifugal pump. The magnetic impeller Magnum pump line are a type of centrifugal pumps. What that figure shows is that the rise in system pressure as you restrict the flow from such a pump is highly nonlinear. In fact, my estimate from that curve is that over 90% of the pressure head has been consumed. So, assuming 90% pressure head consumption of the 1.4 meters = 55.1 inches of water maximum, we get about 5" of residual pressure left to drive flow through *the rest* of the loop. Examining the photo of the PowerGen setup, I concluded that there was a reasonably long coil of tubing with one reasonably sharp bends in in (where the tubing entered the cooling stack), and that there might be a vertical height differential of a few inches between the top of the liquid in the reservoir and the point where the flow emptied into the reservoir. I then attempted a rough calculation of flow resistance offered by that tubing. I estimated the bend was worth about an inch of water, and that the tubing wasn't too significant. So that leaves a little under 4 inches of water pressure left as a driving force, from which we subtract any vertical height difference in the flow outlet and reservoir level. How much would that add up to? 20%, 50% or 100% of what was left? What if the head pressure is actually 1.3 m or 4" less? What is the pressure loss is 93%, or about 2" more? I believe these considerations alone make the flowrate in the PowerGen demo indeterminate (note: not necessarily zero). Subsequently, Mr. Akira Kawasaki supplied John Logajan with an image composed of several photographs he took of the apparatus. Those photos appeared to show a "present one minute and not the next" kink in the return flow line past the point where Mr. Rothwell measured the flow. A true kink is a major flow restriction, as I am sure anyone who has cut off flow from a garden hose by bending knows. That kink alone would be more than enough to stop any remaining flow. So, to summarize, the PowerGen demo used a pump in such a condition that it was very near to the limit of its abilities to deliver flow. I believe that the flow measurement condition used by the demonstrators did not represent the flow in the closed loop. Further the electrolysis power used is very close to what it would take to reach the temperatures observed asuming a low or very low flow. Chris also wrote: > We all agree that the PowerGen demo was 'seriously flawed' as a scientific > experiment, but there is pretty general agreement that it is highly > 'interesting', especially when placed in the context of other Ni/H system > results and the reports of Miley et al and Bowles et al - who have been > willing to go on national TV to say that their PPCs always produce excess > energy. Agreed. I anxiously await the full papers, or even any scrap of data. {{snip}} > I think it is more that we've covered all this ground so exhaustively over > several months, and been unable to produce a 'mundane' explanation which is > satisfactory to anybody. We are all in terminal "mundane-fatigue". In fact, > our resident 'strong sceptic' - Dr Britz, who certainly doesn't accept the > PPC as anomalous - has occasionally become a trifle testy with the mundane > 'explanations'. Well, as I said, perhaps I don't belong then. I prefer to try valiantly to find explanations that do not require rewriting thermodynamics and/or quantum mechanics and/or relativity, etc. And I am stubborn. Cast your vote. > I don't want to put words into his mouth, but I think his > position is not so very different from that of many here - we have a set of > results from various PPC experiments, and we want an explanation for them, > or we want the thing working for us in our own labs, where we can rip into > this thing and find out what is happening in there. Agreed, alternatively full scientific papers discussing the device would be useful. {{snip}} > This is very silly. You cannot expect that nobody will make robust > responses to your comments. Robust responses are welcome. If it ever makes it out, you will see my response to Scott Little is hopefully more in line. Interestingly, I mailed the two response at the same time, one made it and one didn't. Murphy strikes again. {{snip}} > You seem to be implying that > Bill Beaty, who has all our gratitude for his labour of love in maintaining > these critically-important lists, is going to chuck you off if you don't > conform to some true-believer notions. If I have that right, then you owe > him an apology. No, I was implying that I knew that post was marginal with respect to the general rules of the list. I have heard of some very strictly moderated lists, and was simply wondering if I had "really" crossed the line. However, Mr. Rothwell's response to my post contained no new information and lots of innuendos and denigrating terms, which I found offensive. So, I responded. Personally, I felt Mr. Rothwell crossed that line. {{snip}} ---- Kirk Shanahan (My opinions...noone else's) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:01:51 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id HAA14513 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:28:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA14455 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:27:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA20975; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:26:28 -0500 Date: 27 Mar 96 10:22:11 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Big Gun at L.L. article Message-ID: <960327152210_72240.1256_EHB120-2@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex There has been a lot of talk in the newspapers about this big gun experiment at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, in which they create metalic hydrogen at very high pressures. Yesterday, March 26, The New York Times had an article titled "Big Gun Makes Hydrogen Into a Metal" by Malcolm W. Browne. Here is the lead paragraph: "Using a 60-foot-long gun, physicists at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory have created a metallic form of hydrogen. Their results, they believe, will compel planetary scientists to revise conventional notions about the inner structures and magnetic fields of Jupiter and similar giant planets. The metallization of hydrogen was reported in the journal Physical Review Letters and at a meeting last week of the American Physical Society by Dr. William J. Nellis and his colleagues at the Livermore laboratory in California. For a fraction of a second, the experiment converted liquid molecular hydrogen -- normally, a nonconductor of electricity -- into an excellent conductor, presumably a metal." The conversion occurred, moreover, at a pressure only about half as great as theorists had predicted . . . They say it might even be a superconductor, which would not surprise me. There are some indications that ultra loaded metal hydrides are also superconducting. The article says: "The Livermore group found that the electrical resistance of liquid hydrogen fell to one ten thousandth of its normal value when the shock pressure-the pressure reached when struck by a very high speed projectile-of the liquid reached 1.4 megabars, or 1.4 million times the pressure of Earth's atmosphere at sea level." They achieve these high pressures with a 60 foot gun contraption that must cost a fortune. The sample they create lasts for only a fraction of a second. Hey, guys, there *is* an easier way! Lots of easier ways: electrolysis, gas loading, ion beam loading, microbubble collapse . . . they should consult with the CF people. The article concludes on a whimsical note, speculating about what metalized hydrogen must be like, which is difficult to say when your sample disappears in a fraction of a second: Metallic hydrogen might be chemically similar to the group of elements called alkali metals, which Include lithium, sodium and potassium. "It might even be silvery," Dr. Nellis said, "but I'm not going to make any guesses about it until I get a piece of it in my hand, and that may be never." - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:50:35 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id HAA19306 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:55:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA19260 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:55:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-6-185.austin.eden.com (net-6-185.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.185]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id JAA02786 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 09:54:42 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 09:54:42 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603271554.JAA02786@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: vtx: today's bead report Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This AM my present cellfull of beads are still in good shape. Thanks for all the suggested hypotheses. Kirk's stress-relieving idea sounds pretty good. Chris, good to see you back...you haven't succumbed to mad cow disease yet? Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 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 Mar 30 05:50:53 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id KAA22664 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:19:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA22552; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:18:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-6-185.austin.eden.com (net-3-098.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.98]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id MAA15597; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 12:18:37 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 12:18:37 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603271818.MAA15597@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortcor-list@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] pressure drop across cell Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 07:35 3/27/96 -0900, Horace wrote: >If I had more time now I >would have been interrested in asking a few questions and learning >something, but I have a table full of onery uncoorperative paraphenalia to >contend with at the moment! 8^) I couldn't keep from smiling when I read this. Misery does indeed love company. Welcome to the group of people who actually try to make calorimetric measurements. I look forward to your reactions when you get to the calibration/verification stage....:-) Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 11:49:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA04413; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:42:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:42:29 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: William Beaty To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] Response to Jed X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 26 Mar 1996, Kirk L. Shanahan wrote: > Anyway, enough of *my* philosophizing. Here's an offer. I am new on this > list, and perhaps I don't belong. I did presume you all would want to discuss > things freely. Anyway, let me know. One word, or 20 pages I don't care. > Send me an email at kirk.shanahan@srs.gov telling me to go or stay. After two > weeks, on April 10, I will count up the votes (one man, one vote please). > Simple majority rules. If there are more messages to leave than to stay, I'll > go. Otherwise I stay and participate. That means 1 vote to go, and nothing > else, means I go. In either case, I'll post the count. And I will particpate > until that time. (Unless the moderator makes the decision for you...) The list owner (me) frowns on flamewars and debunkery, but I've yet to throw anyone off. See ZEN AND THE ART OF DEBUNKERY for an analysis of the debunker's art. ....................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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 11:51:28 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA04866; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:44:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:44:52 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960327153238_102021.3045_EHT142-1@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] XRF Analysis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Hio Scott! Scott wrote, >> should I try some As2O3? << By all means, And you might throw in some old lace. Just kidding, Fred From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 11:51:10 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA05116; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:45:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:45:49 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603271818.MAA15597@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] pressure drop across cell X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 07:35 3/27/96 -0900, Horace wrote: >If I had more time now I >would have been interrested in asking a few questions and learning >something, but I have a table full of onery uncoorperative paraphenalia to >contend with at the moment! 8^) I couldn't keep from smiling when I read this. Misery does indeed love company. Welcome to the group of people who actually try to make calorimetric measurements. I look forward to your reactions when you get to the calibration/verification stage....:-) Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 11:54:14 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA05460; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:47:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:47:10 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603271833.KAA01396@ix11.ix.netcom.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Bead bubbles and Arsenic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jed & Scott, Jed, at the Power-Gen demonstration which you measured and witnessed quite intensively, were there any serious bubble clogging problem in the Patterson cell? It was a clogging problem mentioned here on the Vortex-Vortcor by people using the ersatz beads. I did not think there were any while I was there.. And I did not see any mention of it in your report posted in Logajan's web site. Perhaps the Arsenic presence in the Patterson beads (actually in the beads or in the solution?) that Scott found in the XRF ray study may insicate why the Patterson cell loaded in and produced excess heat and made fewer bubbles. -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 13:18:15 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id NAA20049 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 13:00:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA19981 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 13:00:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id PAA10110; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:59:59 -0500 Received: from @world.std.com (world.std.com) by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA10449; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:57:16 -0500 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:57:16 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960327160405.3e6f67f4@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: vtx: Re: XRF analysis Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 03:55 PM 3/27/96 +0100, you wrote: >On Wed, 27 Mar 1996, Scott Little wrote: > >[...] >> Thanks, Dieter...but remember, I'm a chemistry neophyte (a little book >> learning...not much actual experience). Please tell me a little about >> Triton X100 (is that a trade name for triphenyl phosphine?). Is it a >> commonly available "reagent"? Do I soak the beads in it or dissolve it in >> the electrolyte? What concentration should I try first? etc. I do have a >> milligram balance. Should I try a small amount of As2O3 first, since that >> would appear to be what "they" are using? > >That should have been triphenyl phosphine oxide, and yes, Triton X100 is a >trade name for a surfactant. I wouldn't like to name a concentration, it'd >be better to read a paper of someone who has used, say, As2O3. On the other >hand, what the hell, 10^-5 M, there, I've said it. For TX100, well, maybe >a 0.1% solution. >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >| Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | >| Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | >| Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Be careful you folks. Some of these materials, and others used to increase throwing power are very toxic. Arsenic is the number 1 toxic material to children. NOTA BENE: Only 100 milligrams is an acute toxic dose in adults. chronic arsenic poisoning is insidious and the symptoms include weakness, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, sometimes constipation, and inflamation of the eyes and throat. other changes are subtle but signs include skin pigmentation changes. please be careful. treatment of poisoning is complicated requires a physician, should be avoid whenever possible, and can include intramuscular injection of dimercaprol in oil. Thanks for listening. Dr. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 05:51:04 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id QAA00118 for vortex-l-outgoing; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 16:23:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA29941 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 16:23:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-6-185.austin.eden.com (net-7-202.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.202]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id SAA16676 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 18:22:43 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 18:22:43 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603280022.SAA16676@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: vtx: Re: XRF analysis Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 15:57 3/27/96 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Be careful you folks. Some of these materials, and others used to >increase throwing power are very toxic. Thank you for the reminder. I've handled lots and lots of toxic compounds over the years (mainly doing XRF application studies) and have a good sense of proper handling techniques. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 20:43:41 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA01743; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:38:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:38:28 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] [VORTCOR-LIST] Response to Scott Little X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: "Kirk L. Shanahan" wrote: > is the density. Glass is more dense than plastic of course. In my further > readings upon you pointing out my error, I discovered that there may be > reason to believe the CETI bead bed is fluidized. The Patterson patents describe both a packed bead embodiment and a fluidized bed embodiment. -- - 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 vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 20:43:40 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA01870; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:39:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:39:07 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960327205203_72240.1256_EHB114-1@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Bead bubbles and Arsenic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:VORTCOR-LIST@ESKIMO.COM Akira Kawasaki asks: "Jed, at the Power-Gen demonstration which you measured and witnessed quite intensively, were there any serious bubble clogging problem in the Patterson cell?" I dunno. The cell was covered over, I could not see inside it. At that flow rate and electrolysis power level, I doubt bubbles would be a problem. It is a shame the thing was covered. I did not see any problems with bubbles in the external tubes, but they had a heck of a time eliminating them. Removing large air bubbles is a tedious and exacting chore with a flow calorimeter. At one point while they were doing that Dennins accidentally sprayed electrolyte all over Paul's pants. Poor fellow! (I think we are talking about electrolysis bubbles here, not air bubbles. They can be a real pain in the butt. They can get into the works and expose the thermocouples.) - Jed From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 20:45:22 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA01892; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:39:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:39:16 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603272244.OAA18352@big.aa.net> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] The Muller GenMotor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Chris commented about experiencing "mundane fatigue". that is about right...in all of my departments, except one: I have a new thread to introduce, namely, the Muller Magnetic Motor. I am in the process of structuring a website for this topic to provide grounding and points of common reference. Apparantly, Bill Muller's work is the base from which the Takahashi and the Kawai magnetic motors were developed. This is my observation, based on issues of timing and the interpretation of events from the mid 1980's. >From Muller, I now understand why the Takahashi motor scooter performed the way it did. Muller's final "paradigm prototype" is very nearly ready for tire kicking. It may or may not be over-unity in the "classical" sense. That pronouncement will be left to observers and evaluators. What is clear is that Muller has developed a "classically" new device - a genmotor. It performs either function, and does so simultaneously. Feed it juice, it rotates a shaft. Rotate its shaft, it produces juice. And it will do so simultaneously. It behaves like a motor and a generator and like neither. This is NOT a generator circuit cudgled into a motor setup or vice verse. Nearly all of it's operating characteristics are highly paradoxial within the framework of conventional theories of motors and generators. The rotor of a 450 hp genmotor can be freely rotated with one hand to generate electricity, and that's with eight to sixteen supermagnets on the rotor rotating through ferrite stators. It is easily controlled to be fully variable in speed and it can probably (this has not been tried) be induced to speed up to the point of catastrophic failure of the rotor/bearings. Its self apparent value lies in its lightness (25% of the weight of conventional devices) and its elimination (useful channeling) of nearly all back emf and substantial elimination of resistive losses, creating a motor or generator which runs cold for a WHOLE LOT LONGER on a given charge of electrical energy. >From the point of view of the Vortex/Free Energy Community, the negative in this device is that it is not going to be possible to replicate its function with commonly available materials. There are no "tricky" mechanical arrangements of materials and wires which result in this genmotor. Muller achieved his breakthrough partly by re-engineering the base materials to eliminate losses. The magnets are in the superclass and the cores have to be made out of a special metglass compound (de rigor) with the coils custom wound. It also requires a pretty sophisticated solid state switching circuit. One of Muller's unique discoveries (which has been patented alongside other unique discoveries by Muller) is that not all ferrites are created equal... For the moment, the question I leave you is whether or not Muller's motor is suitable for discussion on Vortex or Free Energy. Give the difficulty of replication of the device, those who get involved with it are going to have to go to the device. Please address this question. FYI: My role is communication. I am not an engineer/scientist/inventor on this subject. I have no personal claims which I am making about Muller's technology. Technical issues will be relayed to Muller Magnetic, but it may be a few weeks before these can be addressed. The issue raised by this post is: is Vortex OR Free Energy OR neither an appropriate channel for discussions and announcements related to the Muller Magnetic Motor? PS, sorry for multiple posting, I am quite uncertain of whether the software gods at Eskimo are favorably inclined to process the vortex mail at this moment. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Wed Mar 27 20:44:05 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA01903; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:39:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:39:20 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <3159DFBB.5BFA@amauta.rcp.net.pe> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Eduardo Kamisato To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] hyperdimensional physics X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Perhaps there is link between the Cold Fusion and something called Tetrahedral Hyperdimensional Physics by science writer Richard C. Hoagland. http://www.maxinet.com/ufonews/plananom.htm I want to know if anybody have more information about Richard C. Hoagland and his Hyperdimensional Physics. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:02:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id AAA00921 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:47:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA00620 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:37:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id DAA27879; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 03:36:30 -0500 Date: 28 Mar 96 03:34:47 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: The Muller GenMotor Message-ID: <960328083447_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: Michael said, >> Apparantly, Bill Muller's work is the base from which the Takahashi and the Kawai magnetic motors were developed. This is my observation, based on issues of timing and the interpretation of events from the mid 1980's. << Have you included the works of Adams and Aspden in your analysis? From my own investigations, together with Chris Tinsley and Morriss, this subject has been done to death over the last few years, with no satisfactory ou conclusion. Where is Muller located and what are his credentials? If I should know him by repute I apologize in advance. Norman. P.S. I will use vortex-l this time! From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:10:46 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id JAA10495 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 09:39:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from dgs.drenet.dnd.ca (dgs.drenet.dnd.ca [192.12.98.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA10447 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 09:39:23 -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 MAA19196 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 12:39:15 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199603281739.MAA19196@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: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 12:46:28 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) Subject: Re: vtx: Re: XRF analysis Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michell Swartz wrote: > ... > Be careful you folks. Some of these materials, and others used to >increase throwing power are very toxic. > > Arsenic is the number 1 toxic material to children. > > NOTA BENE: Only 100 milligrams is an acute toxic dose in adults. > ... In what should probably be considered the "bible" of electrochemistry, Bockris and Reddy's "Modern Electrochemistry", Plenum 1973, Volume 2, Section 10.4.5 "An Electrodic Method of Purifying Solutions" there is a nice discussion of using pre-electrolysis with a "scavenger" electrode to prepare ultra-pure solutions. They write: Electrodic methods for the purification of solutions are in extensive use today; among the first to use these methods were Lewina, in the purification of alcohols, and Jaffe, in the cleansing of water and other solutions utilizing very high potentials (2000 V). Their rational introduction into studies of electrode kinetics at solid electrodes was first carried out by Conway [B.E. Conway, Theory and Principles of Electrode Processes, The Ronald Press Co., 1965], who showed that hydrogen evolution on nickel electrodes was sensitive to solution concentrations of 10^-10 mole/liter of As2O3 and other "poisons".** And their footnote ** is interesting: ** It is a most intriguing point that the classical Agatha Christie poisons are just those substances which seem most able to slow down interfacial electron-transfer reactions. This point must be placed along side the observations of Srinivasan et al. that the energy-conversion efficiency situation in the body if such that *only* electrochemical mechanisms of conversion of food to power are consistent with all the facts. Are there electrodic mechanisms to many life processes? What makes arsenic, cyanide, etc., so effective in sume small concentrations? Is it entirely coincidental that such poisons in the electrodic situation often accelerate reactions in extremely small concentrations [i.e. 10^-10 mole/liter] and reduce their rates at small concentrations [i.e. 10^-6 mole/liter], while some well-known biological poisons - strychnine and arsenic - are also substances which act as tonics if taken in sufficiently small quantities? So, if substances such as As2O3 act as biological poisons in small concentrations by "slowing down interfacial electron-transfer reactions" as Bockris and Reddy suggest above, does this mean that in very small concentrations they might speed-up the electron-transfer reaction? If so, then perhaps this may or may not be what is required. In an earlier section of the same reference (10.3.2 What Are the Possible Paths for the Hydrogen-Evolution Reaction?) they describe two basic steps that occur in acidic electrolytes with noble metal electrodes M (Platinum, Palladium, etc. and Nickel): (discharge) M(e) + H3O+ -> MH + H2O (desorption: Pt, Pd) 2MH -> 2M + H2 or (Ni) MH + H3O+ + M(e) -> 2M + H2O + H2 In both cases, a relatively fast electron-transfer reaction (discharge) places a hydrogen atom on the metal surface and the desorption step occurs more slowly and is the limiting factor in the evolution of H2 gas. Another possibility is that H may be adsorbed into the bulk metal. In the case of Pt and Pd, the desorption step does not involve any further electron transfers, so increasing the discharge rate (via the addition of a very small concentration of a "poison") might increase the "pressure" for H to be absorbed into the metal rather than to be desorbed as a gas. In the case of Ni, however, an electron-transfer reaction is also involved in the desorption step. So it is not clear that simplying increasing the electron-transfer rate will help. Bockris and Reddy point out, however, that "curiously, not much mechanistic work has been done in alkaline solutions". I suppose that this caveat would also apply to Li2SO4 electrolytes. Maybe Dieter could point us in the direction of current research here. Does anyone really know what happens to substances like As2O3 at electrode surfaces? Any theories on how they affect electron- transfer reactions? Is it possible that they actually block the desorption step (as I suggested in my earlier message)? I wouldn't want this to lead too far off topic, but I think the points for Scott and other experimenter's in the above is that: 1) There is a simple and effective way to prepare ultrapure solutions. 2) Very small concentrations (10^-10 mole/liter) are quite relevant. 3) Very small concentrations can have qualitatively quite different effects than just small concentrations. So ultra pure solutions plus *very* careful addition of selected impurities might be necessary. 4) Different "posions" might very well affect different electrode materials, in different solutions (acidic, basic, salt) in different ways. Theory gives some good hints but it doesn't currently provide a complete picture. This is experimental territory. Cheers, Bill Page. From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Thu Mar 28 11:33:24 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA29503; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 11:26:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 11:26:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603281907.AA06479@gateway1.srs.gov> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Kirk L. Shanahan" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Packed vs. Fluidized X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com wrote: > "Kirk L. Shanahan" wrote: > > is the density. Glass is more dense than plastic of course. In my > > further > > readings upon you pointing out my error, I discovered that there may be > > reason to believe the CETI bead bed is fluidized. > > The Patterson patents describe both a packed bead embodiment > and a fluidized bed embodiment. > > -- > - 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 - Yes but in the packed bed variant, the possibility of bead movement is still allowed, which allows the possibility of observing some level of fluidization effects. Certainly less than the fully fluidized bed though. -- Kirk Shanahan (My opinions...noone else's) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:08:46 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id NAA21272 for vortex-l-outgoing; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:23:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-4.compuserve.com (dub-img-4.compuserve.com [198.4.9.4]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA21236 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:23:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA07905; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 16:22:07 -0500 Date: 28 Mar 96 16:20:18 EST From: Frederick J Sparber <102021.3045@compuserve.com> To: "(unknown)" Subject: vtx: Calorium-Calorons and "Cold Fusion" Message-ID: <960328212018_102021.3045_EHT129-2@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: It is theorized that photons of 7,458 ev and 54.4 ev can create particle pairs the same way that photons of 1.022 Mev can create the electron positron pair. These "light electrons" with 3729 ev and 27.2 ev energy each, especially the 27.2 ev pair can be produced on the Sun and by sunlight insolation on the Earth's ionosphere down to the ozone layer where these ultraviolet to soft x-rays are stopped. The 227.9 angstrom ultraviolet photons or less, and 1.663 angstrom or less, x-rays should be created from the electron excitation transitions of helium, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen and solar flare activity. Like the bound state of the electron-negatron (positronium) these Calorium (in deference to the proponents of the Caloric theory in days gone by) made be in abundance in the Earth's biosphere, either in the bound (neutral) or unbound state as charged particles. The possibility of these particles being attached to molecules of the atmosphere and hydrosphere has been explored with the conclusion that electrostatic phenomena and atmospheric electricity and especially "ball lightning" may in fact be a result of the presence of these particles. Quantum mechanics, and in particular the fine stucture constant, "alpha" infers that these particles can exist until caused to annihilate. Like "regular" particles they can only annihilate with their antiparticles, and may exist in the bound or unbound state. The physical properties of the particles is as follows: Electron Caloron 1 Caloron 2 Energy J 8.186 x 10^-14 5.973 x 10^-16 4.36 x 10^-18 radius meters 2.81 x 10^-15 3.85 x 10^-13 5.29 x 10^-11 mass kg 9.1 x 10^-31 6.64 x 10^-33 4.845 x 10^-35 Supporting information that shows that these "resonant states" should exist will be supplied upon request. The common denominator of water and hydrogen (which is derived from water) in all of the over-unity and Cf phenomena suggests that thes particles are attached to the water molecules-atoms and are being stimulated to annihilate to 27.2 and or 3729 ev photons, thus dumping this energy seen in these phenomena as heat. FJS From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:48:32 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA25200; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:45:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:45:06 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960328201056_72240.1256_EHB28-1@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Packed vs. Fluidized X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:VORTCOR-LIST@ESKIMO.COM Kirk L. Shanahan writes: "Yes but in the packed bed variant, the possibility of bead movement is still allowed . . ." No, the beads are crammed together and held in a pack with a spring or bolts. The trick is to cram them together tightly, but not too tightly, or they crack and the thin film falls off. They do not move. In an old cell, the build-up of dirt and discoloration on the glass shows that they are stuck together and immobile. - Jed From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:49:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA25580; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:46:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:46:57 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603282058.AA20497@gateway1.srs.gov> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Kirk L. Shanahan" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Some corrections X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: It seems I was mistaken to associate "our" James A. Patterson with Dupont. It was actually Dow originally, then later a company called Sondrell Research and Development. There was another James A. Patterson who patented a preparation for a propellant precursor in the 70's from Dupont. Also, there is/was a James A. Patterson publishing information technology papers from Dupont in the last few years (is this the "grandson" who now works for CETI as well?). ------ As a note, I have found a reference listing the specific gravity of polystrenes as 1.1. so, I wasn't too far off to use a .1 value as the delta-rho term in the fluidization point equation. Clear fused quartz has a density of 2.2 gm/cc for comparison. -- Kirk Shanahan (My opinions...noone else's) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:49:40 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA25772; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:47:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:47:50 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603282103.AA20964@gateway1.srs.gov> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Kirk L. Shanahan" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] PowerGen Pressure X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott wrote: > The PowerGen demo was a different animal. They ran about 1000ml/min thru > that one but still I'd expect a rather low pressure drop, say 1 psi at the > most. The flow work represented by 1 psi at 1000 ml/min is only 0.115 watts. Yes. My message calculated the temp rise as 1e-3 C, which translates to about .6 psi, or, in my current favorite units, about 17 inches of water. > > PS. Don't let Jed scare you off, Kirk, Who...me?? {{chuckle chuckle}} > you've apparently got some good > analytical capabilites...welcome to the group! Thanks! --- Kirk Shanahan From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:53:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA14389; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 15:27:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 15:27:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] [VORTCOR-LIST] Response to Chris X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 03/28/96 13:59 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: [VORTCOR-LIST] Response to Chris Kirk S.----How can I say this without being too snotty? Well, how about I do it this way... Could you give me a nice, written out, calculated explaination of the how and why an Edison composite ceramic/carbonized flax filament should and can work? Do that, please! Then I'll conceed that ANYTHING can be calculated with current knowledge. However, if that presents a problem, then I would suggest that you do the following: - 1. Order some sulfonated polystyrene beads. 2. Read up on plating of plastics. 3. Copper flash, plate with Ni-Pd-Ni 4. Build a calorimeter. 5. Run it, and THEN throw stones at CETI... - All of which, I see people like Horace, and Scott, and myself doing... - I guess that's the big problem I have with "number crunchers".... - (PS, I have done my share of number crunching too.... perhaps I should cite in 1982 when I figured out the heat capacity of the Fort Calhoun Nuclear Plant spent fuel pool, and the total spent fuel loading and calculated the "cooling shutdown" heat up rate. I came up with 1.7 degrees per hour, the measured was 1.55 degrees per hour and the "conservative" handbook calculation they decided to use was 2.2 degrees (F.) per hour....which put a severe time crunch on an operation needed to be performed when the cooling was shut down...) Maybe a simpler thing would be to put some Pd in D2O and re-do P&F's work for starters! - What I'm trying to say is that I regard the incessant grinding of numbers for the sake of grinding of numbers to be a form of mental masturbation....Ohhh, it feels so good. But it doesn't prove much. - Frankly, I'd have more respect for Kirk's position if he'd call CETI directly and tell them that he regards their claims as FRAUD, and intended to initiate legal action against them, or advise the Texas and/or Florida A.G.'s to do that. That's OK! Because I DO believe that CETI has not been doing a good job of proving their claims... And, at the same time, I have seen enough RESULTS, with my hands ON them, to encourage me to try to replicate/ and or BETTER CETI, because I think I can present the information in a more convicing manner. MDH From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:53:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA15186; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 08:40:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 08:40:23 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603291625.LAA03459@dgs.drenet.dnd.ca> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vtx: Re: XRF analysis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michell Swartz wrote: > ... > Be careful you folks. Some of these materials, and others used to >increase throwing power are very toxic. > > Arsenic is the number 1 toxic material to children. > > NOTA BENE: Only 100 milligrams is an acute toxic dose in adults. > ... In what should probably be considered the "bible" of electrochemistry, Bockris and Reddy's "Modern Electrochemistry", Plenum 1973, Volume 2, Section 10.4.5 "An Electrodic Method of Purifying Solutions" there is a nice discussion of using pre-electrolysis with a "scavenger" electrode to prepare ultra-pure solutions. They write: Electrodic methods for the purification of solutions are in extensive use today; among the first to use these methods were Lewina, in the purification of alcohols, and Jaffe, in the cleansing of water and other solutions utilizing very high potentials (2000 V). Their rational introduction into studies of electrode kinetics at solid electrodes was first carried out by Conway [B.E. Conway, Theory and Principles of Electrode Processes, The Ronald Press Co., 1965], who showed that hydrogen evolution on nickel electrodes was sensitive to solution concentrations of 10^-10 mole/liter of As2O3 and other "poisons".** And their footnote ** is interesting: ** It is a most intriguing point that the classical Agatha Christie poisons are just those substances which seem most able to slow down interfacial electron-transfer reactions. This point must be placed along side the observations of Srinivasan et al. that the energy-conversion efficiency situation in the body if such that *only* electrochemical mechanisms of conversion of food to power are consistent with all the facts. Are there electrodic mechanisms to many life processes? What makes arsenic, cyanide, etc., so effective in sume small concentrations? Is it entirely coincidental that such poisons in the electrodic situation often accelerate reactions in extremely small concentrations [i.e. 10^-10 mole/liter] and reduce their rates at small concentrations [i.e. 10^-6 mole/liter], while some well-known biological poisons - strychnine and arsenic - are also substances which act as tonics if taken in sufficiently small quantities? So, if substances such as As2O3 act as biological poisons in small concentrations by "slowing down interfacial electron-transfer reactions" as Bockris and Reddy suggest above, does this mean that in very small concentrations they might speed-up the electron-transfer reaction? If so, then perhaps this may or may not be what is required. In an earlier section of the same reference (10.3.2 What Are the Possible Paths for the Hydrogen-Evolution Reaction?) they describe two basic steps that occur in acidic electrolytes with noble metal electrodes M (Platinum, Palladium, etc. and Nickel): (discharge) M(e) + H3O+ -> MH + H2O (desorption: Pt, Pd) 2MH -> 2M + H2 or (Ni) MH + H3O+ + M(e) -> 2M + H2O + H2 In both cases, a relatively fast electron-transfer reaction (discharge) places a hydrogen atom on the metal surface and the desorption step occurs more slowly and is the limiting factor in the evolution of H2 gas. Another possibility is that H may be adsorbed into the bulk metal. In the case of Pt and Pd, the desorption step does not involve any further electron transfers, so increasing the discharge rate (via the addition of a very small concentration of a "poison") might increase the "pressure" for H to be absorbed into the metal rather than to be desorbed as a gas. In the case of Ni, however, an electron-transfer reaction is also involved in the desorption step. So it is not clear that simplying increasing the electron-transfer rate will help. Bockris and Reddy point out, however, that "curiously, not much mechanistic work has been done in alkaline solutions". I suppose that this caveat would also apply to Li2SO4 electrolytes. Maybe Dieter could point us in the direction of current research here. Does anyone really know what happens to substances like As2O3 at electrode surfaces? Any theories on how they affect electron- transfer reactions? Is it possible that they actually block the desorption step (as I suggested in my earlier message)? I wouldn't want this to lead too far off topic, but I think the points for Scott and other experimenter's in the above is that: 1) There is a simple and effective way to prepare ultrapure solutions. 2) Very small concentrations (10^-10 mole/liter) are quite relevant. 3) Very small concentrations can have qualitatively quite different effects than just small concentrations. So ultra pure solutions plus *very* careful addition of selected impurities might be necessary. 4) Different "posions" might very well affect different electrode materials, in different solutions (acidic, basic, salt) in different ways. Theory gives some good hints but it doesn't currently provide a complete picture. This is experimental territory. Cheers, Bill Page. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:10:34 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id JAA21956 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 09:18:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (climate-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.148]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA21913 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 09:18:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.183.89.65] (macwharton.gsfc.nasa.gov) by climate.gsfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA212759901; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:18:21 -0500 X-Sender: wharton@climate Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:18:29 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) Subject: vtx: Robert Park Lecture Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A leading debunker of bogus science will be speaking at Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt Md on April 1, 1996 at 3:30 . How about that, a debunking bogus science lecture scheduled for April Fool's day. I think I will give him a call and mention how the PPC people believe that only the kinetic energy of their cell inflow and outflow need be measured and that the potential energy need not be measured or tested in any way. Based on their measurment of only one of the two components of the total energy these people have then found that the conservation of energy law is no longer valid. A full report will follow but the Vortex-L people will not see it because the system seems to be down, at least for me it is. Robert L. Park Bogus Science: Foolish, Fraudulent and Phobic ABSTRACT Most incredible new scientific claims are wrong. Because even scientists tend to see what they expect to see, however, a false report often creates a large scientific following. This will be illustrated with examples rangin from Joe Newman's "energy machine" to "cold fusion". Current scientific controversies, including the purported health hazards of power line fields and alternative medical cures, will be examined for similar characteristics. SPEAKER Robert L. Park is Professor of Physics at the University of Maryland, College Park. He is a frequent contributor to the op-ed pages of major newspapers and writes WHAT'S NEW, a weekly commentary on science and science policy that is distributed by the American Physical Society. He is also a frequent guest on radio and television news programs. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:07:28 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id LAA11273 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 11:03:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11229 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 11:02:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.74] ([204.57.193.74]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA08485 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:39:39 -0900 X-Sender: hheffner@anc.ak.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 10:01:56 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: vtx: vortcor-list respond problem Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A I have made a number of posts in response to vortcor-list posts, but none have showed up for several days. I just discovered that the responses were being emailed to the people who posted to votcor-list, and not to vortcor-list as it has in the past. A number of you must have recieved private messages from me that seemed a little strange, or maybe you thought they were from vortcor-list? At any rate, the reponses end up not posted. I will re-send what I can find like this to vtx, even though it is out of date and the maybe the discussion has moved on, duplicated what I have said, etc. When you respond to a post, check to see to whom it got mailed! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:09:07 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id LAA11631 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 11:04:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11606 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 11:04:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.74] ([204.57.193.74]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA08492 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:41:29 -0900 X-Sender: hheffner@anc.ak.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 10:03:46 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] pressure drop across cell Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Kirk asked what the pressure drop actually is across the Patterson cell. > >In the case of the little cells, like the one I'm trying to get running, it >is tiny. The flow rate is a measly 20ml/min which is only "drip, drip, >drip" out the outlet hose. I'd guess the drop is around 1" of water column >at the most. Ditto for me. I have done some preliminary leak testing, etc., for a 1.8 cc cell, and the largest pressure I have experienced, except when I had an accidental kink, was 44 mm Hg. I am using a pressure guage from a sphygmomanometer. From this experience I now think continual pressure measurement, and maybe an alarm, at the pump head should be mandatory because it immediately diagnoses flow restriction problems of all kinds. It also dispells almost all "power from the pump" explanations. My pump was running at 122.2 V and 60.3 mA, or 7.37 W when it was pushing 74 ml in 180 s, or 0.41 ml/s at 44 mm Hg. I went to a lot of trouble to thermally isolate the pump motor to measure and account for heat loss, but the energy is almost *all* going to heat loss. A simple pressure measurment shows that. The loop length, and thus resistance, will increase in the final version, but I was worried about restrictions and the now 20 foot length (was once planned 3 x bigger) of tubing in the heat exchanger. I calculated that the hot loop will run 5.86 deg C hotter than the cold loop when the cell output is 5 W, i.e. the delta T at the exchanger is 2.96 deg C at .41 ml/s, so figured 20 feet is enough length for the coils and that is what I ended up making. I made the tubing connections without goop, just pressure, so was worried they would leak, but didn't at that surprizingly low pressure of 44 mm Hg. If the Tygon fatigues it may leak later. > > - Scott Little > >The PowerGen demo was a different animal. They ran about 1000ml/min thru >that one but still I'd expect a rather low pressure drop, say 1 psi at the >most. The flow work represented by 1 psi at 1000 ml/min is only 0.115 watts. > >PS. Don't let Jed scare you off, Kirk, you've apparently got some good >analytical capabilites...welcome to the group! Amen. Your initial post was interresting and informative, even if your calculations are off, considering m dot delta p. If I had more time now I would have been interrested in asking a few questions and learning something, but I have a table full of onery uncoorperative paraphenalia to contend with at the moment! 8^) Stick with theory or facts and let the invective and opinions fall where they may, that's *my opinion*, even if it is convoluted. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:10:30 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id LAA11959 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 11:06:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11906 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 11:06:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.74] ([204.57.193.74]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA08498 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:42:56 -0900 X-Sender: hheffner@anc.ak.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 10:05:13 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] Response to Scott Little Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kirk L. Shanahan wrote: [snip] > >Further, I suspect that the Patterson beads are very high surface area. >Reports on spf give Patterson a 30-year history in catalyst synthesis, and in >that game surface area is of paramount importance. I recall one reference on >spf to SEM photos of CETI's and Miley's beads, with CETI's being "mountainous" >and Miley's being very smooth. (Unfortunately, I don't seem to have saved >that, can anyone confirm this?) Distributing the Pd in a hill-and-valley >structure should also allow the expansion stress to be absorbed more easily. I recall the same, but could not find a reference to "mountainous" in any recent s.p.f posts. > > >One other note. I read some discussion in the most recent archive about what >effect the use of glass vs plastic beads would have. One immediate difference >is the density. Glass is more dense than plastic of course. In my further >readings upon you pointing out my error, I discovered that there may be reason >to believe the CETI bead bed is fluidized. [snip] >Kirk Shanahan (My opinion's...Noone else's) The US Patent 5,372,688 specifically mentions an embodyment where "These conductive microspheres 91 are losely packed whereby, when the electrolyte 89 flows in the directions of the arrows through the electrolytic cell 80 as shown in FIG. 3, they raise above the upright housing 82 so as to be spaced upwardly toward a non-conductive foraminous mesh 98 positioned against the end of the end member 86. Thus by controlling the flow rate of the electrolyte 89, the spread or spacing between the conductive microspheres 91 and the degree of movement or agitation is regulated. Although the loose microspheres roll and mix about, electrical contact is maintained therebetween." Sounds like a fluidized bed to me. Also of much interest to me is a third embodyment consisting of a silver plated (sheet) having the conductive microspheres "epoxy (non-conductive) bonded at 114 and 116 to the conductive plate" ... "thus the only exposed surface of the cathode is that of the conductive microspheres". The anode consists of wire bands of "platinum plated silver wire 0.1 cm in dia." wrapped around the plate! Talk about a different geometry! Also of interest to prior discussions of loading, the patent calls for loading currents of 0.05 amps for 2 hours for the first embodyment, the non-fluidized version. It says after loading the current is "incrementally increased". The temperature of the electrolyte is controlled (I assume this means kept from overheating too much) by "increasing the flow rate of the electrolyte therethrough". The graphs of heat by time show really big delt T's (30 to 60 deg. C) developing in 10-12 minutes. No need for joule heating there! The tests were done by increasing voltage (and thus current) and flow rate until voltage reached 9 or 10 V in about 10 minutes. The test runs shown were maybe of too short a duration to experience bead distruction. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:04:53 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id LAA12183 for vortex-l-outgoing; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 11:07:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA12087 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 11:07:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.74] ([204.57.193.74]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA08507 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:43:36 -0900 X-Sender: hheffner@anc.ak.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 10:05:53 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] hyperdimensional physics Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Perhaps there is link between the Cold Fusion and something called >Tetrahedral Hyperdimensional Physics by science writer Richard C. >Hoagland. > > > http://www.maxinet.com/ufonews/plananom.htm > >I want to know if anybody have more information about Richard C. >Hoagland and his Hyperdimensional Physics. Try: http://www.hoaglund.com As you might be aware, Hoagland has published and been a regular talk show and TV documentary guest regarding UFO stuff, and his Hyperdimensional Physics is said to be extra-terrestrial in origin, inspired by analyzing the shapes of alien structures. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:57:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA02497; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:56:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:56:27 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960329163811_72240.1256_EHB131-1@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Shanahan hypothesis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:VORTCOR-LIST@ESKIMO.COM Kirk L. Shanahan suggests that when the Power-Gen aquarium pump loop is completed, the flow rate might drop so much that the electrolysis power alone can explain the Delta T temperature: "So, to summarize, the PowerGen demo used a pump in such a condition that it was very near to the limit of its abilities to deliver flow. I believe that the flow measurement condition used by the demonstrators did not represent the flow in the closed loop. Further the electrolysis power used is very close to what it would take to reach the temperatures observed assuming a low or very low flow." Let us examine this hypothesis, step by step, in a quantitative fashion. During the 450 watt run, the electrolysis power used was 0.1 watts, and the temperature observed was 6.7 deg C. What would the flow have to be to fit Shanahan's hypothesis? He says the electrolysis power is "very close to what it would take to reach the temperatures observed." How close? How "low or very low" must the flow be? Let us work backwards, and pretend that it is a perfectly insulated cell. Okay, 0.1 watts gives 6 joules per minute or 1.4 calories. These 1.4 calories have to heat the water by 6.7 degrees, so 1.4 / 6.7 = 0.21 ml. So, in theory the flow rate must be a quarter of a milliliter per minute: a drop of water. In theory that should fit, but in practice it never would, for many reasons: 1. At such a low flow rate the device would cease to be a flow calorimeter. It would be static calorimeter with a leak. The warm water in it would reach the inlet thermocouple almost as easily as it reaches the outlet thermocouple, so there would be no Delta T. This flow rate and configuration happens to be very close to what Patterson himself was running a few years ago, with a medical IV pump, when I first talked to him. That static calorimetry showed 300% excess. 2. The cell is *not* perfectly insulated. It is not even well insulated. You can put your hand on it and feel the heat being lost from it, and when you run warm water through it with electrolysis turned off, the temperature drops measurably between inlet and outlet (0.1 deg C). It leaks heat like a sieve. Even if you stopped the flow completely, the water left sitting in the cell would not rise 6.7 deg C above ambient with only a tenth-watt input. It would reach equilibrium long before it got that hot. But, for the sake of argument, let us pretend that it is possible to heat the water this much with a tenth-watt heater. 3. Most of the tubes in the calorimeter are 3/8th inch Tygon. 3/8 inch = 1 cm, and I think the internal diameter is ~8 mm, the radius is 4 mm, so a cross section of the tube is 50 mm^2. Therefore it takes 20 mm of hose to hold milliliter (1000 mm^3). (How convenient! Do you suppose that's a coincidence?) The hose from the reservoir to the cell is about a meter long. At a flow rate of 0.21 ml/min the water would advance through the tube at .42 cm per minute, so it would take 2380 minutes to reach the cell, or 39 hours. That's a long time! By the time the water got from the reservoir to the cell, it would cool down to room temperature. In fact, it would reach room temperature 10 or 20 minutes after leaving the reservoir, at a distance of approximately 10 cm. But that is not what I observed. I saw the temperature at the cell inlet was close to that of the reservoir, and 15 deg C hotter than the room, so it must have got to the inlet fairly quickly, but let us pretend it did not. 4. Since the water reaching the cell must be at room temperature, 20 deg C, the cell has to heat it up all the way to the outlet temperature (about 41 deg C), with only a tenth watt. Let us say that some of the water is swishing back to heat up the inlet thermocouple. How it could reach through those thin tubes without cooling down is a mystery, but let's say it does. That means we must reduce the flow rate to 0.066 ml per minute, and we must have an even more miraculously well insulated cell. 4. The hose from the cell to the stopcocks, where I divert the water into the graduated cylinder, is at least a half meter long. Almost all of the water in that portion of the hose would be at room temperature too. How much does it hold? About 250 ml. And that happens to be how much I collect in the cup! So little or none of the water from the cell would reach my cup, and all of the water in the cup would be would all be room temperature. But it isn't! In fact, it is almost as hot as the outlet water, much hotter than the inlet, which makes it even hotter still than ambient, about 21 deg C all told, at about 41 deg C. 5. As I dump the 250 ml sample (which is miraculously warm), the warm water from the cell would fill up the tube, and new water would enter the cell. That would be room temperature. Naturally the outlet thermistor temperature would drop from 41 deg C to 20 deg C (ambient). With only a tenth watt of input, it would take a long time to recover. I would notice the temperature drop! How long would it take to recover? Well, assuming we can only cram 5 ml of water into that cell in between the beads, and assuming it is perfectly insulated, a 21 deg temperature rise would require 105 calories or 441 joules, so at the rate of 6 joules per minute that's 74 minutes. (As I said, anyone who has worked with something like a poorly insulated 10 cm x 2.5 cm static calorimeter knows that it will reach equilibrium much sooner than this, so it could never actually get that hot.) Let me note that Logajan, I and many others pointed out the effect in step 5. We explained to Shanahan many times that sudden temperature drop would occur even if the flow rate was changed by, say, 50% or 30%. This is one of the many objections I have raised to his hypothesis which he has not addressed. 6. Let's move right along here. (I realize this exposition of mine is also moving at one drop per minute, but I like to be thorough, and I figure that I lost all my readers several paragraphs back, a mercy for them.) Okay, we have some real problems with the observations I made of the tubes and reservoir. As I said, several times, when the loop was completed I observed the water and bubbles moving through the tubes and splashing back into the reservoir. It looked very much like the short take shown on the ABC video, with the returning water splashing around the top of that see-through reservoir. Obviously, if the flow was 1 drop per minute and it moved at a half centimeter per minute, I would not have seen those bubbles merrily chasing along down the tubes. Remember: if the flow rate was only reduced by, say, 90%, that would mean the output is 45 watts, which is gigantic compared to 0.1 watt. That would indicate massive excess heat beyond any rational argument. Even if we assume the input power measurements are as wrong as can be, and the power supply is on the verge of burning up, it would still deliver a mere 5 watts, which is far less than 45 watts. For Shanahan to be correct, we have to reduce the flow rate not by 90% but 99.977%. 7. Not only do we have my visual observations to contend with, but as I pointed to Shanahan many times, we have other people's instrument readings. Cravens reported to me that he ran this experiment with flowmeters. Therefore, we must hypothesize that his flowmeters cannot measure the difference between a liter and a quarter-milliliter. Well . . . I could go on, but I think I have demonstrated that Shanahan has a tough row to hoe if he intends to buttress this argument of his with quantitative arguments based on flow or static calorimetry. But what about the arguments that he presented in the first place? How did he draw the conclusion that the flow rate must be so low? Well, it wasn't exactly a computation, and it certainly wasn't an observation, because he has never seen the cell. This is what he wrote: "In fact, my estimate from that curve is that over 90% of the pressure head has been consumed. So, assuming 90% pressure head consumption of the 1.4 meters = 55.1 inches of water maximum, we get about 5" of residual pressure left to drive flow through *the rest* of the loop." I am not sure what to make of this, but I gather he is assuming that the flow resistance is more or less evenly distributed to each segment of the circuit in proportion to the length of the segment. In other words, if the total circuit length is 15 meters and the cell is 10 cm long, it should present roughly 0.5% of the circuit resistance, and the 30 cm of 1/16th inch diameter tubes leading into the cell produce roughly 2% and so on. The 3/8th inch tube cause resistance because they are crimped, according to Shanahan. Well, in my report I said that the flow rate is regulated with precision valves, which were used to vary the flow from 1.0 to 1.5 liters per minute. So, clearly, a great deal of flow resistance is . . . right in those valves. You open them up, and the flow jumps 50%. Most of the other resistance will be in the cell with the beads, and in those thin little tubes leading into it and out of it. Compared to those little tubes, the cross section of a crimped 3/8 inch tube is roomy indeed. It hardly impedes the flow, since the length of the crimp is short, and it is not, after all, held shut with a clothes pin. A water circuit works kind of like an electrical circuit. Some parts have high impedance, and some have very low impedance. Anyone who plays around with this particular circuit would soon see which parts impede the water a lot, and which allow it to flow freely. If Shanahan would spend some time experimenting with similar aquarium pumps and tubes he would soon see what I mean. You can spray a surprising volume of water with a pump like this in a short time, even when you run it through convoluted, crimped tubes. As I mentioned, Dennis Cravens accidentally demonstrated this as he was removing air bubbles. He turned on the pump when Paul was holding the other end out of reservoir return, and soaked the front of Paul's pants. I myself have had loads of experience with this sort of thing because my house is equipped with: 1. An ornamental pond just outside my living room with lots of pumps, crimped half-blocked-up tubes, hoses and buckets; 2. A daughter who loves to play with (1). Using this equipment, you can transfer an amazing quantity of filthy pond water to, say, the oriental rug in the living room, over a very short span of time (roughly the time it takes a parent to fetch the newspaper and glance at the comics). Let me return to Shanahan's original statement: "I believe that the flow measurement condition used by the demonstrators did not represent the flow in the closed loop. Further the electrolysis power used is very close to what it would take to reach the temperatures observed assuming a low or very low flow." Words like "very close" and "low or very low" are not quantitative. When you make a statement like that, I think it is essential that you stop and ask yourself "how close" and "how low." And the only way to find out is do some sums. Now, I happen to be extraordinarily inept at doing sums. As Chris Tinsley and Arthur Clarke can tell you, just yesterday I got the answer wrong by an order of magnitude in a simple computation I have done hundreds of times over the last 5 years. But I do try to take my own medicine, sketch out the gadget on paper, and do the sums. And I try to relate the answer to what all of us know about daily life with its coffee makers, crimped straws, and sopping wet oriental rugs. I have found that when you neglect this step -- this essential quantitative analysis -- you end up saying something is "very close" when it is, in fact, two orders of magnitude off by any stretch of the imagination. In response to comments by D. Morrison, Martin Fleischmann once wrote: "We believe that the onus is on Douglas Morrison to devise models which would have to be taken seriously and which are capable of being subjected to quantitative analysis. Statements of the kind which he has made belong to the category of 'arm waving'." I believe the same can be said for any model that is based upon a low flow rate at Power-Gen. Let me quote Martin again, from that same essay: "We refrained from discussing this stage of the experiments because the cells and procedures we have used are not well suited for making quantitative measurements in this region. Inevitably, therefore, interpretations are speculative." This is exactly how I feel about the other arguments raised by Shanahan, and about Mitchell Jones's analysis of the heat exchanger. The instruments he has used are not well suited to that analysis. The analysis of Cravens' heat exchanger is far worse: the instruments and work required to make that analysis are non-existent. Nobody has investigated his heat exchanger (which is quite different from Jones') so *all interpretations are speculative.* So speculative, they are a waste of time. Cravens and I made no observations, we have no data, and we installed no instruments that can shed light on this component of his calorimeter. Jones has demonstrated that heat exchangers are complicated, surprising, and non-linear, so none of us has any business speculating about how Cravens' might work. The same can be said of Shanahan's extensive analysis of pump performance based on his quick reading of a manual in a pet supply store. That cannot form the basis for such a complex analysis. You have to get a pump, get the proper instruments, and work with it extensively before you can develop such elaborate analyses. Shanahan's statements like this one: ". . . 4 inches of water pressure left as a driving force, from which we subtract any vertical height difference in the flow outlet and reservoir level . . ." are pulled out of a hat. He has no data, no tests, and no observations to back them up. - Jed From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:55:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA02525; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:56:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:56:40 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960329171517_72240.1256_EHB119-1@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Woops! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:VORTCOR-LIST@ESKIMO.COM See, I said I am no good at doing sums. I wrote: "At a flow rate of 0.21 ml/min the water would advance through the tube at .42 cm per minute, so it would take 2380 minutes to reach the cell, or 39 hours. That's a long time! A meter is 100 cm, not 1000 cm. So that should be 238 minutes, or 4 hours. That's still a long time! It is much longer than it would take for the water in the tube to turn stone cold. From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Fri Mar 29 13:06:05 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA02576; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:56:56 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:56:56 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <960329185520_72240.1256_EHB64-1@CompuServe.COM> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: New Infinite Energy home page X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:VORTCOR-LIST@ESKIMO.COM I have established a new home page for Infinite Energy at: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JedRothwell We currently have a home page at http://www.mit.edu:8001/people/rei/CFdir/CFhome.html, but we have to discontinue that one, or scale it back anyway. Rei says she will leave a pointer there to the new one. Other people, like John Logajan, who have pointers to www.mit.edu should please redirect them to ourworld.compuserve.com. I have not explored the World Wide Web much, so I do not know who else is pointing to us, or who we should point to. I have only four links: http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan John Logajan's home page http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird.html Bill Beaty's WIERD SCIENCE page [Ya' gotta love that name!] http://www.onramp.net/~ceti/ Clean Energy Technology Inc. home page http://www.hooked.net/users/rgeorge Russ George's CF page [I cannot get this one to load, it seems to have 35 KB file that sticks in the craw. I hope I have the address right.] Please let me know if there are others. My home page is short, because I hate that slow the WWW performance. All files together are 59,214 bytes. I have one small .GIF logo, 5178 bytes long. - Jed From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:56:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA02623; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:57:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:57:11 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: vortcor-list respond problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I have made a number of posts in response to vortcor-list posts, but none have showed up for several days. I just discovered that the responses were being emailed to the people who posted to votcor-list, and not to vortcor-list as it has in the past. A number of you must have recieved private messages from me that seemed a little strange, or maybe you thought they were from vortcor-list? At any rate, the reponses end up not posted. I will re-send what I can find like this to vtx, even though it is out of date and the maybe the discussion has moved on, duplicated what I have said, etc. When you respond to a post, check to see to whom it got mailed! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:55:35 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA02657; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:57:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:57:23 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603291950.NAA07247@natashya.eden.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vtx: Re: XRF analysis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 08:40 3/29/96 -0800, Bill Page wrote: >2) Very small concentrations (10^-10 mole/liter) are quite > relevant. Jeez, Bill. My electrolyte solutions probably have 10^-10 moles/liter of at least half the elements in the periodic table! If this level of impurities is really important, it's no wonder at all that CF experiments are not reproducible. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-346-3848 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:56:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA02203; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 15:39:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 15:39:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vortcor-list respond problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >You wrote: >> >>I have made a number of posts in response to vortcor-list posts, but >none --- > >I find that under Vortcor, when you select to respond to a posting, you >are actually responding directly to the person that made the post and >not to vortcor. What you have to do is delete the poster's address >(unless you want him to get your response directly also) and add the >vortcor address: vortcor-list@eskimo.com. > >-AK- Yes - this is the problem to which I refer! It did not work this way on March 24, and should not work this way now. At least I did not see any such announcements. At minimum, a response to vortcor-list should post to vortex-l, not result in a private message. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:55:28 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA22358; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 17:44:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 17:44:00 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603300054.QAA07542@dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com> Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sender: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vortcor-list respond problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: Yes, for instance I was going to post my response through vortcor but did not do the very thing I mentioned: delete your e-mail address and substitute vortcor-list@eskimo.com. I am doing so on this post. -AK- From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 01:55:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA24896; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 21:36:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 21:36:32 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603300500.XAA13565@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Subject: bead report X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Well, the latest beads are STILL looking great! Whatever I did right this time (probably the thermal cycles before starting electrolysis) there is no mistake that things are much, much better for the bead coatings. Right now, I'm trying to calibrate the Newton's Law of Cooling portion of my new dual-method calorimeter. The flow part has been working from the start of my experimentation with the ersatz beads and, thus far, there has been no significant sign of excess heat. By significant, I mean more than about 0.3 watts (my flow calorimetry has a precision of about +/-0.1 watts). - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 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 Sat Mar 30 10:37:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id KAA11366 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:21:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mom.hooked.net (root@mom.hooked.net [206.80.6.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA11303 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:20:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from get.hooked.net (chum-42.ppp.hooked.net [206.80.8.42]) by mom.hooked.net (8.6.10/8.6.5) with SMTP id KAA01357 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:18:57 -0800 Message-Id: <199603301818.KAA01357@mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:20:28 +0000 Subject: Re: vtx: Someone other than CETI Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.23) Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I am always reluctant to post in public forums on the net but every so often I find it hard to resist. Jed quit your whining it's getting very old. Let's see Jed is this the way it is E-Quest, CETI, Hydrodynamics, Pons and Fleischmann, MITI, MIT Lincoln lab, Los Alamos, and all the other organizations with serious non-hobbyist efforts in cold fusion are keeping secrets. Of course a whole lot of groups who claim to get results are not keeping secrets, is that it. How about that group in the mid-west with the burning ceramic, anybody you know Jed keeping secrets pertaining to that one. In Jed's humble opinion keeping secrets is the way to not succeed. Let's see who else in society falls into this category. Does Jed's software company publish it's source code for everyone to use and improve upon. Oh no I forgot that's different. How about the interests of those (are you listening Jed) who expect to make money out of publishing information on cold fusion do they keep any secrets about how they make their enterprise work, opps that's different as well. Give us a break Jed and say something new. Industrial secrecy wasn't invented by cold fusion researchers nor are they going throw out the experience of the vast majority of scientists and engineers in knowing that secrecy is a necessary evil. Any of the groups Jed mentions are more than willing to share their "secrets" with organizations who will participate in a normal fashion with the hiring and support of some tens of engineers and scientists to develop this wonderful new energy source. From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 06:56:25 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id GAA08619 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 06:51:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA08614 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 06:50:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from (aki@pas-ca10-04.ix.netcom.com [204.31.230.132]) by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA28105 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 06:47:30 -0800 Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 06:47:30 -0800 Message-Id: <199603301447.GAA28105@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: vtx: Vortex-L versus vortcor-list To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The Ex-Lax worked! -AK- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 07:53:34 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id HAA16533 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 07:45:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA16498 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 07:44:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.67] ([204.57.193.67]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA13775 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 09:21:46 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 06:43:43 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: vtx: Bead disintegration Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Just a thought about bead disintegration that may or may not be applicable to Scott Little's experiments: if glass beads are loaded into a glass cell and pressure applied via scews instead of springs, upon heating and expansion, the pressure could grow extremely high and destroy the coating at the contact points. Repeated heating and cooling would amplify the effect by letting electrolyte into the void during the cooling/shrinking cycle and increasing the sloghing process during the next heating cycle. One way to avoid this would be to include a compressable material or component, like a soft rubber o-ring, in the cell. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 08:55:30 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id IAA26216 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 08:47:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-7.compuserve.com (dub-img-7.compuserve.com [198.4.9.8]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA26185 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 08:47:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-7.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id LAA26423; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 11:45:51 -0500 Date: 30 Mar 96 11:44:25 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Someone other than CETI Message-ID: <960330164425_72240.1256_EHB113-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Dieter Britz "All this would be fascinating if only someone other than the CETI mob were to see some excess heat, or whatever." Well of course others are! The focus here has been pretty much on CETI alone, but we should not forget that many other good experiments are percolating away. Even some Pd-D experiments are going well, in spite of the great difficulties with those materials. I just talked to Ed Storms on Thursday. He says he continues to get good results with his giant batch of Pd cathodes. He charactorizes them and sorts them in a "triage" procedure, as described in his paper: "How To Perform . . . [P&F experiment]" He continues to get very significant levels of excess heat with the cathodes that test out well in the preliminary phases, and no excess heat with the cathodes that crack, swell, distort, etc. Hydrocatalysis (Mills -- not to be confused with Griggs at Hydrodynamics) continues to report good progress with Ni-H, and success with gas loaded cells. I have heard that E-Quest is also making good progress. They are working at SRI. Unfortunately, they have never published a paper and I fear they never will. Like CETI and many others, they are trying to keep too many aspects of their work secret. This is a fatal mistake in my opinion. CETI, Hydrocatalysis and E-Quest disagree with me. Lots of good things are happening in Japan but unfortunately I am out of touch and I cannot afford to fly over there and get the details. You have to visit the conferences and labs in person to get detailed info. They don't respond to phone calls and they do not publish much. We will get the story in October at ICCF6. I hear informal reports from Italy that new labs have been opened and exciting progress is being made with these coated wire experiments. Some of these developments are covered in the latest issue of Infinite Energy which Gene has FINALLY managed to print and mail out. Bravo Gene! - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 10:41:52 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id KAA12298 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:27:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from eskimo.com (billb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA12223 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:27:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id KAA11383; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:25:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:25:14 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: vortcor-list respond problem 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, 29 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > I have made a number of posts in response to vortcor-list posts, but none > have showed up for several days. I just discovered that the responses were > being emailed to the people who posted to votcor-list, and not to > vortcor-list as it has in the past. Listproc is still somewhat experimental here, and someone on the eskimo.com staff accidentally changed the "reply to:" default for all the lists. He's since fixed it. This affects only vortcor-list. Since vortex-L seems to be working and vortcor-list still acts weird occasionally, we should try moving entirely back to the former. So, if you reply to a message which came from vortcor-list, please try to remember to manually change the "to:" address, and direct your reply to vortex-L. .....................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 Mar 30 12:40:22 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id KAA15277 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:47:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from natashya.eden.com (root@natashya.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA15228 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:46:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from net-6-174.austin.eden.com (net-6-174.austin.eden.com [206.81.226.174]) by natashya.eden.com (8.7.4.1/8.7.1.1) with SMTP id MAA00777 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 12:44:01 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 12:44:01 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199603301844.MAA00777@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: vtx: Can I put out an unsolicited recommendation? Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:23 PM 3/24/96 PST, you wrote: >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Can I put out an unsolicited recommendation? >could I recommend LabTech Notebook? >I have recently aquired the "compeditors" demos for LabTech (I'll NOT >mention those names, as I think that is uncouth....) Oh come on, Mark! We're having a friendly discussion in private here. You're not on national TV. Please discuss openly which mfgr's demos you've looked at, what you found bad/good about each, etc. I'm in the market right now myself. I've been playing with LabTech Notebook Pro's demo and so far it has crashed my computer more times than everything else in the past year combined. National Instrument's LabView looks neat but I'm shy of it's cost (~$2000)... - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 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 Sat Mar 30 11:44:09 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id LAA23599 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 11:37:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA23556 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 11:37:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0u36SO-00020tC; Sat, 30 Mar 96 13:37 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Someone other than CETI To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 13:37:04 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199603301818.KAA01357@mom.hooked.net> from "Russ George" at Mar 30, 96 10:20:28 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Russ George writes: > In Jed's humble opinion keeping secrets is the way to not succeed. Having seen Jed's postings over the years, I think this is not quite his point. Jed has variously defended industrial secrecy. What I understand Jed to be doing here is speaking out against too much secrecy. Obviously it is a judgement call -- reasonable people can reasonably disagree. One of the benefits of letting out a little bit of info is that it can inspire external talent to conceive of new and useful ideas that feed back into the originating entity. Ultimate secrecy requires internal talent to know or discover all the answers. -- - 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 Mar 30 13:02:56 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id MAA06572 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 12:49:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-7.compuserve.com (arl-img-7.compuserve.com [198.4.7.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA06515 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 12:49:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-7.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA18691; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 15:47:01 -0500 Date: 30 Mar 96 15:46:17 EST From: Dean Miller <75110.3417@compuserve.com> To: Joe Flynn Subject: vtx: ZPE: what is it? Message-ID: <960330204617_75110.3417_CHK51-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: " "Zero-Point Energy" (ZPE) is known as an energy that fills the fabric of all space. Technically the ZPE results from an electric flux that flows orthogonally to our perceived dimension or reality. The mass equivalence of this energy has been calculated by physicists to be on the order of 1093 gms/cm3. Henry T. Moray, Walter Russell, and Nikola Tesla described the nature of the ZPE and designed and built equipment to engineer its properties. It may be possible to build devices to cohere this energy. This would result in a non-polluting, unlimited supply of virtually free-energy." Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.01.6G) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 12:59:50 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id MAA06603 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 12:49:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [198.4.9.6]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA06571 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 12:49:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA29797; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 15:47:27 -0500 Date: 30 Mar 96 15:46:23 EST From: Dean Miller <75110.3417@compuserve.com> To: Horace Heffner Subject: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] hyperdimensional physics Message-ID: <960330204623_75110.3417_CHK51-4@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Horace, >> As you might be aware, Hoagland has published and been a regular talk show and TV documentary guest regarding UFO stuff, and his Hyperdimensional Physics is said to be extra-terrestrial in origin, inspired by analyzing the shapes of alien structures. << Akshully (did I spell the correctly, Chris?), Hoagland is of the opinion that these alleged structures were made by humans from Earth who had a high technology civilization some time prior to 10,000 - 12,000 BCE. Not aliens. Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.01.6G) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 13:51:34 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id NAA14742 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 13:38:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from nz1.netzone.com (root@netzone.com [206.43.36.70]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA14694 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 13:38:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from phx-ip-124.netzone.com (phx-ip-152.netzone.com [206.43.37.152]) by nz1.netzone.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA01545 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 14:37:22 -0700 Message-Id: <199603302137.OAA01545@nz1.netzone.com> X-Sender: discpub@netzone.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 14:40:11 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Joe Champion Subject: vtx: Hugo/Champion Experiment - Questions Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Starting tomorrow Mark will start a new series of runs to see if we can replicate the previous test. The apparatus consists of flow through cell with temperature measurements being made at the input and output of the vessel. The temperature is being measured and recorded every 20 seconds. Input power is a conventional measurement of (E*I). One modification incorporated by Mark was the measurement of actual power to the new peristaltic pump. This is being accomplished by measuring (computer recorded) the DC voltage and current to the pump motor. This should assist in determining if pump power has an effect on system energy. We have incorporated a ball flow meter to the circuit. This meter provides only a physical measurement (+/- 3%) and cannot be incorporated into the computer data. Even though system efficiency is a factor in determination of actual output energies, we have elected to ignore the basic calorimetery at this time. That is to say, if we achieve OU by recording the physical parameters, one can only improve. Since I will be reporting the data generated from this experiment specifically for "peer review" by this group, I have the following questions: 1. Based on the above specifications does anyone see any basic omissions of data being recorded? 2. In what format would you like to see the data presented (i.e. chart, columns, averaged, ....)? Pump power, electrolysis power and temperature is measured and recorded on 20 second intervals. Your input is appreciated..... Joe Champion email discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 22:39:27 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id WAA15717 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 22:33:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA15699 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 22:33:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id UAA13080; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 20:32:45 -0500 Received: from @world.std.com (world.std.com) by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA23270; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 15:46:40 -0500 Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 15:46:40 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960330155332.3117d53c@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: vtx: compartments, current and loading Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:41 PM 3/26/96 +0100, Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk wrote: >On Tue, 26 Mar 1996, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >> The coupling of phonons to the H-isotope migration also has >> a role as discussed in my ICCF-4 paper "Catastrophic Active >> Media Theory of Cold Fusion". and then there are the >> anharmonic effects. >> Best wishes. >> Mitchell Swartz >> >> >>Since ICCF4, however, the term "Coehn effect" seems to have been used >> >slightly differently. As I said, it now refers to the apparent ability >> >of Pd to load and maintain a higher H/Pd ratio while the Pd is carrying >> >a significant electrical current. I suppose that there is a direct >> >connection, since electromigration can obviously modify the H/Pd >> >distribution within the cathode. >> >>Cheers,>Bill Page. > >That's strange, though (unless I am missing some conf-procs): the people who >have achieved high loadings didn't do this. Those who put large currents >through their cathode, hoping for some nonequilibrium effect, didn't get >anything out of that either. > >I take the point, though and it does make some sense. Shake up those >protons (or deuterons) and they might diffuse a bit faster, make way for >more to get in there. There are two major compartments. The fluid and the solid. My Q1D paper on loading discussed the transport in the solution. A later paper addressed some issues of the interfacial transport. The paper above (CAM) involved nonequilibrium effects including intrasolid transport, anharmonic and other diffusion. Some aspects of the how the Coehn effect is discussed at ICCF4+ seem more applicable to radio waves in a waveguide at first glance. ================================================ In the case of very thin metal layers, you don't >have this problem of course, diffusion is fast, loading must be fast. Load rates also differ by the metal -- which explains some of the differences between nickel and palladium. this factor can influence how fast the loading must be. ================================================ >All this would be fascinating if only someone other than the CETI mob were >to see some excess heat, or whatever. >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >| Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | >| Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | >| Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Others have seen excess heat. Best wishes. Mitchell From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 15:37:01 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id PAA03805 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 15:25:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA03757 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 15:24:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id SAA06279; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 18:23:12 -0500 Date: 30 Mar 96 18:21:55 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: vtx: Someone other than CETI Message-ID: <960330232154_72240.1256_EHB113-1@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Russ George says that he is tired of my whining. I am even more fed up with Russ George's whining and complaining that nobody will fund his research. He, along with many other CF scientists, want to have his cake and eat it too. Unless you publish performance specifications and you demonstrate the product, you cannot complain when nobody believes your product is real, nobody takes you seriously, and nobody is willing to invest in your company. Russ writes: "Of course a whole lot of groups who claim to get results are not keeping secrets, is that it." Exactly. Mitsubishi, Canon, Piantelli, Shell Oil, SRI and many other industry leaders publish an appropriate level of detail and patents. We can characterize their devices, even if we cannot replicate them. Hydrocatalysis and CETI have also generally released enough information to be taken seriously by investors, and for that reason they have attracted sufficient capital. I think they should release somewhat more than they do, but this is a judgement call. I am happy with the descriptions we find in the ICCF conference proceedings, and in the level of detail the Japanese companies release at the NHE and university conferences. I think it is a tragedy that E-Quest has never seen fit to publish in the ICCF proceedings. "How about that group in the mid-west with the burning ceramic, anybody you know Jed keeping secrets pertaining to that one." Jed would like very much to talk about that, but he always honors secrecy agreements. I think they are making a mistake by not going more public. "Let's see who else in society falls into this category. Does Jed's software company publish it's source code for everyone to use and improve upon. Oh no I forgot that's different. How about the interests of those (are you listening Jed) who expect to make money out of publishing information on cold fusion do they keep any secrets about how they make their enterprise work, opps that's different as well." This is insulting nonsense, and it is inappropriate to this discussion group. It is a gross exaggeration of my views, as Russ well knows. I never suggested total openness about unpatented aspects of the technology. In any case, the opposition to CF is so intense that we must have an unusual level of openness, or the research will never be funded properly. The same was true of other revolutionary technologies. For example, most historians agree that the Wright Brothers floundered around in excessive secrecy for two and half years (1906 - 1908) while they tried to launch a business. They squandered much of their technological lead. If they had kept secret another two years they would never even have been acknowledged as the rightful inventors of the technology, and they would never have earned a fortune. It was a classic case of excessive, counter-productive, self-destructive secrecy. There are many others, but most are not well known, because most people who make this mistake die in obscurity. The Wrights were lucky because in 1908 their investors and others forced them to make public demonstrations, first in Paris, then in Washington, DC. "Any of the groups Jed mentions [CETI, E-Quest, etc] are more than willing to share their "secrets" with organizations who will participate in a normal fashion with the hiring and support of some tens of engineers and scientists to develop this wonderful new energy source." Alas, that has not been my experience. I find a near paranoid level of hostility and secrecy pervades many CF labs. This prevents investment and the normal development of R&D projects with larger corporations. I am not the only one who feels this way; managers at large corporations and investors who want to get involved in CF frequently complain to me about this. John Logajan comments: "Having seen Jed's postings over the years, I think this is not quite his point. Jed has variously defended industrial secrecy. What I understand Jed to be doing here is speaking out against too much secrecy. Obviously it is a judgement call -- reasonable people can reasonably disagree." Exactly. "One of the benefits of letting out a little bit of info is that it can inspire external talent to conceive of new and useful ideas that feed back into the originating entity." Right again! John hits the nail on the head. "Ultimate secrecy requires internal talent to know or discover all the answers." And not only that, ultimate secrecy requires *internal funding* sufficient to pay for all of the research. I assume that CF will require as much R&D as things like semiconductors, hard disks, airplanes and the internal combustion engines. In that case, no individual and no company on earth has enough money and enough talent to go it alone. - Jed From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 16:58:19 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id QAA17925 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 16:48:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA17859 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 16:48:36 -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 SAA15986 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 18:25:09 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 15:46:57 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Re: [VORTCOR-LIST] hyperdimensional physics Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Hi Horace, > >>> As you might be aware, Hoagland has published and been a regular talk show >and TV documentary guest regarding UFO stuff, and his Hyperdimensional >Physics is said to be extra-terrestrial in origin, inspired by analyzing >the shapes of alien structures. << > >Akshully (did I spell the correctly, Chris?), Hoagland is of the opinion that >these alleged structures were made by humans from Earth who had a high >technology civilization some time prior to 10,000 - 12,000 BCE. Not aliens. > > Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.01.6G) Oh, I didn't realize that. Since the structures were on Mars I just assumed alien origins. I've heard Hoaland on Dreamland (Art Bell's program) which I listen to sometimes briefly on Sunday nights when driving my car. I usually find it difficult to focus on what is being said though. I gather Hoagland has a masters in physics, but makes his money as an author these days. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 17:12:23 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id RAA20625 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 17:04:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA20543 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 17:03:37 -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 SAA16056 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 18:40:19 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 16:02:07 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Hugo/Champion Experiment - Questions Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] >Since I will be reporting the data generated from this experiment >specifically for "peer review" by this group, I have the following questions: > >1. Based on the above specifications does anyone see any basic omissions of >data being recorded? > >2. In what format would you like to see the data presented (i.e. chart, >columns, averaged, ....)? > >Pump power, electrolysis power and temperature is measured and recorded on >20 second intervals. > >Your input is appreciated..... >Joe Champion email discpub@netzone.com >http://www.netzone.com/~discpub Maybe a suggestion for later: For data acquisition, pressure transducers are cheaper than flow meters and provide the all important data necessary to eliminate the "power from the pump" argument. I would like to point out that once you have manual measurement of flow at a particular pressure and pump energy input, that flow rate can not be reduced without increasing the pressure, and vice-versa, you have a good check on flow rate consistancy, lack of fiter cloggings, kinks, etc. Even just a manually recorded pressure guage might add much to your ability to eliminate power from the pump that results in waste heat, and thus increase the ou factor reliably. You might be surprized, as I was to find out how little of the pump power actually is delivered to the fluid if there is not much resistance in the loop. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 19:03:28 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id SAA10601 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 18:56:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA10528 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 18:55:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id VAA15797; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 21:55:36 -0500 Received: from @world.std.com (world.std.com) by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA16727; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 21:53:57 -0500 Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 21:53:57 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960330220050.26479296@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: vtx: Hugo/Champion Experiment - Questions Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Joe Champion email discpub@netzone.com wrote: >Input power is a conventional measurement of (E*I). One modification >incorporated by Mark was the measurement of actual power to the new >peristaltic pump. This is being accomplished by measuring (computer >recorded) the DC voltage and current to the pump motor. This should assist >in determining if pump power has an effect on system energy. > >We have incorporated a ball flow meter to the circuit. This meter provides >only a physical measurement (+/- 3%) and cannot be incorporated into the >computer data. why not? integrating that data should help the analysis. >1. Based on the above specifications does anyone see any basic omissions of >data being recorded?> >2. In what format would you like to see the data presented (i.e. chart, >columns, averaged, ....)? the issues of adequate baseline, and total power integration over time were discussed previously including a URL to one method to display this data in an easily evaluable form. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 21:00:41 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id UAA29315 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 20:50:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29285 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 20:50:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.65] ([204.57.193.76]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA17220 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 22:27:35 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 19:49:20 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: vtx: Perturbed experiments Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I hear The HAARP experiments are about to begin or have begun in Gakona, Alaska. These are atmospheric ELF electromagnetic wave experiments I hear. There is an article in the local paper urging people to contact their representatives to stop it, that it can potentially be damaging to the earth's "envelope". Does anyone know what this is all about? Maybe I'll have to look for ELF signals in my CF data, now it's ou, now it isn't, now it's massive ou! ... 8) Actually my biggest problems to date have been catalogs sent by US Mail taking 5 weeks to get here, and one cracked engine block temporarily zapping my dilettante research budget. Come to think of it, there *was* this green stuff all over the car, maybe it's ELF ooze. 8^) About the various recent posts regarding current through the electolyte being carried by ions, including my Ion Brake Hypothesis drivel, I am beginning to think this is all nonsense. Ions do not carry the bulk of the current, this is just not possible. Ions are big and sluggish and wrapped with H2O dipoles in layers like an onion. They just can not go very fast. I think electrons and electron holes, carry the bulk of the current, just as in most other conductors. Dipole rotation and alignment may also be significant, but that effect must be limited, otherwise you couldn't have such a thing as 1 megohm water. The electrons must be able to get where they are needed to balance a charge, in a net sense, at near light speed. It would be an interresting experiment to measure the speed of EM Pulse travel in water and various electrolytes. Yes the "ions" migrate, but it must be via a mostly charge balanced solution, and due to the very low field gradient, the actual ion travel rate must be very close to the natural diffusion rate. It seems like the ions involved in reactions at an electrode surface must be "manufactured" there at the surface. Any "ion" current in the electrolyte must be charge balanced because charge can not accumulate in the interior of a conductor. Furthermore the drip at the degassing chamber eliminates any significant unbalanced ion flow through the fluid return loop. This is because the most charge that can be on the drop as it falls is limited by the electrolysis voltage (about 10 V or less) and the capacitance of the drop, about 0.1 ml and less than .6 cm in diameter, thus having a capacitance C < 0.665 x 10^-12 F/cm (.6 cm) = .399 x 10^-12 F, or less than .4 uuF. At a voltage of 11 V we would store 11 x .4 x 10^-12 Coulombs per drop or 44 x 10^-12 C/ml, and at a flow rate of .41 ml/s that's 18 x 10^-12 A. There is simply no detectable loop current and no unbalanced ions completing the circuit in the fluid loop in a PPC with a dripping degassing chamber. To get a reality check, I built a "Stretched PPC", consisting of a 122.5 cm piece of 1/8" ID Tygon tubing fitted with barbed T connectors at the ends. Inside the tubing was 55 cm of .015" Pt wire, a 10 cm gap, and a 57.5 cm length of .033" nichrome wire. Roughly another 11 cm of wire extended beyond the 3 cm T's and through about 5 cm of additional tubing used to clamp the wire and make a seal. The 1 M Li2SO4 electrolyte flow rate was about .4 ml/s and 5 cm/s. With the fluid stopped and no voltage applied the cell created +.429 V at the Pt anode relative to the NiCr cathode. With fluid in motion from cathode toward anode the potential dropped to .416 V to .392 V. It appeared bubbles forming on the cathode increased the cell resistance. Cell current in mA was then measured with external power 3, 5, 7, and 11 Volts applied positively to the Pt anode, negatively to the NiCr casthode, with the electrolyte flowing forward (cathode toward anode), not flowing, and flowing in reverse. The results follow: V, Still, Flowing, Still, Reversed 3, 0.167, 0.28, 0.21, 0.29 5, 0.99, 1.06, 1.05, 1.07 7, 1.97, 2.04, 2.06, 2.04 9, 3.05, 3.05, 3.09, 3.08 11, 3.76, 3.99, 4.14, 4.09 It was noted that the H2 bubbles were very evident, especially at the higher voltages, and evolving within about 1 cm of the tip of the NiCr wire, while the evolution of O2 bubbles was not distinct. This seems to indicate that 1 cm is a good depth for the cathode bead portion of the cell, but possibly a larger anode is useful and might aid recombination significantly. A pressure guage and drip degasser was also in the fluid circuit. There was not a sufficient pressure to register on the sphymomanometer guage at any time in the runs, which begins to register at 10 mm Hg, but the pressure was not even near that. The tubing was intentionally pinched to make sure the guage was working. There was no visible increase in pressure drop due to any increase in voltage or current, thus eliminating the Ion Brake Hypothesis. The mA numbers are were noted to reduce with time due to bubble formation, so the readings were taken after flicking the cell to free the H bubbles from the cathode. Their accuracyy is overstated, as you can see from the 2 sets of data for the still electrolyte, but generally indicative. There does is no significant difference in the results. Regardles of fluid motion or direction, the cell maintained the same V/A curves. The conclusion must be that either ions travel much faster than 5 cm/s, or charge is not carried by ions as conventionally explainded. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 21:22:06 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id VAA03096 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 21:15:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA03089 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 21:15:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0u3FUC-00022JC; Sat, 30 Mar 96 23:15 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Hugo/Champion Experiment - Questions To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 23:15:31 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199603302137.OAA01545@nz1.netzone.com> from "Joe Champion" at Mar 30, 96 02:40:11 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Joe Champion wrote: > Based on the above specifications does anyone see any basic omissions of > data being recorded? Well, if you can't tell us the chemical composition of the system, you could at least give us the overal mass of the potential consumables. Then you'd have to run it 'til energy out exceeded chemical possibilities (i.e. on the order of 10eV's per atom or above.) Not knowing the details of construction, we have no way of factoring out prosaic chemical explanations. -- - 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 Mar 30 22:23:30 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id WAA12963 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 22:15:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA12951 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 22:15:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-16.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-16.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.16]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA03966 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 16:14:44 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: vortcor-list respond problem Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 06:15:31 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <315dea34.8727802@mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99e/16.194 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:25:14 -0800 (PST), William Beaty wrote: >On Fri, 29 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > >> I have made a number of posts in response to vortcor-list posts, but none >> have showed up for several days. I just discovered that the responses were >> being emailed to the people who posted to votcor-list, and not to >> vortcor-list as it has in the past. > >Listproc is still somewhat experimental here, and someone on the >eskimo.com staff accidentally changed the "reply to:" default for all the >lists. He's since fixed it. This affects only vortcor-list. Bill, should I then take it that this means that you are experimenting with setting the "reply to:" default for VORTCOR-LIST to vortex-L? (As would appear logical to me). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://www.inett.com/himac Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 22:23:30 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id WAA13007 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 22:15:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from tornado.netspace.net.au (root@netspace.net.au [203.10.110.110]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA12991 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 22:15:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-a2-16.mel.netspace.net.au (dialup-a2-16.mel.netspace.net.au [203.17.100.16]) by tornado.netspace.net.au (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA03974 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 16:14:48 +1000 (EST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Hugo/Champion Experiment - Questions Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 06:15:36 GMT Organization: Improving Message-Id: <315df571.11605213@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199603302137.OAA01545@nz1.netzone.com> In-Reply-To: <199603302137.OAA01545@nz1.netzone.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99e/16.194 Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 30 Mar 1996 14:40:11 -0700, Joe Champion wrote: >Starting tomorrow Mark will start a new series of runs to see if we can >replicate the previous test. > >The apparatus consists of flow through cell with temperature measurements >being made at the input and output of the vessel. The temperature is being >measured and recorded every 20 seconds. > >Input power is a conventional measurement of (E*I). One modification >incorporated by Mark was the measurement of actual power to the new >peristaltic pump. This is being accomplished by measuring (computer >recorded) the DC voltage and current to the pump motor. This should assist >in determining if pump power has an effect on system energy. > >We have incorporated a ball flow meter to the circuit. This meter provides >only a physical measurement (+/- 3%) and cannot be incorporated into the >computer data. Hopefully, frequent and regular readings of this device will also be included in the data. (as well as comments mentioning if/when/why variations in the flow occur) > >Even though system efficiency is a factor in determination of actual output >energies, we have elected to ignore the basic calorimetery at this time. >That is to say, if we achieve OU by recording the physical parameters, one >can only improve. > >Since I will be reporting the data generated from this experiment >specifically for "peer review" by this group, I have the following questions: > >1. Based on the above specifications does anyone see any basic omissions of >data being recorded? A couple of pressure gauges, at inlet and outlet would also go a long way. (Thanks Horace) > >2. In what format would you like to see the data presented (i.e. chart, >columns, averaged, ....)? IMO best would be columns of 5 minute averages, where each entry is a URL that points to the complete data for that 5 minute period. Each column would be a different measurement parameter. Of course a multicoloured graph showing all measurements concurrently as a function of time would be a nice addition. (problem with this of course, is multiple scales). > >Pump power, electrolysis power and temperature is measured and recorded on >20 second intervals. > >Your input is appreciated..... >Joe Champion email discpub@netzone.com >http://www.netzone.com/~discpub > > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://www.inett.com/himac Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 30 22:39:30 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id WAA15588 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 22:32:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA15576 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 22:32:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0u3Ggx-000232C; Sun, 31 Mar 96 00:32 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Perturbed experiments To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 00:32:47 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Horace Heffner" at Mar 30, 96 07:49:20 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Horace Heffner wrote: > About the various recent posts regarding current through the electolyte > being carried by ions, including my Ion Brake Hypothesis drivel, I am > beginning to think this is all nonsense. Ions do not carry the bulk of the > current, this is just not possible. Ions are big and sluggish and wrapped > with H2O dipoles in layers like an onion. They just can not go very fast. I > think electrons and electron holes, carry the bulk of the current, just as > in most other conductors. Ions are big and slow, but there are a lot of them. Roughly about 1000 coulomb's worth per mole. One ampere per second transports one coulomb. You can see the commotion of applying electrolysis current to an ionic solution -- it gets very turbulent very quickly. Other proofs that ions carry current are that various electrodepositations manage to acheive high Faraday efficiencies. These would include electroplating operations as well as other types. The amount of metal, for instance, that is transported from the anode to the cathode is consistent with the number of electrons transported through the wire conductors. If electrons carried the current through the solution, then there'd be no mechanism to enforce this one-to-one relationship. The evidence for ion current is pretty overwhelming -- heck, you can see it with your own eyes! -- - 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 Mar 31 01:32:15 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id BAA07721 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 01:24:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA07713 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 01:24:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.76] ([204.57.193.76]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id DAA18610 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 03:01:53 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 00:23:33 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Perturbed experiments Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >The evidence for ion current is pretty overwhelming -- heck, you >can see it with your own eyes! > >-- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - Not in the case of 1 M Li2SO4. All I could see was H2 forming. H2 is available in H2O, or 2(H+) which is everywhere in the solution. Where's the proof? So, are you asserting the H+ ions travel faster than 5 cm/s, or maybe travel in the boundary layers of the tubing, where the flow is less than 5 cm/s? If the latter, the effective cross sectional area should be a lot larger with fluid flow in one direction than the opposite, which does not agree with the data. The only thing that makes any sense to me at the moment is an average velocity much higher than 5 cm/s. I think it would be interresting to try a similar electrodeposition experiment at various fluid velocities toward the anode to see if ion speed shows up. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 04:05:00 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id DAA04549 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 03:59:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-7.compuserve.com (arl-img-7.compuserve.com [198.4.7.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA04541 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 03:59:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-7.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id GAA19085; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 06:57:57 -0500 Date: 31 Mar 96 06:56:29 EST From: Dean Miller <75110.3417@compuserve.com> To: Vortexians Subject: vtx: Perturbed experiments Message-ID: <960331115629_75110.3417_CHK43-2@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace, >> Does anyone know what this is all about? Maybe I'll have to look for ELF signals in my CF data, now it's ou, now it isn't, now it's massive ou! ... 8) << HAARP is supposedly a continuing experiment to create an artificial EM 'mirror' in the ionosphere, much like a microwave parabolic reflector -- only for lower frequencies. Some experiments were conducted several years ago for the process and suggestions for experiments to create an artificial ionosphere were made as far back as the 1910's and 20's (Tesla, among others, thought someone should try this). I recall one proposed experiment, some time before WW II, for shining a really powerful light beam into the air to cause ionization. What HAARP proposes to use the reflector for is open to speculation (and quite a bit of speculating has been done). Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.01.6G) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 07:49:14 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id HAA03372 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 07:43:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA03348 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 07:43:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.80] ([204.57.193.80]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA19368 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 09:20:54 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 06:42:28 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Perturbed experiments Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > I recall one proposed experiment, some time before WW II, for shining a >really powerful light beam into the air to cause ionization. > >What HAARP proposes to use the reflector for is open to speculation (and >quite a >bit of speculating has been done). > > Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.01.6G) Here's have a few that have even been discussed for that particular vicinity (130 miles NW of here): (1) Over the horizon backscatter radar - but nope it can't be that, I think we have a treaty against that. (2) A heavier bandwidth replacement for meteoric burst systems. (3) An attempt to draw energy from the Aurora Borealis by shorting it to ground, as proposed by Senator Ted Stevens. The idea is to ionize a large conducting collector in the air and then zap an ionized path to ground using a laser. Once a conductive path is established it is hoped it will remain self ionizing for a long enough period to overcome the input energy requirement. Could be pretty spectacular and surprizing. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 01:43:04 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id BAA09033 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 01:37:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA09011 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 01:37:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from [204.57.193.76] ([204.57.193.76]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id DAA18696 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 03:15:08 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 00:36:48 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: Hugo/Champion Experiment - Questions Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Sat, 30 Mar 1996 14:40:11 -0700, Joe Champion wrote: [snip] >>1. Based on the above specifications does anyone see any basic omissions of >>data being recorded? >A couple of pressure gauges, at inlet and outlet would also go a long >way. (Thanks Horace) >> [snip] Since the outlet from the cell typically goes through a small resistance to a degassing chamber, which is the low pressure point in the system (i.e. 0) the delta p subsequent to the cell will be nearly unmeasurable, so you really only need one guage prior to the cell. Even with a large pressure drop following the cell due to a heat exchanger, the drop was consistant in steady state operation, so even the slightest change in resistance, and/or/therefore flow rate was instantly reflected in a pressure change prior to the cell. The point is that 99 percent of the benefit can be had with a *single* pressure transducer. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sat Mar 23 01:17:49 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id BAA05395 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 01:11:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from head.globalcom.net (head.globalcom.net [204.111.1.35]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA05372 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 01:10:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from alpha (eb3ppp21.shentel.net [204.111.1.149]) by head.globalcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id EAA04648 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 04:10:52 -0500 Date: Sat, 23 Mar 96 04:05:19 From: dacha@shentel.net Subject: vtx: Comet! To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon B95_14, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. 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 Vortex, Everyone, do yourself a favor and find a dark area at night to look up at the sky. This comet is amazing! Through my little 12" SC telescope it looks like a small sun. Off subject, yes...but this is something else. Robert ------------------------------------- Name: dacha E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 3/23/96 Time: 4:05:19 AM No matter where you go, there you are. http://www.visor.com/info ------------------------------------- From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 12:57:34 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id MAA21300 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 12:47:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA21255 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 12:47:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id OAA05358; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 14:21:10 -0500 Received: from @world.std.com (world.std.com) by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA28026; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 03:13:50 -0500 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 03:13:50 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960331032039.3caf388e@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: vtx: conduction/polarization phenomena Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Logajan wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> About the various recent posts regarding current through the electolyte >> being carried by ions, including my Ion Brake Hypothesis drivel, I am >> beginning to think this is all nonsense. Ions do not carry the bulk of the >> current, this is just not possible. Ions are big and sluggish and wrapped >> with H2O dipoles in layers like an onion. They just can not go very fast. I >> think electrons and electron holes, carry the bulk of the current, just as >> in most other conductors. > >Ions are big and slow, but there are a lot of them. Roughly about 1000 >coulomb's worth per mole. One ampere per second transports one coulomb. > >You can see the commotion of applying electrolysis current to an ionic >solution -- it gets very turbulent very quickly. > >Other proofs that ions carry current are that various electrodepositations >manage to acheive high Faraday efficiencies. These would include >electroplating operations as well as other types. The amount of metal, >for instance, that is transported from the anode to the cathode is >consistent with the number of electrons transported through the >wire conductors. If electrons carried the current through the >solution, then there'd be no mechanism to enforce this one-to-one >relationship. > >The evidence for ion current is pretty overwhelming -- heck, you >can see it with your own eyes! > >-- > - 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 - > 1) The conduction polarization phenomena include both bulk and surface effects (unless a three-ring guard electrode system is used). 2) A major component is intramolecular proton (or deuteron) transfer secondary to diffusion in the applied electric field. The transfer puts TWO hydrogens on one oxygen-oxygen bridge in the hydrogen-bonded stereoconstellation. That is a D-defect, and is matched by an L-defect for neutral solutions. These are L- and D- defects moving through diffusion ellipsoids, slightly perturbed from the otherwise spherically expected diffusion because of the applied electric field intensity. this occurs because the applied electric field intensity produces a local electric field energy quite small compared to what is required to break the three (3) hydrogen bonds to thereby enable the intramolecular hydrogen transfer which is 13.5 kilocalories per mole. 3) Intermolecular transfer occurs at the electrode interface, and is shown by a the tiny arrow in the diagram of loading at http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html 4) There are several other forms of conduction/polarization which augment the above, and they are linked in Hilbert space. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 12:58:47 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id MAA21980 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 12:51:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA21969 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 12:51:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from (rwall@jac-fl8-06.ix.netcom.com [206.217.116.70]) by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA17461 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 12:48:01 -0800 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 12:48:01 -0800 Message-Id: <199603312048.MAA17461@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> From: rwall@ix.netcom.com (Richard Wayne Wall) Subject: Re: vtx: ZPE: what is it? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > >" "Zero-Point Energy" (ZPE) is known as an energy that fills the >fabric of all space. Technically the ZPE results from an electric flux >that flows orthogonally to our perceived dimension or reality. The >mass equivalence of this energy has been calculated by physicists to >be on the order of 1093 gms/cm3. Henry T. Moray, Walter Russell, and >Nikola Tesla described the nature of the ZPE and designed and built >equipment to engineer its properties. It may be possible to build >devices to cohere this energy. This would result in a non-polluting, >unlimited supply of virtually free-energy." > Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.01.6G) Dave what specific equipment did Russell and Tesla design and build to engineer ZPE properties? RWW From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 14:19:27 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id OAA03066 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 14:11:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout09.mail.aol.com (emout09.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.24]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA02987 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 14:11:20 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff@aol.com Received: by emout09.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA13754 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:10:30 -0500 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:10:30 -0500 Message-ID: <960331171030_182091343@emout09.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: ZPE: what is it? Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Check out Aug 1985 Scientific American article by Boyer, "Classical Vacuum." It's the best quick reqadablel intro to ZPE in my opinion. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 14:30:09 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id OAA04711 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 14:21:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail06.mail.aol.com (mail06.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.108]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA04673 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 14:21:02 -0800 (PST) From: Puthoff@aol.com Received: by mail06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA24327 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:19:40 -0500 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:19:40 -0500 Message-ID: <960331171937_182096203@mail06> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: ZPE: what is it? Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Although some speculate that the ZPE results from an "orthogonal flow" from another dimension, this is not the standard interpretation. The standard one is simply that is is an ordinary, random radiation field with cubic freq distribution filling all of space. My own papers speak to the issue that at any given point it is the the radiation field summed from the quantum jiggle of all particles throughout the universe. See papers by Puthoff, Phys Rev A 40, p 4857, Nov 1, 1989, and errata Phys Rev A 44, p 3385, Sept 1, 1991. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 15:09:39 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id KAA29363 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 10:27:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from skypoint.com (mirage.skypoint.com [199.86.32.7]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA29301 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 10:26:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by skypoint.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0u3Rpk-00024eC; Sun, 31 Mar 96 12:26 CST Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: vtx: Perturbed experiments To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 12:26:35 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Horace Heffner" at Mar 31, 96 00:23:33 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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: Horace Heffner writes: > Where's the proof? I don't have any independent knowledge that Li2SO4 in H2O is an ionic conductor only -- I thought you were more generally disputing the existance of ionic conduction. > So, are you asserting the H+ ions travel faster than 5 cm/s, or > maybe travel in the boundary layers of the tubing, where the flow is less > than 5 cm/s? I should be withdrawing from this conversation since I don't really have the specific knowledge to address these issues, but it does seem to me that the only requirements in an ionic current are that at one electrode some ions are transformed into other species, and an inverse operation occurs at the other electrode. There is no general requirement that these species need to flow upstream. If these species pre-exist in the solution, then the current loop can be "closed" around the longpath downstream/reservoir loop. One molar Li2SO4 in H2O has roughly 50 coulomb ion-pairs per cc. I don't have your previous post handy to do further numerical checks, but at first glance, this population density does seem to give us a reasonable level of current capacity without requiring enormous macro velocities in the solution -- if the transport species can come around the backway. -- - 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 Mar 31 15:11:19 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id LAA08158 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 11:21:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.7.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA07302 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 11:12:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id OAA22767; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 14:10:53 -0500 Date: 31 Mar 96 14:09:07 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: vtx: Italian justice....... Message-ID: <960331190906_100433.1541_BHG113-2@CompuServe.COM> Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear All, I've just heard the result of a court case in Italy, the one where Fleischmann and Pons and others sued the Republicca newspaper for referring to cold fusion as scientific fraud. They lost the case. This has been gleefully reported on sci.physics.fusion by the scientific advisor to the defence, one Dr Douglas O Morrison of CERN - of whom my opinion is about as low as my opinion sinks. So, why am I pleased? Because I hope this will finally knock some sense into the heads of CF people. I said in Boston that we haven't got time for science in CF. That was not because I'm against science - I'm all for it - but because (as I also said) scientists will believe anything which they are funded to believe. Also, contrariwise. But there's only one way they'll be funded. If the CF wars are to be fought within science, then Planck's Other Constant will apply. Planck set this value at 20 years, the time it takes for fresh minds to overcome the past. Look at those old films of the nuclear physicists of the 1930s and 1940s. Notice the 'buzz' they all radiate? Compare them with today's crop. Scientists they may be, but primarily they are the guardians of Holy Writ. So, how do we reduce Planck's twenty years? By putting the machines into ther hands of people with money, showing that they work, and bringing some materials scientists in on the act - in a big way. Not piecemeal, and most definitely not by doing "really good science" to find out exactly why they work. We need that right now like we need a hole in the head. I will bet that some of the big companies who are now dabbling in the field are finding that the problems of reproducibility of results will not have gone away. I will also bet that some of them are cutting their losses and getting out of CF. The solutions to non-reproducibility are likely to be counter - intuitive. A single corporation essentially means a single individual controlling its research. If that individual has a fixed idea, then - if it is a wrong idea - no hope there. Meanwhile, out there we have all these little groups. Some want the Nobel, others are like Tom in Tom & Jerry, with $$ signs in their eyeballs. All of them seem to think that they have the one best system, and are terrified that if they tell anybody about it - then somebody will find an improvement or circumvent their patents. Commercial secrecy is legitimate, but paranoia, greed and secretiveness are not. I would suggest to these groups that they are far more likely to be relegated to the most microscopic of footnotes. Other people with a more open, co-operative and positive attitude will just walk past them. And let us be clear about the present role of science in CF. Its role is primarily to help in the development of high-performance machines, and to ensure the safety of products. Once there are products - even poor-quality, low performance products - then there will be no shortage of scientists to work on improving them. There will also be plenty of funding to find out the basic phenomenon. In the face of such funding, there will be plenty of believing scientists. To find the mechanism - or mechanisms - of CF is perhaps the most important aspect of the subject, but it is certainly the *least* urgent. Maybe this court judgement will wonderfully concentrate a few minds. I doubt it, though. As Schiller puts it: "Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." Bloody right, is that. And if the gods themselves contend in vain against stupidity, I don't give much for the chances of an Italian judge. Chris From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 17:37:45 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id RAA09063 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:31:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from GAV.GAT.COM (GAV.GAT.COM [192.5.166.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA09046 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:31:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:31:35 -0800 (PST) From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com Message-Id: <199604010131.RAA09046@mail.eskimo.com> Received: from [198.133.146.230] by 198.133.146.230 with SMTP; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:31:31 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: vtx: Hugo/Champoin experiment Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In the first runs of the Hugo/Champion experiment it was obvious that many times the system was not in steady state. You must show data streams at least a few times longer than the time required for the system to settle into steady state. Otherwise the data cannot be interpreted in any useful way, and the "experiment" is actually a waste of time. Michael J. Schaffer michael.schaffer@gat.com Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 General Atomics, PO Box 85606, San Diego CA 92186-9784, USA From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 17:55:31 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id PAA21878 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 15:48:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA21776 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 15:47:29 -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 RAA21328 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:24:42 -0900 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 14:46:08 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: vtx: conduction/polarization phenomena Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >John Logajan wrote: [snip] If electrons carried the current through the >>solution, then there'd be no mechanism to enforce this one-to-one >>relationship. >> >>The evidence for ion current is pretty overwhelming -- heck, you >>can see it with your own eyes! >> >>-- >> - 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 - >> > > 1) The conduction polarization phenomena include both bulk and >surface effects (unless a three-ring guard electrode system is used). > > > 2) A major component is intramolecular proton (or deuteron) transfer >secondary to diffusion in the applied electric field. > > The transfer puts TWO hydrogens on one oxygen-oxygen bridge >in the hydrogen-bonded stereoconstellation. That is a D-defect, >and is matched by an L-defect for neutral solutions. > > These are L- and D- defects moving through >diffusion ellipsoids, slightly perturbed from the >otherwise spherically expected diffusion because of the applied >electric field intensity. this occurs because the applied >electric field intensity produces a local electric field energy >quite small compared to what is required to break the >three (3) hydrogen bonds to thereby enable the intramolecular >hydrogen transfer which is 13.5 kilocalories per mole. > > 3) Intermolecular transfer occurs at the electrode interface, >and is shown by a the tiny arrow in the diagram of loading >at http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html > > 4) There are several other forms of conduction/polarization which >augment the above, and they are linked in Hilbert space. > > Hope that helps. > > Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) OK, maybe the charge is not carried by electrons. Yes, electrons in a wire move very slowly in a wire, on average, much less than walking speed. But the charge demand is equalized at the other end of the wire at near lightspeed, just as when you turn on a hose full of water some comes out the other end at the speed of sound in water. In the case of copper wire, that there is a mechanism of charge exchange that does not involve atomic nucleus motion, it is not so clear that such a mechanism exists in electrolytes, but if a current pulse travels faster than the speed of sound in water, it does, and it does not involve neutralizing ions because none precipitate or evolve from the solution except at the electrodes. Yes ions move in an electrolyte, but that can not be the only mechanism for carrying charge. There are lots of examples proving that ions do and can move, and many experiments that prove such. Electrophoresis is based on that principle. But the ions move slowly, not 5 cm/s. The electron current supplied through the electrolyte to drive the electrolysis in the experiment I did must be transported through the electrolyte by some mechanism other than ion motion. The H+ ions were not travelling through the solution from the anode toward the cathode, were they? Although, maybe the charge is carried downstream by the SO4- ions, and upstream by the H+ ions? Such a carge carrying mechanism could carry a pulse (current rise) at the speed of sound in water. I'll have to think about this, I am definitely confused. The one thing I feel reasonably certain about is that all the proposed mechanisms involve nucleus motion, thus must be limited in propagation speed by a value near the speed of sound in water, about 1500 m/s. I did notice a very clear and reproducible "battery" voltage drop in the cell when the pump was turned on of .416 V to .392 V. Let's see, (5 cm/sec * .416 V) / (150000 cm/s) = .0000139 V. No, that's not it. There was about a 5 percent drop in voltage. Looking at it the other way, maybe the .024 V drop represents a 5.8 percent drop in speed, thus indicates a propagation speed of (.416 V * 5 cm/s)/(.058 V) = 36 cm/sec. Does anyone know if the propagation speed is near 1500 m/s for a current rise time (i.e about 1 ms for 50 ft) or if it is nearer to 1.4 seconds per 50 ft, or closer to light speed? I am thinking of trying an experiment with a 50 ft. section of Tygon to find the answer. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-owner@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 18:26:26 1996 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id SAA16318 for vortex-l-outgoing; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 18:15:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ix2.ix.netcom.com (ix2.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA16307 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 18:15:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from hou-tx16-02.ix.netcom.com by ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id SAA04806; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 18:14:17 -0800 Received: by hou-tx16-02.ix.netcom.com with Microsoft Mail id <01BB1F3D.680BF1E0@hou-tx16-02.ix.netcom.com>; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 20:05:28 -0600 Message-ID: <01BB1F3D.680BF1E0@hou-tx16-02.ix.netcom.com> From: Craig Haynie To: "'vortex-l@eskimo.com'" Subject: vtx: RE: ZPE: what is it? Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 08:58:56 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BB1F3D.6836AB60" Sender: owner-vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB1F3D.6836AB60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello! Does anyone know where I can get more information on ZPE? Perhaps a book or magazine article? Thanks, Craig Haynie (Houston) ccHaynie@ix.netcom.com ---------- From: Dean Miller[SMTP:75110.3417@compuserve.com] Sent: Saturday, March 30, 1996 2:46 PM To: Joe Flynn Subject: vtx: ZPE: what is it? " "Zero-Point Energy" (ZPE) is known as an energy that fills the fabric of all space. Technically the ZPE results from an electric flux that flows orthogonally to our perceived dimension or reality. The mass equivalence of this energy has been calculated by physicists to be on the order of 1093 gms/cm3. Henry T. Moray, Walter Russell, and Nikola Tesla described the nature of the ZPE and designed and built equipment to engineer its properties. It may be possible to build devices to cohere this energy. This would result in a non-polluting, unlimited supply of virtually free-energy." Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.01.6G) ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB1F3D.6836AB60 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhwCAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAENgAQAAgAAAAIAAgABBJAG ABwBAAABAAAADAAAAAMAADADAAAACwAPDgAAAAACAf8PAQAAAEUAAAAAAAAAgSsfpL6jEBmdbgDd AQ9UAgAAAAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAFNNVFAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQAAAAAe AAIwAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AAzABAAAAFAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20AAwAVDAEA AAADAP4PBgAAAB4AATABAAAAFgAAACd2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tJwAAAAIBCzABAAAAGQAA AFNNVFA6Vk9SVEVYLUxARVNLSU1PLkNPTQAAAAADAAA5AAAAAAsAQDoBAAAAAgH2DwEAAAAEAAAA AAAAAzIzAQiABwAYAAAASVBNLk1pY3Jvc29mdCBNYWlsLk5vdGUAMQgBBIABABUAAABSRTogWlBF OiB3aGF0IGlzIGl0PwAmBgEFgAMADgAAAMwHAwAfAAgAOgA4AAAAbwEBIIADAA4AAADMBwMAHwAI ADoABQAAADwBAQmAAQAhAAAARDRFOTU5MkFEMDhBQ0YxMUJBQ0U0NDQ1NTM1NDAwMDAAHAcBA5AG AGgFAAAQAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwA2AAAAAABAADkA4B3xlRIfuwEeAHAA AQAAABUAAABSRTogWlBFOiB3aGF0IGlzIGl0PwAAAAACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABux8SleAqWenVitAR z7rOREVTVAAAAAADAAYQcnpTxQMABxACAwAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAASEVMTE9ET0VTQU5ZT05FS05P V1dIRVJFSUNBTkdFVE1PUkVJTkZPUk1BVElPTk9OWlBFP1BFUkhBUFNBQk9PS09STUFHQVpJTkVB UlRJQ0xFP1RIQU5LUyxDUkFJR0hBWU5JRQAAAAACAQkQAQAAACEEAAAdBAAAjAYAAExaRnUE9bNe /wAKAQ8CFQKoBesCgwBQAvIJAgBjaArAc2V0MjcGAAbDAoMyA8UCAHByQnER4nN0ZW0CgzN3AuQH EwKAfQqACM8J2TvxFg8yNTUCgAqBDbELYOBuZzEwMxRQCwoUUYUL8mMAQCBIZWwVoGYhCoUKhURv B5EAcHlBAiBlIGtubwfgd0ZoBJAc0EkgYwORZ70RwCAEYB1xC4ACEHIAwBR0aQIgIB8hWlBFWD8g UASQEYBwHGEgOQbgb2sfQAXAAMBnYR56C4Ac0ArAHwBjbGUKPxtcVBGAbmtzLCkbXENyC3BnGuBh eXMDABzQKEgIYBPAAiApCQqFY2MklEBpeC7lHMB0BaBtLibxG1wK9CBsaTE4MALRaS14MTQ0DfAM 0ClDC1kxrjYKoANgE9BjBUAtK2evCocqGwwwKuZGA2E6LG7XKuYMghwgZQORTQMQIdAAcltTTVRQ OjcENTEZMC4zNDE3mkAm8XAlMASQdmUnIv5dLA8tHQZgAjAuTy9bBhDqdAhwZCSgLAXQCsARcAgg MzA3cDE5OTaQIDI6NDhgUE0y39ktHVRvNR8vW0ocQC3wGmwksG44/zPudWJq9yshOx8vW3YM0D/w H4E/8M8dQB7wHoAEIGl0If0oRlwzNinnGkUq5iJGEFphBJBvLVBvC4AFQEVRHMByZ3lGICgfgSnX QrIc8gOgYRxiIAnwRyL8IHRCgikQGxAEIElAHNDWZgGgBRBjH0BmCoUHQHUDIHMKsGMycCLQBZBo vwMAHcAbEEkiHNAfgSAWEPBzdWx0BCADUkiTIdBnKzBKYhjgdXhJNRWgd8ZzCoUVsWhvZwIgTFRm bx9ACHAgcASQS6Bp8TJgZCBkB3EAgR8iBcD3FhAHQELweUvBSgEAwAQR+GVxdVGgB0AJ8EugSpjf SUBCwUjVEYAEIGIJ4R2xXGxjTVAe8FHBYkkgcP5oE7AhsAQATXFQ4VYwH0IfSfIFsASBSpE4IDA5 MwEKhWdtcy9jbTNTS8Aa8G5ySSBUS8BNuwWwN1JXB0AT0AXAUiUwHxGwGxA3cABwUdBOaWv3BvAg UEvgc10xDbAE8lYw/1HQSfEKhVCANxFUgkyXXLLfXcEkYBzAUdBcsmJUAE1gvVPTcFIRBUBQ4Qnw ZyFB/1kRQvBPlirhUVEfAAeQS8DOSR4hJKBYMnBvBBBeEO8h0FgDYUFgQnYhsAeRUOG/BaAdU1U5 UzIEAAqFdwhgn2XhTSQegSBBHQBuLWTwnRsQdR8AGRA3cHVuKKDubULwUcFNQHALUEkgWUG7ZjAA IHVMUwNQCeAtZ4X+IgqFMBQrYE2UMCAEIFtANyFBBCBvZCglMGpxIE8EeldpgTIuMDEu/DZHJYZx L0PPRN8rIgqFBRUxAHWwAAAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzBA2SF3Eh+7AUAACDBA2SF3Eh+7 AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAppc= ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB1F3D.6836AB60-- From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 23:59:39 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA09543; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:55:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:55:43 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vtx: Re: XRF analysis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 29 Mar 1996, Bill Page wrote: [...] > In an earlier section of the same reference (10.3.2 What Are the > Possible Paths for the Hydrogen-Evolution Reaction?) they describe two > basic steps that occur in acidic electrolytes with noble metal > electrodes M (Platinum, Palladium, etc. and Nickel): > > (discharge) M(e) + H3O+ -> MH + H2O > > (desorption: Pt, Pd) 2MH -> 2M + H2 > > or (Ni) MH + H3O+ + M(e) -> 2M + H2O + H2 > > In both cases, a relatively fast electron-transfer reaction > (discharge) places a hydrogen atom on the metal surface and the > desorption step occurs more slowly and is the limiting factor in > the evolution of H2 gas. Another possibility is that H may be > adsorbed into the bulk metal. In the case of Pt and Pd, the > desorption step does not involve any further electron transfers, > so increasing the discharge rate (via the addition of a very > small concentration of a "poison") might increase the "pressure" > for H to be absorbed into the metal rather than to be desorbed as > a gas. > > In the case of Ni, however, an electron-transfer reaction is also > involved in the desorption step. So it is not clear that simplying > increasing the electron-transfer rate will help. > > Bockris and Reddy point out, however, that "curiously, not much > mechanistic work has been done in alkaline solutions". I suppose > that this caveat would also apply to Li2SO4 electrolytes. Maybe > Dieter could point us in the direction of current research here. > Does anyone really know what happens to substances like As2O3 at > electrode surfaces? Any theories on how they affect electron- > transfer reactions? Is it possible that they actually block the > desorption step (as I suggested in my earlier message)? > > I wouldn't want this to lead too far off topic, but I think the > points for Scott and other experimenter's in the above is that: > > 1) There is a simple and effective way to prepare ultrapure > solutions. > > 2) Very small concentrations (10^-10 mole/liter) are quite > relevant. > > 3) Very small concentrations can have qualitatively quite > different effects than just small concentrations. So ultra > pure solutions plus *very* careful addition of selected > impurities might be necessary. > > 4) Different "posions" might very well affect different electrode > materials, in different solutions (acidic, basic, salt) in > different ways. Theory gives some good hints but it doesn't > currently provide a complete picture. This is experimental > territory. Well, we don't know too much about how adsorbed substances inhibit electron transfer, although we do have some ideas. The simplest, and quite sensible, one is that they simply block the surface. There is a relation between a surface active substance's (sas's) bulk concentration and its surface concentration - the adsorption isotherm, of the form bC = I(theta), where b is a constant expressing the strength of adsorption, theta is the fractional coverage (surface conc divided by maximum surface conc for a monolayer), and I is some function. There is a string of different I's, the simplest being Henry's isotherm, I = theta (holds only for v. small theta). The simple blocking theory has it that b is very large, so that v. small sas bulk concentration is required for a given coverage. The sas's we have been talking about: As2O3, thiourea, triphenyl phosphine oxide, all have rather large b and will therefore almost fully cover an electrode at even extremely small concs - so small that these substances take a while, especially in a stagnant solution, to diffuse to the electrode in sufficient amounts. As for ultrapure solutions and electrochemical purification; this is all true but if Scott is trying to replicate the Patterson cell (or CETI setup), he may initially be better off doing exactly what they did. Agreed, it would ultimately be best to get a handle on what causes what is being caused (if anything) and control the conditions precisely; but at the moment there is no theory to speak of. You can, by the way, get very pure solutions by filtering them through a column of active carbon. I even used suspended active carbon at one time, it worked, and didn't interfere with the electrode reaction. The hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) and its isotopic counterpart, the DER, is the "class" problem in electrochemistry, and has attracted the most capable electrochemists for 100 years. As Bill indicates, it is a complex animal, and at Pd it is even more so because of the absorption effect. Bockris and Reddy are a bit out of date here (the book is a classic but was published in the '70's (mine is with a student at the moment, can't check)). In the last few years, work has been done in basic solution. Prominent among these is the Enyo group in Japan. There has just appeared a paper by Mengoli et al in J. Electroanal. Chem., which I now have at home to do the abstract, and so I can't remeember whether it's in vol. 402 or 403; I'll let y'all know. I also happen to know that there will soon appear another paper in the same journal on the same subject, by Todd Green et al, very careful work done by Todd, who got straight-line Tafel plots where others reckon they get two-component, "bent" plots, probably because they had mass transport problems. Green et al were able to (almost) eliminate the Volmer-Tafel mechanism except at rather high current density (to those of you who know what this means). A very interesting feature of the Mengoli et al paper is that they have measured the diffusion coefficient of deuterium in PdDx as a function of D/Pd loading, and find that it changes by about 2 orders of magnitude, going up with x, from 10^-7 cm^2/s (x=0) to about 10^-5 at x = 0.91. Amazing, if true. PS: I thought I should do the right thing and post technical responses to vortex-l, and did so last week. These have not appeared, I think. I am confused now. What is the situation, Bill B? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortcor-list@eskimo.com Sun Mar 31 23:59:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA09599; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:56:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:56:10 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Originator: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: vortcor-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: vortcor-list respond problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 29 Mar 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > I have made a number of posts in response to vortcor-list posts, but none > have showed up for several days. I just discovered that the responses were > being emailed to the people who posted to votcor-list, and not to > vortcor-list as it has in the past. A number of you must have recieved > private messages from me that seemed a little strange, or maybe you thought > they were from vortcor-list? At any rate, the reponses end up not posted. > I will re-send what I can find like this to vtx, even though it is out of > date and the maybe the discussion has moved on, duplicated what I have > said, etc. > > When you respond to a post, check to see to whom it got mailed! This is one of many postings that I have now received several times. Can we get this mess straightened out, please? I came in this morning to 83 email messages, most of them old ones I already read and wiped last week. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------