From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 1 20:23:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA01201; Sat, 1 Jun 1996 20:20:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 20:20:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31B064D8.C7D@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Muller Magnetic Dynamo Bulletin #2 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael Mandeville wrote: >Snip: > to keep its output throttled down. Then, a buffering system needs to > capture the restricted output (ideal is a capacitor bank, but unfortunately > these are a lot more expensive than batteries) and after powering up and > charging up, the system should free run. Buffering the output for feedback > is the issue. The capacitors need to handle 4000 watts at 200 volts, just to > be safe and run no risk of burning them out. That's a lot of capacitance. > Batteries can be used, but you would have to test and calibrate them and > diddle with decisions like do you use them fully charged or do you use them > partially discharged, etc, and then let the dynamo run for quite some time > to get a good feeling about the result. Capacitors make it so clean, quick, > and decisive. > ____________________________________ > MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing > Michael Mandeville, publisher > mwm@aa.net > http://www.aa.net/~mwm Just how much capacitance is needed? 4000 watts at 200 volts is a bit foggy. It sounds like 240 volt electrolytic motor-start capacitors with X-number in parallel might do the trick. I'm not sure about the 300 Hz operation, but I think it would be OK. I'm holding a GE, 220 VAC, 88 to 108 MFD motor-start capacitor in my hand. It measures about 2 in. in diameter, about 5 in. long. I probably paid about 5 bucks for it at a Cleveland-area surplus store. I would guess that 5 to 10 such units in parallel would handle the 4000 watts/200 volts = about 20 amps, for a time long enough to run the tests. I don't know about the 300 Hz - does anyone else? If we are talking about DC operation with switching ripple on top, then DC electrolytics might work. I'm looking at a 350 VDC, Sprague high-rate electrolytic capacitor at 6100 MFD. It's about 3 in. in dia., and about 10 in. long. - weighs about 3 pounds. These units will put out a fast pulse on the order of 10,000 amp! They could do a good DC buffering job at 20 amps. Cost me about $12 each surplus (less in quantity). Final thoughts: if we are just talking about a really efficient, solid- state-commutated, permanent magnet DC motor, then, I have a similar unit running the muffin fan in my computer. I think this motor must be OU to interest vortexians. A "free running" test seems to be the way to go for a simple preliminary screen. Still-a-doubter-but-willing-to-help Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 1 20:24:08 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA01243; Sat, 1 Jun 1996 20:20:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 20:20:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606011019.AA14137@POST.TANDEM.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: HORST_BOB@Tandem.COM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: RE>US Patent Office Response to an Application X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Tandem-QM Gateway: Version K4.5 T0: vortex list [SMTPGATE @POST (vortex-l@eskimo.com)] Ray writes: "I just received a communication from the US Patent Office regarding my application. Unfortunately, it is a final action unless I can find a way to convince them otherwise." I have a much different viewpoint than Jed and others who have responded to Ray's request for help. I am not a patent attorney, but have been through the process a few dozen times on patents in other fields. If you really have something that is a valuable improvement in CF, you should definitely not give up on your patent. It is actually to your advantage to delay it as long as possible while still keeping it active in the patent office. Assuming you filed the patent before last July, your patent will be valid for 17 years from the date of issue (now it is 20 years from the date of filing). The early years will have little value because no one will be selling any devices based on your patent. You want to delay coverage until CF is in widespread use, then license it to those producing devices. Also, the longer your application is in the patent office, the more evidence will accumulate that CF is real, and the examiner will be more likely to understand your arguments. Regarding the specifics of your application, you did not indicate whether or not this is the first office action. If it is the first, there is nothing to be alarmed about. There is an unwritten rule that every patent is rejected on first examination. The first action is really just a chance for you to educate the examiner and answer questions he has on your application. I have had several patents initially rejected for absurd reasons. Once they really understand the invention, they will issue the patent. If you have already gone several rounds with the examiner, you will need a different tactic. You may want to arrange a confernence (in person or by phone) between the examiner, you and your attorney. I have seen this to be effective in cases where the examiner is new or has a complete misunderstanding of the patent. If this fails, you can appeal, or file a continuation application. The continuation, or continuation-in-part (CIP) allows you to keep the application alive almost indefinitely. Once it is clear that CF devices really work and are being marketed, the floodgates will open and CF patents will be issued as in other fields. You do not want to withdraw your application, as you will lose the original priority date. To help convince the examiner, first realize that patent examiners are not superhuman. They will read anything you send them, but their prior art searches are normally restricted to previous patents. You need to bring other material to their attention. In this case, I would suggest a two-prong approach. First show that the books he quoted from were not the only opinions at that time. Send him "Fire From Ice" and some other technical papers published around the time of the other two books. Second, show him that those are old references and that the state of the art has advanced since then. Send references on the Patterson and Pons/Fleishman patents as well as journal articles and Infinite Energy articles. (Also, as much as we love to bash lawyers, there is no substitute for a good patent lawyer. I have seen them work wonders.) But don't get too impatient. I still have some 1989 patents pending. You should continue to develop your ideas into a saleable device. If that happens, you will have no trouble demonstrating it to the patent office and getting a patent. If you cannot make the device work, then the patent would have probably been worthless anyway. I think the patent office will delay most CF patents until either the first production devices hit the market, or until there is an accepted explanation of where the energy comes from. To me, this is perfectly reasonable. Until devices hit the market, inventors should not be that concerned because there is really nothing (no revenues) to protect. -- Bob Horst From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 2 05:42:23 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA05262; Sun, 2 Jun 1996 05:38:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 05:38:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: tilleyrw@digital.net (Robert Tilley) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Evidence for continental drift X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >BTW, Dieter, I am developing a paradigm which I am calling "gravity >tectonics". It takes plate tectonics to the next level of synthesis, one >which is patently obvious, in the sense that Jed mentions it, but which is >totally beyond the grasp of the specialists in academia because they won't >go beyond the textbooks to confront the existing contradictions inherent in >plate tectonics, one of the biggest of which is THE TOTAL LACK OF A >MECHANISM, which HAS NEVER BEEN RESOLVED BECAUSE THERE IS NO PARADIGM FOR >IT. I thought the mechanism was currents in the layer of magma that the landmasses rest upon. What's up? --------------------------------------------------------------------- | "Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, | | and why. Then do it." -- Lazarus Long | |-------------------------------------------------------------------| | Robert Tilley * tilleyrw@digital.net * "Once upon a time..." | |-------------------------------------------------------------------| | *** --- *** -- http://ddi.digital.net/~tilleyrw/ -- *** --- *** | |-------------------------------------------------------------------| From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 2 16:03:16 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA01455; Sun, 2 Jun 1996 15:57:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 15:57:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960602180052_405751282@emout09.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: RMCarrell@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: RE>US Patent Office Response to an Application X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-06-01 23:21:28 EDT, Bob Horst wrote: >Ray writes: > > "I just received a communication from the US Patent Office regarding my > application. Unfortunately, it is a final action unless I can find a > way to convince them otherwise." > >I have a much different viewpoint than Jed and others who have responded to >Ray's request for help. I am not a patent attorney, but have been through >the process a few dozen times on patents in other fields. > >If you really have something that is a valuable improvement in CF, you should >definitely not give up on your patent. It is actually to your advantage to >delay it as long as possible while still keeping it active in the patent >office. I'm not a patent attorney either, but I had occasion to study a patent filed in 1956 and continued to the 70's before it was issued. The original patent teaching was rather useless but the inventor (who shall remain nameless) kept updating the claims while the state of the art was improved by others. His patent firm (working on a contingency basis) then went after some of the biggest corporations in the country with offers to license this patent for eye-popping sums, which was for a technology incidental to their production processes. The inventor in question is very skilled in writing conceptual patents and has become quite wealthy by this tactic, which he has used in many areas. >You need to bring other material to their attention. I recommend Edmund Storms "Review of the 'Cold Fusion' Effect" which he will send you for $10. His address is 270 Hyde Park Estates, Santa Fe, NM 87501. It is a broad survey of 190 studies in 43 pages with 19 pages of references. >You should continue to develop your ideas into a saleable device. If that >happens, you will have no trouble demonstrating it to the patent office and getting a >patent. If you cannot make the device work, then the patent would have >probably been worthless anyway. Stanley Meyer has been demonstrating his electrolytic cell for years and has US patents under Section 101, which reportedly means that he demonstrated it to the US Patent Office and they effectively certify that it performs according to the claims. I haven't seen the patent, but there is no conventional explanation for the reported performance of the device, which produces voluminous dissociation of water into H and O with very little input power. Patterson explicitly avoided the term 'cold fusion' in his first patents, but I understand that in a recently granted patent the term 'cold fusion' and the excess energy claims are conspicuous. And Kawai has an issued US patent for his motor, with o/u claims in it. Mike Carrell From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 2 19:54:11 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA06566; Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:45:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:45:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: US Patent Office Response to an Applicat X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 05/31/96 23:01 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: US Patent Office Response to an Applicat How many people heard Russ George's Sat. National Public Radio Talk. I had non other than my Church's organist (Phd, Professor at a prestigious private school in keyboard/theory) come and ask me about it. It seems it may be out in the open now that EPRI/SRI tested the George/Stringham device and found He4 produced a plenty and 2:1 to 3:1 input to output ratios, once the "accoustical power" input was established. - Question is now whether EPRI will publish the formal report, or if they are going to "waffle". Powerful politics going on. Fortunately George and Stringham have a written "license" to the information, and can publish it themselves if they have to. But we can all see the psychological problem there. Jed---the importance of mentioning my Church organist is to point out the value of the publicity. This is a well educated man, who had enough science background to understand the difference between hot fusion, with its high (and "deadly") nuetron flux and the Cold Fusion, which appears to make D+D+D+D = 2He4, i.e. the "ideal" nuclear source. He's also smart enough to realize that many MILLIONS of $$$ have be wasted on truely worthless items by good old Uncle S., and he's asking, "Why not some $$$ to this, because of its great potential." I just keep thinking of the infamous "bovine belching" research of a few years back. - Keep burping everyone! It's the cows.... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 00:45:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA01676; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 00:41:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 00:41:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960603070652_100060.173_JHB96-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: RE>US Patent Office Response to an Application X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Mike, >> Stanley Meyer has been demonstrating his electrolytic cell for years and has US patents under Section 101, which reportedly means that he demonstrated it to the US Patent Office and they effectively certify that it performs according to the claims. I haven't seen the patent, but there is no conventional explanation for the reported performance of the device, which produces voluminous dissociation of water into H and O with very little input power. << I've not only seen Meyer's patents but spent time and cash attempting to replicate his results without any success. I am also in regular contact with his "agent" in GB, Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin, who still believes in Meyer and is trying to spread the word in military and commercial areas. The main problem with Stan Meyer is his paranoia wrt the Arabs who he accuses of trying to kill him, and if he suspects that any inquirer has any connection with Arab or oil interests he clams up completely. This happened recently with a deal he started with an Irish group who wanted to use his system for industrial heating. They got as far as building a test furnace and sending the carcase to Meyer for him to fit his "secret" bits. Thats the last the Irish ever saw of their prototype!!! Meyer apparently threw a fit accusing them of connections with Arabs and refused to do any more work for them. Funny how everything stops when the nitty-gritty of supplying working parts is imminent. Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 02:57:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA15075; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 02:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 02:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: David Hildyard To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Please read this.... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Does anyone know the email address of Toby Grotz (Institute for New Energy)? Thanks beforehand. DPH. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 02:59:16 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA15133; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 02:54:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 02:54:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <833790523.24519.0@survival.demon.co.uk> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Bill Wright To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vtx: The Muller GenMotor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > At 03:17 4/4/96 -0800, Bill Wright wrote: > > >I have built an Adams Motor Generator and am now starting to test > >it out. Can anyone tell me what might be the expected out from > >such devices. > > Nominally, the desired result is more mechanical power produced by > the motor than electrical power consumed. You need to cobble up > some kind of dyamometer to measure the mechanical output power and > you need some decent electronic gear to measure the electrical input > power accurately. If you would like suggested designs/arrangements > for each of these measuring systems, I would be glad to > elaborate...if you will provide a reasonably complete description of > what you've built. > > 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) > > Dear Scott Thank you for your message, sorry to have taken an age in replying. Thanks for the offer of help in thinking up a test method, I guess I'll end up with a pony brake. Do you know of any genuine working ou machines similar to the Adams Takahashi or Muller ? Best regards, Bill Bill Wright London England E-Mail bill@survival.demon.co.uk From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 08:33:36 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA25764; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 08:27:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 08:27:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606030740.HAA28187@ns1.indirect.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Reed Huish To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Please read this.... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, David Hildyard wrote: > >Does anyone know the email address of Toby Grotz (Institute for New Energy)? > >Thanks beforehand. > 760 Prairie Avenue Craig, CO 81625 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 08:34:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA26024; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 08:28:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 08:28:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606031445.JAA27231@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vtx: The Muller GenMotor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 02:54 6/3/96 -0700, Bill Wright wrote: >Dear Scott > >Thank you for your message, sorry to have taken an age in replying. >Thanks for the offer of help in thinking up a test method, I guess >I'll end up with a pony brake. Isn't it "prony" instead of "pony"? Anyway, that gives you an adjustable load...then you need a torque measuring scheme. A very fundamental method is to mount either the motor or the load in a cradle with pivots that are co-axial with the axis of rotation. Then a balance arm attached to the cradle can be used to determine, while the thing is operating, what the torque is. >Do you know of any genuine working ou machines similar to the Adams >Takahashi or Muller ? I don't know of ANY genuine working ou machines. 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:13:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA07297; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606031641.JAA05989@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: never mind X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 09:21 PM 5/31/96 -0700, you wrote: >I see Brit Columbia is on the other end of the map. Bill B. is it near you? > Do you know someone in the area who could give it a quick once over for us. > >Frank Z > > Bill: would getting together the capacitors we need and sending a weekend expedition up to eastern BC over the weekend be a suitable project fro the Seattle Weird Science Club? ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:13:59 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA06761; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:04:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:04:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960603152025_72240.1256_EHB132-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: NPR transcripts X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I missed the National Public Radio (NPR) program with the interview of Russ George. My sister told me about it later, and Mark Hugo posted a message here. Russ should have alerted us in advance. Anyway, the program was All Things Considered. You can order a tape or transcript of any NPR news program from: Journal Graphics Tel. 800-831-9000 The cost is $12 per transcript - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:15:20 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA07337; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:07:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:07:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vtx: The Muller GenMotor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott The Prony brakes I used in high school back in the dark ages consisted of a leather strap around a drum on the motor under test. The strap was spring loaded and had an adjusting screw concentric with the spring to change the tension on the leather belt. There was a water reservoir which dripped water onto the drum for cooling. The leather strap was mounted on a long arm, which was horizontal, and the end of it was held up and the force measured by a spring scale attached to the end of the arm. s p s r c i a n l ` g e __________________arm_________________ ( ) ( + motor) shaft ( ) ( ) leather strap Hank Scudder - it is terrible making ASCII images ---------- From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vtx: The Muller GenMotor Date: Monday, June 03, 1996 8:29AM At 02:54 6/3/96 -0700, Bill Wright wrote: >Dear Scott > >Thank you for your message, sorry to have taken an age in replying. >Thanks for the offer of help in thinking up a test method, I guess >I'll end up with a pony brake. Isn't it "prony" instead of "pony"? Anyway, that gives you an adjustable load...then you need a torque measuring scheme. A very fundamental method is to mount either the motor or the load in a cradle with pivots that are co-axial with the axis of rotation. Then a balance arm attached to the cradle can be used to determine, while the thing is operating, what the torque is. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:18:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA07211; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:06:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:06:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606031629.JAA04481@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Evidence for continental drift X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 05:38 AM 6/2/96 -0700, you wrote: >>BTW, Dieter, I am developing a paradigm which I am calling "gravity >>tectonics". It takes plate tectonics to the next level of synthesis, one >>which is patently obvious, in the sense that Jed mentions it, but which is >>totally beyond the grasp of the specialists in academia because they won't >>go beyond the textbooks to confront the existing contradictions inherent in >>plate tectonics, one of the biggest of which is THE TOTAL LACK OF A >>MECHANISM, which HAS NEVER BEEN RESOLVED BECAUSE THERE IS NO PARADIGM FOR >>IT. > >I thought the mechanism was currents in the layer of magma that the >landmasses rest upon. What's up? > what currents? ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:19:36 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA07175; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:06:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:06:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606031628.JAA04473@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Muller Magnetic Dynamo Bulletin #2 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Thank for the tips, Frank, I will run this by Muller and see if sympatico. If so, we can put out a call for some units. >Just how much capacitance is needed? 4000 watts at 200 volts is a bit >foggy. It sounds like 240 volt electrolytic motor-start capacitors >with X-number in parallel might do the trick. I'm not sure about the >300 Hz operation, but I think it would be OK. > >I'm holding a GE, 220 VAC, 88 to 108 MFD motor-start capacitor in my >hand. It measures about 2 in. in diameter, about 5 in. long. I >probably paid about 5 bucks for it at a Cleveland-area surplus store. > >I would guess that 5 to 10 such units in parallel would handle the >4000 watts/200 volts = about 20 amps, for a time long enough to run the >tests. I don't know about the 300 Hz - does anyone else? > >If we are talking about DC operation with switching ripple on top, >then DC electrolytics might work. I'm looking at a 350 VDC, Sprague >high-rate electrolytic capacitor at 6100 MFD. It's about 3 in. in dia., >and about 10 in. long. - weighs about 3 pounds. These units will put >out a fast pulse on the order of 10,000 amp! They could do a good >DC buffering job at 20 amps. Cost me about $12 each surplus (less in >quantity). > >Final thoughts: if we are just talking about a really efficient, solid- >state-commutated, permanent magnet DC motor, then, I have a similar unit >running the muffin fan in my computer. I think this motor must be OU >to interest vortexians. A "free running" test seems to be the way to >go for a simple preliminary screen. > >Still-a-doubter-but-willing-to-help Frank Stenger > > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:20:12 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA06997; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:05:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:05:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606031628.JAA04440@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: RE>US Patent Office Response to an Application X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 12:41 AM 6/3/96 -0700, you wrote: >Mike, > >>> Stanley Meyer has been demonstrating his electrolytic cell for years and has >US patents under Section 101, which reportedly means that he demonstrated it >to the US Patent Office and they effectively certify that it performs >according to the claims. I haven't seen the patent, but there is no >conventional explanation for the reported performance of the device, which >produces voluminous dissociation of water into H and O with very little input >power. << > >I've not only seen Meyer's patents but spent time and cash attempting to >replicate his results without any success. > >I am also in regular contact with his "agent" in GB, Admiral Sir Anthony >Griffin, who still believes in Meyer and is trying to spread the word in >military and commercial areas. The main problem with Stan Meyer is his paranoia >wrt the Arabs who he accuses of trying to kill him, and if he suspects that any >inquirer has any connection with Arab or oil interests he clams up completely. > >This happened recently with a deal he started with an Irish group who wanted to >use his system for industrial heating. They got as far as building a test >furnace and sending the carcase to Meyer for him to fit his "secret" bits. >Thats the last the Irish ever saw of their prototype!!! Meyer apparently threw >a fit accusing them of connections with Arabs and refused to do any more work >for them. > >Funny how everything stops when the nitty-gritty of supplying working parts is >imminent. > >Norman > > The inability to do something elementary which is necessary to complete an objective is usually blamed on some one else's action. I have seen a lot of people invent enemies whose threats keep them from finishing something useful. Frankly, I am at the point that I interpret such claims prima facie as a part of a con. Reasonable people find reasonable ways to do their thing, even in the face of great risk. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:20:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA07417; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:07:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:07:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606031803.NAA15700@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vtx: The Muller GenMotor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 10:46 6/3/96 -0700, you wrote: >Scott > The Prony brakes I used in high school back in the dark ages >consisted of a leather strap around a drum on the motor under test. >The strap was spring loaded and had an adjusting screw concentric >with the spring to change the tension on the leather belt. There was >a water reservoir which dripped water onto the drum for cooling. >The leather strap was mounted on a long arm, which was horizontal, >and the end of it was held up and the force measured by a spring scale >attached to the end of the arm. > s > p s > r c > i a > n l > ` g e >__________________arm_________________ >( ) > ( + motor) shaft > ( ) > ( ) > leather strap > >Hank Scudder - it is terrible making ASCII images Not so bad, Hank. That sounds quite workable. Do you recall how stable the friction load was? In other words, did you have to constantly twiddle the adjustment knob as things heated up, etc? 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:23:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA07042; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:06:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:06:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606031628.JAA04462@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Muller Magnetic Dynamo Bulletin #2 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 08:19 PM 6/1/96 -0700, you wrote: >Michael, > >Your description of the Muller m/c seems to be identical with the Takahashi >motor/gen which Chris T. and I inspected some months ago. The difference seems >to be only that of size. > >I was expecting the Tak. outfit to publish and demo their thing last April but >things seem to have stalled there. > >There seems to be an ongoing pattern to all this stuff - great news of absolute >ou - promises of demo - run out of cash - black death. Jed is right!!! > >Norman > > Nope. Jed is a wonderful writer and a great protaganist. But here we are going to stop his cynicism dead in its tracks. We are going to try to do exactly what he is preaching. We are going to try to lay this whole thing out in front of the Vortex. I am going to try to arrange a group demo of sufficient credibility that the 100 monkey phenomenon will kick in shortley thereafter. I am thinking along about the end of June... I am getting some interesting responses from the webpages. A few are emailing, one big call just interrupted the writing of this message. With Takahashi, I deduce, the top Japanese corporations are jawjawing up the world markets right now. That is why there is dead silence. Takahashi is well connected and well credentialed and if the reports are true that he has licenced the battery doubler to the likes of Panasonic and Sony, well, isn't it obvious??? ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:24:39 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA06945; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:05:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:05:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960603152035_72240.1256_EHB132-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: US Patent Office Response X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Bob Horst writes: "If you cannot make the device work, then the patent would have probably been worthless anyway." Right! "Until devices hit the market, inventors should not be that concerned because there is really nothing (no revenues) to protect." Right again! Double right! "I think the patent office will delay most CF patents until either the first production devices hit the market, or until there is an accepted explanation of where the energy comes from. To me, this is perfectly reasonable." Well I don't find it *pefectly* reasonable . . . How would anything new ever reach the market by that standard? Many products reach the market with no theoretical explanation, like asprin. This is a chicken-and-egg problem. Actually, as Bob points out, under the old rules this would be a tremendous advantage to the people who get the patents. Under the new rules, I believe you get 20 years from the date of filing even if the Patent Office delays granting the patent for 19 years and 51 weeks (giving you exclusive rights for 1 week). The new rules seem blatently unfair to me, but in a way I like them because they force people who apply for patents to hurry up and reveal what they have. In the past, people screwed around for years with CIPs. Bob -- or somebody -- said that patents filed before a certain date are "grandfathered" into the old rules. I don't know about that. Let us ask our ever-helpful CF patent expert Bob Bass. By the way, Bob B. told me that you *do* have to get permission from CETI before replicating their device even for scientific purposes. That surprised me. Bob suggests: "Send [the P.O.] references on the Patterson and Pons/Fleishman patents as well as journal articles and Infinite Energy articles." If you want something with authority, send EPRI TR-104195, "Development of Advanced Concepts for Nuclear Processes in Deuterated Metals," SRI International and Lockheed Missiles and Space Company, 128 pages + microfiche. Or just copy the first two pages, especially the part that says: "EPRI PERSPECTIVE This work confirms the claims of Fleischmann, Pons, and Hawkins of the production of excess heat in deuterium-loaded palladium cathodes at levels too large for chemical transformation." That's the bottom line, isn't it? An unequivocal statement by the world's largest private energy R&D organization says It Works. The anti-CF branch of EPRI got their innings in Hoffman's book "A Dialog on Chemically Induced Nuclear Reactions." Anyone who takes that book the least bit seriously should read my review of it, in Infinite Energy number 3. Or you can compare Hoffman to the official EPRI report for a good laugh. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 12:24:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA07137; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:06:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:06:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606031629.JAA04497@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Muller Magnetic Dynamo Bulletin X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 08:55 AM 6/2/96 -0700, you wrote: >In a message dated 96-06-01 00:23:30 EDT, Joe Flynn wrote: > >>Would be interested to know what new semiconductor switches >>have become available in the last three years? > >I can't give you part numbers, but there are now available SCR's with high >gain and optical isolation that can handle klioamps and klilovolts at the >same time. They are used in the systems which drive induction motors for >traction service, the GM IMPACT electric car, HV DC power transmission, and >the like. All these have in common the need to swich high currents in >inductive loads at high speeds. You would also find them in Carver's HI FI >amplifiers that deliver kilowatts to low impedance loads from a cluster of >parts you could hold in your hand (maybe two hands). There were articles in >IEEE Spectrum within the past year or so. You might start with Motorola, TI, >or National Semiconductor, or dig up the semiconductor master catalogues. > >Mike Carrell > > > Perzactly. I can't personally say anything about what Muller is doing because that is the one area which Muller does not want to give wannebes a head start on. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 19:01:03 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA23912; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 18:54:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 18:54:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: NPR transcripts X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/03/96 12:13 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: NPR transcripts A little defense of Russ G. here, I knew about the program because I called Russ last Friday. I don't think HE got much warning either. Since he's banging away at the "final report" and fighting with the EPRI&SRI wonks every step of the way----(don't need names do we? It's the 'Usual Suspects') I don't think he was tremendously concerned about alerting us. Let's just hope that EPRI DOES publish the report, and puts a reasonable price on it for outsiders (like $25 or $50 , not the $10,000---we paid dearly for this information, and want to formally and legally restrict it type price, which they have attached to other EPRI work!) MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 3 19:04:12 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA24382; Mon, 3 Jun 1996 18:56:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 18:56:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960603172306_406397405@emout15.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Myer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Norman, I have read your post about Stanley Myer and seen him in the BBC documentary "It Runs on Water. I sent Stanley a copy of my Book on a Disk, he never responded. Frank Stenger and I tried to look up his phone number. It is not to be found. I live in western Pa a short hop from where Myers lives. Frank Stenger lives in Ohio, even closer. We would like to see his machine and, to be sure, we are not going to shoot him. Puthoff will test one of his machines for the asking. A good test from Puthoff is worth money, investors will follow. As far an I know Puthoff and Little have shot down a lot of people with inventions that didn't work but they never shot anyone. Norman please get the word to Myer that Barron, Stenger, and Znidarsic would like to come and see him. We will arrange to have the device tested and it works I can get the device before some people who can get the thing to the market. Tell him to look up znidarsic on LYCOS, he will see that I am not an Arab terrorist. Stenger is not dangerous, he even spent an entire day saving a rackcoon. Puthoff and Little have dedicated their lives, giving up some high paying jobs, to bring new enegy technology to the market. If Myer can't trust this group he is a farce. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 02:49:08 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA12085; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 02:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 02:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31B3A3F1.7AE6@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Myer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > > Norman, > >Snip: > he never responded. Frank Stenger and I tried to look up his phone number. > It is not to be found. I live in western Pa a short hop from where Myers > lives. Frank Stenger lives in Ohio, even closer. > Frank Znidarsic Hey Frank! I thought the guy we were looking for was named "Corum" of Tesla-type fireball fame! Myer is a new chap? Over 60 and confused, Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 02:49:30 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA12201; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 02:45:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 02:45:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Myer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/03/96 19:04 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Myer Frank---I don't think they were direct enough regarding Meyr. He is a NUT CASE. Deal with him appropriately. - MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 02:50:18 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA12286; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 02:46:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 02:46:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606040349.UAA12596@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Myer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 06:56 PM 6/3/96 -0700, you wrote: >Norman, > > I have read your post about Stanley Myer and seen him in the BBC >high paying jobs, to bring new enegy technology to the market. If Myer can't >trust this group he is a farce. > > >Frank Znidarsic > a lot of people have tried to tune into Myer and have failed. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 02:58:09 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA12361; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 02:47:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 02:47:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960604064952_100060.173_JHB72-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Myer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Frank, >> If Myer can't trust this group he is a farce. Frank Znidarsic << According to the admiral Myer seems only to be interested in "doing deals" with industrial organisations. This always means cash up front - surprize surprize! I understand that there are a few such deals in progress with diesel engine manufrs but as I understand it none of these have ever come to anything. Usually the cash dries up when Meyer gets close to completion. He is reputed to very wealthy from the sale of his car spares business, so he can afford to finance his paranoia. I will put your proposition to the admiral and see where that gets us. Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 21:11:57 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA07954; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960604073805_318020678@emout14.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: EclectiKat@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Evidence for continental drift X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-06-03 15:08:57 EDT, you write: >> >>I thought the mechanism was currents in the layer of magma that the >>landmasses rest upon. What's up? >> You mean that North America drives the whole damn Pacific Plate under due to LAMINAR FLOW FRICTION WITH A LIQUID MAGMA? Does that sound reasonable? How can a liquid magma gain a purchase on the whole plate with a force sufficient to push such a massive object? Think that the original question is reasonable. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 21:12:54 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA08226; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:07:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:07:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960604171613_72240.1256_EHB135-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Negotiating with inventors X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I believe there is no likelihood that Meyer will respond to offers to examine his machine. He has a terminal case of the Inventor's Disease. I cannot tell whether his machine is a hoax or whether it is real but permanently out of reach because of his paranoia. It makes no difference. A discovery kept secret by a paranoid inventor is tantamount to fraud. It cannot hurt to have Adm. Griffin approach Meyer, but I warn all participants to refrain from purchasing non-refundable air tickets. Gene and I made that mistake twice while responding to on-again, off-again invitations from CETI. As I have often noted, even legitimate inventors and scientific geniuses often suffer from the Inventor's Disease. The ones who survive -- the ones we hear about, because they do not take their secrets to the grave -- often owe their success to canny businessmen who force the inventors to act in sane, rational manner and to act in their own best interests. The person who did the most to rescue the Wright brothers from themselves was the French industrial entrepreneur Hart O. Berg. Here is part of a memo he sent to his headquarters in New York City after his first day of negotiations with Wilbur Wright in June, 1906. Anyone who has dealt with CF scientists will recognize his feelings: About 5 o'clock in the afternoon, I think, you will distinctly note that I said "I think," I brought about some sort of action in his mind, and think he was on the point, you will note that I say that "I think he was on the point," of veering around from the government to company methods. . . . I think he agreed, you will note that I distinctly say "I think he agreed," to go to Paris with me Monday. . . I am much pleased with Wright's personality. He inspires great confidence and I am sure he will be a capital Exhibit A. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 21:13:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA08364; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:08:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:08:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960604194727_100433.1541_BHG78-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: CF in New Scientist X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I've been remiss on watching the press, Arthur Clarke spotted this in New Scientist of May 25, "Washington Watch", P54: COLD fusion is the scientific embarrassment that won't go away. A small band of researchers across the US still tend their cold fusion cells, carefully noting how much electrical power goes in and how much heat comes out. Some are sponsored by Japanese research establishments, others are financed by private investors. Disregarding the scorn of the international physics community, they insist that their experiments still produce more heat than any chemical reaction could explain. Recently, several scientists at the renowned Naval Research Laboratory in Washington DC became intrigued by the experiments. They invited a few of the cold fusion researchers to present their work at the NRL. But, hearing of the meeting, higher-ranking officials at the laboratory sensed a PR fiasco in the making. They decided that cold fusion was still too hot to handle and banned media interviews with NRL scientists on the subject. The cold fusion meeting went on as scheduled, but inquiring reporters were informed that scientists at the NRL "had nothing to say" on the topic. -------------------------------------------- I can't help feeling that the NS attitude continues to soften. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 21:13:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA07393; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:03:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:03:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960604110136_100433.1541_BHG33-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Muller Magnetic Dynamo Bulletin #2 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael, > Nope. Jed is a wonderful writer and a great protaganist. But > here we are going to stop his cynicism dead in its tracks. We are > going to try to do exactly what he is preaching. Actually, Jed is not a cynic. Jed is like me, he is frustrated by what we see as human folly. He has good business experience with new technology, and has spent plenty cash on CF etc. Folly has always been perhaps the greatest single force which has shaped human affairs (see Barbara Tuchman's fine history of the subject; "The March of Folly", or "The Guinness Book of Regrettable Quotations"), yet one which has received far too little attention until recently. If you do indeed follow his 'preaching', things will happen fast enough. Your account of Muller has sounded quite hopeful. What impresses me is that people here say things like: "I remain skeptical, but am willing to help." I think this is wonderful. Some might see a willingness to go places, be friendly, and check out the improbable despite a series of disappointments as being stupid. I don't, I see it as the true spirit of scientific enquiry. And people assume that "anomalists" must be wild-eyed True Believers - in fact there is no reason why they should be any less rigorous in their approach than anyone else. > Takahashi is well connected and well credentialed and if the > reports are true that he has licenced the battery doubler to the > likes of Panasonic and Sony, well, isn't it obvious??? No, it isn't. NOTHING is obvious in this game! Possible, yes. Obvious, rarely. Chris PS I just happened to find a copy of Asimov's hilarious article, "The Micropsychiatric Applications of Thiotimoline," which is in Astounding, about 1958. If anyone wants a copy, I've scanned it and made .JPGs of the diagrams. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 21:13:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA08601; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:09:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:09:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960604220357_407406639@emout08.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: called Stanley M. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I called Stanley M, it was easy enough. A man answered by the name of Russel Falerel he works for Stanley. Russel is going to send me some information. Stanley sells a book for $40 that tells of his independent test results. This is fishey .CETI gives their flyers away for free.... This document tells of independent test results done by: Dr. Papuss in Italy. Kansas State University and North Eastern University in Boston. I'm sending for the document...Its easy enough to call the people who did the tests to. It should be anyway. If not its really fishey. I told Russel that I'm in Johnstown about 2.5 hrs away by auto and would like to come up and see Stanley. He will let Stanley know. The selling of the test results when you are supposedly sitting on something worth mega bucks smells bad. CETI doesn't do it, Reed H. doesn't do it. Joe Newman does. I sell material myself...If I had a free energy machine...I wouldn't bother with such a trivial proposition. Frank S. Let's go!! .You can advise me...We can take pictures for Jed... and perhaps get one of these things for Puthoff to test... Frank Z PS By the way Reed..Long time since I've seen you. How are you doing? How did the show go in Canada? I had wanted to go to Lanl this week to witness the Yusmir results. The tests have been delayed until a later unknown date. I want to look at the CETI technology again, see the Yusmar, see the Stanley's device and find out the latest on Reeds feed back loop. I'm am hopefull to have something going soon. Miley just came back from Austraila. He has been really nice to me. My Pittsburgh group is pressing me to get the technology. I'm trying. I want to get good technology and a good deal. The CETI technology is good..the problem is will anyone really pay 1 million dollars for a non-exclusive license. Not me. I guess after we look at all of the technologies we will have to make CETI an offer. Puthoff sent me a preprint of his Physics Essays Paper. Very nice. Hal never stops. Frank From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 21:16:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA08103; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31b44acc.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Peter Glueck" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: P & F publishing again. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Pons and Fleischmann are publishing again: In today's Current Contents which says zero for the publications with the keyword "cold fusion", I have found the following article: S Pons, M Fleischmann "Calibration of the Pd/D2O system: Effects of procedure and positive feed-back" Journal de Chimie Physique et de Physico - Chimie Biologique 93:4 (APR 1996) pp 711-730. The paper is in French and I could translate it for the group in 2-3 days (it's long!) but unfortunately we do not have this reputed journal in the libraries of Romania. It is again a paper on measurement and calibration and it seems that actually P & F are the first victims of "jonesitis" this serious illness of the CF scientists having as basic symptom focusing on measurement and not on the triggering of the effect. The scientific terror initiated by Steven Jones and his comrades has misled so many of our best scientists. I hope that the IMRA-Europe laboratory has actually produced something more valuable than such ..I am convinced .perfect, papers. Who knows??? In the same Current Contents I have found two other papers of interest: F. Celani et al. "Deuterium overloading of palladium wires by means of high power mu s pulsed electrolysis and electromigration: Suggestions of a "phase transition" and related excess heat. Physics Letters A 214: 1-2 (MAY 6 1996) pp 1-13. CF has a great collection of puzzles, Francesco Celani has added the following: a very high D/Pd ratio is not resulting in a high heat excess effect as it was expected. Why? Y. Sakamoto et al. Calorimetric enthalpies for the palladium-hydrogen (deuterium) systems at H(D) contents up to about [H]([D])/Pd =0.86. Journal of Physics -Condensed Matter 8: 18 (APR 29 1996) pp 3229-3244 A fine negative paper, I think. If somebody in the group has Curr. Cont. with abstracts, please look for the basic information for these papers. Thank you in advance. And, eventually, Dr. Claudia Eberlein's paper was published in Physical Review Letters 76:20 (May 13 1996) pp 3842-3845 Peter -- dr. Peter Gluck Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology Fax:064-420042 Cluj-Napoca, str. Donath 65-103, P.O.Box 700 Tel:064-184037/144 Cluj 5, 3400 Romania E-mail: peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro , itimc@utcluj.ro From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 4 21:19:25 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA08484; Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:08:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 21:08:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960604211414_72240.1256_EHB52-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: More Wright quotes X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Try comparing the CF work of say, Dennis Cravens, with some run-of-the-mill 'me too' experiment in ICCF5 and you realize some people might do this business for 30 years and get nowhere. Martin said, "Dennis has figured out half our secrets" (to which Dennis replied, "which half?") Dennis achieves these remarkable results with nothing more sophisticated than a Block and Decker sander to polish the cathodes. He cannot do a SIMS analysis of isotopic distribution, but he manages to learn an amazing amount about how this stuff works. Most researchers seem to flounder around with no apparent goal, while a few work methodically to solve a linked set of problems in order to achieve a specific goal. This is true of CF and of most other R&D, in other areas. It is a cliche, but people do not see the big picture. They swing back and forth between different goals. One year they are aiming for high loading, the next time you talk to them they are looking for nuclear products, then they say they are back to high loading again. They do not seem to make measurable progress in any of those areas. They give the same paper repeatedly, or they refuse to publish at all, saying the work is "not quite ready" year after year. People lack spirit and gumption. To some extent, success in R&D and basic science depends on an old fashioned spirit of can-do optimism. The other day, Sen. Robert Dole said that the U.S. would already have an SDI missile defense if we had "strong leadership." That is a ridiculous exaggeration, but there is a grain of truth to it. There are, of course, limits to technology that no amount of spirit can overcome. I do not think that 20th century computer and rocket technology could build a working SDI any more than Babbage's 19th century mechanical computers could have processed a hundred million floating point operations per second. The problems of SDI are far to big and the countermeasures too easy. On the other hand, the U.S. Navy developed nuclear powered marine engines and launched a submarine in 1954, nine years after Hiroshima, working on a shoestring by today's standards. The best description of how to do R&D that I have ever seen was written by Wilbur Wright, for the bulletin of the Aero Club of America, in May 1912. When the general excellence of the work of Lilienthal is considered, the question arises as to whether or not he would have solved the problem of human flight if his untimely death in 1896 had not interrupted his efforts . . . One of the greatest difficulties of the problem has been little understood by the world at large. This was the fact that those who aspired to solve the problem were constantly pursued by expense, danger, and time. In order to succeed it was not only necessary to make progress, but it was necessary to make progress at a sufficient rate to reach the goal before money gave out, or before accident intervened, or before the portion of life allowable for such work was past. The problem was so vast and many-sided that no one could hope to win unless he possessed unusual ability to grasp the essential points, and to ignore the nonessentials . . . When the detailed story is written of the means by which success in human flight was finally attained, it will be seen that this success was not won by spending more time than others had spent, nor by taking greater risks than others had taken. Those who failed for lack of time had already used more time than was necessary; those who failed for lack of money had already spent more money than was necessary; and those who were cut off by accident had previously enjoyed as many lucky escapes as reasonably could be expected. Lilienthal progressed, but not very rapidly. His tables of pressures and resistances of arched aeroplane surfaces were the results of years of experiment and were the best in existence, yet they were not sufficiently accurate to enable anyone to construct a machine with full assurance that it would give exactly the expected results. Under such conditions progress could not but be slow. His methods of controlling balance both laterally and longitudinally were exceedingly crude and quite insufficient. Although he experimented for six successive years 1891 - 1896 with gliding machines, he was using at the end the same inadequate method of control with which he started. His rate of progress during these years makes it doubtful whether he would have achieved full success in the near future if his life had been spared . . . The part about: "Those who failed for lack of time . . ." should be framed and mounted in front of every R&D engineer and scientist. Read that part every morning, the way school children recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Two weeks after he wrote that, Wilbur Wright ran out of time, dying of typhoid at age 45. I reread it the other day and it triggered that spate of lugubrious messages I posted about "taking secrets to the grave." It's true though! Don't forget it! But at my back I always hear Time's winged chariot hurrying near. Or as, Raphael Soyer said: You have time, but not an OCEAN of time. The Wrights were marvelous writers. They were remarkably aware of their own thought processes, and they were good at teaching others how to think, how to plan and do research. George Spratt complained that the brother's 'round off the corners' method of debate, where they ended up switching sides, was intellectually dishonest. Wilbur responded in a letter in May 1902: It was not my intention to advocate dishonesty in argument nor a bad spirit in a controversy. No truth is without some mixture of error, and no error so false but that it possesses some elements of truth. If a man is in too big a hurry to give up an error he is liable to give up some truth with it, and in accepting the arguments of the other man he is sure to get some error with it. Honest argument is merely a process of mutually picking the beams and motes out of each other's eyes so both can see clearly. Men become wise just as they become rich, more by what they save than by what they receive. After I get hold of a truth I hate to lose it again, and I like to sift all the truth out before I give up an error. Think about that next time you find yourself in a sterile debate about whether CF is nuclear or ZPE. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 5 15:04:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA03425; Wed, 5 Jun 1996 15:01:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 15:01:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960605093957_75110.3417_CHK39-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dean Miller <75110.3417@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Evidence for continental drift X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Hi Eclec..., This is surely off the subject of this list, but I can no longer resist the temptation to open my mouth (or limber up my fingers). >> You mean that North America drives the whole damn Pacific Plate under due to LAMINAR FLOW FRICTION WITH A LIQUID MAGMA? Does that sound reasonable? How can a liquid magma gain a purchase on the whole plate with a force sufficient to push such a massive object? Think that the original question is reasonable. << Several points: 1) Magma (or whatever you want to call the stuff under the crust) is a _fluid,_ not a liquid. Fluids flow given the correct impetus, but can have the crystalline structure of a solid. Ice is an example of a fluid that flows and appears to be a solid. 2) Moving masses can push other masses -- it doesn't matter whether or not the mass is solid or fluid (ever noticed that air, when it has a high enough energy density, can push over trees and buildings?). IOW, a moving fluid underneath a solid crust is perfectly capable of exerting force on the crust (assuming there is adequate friction or crust projections into the fluid -- and there is). That being said, it turns out the measurements of magma (fluid) movement appears to have no correlation with tectonic plate movement. In a few cases the magma movement is in the same direction as overlaying plate, but in most cases the magma movement is in quite a different direction -- even 180 degrees different. So what causes the tectonic plates to move? There are a lot of ideas, but none have much going for them. My guess is the plate movement we see is a residual settling from the real movements, which happen in jumps every so often. Dean -- from Des Moines (using OzWin 2.01.9G) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 5 15:05:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA03513; Wed, 5 Jun 1996 15:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 15:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31b591f3.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Peter Glueck" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: One paper. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In Current Contents 21/1996 which has arrived here with a two weeks delay, I have found only one paper from "our field" A G Lipson, D M Sakov, EI Saunin "Interaction of weak neutron flow with triglycinesulphate (DO.6HO.4) crystals due to the paraelectric ferroelectric phase transition" Pisma v Zhurnal Tekhnicheskoi Fiziki 21:24 (DEC 26 1995) pp 25-31. Andrey Lipson, the follower of the famous Prof. Deryagin (polywater story!) is interested in the nuclear aspects of CF. For the systems he is studying he tries to demonstrate that the excss heat is not of nuclear origin. A very serious young man having the first PhD in cold fusion. Peter -- dr. Peter Gluck Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology Fax:064-420042 Cluj-Napoca, str. Donath 65-103, P.O.Box 700 Tel:064-184037/144 Cluj 5, 3400 Romania E-mail: peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro , itimc@utcluj.ro From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 5 15:07:56 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA03092; Wed, 5 Jun 1996 14:59:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 14:59:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960605041758_210847379@emout18.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: EclectiKat@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Negotiating with inventors X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-06-05 00:09:22 EDT, you write: >As I have often noted, even legitimate inventors and scientific geniuses >often >suffer from the Inventor's Disease. The ones who survive -- the ones we hear >about, because they do not take their secrets to the grave -- often owe their >success to canny businessmen who force the inventors to act in sane, rational >manner and to act in their own best interests. The person who did the most to >rescue the Wright brothers from themselves was the French industrial >entrepreneur Hart O. Berg. Here is part of a memo he sent to his headquarters >in New York City after his first day of negotiations with Wilbur Wright in >June, 1906. Anyone who has dealt with CF scientists will recognize his >feelings: I have worked with companies that have good patents and no marketing, and ones that have good marketing and no patents, and there's absolutely no question in anyone's mind that persistent marketing dominance wins the race, given a good product. Jeff Golin From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 6 05:11:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA11693; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 05:08:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 05:08:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606051758.AA6457@POST.TANDEM.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: HORST_BOB@Tandem.COM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vtx: patents X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Tandem-QM Gateway: Version K4.5 T0: Vortex List [SMTPGATE@POST (vortex-l@eskimo.com)] I wrote: "I think the patent office will delay most CF patents until either the first production devices hit the market, or until there is an accepted explanation of where the energy comes from. To me, this is perfectly reasonable." And Jet replied: >Well I don't find it *pefectly* reasonable . . . How would anything new ever >reach the market by that standard? Many products reach the market with no >theoretical explanation, like asprin. This is a chicken-and-egg problem. Note that my comment said "or". In the case of CF, I think it is much more likely that a device will hit the market before everyone agrees on where the energy comes from. The explanation should not be needed by the patent office, just the device itself. >Bob -- or somebody -- said that patents filed before a certain date are >"grandfathered" into the old rules. I don't know about that. Let us ask our >ever-helpful CF patent expert Bob Bass. By the way, Bob B. told me that you >*do* have to get permission from CETI before replicating their device even for >scientific purposes. That surprised me. I double checked the date, and it was June 7, 1995 when the new rules went into effect. Applications before that date get their choice of 17 years from issue or 20 years from application. This was such an advantage that many companies went into a mad scramble to file before June 7. I remember it well... As to needing CETI's permission to replicate, I do not see how that could be true. (But maybe they want everyone to believe that.) The patent office was established to encourage innovation by giving inventors exclusive rights to the invention in exchange for publishing the details on how to build it. The reason for publishing is exactly so other can replicate and then improve on the invention. So I believe it is neither morally or legally wrong to replicate the CETI device or any other patented device. You would get into trouble only if you sell the device to others before negotiating license fees. -- Bob From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 6 05:13:34 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA11900; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 05:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 05:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31B6408E.B0F@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: called Stanley M. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > >Snip: > The selling of the test results when you are supposedly sitting on something > worth mega bucks smells bad. CETI doesn't do it, Reed H. doesn't do it. > Joe Newman does. I sell material myself...If I had a free energy > machine...I wouldn't bother with such a trivial proposition. Frank S. Let's > go!! .You can advise me...We can take pictures for Jed... and perhaps get > one of these things for Puthoff to test... > > > Frank Roger the "smell bad" Frank! First, I have to get my son married off in Omaha! Frank Stenger (We need some more Franks in this group!) From FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Thu Jun 6 20:30:09 1996 Received: from emout18.mail.aol.com (emout18.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.44]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA28274; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 20:29:56 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by emout18.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA17091; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 23:28:52 -0400 Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 23:28:52 -0400 Message-ID: <960606232851_551093385@emout18.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, billb@eskimo.com, jgrow@vir.com Subject: John Grow Status: RO X-Status: A Bill B. do you have space to sign John Grow onto vortex - l. jgrow@vir.com John sells zero point energy books through his company Knowledge Quest Books in Canada. John builds huge tesla coils for experiments. John is in touch with the Serile cold fusion effort in GB. John owns Target Technologies. They make celluar phones. John in the past worked for Gene Maning...Jene Mallove's old boss I believe. John is a welcome addition to our group. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:23:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA08454; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:18:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:18:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606061258.HAA02813@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Howdy sports fans! I've been real busy on other projects lately but I have been making some really neat measurements with my calorimeter lately. I have put 2 "D" NiCd batteries in the experiment chamber and performed a complete charge/discharge cycle on them while the calorimeter was running. This makes a much more interesting plot than a resistor! Thanks to Mark Hugo for suggesting this experiment. (Mark, I will eventually get around to the variant we discussed). The graphical results along with a brief description can be viewed in full color on my fledgling web page which is at http://www.eden.com/~little Now go easy on me...my web page is pretty crude. My hat's off to Bill Beaty and John Logajan and anyone else who can make a slick-looking web page. 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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:23:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA08538; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:19:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:19:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960606193856_72240.1256_EHB80-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: NPR Transcript X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I got this transcript of the radio program about cold fusion. It is "All Things Considered" (NPR) June 1, 1996, Transcript #2231, Segment # 6 : Scientists Research Cold Fusion Despite Nay-Sayers. You can get it from Journal Graphics, Tel. 800-831-9000, price $12. This is the usual stuff about CF, with some interesting comments from Russ George (E-Quest), and Mike McKubre (SRI). Mike said he would like to make a demonstration device, but he has not been able to do so: People's attention needs to be grabbed by something that's simple, unarguable, concrete and rugged, and it has to be simple enough to explain it to the average person or average politician. And it really has to be a lot more robust than anything that we have generated so far. He has the right idea, anyway. There are number of misspelled names in the transcript. Here are the correct spellings: Martin Fleischmann Stanley Pons Russ George (spelled right, but there is an [sp?] notation in the transcript) Michael McKubre - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:23:42 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA08625; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:19:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:19:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960607082602_409196281@emout12.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: RMCarrell@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: The Wrights and David Sarnoff X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To Jed's excellent and instructive anecdotes about the Wright Brothers, let me add another chapter from the history of the electronics industry. The broadcast and television industry as it exists today is very much due to the leadership of David Sarnoff, president of the Radio Corporation of America. He was not an engineer but an entreprenurial giant and visionary who saw the synergy between a 'radio music box' and the broadcast newtworks to service them. This all seems so obvious now, but in the '20s, when he assumed the presidency of RCA, it was not obvious at all, for RCA was dedicated to overseas radiotelegraph traffic. The basic technology for voice trnasmission, was known, but he created an industry. In the early 30's he hired Vladimir Zworykin and gave him the resources to invent the tools of modern television. Again, the basic ideas were well established, and others, such as Farnsworth at RCA's arch rival Philco, were also working on electronic television. But Zworykin's iconoscope could integrate incoming photons and Farnsworth's image dissector could not, so the senstivity of the RCA cameras were much greater and Sarnoff was able to publicly announce commercial television at the 1939 World's Fair. World War 2 held up commercial deployment but immediately after RCA was ready with a reliable 30 tube TV receiver (when radios had 3 to 5 tubes), and complete studio equipment. They licensed everybody and built receivers for other brand names until other factories could get going. And NBC, owned by RCA, began regular broadcasting. Color TV was the 'obvious' next development. CBS got FCC approval for a system which transmitted color images as three sequential fields, which required a rotating color filter in front of the picture tube. You can imagine what your 35" TV would have been like! It was Sarnoff who literally bet the company on the development of compatable color TV. This meant that the information for a color signal had to be stuffed into the bandwidth allocated for a monochrome signal. It meant that a picture tube had to be designed and built which would generate three colors, not just one. Sarnoff marshalled the very considerable technical resources of RCA to the task. The senior scientist, a board member, was virtually resident at the laboratories of the picture tube division in Lancaster, PA, talking to everyone and looking at the development work. He also wrote checks, commanding instant resources wherever something was needed. The receiver demonstrating the possibility of compatable color television was a monster, with three kinescopes whose light was mixed and filtered by dichroic mirrors. It had a forest of fussy adjustments. But it worked, and the FCC overturned the CBS system and approved the RCA compatable color system -- which meant that a monochrome receiver could receiver a color signal, but would not decipher the buried color information. But who needed it? B&W television was plenty good enough, and saturation of the market was not yet reached. Again, it was RCA who built and marketed compatable television broadcast and receiver equipment, and NBC who began broadcasting and promoting color television programs. Sarnoff's contribution is commemorated in a bronze plaque and a memorial library, filled with an astonishing collection of honors and memorabilia, at his beloved research laboratory, the David Sarnoff Research Center, in Princeton NJ. In its glory years, the Sarnoff center was a national treasure and I was privliged to work there for the last dozen years of its existence as a funded corporate laboratory. RCA was bought by GE for $6 billion of its petty cash, and the Sarnoff Center was donated to SRI International as a for-profit susidiary. I was involved with the picture tube production systems for some years and at one time produced a study of the benefits that would follow from putting barcodes on each tube so it could be tracked through the production process. It looked easy, and the Sarnoff center built a machine for producing the barcodes. Yet it took five years of steady work before a process for durably marking barcodes on the tubes would be ready for production deployment; there are some very harsh environmental conditions in the making of picture tubes. The Sarnoff center is now a shadow of its former self. RCA is history, the brand name in consumer electronics and recordings is owned by others. Sarnoff's vision ended with color television and the corporation lost focus with succeeding presidents. There are some significant refinements in color picture tubes yet to emerge. One significant legacy of the Sarnoff Center is emerging into the commercial market. Although RCA was not the first to show a way to digital television -- that honor belongs to General Instrument -- the Sarnoff Center has been a principal source of developing the signal compression technology that can squeeze a high definition color signal into a standard TV channel, and enables the Digital Video Disc to be on the market this year. The alternate energy industry -- including CF -- does not yet have its Sarnoff. The 'killer application' -- spreadsheets -- that drove the PC industry isn't quite in view. Jed is right, that marketing and timing makes the difference. RCA, for all its successes, failed in important ways, guessing wrong on 45 RPM records, computers, video discs, liquid crystal displays, electronic publishing (yes, children, it was RCA that showed it could be done -- I was there) and a host of other misses that will get a verteran sobbing in his beer. Honest men can disagree and I have played devil's advocate to Jed's very reasonable position. I will close by noting that if the energy source in the electrolytic cells is a family of transmutation reactions in the cathodes, then we are "burning" nickel and palladium, not water. This makes a lot of difference in the path of large scale deployment and the nature of the industry to emerge. Meanwhile, the hyperefficient motors and plasma energy sources may render the electrolytic cells irrelevant and the Wright's wisdom, as quoted by Jed, will prevail. Mike Carrell From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:25:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA08719; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606071330.IAA24357@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In Cold Fusion #17, in an article by Peter Graneau about his water-arc explosions, it is stated: "This bonding energy [H2O-H20 bonds...i.e. 540 cal/gm], per unit mass, is smaller in tiny fog droplets than it is in rain drops or bulk water." Somehow this doesn't seem right to me... I would expect that you would always have to ADD energy to bulk water to convert it into tiny fog droplets...not the other way around. In the limit, tiny fog droplets become water vapor and I KNOW you have to ADD energy to bulk water to convert it into water vapor. Could there possibly be a saddle-shaped energy function here with "tiny fog droplets" being a LOWER energy state than either bulk water or water vapor? Could some of our esteemed chemistry colleagues comment on this issue, please? Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:29:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA08772; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:20:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:20:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: I have been working with my $10 temperature sensors. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: I have been working with my $10 temperature sensors. - I'm pretty pleased. It looks like I'll have to get a precison Pot, 15K and then anchor it after cal. work. But I think by tweaking it I might get +/-.5 degree F. absolute accuracy, and for what I'm looking for that's going to be fine. (That's a MINMUM accuracy, it might do better than that.) - I'm trying to remember if I included the "Rainbow" group in my listing of reasonably priced products that CF hobbiests can use. - MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:29:56 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA08844; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960607180439_551619325@emout19.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Fwd: John Grow corrections X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: From: jgrow@vir.com (John Grow) To: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: 96-06-07 09:19:43 EDT Frank, Something got lost in the translation. My bio is as follows: B.Eng in Electrical Engineering M.B.A. in marketing and over 8 years of various night time courses in law, business, and sciences Canadian Armed Forces, mechanicalized infantry. Before I started a few companies, I was with Siemens, then Hewlett Packard. The companies that I was a partner was as follows; Silent Signal, we designed cellular phones for Asian companies. TigerTec Electronics, custom electronic designs, mostly government projects TigerTec Environmental Services, we desgned complete waste processing system, we have many patents, and it is on hold. An ex-partner, defrauded our company of $ 1.5 million US dollars. We closed everything down, paid all of our debts, laid off 12 employees. Luckily, he did not ruin any lives, relationships or home. My long time friend, and energy researcher / business partner Joseph Dabby, we regrouped and designed products for the medical marketplace. We are in the process of working with a few companies on possible joint ventures. Things have been slow. Since our interests lie in the unknown, past science, anti-gravity, etc....., we started Knowledge Quest Books to fill a growing need. This venture is being run in parallel to other projects. I never worked for Gene Manning, I had asked if you knew Jeanne Manning, the author who is very interested in New Energy sources. Thank you John Grow From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:30:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA08894; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:20:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:20:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960607180525_321526057@emout17.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Fwd: John Grow info from Frank Znidarsic is incorrect X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: From: jgrow@vir.com (John Grow) To: billb@eskimo.com CC: fznidarsic@aol.com Date: 96-06-07 09:26:03 EDT Bill, I sent my correct bio to Frank, I forgot to CC you. Also add Anti-gravity researcher since 1975, many experiments, lastest project, 40 foot high Telsa coil > 250 million volts. I believe the current crop of UFO's that we see are so simple that it defies our complicated thinking. Regards, John From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:26:45 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA08962; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960608112033_213117957@emout10.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: need help X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I have received the information packet from Stan Meyer. It's very nice. It doesn't look nutty at all. The packet sites several sites were independent tests or similar research took place. I am trying to verify the information. Does anyone on the vortex know any of the following people, organizations, or reports? Dr. T. Nagypal of Austria paper on Voltage dissociation June 4, 1991. "Voltage Dissociation;" Kansas State University report #929269 by Gary L. Johnson. Jan 1992. Northeastern University Boston test report by Azevedo, Graneau, and Millet. "Powerful Water Plasma Explosion" Dublin Institute of Technology Report by Reas O'Neill 1993. Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin, Perkins report Feb 28, 1993 from Sussex University. Dr. Jacob Huber of Kehrsatz Switzerland "raum and zite" magazine. Thanks Frank Znidarsic 481 Boyer St. Johnstown Pa. 15906 Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:26:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA09103; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606082253.IAA13414@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Martin Edmund Sevior To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: CETI and U Missouri X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: A few days ago I saw a rare post of relevance to CF on spf. In it Bob Sullivan claimed that his sources "close" to U of Missouri report that the group has stopped all investigations of the CETI Cell. Does anyone out there have any comments? I must say that his descriptions of the work done by that group cast a lot of doubt on the quality of their replication. I wouldn't have "gone public" of his descriptions of what they did were all they did. Martin Sevior From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 8 18:29:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA08678; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:19:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:19:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Todd Heywood To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: 8690 UNPAIRED SPINS & MAGNETIC MOMENTS: DANCING WITH ELECTRONS 06.07.96 (fwd) X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Bits and pieces of this, and between-the-line implications, may be interesting to some... Todd UNPAIRED SPINS & MAGNETIC MOMENTS: DANCING WITH ELECTRONS 06.07.96 by Michael Schneider, Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center HPCwire ============================================================================= When we think of magnetism, most of us remember iron filings on a piece of thin cardboard. Moving a bar magnet under the paper makes the normally invisible lines of the magnetic field visible. At this point, the inquisitive among us may ask questions: What is a magnetic field? Where does magnetism come from? Think of an attractive dancer circling the outskirts of a crowded dance floor, spinning alone to the music. At a fundamental level, says Arthur Freeman, that's magnetism. In the three-dimensional dance space occupied by an atom, electrons pair up as they revolve around the nucleus, each spinning on its axis in an opposite direction to its partner -- in effect, canceling each other's spin. Among the outermost electrons of some metal atoms, however -- those most weakly bound to the nucleus, a few unpaired electrons spin in the same direction. It's this net unpaired spin, explains physicist Freeman of Northwestern University, that in these magnetic metals gives rise to a "magnetic moment," creating the pull of a magnetic field. Relying on powerful computational methods to simulate the bewildering complexity of this atomic dance floor, Freeman has revolutionized ideas about magnetism. During the last decade he has shown, contrary to what physicists believed prior to his work, that a surface atomic layer of a metal can have more magnetic moment than the bulk form of the same metal. Research stimulated by this finding has led to increasing magnetic data storage on compact discs by more than 40 times. Freeman's pioneering work with magnetism along with important computational studies in superconductivity and other solid-state properties has helped to herald a new branch of science, computational materials science. "We are now making materials," says Freeman, "with exotic properties that nature doesn't give us, new materials from old elements. What happens is once you have a new tool -- like Galileo had the telescope -- you make discoveries. We have a new tool -- the computational capability of the computer. So we make new discoveries." THIN-LAYER MAGNETISM COMES ALIVE Freeman's interest in thin-layer magnetism began in the mid-1970s when he didn't believe experiments showing that the surfaces of bulk metals -- such as nickel, iron and cobalt -- have no magnetic moment: "We did computational investigations, and we found that at least theoretically, they weren't magnetically dead. They were more alive than the bulk." With iron, Freeman and collaborators discovered that magnetism at the surface actually increased 40 percent. Freeman next modeled a single-atom layer, a "free monolayer," and discovered that the magnetic moment is even stronger than on a bulk metal surface. Experimentalists couldn't make free monolayers in the laboratory to test these predictions, so Freeman began simulating a metal monolayer on a surface of silver or gold, which because they have no unpaired electrons are magnetically neutral. He found that the magnetic moment dropped only slightly from the free monolayer value, less than 1 percent for iron. The increased magnetic moment that occurs in a monolayer, explains Freeman, happens because each atom has fewer atomic neighbors than in the bulk: "You have a reduced dimensionality. In a single layer, an iron atom, for instance, has four atoms surrounding it, whereas in the solid it has eight. The interactions with other atoms in the bulk tend to reduce magnetism." In work on Pittsburgh's CRAY C90, Freeman and former post-doctoral fellow Ruqian Wu, now at the California State University-Northridge, determined that magnesium oxide is even more neutral than silver or gold. They also found that sandwiching layers of metal between neutral materials helps protect the metal and doesn't significantly reduce its magnetic properties. "You've covered it so it won't rust or oxidize," says Freeman, "so for practical purposes, multilayers are much better." IMPROVED MAGNETIC STORAGE When laboratory researchers first tried to duplicate Freeman's simulations of a monolayer on a neutral surface, the experiments failed. "One of the crucial experiments for monolayer magnetism was iron on silver," says Freeman. "They did photoemission, looking at what happens to electrons emitted from the surface. They found no magnetism." The researchers, it turned out, were looking in the wrong direction. In most cases, magnetic moments align parallel to the plane, but in this case, they align perpendicularly, vertical instead of horizontal. With corrected technique, the researchers found the magnetism. "In an attempt to confirm or refute the predictions of enhanced magnetism," Freeman says, "they discovered something very important for applications in magnetic recording." The perpendicular alignment permits packing more information. This factor coupled with the stronger magnetic moment of a single-atom layer is transforming the magnetic recording industry of compact discs and lasers. Freeman, along with Wu and visiting professor Dingsheng Wang of the Academy of Sciences of China in Beijing, developed a new computational approach -- the state-tracking scheme -- that predicts which materials have magnetic moments oriented perpendicularly. Along with enhanced storage, the new magnetism revealed by Freeman's work broadens the choice of materials beyond conventional oxide discs. TAKING SUPERCOMPUTING TO THE LIMIT Because detailing electronic structure requires complicated quantum- mechanical calculations, Freeman's research demands supercomputing. About 18 person-years -- by Freeman and three post-doctoral fellows -- went into development of a very precise computational approach known as the full-potential linearized augmented plane wave (FLAPW) method. With FLAPW, Freeman and his collaborators are able to study 75 atoms in a unit cell on the C90. Fifteen years ago, even using less precise methods, the number was only 10. But he's still not satisfied. "I'm still overwhelmed that we can deal with so much complexity. The ability to calculate spin and orbital magnetic moments layer-by-layer and atom-by-atom is remarkable. But we want to answer questions that are more complex. We need every increase in computing power. We never get enough for our simulations of real materials." Currently Freeman and his colleagues are further developing their ability to calculate perpendicular magnetism in overlayer and multilayer systems. They also are studying the single-layer magnetism of metals from the next row in the periodic table -- the so-called 4d elements, such as rhodium and ruthenium. While these elements have no magnetism in the bulk, a magnetic moment arises when a monolayer is deposited on a substrate. "We're creating magnetism," says Freeman, "where none existed before." For more information on this topic, including graphics, see the PSC Freeman Web site http://www.psc.edu/MetaCenter/MetaScience/Articles/Freeman/Freeman.html. ------- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 10 02:06:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA01532; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI and U Missouri X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Martin writes: > A few days ago I saw a rare post of relevance to CF on spf. In it Bob > Sullivan claimed that his sources "close" to U of Missouri report that > the group has stopped all investigations of the CETI Cell. Does anyone > out there have any comments? Until Bob names names, I don't see much reason to trust his sources. I believe his standard response is that since some positive CF rumors are also sourceless, he is likewise justified. But I don't put any stock in sourceless-pro-CF reports, so Bob's position is lost on me. > I must say that his descriptions of the work done by that group cast a lot of > doubt on the quality of their replication. I wouldn't have "gone public" > of his descriptions of what they did were all they did. But are his descriptions made up??? -- - 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 10 02:09:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA01717; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:05:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:05:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > The graphical results along with a brief description can be viewed in full > color on my fledgling web page which is at > http://www.eden.com/~little I'm getting dark text on a dark background which makes it impossible to see the text unless I force my color defaults in the browser config. But the graphs are great! -- - 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 10 02:09:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA01749; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:06:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:06:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >The graphical results along with a brief description can be viewed in full >color on my fledgling web page which is at > >http://www.eden.com/~little > >Now go easy on me...my web page is pretty crude. My hat's off to Bill Beaty >and John Logajan and anyone else who can make a slick-looking web page. > >Scott Little Very nice! Too bad about Ein/Eout. What kind of software? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 10 02:09:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA01786; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:06:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:06:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960609082827_100060.173_JHB71-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: need help X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Frank, >> Does anyone on the vortex know any of the following people, organizations, or reports? << >> Dublin Institute of Technology Report by Reas O'Neill 1993. Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin, Perkins report Feb 28, 1993 from Sussex University. << Yes I know the above. Griffin is Meyer's "agent" in GB and believes everything Meyer says, and has done for several years. Very nice bloke - ex Comptroller of the Brit. Navy and wants to fit Meyer propulsion thingies to our ships. The Dublin outfit has been shafted by Meyer after spending 250K UKL on an experimental furnace. At the start of their experiment about 2 years ago they thought that Meyer's HV electrolytic cell was genuine, but in the final analysis Meyer refused to fit his magic box to their expensive proptotype furnace which they had sent to him for that purpose. No love lost there! Perkins Diesel is supposed to be testing Meyer's stuff now, among other supposed multi-million $$$ projects, but nothing published yet. If Meyer ever thinks that arab money is involved in any of his collaborative projects he immediately pulls the plug. The Sussex University work I was involved in resulted tried to make sense of Meyer's circuitry and while they thought that they were getting somewhere it never really proved anything and they stopped all work on it. As far as I know, his Volkswaggon water powered car has never run on water alone. It always starts up on gasoline and then is supposed to change over to water, but no-one has yet seen the transformation. Meyer has a very good promotional video and his literature seems real, but I find it difficult to believe that his patents are valid - mainly because no-one, including me, has been able to make his cell do anything other that electrolyse water in standard format. Hope this helps. If you can elicit any more solid info from any of your refs I will be very surprised, but delighted! Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 10 02:09:45 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA01817; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:06:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 02:06:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606091324.IAA19046@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: I have been working with my $10 temperature sensors. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 06:20 PM 6/8/96 -0700, Mark H wrote: >I'm pretty pleased. It looks like I'll have to get a precison Pot, 15K and >then anchor it after cal. work. But I think by tweaking it I might get >+/-.5 degree F. absolute accuracy, and for what I'm looking for that's >going to be fine. (That's a MINMUM accuracy, it might do better than that.) Mark, I'm using some precision 0.2C thermistors from BetaTherm that cost only about $2.50 each (in quantities of 100). I make a voltage divider using a 10k fixed resistor (that I measure accurately), ground one end of the divider, connect the other to a stable 5 volt supply and connect the center node to the ADC input channel on my data acq board. Then using the measured voltage and the known fixed resistor value, I calculate the thermistor's resistance and plug that into the Steinhart-Hart equation (BetaTherm provides the coeffs) and the results DO come out correct to within 0.2C (or at least they agree with my big glass thermometers (0.1C accuracy) that well. When a computer is not part of the experiment, I frequently just use these thermistors directly connected to a DVM to read their resistance. A programmable calculator makes quick work of the S-H eqn and, again, I've got 0.2C accuracy for $2.50 per sensor (if you ignore the cost of the DVM and the calculator, AND are willing to key in the R value and hit the RUN key to see the result). How do the sensors you're using indicate their result? on a DVM? - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:45:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA02565; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606101123.GAA05377@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 02:06 6/10/96 -0700, Horace wrote: >Very nice! Too bad about Ein/Eout. What kind of software? Completely "home-brewed" using QuickBASIC. THIS is a big reason that I'm interested in off-the-shelf data acq software. This program is a big mess....but, on the other hand, it is at least possible to go in there and change any little thing that I want to change. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:58:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA03123; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:28:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:28:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606101338.GAA24887@mom.hooked.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Russ George" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI and U Missouri X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Stuff it Jed. E-Quest has been working full time non stop with major scientific organizations for the past year replicating it's work with oversight by the finest sicentists in the nation. Is just doesn't give the results of hundreds of thousands of dollars of work to you for free so get off my back. Russ George From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:45:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA03537; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:29:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:29:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI and U Missouri X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/10/96 02:09 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: CETI and U Missouri I hate to get involved in this mess, but I have talked to Bowles directly. The results seemed very credible with the CETI supplied cells. As to whose thermoco uples AND thermistors were supplied...That I am not sure. HOWEVER, both were av ailable I understand. And both agreed with each other. - Anyone can access my letter in Infinite Energy from the summer of '95 describ- ing my personal observations in this matter. Frankly, although I have NO sympa- thy for Dennis Cravens, who is a computer phobe, and so "out of it" that he doesn't even use chart recorders to do his work, I do believe the observations were correct. BUT, as I suspected at the time, and still suspect, I think the CETI cells successes are probablistic. Frankly, Redding/Patterson/Cravens etc. were trying to solicite $1,000,000 on the basis of inadequate testing the robustness of the system. - MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:38:13 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAB04224; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31bb79a1.10386880@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Another theory X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I offer the following for your consideration. The metal layer on Pattterson cell beads is from 1-3 microns thick. Therefore the metal boundaries form a resonant chamber for both electromagnetic and sonic vibrations. Electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 3 microns lies in the infra-red. This means that this cavity will tend to select vibrational modes with very specific frequencies. This means that the Boltzman distribution will not be valid, or will under normal circumstances contain two peaks, rather than one. These two peaks can be made to coincide by varying the thickness of the metal layer. For 300K this thickness is about 32 micron, or for 400K (a better temperature if one wants to boil water:), about 25 micron. The implication here is that the current thickness of the metal layer in Patterson beads, may not be ideal. Though the thickness that is currently employed, would tend to select much higher frequencies (and thus more energetic photons), the problem is there would IMO be less of them. When the two peaks coincide, one gets a distribution, with a strong sharp main peak, followed by a succession of smaller peaks at harmonics of the main peak. Or at least, this is what I would expect to happen. Now what is the point of all this you ask? Well, consider the recent use of lasers in plasmas, to produce bench-top particle accelerators. Suppose that in such a resonant cavity as we have here, the infra-red radiation that is produced by the normal motion of particles, is selected and made to cohere by the cavity, playing the part of a poor man's version of the laser mentioned above. Now suppose further that the hydrogen ions in the metal play the part of the particles in the plasma. What we have is a poor man's particle accelerator. Furthermore, as heat is liberated by any fusion reaction, that heat goes to feed the "laser", ensuring that it can be self sustaining. The problem is that I have absolutely no idea of whether or not this is a workable concept, or utterly ridiculous. Please note that in the above, I am assuming a continuous exchange of energy between the particles and the radiation within the metal layer. I also have a slightly different version, based upon Charles Cagle's theory, but this I will spare you, without his permission. If you are an experimentalist by nature, and you think the above worthy of consideration, then you might like to try a batch of beads with a 25 micron thick metal layer. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:47:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA04813; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31bb8b68.14938431@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: RE>US Patent Office Response to an Application X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:06:02 -0700 (PDT), Michael Mandeville wrote: [snip] >The inability to do something elementary which is necessary to complete an >objective is usually blamed on some one else's action. I have seen a lot of >people invent enemies whose threats keep them from finishing something >useful. Frankly, I am at the point that I interpret such claims prima facie >as a part of a con. Reasonable people find reasonable ways to do their >thing, even in the face of great risk. >____________________________________ [snip] While this may indeed be the reason, I have long suspected that Meyer's mechanism will only work when water is present in bulk, while he himself seems to think it will work on vapour or tiny water droplets. It _could_ be, that since all or most of his latest work has been in this direction, that it has failed, and he is unwilling to admit it even to himself, as this would mean that his theory is wrong, even if his initial results were valid. Personally, I have always believed that if he produced any excess energy at all, then this was due to some form of fusion, or transmutation, with some form of resultant ionising radiation responsible for splitting the water into hydrogen and oxygen. It is for this reason that I believe that it is necessary for water to be present in bulk. Otherwise, no significant proportion of the radiation is captured by the water, hence little or no Brown's gas is produced. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:42:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA05114; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:34:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:34:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31bb8e51.15683141@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Apple orchards X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: When I was a boy, attending school in Tasmania, (then known as "the apple isle"), we were told that when farmers were expecting a frost, they would spray water in the orchard. The idea being that moist air is a better "thermal blanket" than dry air, thus helping to keep the trees warm. While this may be true, I can't help wondering if the formation of tiny water droplets in the air from vapour, didn't also tap some ZPE energy, in the growth of the spheres. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 15:05:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA05342; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:36:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:36:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606101805.NAA02950@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: another lab's ersatz bead work! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: An well-qualified but necessarily anonymous lab that received some of the ersatz beads has provided me with a summary of work: EXPERIMENTAL SETUP The experiments are conducted in a Patterson-style flow-through cell made from a 25 mm ID quartz tube. The anode is a Pt mesh disk at the top of the active volume of the cell. Another Pt mesh is used to make light-pressure electrical contact with the cathode, which consists of a bed of ersatz beads in the bottom of the active cell volume. Cathode and anode lead wires are Pt. The 'insulating separator' between cathode and anode consists of polystyrene ion exchange beads. The bead layers are retained by thin, fine-mesh plastic grids adapted from filter holders. A calibration heater resistor is located in the cell, just below the cathode mesh. Electrolyte is circulated by a variable speed peristaltic pump, usually at ~0.25 mL/s. Both liquid and electrolysis gas flow rates are measured. There is no explicit filter in the flow path, but the plastic grids and a liquid-mixing porous plug in the exit hole both would trap any small flakes that might be present. The cell is placed in a controlled environment enclosure consisting of a commercial temperature-controlled water bath below and a styrofoam box above. The bath water is circulated constantly by a small immersed pump. Air within the enclosure is circulated by a small fan, and air temperature is regulated to equal the bath temperature by a feedback circuit driving a small heater resistance wire. The electrolytic cell inside the enclosure is further enclosed by foam insulation to reduce the effects of temperature fluctuations. The incoming electrolyte from the ex-enclosure reservoir bottle, pump and flow meter first circulates through >10 m of 6 mm OD plastic hose coiled in the bath, which is sufficient for the electrolyte to reach within ~0.01 C of the bath temperature. The whole experiment is located on a bench in an air conditioned room, whose temperature is typically about 22 C, but which does fluctuate some. Electrolysis power is supplied by a conventional transformer-rectifier- filter-regulator power supply in constant-current mode. The electrolyte temperature is measured by thermocouples in Teflon-coated, 3 mm OD, stainless steel sheaths (an Omega catalog item). The TCs, the calibration resistor, and the water bath remain electrically isolated from the electrolyte by >MOhm. The TCs are inserted into the fluid stream such that the electrolyte flows along the TC sheath for a few cm, to reduce measurement errors. One TC measures inlet temperature just before electrolyte enters the bottom plug of the cell, the other measures outlet temperature just before electrolyte leaves the top plug. Cell voltage and current and the two temperatures are recorded continuously on a paper chart recorder, about once per minute. The recorder also computes and records the difference between the two temperatures on an expanded scale. Usually ten readings were averaged to reduce the influence of short term fluctuations. EXPERIMENTAL METHOD The cell was operated cautiously for the ersatz bead tests, holding the current to <100 mA (usually only 60 mA) and temperature <35 C. There was no flaking of the bead coatings. Most of the ersatz bead runs were done with the water bath heater turned off. The bath temperature drift under these conditions, due to room temperature variations, is generally <0.05 C/hr, slow enough that the cell inlet and outlet temperatures changed together. Typical electrical power input at 60 mA is a bit less than 300 mW. The measured electrolysis gas power equivalent amounts to about 70 mW (there is typically ~20% recombination), so the thermal power is usually about 200 mW. Experiments were conducted for Li2SO4 concentrations between 0.5M and 2.0M, and for pH between 4 and 10. pH was adjusted by H2SO4 and LiOH additions. The data exhibit statistical variations consistent with about 50 mW uncertainty, which corresponds to about 15% of the electrical input power. Temperature measurement is the major contributor to this uncertainty. At the usual flow rate used, 1 W corresponds to about 1 C, or 50 mW to about 0.05 C. Neither thermocouples nor most commercial TC readers are stable to within a few hundreths of a C, and the observed irreproducibilities and variabilities are consistent with typical TC limitations. On occasion, apparent excess powers a little above 50 mW (15% excess) were observed. However, these were rare and irreproducible events and were probably just statistical excursions. Alternatively, they might be either brief excess power events or as-yet unexterminated 'bugs'. At present, we can not report any statistically significant excess power from our ersatz bead tests. If we were getting even 0.2 W excess, which would still be very small in CETI's cells, we would have no problem distinguishing it from the measurement uncertainties in our system. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:53:54 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA05678; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:37:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:37:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960610182601_553400236@emout10.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: fusion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Daily R&D News Digest 06/10/96 View Article(s) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Princeton Lab Deputy Director Reflects on the Fate of the Item 1__ of 1 Fusion Program" Page 1__ of 3 Nuclear News (04/96) Vol. 39, No. 4, P. 51; Zeyher, Allen 06/10/96 The 33 percent cut in funding for DOE's fusion research for fiscal year 1996--from $360 million in fiscal 1995 to $244 million--virtually cuts the country's fusion program to the bone, concluded the Fusion Energy Advisory Committee (FEAC). "The historically strong United States leadership role in the world magnetic fusion energy program came to an end with the decision on FY 1996 funding," said FEAC Chairman Robert Conn. The fusion community is pulling back from its goal of building a prototype fusion power plant by 2025 because of the budget cuts, and the country will now pursue fusion energy only as a partner in international collaborations. The new mission of the renamed Fusion Energy Sciences Program is to increase understanding of plasma science, fusion science, and fusion technology. While the F1=Help F2=Options F3=Quit F4=Download F7=Backward F8=Forward F9=Prev Item F10=Next Item F11=Print F12=Return From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:48:16 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA05951; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:38:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:38:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960610182714_553401458@emout08.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Myer's stuff X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Page Four Computer logic functions per second (see photo enlargement on page four). Meyer calls the microchip a major key to the success of Water Fuel Cell. It has meant complying with patent laws in the United States and other countries to develop the technology and the systems engineering. And, yes, it has meant taking risks-personal and professional- to do all this in such a way to ensure the technology will develop without receiving technical blockages. "There are many entities out there who want to keep this technology from reaching it's potential," said Meyer. "The United States, however, has kept its word in allowing the technology to be released into the marketplace. Earlier, there was enormous foreign opposition to the Water Fuel Cell technology; now, we're receiving enormous support from both the United States and foreign countries who have recognized the viability of the Water Fuel Cell technology and want to bring the technology to the marketplace." An explanation of the Water Fuel Cell technology What is the Water Fuel Cell technology? For the layman, it is advanced hydrogen technology produces hydrogen gas from natural water. The process is done economically and in and environmentally safe manner. Electrical "atomic" energy is extracted from the water under a controlled means at room temperature. In other words, water can now be considered a viable fuel source in gas as well as electrical generation. Independent labs around the Page Four have been testing parts of the technology. Some of those tests include: o Dr. T. Nagypal of Austria, June 4, 1991-voltage dissociation. o Kansas State University report #929469 by Gary L. Johnson, January 1992, "Electrically-induced Explosion in Water," which confirmed the Water Fuel Cell mode of operability of the process of instantly converting water into thermal explosive energy on demand, specified under the U.S. National Security Energy Act. o Northeastern University (Boston) test/report by Azevedo, Graneau,and Millet titled "Powerful Water Plasma Explosion," July 28,1986. This test confirmed the use of voltage of opposite electrical attraction forces to instantly convert water into thermal explosive energy. o Dublin Institute of Technology evaluation report by Rea O'Neill, 1993, which denoted the mode of operability of utilizing particle oscillation of state space as an energy generator. a Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin (England), Perkins report dated February 28, 1993, a mode of operability report from Sussex University stating success in producing hydrogen from a breadboard rig based on Meyer's circuitry. o Dr. Jacob Huber of Kehrsatz, Switzerland, a "i raum & zite" magazine article in the January/February 1991 issue, confirming the Water Fuel Cell's energy priming stage. In the Water Fuel Cell, the 40,000 volts of opposite electrical attraction force at around one milliampere is all that is required to convert water to explosive thermal energy on demand. This energy is increased through the "voltage tickling of state" space (particle oscillation as an energy generator). It is spark-ignited by the applied pulse-voltage of opposite electrical voltage polarity, and the energy is released safely. There are four basic processes that occur: 1) electrical polarization process stage; 2) universal energy priming stage; 3) gas ionization stage; and 4) thermal gas triggering stage. These processes occur in a sequence of events in an instant of time. Eighteen microliters of a water droplet per injection cycle is all that is required to run the experimental dune buggy at 65 m.p.h. down the road. To run a truck, for example, it would take only 148 microliters of a water droplet to equal the on-road performance of the dune buggy, Meyer said. normally, gasoline has .5 pounds of hydrogen in it; whereas water has 1.7 pounds of hydrogen - or 2.5 times that of gasoline. Running a car under the Water Fuel Cell method, you would go 2.5 times farther than on gasoline. The Water Fuel injectors (see photo enlargement on page three) that replace the conventional spark plugs in an internal combustion engine form the resonant cavity which allows water to be converted to thermal explosive energy. This technology allows the car to run both safely and under control. Continued on pagefive From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:48:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA06231; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960610182815_553402129@emout08.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Myer's stuff X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Page Three "The profit-sharing certificate is being issued into the international marketplace worldwide, in compliance with the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Act, as well as in regard to the United States Free Trade Act," Meyer said. "Now, issuing the profit-sharing certificates will allow many people from all over the world from many different walks of life to participate in Water Fuel Cell's future developments." Plans are progressing for the establishment of the development center in a campus-type design. Land development sites are being considered. In addition to the research complex and international headquarters, proposed parts of the development include a VIP center, recreational facilities, Center for the Performing Arts, a telecommunication/data center, design concept facility, heliport, International Center for Cultural Exchange, a Water Fuel Cell Museum of History, and a colk of advanced studies. Water Fuel Cell would provide the engine and technology knowledge to aid industry in manufacturing retrofit units to take into mass production for cost effectiveness. "The Water Fuel Cell" Development Center will be truly an international research and development location," Meyer said. "We must all work together as a team to solve energy problems in countries all over the world. We must coordinate between the military and industry to develop the technology for all world entities." Meyer maintains that it is very important to bring out the technology via private industry if possible. However, if there would be a major world catastrophe endangering our fossil fuels energy supply, then governmental assistance from many countries would, hopefully, be forthcoming in order to get the technology out the door and to the marketplace in time to avoid a possible world crisis." Meyer said many countries are concerned about dwindling energy supplies. Because of the viability of the Water Fuel Cell technology, Meyer has been thrust into the international limelight. It seems that Meyer himself, as well as the Water Fuel Cell project, is more well-known and recognized in other countries than in United States. "Many foreign countries and industries worldwide have requesting a way they could invest in ater Fuel Cell so they could aid in giving birth to the Water Fuel Cell Development Center," said Meyer. "This is why the profit-sharing certificates are now being legalized to allow this type of funding to come in." Personnel for the Development Center are being sought anticipation of starting the Development Center, appropriate personnel will be needed. Meyer is currently looking for systems and electronic engineers and technicians who are sensitive to the purpose and basic philosophy of Water Fuel Cell. Resumes are now being accepted for multi-media specialists with Macintosh and desktop publishing skills; full-systems engineers and technical electronic systems engineers who have computer skills that include CAD design, E-Prom computer logic, formatting, and computer chip board layout; general office managers and accountants; project managers with an ability to oversee technical electronic engineering projects from inception to\par completion; and electronic technicians are skilled in project assembly, design, and testing. Requests for information on submission of resumes Should be sent to: Dr. Russell E. Fowler Executive Director of Water Fuel Cell Personnel and Education Department, 401 Rick Lane, Indianapolis, IN 46217; Tel/FAX 1-317-787-5226 after 7 p.m. weekdays. Water Fuel Cell technology It's been a long road to get the technology to the stage where it is today. It has meant designing, developing, and making systems component hardware previously not on the market anywhere in the world. It has meant testing and retesting, which has resulted in changing those same designs, developments, and parts as new technology is introduced. It has meant downsizing the experimental dune buggy's original electronic system from a box-like computer housing based on integrated circuit design to E-Prom circuitry which is cost-effective in terms of mass production, and finally to a microchip that can perform approximately 1.6 million Continued on pagefour Page Three Page Three From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:50:08 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA07090; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960610182923_553402958@emout16.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Myer's stuff X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: History In The Making WFC Publications Available The Birth of New Technology .... WFC Technical Brief Explaining the Hydrogen Fracturing Process on how to use "Water" as a new fuel-source. U.S. $40 plus $5 postage in U.S. or $10 foreign mailing. U.S. Currency Only WFC Dealership Sales Manual Explaining Water Fuel Cell business fonnat and general overview of WFC tech-base and related spin-off development (s) and included therein WFC Profit Sharing Certificate Preliminary Prospectus. U.S. $35 plus $5 postage in U.S. or $10 foreign mailing. U.S. Currency Only. WFC International Independent Test-Evaluation Report-Binder Listing of independent "Publication of Reports" conducted by various research laboratories World-wide confirming WFC "Technology of Inventions". U.S. $40 plus $5 postage in U.S. or $10 foreign mailing. U.S. Currency Only. WFC U.S. Patent Grants "Publication of Release" Listing VVTC U.S. patent Grants "Publication of Release" in binder. U.S $70 plus $12 postage in U.S. or $22 foreign mailing. U.S. Currency only. Historical WFC International News "Releases of Review" Listing WFC International News Releases "out of circulation" mailers denoting public notice of WFC Development and Business activities. U.S. $35 plus $5 postage in U.S. or $10 foreign mailing. U.S. Currency Only. WFC International News Release Yearly news update on Water Fuel Cell business and product development activities World- wide. U.S. $5 per copy plus $2.50 postage in U.S. or $4.50 foreign mailing. U.S. Currency Only. WFC Video Tapes Titled: "The Birth of New Technology ... Extraordinary Science Talk". Titled: Equinox "It Runs On Water" Zero point energy. Edited (30 Minutes). U.S. $35 each plus $5 postage in U.S. or $7 foreign mailing. U.S. Currency Only. WFC Dealership Information To attend a WFC Dealership Seminar, please call Charles Holbrook (1-614-335-2153) before 7 am or after 7 pm EST or Fax 1-614-871-8075 for scheduling information, or mail request to Water Fuel Cell, 3792 Broadway, Grove City, Ohio 43123 to obtain a WFC Dealer- ship Seminar Authorization Pass. WFC Employment Opportunities Please send employment Resumes and related information to Dr. Russell E. Fowler, WFC Executive Director Personnel and Education Department, 401 Rick Lane, Indianapolis, IN 46217, Tel/Fax 1-317-787-5226 7 pm - 9 pm EST weekdays only. Requested WFC information not to be used for manufacturing purposes. Water Fuel Cell 3792 Broadway Grove City, Ohio 43123 Tel. 1-614-871-4173; Fax 1-614-871-8075 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:58:30 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA07585; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606110115.SAA08020@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Muller Magnetic Dynamo Bulletin #2 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 09:03 PM 6/4/96 -0700, you wrote: >If you do indeed follow his 'preaching', things will happen >fast enough. Your account of Muller has sounded quite hopeful. > t hanks, I am trying to apply the lessons and Muller is listening avidly although he does waver... >What impresses me is that people here say things like: "I remain >skeptical, but am willing to help." I think this is wonderful. Some >might see a willingness to go places, be friendly, and check out the >improbable despite a series of disappointments as being stupid. I >don't, I see it as the true spirit of scientific enquiry. And people >assume that "anomalists" must be wild-eyed True Believers - in fact >there is no reason why they should be any less rigorous in their >approach than anyone else. > > > Takahashi is well connected and well credentialed and if the > > reports are true that he has licenced the battery doubler to the > > likes of Panasonic and Sony, well, isn't it obvious??? > >No, it isn't. NOTHING is obvious in this game! Possible, yes. >Obvious, rarely. > Yes, you are without doubt right on. On this one I allow myself for the time being to believe my speculation that big conglomerates are dividing up that particular pie. I also consider that Gasoline prices have gone up on the US West Coast during the last six months by as much as 35%, and I have a tentative hypothesis that big oil/bank circles are driving prices up to get the highest retail they can from existing production, given that they now know that naptha/water mixtures and god knows what else (from new energy technology) is going to begin the historical reversal on the demand curve for gasoline. I think they are placing a serious bet that this is the reversal time. I think they have a lot of divergent sources of information which are leading them to placing that bet. So I think that they are now going to "cream" whatever they can from the retail level, regardless of the political/economic consequences. Both the international banks and the oil companies monitor the potentials and economics of alternative sources of energy very thorougly. I am sure they have analysts who are familiar with all of the names of the inventors who have been discussed on these lists, and a hell of a lot more than we have heard of. I know from personal experience that they take the possibility of replacement technology very seriously. For instance, the basic cartel price for a barrel of oil was set as policy through the advice of the Rockefeller banking group in 1981, to hold the price 25% below the ability of alcohol fuels and solar energy to compete. I saw the economic studies during that time. Rockeller consultants were asked by the Saudi's what was the maximum feasible price for a barrel of oil, and the Rockefeller consultants told them, well, at this price, you get this altervative coming on stream taking this percentage of the market, and so forth...Actually, the Saudi's asked the question because the Rockefeller group was telling them that the Shah's (Iran) prices (at $35/barrel)were unrealistic and would ruin the market permenantly (this was in the heydey of the wave of new alcohol fuel plants being ordered). This is perhaps not as easy to relate to in Europe, where the governments are taking already such a huge portion of a large retail bite per gallon. IN the U.S., the one thing they have always feared is the undervalued agricultural and timber sectors (which is trully mammoth compared to anything in Europe) from getting serious about energy production. This fear has kept both the price and the taxes on fuel very low compared to Europe. The U.S. free market could have easily built up a mammoth methanol industry a la the German World War II solution based on feedstocks which could be grown in huge quantities by U.S. farmers. Oil has reigned only by keeping consumer prices relatively low, meaning that the profits of creating a competing industry would be pretty marginal to non-existent. David Rockefeller personally intervened in the oil cartel and read them the economic riot act which stablized the price of oil, which has never been higher that the redlines which are established in 1981. Those policies have run their course however, and I think it is no longer possible to contain the new wave of competing solutions. So I expect that they will adapt a much more aggressive pricing strategy to cream what they can while they can. The price rises will be fairly steady until a certain point (where electrical vehicles are produced in substantial quantity), then the price will precipitously drop and you will not believe how cheap gasoline can be (in the U.S.). I think it will take about 5 years for this scenario to work itself out, because you will have to displace enough gas driven cars to displace enough of the imported cartel fuel to create panic amoung the producers. The naptha/water blend is very close to 50/50, which means that theoretically, the world is now producing over twice as much fuel as it needs, but it will take at least 5 years for production and distibution of this new fuel to get significant and even then it will still be relatively small. Add in the electrical vehicle industry (which is politically very well protected and promoted now in the U.S.), which I think is basically very near to take-off, and you can see the big demand double whammy which is going to hit big oil (and the banking cartels behind them). They are very well aware of it, and more, and I am sure many oil/bank analysts have pencilled in their new redlines. So frankly I find it hard to believe that Takahashi's cold motor is anything but "hot" in certain leagues...and, you are right, nothing here is obvious. It is all betwixt the text of the news and the actions and non-actions of the players. >Chris >PS I just happened to find a copy of Asimov's hilarious >article, "The Micropsychiatric Applications of Thiotimoline," >which is in Astounding, about 1958. If anyone wants a copy, I've scanned it and >made .JPGs of the diagrams. > I'm game. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:57:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA07872; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606110114.SAA07957@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Evidence for continental drift X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 09:06 PM 6/4/96 -0700, you wrote: >In a message dated 96-06-03 15:08:57 EDT, you write: > >>> >>>I thought the mechanism was currents in the layer of magma that the >>>landmasses rest upon. What's up? >>> > >You mean that North America drives the whole damn Pacific Plate under due to >LAMINAR FLOW FRICTION WITH A LIQUID MAGMA? Does that sound reasonable? How >can a liquid magma gain a purchase on the whole plate with a force sufficient >to push such a massive object? Think that the original question is >reasonable. > > The question is fundamentally important. No mechanism for laminar flow has been demonstrated. Convection heat circulation has been speculated but in my opinion is not very convincing. The tidal force of the moon is intuitively far more likely as a driver. This gives us a sinoisoidal up and down lateral driving vector which can impart the grinding and creep motions. Lateral flow by a fluid at the ridiculously slow rates of centimeters per century just utterly fails to account for the plate buckling, sinking, and lifting. It has to activated by net gravity fluctuations. Call this "Gravity Tectonics". It is elegantly simple. The moon is the chisel which sculpts the surface of this planet and the water rounds off the rough edges! ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:55:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA08122; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606110115.SAA08018@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: vtx: The Muller GenMotor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 02:07 AM 6/10/96 -0700, you wrote: >If two spring scales are used; one scale fixed on one side of >the pulley and one adjustable on the opposite side of the >pulley; by reading the difference >between the scales and knowing the RPM you can calculate the >output in >watts. > >Joe Flynn > > I am sorry, but I don't get it. I can't visualize it. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 15:01:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA08633; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:49:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:49:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <01I5RI4U70MA8Y8T7V@delphi.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 8 Jun 1996, Scott Little wrote: > In Cold Fusion #17, in an article by Peter Graneau about his water-arc > explosions, it is stated: Scott, since I have not followed the work of Peter Graneau, in what context do the water-arc explosions refer to, a CF cell or a furnace of some sort? Joe Flynn From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 14:58:17 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA09554; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606110646.AA00786@kemi.aau.dk> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: [I thought I sent this yesterday as a REPLY but it seems that the return address was crook, so I got it bounced back at me. Here it goes again] On Sat, 8 Jun 1996, Scott Little wrote: > In Cold Fusion #17, in an article by Peter Graneau about his water-arc > explosions, it is stated: > > "This bonding energy [H2O-H20 bonds...i.e. 540 cal/gm], per unit mass, is > smaller in tiny fog droplets than it is in rain drops or bulk water." > > Somehow this doesn't seem right to me... I would expect that you would > always have to ADD energy to bulk water to convert it into tiny fog > droplets...not the other way around. In the limit, tiny fog droplets become > water vapor and I KNOW you have to ADD energy to bulk water to convert it > into water vapor. Could there possibly be a saddle-shaped energy function > here with "tiny fog droplets" being a LOWER energy state than either bulk > water or water vapor? There are two separate issues here: the bond energy between water and water, and the energy needed to form these tiny droplets. What the above is saying is that within the droplets, already formed, the bond energy, per mol of water, is smaller than in bulk water. If this is so, it has to be due to a surface tension effect. Also, "smaller" might well mean more negative... i.e. the absolute value of that energy might be larger. No doubt that number should be negative in the first place - because of the dipolar nature of the water molecule, two of them are happier together than apart, so the bonding is spontaneous, releasing some energy. Water is a strange substance and gets stranger, the more you read about it. There are books written about its structure. Some of these might be good to check; also check up on surface tension if you want to know more. Me, I'm busy with real work. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 15:06:14 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA09789; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Brown gas, a mixture of two parts hydrogen gas to one part oxygen, has been alleged to produce fusion reactions. Check out: http://www.primenet.com/~ltseung/brown1.htm There are brown gas generators available starting from $1,200. This would seem to me to be more interesting than working with CETI like cells that don't seem to do very much. You get a lot more action from a Brown gas tourch than from your puny do nothing CETI cells. Of course there is a problem with palladium because it would burn up but you could take a Brown tourch to something like titanium. It is supposed to cut right through it and it is suggested that there may be some cf energy that is assisting this reaction. With such large power outputs it should be easy to test for any excess heat. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 15:03:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA10025; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:55:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:55:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606111454.AA16121@echo.i-link.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (21st Century Logic) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: U. Missouri Post on spf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: ***{I just noticed the following post on spf. It would be interesting to hear a response from someone who has talked to the U.M. people. Anybody? --Mitchell Jones}*** Path: news.i-link.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!sgigate.sgi.com!uh og.mit.edu!news.mathworks.com!nntp.primenet.com!winternet.com!alpha.sky.net! ip61 From: bsulliva@sky.net (Bob Sullivan) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: cold fusion, the movie? Date: Thu, 06 Jun 96 23:59:19 GMT Organization: SkyNET Corporation Lines: 40 Distribution: world Message-ID: <4p7rcn$7a8_001@ip61.sky.net> References: <4ovmru$768_001@ip200.sky.net> <4p58cv$gm6$1@mhade.production.compuserve.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ip61.sky.net X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4 In article <4p58cv$gm6$1@mhade.production.compuserve.com>, John C <71531.1617@CompuServe.COM> wrote: ->You said that no academic research institutions have replicated ->the CETI CF device. I thought that The University of Missourii ->and The University of Illinois both had replicated the CETI ->device. Do you deny this? That's the University of Missouri at Kansas City. Contrary to the Rothwellian fantasies, UMKC has never attempted replication in the sense of independent construction. The have attempted runing several CETI-constructed cells. The first cell (with CETI-installed thermocouples) 'appeared' to give a small excess (assuming 100% Faraday efficiency using the CETI heat balance calculations) before the shell broke. They accidently pulled the one of the leads out of the second one and returned it to CETI presumably without testing. The third cell (with CETI-installed thermocouples) was destroyed when they reversed the cell voltage in an attempt to stop perceived 'heat after death.' UMKC used their own thermisters instead of the CETI-supplied thermocouples on the fourth cell. For some mysterious(?) reason the cell failed to work. They didn't check operation with the thermocouples. The cell was returned to CETI with the thermocouples attached. When CETI supplied the fifth cell they did not return the UMKC thermisters. New thermisters applied to this cell showed the same negative results as for the fourth cell. Activities at UMKC have been non-existent for some time. No funding. No interest. Before anyone asks, the (multiple) sources are confidential. If you want conformation (or denial) go to UMKC. The same contacts are further removed from the source for info on Miley's group than for UMKC, but again, contrary to the Rothwellian fantasies, the reports I get indicate that their 'results' don't climb above a reasonable estimate of the noise. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 11 15:16:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA10285; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:57:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:57:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: home page X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott That is a very nice job, quite understandable, and a very effective communication of your experiment. The color scheme came out just fine on my system. I bounced back and forth with my netscape navigator between the text and the oscilloscope image, and was able to understand what you had done without trying to memorize the text or take notes. Thanks Hank From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 13:33:05 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA02996; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:11:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:11:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606112208.SAA02145@spectre.mitre.org> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Robert I. Eachus" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Apple orchards X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk (rvanspaa@netspace.net.au) said: > When I was a boy, attending school in Tasmania, (then known as "the > apple isle"), we were told that when farmers were expecting a frost, > they would spray water in the orchard. The idea being that moist air > is a better "thermal blanket" than dry air, thus helping to keep the > trees warm. While this may be true, I can't help wondering if the > formation of tiny water droplets in the air from vapour, didn't also > tap some ZPE energy, in the growth of the spheres. No magic, ZPE, or cold fusion involved. Fruit freezes at temperatures lower than water, and as the water freezes it releases heat. Only when all the water is frozen will the temperature get low enough to freeze the fruit. At this point the fruit is ice covered, but that is fine--the ice acts as a thermal blanket, and melts the next sunny day. (Or sublimates in some circumstances...) Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 13:42:57 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA03514; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:14:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:14:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606120002.AA00883@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: another lab's ersatz bead work! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott, its not clear why you say they ``work''---the relevant part of the report was: >On occasion, apparent excess powers a little above 50 mW (15% >excess) were observed. However, these were rare and irreproducible >events... that amounts to rare observances of a 0.05 C temperature differential...not much to shake a stick at. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 13:40:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA03717; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:16:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:16:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Another theory X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/11/96 14:37 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Another theory I like this theory, although I hate getting involved in the "theory" mess. What sticks out to me is the potential for this sort of thing to explain "hit and miss" on P's work. (Also shows, if you had lots of bucks you could do some careful maxtrix experiments with carefully controlled amounts of plating and see the effects.) - Again, at the risk of being treated as either a "total believer" or a "skeptic". I believe the Patterson results were real, and ligetimate. HOWEVER, I also think Redding, Patterson's grandson, saw nothing but $$$$$ and this over-ruled good sense in terms of VALIDATING the work. - I have gone from from frustration to total distain for Redding, and SYMPATHY for Patterson, who is not really "aware" of all the political goings on, and feel anyone turning down Redding in his request for $$$ is validated. - MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 13:41:12 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA03895; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960611230112_100433.1541_BHG30-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Meyer, water droplets X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Frank has given us a lot of the Meyer stuff, which is fine - I suppose. Without attacking Frank in *any* way, can I just say that I find all this highly irritating? He says he has had foreign help. Certainly this is true, and at least one outfit has been left very seriously out of pocket as a result of helping him. The help has not, of course, been reciprocated by Mr Meyer. Yet I see that Mr Meyer is still quoting those associated with that group! Adm. Griffin is above reproach in terms of personal character, and I see it as a great pity that he has become involved with somebody who has such - er - "unconventional business notions." The only one of those technical reports I have seen was the U Sussex one. Careful study showed that it reported precisely nothing out of the ordinary. Dr Mallove has also visited Mr Meyer, and was not permitted to make any measurements - even those which would have revealed nothing. It would have been quite sufficient to give strong suggestions of an anomaly if a fine piece of fuse-wire had sustained the "H-O dissociation current" without melting. This was not allowed. Whilst it is true that Meyer has been granted patents for his process, and it is true that his "water-dissociation" vessel stays cool after a long run - so the man possibly has something - I would make the following comments: 1. The granting of a patent is not in itself a guarantee that something works as advertised by the inventor. 2. I have personally (in the days when I was a little less cautious) worked to replicate Meyer's device from the patents. I have assisted others (against my will, admittedly) who have asked me to help with their own attempts. A device built to the patent specifications simply does not work. 3. The business practices of Mr Meyer have been reported as deeply unsatisfactory by some who have dealt with him. 4. In one sense, something which has any chance of being real is worthy of investigation. However, there is a broader picture; if the inventor appears to be of unsatisfactory character then I believe we should not deal with him until the matter of his dissatisfied customers is cleared up, and I feel that any of us who get involved with such a person risks bringing the whole field into a kind of disrepute which is *much* more important than the kind of 'scientific' disrepute we all are in already. 5. The above criticisms might also be applied to the products of Dr Potapov. However, the problems with those devices (and the behaviour of that company) are pretty trivial stuff in comparison with all the stories about Mr Meyer. I think that those of us involved with 'anomaly science' should avoid people like Mr Meyer, and concentrate our energies elsewhere. ----------------------------------- On a separate issue, I agree entirely with Dieter Britz's comments about water and the obvious(?) differences between bulk and droplet water based on surface tension. Yet I wonder if there might be some link between sonoluminescence, where there are micro-spheres of gas surrounded by a water/gas interface; and micro-spheres of water currounded by a water/gas interface? A pretty feeble and obvious comment, but .... maybe? Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 13:47:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA04043; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606121253.HAA27602@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 14:53 6/11/96 -0700, Dieter wrote: >There are two separate issues here: the bond energy between water and water, >and the energy needed to form these tiny droplets..... I appreciate your reply, Dieter. I SHOULD go dig up books about this subject and study them....but indulge me for a moment more in a thought experiment that may eliminate the need for that: Suppose for a moment that there exists a state for water called Tiny Fog Droplets (TFD). Further, suppose that water in the TFD state is at a lower overall energy level than either bulk water or water vapor. Now, since the Earth is billions of years old and there has been plenty of time for all of Earth's water to experience an opportunity to get put into the TFD state (e.g. wind blowing over ocean waves, rain drops splatting, etc.)...doesn't it stand to reason that most of the Earth's water would be in the TFD state by now? The only two ways that this could NOT be the case (which it clearly is not), are (1) there is some serendipitous mechanism operating whereby solar energy is constantly being ADDED to water in the TFD state to take it either directly into the bulk state or into the vapor state whence it condenses into the bulk state somehow bypassing the TFD state...or (2) the TFD state is NOT at a lower energy level than bulk water. Do you think I still need to go to the library? Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 13:40:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA04192; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:19:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:19:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606121257.HAA27746@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 14:49 6/11/96 -0700, Flynn wrote: >Scott, since I have not followed the work of Peter Graneau, in >what context >do the water-arc explosions refer to, a CF cell or a furnace of >some sort? No, Joe. He builds a cannon of sorts with a spark gap at the breech end. He puts in a little water, submerging the gap electrodes, then discharges a big high-voltage capacitor thru the gap. The resulting blast has great force but it is exceedingly difficult to accurately measure the energy contained in the blast. A lab in Canada has done some very innovative work towards making these measurements and the results are at least intriguing...i.e. there is some evidence for o-u in the water arc. This, Graneau explains, is due to the transformation of the water from the bulk state to the Tiny Fog Droplets state. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 13:45:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA04258; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606121345.AA64646@uu1611.prelude.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: d.powell@prelude.com (Don Powell) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: A > Brown gas, a mixture of two parts hydrogen gas to one part oxygen, has >been alleged to produce fusion reactions. Check out: > Reality Check time. I've heard some bizarre stuff on this list but this takes the cake. If you combine 2 parts H and 1 part O then you get an instant explosion following normal everyday chemistry with a result of water vapor. It is foolish to even suggest there could be fusion involved. (unless of course you think that combining hydrogen and oxygen to make water is fusion) > >Lawrence E. Wharton >NASA/GSFC code 913 >Greenbelt MD 20771 >(301) 286-3486 You know thje great thing about the Internet is you can be anyone you want to be but if this guy really is with NASA then we are in serious trouble. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 13:49:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA04333; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:20:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:20:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31BEDCB6.2083@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > At 02:06 6/10/96 -0700, Horace wrote: > > >Very nice! Too bad about Ein/Eout. What kind of software? > > Completely "home-brewed" using QuickBASIC. THIS is a big reason that I'm > interested in off-the-shelf data acq software. This program is a big > mess....but, on the other hand, it is at least possible to go in there and > change any little thing that I want to change. > > Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. > Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA > 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) Beautiful stuff on the Ni-Cads Scott! Does anyone have a nickel-hydrogen cell for Scott to run???? Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 13:56:33 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA04488; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:20:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:20:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: RE: Apple orchards X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Ivan Farmers in Florida do this all the time also. I think the mechanism is just that constanly adding liquid water to the freezing mess keeps the temperature from going below 0 degrees C because of the heat of fusion-50cal/gram or so. On ski slopes in the mountains this results in the fantastically beautiful rime frost from freezing fogs. Hank ---------- From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Apple orchards Date: Tuesday, June 11, 1996 2:35PM When I was a boy, attending school in Tasmania, (then known as "the apple isle"), we were told that when farmers were expecting a frost, they would spray water in the orchard. The idea being that moist air is a better "thermal blanket" than dry air, thus helping to keep the trees warm. While this may be true, I can't help wondering if the formation of tiny water droplets in the air from vapour, didn't also tap some ZPE energy, in the growth of the spheres. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 16:01:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA00872; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:48:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:48:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960612173326_554930604@emout16.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Fwd: help reach Antony Griffin X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Getting help on sorting this Myer thing out. --------------------- Forwarded message: From: 101544.702@CompuServe.COM (Richard Hellen) To: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com (INTERNET:FZNIDARSIC@aol.com) Date: 96-06-12 15:04:38 EDT Frank >From Who's Who 1995, I've found the following details on Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin. Born 24 Nov 1920. Joined Royal Navy 1934. Commander of Ark Royal 1966-68. Commander Plymouth Sub Area 1969-71 etc. A real high flyer. Home address Moat Cottage, The Drive, Bosham, West Sussex PO18 8JG, Tel 01243 573373. Who's Who also links him to Stephen Clarke Finch, who married the Admiral's daughter, Sarah Rosemary Ann. S C Finch is an independant consultant since 1989, but was a telecommunications specialist and another high flyer, only this time for British Pretroleum. The only reason for mentioning him was the fact that he will have contacts with BP who may be interested in the Admiral's alleged interests in Meyer's work. I suggest that you either write to the Admiral directly, and call him after he's had time to read your letter. Meyer's flyer seems very ambitious. How exactly do the profit sharing certificates work? Are they a form of share certificates or are they a means of giving returns on investment without parting with any ownership? Regards Richard From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 12 16:09:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA01326; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... - I would like to find a reasonably priced (Translate $50 to $150 or max $200) priced program which would allow me to use a windows format, place resistors and "op amps" on the window, place a variety of input signals into the "circuit" and observe the output. Any suggestions? - Thanks Vortexians! From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 14:56:32 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA14048; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:45:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:45:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Mark Hugo askes: > I would like to find a reasonably priced (Translate $50 to $150 or max > $200) priced program which would allow me to use a windows format, place > resistors and "op amps" on the window, place a variety of input signals > into the "circuit" and observe the output. Any suggestions? The only ones I've had experience with are about twice your desired price, $300. Of those, I prefer CircuitMaker, though I haven't seen the latest version of ElectronicsWorkbench. CircuitMaker is more versatile, and I recommend it over EWB. You can download demos -- I have their web sites listed in 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 vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:02:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA14513; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31BF5485.654@introtech.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Henry Eisenson To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > doesn't > it stand to reason that most of the Earth's water would be in the TFD > state by now? Seems to me that you have a pretty good grasp of entropy, Scott. Clausius would agree with your argument, which is sound enough to end this thread (but I bet it doesn't!). Henry Eisenson ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| INTROTECH A path to the world's largest market 6336 Greenwich Drive San Diego, CA 92122 (619) 453-7600, fax 552-9050 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 14:58:09 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA14719; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:50:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:50:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Meyer, water droplets X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Chris wrote: [snip] > >2. I have personally (in the days when I was a little less cautious) worked to >replicate Meyer's device from the patents. I have assisted others (against my >will, admittedly) who have asked me to help with their own attempts. A device >built to the patent specifications simply does not work. > >3. The business practices of Mr Meyer have been reported as deeply >unsatisfactory by some who have dealt with him. > >4. In one sense, something which has any chance of being real is worthy of >investigation. However, there is a broader picture; if the inventor appears to >be of unsatisfactory character then I believe we should not deal with him until >the matter of his dissatisfied customers is cleared up, and I feel that any of >us who get involved with such a person risks bringing the whole field into a >kind of disrepute which is *much* more important than the kind of 'scientific' >disrepute we all are in already. > [snip] > >Chris Does anyone have the Meyer Patent Number(s)? I am about ready to order a bunch of HAARP related patents from the USPTO and would like to include the Meyer patents in the order. This seems like it might be more in keeping with Chris' view than ordering "The Birth of New Technology .... WFC Technical Brief Explaining the Hydrogen Fracturing Process on how to use "Water" as a new fuel-source. U.S. $40 plus $5 postage in U.S. or $10 foreign mailing. U.S. Currency Only" which I was tempted to do. Besides I am both broke (temporarily) and cheap (permanently), so the choice is clear! I have been thinking along the lines that maybe producing H2 and O2 is worthy of some attention. This is especially true in light of the "success" of NASA with the light water Ni with K2CO3 electrolyte cell from Hydrocatalysis Power Corp. The "excess energy" does not seem to be there without considering recombination, but if you can produce and store H2 and O2 at a nominal or no energy cost, preventing the recombination, you really have something usefull. It may be possible to heat your house and generate fuel for your car at the same time. Maybe too much focus has been on generating the heat (and thus minimizing electrolysis current) and not enough on generating fuel. Maybe it is possible to generate enough fuel and heat to run the generator that powers the electrolysis. NASA only got 1.06 to 1.68 times unity, so the generator would have to be very efficient (enter Muller?) I think focusing on an othogonal cell (vertical electrolyte flow, horizontal current flow, vertical electrodes) with a gas separator membrane is a good approach. Besides, I am now too chicken to test a gadget that produces 2H2 + O2 in a confined space in a big foam block in my kitchen. Ditto on overcharging nicad batteries. I was thinking about putting it outside, but I've heard enough about fires to last me a while. The Miller's Reach fire (Houston Alaska, Big Lake, and points south) is still not out, but is still about 20 miles away and it's lightly raining at the moment. Officials are now saying next Sunday it should be out. I guess I need to build a metal shed. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 14:56:28 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA14991; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:51:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:51:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 12 Jun 1996, Don Powell wrote: > > Brown gas, a mixture of two parts hydrogen gas to one part oxygen, has > >been alleged to produce fusion reactions. Check out: > > > > Reality Check time. I've heard some bizarre stuff on this list but this > takes the cake. If you combine 2 parts H and 1 part O then you get an > instant explosion following normal everyday chemistry with a result of water > vapor. It is foolish to even suggest there could be fusion involved. > (unless of course you think that combining hydrogen and oxygen to make water > is fusion) Check again. I agree about fusion, but the mixture will not explode unless triggered by something, like a spark or a metal surface like Pt or Pd. It is not exactly a safe gas mixture to have in your lounge, but it won't go off without a trigger. My guess is that the Meyer lot would like us to think that this gas mixture has some magical properties, being made from water by waving a wand, or something - since Meyer claims to break up water without using the usual amount of energy. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:04:30 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA15213; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960613074916_100060.173_JHB38-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Fwd: help reach Antony Griffin X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Richard, There's no milage in trying to squeeze Griffin for more info or help with Meyer at this stage. The only thing Meyer is interested in is cash, and he seems to have set up another scam with this so-called profit sharing lark. No-one has yet been able to get the whole specification for a working unit out of Meyer, and no-one to my knowledge has yet witnessed an instrumented ou performance of his gizmo. Poor old Griffin has been to Meyer's garage/lab/workshop a dozen or so times in the last 4 years and is convinced that Meyer is genuine. I'm afraid its a case of the triumph of hope over reality. Griffin has been warned off approaching any GB govt. establishment with these ideas so he is concentrating on commercial Cos., some of which seem to have taken the bait. The P.R. is good and can persuade the average development/ research bod. to have a go. I was persuaded to make a few sets of his cell and gave them to a couple of our vortexian friends to play with. I managed to blow up my feeder circuits with em feedback after hours of playing tunes with waveforms and frequencies eventually hitting a resonant condition with my intercom which nearly deafened me! I am amazed that he has any patents allowed with the gobbldygook they contain, but he is a very persuasive bloke, so if he demonstrated his multi-tube cell with minimal instrumentation to some patent examiner and lit up the H + O gas jet to melt some Fe wire with sparks etc so what? Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:03:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA15446; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:54:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:54:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960613074918_100060.173_JHB38-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Mark, I tried to find the same program a few years ago, but the price was then way over the top for a full self computing analog circuit builder. Depending on the complexity of your systems why not do what I eventually did and use MathCAD or similar and feed it with the functions appropriate to the circuit elements and then let it plot the outcome between chosen limits? I know this can get hairy but with perseverance for the simpler circuits it does work. Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:08:33 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA15672; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 12 Jun 1996, Scott Little wrote: [...] > Suppose for a moment that there exists a state for water called Tiny Fog > Droplets (TFD). Further, suppose that water in the TFD state is at a lower > overall energy level than either bulk water or water vapor. Now, since the > Earth is billions of years old and there has been plenty of time for all of > Earth's water to experience an opportunity to get put into the TFD state > (e.g. wind blowing over ocean waves, rain drops splatting, etc.)...doesn't > it stand to reason that most of the Earth's water would be in the TFD state > by now? > > The only two ways that this could NOT be the case (which it clearly is not), > are (1) there is some serendipitous mechanism operating whereby solar energy > is constantly being ADDED to water in the TFD state to take it either > directly into the bulk state or into the vapor state whence it condenses > into the bulk state somehow bypassing the TFD state...or (2) the TFD state > is NOT at a lower energy level than bulk water. > > Do you think I still need to go to the library? Yes, because you leave untouched the original problem of H2O-H2O bond energy difference between bulk and TFD water. In another posting, you mention the work of Graneau, stating that the apparent possible ou might come from TFD formation. It is the other way around (your point (2) above, it takes energy to disperse water into TFD. So if there seems to be ou, it would have been more if some of the ou energy had not been absorbed by forming TFD. I don't believe there was any ou, of course, the calculation of input energy when you zap a system like that, must be very uncertain, to say the least. We still have the open question of whether surface effects in TFD can affect that bonding energy, irrespective of the energy state of TFD themselves. Now I've forgotten what the F stands for, was that frigging? Where does Graneau say that about ou, by the way, and where does say that about bond energies? I'd like to read that, and maybe, some time, do some reading myself. Water structure, as I said, is fascinating. Bockris, by the way, has a theory of the electric double layer that involves structured water at the metal interface, and there is a bloke named Frank (or maybe Franks, they are both experts on this) who believes in long-range water structure at interfaces. If you do visit the library, look for these names, as well as Samoilov. One of these Frank(s)'s is likely the one who wrote the book on polywater (aka Deryagin water, after Deryagin, now known for fractofusion). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:11:57 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA15910; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:57:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:57:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: A Don Powell wrote: [snip] > > Reality Check time. I've heard some bizarre stuff on this list but this >takes the cake. If you combine 2 parts H and 1 part O then you get an >instant explosion following normal everyday chemistry with a result of water >vapor. It is foolish to even suggest there could be fusion involved. >(unless of course you think that combining hydrogen and oxygen to make water >is fusion) > [snip] > > You know thje great thing about the Internet is you can be anyone you want >to be but if this guy really is with NASA then we are in serious trouble. You must not have lurked here very long or you would know that Larry Wharton is a regular and valued contributor to this list. I personally am very grateful to him for the public and private assistance he has given a novice like me. If you would look into the Brown's gas phenomenon you would see that the suggested anomaly is the extreme temperature generated, higher than normal 2H2 + O2 burning. This is partially due to the fact the generator (at least partially) produces O and H atoms, and/or ions, (not just H2 and O2) which combine in the torch flame to produce H2O. The question at hand is whether the extreme temperature represents some kind of unexplained energy gain. I would like to note that this is a slightly moderated list. If you wish to make personal attacks like "if this guy really is with NASA then we are in serious trouble" you might consider doing so in some other forum. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:09:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA16215; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606130837.BAA30048@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Meyer, water droplets X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 01:17 PM 6/12/96 -0700, you wrote: >Frank has given us a lot of the Meyer stuff, which is fine - I suppose. > Frank, I wish to concur with Tinsley's "findings". When I worked as an analyst for a investment banking firm I did I pretty thorough professional due diligence on Myer. Many "killing" doubts emerged. >Adm. Griffin is above reproach in terms of personal character, and I see it as a >great pity that he has become involved with somebody who has such - er - >"unconventional business notions." > Myer is a talented promoter and Myer has developed several different sets of partners during the past 15 years, involving well over a million dollars. Some of these partners were in conflict over what their deal with Myer was. >The only one of those technical reports I have seen was the U Sussex one. >Careful study showed that it reported precisely nothing out of the ordinary. > Myer has never demonstrated tangible business results for his investors, even though as early as 10 years ago they were lead to believe that results were just a year away. >Dr Mallove has also visited Mr Meyer, and was not permitted to make any >measurements - even those which would have revealed nothing. It would have been >quite sufficient to give strong suggestions of an anomaly if a fine piece of >fuse-wire had sustained the "H-O dissociation current" without melting. This >was not allowed. > > >2. I have personally (in the days when I was a little less cautious) worked to >replicate Meyer's device from the patents. I have assisted others (against my >will, admittedly) who have asked me to help with their own attempts. A device >built to the patent specifications simply does not work. it does sound or should I say "read" good. i have or had the complete set of patents. as of six years ago, there are many aspects of his technology which are difficult to say that he really has any lock on. all of his ideas are basicly obvious and or already known. most likely, the most you can say is that he has a design patent (as of his patents six years ago). > >3. The business practices of Mr Meyer have been reported as deeply >unsatisfactory by some who have dealt with him. > to the tune of over a million dollars >4. In one sense, something which has any chance of being real is worthy of >investigation. However, there is a broader picture; if the inventor appears to >be of unsatisfactory character then I believe we should not deal with him until >the matter of his dissatisfied customers is cleared up, and I feel that any of >us who get involved with such a person risks bringing the whole field into a >kind of disrepute which is *much* more important than the kind of 'scientific' >disrepute we all are in already. > there are a lot of people unhappy with what they alledge to be Myer's "ethics" - ethical problems are often a problem of appearances and perspective, but you have got to go into super caution mode, given what appears to be questions from quite a number of perspectives about Myer. >I think that those of us involved with 'anomaly science' should avoid people >like Mr Meyer, and concentrate our energies elsewhere. yeah I predict that a serious investigation of Myer will end up somewhat like our examination of Newman, with this difference, the principles used or claimed to be used by Myer work and will produce useful results, o/u will still be undecidable, and Myer will remain an enigma. If there is o/u it will be quite a great suprise, but I think that you will have to re-engineer the entire approach in your own workshop to find out, not relying too much for the specifics on the patents, more on the intrinsic basics of science. Because of water's very strange non-linear energetics at phase transistion, there may definitely be some tricks which can be culled out curtesy of the weilu master. One thing which is not sufficiently appreciated is that hydrogen and oxygen become a very energetic em flux field which is very, well, coherent when they unite purely, without any other chemical reactions involved (gases combusting, such as nitrogen). This reaction broadcasts very little heat, creating astounding pressure differentials by implosion of the mass. No doubt you have very steep brick wall shock waves, which, if coherent,say small implosions in a small resonant chamber, could be harnessed into additional work, such as Brown has demonstrated, plus you should be able to harness the em flux, again, if you can make the acoustic resonant chamber also an electrically resonant chamber, which should enable you to extract an additional bonus of energy for coupling in some manner. Maybe piezo concepts are used to couple the sound force, magnetics the em flux, and pistons or tubine effect for the vacuum implosion. It would take a lot of money and time to seriously play with this stuff. I wouldn't do it as a quest for o/u. There is a lot of other more promising stuff closer to reality. Like magnetic motors... ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:13:33 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA16439; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 15:00:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 15:00:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606131038.AA18505@student.utwente.nl> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... >- >I would like to find a reasonably priced (Translate $50 to $150 or max >$200) priced program which would allow me to use a windows format, place >resistors and "op amps" on the window, place a variety of input signals >into the "circuit" and observe the output. Any suggestions? There's a program called PSpice, I don't know what the commercial version cost, but there is a free evaluation version available (on the Net) that alows schematics up to 25 parts. This evaluation version also has (at least one) OPAMP (ua741), when one knows how to use the program, it is rather simple. Here the name of the company that sells it: MicroSim Corporation 20 Fairbanks Irvine, CA 92718 USA (714) 770 3022 Timothy van der Linden (T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:21:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA17231; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 15:05:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 15:05:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606131139.GAA05203@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: another lab's ersatz bead work! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 01:14 PM 6/12/96 -0700, Barry wrote: >Scott, its not clear why you say they ``work''--- Barry, I think you got confused by an unfortunate typo I made in the introduction. I should have said (referring to the lab's efforts); "here is a summary of their work." instead, I said; "here is a summary of they work." I, too, conclude from the summary that they did NOT get positive results. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:13:30 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA17584; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 15:07:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 15:07:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606131141.GAA05283@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 01:20 PM 6/12/96 -0700, Frank Stenger wrote: >Beautiful stuff on the Ni-Cads Scott! Does anyone have a >nickel-hydrogen cell for Scott to run???? That's a neat idea! Surely the reason that NMH (nickel metal hydride) cells are such good batteries is that they are really CF cells in disguise...:-) I suppose I could just go purchase one for a video camera or laptop computer. Do they make "D" cells in NMH? - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 13 15:15:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA17963; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 15:09:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 15:09:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606131148.GAA05451@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 03:51 PM 6/12/96 -0700, you wrote: >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... How about one for free? Go to this web page: http://castor.acs.oakland.edu/cgi-bin/vsl-front/QuickForm and search for "Spice" in the MS-Windows programn category. Then download some of them and try them out! I don't know how the shareware/freeware versions of Spice work but the EE's at work swear by (and sometimes at!) the commercial version that they use. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 04:20:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA01313; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/13/96 15:02 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... NORMAN! Things have changed! Hank S. sent me several advertizments for exactly what I need. THANKS! From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 04:20:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA01521; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31C0A1CA.B9B@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Scott's hot Ni wire X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Open speculation to Scott L. Assume that there are some unkown number of *potential* CF sites in an unstressed chunk of metal. Maybe the sites are related to impurity sites and, perhaps to dislocation sites. We would expect these sites to be under unusual lattice stress. Speculate that in these unusual lattice stress areas, the electronic cloud is deformed so that: 1. The normal penetration of the electron wave functions into the nucleus, for some metals, is extended - leading to increased chance of electron-capture reactions - leading to energetically favorable isotope shifts in the metal nuclei. For example: 28Ni58 (0 spin,+parity) captures 2 electrons. It dumps who-knows-what and 1.918 Mev excess energy and converts to 26Fe58 (0 spin,+parity). Ni58 has 67.88% abundance, Fe58 has 0.33%. OR: 2. Hydrogen atoms diffuse into these high-stress areas and/or cause even higher stress areas - leading to CF events IF conditions are JUST RIGHT. Now, it seems plausible that the HIGH STRESSES in our magic crystal sites have a short life and soon relax to normal lattice stress levels. So, now we think: Initially, a piece of virgin metal exposed to hydrogen shows little CF activity. There are lots of potential sites around, but not much hydrogen to engage the sites (and perhaps cause new ones). As the H loading increases, the CF activity goes up since there is now a lot of H chasing a lot of potential CF sites. As the process gets old, the H loading reaches its maximum value but the old active sites begin to relax to normal stress and CF activity slows down. Eventually, we wind up with a highly loaded metal with all CF sites "worn out". Activity-vs-time might look like peak * * * * * * * * * * initial final This kind of process would look a lot like the "poisoning" effect I have seen mentioned in some vortex postings. The bottom line, Scott, is that it might be interesting to deform the Ni wire in your calorimeter AFTER IT HAS SOME H LOADING. Is there any way you could stretch the wire a small bit without breaking it? Maybe using some thin fiberglass pull rods? Speculating that as the crystal planes slip in the wire, maybe all CF hell would break loose! Long-on-bull, short-on-calorimeters-------Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 04:25:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA01586; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:16:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:16:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606140043.RAA21836@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Muller Dynamo Bulletin #3 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear All Of You Who Have Expressed Interest: After a very interesting trip to Houston to evaluate an energy related technology, which I will share in a separate posting, I am back in the computer saddle with Muller. I thought I had Muller talked into configuring his test dynamo setup to feed the output into the input to permit free run of the unit so that diehard skeptics who don't want to be deceived by measuring technology, such as Eisenson, would see unambiguous o/u right in front of their eyes. Muller then thought about it while I was gone and has decided that he does not want to undertake doing that. The reasons he cites: (1) What he has setup in his lab does in fact work and it took a lot of work to get it to work. (2) Any sort of test devices can be plugged in to record an over unity energy gain of approximately 2:1 (3) This should be enough to convince professionals that it is worth investing $350,000 into a commercial prototype, which should theoretically approach 10:1 o/u. (4) Rejigging the test model involves time, money, and risk of burning out his SRC's, which, because they are expensive for a mature man on a pension, he just doesn't want to fool with. He does not want to change a single thing in his existing proof of concept. (5) He will provide complete access to tire-kickers, nothing will be hidden, and any type of non-destructive testing and monitoring with any type of commercial or profesional equipment, as long as it is electrically and mechanically sound (poses no circuit risks), will be permitted. I might add that Muller loves to explain his concepts, so testers and tire-kickers will also get an intensive running seminar on the nature of magnetics, motors, generators, and what and why they are seeing what they are seeing. Muller is very much an engineer, not a promoter, and frankly it is difficult to keep up with his technical "download". I am not happy personally with his reluctance to risk a little more work, money, and time. But that is the way it is. Muller believes that doubting Thomases should remain so. He is only interested in interacting and proving himself with people who have enough grasp of the concepts of electricity and magnetism that the existing test model, with proper measurement, is sufficient to evoke a scientific AHA experience. He believes that such people exist, will come, and will provide the recommendations/energy/money for the next stage. Two different parties are scheduling to visit Muller during the week of June 24-30 in Penticton, British Columbia. I will know the exact dates next week. If anybody else in Vortex and/or Free Energy land desires to see Muller's demonstration and conduct a serious test of the device, this is an excellent opportunity to do so. Testers are free to use the information they gain in any manner they choose, except that circuit diagrams and silicon specifications are considered top secret at this point. Photographs are permissable, except for the silicon breadboards. Any of you who would like to pursue this further, please email me. If you are in the Seattle area, hint hint, Bill B, an entourage could be put together to visit Muller's lab... ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 04:20:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA01654; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:16:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:16:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31C0BFDC.157@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > At 01:20 PM 6/12/96 -0700, Frank Stenger wrote: > > >Beautiful stuff on the Ni-Cads Scott! Does anyone have a > >nickel-hydrogen cell for Scott to run???? > > That's a neat idea! Surely the reason that NMH (nickel metal hydride) cells > are such good batteries is that they are really CF cells in disguise...:-) > > I suppose I could just go purchase one for a video camera or laptop > computer. Do they make "D" cells in NMH? > > - Scott Little > EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 > 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) OK, my dirty little secrete will soon be obvious to all! Scott, I think I have developed an unnatural attachment to your calorimeter. I have this obsessive-compulsive urge to dream up things you can insert into its work area. Please forgive me - I'll try to keep it under control! I do have some nickel stock(pretty good stuff, I think - from a small plating company in our area). I could go out to the garage and use a flat-bastard (file) to grind out a small bag of nickel filings. Has anyone tried a CF run in a Patterson-type cell using a bed of Ni filings? Making Patterson beads seems too hard a job! Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 04:20:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA01699; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:16:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:16:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606140202.TAA13639@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: A chance to observe X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To Members of Vortex-l The debate will continue for some time as to the validity of low energy nuclear events. I do not offer a solution, but chance for observation. In August, I will be hosting an estrange open house at a low energy nuclear transmutation precious metal production facility in central California. Estrange in the since that only twelve people will be invited and each will be required to sign a limited confidentiality agreement. Seven slots remain open at this time. Since the debate of realism regarding my work has been a joke to some extent in this forum, I am soliciting qualified observers. For those interested, here are the rules: 1. An observer must be familiar with general science as it would relate to low energy transmutation. 2. An enforceable limited confidentiality agreement must be signed. This agreement allows for the observer(s) to report their findings but can not divulge the proprietary technologies utilized in the process. 3. The observer will be allowed to view all aspects of the commercial operation for 48 hours. Samples of up to 5,000 grams may be collected by each. Each observer can designate from which part of the processes they wish to collect the samples and devise their individual procedures of how the samples are collected. It is preferred that each observer supply their own sample containers and physically take their own samples. Safety equipment and disposable gloves will be provided, but if one wishes they can bring their own. 4. The observer will not be required to comment on their thoughts during their visit. They will be allowed to take the material back to their laboratory, or a facility to establish their opinion separate from the plant and the others. 5. The observer must be willing to complete final review of the samples within 14 days. 6. The observer must be willing to give a complete written statement as to their findings based on their external confirmation within 5 days after testing. 7. The findings of each observer will be presented at the Texas A&M conference in September. A paper will be prepared for publication, but each observer may publish within the guildelines of the confidentiality agreement. For those who would consider participation, you may contact me direct at 602-951-6816, or email me at the below address. But there is a catch to this program, I am not asking someone to witness a test tube reactor and attempt validation. Nor, will the observer be asked if they witnessed an anomaly. The sole question will be -- did the observer "CONFIRM" commercial production of precious metals from Champion's low energy nuclear reactor? _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 04:25:57 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA01735; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31C10590.45CF@rt66.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Richard Thomas Murray To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Eberlein theory of sonoluminescence X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At LANL I zeroxed Claudia Eberlein's famous paper, "Sonoluminescence as Quantum Vacuum Radiation, Physical Review Letters, 76, (20), May 13, 1996, 3842-5. "More closely related to this is the Unruh effect well known in field theory [10]; its original statement is that a uniformly accelerated mirror in vacuum emits photons with the spectral distribution of blackbody radiation. However, the phenomenon is far more general than that and in particular not restricted to perfect mirrors. This kind of quantum vacuum radiation has been shown to be generated also by moving dielectrics [11]. Whenever an interface between two dielectrics or a dielectric and the vacuum moves noninertially photons are created. In practice this effect is very feeble, so that it has up to now been far beyond any experimental verification. Sonoluminescence might be the first identifiable manifestation of quantum vacuum radiation." Reference [10] is Unruh, 1976; Reference [11] is Barton and Eberlein, 1993. Any dialectric "moving noninertially", that is to say, affected by some force that adds to the inertial movement along local curved space-time geodesics, emits photons that generate "dissipative force acting on the moving bubble surface...a proportionality to the fourth derivative of the velocity is also found in calculation of frictional forces on moving perfect mirrors [21]. The emission of photons is thus not predominantly influenced by the acceleration of the interface." I think this means that the vacuum friction force derives from the second derivative of the acceleration of the surface. I get an intuitively pleasing picture that the vacuum, boiling as an immensely deep energy sea of evanescent photon-antiphoton pairs, acts to retard sudden, extreme movement of dialectrics (which might be a single atom), stimulating the creation of observable photons. Can this kind of process lead to the production of other particles from the vacuum? Could this kind of process in a lattice lead to generation of coherent beams? Suppose with nanotechnology, a spinning paddle mirror of diamond film is driven by a very high frequency pulsed electron beam. How much beam energy could be turned into flashes of photons? Does the reverse process occur: that is, would intense high speed laser pulses on the spinning diamond nanopropeller generate electron emission? From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 04:20:59 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA01783; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:17:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:17:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: William Beaty To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: INSULTS ON VORTEX-L X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > Don Powell wrote: > [snip] > > You know thje great thing about the Internet is you can be anyone you want > >to be but if this guy really is with NASA then we are in serious trouble. It looks like it's time to revise the rules for Vortex-L. The ban on nasty behavior apparently is not worded strongly enough. I had to do the same thing recently on freenrg-L as a result of the Joe Newman discussion, so I knew it was only a matter of time. >2. This is not the sci.physics.fusion newsgroup; ridicule, debunkery, and > namecalling between believers and skeptics are forbidden. The tone > should be one of legitimate disagreement and respectful debate. > Vortex-L is a big nasty nest of 'true believers' (hopefully having > some tendency to avoid self-deception,) and skeptics may as well leave > in disgust. But if your mind is open and you wish to test "crazy" > claims rather than ridiculing them or explaining them away, hop on > board! (For a good analysis of the negative aspects of debunkery, > see ZEN AND THE ART OF DEBUNKERY.) I'm going to leave rule #2 as is, and insert this: 3. WARNING: The standards for behavior here are very high. Flames, including insults, personal attacks, snide remarks, namecalling, etc., are forbidden. If you must be nasty, do it via private email. Anyone indulging in this behavior on vortex-L will be immediately removed from the 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@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 10:43:05 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA08498; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31c14979.20445654@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Meyer, water droplets X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 13 Jun 1996 14:50:31 -0700 (PDT), Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >Does anyone have the Meyer Patent Number(s)? I am about ready to order a [snip] 4389981 4613779 4421474 C1231872 C1233379 C1228833 C1227094 4613304 C1235669 4275950 1234774 3970070 C1234773 4265224 C1213671 4465455 4798661 4826581 5149407 E0101761 J1577992 E0086439 J1584224 4936961 J1694782 5293857 Those preceded by a letter are foreign. C=Canada (I think) J=Japan E=European This was as of 1994. There may have been more since. 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@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 10:30:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA08818; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:18:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:18:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606141332.IAA01703@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 14:56 6/13/96 -0700, Dieter wrote: >> Do you think I still need to go to the library? > > >Yes, because you leave untouched the original problem of H2O-H2O bond energy >difference between bulk and TFD water. In another posting, you mention the >work of Graneau, stating that the apparent possible ou might come from TFD >formation. It is the other way around (your point (2) above, it takes energy >to disperse water into TFD..... Ah, Dieter...your intuition matches mine. However, you apparently missed the original point of all this: In Cold Fusion #17 (May 1996, published by Wayne Green) on page 15, there is an article by Graneau in which he claims that the extra energy in his water arc experiments that makes them o-u COMES FROM the H20-H20 bond energy that is released when bulk water is quickly transformed into the Tiny Fog Droplets (or alternatively, Tiny Frigging Droplets) state. In your statement above, "it takes energy to disperse water into TFD", you seem to be agreeing with my position in this matter. Anyway, the question here is this: "Is it conceivable that the TFD state of water could represent a lower overall energy state than the bulk state?" My point in my latest post was that, if this was true, then I'd expect most of the Earth's water to now be in the TFD state....wouldn't you? Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 10:57:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA08956; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:19:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:19:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606141341.IAA02409@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 04:16 6/14/96 -0700, Frank Stenger wrote: >OK, my dirty little secrete will soon be obvious to all! Scott, I >think I have developed an unnatural attachment to your calorimeter. >I have this obsessive-compulsive urge to dream up things you can insert >into its work area. Please forgive me - I'll try to keep it under >control! Oh please don't! This is how people sometimes achieve great things. One guy makes a curious widget, then another guy comes along and says, "Hey, I know what we can do with that!" >I do have some nickel stock(pretty good stuff, I think - from a small >plating company in our area). I could go out to the garage and use a >flat-bastard (file) to grind out a small bag of nickel filings. Has >anyone tried a CF run in a Patterson-type cell using a bed of Ni >filings? Well, I've come pretty close. The first thing I ran in my Patterson-style cell was a bed of small Ni beads....absolutely even a hint of excess heat! (NOTE: "hint" means >0.1 watts in my system). Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 10:44:14 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA09075; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960614100905_556196332@emout15.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: cells/tests/myer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Good idea Frank S. I had an old miners headlamp with an Edison Cell attached. I think the cell contained plates of a high nickel alloy. It may also be worth a try. Frank S. I see you typing OK, and now you are filing metal, glad to see you fully recovered from your fall. Larrence at NASA .I enjoy and respect your posts. Don't assume the criticism comes from all members of the group. P. Glueck. I hope the elections go well and result in a favorable climate, one in which we can work together. Myers patent # s per request. 4389981, 4613779, 4421474, 1231872 ,1233379, 1228833, 1227094, 46113304, 1235669, 4275950, 1234774, 3970070, 1234773, 4265224, 1213671, 4465455, 4798661, 4826581, 5149407, 0101761, 1577992, 0086439, 1584224, 4936961, 1694782, 5293857, pct/us91/03476 If its bunk there sure is a lot of it. Comments questions about Myer's work. I saw the gas produced by Myers's rig burning on the show "It Runs on Water" Should not a stokiometric ratio of oxygen and hydrogen explode? Will Browns gas burn or does it just go poof? My experience with gas welders suggests to me that the gas should not burn with a flame but rather explode with a boof. Myers wants to build a library, heliport, science center, and an Indy 500 race car. I think a more reasonable business plan would be to get a few hundred of the most elementary devices out to the marketplace by the end of the year. Upon reading Myer's stuff I found that his device has more to to with tiny high voltage underwater sparks that with the process of electrolysis. I conducted a experments a few years ago with underwater arcs. I was trying to reproduce the underwater fireballs seen in deep underwater welding. A Jacques Cuestoe show in the early 1970's featured the fireballs produced in underwater welding. I thought these fire balls may have something to do with ZPE and ball lightning. The show was neat..I wish I could find a copy. In order to study this underwater fireball effect a few year ago I stuck a spark plug into the end of a piece of tygon tubing. I fastened it on with a clamp and filled the tube with water. I connected plug to my high spark generater. I got a white underwater spark. Nothing notable. Next I wanted to try higher pressure. I connected the other end of the tygon tubing to a 80 PSI air compressor. I found the plug would not fire. I reduced the gap and the plug fired with a bright white flash. Nothing notable. It's harder to make an arc at higher pressures. This is known. Finally a reduced the pressure and fired the plug again. To my surprize a got thousands of tiny bubbles. They looked like the white foam seen in Myer's cell. I assumed that the shock of the spark knocked air out of solution. I assumed that air went into solution under higher pressure and formed a supersaturated soultion when the pressure was reduced. I fired the plug a second time under reduced pressure less bubbles were produed. The thing was cool so I videoed it. Russ Marchell at Potolemaic flims features the experiment on his gravity video. Just because it looks neet I suppose. I wonder if there is any connection between this experiment and Myer's stuff. Frank Z From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 10:31:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA09261; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:21:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:21:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606141424.AA70362@uu1611.prelude.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: d.powell@prelude.com (Don Powell) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >You must not have lurked here very long or you would know that Larry >Wharton is a regular and valued contributor to this list. I personally am >very grateful to him for the public and private assistance he has given a >novice like me. Actually I have been on here quite a long time and my comment was concerning the H2 + O => 2H2O reaction. In all of my reading of this list as well as the Alternative Energy List and the Hydogen lists, I do not recall reading anything about Brown's gas phenomen. I obviously missed some mail concerning this generator. I am EXTREMELY interested in this as I have been looking at hydrogen for 14 years for just such an anomoly. Please email me the specifics of the generator. > >I would like to note that this is a slightly moderated list. If you wish to >make personal attacks like "if this guy really is with NASA then we are in >serious trouble" you might consider doing so in some other forum. > I have already been chastised for this by the moderator and said I will apologize if someone would send me the specs on a device that creates this anomoly. On a related issue: Dieter Britz wrote: >Check again. I agree about fusion, but the mixture will not explode unless >triggered by something, like a spark or a metal surface like Pt or Pd. It is >not exactly a safe gas mixture to have in your lounge, but it won't go off >without a trigger. My guess is that the Meyer lot would like us to think that >this gas mixture has some magical properties, being made from water by waving >a wand, or something - since Meyer claims to break up water without using the >usual amount of energy. Any Hydrogen in an Oxegen enviroment over a certain percentage (I have to look up the % but was quoted in Alternative Energy List) causes an explosion with no trigger needed. In the case of Pt and Pd, those are catalysts that will cause the reaction to occur at a lower temperature but they are not necessary. Now a spark will definetly set off any Hydrogen gas that is at a lower than normal explosive %. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 10:32:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA09470; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:22:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:22:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960614151146_72240.1256_EHB158-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: CETI cells are probabilistic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Mark Hugo writes: "BUT, as I suspected at the time, and still suspect, I think the CETI cells successes are probabilistic." Yes, some beads work and some do not, for reasons still not clearly understood. CETI and Cravens have been open and up-front about this fact. They have said this on many occasions. They have often told me this is the reason they cannot sell the beads yet, or even distribute them widely for testing. Dennis made this point again at INFN. My response is to point out that first generation high-tech products are usually flawed. When quartz crystal digital watches were introduced in the early 1970s, up to 40% of the ones that reached the retail stores failed. Even the Japanese ones! First generation microcomputer hardware and software is notoriously unreliable. "Frankly, Redding/Patterson/Cravens etc. were trying to solicit $1,000,000 on the basis of inadequate testing the robustness of the system." Well, I think the testing is as good as anyone could do on such a limited budget with so few people. Mark does not like Dennis's computer phobia, but I don't mind it. However, I agree that they are asking for too much money up front. It seems like a poor business strategy. But if it works it will seem like a brilliant strategy I guess. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 10:47:40 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA09629; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:22:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:22:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960614151159_72240.1256_EHB158-3@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Russ George writes: "Stuff it Jed. E-Quest has been working full time non stop with major scientific organizations for the past year replicating it's work with oversight by the finest scientists in the nation." Yes, I know. I have heard from some of them. They express the same confusion and doubts about the calorimetry as I do. That is why I think E-Quest should publish a detailed exposition of their work. If you are right, the exposition will give you credibility, and if you have made a mistake people will catch it and make valuable suggestions. "Is just doesn't give the results of hundreds of thousands of dollars of work to you for free . . ." This is nonsense. As all readers of this forum know, I advocate *filing for a patent*, and then publishing scientific papers. Inventors must secure intellectual property rights before going public. But if they never go public, they never get credibility or funding, and they will never learn enough to debug the product. I am suggesting that E-Quest do what Edison, Westinghouse, Bell Labs, Intel and Apple Computer have done. I have read accounts of hundreds of different inventions and products. I have never heard of a case in which a technology was perfected in secret to the point where it could be marketed. No individual or group of researchers has ever been smart enough to do that. The closest example was Edison's introduction of the incandescent light in 1878, and that was the culmination of 20 years of published research by many other people besides Edison. Bardeen and Shockly could never have made transistor radios. Furthermore I have repeatedly made it clear to Russ that what I personally want to know more about is the calorimetry, not the actual device. Russ has repeatedly claimed that the device produces 300% excess -- he said this most recently on NPR, on June 1, 1996. I would like to know the scientific basis for this claim. I will not take Russ's word for it. I need proof, details, calibration curves, information on the blank runs, and so on. I never take anyone's word for anything. Revealing the methods of calorimetry should not endanger the property rights to the device inside that produces the heat, which may be treated as a "black box." People who are unwilling to describe their experimental technique cannot be taken seriously, and they cannot expect funding or respect from the public. I would go further: people who are unwilling to *demonstrate* their experimental technique cannot expect anyone to believe them. There are, in my opinion, only two valid reasons to keep product development R&D secret: 1. If you are already funded and you do not care about the public perception of your work. In that case, you have no business complaining when people refuse to take you seriously. 2. If you are making rapid progress and you expect a breakthrough shortly. This cannot be the case at E-Quest. They have reported 300% maximum excess for two or three years now. ". . . so get off my back." Nobody forces you to read my messages. Your tone is inappropriate to this forum. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 10:57:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA09703; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960614151135_72240.1256_EHB158-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Rule 2 too harsh X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Bill Beaty writes: I'm going to leave rule #2 as is, and insert this: 3. WARNING: The standards for behavior here are very high. Flames, including insults, personal attacks, snide remarks, namecalling, etc., are forbidden . . . Anyone indulging in this behavior on vortex-L will be immediately removed from the list. I think this is too harsh. Why not make it: "Anyone indulging . . . will be removed from the list after three warnings"? - Jed From billb@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 10:00:21 1996 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 KAA15729 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 10:00:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Default (moon-c20.aa.net [204.157.220.120]) by big.aa.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA16428 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 10:00:15 -0700 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199606151700.KAA16428@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: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:59:48 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Brown's Gas Status: RO X-Status: At 03:58 AM 6/15/96 -0700, you wrote: >To all vortexians interested in Brown's Gas > >BG, a stochiometric mixture of H and O does definitely not EXPLODE as long as >you keep the mixing ratio. Missing the ratio more than 5% gives a property >change to EXPLOSIVE. Keeping the ratio results in an IMPLOSIVE gas. I'm not >telling you theoretical stuff - I purchased a gas generator two years ago i built one and >imported some others for friends of mine. They all reported the claimed results: >a flame with implosive characteristics and very low temperature (you can move >you finger through the flame sort of, very rapidly....but don't tarry there! ]; try this with an acetylene torch !!). When coming >into contact with some metal or brick or tungsten even the temperature rises up >to more than 5000 Kelvin depending on the material. You are able to weld a steel >rod to a ceramic brick e.g. We also replicated the experiments the inventor made >himself: Filling some container with water and then bubbling the gas from below >so that there is only this gas in a certain volume over the water surface >(keeping it clean from any mixed air). Then igniting the gas with a spark plug. >The volume collapses to 1860th of the initial volume resulting in a sucking up >the water reservoir. Thee experiments are very impressive. Brown himself also >set up motors working with this principle and pumps. Another application is to >store the gas in crude oil and get it off later applying little heat. Much more >applications are under development. > >All these experiences were made meanwhile by dozens of people. There is no more >doubt about this. The PACE Newsletter published many articles on Brown's Gas. >Andrew Michrowski (PACE president, residing in our Ottawa's head office) >presented a paper on this topic during the ISNE '96 in Denver as well. There are >also very interesting transmutation experiments reported applied to radioactive >probes with crucial decay rates in very short time intervals. > >for a direct contact: > Andrew Michrowski > 100 Bronson Avenue / 1001 > Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6G8 > Canada > fax (613) 235 5876 > >Any comments ? > >Wolfram Bahmann >Planetary Association for Clean Energy, Inc. - EURO. SECR. > >Feyermuehler Str.12 D-53894 MECHERNICH Germany >fax: Int+49/ 2443-8221 e-mail: 100276.261@compuserve.com > confirm, all the effects above are real from my own personal experience. Brown's reports are all accurate. His theory may be weak but it doesnt matter because he is an experimentalist and what he has worked out from experiment is all accurate. Brown strikes many people as very irrascible and he is hard to strike a deal with or do business with because of a wide culture gap (he spent a long time as a communist prisoner in the gulag)but he is not a liar. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 20:39:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29002; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:35:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:35:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606141852.NAA17185@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: oops! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: recently I said: Well, I've come pretty close. The first thing I ran in my Patterson-style cell was a bed of small Ni beads....absolutely even a hint of excess heat! (NOTE: "hint" means >0.1 watts in my system). when I actually meant: Well, I've come pretty close. The first thing I ran in my Patterson-style cell was a bed of small Ni beads....absolutely NOT even a hint of excess heat! (NOTE: "hint" means >0.1 watts in my system). Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 20:39:44 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29186; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:36:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:36:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606141853.NAA17287@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Rule 2 too harsh X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 10:23 6/14/96 -0700, Jed wrote: >I think this is too harsh. Why not make it: "Anyone indulging . . . will be >removed from the list after three warnings"? Yeah, Bill....if you can stand the extra work of keeping up with the number of warnings, this would be much better. Some folks don't realize they're flaming until others tell them so. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 20:40:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29243; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606142051.NAA13448@mom.hooked.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: RGeorge@hooked.net To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: My tone is certainly appropriate. When you persist in your intent to disparage and detract from anyone and everyone who does not do things your way you knowingly are attemting to do them harm. This argument has gone far enough it and it makes this forum useless to me. It's the fate of every public forum when arm chair hecklers step to the front. Russ George Russ George From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 20:41:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29304; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Rule 2 too harsh X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > >I think this is too harsh. Why not make it: "Anyone indulging . . . will be >removed from the list after three warnings"? > >- Jed Yes - it is easy to slip up now and then - and where is the thin blue line? Most people here have the courtesy to cease if someone calls foul. It's your list Bill, but are you maybe having an uncharacteristically bad day? Somebody on freenrg-L must have really got to you! Maybe "can be immediately removed from the list" vs "will be immediately removed from the list" would give you a little more flexibility. BTW, how do you subscribe to freenrg-L? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 20:45:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29338; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Meyer, water droplets X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: [snip a gazillion Meyer patent numbers] >5293857 >Those preceded by a letter are foreign. >C=Canada (I think) >J=Japan >E=European >This was as of 1994. >There may have been more since. >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk Wow! Thanks much Robin. I had no idea there were that many. It's going to cost over $40 just for copies of the US patents. I don't know how that guy has afforded all those patents unless he has produced *something* worthwhile. Some look fairly old. I just renewed my one and only patent, and the $500+ renewal fee was a significant expense to me - and the renewal fees just keep getting bigger as the patent ages. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 20:41:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29384; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960614185237_556522987@emout16.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: little bubbles X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I never thought much of my experiment in which I produced the mass of tiny bubbles until now. The bubbles were very tiny. They looked like a white froth. They traveled upward with a speed of about 1inch / 5seconds (The smaller the bubble the slower it travels.) Well now, it appears that Patterson knows how to make tiny beads and I know how to make tiny bubbles. I think the technology of bubble production is important. The Yusmir and the Griggs machines work by imploding tiny bubbles. This in a very inefficient process. The bulk of the fluid must be pressurized for the sake of the relatively small mass of the bubbles. It would be better to put energy into the bubbles directly. Could this be what Myer has unwittingly accomplished? I invision a bubble inertial confignment fuision machine to work as follows: 1. A supersaturated solution of air and water is produced. It could be produced by my method of subjecting water to a pressure of 60 PSI air then backing off on the air pressure. 2. The air is knocked out of solution with a shock. This could be done with my method of inducing a 5 kv 100 joule spark in the water. 3. Now we have water full of very tiny bubbles. I've done this. It's fun and easy, try it. 4. Next we place energy is placed into the bubbles. This can be done with a high electrical field, I hope. If the water is ultra-pure the bubbles will be more conductive than the water. An arc will form through the bubble path. 5. The micro-bubbles will explode. A lot of energy will be placed into the tiny area of a few micro-bubbles. How hot will they get? How fast can we apply the energy? 6. The arc will tend to expand and release the energy. The high voltage will be pulsed off before the arc expands to normal size. We don't want to heat the bulk of the water through ohmic heating. 7. A pulse of high voltage will be reapplied in a cyclic fashion to form repeated micro bubble explosions. 8. Does this sound like Myer's machine? I'm going to try and built it. Anyone else game for this thing? I've already built the bubble producing machine, now I've got to try to put energy into the bubbles. What do you think? Frank Znidarsic Bubble head. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 14 21:56:24 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA09273; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 21:44:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 21:44:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606150428.XAA22283@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: hot Ni wire X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Frank, thanks for the very interesting proposal about stretching the Ni wire. Have you by any chance read the Piantelli "patent" that was published recently in Infinite Energy. In that, he talks about using mechanical shock to start up his heated Ni in H gas CF reaction. Unfortunately, I've not heard of anyone, including myself that has replicated his experiment. I have actually tried a direct replication of the Piantelli experiment and I tried striking the end of the Ni rod to send shock waves down it in the hope that would stimulate the CF reaction. I'm certain that my impacts did NOT cause and plastic deformation though. I didn't see any indication of excess heat. Maybe the plastic deformation would do the trick... Unfortunately, my Ni wires were in little sealed cells filled with H gas. It'd be a major udertaking to rig up a way to stretch them. But that data was taken with the old differential calorimeter which had a pretty small experiment chamber. Now, with the better part of a cubic foot to work with, I might be able to rig up something pretty easily....hmmmm. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 04:03:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA00536; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:56:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:56:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Steve Ekwall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Rule 2 too harsh X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 14 Jun 1996, Jed Rothwell wrote: > To: Vortex > Bill Beaty writes: > I'm going to leave rule #2 as is, and insert this: 3. WARNING: The > standards for behavior here are very high. Flames, including insults, > personal attacks, snide remarks, namecalling, etc., are forbidden . . . > Anyone indulging in this behavior on vortex-L will be immediately > removed from the list. >> I think this is too harsh. Why not make it: "Anyone indulging .will be >> removed from the list after three warnings"? >> - Jed > Jed,Jed,Jed (3x!).... so if we/they/or others ask you NOT to pee-pee another while in this room, you still WANT permission to do it anyway (x3)(tsk-tsk!) GrOw Up and just put forth what you really think 'THINK'!...! no touchy feely crap should be allowed here!! (It's hard enough already!!) -=steve ekwall=- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 04:10:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA00648; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:57:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:57:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960615062551_100060.173_JHB59-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Help in finding a circuit analysis package... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Mark, >> NORMAN! Things have changed! Hank S. sent me several advertizments for exactly what I need. << Great! I dl'd the ICAP/4 demo SPICE and have struggled to get it to simulate a dummy circuit, but the limitations on the range of bits in the demo rather spoil the fun! Good luck! Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 04:06:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA00710; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:58:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:58:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960615071559_100060.173_JHB37-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: little bubbles X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Frank, My interpretation of the Meyer H/O system (which is only one of the gadgets his patents cover) is as follows: 1 He produces a pulse train comprising a multi-pulse cascade of about 4 stepped reducing amplitude pulses repeated with a gap of a few pulse widths at a repeat frequency around 16kHz. 2 This triggers a +ve biased high voltage supply (I went up to 12kV) from a tunable circuit where the capacitative element is the water cell, the water being the dielectric. 3 The idea is to get the HV circuit to resonate at about 16 - 18 kHz when the current flow at resonance is milliamps and the electrolysing of the water is way above the theoretical max. I replicated his cell construction to the letter, at least as well as possible from his patents, even to the extent of getting special SS telescopic tubing and insulation spacers to withstand the voltage across a radial gap of 0.5mm. It was fun to run dry watching the arcing racing up and down the tubes, but I found it impossible to get resonance when full of water. I reckon this was due to the effect of the variability of the bubbles of H & O which must form as soon as the current flows and changes the capacitance of the concentric tubes. I tried everything, even made variable chokes to try to tune to resonance. That is when I blew up my pulse generator and intercom by em induction in the feeder leads!!! So - good luck if you try to repeat Meyer. Screen all your leads and the pulse gen. circuit and stand clear of the 10kV. By the way - when Meyer runs his H2-O blow torch he isolates the gas generator from the flame by a capillary tube so that the flame-rate is lower than the gas flow and there is plenty of heat conduction. Like a sort of Davy lamp safety effect. Thats why he doesn't get an explosive re-comb of the gases in the cell. Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 04:10:32 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA00746; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:58:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:58:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: little bubbles X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > >8. Does this sound like Myer's machine? I'm going to try and built it. > Anyone else game for this thing? I've already built the bubble producing >machine, now I've got to try to put energy into the bubbles. What do you >think? > > >Frank Znidarsic Bubble head. Frank, Some months ago I tried using a 60 mA, 15,000 V transformer discharge in water using two 35 MGo nickle plated magnets facing each other about 5" apart for electrodes. The discharge was in a flat bottom glass cassarole dish. A pattern of bubbles formed on the bottom of the bowl in an oval shape that could be imagined to follow the magnetic (or electrostatic since they were parallel)) field lines. Someone suggested maybe it was Brown's gas. I thought it was odd, but didn't follow up on it to see what caused the effect - air, steam, Brown's gas, illusion, or what. I do remember then looking at a web page that described Brown's gas, etc. I think it was in Australia. I'll look to see what I can find to satisfy Don Powell's request for info on same. Also I assume you have read Bill Beaty's various dangerous HV experiments - some of which relate very well to this subject. Of special interest is the charge/(mass of water) to get a good explosion. Also of interest might be loading thin Ni, Pd, Al, Ti, etc. wires and then exploding them under water with high energy capacitor discharges. I think this has been done though. Also, I believe Scott Little has posted that he has done some water exploding experiments with negative calorimetry results. Personally I like the idea of using something like John Logajan's gadget for doing electrolysis in a high pressure vessel, but using a couple spark plugs so as to separate the H2 and O2 gasses with a partition and then blasting a very high current discharge through the compressed H2 gas (the idea being to achieve the 6000 psi of the Kamada experiment and then the required current density in the H2. All you need is a good blockhouse and remote video! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 04:10:25 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA00791; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:58:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:58:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960615091951_100276.261_JHF82-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Wolfram Bahmann <100276.261@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Brown's Gas X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To all vortexians interested in Brown's Gas BG, a stochiometric mixture of H and O does definitely not EXPLODE as long as you keep the mixing ratio. Missing the ratio more than 5% gives a property change to EXPLOSIVE. Keeping the ratio results in an IMPLOSIVE gas. I'm not telling you theoretical stuff - I purchased a gas generator two years ago and imported some others for friends of mine. They all reported the claimed results: a flame with implosive characteristics and very low temperature (you can move you finger through the flame; try this with an acetylene torch !!). When coming into contact with some metal or brick or tungsten even the temperature rises up to more than 5000 Kelvin depending on the material. You are able to weld a steel rod to a ceramic brick e.g. We also replicated the experiments the inventor made himself: Filling some container with water and then bubbling the gas from below so that there is only this gas in a certain volume over the water surface (keeping it clean from any mixed air). Then igniting the gas with a spark plug. The volume collapses to 1860th of the initial volume resulting in a sucking up the water reservoir. Thee experiments are very impressive. Brown himself also set up motors working with this principle and pumps. Another application is to store the gas in crude oil and get it off later applying little heat. Much more applications are under development. All these experiences were made meanwhile by dozens of people. There is no more doubt about this. The PACE Newsletter published many articles on Brown's Gas. Andrew Michrowski (PACE president, residing in our Ottawa's head office) presented a paper on this topic during the ISNE '96 in Denver as well. There are also very interesting transmutation experiments reported applied to radioactive probes with crucial decay rates in very short time intervals. for a direct contact: Andrew Michrowski 100 Bronson Avenue / 1001 Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6G8 Canada fax (613) 235 5876 Any comments ? Wolfram Bahmann Planetary Association for Clean Energy, Inc. - EURO. SECR. Feyermuehler Str.12 D-53894 MECHERNICH Germany fax: Int+49/ 2443-8221 e-mail: 100276.261@compuserve.com From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 05:00:22 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA00857; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:59:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 03:59:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31c2963d.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Peter Glueck" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: A subject for this weekend. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortexers, Frank Znidarsic wrote, inter alia: Peter Glueck: I hope the elections go well and result in a favorable climate, one in which we can work together. Thanks, Frank, OUR elections go well and here the enemies and the friends are almost indistinguishable, with the very exception of a few thousand extremists (you also had some of these recently in Montana, I think). But if I am looking at the television to the red mobs in Russia carrying Stalin's pictures, I am really disgusted and scared. A few years ago I have coined the Twin Peaks Principle: "The evil is indestructible, ubiquituous and always wins". (But not completely, I hope) Please excuse me for touching this subject; it's weekend and you are my unknown friends. Ora pro nobis. Peter -- dr. Peter Gluck Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology Fax:064-420042 Cluj-Napoca, str. Donath 65-103, P.O.Box 700 Tel:064-184037/144 Cluj 5, 3400 Romania E-mail: peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro , itimc@utcluj.ro From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 05:45:13 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA17763; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 05:42:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 05:42:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31c21411.9609868@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:19:02 -0700 (PDT), Scott Little wrote: >At 14:56 6/13/96 -0700, Dieter wrote: > >>> Do you think I still need to go to the library? >> >> >>Yes, because you leave untouched the original problem of H2O-H2O bond energy >>difference between bulk and TFD water. In another posting, you mention the >>work of Graneau, stating that the apparent possible ou might come from TFD >>formation. It is the other way around (your point (2) above, it takes energy >>to disperse water into TFD..... > >Ah, Dieter...your intuition matches mine. However, you apparently missed >the original point of all this: > >In Cold Fusion #17 (May 1996, published by Wayne Green) on page 15, there is >an article by Graneau in which he claims that the extra energy in his water >arc experiments that makes them o-u COMES FROM the H20-H20 bond energy that >is released when bulk water is quickly transformed into the Tiny Fog >Droplets (or alternatively, Tiny Frigging Droplets) state. > >In your statement above, "it takes energy to disperse water into TFD", you >seem to be agreeing with my position in this matter. Anyway, the question >here is this: "Is it conceivable that the TFD state of water could >represent a lower overall energy state than the bulk state?" > >My point in my latest post was that, if this was true, then I'd expect most >of the Earth's water to now be in the TFD state....wouldn't you? > >Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. >Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA >512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) > > I _suspect_, that if there is anything to ZPE at all, then all of you have somewhat missed the point. The point being that as all matter is immersed in a sea of ZPE, what we normally think of as our "system" or "thermodynamic box", in other words, where we draw the boundaries, is simply too small. As we are want to leave the ZPE out of consideration. Normally this is valid, however perhaps in some circumstances there is a degree of interaction. The condensation of water vapour into TFD may be such a circumstance. This means that the system that is being considered in this case (the cycle of evaporation and condensation, in which TFD is an intermediary stage) actually has the goal posts moved, partway through the transition. In other words for the system in question, energy is not conserved, because in fact the system is open, not closed. More clearly stated: When molecules are removed through evaporation from a flat body of water (or a large bulk), the interaction with the ZPE is less than when water molecules are added to TFD. When TFD combine again to form bulk water, there is again little or no interaction with the ZPE. This implies that repeated cycling of water through evaporation and condensation results in an actual excess of heat. This explains the anomalies in the steam tables. This cycle (evaporation->condensation->evaporation) may act as a one-way gate of ZPE into random thermal energy. It may in fact involve an increase in entropy, as one may think of the ZPE as a vast ocean of *ordered* energy, in the form of standing waves, while random thermal energy is about as disordered as one can get. The reason that the worlds oceans don't all end up as TFD, is because TFD by itself, doesn't represent a particularly low energy state. It just happens to be the state that gives a free ride to the ZPE allowing it to convert to heat. 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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 07:21:56 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA26365; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 07:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 07:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31C2C52B.4D12@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: hot Ni wire X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > Frank, thanks for the very interesting proposal about stretching the Ni wire. > > Have you by any chance read the Piantelli "patent" that was published > recently in Infinite Energy. In that, he talks about using mechanical shock > to start up his heated Ni in H gas CF reaction. Unfortunately, I've not > heard of anyone, including myself that has replicated his experiment. > > I have actually tried a direct replication of the Piantelli experiment and I > tried striking the end of the Ni rod to send shock waves down it in the hope > that would stimulate the CF reaction. I'm certain that my impacts did NOT > cause and plastic deformation though. I didn't see any indication of excess > heat. > > Maybe the plastic deformation would do the trick... Unfortunately, my Ni > wires were in little sealed cells filled with H gas. It'd be a major > udertaking to rig up a way to stretch them. But that data was taken with > the old differential calorimeter which had a pretty small experiment > chamber. Now, with the better part of a cubic foot to work with, I might be > able to rig up something pretty easily....hmmmm. > > - Scott Little > EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 > 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) Thanks for the update on the past related work, Scott! You guys will educate me yet. On the plastic deformation of H2-loaded metal lattices: It seems to an old mechanical engineer that it's a bit like an 8-ball on a racked but quiet pool table. Nothing happens until the break! Then, all hell breaks out! On a more scientific speculative note, the stresses we can exert on bulk metal are just every-day average stresses. But, when a plastic deformation happens, who knows what levels the interatomic stresses might reach near inclusions, dislocations, etc. On another side note: I looked at some Ni filings last night - using a $9.95 microscope - and noticed what a tortured little mess each grain was! There are shear planes, fracture surfaces(rough!), inclusions, and unknown internal stresses generated but not relaxed by any anealing. Anyway, maybe only palladium works????? Full-of-questions-with-no-answers, Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 09:35:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA10878; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:25:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:25:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606151620.JAA13764@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: A chance to observe X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: An intereting, fair offer, Joe. August in California, hmmm, you intend to roast and toast us as part of the feedstock? Frankly I would love to do it but I am not degreed in the physical sciences so I probably should not fill one of your slots. My testimony is publicly worthless on this subject and is probably as welcome in the halls of academe as well never mind. Hope you will keep us posted. At 04:16 AM 6/14/96 -0700, you wrote: >To Members of Vortex-l > >The debate will continue for some time as to the validity of low energy >nuclear events. I do not offer a solution, but chance for observation. > >In August, I will be hosting an estrange open house at a low energy nuclear >transmutation precious metal production facility in central California. >Estrange in the since that only twelve people will be invited and each will >be required to sign a limited confidentiality agreement. > >Seven slots remain open at this time. Since the debate of realism regarding >my work has been a joke to some extent in this forum, I am soliciting >qualified observers. For those interested, here are the rules: > >1. An observer must be familiar with general science as it would relate to >low energy transmutation. > >2. An enforceable limited confidentiality agreement must be signed. This >agreement allows for the observer(s) to report their findings but can not >divulge the proprietary technologies utilized in the process. > >3. The observer will be allowed to view all aspects of the commercial >operation for 48 hours. Samples of up to 5,000 grams may be collected by >each. Each observer can designate from which part of the processes they >wish to collect the samples and devise their individual procedures of how >the samples are collected. It is preferred that each observer supply their >own sample containers and physically take their own samples. Safety >equipment and disposable gloves will be provided, but if one wishes they can >bring their own. > >4. The observer will not be required to comment on their thoughts during >their visit. They will be allowed to take the material back to their >laboratory, or a facility to establish their opinion separate from the plant >and the others. > >5. The observer must be willing to complete final review of the samples >within 14 days. > >6. The observer must be willing to give a complete written statement as to >their findings based on their external confirmation within 5 days after >testing. > >7. The findings of each observer will be presented at the Texas A&M >conference in September. A paper will be prepared for publication, but each >observer may publish within the guildelines of the confidentiality agreement. > >For those who would consider participation, you may contact me direct at >602-951-6816, or email me at the below address. But there is a catch to >this program, I am not asking someone to witness a test tube reactor and >attempt validation. Nor, will the observer be asked if they witnessed an >anomaly. The sole question will be -- did the observer "CONFIRM" >commercial production of precious metals from Champion's low energy nuclear >reactor? > >_______________________________ >Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com >http://www.netzone.com/~discpub > > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 09:37:30 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA10914; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:25:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:25:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606151620.JAA13793@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: cells/tests/myer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 10:20 AM 6/14/96 -0700, you wrote: > >If its bunk there sure is a lot of it. One can have a SUPER cautious attitude about Myer, such as Tinsley and I have both alluded to, but that does not mean we believe his stuff is bunk. Myer is working on good ideas and his patents, the half dozen I have seen, were well written and quite understandable. There is also prior art and all of the basic ideas in the patents I reviewed (as of 1991) had been articulated by other people, so there is a question of how much is Myer and how far those particular claims really go in the proprietary sense. > >Comments questions about Myer's work. > >I saw the gas produced by Myers's rig burning on the show "It Runs on Water" >Should not a stokiometric ratio of oxygen and hydrogen explode? not if the mixture if only those two gases. it implodes. the popping (if you have flashback into the generator chamber or any storage container is quite distinctive, very very sharp. it is quite amusing to watch a metal or plastic container suddenly collapse into a crumple. and then you realize you have just watched a form of free gravity energy do work (atmospheric pressure). as Brown has shown, this is a viable, useful potential. it could considerably extend the power capabilities of hydroelectric dams. the excess electricity produced at off-times could be used to produce the gases which are then consumed to create a vacuum which could be employed to draw the water back up into the reservoir. The energetics are better than straight electrical pumping because you get to use the atmospheric pressure (gravity) to overcome gravity. it is a form of leverage, more pounds lifted per unit of input force, but I don't remember how the energetics work out in actual numbers. Brown has been advocating that people use this principle for years and years and years, especially in autos. He even claimed you could convert an auto engine to work by being vacuum driven (pull the pistons, not push them, aactualy of course, the atmosphere does all of the work, pushing the pistons). He even claimed to have built one in Australia. Don't ask me how to get ahold of him. I have no idea. The last time I heard of him, he was in China. A friend of mine bought one of his gas generators made in China but it was of such poor quality of construction, nobody wants to use it. >Will Browns >gas burn or does it just go poof? My experience with gas welders suggests >to me that the gas should not burn with a flame but rather explode with a >boof. if the flow is too fast, it won't even ignite if using a flame, it will blow it out. if the flow is just right, it will burn in a blue pencil torch just like any gas burner. if the flow is too slow, it is likely that it will pop and consume all of the gas in the lines, up to the choke of your flame arrestor, if you have one, and even then sometimes it can implode all of the nascent gas in the generation chamber. assuming no strange gases, using relatively clean unsalted water, you get an implosion. there is very little danger of explosion with a properly constructed generator and clean water and a proper electrolyte, such as sodium hydroxide. stociometric hydro/oxy is pretty safe because of the implosion factor. even so, if can generate a startling shock wave. Brown found that if the mix is 5% out of ratio either way, it turns explosive. by the way, it is important to properly discharge all gases out of the water before using it. water can hold a lot of gas, especially if you have just pumped it. you want ZERO nitrogen present, so let the water stand a good while, at least a day, not too cold, quietly, so that the gases will work themselves out. > > >Upon reading Myer's stuff I found that his device has more to to with tiny >high voltage underwater sparks that with the process of electrolysis. > >I conducted a experments a few years ago with underwater arcs. I was trying >to reproduce the underwater fireballs seen in deep underwater welding. A >Jacques Cuestoe show in the early 1970's featured the fireballs produced in >underwater welding. I thought these fire balls may have something to do with >ZPE and ball lightning. The show was neat..I wish I could find a copy. stocio hydro/oxy can be combusted anywhere, in outer space, on the bottom of the ocean, inside of a glacier. the fire ball is formed by the surrounding water heating up, dissociating, leaving the minerals in the water suspended in a hot ionic soup, now reassociating in a variety of pathways. Under the ocean what would one expect to see a lot of: yellow from the sodium. > > >In order to study this underwater fireball effect a few year ago I stuck a >spark plug into the end of a piece of tygon tubing. I fastened it on with a >clamp and filled the tube with water. I connected plug to my high spark >generater. I got a white underwater spark. Nothing notable. > >Next I wanted to try higher pressure. I connected the other end of the tygon >tubing to a 80 PSI air compressor. I found the plug would not fire. I >reduced the gap and the plug fired with a bright white flash. Nothing >notable. It's harder to make an arc at higher pressures. This is known. > >Finally a reduced the pressure and fired the plug again. To my surprize a >got thousands of tiny bubbles. They looked like the white foam seen in >Myer's cell. I assumed that the shock of the spark knocked air out of >solution. I assumed that air went into solution under higher pressure and >formed a supersaturated soultion when the pressure was reduced. I fired the >plug a second time under reduced pressure less bubbles were produed. The >thing was cool so I videoed it. Russ Marchell at Potolemaic flims features >the experiment on his gravity video. Just because it looks neet I suppose. > I wonder if there is any connection between this experiment and Myer's >stuff. > >Frank Z > you were dissassociating the hydro and oxy producing so-called Brown's gas. the tiny white bubbles are exactly what you see as the gasses evolve out of the water. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 09:40:16 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA10957; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:25:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:25:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606151621.JAA13808@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 10:21 AM 6/14/96 -0700, you wrote: > > >>Check again. I agree about fusion, but the mixture will not explode unless >>triggered by something, like a spark or a metal surface like Pt or Pd. It is >>not exactly a safe gas mixture to have in your lounge, but it won't go off >>without a trigger. My guess is that the Meyer lot would like us to think that >>this gas mixture has some magical properties, being made from water by waving >>a wand, or something - since Meyer claims to break up water without using the >>usual amount of energy. > >Any Hydrogen in an Oxegen enviroment over a certain percentage (I have to >look up the % but was quoted in Alternative Energy List) causes an explosion >with no trigger needed. In the case of Pt and Pd, those are catalysts that >will cause the reaction to occur at a lower temperature but they are not >necessary. Now a spark will definetly set off any Hydrogen gas that is at a >lower than normal explosive %. > > a trigger is necessary. actually, it is hard to get the stuff to burn. it is so bouyant it goes straight up when it escapes from something so it does not seep around in a space building up dangerous levels. and it is not particularly explosive. do you remember that famous photo of the Hindenburg burning at the airport? Do you remember the figures in the photo? Those figures are the proof that it did not explode. The newspapers claimed the Hindenburg exploded, setting off everyone to think it explodes. The newspapers lied. It did not explode. It burned, rather slowly actually. Hydrogen is less dangerous that gasoline. What makes it difficult is that it is damn hard to hold onto. It won't stay put. It will travel through practically anything, and what it doesnt get through it saturates and "embrittles", weakening the molecular bonds of the host material. So, it is best used by creating it on the spot where you are going to use it. Myer, if he found any magic, may have figured out a better energetics for making and using it, enough to create efficiencies interesting enough for adaptation. Who knows? The world is full of magic we don't understand yet. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 09:48:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA13597; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606151630.JAA14459@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Rule 2 too harsh X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 08:36 PM 6/14/96 -0700, you wrote: >At 10:23 6/14/96 -0700, Jed wrote: > >>I think this is too harsh. Why not make it: "Anyone indulging . . . will be >>removed from the list after three warnings"? > >Yeah, Bill....if you can stand the extra work of keeping up with the number >of warnings, this would be much better. Some folks don't realize they're >flaming until others tell them so. > >Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. >Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA >512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) > > it is easy to get carried away...some actually SEEM to deserve it even if it is undesirable behavior ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 09:48:59 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA13680; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606151635.JAA14737@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: little bubbles X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 08:37 PM 6/14/96 -0700, you wrote: >I never thought much of my experiment in which I produced the mass of tiny >bubbles until now. The bubbles were very tiny. They looked like a white >froth. They traveled upward with a speed of about 1inch / 5seconds (The >smaller the bubble the slower it travels.) Well now, it appears that >Patterson knows how to make tiny beads and I know how to make tiny bubbles. > I think the technology of bubble production is important. The Yusmir and >the Griggs machines work by imploding tiny bubbles. This in a very >inefficient process. The bulk of the fluid must be pressurized for the sake >of the relatively small mass of the bubbles. It would be better to put >energy into the bubbles directly. Could this be what Myer has unwittingly >accomplished? > >I invision a bubble inertial confignment fuision machine to work as follows: > >1. A supersaturated solution of air and water is produced. It could be >produced by my method of subjecting water to a pressure of 60 PSI air then >backing off on the air pressure. > >2. The air is knocked out of solution with a shock. This could be done with >my method of inducing a 5 kv 100 joule spark in the water. > >3. Now we have water full of very tiny bubbles. I've done this. It's fun >and easy, try it. > >4. Next we place energy is placed into the bubbles. This can be done with a >high electrical field, I hope. If the water is ultra-pure the bubbles will >be more conductive than the water. An arc will form through the bubble path. > >5. The micro-bubbles will explode. A lot of energy will be placed into the >tiny area of a few micro-bubbles. How hot will they get? How fast can we >apply the energy? > >6. The arc will tend to expand and release the energy. The high voltage >will be pulsed off before the arc expands to normal size. We don't want to >heat the bulk of the water through ohmic heating. > >7. A pulse of high voltage will be reapplied in a cyclic fashion to form >repeated micro bubble explosions. > >8. Does this sound like Myer's machine? I'm going to try and built it. > Anyone else game for this thing? I've already built the bubble producing >machine, now I've got to try to put energy into the bubbles. What do you >think? > > >Frank Znidarsic Bubble head. > > > this is all real cute, Frank, except for one faulty premise. namely, as explained in previous post response to one of your posts, you are producing so-called Brown's gas. electricity + water = stocio hydro oxy ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 10:08:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA15135; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:55:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:55:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606151647.JAA15468@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 08:37 PM 6/14/96 -0700, you wrote: >My tone is certainly appropriate. When you persist in your intent to >disparage and detract from anyone and everyone who does not do things >your way you knowingly are attemting to do them harm. This argument >has gone far enough it and it makes this forum useless to me. It's >the fate of every public forum when arm chair hecklers step to the >front. > >Russ George >Russ George > > aw shucks, gee golly, Russ, said no particular goat to Russ as he chewed Russ's coloring book, but you draw the lines a little too hard and put on the colors a little too thick...and besides, I've stood up in front of thousands of farmers, who aren't exactly gentle in their attitudes, and found a very effective way to ignore heckling. like all accomplished speakers know, ignore them. today's heckler is tomorrow's fervent believer. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 10:07:03 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA15179; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:56:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 09:56:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606151651.JAA15807@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: little bubbles X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 03:58 AM 6/15/96 -0700, you wrote: > >> >>8. Does this sound like Myer's machine? I'm going to try and built it. >> Anyone else game for this thing? I've already built the bubble producing >>machine, now I've got to try to put energy into the bubbles. What do you >>think? >> >> >>Frank Znidarsic Bubble head. > >Frank, > >Some months ago I tried using a 60 mA, 15,000 V transformer discharge in >water using two 35 MGo nickle plated magnets facing each other about 5" >apart for electrodes. The discharge was in a flat bottom glass cassarole >dish. A pattern of bubbles formed on the bottom of the bowl in an oval >shape that could be imagined to follow the magnetic (or electrostatic since >they were parallel)) field lines. Someone suggested maybe it was Brown's >gas. I thought it was odd, but didn't follow up on it to see what caused >the effect - air, steam, Brown's gas, illusion, or what. I do remember >then looking at a web page that described Brown's gas, etc. I think it was >in Australia. I'll look to see what I can find to satisfy Don Powell's >request for info on same. > > confirm: you were producing stocio hydro oxy or so-called Brown's gas ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 10:41:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA20030; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 10:37:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 10:37:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606151716.KAA17312@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Rule 2 too harsh X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 03:56 AM 6/15/96 -0700, you wrote: >On Fri, 14 Jun 1996, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> To: Vortex >> Bill Beaty writes: >> I'm going to leave rule #2 as is, and insert this: 3. WARNING: The >> standards for behavior here are very high. Flames, including insults, >> personal attacks, snide remarks, namecalling, etc., are forbidden . . . >> Anyone indulging in this behavior on vortex-L will be immediately >> removed from the list. >>> I think this is too harsh. Why not make it: "Anyone indulging .will be >>> removed from the list after three warnings"? >>> - Jed >> >Jed,Jed,Jed (3x!).... so if we/they/or others ask you NOT to pee-pee another >while in this room, you still WANT permission to do it anyway (x3)(tsk-tsk!) >GrOw Up and just put forth what you really think 'THINK'!...! >no touchy feely crap should be allowed here!! (It's hard enough already!!) >-=steve ekwall=- > > under Rule #2 this reply from Ekwall would have resulted in Ekwall's immediate removal from the list, if my finger had been on the switch. or am I just being as cranky? (it's getting harder to tell). ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 10:42:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA20069; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 10:38:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 10:38:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: P/D conductor to create condensed charge X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: There have been various discussions here about condensed charge, i.e. small ball lightning or "electrum validum" or EV. See US patents 5,018,180 and 5,123,039 by Ken Shoulders for a description of methods of generating condensed charge. These balls are about .1 to 1 micrometer in diameter and are thought to typically contain 10^11 electrons and less than one positive ion per 10^5 electrons. The EV structure was stated to be typically 10 beads wrapped into a ball. The balls are generated at the tips of needles or pointed printed circuit elements. I once tried generating EV's but it was a just low budget amateurish failure. I would be interrested in knowing if anyone has been successful at replicating anything like Ken Shoulder's results. He suggested ou performance, but this is not what I mean. I would be interrested if anyone has ever obtained any evidence that EV's have been generated - foil traces, visible balls or traces, flourescent stimulation, electronic pulse detection, oscilloscope traces, etc. I think this work may be important. If it is possible to condense electrons, it should also be possible to condense protons or deuterons at the tip of a P/D conductor. I think a very good experiment to try would be using a needle shaped proton conductor pulsed with a *positive* pulse (unlike the EV circuits which pulse negative to generate the EV). This could produce a P or D condensate, just like a condensate of electrons was created via Ken Shoulder's experiment. It is a completely analagous situation - the extention of a conduction band into space at the tip of a needle where the field gradient is very strong. Shoulder used 10 KeV for needles in vacuo or near vacuum heavy noble gas, or 2 KeV for printed circuits I believe. If a low mass particle like an electron can be clustered then a large mass particle might be even easier to cluster, even though the higher mass means a higher momentum (shorter deBroglie wavelength) at a given energy. It may mean the condensate could be formed at a lower voltage. Also the higher mass of a P or D may help to eject or separate it from the band state, assuming it's mass is accelerated toward the tip while in the band state. This might be an easy experiment to do - if there is a commercial source of proton conductor ceramic available. It would be a matter of fracturing the ceramic or grinding it into sharp tipped objects. The main problem might be the high operating temperature of proton conductors. It seems like the experiment could be performed in an H2 or D2 environment, with loading occuring via reverse voltage. Alternately the needles could be loaded from the back side by mounting them protruding through a heavy metal foil. The needles would be mounted in an apparatus similar to Ken Shoulder's EV generators, but pulsed positively. The resulting protium validum (PV) should not last very long due to fusion. I don't know if D conductors have been made, but creating actual fusion at the needle tip would be much more practical using D, because the D + D reaction should be much more probable than P + P fusion. This idea may be relevent to electrolysis fusion. If the electrolyte contains P or D conduction bands, as Bill Page has suggested, at least periodically or sporadically, the presence of fine needle points at the electrode surface (created during electrolysis) may provide a mechanism for creating a condensate (or PV) at the tip. It would be a kind of EV generator in reverse. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 17:49:12 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA08313; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 17:44:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 17:44:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael Mandeville wrote: >a trigger is necessary. actually, it is hard to get the stuff to burn. it >is so bouyant it goes straight up when it escapes from something so it does >not seep around in a space building up dangerous levels. and it is not >particularly explosive. do you remember that famous photo of the Hindenburg >burning at the airport? Do you remember the figures in the photo? Those >figures are the proof that it did not explode. The newspapers claimed the >Hindenburg exploded, setting off everyone to think it explodes. The >newspapers lied. It did not explode. It burned, rather slowly actually. >Hydrogen is less dangerous that gasoline. What makes it difficult is that >it is damn hard to hold onto. It won't stay put. It will travel through >practically anything, and what it doesnt get through it saturates and >"embrittles", weakening the molecular bonds of the host material. So, it is >best used by creating it on the spot where you are going to use it. Myer, >if he found any magic, may have figured out a better energetics for making >and using it, enough to create efficiencies interesting enough for >adaptation. Who knows? The world is full of magic we don't understand yet. >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher This discussion about the volatility of 2H2 + O2 seems born out in the fact most unpressurized cells don't seem to explode, even though the gasses are mixed together. However, I am bothered by memory of a film of a safety demonstration I watched in high school. In the demonstration 2H2 + O2 was electrolysed into an inverted flask. It was shown to be safe and stable in the lab overnight. Then a window shade was drawn up and direct sunlight was allowed to strike the flask and it exploded right on queue. I really don't trust that mixture. It also gets more volatile with pressure, although I believe such gas existed in the top of the containment structure at Three Mile Island at 3 atmospheres without exploding. If you are using it around plastics or synthetics there is also the danger of very small normally imperceptable sparks. It is also maybe worthy to note that the Hindenberg H2 was not mixed with O2 so could only burn with the 20 percnt O2 at it's boundaries - yet that thin sheet of flame was sufficiently hot to melt parts of the structural girders. I think most of the flame you see in the film must be from the rubberized lining because H2 burns nearly invisibly. I suspect the difficulty with ignition in rocket engines and torches must be lack of reliable and adequate mixing at the ignition point. This doesn't seem possible with Brown's gas though - unless the H2 rises to the top quickly? I think great care, caution, and planning should be used when it comes to safety around H2/O2 mixtures. Murphy was a genius. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 17:59:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA09399; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 17:54:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 17:54:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606160045.KAA07358@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Martin Edmund Sevior To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI cells are probabilistic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jed writes: > Mark Hugo writes: > > "BUT, as I suspected at the time, and still suspect, I think the CETI > cells successes are probabilistic." > > Yes, some beads work and some do not, for reasons still not clearly > understood. CETI and Cravens have been open and up-front about this fact. > They > have said this on many occasions. They have often told me this is the reason > they cannot sell the beads yet, or even distribute them widely for testing. > Dennis made this point again at INFN. In all likelyhood these will not become commercially useful until they're blessed by the world scientific community. What they need is a proof in principle. 200 watts is enough to drive a toy Stirling Engine and to get to self sustain. Imagine taking that to an APS meeting, plonking it down in the lobby and saying here is proof of CETI technology. Not everyone will believe them even then, but enough will be interested enough to REALLY want to try it at home. Pretty soon there would be a massive demand for CETI cells for SCIENTIFIC and Hobbyist purposes. If the yield is low, just charge more for pre-testing and all the abandoned cells. This is just how the semiconductor business works. > My response is to point out that first > generation high-tech products are usually flawed. When quartz crystal digital > watches were introduced in the early 1970s, up to 40% of the ones that reached > the retail stores failed. Even the Japanese ones! First generation > microcomputer hardware and software is notoriously unreliable. > > Jed, I was there. The first microcomputers weren't useful, they were just fun toys for hobbyists like me. It was still enough to get Bill Gates rich. > "Frankly, Redding/Patterson/Cravens etc. were trying to solicit > $1,000,000 on the basis of inadequate testing the robustness of the > system." > Frank you seem determined to try to make money from CF. I don't think you'll find anything for useful commercial energy production. Go for Scientific and Hobbyist markets. Robustness isn't a problem as long as the cells can be pre-tested and the yield is greater than 0. A iron-clad demonstration of non zero yield would be a fantastic step forward. Get a cell into Scott's dual calorimeter and let's see what happens. By the way Scott, does your budget strech far enough to get you to ICCF6? You could present a paper on your erastz beads work with your Calorimeter. Maybe you'd get a response from CETI and they'd let you try a real cell. Martin Sevior From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 21:28:09 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA12007; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 21:23:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 21:23:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31c2aebe.49213251@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:17 -0700 (PDT), RGeorge@hooked.net wrote: >My tone is certainly appropriate. When you persist in your intent to >disparage and detract from anyone and everyone who does not do things >your way you knowingly are attemting to do them harm. This argument >has gone far enough it and it makes this forum useless to me. It's >the fate of every public forum when arm chair hecklers step to the >front. > >Russ George >Russ George > Russ, Please don't give up on this forum. I for one appreciate any contribution from someone who actually claims to have had some success. 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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 23:13:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA22285; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 23:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 23:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606160602.XAA23647@spain.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > >Actually I have been on here quite a long time and my comment was concerning >the H2 + O => 2H2O reaction. In all of my reading of this list as well as >the Alternative Energy List and the Hydogen lists, I do not recall reading >anything about Brown's gas phenomen. I obviously missed some mail >concerning this generator. I am EXTREMELY interested in this as I have been >looking at hydrogen for 14 years for just such an anomoly. Please email me >the specifics of the generator. > For more information on Dr. Yull Brown's gas generators, currently made in China, contact Dr. Andrew Michrowski at PACE (The Planetary Association for Clean Energy) Tel: (613)236-6265, fax: (612)235-5876, address: 100 Bronson Ave., Suite 1001, Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6G8 Canada. I talked to Dr. Michrowski last week and he is now a distributor of Dr. Brown's gas generators and has published information of Brown's gas and its unique features over the past twenty years through his excellent new energy journal the PACE Newsletter. Subscription: $35/yr USA four times a year. For an excellent overview of Brown's gas and how to build a simple unit, read George Wiseman's "Brown's Gas, Book 1" ($10.00) available from the International Tesla Society (ITS) bookstore (800)397-0137. My research into Brown's gas that I call "water gas" was published in the November 1995 issue of the New Energy Newsletter (NEN), and available on Keelynet BBS file as WATERGAS.ASC. Also both the ITS and NEN have excellent publications in the field of new energy technology. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 23:55:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA25494; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 23:45:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 23:45:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31c3a18e.9218842@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: P/D conductor to create condensed charge X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 15 Jun 1996 10:38:12 -0700 (PDT), Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >I don't know if D conductors have been made, but creating actual fusion at >the needle tip would be much more practical using D, because the D + D >reaction should be much more probable than P + P fusion. This sounds a lot like a description of some of the glow discharge experiments that have been done. [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 billb@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 10:14:42 1996 Received: from mom.hooked.net (root@mom.hooked.net [206.80.6.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA13466 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 10:14:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from get.hooked.net (chum-54.ppp.hooked.net [206.80.8.54]) by mom.hooked.net (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA25632 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 10:19:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606161719.KAA25632@mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 10:17:36 +0000 Subject: an alternative to giving up Reply-to: rgeorge@hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.32a) Status: RO X-Status: I was at a point of frustration in my participation in this forum due to a combination of my personal foible of reacting to heckling and the heckling itself. Bill Beatty suggested a great alternative I had overlooked, use a kill file to delete the objectional material. I think that's a great idea and since I use Pegasus Mail an easy one to implement. So now any message that includes material from the person I find offensive is simply deleted before I ever see it. Russ George From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 10:32:36 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA14726; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 10:26:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 10:26:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606161724.KAA27520@mom.hooked.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Russ George" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Microsoft NetMeeting X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Here's tip for anyone who hasn't found it yet. Microsoft has just released a new Win95 application called NetMeeting. I have been using it for a few days now and I am able to connect to one or several colleagues via the internet anywhere in the world. Using my local 28800 modem and a local call to my ISP I carry on simultaneous voice, whiteboard, and shared editing of an Excel document. It's a breakthrough in science and allows collaboration with incredible ease and low cost. Live video is a bit slow but punching up pictures is possible. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 11:13:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA19985; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 11:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 11:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960616134634_218416648@emout17.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Puthoff@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott, is there a typo in your msg? "Well, I've come pretty close. The first thing I ran in my Patterson-style cell was a bed of small Ni beads....absolutely even a hint of excess heat!" Hal From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 11:54:45 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA26173; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 11:49:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 11:49:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606161833.NAA16890@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NiCd batteries X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 11:05 AM 6/16/96 -0700, you wrote: >Scott, is there a typo in your msg? > >"Well, I've come pretty close. The first thing I ran in my Patterson-style >cell was a bed of small Ni beads....absolutely even a hint of excess heat!" > Yeah, sure is....and I posted a correction to Vortex, entitled "Oops!". - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 12:26:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA29784; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 12:13:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 12:13:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <22137@oroboros.demon.co.uk> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: CRSM@oroboros.demon.co.uk (Chris Morriss) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown's Gas X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: A colleague of mine (power supply designer) has designed a PSU for a UK company that makes these generators. It seems that they are used in the jewellery business for welding very small pieces of precious metal. I guess that the flame is very pure with few contaminents. Yes, you can (quickly) pass your finger through the flame. This is because water from the H2 and O condenses onto it and forms a protective layer. I suggest that you get your finger out of the way quickly though. -- Chris Morriss From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 14:08:59 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA13118; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 14:05:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 14:05:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael Randall wrote: [snip of lots of good information from Michael Randall] > >My research into Brown's gas that I call "water gas" was published in the >November 1995 issue of the New Energy Newsletter (NEN), and available on >Keelynet BBS file as WATERGAS.ASC. > >Also both the ITS and NEN have excellent publications in the field of new >energy technology. > A very good web site from the Institute of New Energy (Hal Fox of NEN etc.) can be found at: A reference to PACE can be found there, but it has limited information. I did find a very cool Australian website called "The Mad Scientists Lair" at: which pointed back to: (our old friend eskimo.com) Which is a page on Brown's gas that shows a photo of a Brown's gas generator. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 15:23:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA21412; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 15:12:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 15:12:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: P/D conductor to create condensed charge X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >On Sat, 15 Jun 1996 10:38:12 -0700 (PDT), Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >>I don't know if D conductors have been made, but creating actual fusion at >>the needle tip would be much more practical using D, because the D + D >>reaction should be much more probable than P + P fusion. > >This sounds a lot like a description of some of the glow discharge >experiments that have been done. > >[snip] > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk By this I assume you mean the glow discharge on Pd wire experiments by Claytor et al descirbed at: or maybe some of the various transmutation experiments as described in Infinite Energy, or maybe Piantelli? Also of interest might be the new ou "Pulsed Cold Plasma" devices invented by Paulo Correa, US Patents 5,416,391, 5,449,989, and 5,502,354. A press release can be found at: What I have suggested is very different from these experiments in that the source of ions is from conduction bands, which must be formed in a solid (or maybe liquid as Bill Page suggests). The ions issue forth from a solid, not a gas, a specific kind of solid, i.e. one which possesses the necessary proton or deuteron conduction band, that is positive and the surface of which is in a very high field gradient at a point. This suggestion is logical becuase there is evidence (i.e. US Patents) that suggest such a configuration can produce a very small version of ball lightning. If a negative electrode can do this with electrons, perhaps a positive electrode made of a suitable conductor can do this for ions. If it can produce a self containing very energetic ball of ions (i.e. 10 KeV), it is reasonable that fusion to some degree may occur. An interresting test of this, and maybe simultaneously Bill Page's proton conduction band hypothesis, might be to produce HV positive pulses in an electrolyte at the tip of a very fine glass capillary tube, i.e. one that is stetched down to a micron sized tip. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 15:32:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA23569; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 15:29:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 15:29:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606162217.RAA26847@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 05:42 AM 6/15/96 -0700, Robin wrote: >I _suspect_, that if there is anything to ZPE at all, then all of you >have somewhat missed the point. >The reason that the worlds oceans don't all end up as TFD, is because >TFD by itself, doesn't represent a particularly low energy state. It >just happens to be the state that gives a free ride to the ZPE >allowing it to convert to heat. I'm naturally intrigued by your concept but, playing Devil's Advocate for a moment, I find it rather untenable. Specifically the problem is this: The ZPF is ubiquitous...like gravity here on Earth. Your suggestion that there is a special path by which the conversion of bulk water to TFD water LIBERATES energy is somewhat like saying that there is a special path by which I can raise a weight UP a certain distance and RECEIVE energy in doing so. No? - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 19:08:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA23826; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 19:02:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 19:02:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960617015043_72240.1256_EHB136-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: CETI cells are probabilistic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Martin Sevior writes: "What they [CETI] need is a proof in principle. 200 watts is enough to drive a toy Stirling Engine and to get to self sustain. Imagine taking that to an APS meeting, plonking it down in the lobby and saying here is proof of CETI technology. Not everyone will believe them even then, but enough will be interested enough to REALLY want to try it at home. Pretty soon there would be a massive demand for CETI cells for SCIENTIFIC and Hobbyist purposes." Exactly right. For years, many of us have been telling CETI they should do this. We have also made this suggestion to Randy Mills at HPC and to others in this field. They have all told me they do not want to, and most say it is technically impossible. Why they would not want to is beyond me. It is *light years* beyond me! It boggles my mind. "If the yield is low, just charge more for pre-testing and all the abandoned cells. This is just how the semiconductor business works." Right. This is also how agriculture works. You pay for the peaches killed by frost, and the ones the crows ate. (And I might add, crows always eat the most delicious ones, so if chase away a crow who leaves a half-eaten peach on the tree, you should pick it and eat the rest.) "Jed, I was there. The first microcomputers weren't useful, they were just fun toys for hobbyists like me. It was still enough to get Bill Gates rich. Yes. I was there too, and I make a good living thanks to my knowledge of microcomputers. However, I learned about computers many years before microcomputers emerged. I once owned a Data General minicomputer -- the first and largest personal computer in Atlanta. Sometimes, people who are familiar with older technology become blind to the inherent potentials of the new. Many mainframe and minicomputer experts pooh-poohed the microcomputers when they first appeared, just as many hot fusion scientists denigrate cold fusion. Many, but not all. An open minded person can leverage knowledge of the old technology to take advantage of the new. It is all a matter of attitude; anyone can do it, at any age. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 23:29:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA02410; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 23:22:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 23:22:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960617022101_136474657@emout19.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: EclectiKat@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: As anyone that uses Hydrogen as a fuel for a hand torch (e.g., those doing work in quartz fabrication or glassblowing), mixing hydrogen with oxygen does not result in combustion in the fuel line and you can keep these gases mixed for long distances in the line without fear of igniting, up to the torch itself as long as you don't have flashback up the line. As one of my old mentors once said, "Hydrogen is not dangerous if you don't try to confine it". Bell Jars with hydrogen/oxygen mixtures flowing out from the bottom are completely safe, but a word of warning to those that want to try this at home, don't try to confine it. Jeff Golin From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 16 23:32:35 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA02548; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 23:23:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 23:23:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960617022137_136474903@emout14.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: EclectiKat@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Rule 2 too harsh X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: This discussion is getting almost more petty as the alleged minor "flaming" itself. As a lurker, I have little to add aside from my work in attempting to re-create D2 glow discharge tubes. However, it would be a major loss to this forum to lose any input from major contributors such as Russ or Jed on the leading edge. Isn't it really more important to hear from those really doing hard research in this area than worry about some imagined slight or offense? This should be a "big tent" that welcomes all. Jeff Golin From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 01:52:55 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA15325; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 01:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 01:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 14 Jun 1996, Scott Little wrote: [...] > In your statement above, "it takes energy to disperse water into TFD", you > seem to be agreeing with my position in this matter. Anyway, the question > here is this: "Is it conceivable that the TFD state of water could > represent a lower overall energy state than the bulk state?" > > My point in my latest post was that, if this was true, then I'd expect most > of the Earth's water to now be in the TFD state....wouldn't you? I am with you now. It depends on what kind of energy you mean. If it is Gibbs free energy, then yes. If it enthalpy, then maybe not, because entropy can veto a process that leads to a lower enthalphy state, if it leads to a higher Gibbs free energy state. So the TFD thing needs some quantification. I tend to doubt that it can go like that and yes, if it did, it would have done it long ago. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 04:11:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA26108; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 04:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 04:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31c4d784.5531960@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 16 Jun 1996 15:30:58 -0700 (PDT), Scott Little wrote: >At 05:42 AM 6/15/96 -0700, Robin wrote: > >>I _suspect_, that if there is anything to ZPE at all, then all of you >>have somewhat missed the point. > > > >>The reason that the worlds oceans don't all end up as TFD, is because >>TFD by itself, doesn't represent a particularly low energy state. It >>just happens to be the state that gives a free ride to the ZPE >>allowing it to convert to heat. > >I'm naturally intrigued by your concept but, playing Devil's Advocate for a >moment, I find it rather untenable. Specifically the problem is this: The >ZPF is ubiquitous...like gravity here on Earth. Your suggestion that there >is a special path by which the conversion of bulk water to TFD water >LIBERATES energy >is somewhat like saying that there is a special path by which I can raise a >weight UP a certain distance and RECEIVE energy in doing so. No? Yes. In fact this isn't quite as strange as it sounds. While you have used gravity as an analogy, let me instead use nuclear energy. In this case there are indeed some paths by which energy is liberated. i.e. fission, fusion and radioactive decay. Why is this a valid analogy? Because mass itself is a consequence of ZPE, hence any conversion of mass to energy is also a path by which ZPE converts from order energy to disordered energy. Perhaps something similar can be said for a gravity field in the neihborhood of a black hole. Does "Hawking radiation" fit your description? (I.e. the means by which black holes "evaporate" according to Steven Hawking). [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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 06:31:45 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA09761; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 06:14:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 06:14:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606171310.IAA20863@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Confessions of an Alchemist X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Since Joe Champion has issued an open invitation to his precious metal factory, I thought this would be an appropriate time to share our own experiences with the group. Earlier this year, with the guidance of Champion, we attempted to make Pt out of Hg. Hey!...we had the necessary stuff on hand...the procedure was simple...and, if it worked, our funding problems would be solved, right? In a glass beaker, we added about 20g of Na metal (in several-gram lumps) to 100ml of Hg metal. As each lump was pushed (with a long stick) under the surface of the Hg a fierce reaction ensued. Great plumes of nasty smoke issued forth and, by the time we had added all 20g of Na to the mercury, the beaker was quite a bit too hot to hold in bare hands. A semi-solid Na-Hg amalgam had formed. Champion said that the heat of reaction was to be expected and was a positive indication of the nuclear reactions taking place. He predicted that the resulting amalgam would contain about 1% Pt. We prepared three samples from this amalgam for XRF analysis: 1. Raw amalgam 2. HNO3 solution of the amalgam 3. Mg-induced precipitate of the HNO3 solution These three samples were analyzed on a Jordan Valley EX- 6500, a high-performance x-ray fluorescence analysis system. There were no detectable signs of Pt in the samples. The sensitivity of this analysis technique is hampered somewhat by the high Hg content of these samples so we used long counting times and the maximum tolerable excitation. It is estimated that a mere 20 ppm of Pt would have been easily noticeable under these analysis conditions. The amount of Pt that Champion predicted was 10,000 ppm. Clearly, our experiment did not work as Champion claimed it would...but the reaction proceeded exactly as he said it would! I investigated briefly the reaction of Na and Hg and, with Dieter's help, discovered that the rather large heat of reaction I observed matches closely with values tabulated in various chemistry reference books. Of course, those values were obtained empirically so who knows...maybe chemists have been creating nuclear reactions all along without realizing it! Perhaps we did something wrong. Perhaps we did create Pt but, for some reason, the yield was very, very low...below the detection limit of our XRF analysis. Joe, since we're all friends here, I'd like to ask you a question that's been bothering me. If you have a factory that is actually converting base metals into precious metals, why do you want to invite observers? Why not simply operate the factory until you're filthy rich and then kick back and enjoy life? Regarding the invitation: Part of me wants to see your operation...but then I realize that nothing I see there could totally convince me that you're not spiking the process somewhere along the line. I may be giving up the opportunity of a lifetime but I think I'll just wait until I can have another opportunity to replicate the process in my own lab. Thanks anyway. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 06:20:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA09834; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 06:14:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 06:14:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606171310.IAA20867@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 01:45 6/17/96 -0700, Dieter wrote: >I am with you now. It depends on what kind of energy you mean. If it is Gibbs >free energy, then yes. If it enthalpy, then maybe not, because entropy can >veto a process that leads to a lower enthalphy state, if it leads to a higher >Gibbs free energy state. I hate to admit this, Dieter, but I go all glassy-eyed when I hear the terms enthaply and Gibbs free energy...and this is AFTER I've studied several books on thermodynamics searching for SOMEONE who can explain these terms on a fundamental level that will penetrate my thick skull. Can you please provide a simple explanation/definition of enthalpy and Gibbs free energy and compare both quantities to "total system energy" which is what I keep wanting to use. Thanks in advance. Scott From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 08:12:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA28968; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 08:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 08:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 17 Jun 1996, Scott Little wrote: [...] > I hate to admit this, Dieter, but I go all glassy-eyed when I hear the terms > enthaply and Gibbs free energy...and this is AFTER I've studied several > books on thermodynamics searching for SOMEONE who can explain these terms on > a fundamental level that will penetrate my thick skull. > > Can you please provide a simple explanation/definition of enthalpy and Gibbs > free energy and compare both quantities to "total system energy" which is > what I keep wanting to use. Thermo is one of those subjects where some of the time you have to just lay back and accept fate, i.e. the formality of it, without getting a good feel for it. It may happen that with practice you get some feel. I have a little book, Concise Chemical Thermodynamics, by one Warn, which handles this nicely. It asks the question "Will this chemical process run from left to right?" and tries it with different energy definitions. U, which is just energy change itself, doesn't work; enthalpy H, which takes into account gas expansion, doesn't either, and finally, if you define Gibbs free energy (there is another like it for constant volume, Helmholtz ditto) the way it is defined, Delta-H - T*delta-S, it is what does the job. That is, it can tell you whether a process will run, be spontaneous. If you (like me) don't have a good feel for how the obvious order/disorder arguments about entropy become T*dS, don't worry, the formula works. Entropy is an abstract idea, while U and H are real physical (you could argue about this, too, though). So take Gibbs etc as a mathematical definition for a state that can be used to decide spontaneity. You were invoking spontaneity with those TFD's - "If ... then all water would have long ago become TFD" etc, and Gibbs applies to such an argument. That's why I asked whether those energies Graneau or you (?) mention, are meant to be H's or G's. There is quite a difference in order between bulk water and TFD's, I imagine. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 09:00:45 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA06903; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 08:44:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 08:44:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlagarde@cyberaccess.fr (Jean_de_Lagarde) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI cells are probabilistic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Being new in this forum, I apologize for asking a very simple question : Is it possible to have a list of those people who replicated successfully the CETI experiment, either with CETI beads or with self made ones ? Jean de Lagarde (France) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 09:02:10 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA07016; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 08:45:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 08:45:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606171521.IAA25995@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Confessions of an Alchemist X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 06:14 AM 6/17/96 -0700, you wrote: Scott Little wrote: > >Joe, since we're all friends here, I'd like to ask you a >question that's been bothering me. If you have a factory >that is actually converting base metals into precious >metals, why do you want to invite observers? Why not simply >operate the factory until you're filthy rich and then kick >back and enjoy life? > Scott, I am enjoying life now. But everybody has the desire to gain peer review. Is this not the case with CETI, PF and others? The commercial phase of my research is somewhat unique, for it is environmentally friendly (no Hg or Pb)and produces about 6,000 grams of precious metals per day (inclusive of Ag, Pt and Au). As far as your comment: >Regarding the invitation: Part of me wants to see your >operation...but then I realize that nothing I see there >could totally convince me that you're not spiking the >process somewhere along the line. Come on now Scott, if twelve researchers are allowed to crawl over and through these one ton reactors and determine the methodology of how anyone could spike 6,000 grams of precious metals (6,000 ppm) into each, especially when the isotopic distribution is different than that of nature, then once and for all, I could be labelled a fraud. Also, it would be determined that I was the largest owner (producer) of isotopic imbalanced metals. Sorry, I do not have a tinker toy version of this technology for anyone to take to their laboratory and play with. _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 09:48:42 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA15119; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 09:26:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 09:26:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606171549.LAA04840@spectre.mitre.org> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Robert I. Eachus" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner (hheffner@anc.ak.net) > However, I am bothered by memory of a film of a safety > demonstration I watched in high school. In the demonstration 2H2 > + O2 was electrolysed into an inverted flask. It was shown to be > safe and stable in the lab overnight. Then a window shade was > drawn up and direct sunlight was allowed to strike the flask and > it exploded right on queue. I really don't trust that mixture. > It also gets more volatile with pressure, although I believe such > gas existed in the top of the containment structure at Three Mile > Island at 3 atmospheres without exploding. If you are using it > around plastics or synthetics there is also the danger of very > small normally imperceptable sparks. A couple of clarifications... Yes, UV light can make 2H2 + O2 explode, but only if it is wet. The water vapor is a necessary catalyst. Second, at the correct ratio, the explosion is more likely to be an implosion, but you can get both or either. Depends on the specific heat of the container, and whether the surface is acting as a catalyst. Also on TMI. I there was a pressure spike when the evolved H2 "exploded" with the air in the confinement building, but there was very little O2 released due to reaction with the fuel and other metal. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 11:56:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11332; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 11:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 11:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606171707.AA51990@uu1611.prelude.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: d.powell@prelude.com (Don Powell) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >> >>Any Hydrogen in an Oxegen enviroment over a certain percentage (I have to >>look up the % but was quoted in Alternative Energy List) causes an explosion >>with no trigger needed. In the case of Pt and Pd, those are catalysts that >>will cause the reaction to occur at a lower temperature but they are not >>necessary. Now a spark will definetly set off any Hydrogen gas that is at a >>lower than normal explosive %. >> >> > >a trigger is necessary. actually, it is hard to get the stuff to burn. it >is so bouyant it goes straight up when it escapes from something so it does >not seep around in a space building up dangerous levels. Actually it can accumulate, at least when charging a battery bank, to dangerous levels. Which is why most Off-grid people keep thier batteries in a sealed room with a ventilation system to outside. > and it is not >particularly explosive. do you remember that famous photo of the Hindenburg >burning at the airport? Do you remember the figures in the photo? Those >figures are the proof that it did not explode. The newspapers claimed the >Hindenburg exploded, setting off everyone to think it explodes. The >newspapers lied. It did not explode. It burned, rather slowly actually. >Hydrogen is less dangerous that gasoline. You are right. I can't beleive I made this mistake. I have been re-education people for years that Hydrogen does not explode but only burns and here I go making the biggest mistake across the globe! From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 11:51:13 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11474; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 11:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 11:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606171726.AA12932@uu1611.prelude.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: d.powell@prelude.com (Don Powell) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Apologies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I would like to go ahead and apologize for my remarks concerning NASA and Brown's gas. I have not yet ordered a generator but I have seen enough to warrant me not slamming something I do not yet understand. I would like to apologize directly the the NASA guy but unfortunately for disk space reasons I have deleted the original post. I look forward to getting my generator and hope it helps me with some of the theories I have been attempting to prove. Anyway I'm sorry and in the future will first ask for more info and then flame (singe actually) accordingly. BTW, I agree with Rule# 2 within reason. It is just the the 2H2 + O2 => 2H2O + energy is a rather favorite subject of mine and I really thought that I had heard all theories concerning it. A very Humble, Don Powell d.powell@prelude.com From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 14:31:05 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA11205; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 14:15:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 14:15:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960617184218_72240.1256_EHB183-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: CETI replications X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Jean de Lagarde asks: "Is it possible to have a list of those people who replicated successfully the CETI experiment, either with CETI beads or with self made ones?" Yup. The first replication I am aware of was performed by Dennis Cravens in the Spring of 1995. It has been replicated by U. Illinois, U. Missouri, Motorola and others. The beads were independently replicated from scratch by Miley et al. at U. Illinois, using sputtering rather than electrolytic deposition of the thin film. Cravens published a fairly detailed description of his calorimetry in our magazine, Infinite Energy, # 2. Details of the other replications have not been published yet, although some of the Motorola data was shown informally at a recent conference. Miley hopes to present a paper describing his work at the annual September CF conference at Texas A&M. You can find more information about the CETI device in U.S. patents: 4,943,355 7/1990 Patterson 5,036,031 7/1991 Patterson 5,318,675 6/1994 Patterson 5,494,559 2/1996 Patterson CETI has a home page: http://www.onramp.net/~ceti/ - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 14:21:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA11404; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 14:16:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 14:16:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: H2O-H2O X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/17/96 08:12 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: H2O-H2O Dengbie's (I hope that is spelled correctly) 1969, "Elements of Chemical Equilibria" is an EXCELLENT text which even ME's and ChemE's can handle. 50 to 100 pages in it put all chemical thermo in an understandable form. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 14:35:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA11455; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 14:16:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 14:16:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > >> and it is not >>particularly explosive. do you remember that famous photo of the Hindenburg >>burning at the airport? Do you remember the figures in the photo? Those >>figures are the proof that it did not explode. The newspapers claimed the >>Hindenburg exploded, setting off everyone to think it explodes. The >>newspapers lied. It did not explode. It burned, rather slowly actually. >>Hydrogen is less dangerous that gasoline. > >You are right. I can't beleive I made this mistake. I have been >re-education people for years that Hydrogen does not explode but only burns >and here I go making the biggest mistake across the globe! It seems really important to distinguish between pure unconfined H2 as in the Hindenberg vs confined 2H2 + O2. I hope we do not forget the researcher killed at SRI by an exploding P&F type cell, even if it was a closed (recombinate) cell. This kind of research has it's risks, yet if we don't dismiss them or minimize them, but rather do all we can to prevent things from going wrong, and be prepared for the fact that evetually they will, we have taken the right course and have the best chances. It is a real disservice, especially to novices, to minimize the anticipation of risk. On the other hand, I would much prefer to be around H2 mixed with pure O2 than gasoline mixed with pure O2! A hydrogen driven ecomomy would clearly be vastly superior to a fossil fuel carbon driven economy. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 17:35:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA18121; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 17:23:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 17:23:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31C5DF2E.310@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: >Snip: > It seems really important to distinguish between pure unconfined H2 as in > the Hindenberg vs confined 2H2 + O2. I hope we do not forget the > researcher killed at SRI by an exploding P&F type cell, even if it was a > closed (recombinate) cell. This kind of research has it's risks, yet if we > don't dismiss them or minimize them, but rather do all we can to prevent > things from going wrong, and be prepared for the fact that evetually they > will, we have taken the right course and have the best chances. It is a > real disservice, especially to novices, to minimize the anticipation of > risk. > > On the other hand, I would much prefer to be around H2 mixed with pure O2 > than gasoline mixed with pure O2! A hydrogen driven ecomomy would clearly > be vastly superior to a fossil fuel carbon driven economy. > > Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 > Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 Hear! Hear! Horace! Remember the Apollo 13 H2-O2 fuel-cell explosion! At NASA the "Hydrogen Safety Manual" was the size of a medium phone book. Hydrogen has very wide explosive concentration limits - so, don't take risks! Workers have been badly burned walking through clear hydrogen flames. The radiation from the flame is low - until some biomass walks into it! True, much of the danger of hydrocarbon flames is the copious thermal radiation given off by the carbon content. True, 2 mole H2 + 1 mole O2 = 2 mole H2O 3 moles = 2 moles. But, this will only implode as fast as the container walls can cool the super-heated steam of combustion. Wall area for cooling goes up like size^2 while volume for exploding goes up like size^3! Watch it! Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 17:32:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA18399; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 17:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 17:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606180032.AA03578@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Confessions of an Alchemist X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: JC writes: >I am enjoying life now. But everybody has the desire to gain peer >review. Is this not the case with CETI, PF and others? Huh? I _am_ a scientist and I don't have a desire to gain peer review, approval or acceptance. What I'd love to have is something so good that people have to accept it, like it or not. In other words, I'd say everybody wants something that works, which is what you claim to have already. >my research is... environmentally friendly >and produces about 6,000 grams of precious metals per day Hmmm....even 6,000gm of silver is worth several thousand dollars. So, if you want us to believe you, why don't you just amass a $1,000,000 fortune over the next 12 months. Should be a piece of cake with your process. After paying for your own costs, send a $60,000 check to each of the 12 observers. That would convince me. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 17 19:22:36 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA09403; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 19:15:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 19:15:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960617215941_331342245@emout07.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: answer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott the subject of entropy and enthalpy is very confusing. I the steam power plant where I work we use enthalpy and entropy to calculate steam pressures and temperatures. 1. Entropy..when steam goes through a control valve that is perfectly insulated from the environment pressure and temperature are reduced. Volume expands. Enthalpy remains CONSTANT. No energy is lost to the environment. If you know the temp press in you can clalculate the enthalpy in. If you know the enthalpy in and you know the enthalpy out. Its the same. If you know just one other parameter you can find all of the properties of the steam at the low side of the control valve. Enthalpy remains constant ENTROPY INCREASES through a control valve. The change in entropy represnets a loss in the ablility to do work. 2. Enthalpy... When steam goes through a "perfect" steam turbine work is extracted from the steam. This work constants a flow of energy. The entropy of the steam entering the turbine equals the entropy of the steam the turbine Entropy remains constant in a turbine. The loss of enthalpy represnets a flow of energy out of the system. 3. Gibbs free energy and Gibbs entropy are same sort of thing but they apply to chemical systems. This is an off the topic subject but I feel the working environment of the professional is rapidly declining in the USA. My employer just gave its management personal the edict that they have to work 360 hours before any straight time pay can be collected for overtime. Front line supervisors have been layed off. Empowered team members are in charge on the week end. The team members cannot address the technical problems. I'm getting called out at 2 am on the weekends to fix things. Now a find out that I will not get paid for this constant harassment. It's been declaired to be part of my job. When I ask about it I am told some hogwash about the process, the team, and the vision. I want paid when I get jerked out of bed to solve some intractable problem. I don't care about the other bull.. Is Dilbert the only one who really can see past management propagana? Others have been given assignments that were formerly contracted out. These assignments require a 10 hr / day 6 days /week duty assignments + they travel on their own time The work is dirty and mondane.. No extra pay. Is part of the job. Money is being funneled into oversea's investments. Top management is receiveing huge bonuses. This crap seems to be a national phenomena. Where will it all stop? What is going on? Is the Fail Labor Standards Act dead? Are we all exempt even when we carry a tool kit? When a was a in college I got a summer job, got paid, and made some money. I also gained some experience. We have a student working for us. She is not a summer employee..she is an intern. She gets paid nothing. In fact, she has to pay the college for the credits. Who figured this one out? I told her that she needs paid experience. If its not worth paying for its not worth doing. No wonder the Russians are having trouble with their elections. Tired and mad. Frank Z From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 04:54:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA00531; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 04:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 04:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlagarde@cyberaccess.fr (Jean_de_Lagarde) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI replications X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell writes >Yup. The first replication I am aware of was performed by Dennis Cravens >in the Spring of 1995. It has been replicated by U. Illinois, U. Missouri, >Motorola and others. The beads were independently replicated from scratch by >Miley et al. at U. Illinois, using sputtering rather than electrolytic >deposition of the thin film. Cravens published a fairly detailed description >of his calorimetry in our magazine, Infinite Energy, # 2. Details of the other >replications have not been published yet, although some of the Motorola >data was shown informally at a recent conference. Miley hopes to present a >paper describing his work at the annual September CF conference at Texas A&M. I perfectly know all that, but I would like to know if other individuals like Mitchell Jones (who had a long discussion with Jed about the efficiency of his heat exchanger) or Mark Hugo (who made a long report on the history of Patterson cell) had replicated the experiment and found excess heat. Jean_de_Lagarde From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 07:34:16 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA23097; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 07:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 07:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI replications X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >I perfectly know all that, but I would like to know if other individuals >like Mitchell Jones (who had a long discussion with Jed about the >efficiency of his heat exchanger) or Mark Hugo (who made a long report on >the history of Patterson cell) had replicated the experiment and found >excess heat. > > Jean_de_Lagarde There have been no reports here of successful replication of the CETI beads. Scott Little created some ersatz beads, but these are not identical to the CETI beads in that the core is not the same - i.e. copper plated sulfated plastic. No one has reported ou performance of these beads. I will be quickly corrected if wrong, but I don't think anyone has reported any ou performance from *any* calorimetry type experiments, but work in this direction is still in its beginnings for many of us. This is an honest bunch! If something develops and is multiply confirmed here you can bet your bottom dollar on it. What a great place to be! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 07:53:44 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA23184; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 07:30:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 07:30:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618142414_72240.1256_EHB79-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Joe Champion's isotopic anomalies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Joe Champion claims that he is transmuting materials into metals with unnatural isotopic ratios. He should send me a few small samples. My address is: 2050 Peachtree Industrial Court, Suite 113-A Chamblee, Georgia 30341 I can have samples tested at the same laboratories that confirmed Mizuno's isotopic shifts. These are normally expensive tests, but I think I can have them done at no charge. If the shifts are large enough, they will convince many people that the claims are true. In a sense, these shifts are more convincing than excess heat or short-lived radioisotopes, because they do not vanish. You can confirm them five years later, or thousands of years later. If there is any gold lying around in a museum somewhere that was supposedly created by an alchemist, it would be interesting to examine the contaminants. Gold itself has only one isotope. As I see it, Joe has nothing to lose and everything to gain by sending me a few samples. This test could not be faked. I think it is safe to assume that no garage technology can separate and concentrate isotopes on a large scale. For that matter, if Joe has "only" developed a method of concentrating isotopes, that in itself is a remarkable breakthrough with immense commercial potential. I think an independent analysis of the metals would be much more convincing than a visit to the site. Furthermore, as far as I am concerned, if Joe ignores this offer he must be faking or unsure of his results. I feel the same way about Russ George and his calorimetry. I cannot imagine any legitimate reasons for him to refuse, since he has gone public with the claims. There is no point in proclaiming something repeatedly and then refusing to provide proof. That makes you look very suspicious! I am not setting myself up as the final arbiter of these claims: I would make Hitachi and other big-name labs the arbiters. Regarding Russ George's statements, while I do not want to carry on a tit for tat argument here, I must protest his statements one last time. Then I promise I will shut up about the issue, and never address his messages again. I asked for scientific data that would verify his repeated public claims of 300% excess heat. I want a step-by-step exposition describing how he measured that 300%, what instruments he used, what calibrations and blanks he employed, and so on. This is essential information that anyone would require before believing a scientific claim from any laboratory. When Russ first made his claims, years ago, I naturally assumed that such data would soon follow, in a paper. Legitimate labs always share this sort of information freely. Russ has now claimed that by asking for this information I "disparage and detract from anyone and everyone who does not do things your way." As if I am the only person in the world who demands rigorous scientific proof of scientific claims! As if I invented the scientific method! What, is it now Jed's way to publish a calibration curve? Extraordinary, revolutionary claims should be taken at face value without a drop of hard data or proof?!? Russ claims that I am "knowingly . . . attempting to do [him] harm." Well, yes, in that case, I am. If demanding a rigorous scientific paper is harmful, then I mean to do E-Quest, CETI and many other CF scientists any amount of harm! When scientists are sloppy, they hurt to the field, they damage their own reputations and other people's, and they make me look like a fool for trusting them in the first place. In my Infinite Energy article and in the messages I posted here I took E-Quest to task for their unforgivably sloppy Power-Gen demonstration. I will never hesitate to criticize E-Quest, Toyota, or anyone else for such sleazy work. Russ describes me as an armchair heckler, yet he has published *nothing* whereas I have published papers, articles, translations and descriptions of experiments. Science without exposition and communication is meaningless. People who refuse to back up scientific claims with credible evidence do not play by the rules, and they should not take part in a serious scientific discussion. I have always assumed that was one of the basic rules of academic discourse. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 08:30:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA02472; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 08:19:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 08:19:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: answer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/17/96 19:21 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: answer Dear Tired and Mad friend: See the "Dilbert" cartoon about Dogbert handing out a set of lovely backbones to the Engineers. A national strike is long over due in this country. I am a formerly staunch Republican who is quickly on the way to supporting SOME Federally mandated interventions in the corporate systems of the US. (I can give you one quick example--- a cap on executive salaries, with no cap on stock options---but the proviso that stock cashed in before 10 years of "maturing"is taxed at 98%!!!!) - MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 09:16:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA07595; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 08:48:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 08:48:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606181517.IAA20663@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Joe Champion's isotopic anomalies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 07:30 AM 6/18/96 -0700, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >Joe Champion claims that he is transmuting materials into metals with >unnatural isotopic ratios. He should send me a few small samples. My address >is: > >2050 Peachtree Industrial Court, Suite 113-A >Chamblee, Georgia 30341 > Jed, Thanks for the offer. Samples will be sent this week. _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 09:40:23 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA14100; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 09:21:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 09:21:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: RE: answer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: " Top management is receiveing huge bonuses. This crap seems to be a national phenomena. Where will it all stop? What is going on? Is the Fail Labor Standards Act dead?" "Thanks, Frank, OUR elections go well and here the enemies and the friends are almost indistinguishable, with the very exception of a few thousand extremists (you also had some of these recently in Montana, I think). But if I am looking at the television to the red mobs in Russia carrying Stalin's pictures, I am really disgusted and scared. A few years ago I have coined the Twin Peaks Principle: "The evil is indestructible, ubiquituous and always wins". (But not completely, I hope)"" .............................................. Dear Peter, Frank and the world... My heart and soul goes out to both of you. I would like to think that these political and management events just happen, but in all things there is cause and effect. Most often "a greater plan or a greater greed." In my early days of working in russia I met many in the "underground". People financed by the west to disrupt the soviet economy (as if it wasn't in bad enough shape on it's own). Like in south america these people became powerful after the "revolution". Many of the more powerful mafia types now in russia got their start from US tax dollars... One day good people against the enemies of america...the next day enemies of the world. What you gonna do? Today I heard a politicians saying if the commies win we will have to start the cold war all over again.....so sad..but let's see, did it ever end? Lets see, spend $60-$80 billion to build a new nuke missile shield around the US, but no money for education and new energy research. Reason? politics? economics? greed? Nationalism, greed and ivory towers... It is people like those here on Vortex that can set a new example for the world. People communicating with each other, exchanging ideas and "thinking" the lost art of the 20th century.. I've walked though the chernobly plant, know first hand what can happen when a fusion reactor "has a little problem". Taking nasal samples from dead babies to gather data, one's life can be forever changed. Riding back on the train to Kievskya station in Moscow I gave up on God, management and governments and decided to put my faith in people like you here on vortex. I'm not a revolutionary, just a very tired human. You see governments, management and God are often faceless, never needing to take responsibility, good people on the other hand must accept things as they happen, or their souls will not allow them peace. To seek change through words, may do so little,but we should at least see much of that "little" can do. Find answers, change the world.... Do Not Give Up on the quest for truth. Help someone, when you yourself need help. Understand how great life is and what a gift it is just to be here. Question everything that you are told not to question. Teach a child to love, to think, to care. We are all children, we just gotta learn to play together cause for now...we only got one sand box. Please forgive me for this stupidity, but I am a little sad today. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 09:52:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA14151; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 09:21:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 09:21:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Joe Champion's isotopic anomalies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: >I can have samples tested at the same laboratories that confirmed Mizuno's >isotopic shifts. These are normally expensive tests, but I think I can have >them done at no charge. If the shifts are large enough, they will convince >many people that the claims are true. In a sense, these shifts are more >convincing than excess heat or short-lived radioisotopes, because they do not >vanish. You can confirm them five years later, or thousands of years later. If >there is any gold lying around in a museum somewhere that was supposedly >created by an alchemist, it would be interesting to examine the contaminants. >Gold itself has only one isotope. > Actually, gold has more than 10 known isotopes, but only one is stable. All the others have short half lives. Therefore, an artificially produced sample of gold would not show anything but the single stable isotope, unless it got to the analysis lab quickly. However, if any of the unstable isotopes were produced in the transmutation process, the radioacivity in the reactor would be intense as the unstable isotopes decayed. Most other heavy elements have two or more stable isotopes, and for these one can measure the isotopic ratios. There are frequently small differences in natural isotopic ratios, because simple processes like diffusion effect some isotope separation. However, it is true that large differences would require some unusual process. > >For that matter, if Joe has "only" developed a method of concentrating >isotopes, that in itself is a remarkable breakthrough with immense commercial >potential. However, one can not help but wonder what kind of reaction process would be so selective that it would produce ONLY stable intermediates and products and NO radioactive ones at all. Bring your Geiger counter and lead shield with you to California. 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@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 10:02:42 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA19197; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 09:47:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 09:47:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618152932_100433.1541_BHG34-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Sloppy typing? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I feel I should point out that there are certain advantages to being able to type only slowly. Jed comments that the E-Quest demonstration at PowerGen was sloppy. This is a baseless slur. The sloppy demonstration at PowerGen was put on by CETI. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 11:06:23 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA01731; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:54:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:54:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: RE: tired and mad X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Frank It would seem that engineers are going to have to go UNION if this type of management behavior continues. I know Boeing and other aerospace outfits have already. It is fundamentally against our temperment as highly individualistic contributors, but engineers are now treated as a commodity item, instead of being on managements team as a check on reality and creating new products. Recently design engineers have been laid off here, and then hired back as free lance consultants through a job-shop without benefits. The same thing has happened to my son-in-law at GE. No wonder we are falling behind Japan and Korea Hank ---------- From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: answer Date: Monday, June 17, 1996 7:15PM This is an off the topic subject but I feel the working environment of the professional is rapidly declining in the USA. My employer just gave its management personal the edict that they have to work 360 hours before any straight time pay can be collected for overtime. Front line supervisors have been layed off. Empowered team members are in charge on the week end. The team members cannot address the technical problems. I'm getting called out at 2 am on the weekends to fix things. Now a find out that I will not get paid for this constant harassment. It's been declaired to be part of my job. When I ask about it I am told some hogwash about the process, the team, and the vision. I want paid when I get jerked out of bed to solve some intractable problem. I don't care about the other bull.. Is Dilbert the only one who really can see past management propagana? Others have been given assignments that were formerly contracted out. These assignments require a 10 hr / day 6 days /week duty assignments + they travel on their own time The work is dirty and mondane.. No extra pay. Is part of the job. Money is being funneled into oversea's investments. Top management is receiveing huge bonuses. This crap seems to be a national phenomena. Where will it all stop? What is going on? Is the Fail Labor Standards Act dead? Are we all exempt even when we carry a tool kit? When a was a in college I got a summer job, got paid, and made some money. I also gained some experience. We have a student working for us. She is not a summer employee..she is an intern. She gets paid nothing. In fact, she has to pay the college for the credits. Who figured this one out? I told her that she needs paid experience. If its not worth paying for its not worth doing. No wonder the Russians are having trouble with their elections. Tired and mad. Frank Z From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 11:13:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA01936; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:55:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:55:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606181734.MAA26242@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI replications X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 04:46 6/18/96 -0700, Jean_de_Lagarde wrote: >I perfectly know all that, but I would like to know if other individuals >like Mitchell Jones (who had a long discussion with Jed about the >efficiency of his heat exchanger) or Mark Hugo (who made a long report on >the history of Patterson cell) had replicated the experiment and found >excess heat. Jean, I have made a fairly serious effort to replicate the Patterson cell. I ordered some glass beads coated with 1 micron thick layers of Ni, Pd, & Ni and tested them in a cell of my own design which closely approximated the cells that Patterson uses. To date I have tried about 20 different experiments with these beads and I have never seen any indication of excess heat. My calorimeter has a detection limit of about 0.1 watts of excess heat. Another lab (anonymous), well-equipped and well-staffed, received some of my glass beads and they tested them in a completely different apparatus but still generally in accordance with Patterson/Craven's recommendations and they, too, saw no signs of excess heat. It is frustrating that none of the advertised replicators (e.g. Professor Miley's group, Motorola, U of Missouri, ?, ?) have published any papers describing their experiments. I am slightly afraid that some of these so-called replications are simply cases in which Cravens-built apparatus was shipped to a new location, set up, and observed to perform just as it did when Cravens' built it. I hope I'm wrong about this concern. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 11:14:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA02069; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:55:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:55:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618164553_72240.1256_EHB60-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Bravo for Joe! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Joe Champion writes: "The samples will be sent this week. I will enclose as much data as possible as to the metals included." Marvelous! Wonderful! I'll try to call my Japanese contacts tonight and make sure they can analyze the materials. They told me some months ago that they could. I hope the equipment is still available. I believe it takes two weeks to one month to run the analyses. In your data, please make a note of the most dramatically altered isotopic ratios, if that is not obvious from the raw data. It is refreshing to see such a cooperative attitude, and such a fast response. "After this test, you can start an analysis on the raw material to see if you can detect anything." Well . . . why not send me some of the raw material too? Please be sure label everything and wrap it in plastic. I will forward it unopened, so I don't contaminate the samples. It might be a good idea to wrap two or three separate small pieces because I have three labs in mind but I am not sure which is available, so I will contact all three and maybe they will all agree. We could ask them to send the same sample from one lab to the next, but that would take months. I look forward to getting the packages. I'll try to get the analysis done as soon as possible. I will publish all findings here and in Infinite Energy. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 11:27:03 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA05614; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 11:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 11:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606181804.AA16160@echo.i-link.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (21st Century Logic) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >My tone is certainly appropriate. When you persist in your intent to >disparage and detract from anyone and everyone who does not do things >your way you knowingly are attemting to do them harm. This argument >has gone far enough it and it makes this forum useless to me. It's >the fate of every public forum when arm chair hecklers step to the >front. > >Russ George It is an unfortunate truth that we do not live in a rational world. Individuals who make wildly irrational statements and then respond to polite criticism with seething hostility are the norm. There is no power of persuasion or force of logic that can move them from their positions, and their presence in a group devoted to the discussion of ideas is inappropriate. They can be dealt with in only two ways: (1) by removal from the list of participants (in moderated groups), and (2) by having their nonsensical statements publicly and relentlessly dissected, until they are finally driven from the field in humiliation (in unmoderated groups). I, frankly, prefer the unmoderated type of group, provided only that there are people in the group who have something worthwhile to say. Unfortunately, those who had worthwhile content to discuss permitted themselves to be driven from spf into this group by the flamers, and, reluctantly, I followed you here. Result: here we have to deal with a "moderator" (i.e., a censor) who permits defensive and hostile responses to criticism, apparently on the ground that they contain no overt insults, and yet maintains an intent to delete from the group anyone who responds to them in the manner which they deserve. What manner is that? Simple: it would be appropriate to respond to Russ George's wildly irrational statements by bluntly labeling them as *horse manure* and then explaining, in detail, precisely why. It is necessary to employ some sort of label such as that as a preface to a reasoned response, because it is inappropriate to deal politely with a person who behaves the way Russ George has behaved. If you respond politely to him by ignoring his insults, he wins. (It looks as if you are intimidated.) But does one dare to respond appropriately? Or will the censor strike? Such is the dilemma of the "moderated" group. The solution, in my view, is straightforward: post your comments on unmoderated groups, let everyone--flamers included--have their say, and respond to each message in the manner that is appropriate to its content. The above, of course, is a lecture that has no purpose. Most of you are crybabies. You need an information daddy to protect you from flamers because you haven't the guts to deal with them yourselves. That, after all, is why you are here, isn't it? --Mitchell Jones From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 13:47:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA02700; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618192136_100433.1541_BHG34-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell Jones writes: "The above, of course, is a lecture that has no purpose. Most of you are crybabies. You need an information daddy to protect you from flamers because you haven't the guts to deal with them yourselves. That, after all, is why you are here, isn't it?" I would say that to attack the entire group in this way shows at least a lack of sense of humour. Actually, it shows a great number of other things too. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 13:42:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA02947; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:29:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:29:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618185221_100433.1541_BHG42-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: "Science" posts X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Robert (dacha@shentel.net) should make no apology for his comments today, which I for one wholly support. Whilst the specific comment is not the backbone of his post, I would suggest that his implication - that the C20th has suffered severely from incompetence in thought - should be considered very seriously. I am increasingly of the opinion that C20th science has suffered most seriously from a failure to study formal logic. It is all very well to pay lip-service to (or misquote) William of Ockham; but a fellow of that mental calibre would, I suggest, if brought in from the C14th make mincemeat of much of our vaunted 'scientific theory'. I am by no means the only person who feels that virtually all of modern technology is based on scientific work done in (or at the very end of) the C19th. I was going to quote from the article on Ockham in the Microsoft Encarta Encyclopaedia (which is abysmal, but I do have it on loan), but I just read it and it is mostly rubbish - specifically they can't even translate the famous Razor correctly. For the record, the correct translation is: "Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity." Jed Rothwell has suggested that I repost here a couple of my postings on the Compuserve Science Forum. I'll admit that I do not like posting there because I end up wasting time in sterile debates with Dr Blue and Mr Dunsmuir. Inevitably the postings are pretty bogus, my comment that the possibility that the Coulomb barrier might be breached by ZPF attraction is entirely speculative, is a case in point! -------------------------------------------------- This one was entirely tongue-in-cheek.... -------------------------------------------------- Marty, On the matter of research in physics, I should draw your attention to the article by John Horgan, an Editor of Scientific American, in the current MIT Technology review: "In its broad outlines, this scientific account of reality seems unlikely to change. It has been painstakingly woven together from empirical evidence, and stoutly reinforced by continued observation. It is therefore, as much as any thought that has ever crossed the human mind, true. Sheldon Glashow, a Nobel physicist at Harvard University, remarked in 1989 that the last decade of research in his field had revealed 'not the slightest flaw, not the tiniest discrepancy' in the standard model of physics'...." The article is introduced in this way: "Standing on the shoulders of giants, modern researchers face a shrinking scientific horizon. Their lot may be either to continue applying and refining great ideas of the past or to plunge into ever more speculative and untestable realms. Either way, says the author, pure science as we know it appears to be nearing an end." So, I think you should be honoured to get the chance to refine the details, and excited to be living at a time when physics has become a closed book. One particularly telling phrase is, "If you truly believe in modern physics," which I think is interesting in that it is the first time I have seen the expression "true believer" used in other than a pejorative sense. Regards, Chris -------------------------------------------- This one less so: -------------------------------------------- Richard, > The problem is, it keeps it up for thirty days, that's a lot more > Joules than one expects from an electrolytic reaction based on the > small amount of reactive agents available. Is this a puzzle, or > just snake-oil? I really should know better than to discuss this subject here, but, well... Firstly, the general consenus here is, I feel, that serious fraud or error is involved. One immediate problem is that the repeated and oft-confirmed thermal anomalies of 'CF' (whatever that is) are generally reported by electrochemists. This is of little interest to the majority of nuclear physicists who, without isolating the cause, claim error or fraud. Similarly, any reported nuclear effects are discounted on the basis that nuclear physicists are rarely involved in taking the measurements. More commonly these are performed by commercial laboratories. For this reason it is of particular interest that Prof Miley of U Illinois, the editor of the journal of the American Nuclear Society ("Fusion Technology") has been willing to go on national television with Dr Bowles of U Miss at KC jointly to confirm the thermal anomalies. (Precisely why some here prefer anonymous rumours to public assertions by the scientists involved is unclear.) Similarly, the work of the research arm of the US electric utilities (EPRI) at SRI has produced the following statement in their report EPRI TR-104915s (August 1994): EPRI PERSPECTIVE This work confirms the claims of Fleischmann, Pons, and Hawkin of the production of excess heat in deuterium-loaded palladium cathodes at levels too large for chemical transformation. However, the phenomena were obtained in only about half of the cells. >From the conditions of loading, initiation time, and current density on the successful observations of excess heat, it is understood why the phenomena are so difficult to attain. [this continues, with a discussion of the effect of silica, palladium purity, and metallurgy]. It is generally agreed that the SRI calorimetry is most painstakingly precise. Negative comment on the SRI work has generally been confined to suggestions that they perhaps have concentrated on their instrumentation and precision to the detriment of optimising the effect itself. However, my previous disappointment at the level of SRI's reported heat excess has been to a degree been reversed now that I appreciate that the excess energy quoted is the gross excess ratio of the heat produced to [the total input power *plus* the heater power used to ensure that the cell remains at a constant elevated temperature] (isothermal calorimetry). On the matter of the source of the energy, I for one do not accept that this is nuclear as such. That is because of the previously poor quality of the evidence. However, while still not willing to accept a wholly nuclear source, I must pay attention not only to the helium results discussed here recently, but to the increasing quality of the reports (in both Ni/H2O and Pd/D2O work) of apparent nuclear effects in the cathode material. Inevitably we receive reports in advance of publication, and thus it would be improper to give details. All I would be willing to say is that most of my objections seem to have been answered in the more recent work. Not only are the 'new' elements present in quantities which would appear to defy contamination, they are frequently present as a single isotope which would normally constitute only a proportion of that element; and the analyses by independent groups have been done by several different techniques. It can hardly be imagined that Miley is failing to search his apparatus most carefully for such effects, though we are unlikely to hear anything 'official' from Illinois for some time. (It should be appreciated that Miley has obtained full independent replication of the thermal effect using 'beads' made at Illinois by a different though related technique.) I am indeed perfectly familiar with the reasoning which 'proves' that such 'low energy transmutations' are impossible. Certainly, although some cathodes are reported as showing significant radioactivity immediately after use, and the EPRI report shows a cathode's autoradiograph, insufficient radiation is produced to penetrate the water of the cell in more than very tiny amounts (EPRI's report also shows an autoradiograph of a cell). As I say, I am only gradually being persuaded that these apparent nuclear effects are responsible for all (or even any significant amount) of the heat. That leaves open the question of the source of this thermal emergy. I mentioned elsewhere here that a crank is a person who is impervious to any and all evidence which disagrees with his world-view. This is especially evident in 'creationists', who simply wriggle away from all the factual evidence offered. However, I would suggest that anybody who demands full stoichometric equivalence between - say - heat and helium, when that is clearly at best merely one facet of the odd behaviour of these devices, or who insists that our knowledge of physics is now in effect complete, is displaying similar behaviour to that of a creationist who demands to see each and every intermediate form (and then demands to see the ones in between!). I think it was Rayleigh who commented wryly that no experimental evidence can be accepted until confirmed by theory - and he had a point. But 'CF' appears to be at least as complex in relationship to conventional nuclear physics as biochemistry is to chemistry, and I feel that those who demand to see commensurate radiation (or whatever) are like a chemist who demands to see light and high temperatures when an animal 'burns' sugar. And I remain puzzled by the intensity of emotion which seems to be shown by those who apparently would like to see all work in this field stopped. Essentially, the argument of the opponents appears to be based on the 'theoretical impossibility' of the results, disguised by attacks on individuals, and their focussing on the admittedly confusing nature of all but the calorimetry. Again, one is forcibly reminded of the creationists who oppose (often successfully) the US screening of any TV programme which portrays evolution. To my personal knowledge, those involved with the BBC/CBC Horizon documentary on 'CF' got considerable hammer for making that programme. I'm not sure if their then rather radical documentary on helicobacter pylori (which I got a fair flaming for reporting here at the time) has been shown yet on US TV, but the CF one certainly has not been! Chris --------------------------------------------- Mark, > Did you see the 'Horizon' programme about over-unity devices? Channel 4 "Equinox", actually. "Horizon" is BBC. > Whatever, they mentioned that a US fire department was so > impressed with the Griggs pump device that they use it to heat the > water for their shower units. I think you will find that the primary selling points of the Griggs device (Hydrosonic 'pump') are ease of maintenance, lack of need for boiler insurance, and its ability to produce clean steam or very hot water from filthy input water without clogging. It is this last feature (plus the fact that it is driven by rotary power) which has made it attract interest from many quarters, including the British MoD. It is not advertised as 'over-unity', that is very much a side benefit. What was not pointed out on the programme is that the gentleman at the fire station in Florida is well-qualified in precision energy measurements, and is among many customers who report anomalous heating performance. Note that an electrical resistance (immersion) water heater is effectively 100% efficient. > Odd thing is that no one really knows how or why it works. I have seen the study contract between NASA (Huntsville) and HydroDynamics. We have not yet seen the results of NASA's investigation of the Hydrosonic 'pump', but one primary aim of the study is to test the energy balance of the devices. It is 'just a water stirrer'. Recent and unconfirmed reports suggest that the high level of cavitation induced in the water is associated with the strange behaviour of the machine. This may have some connection with sonoluminescence (which also involves small collapsing bubbles). A recent paper by Eberlein at Cambridge University suggests that there is interaction between the 'zero point energy' and such micro-bubbles. She suggests that energy is conserved in such systems, while both Puthoff and Schwinger suggest that this may not always be true. The energy-transfer between 'external reality' and the zero-point field occurs when a mirror is accelerated through the vacuum, and a doppler shift of the EM radiation of the ZPF occurs. The 'mirror' in this case would be the surface of the micro-bubble. On a purely speculative note, I find it interesting to imagine that such 'accelerating mirrors' might occur in the possible 'unusual electron configurations' within other systems. There is also the thought that the 'Casimir effect,' wherein the exclusion of the longer wavelengths of the ZPE causes two closely adjacent surfaces to be pulled together, is inversely proportional to the fourth power of their separation. This being the case, the normally very weak Casimir effect might just produce in some systems localised forces sufficient to overcome the Coulomb repulsion between charged particles. Pure speculative drivel, of course. Without numbers, science speculation is just so much hot air. Chris -------------------------------------------- Apologies for any errors or misrepresentations. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 13:53:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA03216; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: nuclear battery X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: This is a snippet of the nuclear battery paper. It is in MS Word. Just drop me a note if you would like a copy or I will have it on my webpage in about a week. THE RESEARCH DIRECTION BASIS ON INTERACTION OF THE PLASMA FLUX DENSE WITH A CONDENSED MATTER SURFACE FOR GENERATING NUCLEAR REACTION 1. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE AND EQUIPMENT Experimental results on search of excess heat, nucleus transmutation, generation tritium and neutrons, helium-3, helium-4, charge particles, Gamma and X-ray flux is very unexpected by possibility for discovering the product of nuclear reactions for energy in a few tens keV and it is possible in a few tens eV. We detected with confidence the product of nuclear reactions in condensed media (NRCM) only then as soon as we raised the energy ions of Deuterium which had bombardment a target solid out plasma of powerful glow discharge to level in a few tens and hundred eV. The experiments we had conducted in powerful glow discharge of direct current on the base improved equipment UVN-84R-1 (fig. 1 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 15:13:22 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA20638; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 14:56:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 14:56:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618204945_72240.1256_EHB147-3@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Sloppy typing! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Chris Tinsley pointed out that I accidentally accused E-Quest of putting on a sloppy demonstration at PowerGen. Oops! Sorry. That was CETI. They have put on splendid demonstrations and one sloppy demonstration. As I said in Infinite Energy, on balance, I think they have done a great job and I look forward to more demonstrations. It was sloppy but convincing because it was so darn hot. Ah, but it could have been wonderful! With proper instrumentation, it would have been a triumph. CETI would be raking in hundreds of millions of dollars by now . . . That is what broke my heart. It could have been the most dramatic public demonstration of a new technology since the day Wilbur Wright flew in France and convinced all of Europe overnight; or the time Charles Parsons raced the Turbinia past the Grand Fleet Review and thumbed his nose at the Royal Navy establishment. Sigh . . . - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 15:24:40 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA20735; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 14:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 14:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618204921_72240.1256_EHB147-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Joe Champion's isotopic anomalies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Michael J. Schaffer wrote: "Actually, gold has more than 10 known isotopes, but only one is stable. All the others have short half lives. Therefore, an artificially produced sample of gold would not show anything but the single stable isotope, unless it got to the analysis lab quickly." Right. That's what I meant. I thought the short lived ones would be gone in a few hours. And I presume that any sample that comes to me in the mail would be months old. I asked Mizuno about short lived isotopes in the analysis described in "Anomalous Isotopic Distribution . . ." He said the samples were tested years after electrolysis. The cathodes were stored carefully and kept clean. "Most other heavy elements have two or more stable isotopes, and for these one can measure the isotopic ratios. There are frequently small differences in natural isotopic ratios, because simple processes like diffusion effect some isotope separation." I asked to Ron Brightsen about that, specifically about copper, which we emphasized in Mizuno's paper. He said that lighter elements below carbon have a larger natural spread than the heavy ones. They are more easily diffused. I think he said that copper is stable to within 0.0001%. He said that uranium hexafloride is diffused over and over again, thousands of times, before the ratios begin to change radically. We have industrial scale isotopic separation of uranium, and heavy water. Are there any other large scale isotope separation? I do not know of any. Suppose hypothetically that Champion has discovered a cheap, simple way to enrich isotopes (rather than synthesizing them). There might not be much use for that at first, but isotopically pure samples of iron, silicon and other elements may turn out to have many interesting and useful properties. That is what Ron Brightsen thinks. There is some experimental evidence for this idea. As I recall, he said that tests of isotopically pure samples of iron have revealed unexpectedly large differences in thermal and electrical conductivity. "However, one can not help but wonder what kind of reaction process would be so selective that it would produce ONLY stable intermediates and products and NO radioactive ones at all." Well . . . is that the case? I mean, is the claim here that this mysterious process produces ONLY stable intermediates? Maybe it produces copious radioactive ones and they mostly fade away after a few weeks. Maybe Joe will be violating the U.S. Post Office laws by mailing me a sample. One thing for sure: I will not keep it in my pocket! There is a big debate in the cold fusion business about whether cathodes produce intermediate short lived isotopes and radiation. That is a bugbear with the hot fusion crowd who claim that all nuclear reactions must produce X amount of radiation and X-Rays. God must have told them so on the telephone, they are so sure of it. It is not a debate I want pick sides in, because I couldn't care less about it, but I would like to point two things: 1. If CF can do it, I suppose Champion's process can too. I believe there are CF theories about how the metal lattice increases the likelihood of reactions producing stable intermediaries. Is Champion's environment primarily a solid state metal lattice? 2. CF definitely does produce *some* short lived radioisotopes, in some cases anyway. I have no idea whether they are commensurate with the heat or whether they fit in with hot fusion theories or not, but I note, for example, that SRI made autoradiographs of the cathodes, and they found a bunch more radiation than predicted by conventional nuclear theory. Forty orders of magnitude more, which is a lotta zeros by golly! They put the cathodes between layers of ASA 3000 film for 12 days. "Bring your Geiger counter and lead shield with you to California." The beauty of it is I don't have to go to California. All I have to do is stay awake until the middle the night and call people in Japan and ask them if they would kindly test samples I mail them. They said they would. I hope they do. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 15:03:57 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA20864; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 14:57:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 14:57:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618204934_72240.1256_EHB147-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Scott did not replicate CETI X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: "Jean, I have made a fairly serious effort to replicate the Patterson cell. I ordered some glass beads coated with 1 micron thick layers of Ni, Pd, & Ni and tested them in a cell of my own design which closely approximated the cells that Patterson uses." I don't like to quibble, but I would not call Scott's experiment a "replication." After all, he used different material for the bead core. Patterson has made it clear that the bead core is critical, and he worked a long time to find the right material. I would call Scott's work a parallel effort or similar type of experiment. It is yet another thin film experiment, like the one described in Miley's ICCF4 paper. Scott's experiment may be valuable in its own right. I thought it was valuable enough to contribute money to defray his expenses. But it is not a replication as such because the materials are quite different, and I do not think we can draw any conclusions about CETI's results just because Scott has not seen excess heat. That would not be fair to Jim Patterson or to Scott. I suppose it is possible that any bead core will do. But that is not what Patterson said, and at this stage we do not know which parameters are critical and which do not matter, so we must assume they are all critical. Furthermore, Scott has only tested one batch of beads (I think) whereas Patterson went through many batches over several years before he got results, so any conclusions about the glass bead approach would be premature. All we know is that it does not work the first time. Few things in life do. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 16:07:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA03493; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 16:00:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 16:00:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618181453_416884324@emout18.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Puthoff@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: RE: answer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dacha statement re the human condition: Most eloquent and well-received, Hal Puthoff From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 16:10:30 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA03556; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 16:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 16:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618182411_416890100@emout14.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Puthoff@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: nuclear battery X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Robert, I would like a copy. Hal Puthoff, Ph.D. EarthTech Intern'l, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane W., #300 Austin, TX 78759-5329 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 16:11:12 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA03696; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 16:01:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 16:01:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960618183058_416895167@emout18.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Puthoff@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: "Science" posts X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Chris, I love your "speculative drivel." Let's hear more of it! Hal Puthoff From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 17:49:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA21774; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 17:45:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 17:45:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190008.TAA26641@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Scott did not replicate CETI X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 14:57 6/18/96 -0700, Jed wrote: >I don't like to quibble, but I would not call Scott's experiment a >"replication." After all, he used different material for the bead core. Jed's right, of course. All I've done is ticked off one more experiment on the infinitely long list of experiments that DON'T work... Regarding Patterson's claim that the core is critical....didn't the most recent patent open up the possibility of other core materials...or not? Anybody remember? Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 17:50:24 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA22084; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 17:48:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 17:48:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190014.TAA27064@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: any mass spec'ers on Vortex? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jed, it sounds like you're planning to send Champion's samples to Japan, right? That will take some time. Does anyone here in the US have ready access to a mass spec with sufficient performance to measure isotopic ratios? Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 19:51:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA10997; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190123.LAA30361@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Martin Edmund Sevior To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Bravo for Joe! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jed writes: > > To: Vortex > > Joe Champion writes: > > "The samples will be sent this week. I will enclose as much data as > possible as to the metals included." > > Marvelous! Wonderful! I'll try to call my Japanese contacts tonight and make > sure they can analyze the materials. They told me some months ago that they > could. I hope the equipment is still available. I believe it takes two weeks > to one month to run the analyses. In your data, please make a note of the most > dramatically altered isotopic ratios, if that is not obvious from the raw > data. > > It is refreshing to see such a cooperative attitude, and such a fast response. > > > "After this test, you can start an analysis on the raw material to see > if you can detect anything." > > Well . . . why not send me some of the raw material too? Please be sure label > everything and wrap it in plastic. I will forward it unopened, so I don't > contaminate the samples. It might be a good idea to wrap two or three separate > small pieces because I have three labs in mind but I am not sure which is > available, so I will contact all three and maybe they will all agree. We could > ask them to send the same sample from one lab to the next, but that would take > months. > > I look forward to getting the packages. I'll try to get the analysis done as > soon as possible. I will publish all findings here and in Infinite Energy. > Unfortunately if isotopic anomalies are seen in SMALL samples this will not be taken as incontrovertable evidence of transmutations. It is possible to buy isotopically altered samples of materials from agencies like Oak Ridge National Lab. In my incarnation as a Nuclear Physicist I did this many times. Ask for a kilogram of something Jed. Since Joe has 1 ton reactors this should be no problem. The order of magnitude of cost for say, isotopically enriched copper, is about $2000 per gram. Martin Sevior From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 19:52:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA11098; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:49:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:49:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190240.TAA14602@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Re: the below source of Brown's Gas generators Those who are interested in these generators should make certain that they have warrenties and the ability to return them if they are dis-satisfied with the quality. A friend of mine purchased a Chineese (mainland) made unit (nominally Brown's unit) and it was so shoddily made that it immediately blew a fuse because it was not wired correctly and there was not a single matching nut or bolt in the unit, and one of the hoses leaked. The unit had literally to be rebuilt, with new controls, fusing, and wiring. At 11:07 PM 6/15/96 -0700, you wrote: > >> >>Actually I have been on here quite a long time and my comment was concerning >>the H2 + O => 2H2O reaction. In all of my reading of this list as well as >>the Alternative Energy List and the Hydogen lists, I do not recall reading >>anything about Brown's gas phenomen. I obviously missed some mail >>concerning this generator. I am EXTREMELY interested in this as I have been >>looking at hydrogen for 14 years for just such an anomoly. Please email me >>the specifics of the generator. >> >For more information on Dr. Yull Brown's gas generators, currently made in >China, contact Dr. Andrew Michrowski at PACE (The Planetary Association for >Clean Energy) Tel: (613)236-6265, fax: (612)235-5876, address: 100 Bronson >Ave., Suite 1001, Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6G8 Canada. I talked to Dr. >Michrowski last week and he is now a distributor of Dr. Brown's gas >generators and has published information of Brown's gas and its unique >features over the past twenty years through his excellent new energy journal >the PACE Newsletter. Subscription: $35/yr USA four times a year. > >For an excellent overview of Brown's gas and how to build a simple unit, >read George Wiseman's "Brown's Gas, Book 1" ($10.00) available from the >International Tesla Society (ITS) bookstore (800)397-0137. > >My research into Brown's gas that I call "water gas" was published in the >November 1995 issue of the New Energy Newsletter (NEN), and available on >Keelynet BBS file as WATERGAS.ASC. > >Also both the ITS and NEN have excellent publications in the field of new >energy technology. > > > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 19:57:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA11191; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:49:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:49:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190240.TAA14614@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 05:44 PM 6/15/96 -0700, you wrote: > >I think great care, caution, and planning should be used when it comes to >safety around H2/O2 mixtures. Murphy was a genius. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > yes, agreed, I was not trying to minimize the danger issue, just trying to get people out of the popular mis-impressions which float around, which is often betrayed in the vocubulary which is used. as far as the exploding beaker goes, the overnight storage probably allowed the ratio of hydro/oxy to drift out of stocio ratio by more than 5%, hence it become explosive as Brown as reported. when I experimented with the generators, I ran it for about 20 minutes, allowing the gases to escape (working at the swing up open door of a garage. This assured purging of all other gases and ratio imbalances. I used distilled water, and let it stand for a day after filling the tanks, to let all mixture of gases escape. Then I prayed and lit the torch. (The first time, it took me 30 minutes to learn how to get the damn thing adjusted to maintain the flame). The best pressure to use is right around 35-40 lbs/sq. inch, greater pressure is not necessary because the flow will be too fast unless the valve is just barely cracked. Too much flow will blow your igniter right out (which also blew my mind as I was pre-conditioned to think of it igniting like gasoline would). So high pressures are not at all necessary. The key is a fast electrolysis to minimize the storage and tankage. If the pressure drops below about 25 you can get into a problem with flashbacks, and even the commercial arresters are not all that good with the hydro/oxy mix. It will flashback even through those. The best failsafe I found was a tube of water, forcing the gases to bubble through a tube of water, but that made for very wet gas (which burned as a splayed orange flame as opposed to a long thin blue pencil flame. Eventually I learned that I didn't mind the occassionnal pop flashback into the generator chamber if I turned off the unit too slowly. The successful key was very fast torch valve turn-off. the only way to approach any chemistry involving volatile and/or toxic materials is with extreme paranoia. the operant insight is: murphy are us and we are a bunch of clumsy bozos to boot. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 19:54:13 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA11278; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:50:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:50:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190240.TAA14617@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI cells are probabilistic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 05:54 PM 6/15/96 -0700, you wrote: >By the way Scott, does your budget strech far enough to get you to ICCF6? >You could present a paper on your erastz beads work with your Calorimeter. >Maybe you'd get a response from CETI and they'd let you try a real cell. > >Martin Sevior > > very good ploy ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 19:55:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA11399; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:51:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:51:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190240.TAA14620@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Joe Champion's isotopic anomalies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 09:21 AM 6/18/96 -0700, you wrote: >Jed Rothwell wrote: >>I can have samples tested at the same laboratories that confirmed Mizuno's >>isotopic shifts. These are normally expensive tests, but I think I can have >>them done at no charge. If the shifts are large enough, they will convince >>many people that the claims are true. In a sense, these shifts are more >>convincing than excess heat or short-lived radioisotopes, because they do not >>vanish. You can confirm them five years later, or thousands of years later. If >>there is any gold lying around in a museum somewhere that was supposedly >>created by an alchemist, it would be interesting to examine the contaminants. >>Gold itself has only one isotope. >> actually, Champion is talking about other metals in the platinum series ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 21:01:35 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA21694; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 20:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 20:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190246.TAA15108@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: We are here because the type of discussion below is a waste of time. The minds here are hardly crybabies. We simply discern the intelligence of more productive pursuits. End of discussion At 11:14 AM 6/18/96 -0700, you wrote: >>My tone is certainly appropriate. When you persist in your intent to >>disparage and detract from anyone and everyone who does not do things >>your way you knowingly are attemting to do them harm. This argument >>has gone far enough it and it makes this forum useless to me. It's >>the fate of every public forum when arm chair hecklers step to the >>front. >> >>Russ George > >It is an unfortunate truth that we do not live in a rational world. >Individuals who make wildly irrational statements and then respond to >polite criticism with seething hostility are the norm. There is no power of >persuasion or force of logic that can move them from their positions, and >their presence in a group devoted to the discussion of ideas is >inappropriate. They can be dealt with in only two ways: (1) by removal from >the list of participants (in moderated groups), and (2) by having their >nonsensical statements publicly and relentlessly dissected, until they are >finally driven from the field in humiliation (in unmoderated groups). > >I, frankly, prefer the unmoderated type of group, provided only that there >are people in the group who have something worthwhile to say. >Unfortunately, those who had worthwhile content to discuss permitted >themselves to be driven from spf into this group by the flamers, and, >reluctantly, I followed you here. Result: here we have to deal with a >"moderator" (i.e., a censor) who permits defensive and hostile responses to >criticism, apparently on the ground that they contain no overt insults, and >yet maintains an intent to delete from the group anyone who responds to >them in the manner which they deserve. > >What manner is that? Simple: it would be appropriate to respond to Russ >George's wildly irrational statements by bluntly labeling them as *horse >manure* and then explaining, in detail, precisely why. It is necessary to >employ some sort of label such as that as a preface to a reasoned response, >because it is inappropriate to deal politely with a person who behaves the >way Russ George has behaved. If you respond politely to him by ignoring his >insults, he wins. (It looks as if you are intimidated.) But does one dare >to respond appropriately? Or will the censor strike? Such is the dilemma of >the "moderated" group. The solution, in my view, is straightforward: post >your comments on unmoderated groups, let everyone--flamers included--have >their say, and respond to each message in the manner that is appropriate to >its content. > >The above, of course, is a lecture that has no purpose. Most of you are >crybabies. You need an information daddy to protect you from flamers >because you haven't the guts to deal with them yourselves. That, after all, >is why you are here, isn't it? > >--Mitchell Jones > > > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 21:01:34 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA21777; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 20:54:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 20:54:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960619033526_72240.1256_EHB194-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Mass spec ready to roll in Japan X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: "Jed, it sounds like you're planning to send Champion's samples to Japan, right? That will take some time." Yeah. I just talked to them. They are ready to roll. It shouldn't take long. A couple weeks, maybe a month. If they start to find anomalies with one instrument they will bring out the other two. Mailing is no problem. Letters get to Osaka faster than New York or Washington. So, the next step is for Joe to pop those samples in the mail to me. I may have two other places that can also do it. So please send at least 3 pieces. I imagine they can be very small. Should I ask about the minimum size? I would prefer several small pieces rather than one big one because I do not want to chop up the sample. I might contaminate it. I would like to keep the identity of the lab confidential for a few weeks in a kind of double-blind experiment. This is a . . . uh, controversial experiment, to say the least, and I don't want to prejudice the results. I explained the situation to them. It is a small electronic world so let us play this quietly and smoothly, stand aside, and await results. Don't plaster it all over Internet that I am arranging a test of alchemy. Martin Sevior writes: "Unfortunately if isotopic anomalies are seen in SMALL samples this will not be taken as incontrovertable evidence of transmutations. It is possible to buy isotopically altered samples of materials from agencies like Oak Ridge National Lab." What materials? Any element, or certain selected elements only? Is there one we can be sure they do not sell, beside plutonium? Does anyone happen to have a contact at Oak Ridge who would know what they offer? "Ask for a kilogram of something Jed. Since Joe has 1 ton reactors this should be no problem. The amounts are up to Joe, I suppose. If he wants to convince everyone perhaps he should heed your advice. "The order of magnitude of cost for say, isotopically enriched copper, is about $2000 per gram." Do you recall what percent enriched the copper is, and which isotope? - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 22:41:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA08334; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 22:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 22:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190508.WAA10331@mom.hooked.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Russ George" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: any mass spec'ers on Vortex? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Isotope ratio analysis is a snap. Any decent surface analysis lab with a dynamic or TOF SIMS instrument can do the job in a morning for $500. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 22:41:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA08483; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 22:37:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 22:37:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: answer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > Lets see, spend $60-$80 billion to build a new nuke > missile shield around the US, but no money for education > and new energy research. Sounds like election year rhetoric. :-) Obese amounts of money have been are are still being spent on "education" in the US. It is well known, however, that there is no apparent correlation between these obese expenditures and educational output. In fact, as spending has skyrocketed, educational output has declined. As for "greed", I not sure how spending on A instead of B changes the amount of "greed." The NEA is the teachers' union in the US and it is incredibly rich and powerful. Teachers' average salaries are higher than autoworkers, and autoworkers were the most highly paid labor in the US. No money for education? -- - 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@eskimo.com Tue Jun 18 23:45:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA18665; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 23:42:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 23:42:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190544.PAA32398@liszt.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Martin Edmund Sevior To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Mass spec ready to roll in Japan X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jed wrote: > > What materials? Any element, or certain selected elements only? Is there one > we can be sure they do not sell, beside plutonium? Does anyone happen to have > a contact at Oak Ridge who would know what they offer? > Generally these agencies sell isotopically "pure" materials. For example, natural nickel is 58.3% 58, 26.1% 60, 4.6% 62 and .9% 64. I once did a Nuclear Physics experiment with a target of Ni that was 99% Nickel -64. It cost (in 1982) $600 for 50 milligrams. Certainly isotopically enriched platinum is available. I don't know the cost but I'm sure it's more than $1000 per gram, depending on what isotope is wanted. Almost anything is available. I've personal knowledge of seperated isotopes for Platinum, Copper, Nickel, Calcium, Titianium, Potassium, Silicon and they're just ones that I've personally seen. Now as you may guess, for an element to be isotopically enriched LOTS of the element must be processed and lots is left over after the processing. This spent material will of course be isotopically anomalus. I don't know what happens to this "spent" material or at what price it would be sold. One could worry that Joe has a stock of such material... The only way to counter such arguments would be to do extensive police work to identify the end users of the spent material or to show such a large amount of anomalus material that this sort of thing would not be possible. I think a kilogram of Platinium would do it. 2 kilos would be better. A kilo a week would convince me for sure. Want to be Joe's agent Jed? Take a slice of the profit to demonstrate each shipment is isotopically anomalus? Martin Sevior From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 00:06:10 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA21901; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:03:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:03:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190650.XAA20487@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Mass spec ready to roll in Japan X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 08:54 PM 6/18/96 -0700, you wrote: >To: Vortex > > > "Ask for a kilogram of something Jed. Since Joe has 1 ton reactors this > should be no problem. > >The amounts are up to Joe, I suppose. If he wants to convince everyone >perhaps he should heed your advice. > > The material is being shipped from two different locations tomorrow (6/19/96) via next day delivery. I have split the material into two groupings. One for Jed, the other for a US facility which will report back within a week. For those who consider the fact that I may have bought the material in an attempt to deceive this group, allow me to state that the August Party is still on. That is to say, I am not shiping kilograms of material tomorrow just to appease suspension. This is only a warmup for things to come. As far as the radioactivity of the material, we have not been able to observe anything in excess of twice background and even those readings are questionable. Members of this forum have signed up to visit the facility under the rules of confidentiality. If you want to hear about kilograms of material, wait for the independent facility observation. FYI -- the tests will demonstrate isotopic anomalies in several metals of the platinum group and select base metals. I am not concerned about the results, for numerous MS studies have been completed on my work. As of this posting, three slots remain open for August. _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 00:06:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA21973; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:04:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:04:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Joe Champion's isotopic anomalies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 18 Jun 1996, Jed Rothwell wrote: [...] > Gold itself has only one isotope. I just checked this, and it's correct; the other three possible isotopes have a natural abundance of zero, being unstable. The reason I checked is that Robert Heinlein, in "Door into Summer" has his hero come back from the future with a big lump of gold, and the special thing about it - which somebody discovers - is that it's isotopically pure. This means Heinlein didn't do his homework and bother to check on this. A pity. I still like that novel though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 00:08:23 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA22075; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:04:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:04:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606190702.AAA20272@switzerland.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: 6/18/96, Michael Mandeville wrote: >Re: the below source of Brown's Gas generators > > >Those who are interested in these generators should make certain that they >have warrenties and the ability to return them if they are dis-satisfied >with the quality. A friend of mine purchased a Chineese (mainland) made >unit (nominally Brown's unit) and it was so shoddily made that it >immediately blew a fuse because it was not wired correctly and there was not >a single matching nut or bolt in the unit, and one of the hoses leaked. The >unit had literally to be rebuilt, with new controls, fusing, and wiring. > There are several units of the BG 1000 Brown's Gas (BG) Generators in California priced at $5,500 still available while supplies last. My interest in BG was to fuel a car engine for ou stand alone operation. There were reports in Australia back in the early '80's that Prof. Brown drove a converted Ford auto on his gas for over a week on water and that his said could have fueled the car for one year on one gallon of water. One theory of how this could be accomplished is that the series electrolysis unit acts like an orgone accumulator that once started, primed by input dc pulsed current, continues to generate the stoichiometric gases of mon-atomic H & O without depleting the water or without any additional current needed. In my watergas research, I noticed that the electrolysis process continued for several minutes in a declining generation of gas production even though the current was shut off. I tried several types of electrolyte and water combinations to enhance this event without success. Another approach was written in the last chapter of the later edition of Joseph Cater's book "Awesome Lifeforce" using only air and a super orgone accumulator box. Air enters the box at one end and gets energized inside the box and then exits the other side of the box thru a pipe to the carburator to fuel the engine. Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 02:31:44 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA08747; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 01:48:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 01:48:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31c78ea6.27017697@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: nuclear battery X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:31:41 -0700 (PDT), dacha@shentel.net wrote: >This is a snippet of the nuclear battery paper. It is in >MS Word. Just drop me a note if you would like a copy or I >will have it on my webpage in about a week. Could you post the address of your Web page? Thanks, Robin From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 07:05:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA23371; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 06:57:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 06:57:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1996Jun19.090623.1255.979841@mspost.ic.gc.ca> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: steckly.gary@ic.gc.ca (Steckly, Gary: DGRB) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Joe Champion's isotopic anomalies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael Mandeville writes: > actually, Champion is talking about other metals in the platinum series That is correct. I believe somewhere on Joe's web site he states: >"How do we know (or prove) that the metals are produced from >such a process?" >This is simple. Platinum, as found in nature, has six isotopes. >The platinum produced by the process I developed only has >three, which are: 194, 195 and 196. Mass >spectroscopy analysis quickly verifies my claims of synthesized >origin. " Back in February, Mr. Champion had indicated he could send me a 50 gram sample for analysis, and I had 2 (possibly 3) different labs willing to test it. Well either the sample was lost in the mail or intercepted by those mysterious "men in black" that we keep hearing about (no...not the Amish) but I never received the sample. I still get the occasional email from my friends at the lab wondering what happened to my alchemically manufactured platinum ;-) I wish you better luck Jed. regards Gary _ From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 09:10:33 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA15136; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 08:54:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 08:54:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: answer X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/18/96 22:41 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: answer If my brother, who is an industrial Chemist for Motorola now, had continued as a high school teacher (left in '82) he would now be earning $15K a year more, and have his summers off. You can judge the frustration of teaching in the public schools by the fact that my brother has NO REGRETS on having left teaching. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 09:14:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA15273; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 08:55:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 08:55:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: nuclear battery X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >This is a snippet of the nuclear battery paper. It is in >MS Word. Just drop me a note if you would like a copy.... > > THE RESEARCH DIRECTION BASIS ON INTERACTION OF THE >PLASMA FLUX DENSE WITH A CONDENSED MATTER SURFACE FOR >GENERATING NUCLEAR REACTION >1. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE AND EQUIPMENT Please e-mail me a copy of this paper. Thank you. 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@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 12:26:42 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA20401; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:04:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:04:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960619172326_72240.1256_EHB83-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Joe Champion's isotopic anomalies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Gary Steckly reports: "Back in February, Mr. Champion had indicated he could send me a 50 gram sample for analysis, and I had 2 (possibly 3) different labs willing to test it. Well either the sample was lost in the mail or intercepted by those mysterious 'men in black' . . ." Hmmm . . . Perhaps there was some sort of misunderstanding? Well, I shall report here in a week or two if the package does not show up. Let us stay cool and give a Joe a few weeks to follow through and mail me something. "I wish you better luck Jed." No, that kind of luck would be fine with me. If the package never comes, and there is no word of explanation from Joe, I think every reader of this forum will understand what is going on, and I will have done my job. My purpose is learn the truth, not to support or attack anyone's claims. Also, by the way, I am definitely NOT interested Martin Sevior's tongue-in-cheek proposal that I act as Joe's agent. No way Jose! - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 12:14:45 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA20492; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:04:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:04:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960619172353_72240.1256_EHB83-3@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: History of Fusion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex John Shadegg asks for "a way to get the history fusion research to date." I recommend you start with Gene Mallove's book "Fire from Ice" (Wiley, 1991), and then read some of the general reviews of the field by Edmund Storms, including: E. Storms, "Cold Fusion Heats Up," Technology Review, May-June 1994 issue (MIT), pages 20-29 E. Storms, "Critical Review of the 'Cold Fusion' Effect," Journal of Scientific Exploration, 1996. Contact me for pre-prints. For more information, see my home page: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JedRothwell This has links to various other home pages with information on cold fusion. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 12:25:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA20604; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:05:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:05:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606191830.AA31691@echo.i-link.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (21st Century Logic) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >Mitchell Jones writes: > >"The above, of course, is a lecture that has no purpose. Most of you are >crybabies. You need an information daddy to protect you from flamers >because you haven't the guts to deal with them yourselves. That, after all, is >why you are here, isn't it?" > >I would say that to attack the entire group ***{You exaggerate, Chris. I said "most of you," not "all of you." --Mitchell Jones}*** in this way shows at least a lack of >sense of humour. Actually, it shows a great number of other things too. ***{I am sure it does, but lack of a sense of humor isn't one of them. In fact, I have never known anyone who literally "lacked a sense of humor," myself included, and I wonder whether such a condition is even possible in a structurally intact and functioning human brain. I will say this, though: I have no idea what there is about the topic that I addressed in my post which you think is amusing. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 12:14:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA20760; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:06:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:06:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606191830.AA31693@echo.i-link.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (21st Century Logic) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >We are here because the type of discussion below is a waste of time. The >minds here are hardly crybabies. We simply discern the intelligence of more >productive pursuits. End of discussion. ***{In my view, it is not a "waste of time" for those who have the capacity to reason to hold their ground and participate in internet newsgroups, in spite of the desires of hate-filled conformists to drive them out. The appropriate way to deal with flames is with *reason*, not with flight into hiding places such as this group, where an information daddy has been appointed to protect the little kiddies who are afraid to protect themselves. If such a statement seems unkind I am sorry, but I look upon this type of flight behavior with the same disdain that blacks reserve for members of their race who sit at the back of the bus. You guys are far better, and far brighter, than the flamers who drove you out of sci.physics.fusion. You have a better right to be there than they do. Why should you let them drive you out, when you can use reason to drive *them* out? I'll grant that responding to flames can be unpleasant, and that it is difficult. It is a high art form that must be learned through practice. But if you think it is a "waste of time" to have pride in what you are and, as a consequence, to stand up for your rights, then I strongly disagree. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >At 11:14 AM 6/18/96 -0700, you wrote: >>>My tone is certainly appropriate. When you persist in your intent to >>>disparage and detract from anyone and everyone who does not do things >>>your way you knowingly are attemting to do them harm. This argument >>>has gone far enough it and it makes this forum useless to me. It's >>>the fate of every public forum when arm chair hecklers step to the >>>front. >>> >>>Russ George >> >>It is an unfortunate truth that we do not live in a rational world. >>Individuals who make wildly irrational statements and then respond to >>polite criticism with seething hostility are the norm. There is no power of >>persuasion or force of logic that can move them from their positions, and >>their presence in a group devoted to the discussion of ideas is >>inappropriate. They can be dealt with in only two ways: (1) by removal from >>the list of participants (in moderated groups), and (2) by having their >>nonsensical statements publicly and relentlessly dissected, until they are >>finally driven from the field in humiliation (in unmoderated groups). >> >>I, frankly, prefer the unmoderated type of group, provided only that there >>are people in the group who have something worthwhile to say. >>Unfortunately, those who had worthwhile content to discuss permitted >>themselves to be driven from spf into this group by the flamers, and, >>reluctantly, I followed you here. Result: here we have to deal with a >>"moderator" (i.e., a censor) who permits defensive and hostile responses to >>criticism, apparently on the ground that they contain no overt insults, and >>yet maintains an intent to delete from the group anyone who responds to >>them in the manner which they deserve. >> >>What manner is that? Simple: it would be appropriate to respond to Russ >>George's wildly irrational statements by bluntly labeling them as *horse >>manure* and then explaining, in detail, precisely why. It is necessary to >>employ some sort of label such as that as a preface to a reasoned response, >>because it is inappropriate to deal politely with a person who behaves the >>way Russ George has behaved. If you respond politely to him by ignoring his >>insults, he wins. (It looks as if you are intimidated.) But does one dare >>to respond appropriately? Or will the censor strike? Such is the dilemma of >>the "moderated" group. The solution, in my view, is straightforward: post >>your comments on unmoderated groups, let everyone--flamers included--have >>their say, and respond to each message in the manner that is appropriate to >>its content. >> >>The above, of course, is a lecture that has no purpose. Most of you are >>crybabies. You need an information daddy to protect you from flamers >>because you haven't the guts to deal with them yourselves. That, after all, >>is why you are here, isn't it? >> >>--Mitchell Jones >> >> >> >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm@aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 14:42:20 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA19064; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 14:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 14:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Adams motor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: A good description of the Robert Adams motor is at: http://www.iinet.net.au/~steveb/adams/m1.html There appears to be one common aspect to this motor and thoes of Muller, Kwai, Tahaishti, and Newman. That is a permanent magnet armature and an electromagnetic stator. This design is a remarkable source of consistancy between the various inventors. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Wed Jun 19 16:42:46 1996 Received: from emout17.mail.aol.com (emout17.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.43]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA11651 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:42:42 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by emout17.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA13571 for billb@eskimo.com; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 19:42:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 19:42:23 -0400 Message-ID: <960619194222_220905535@emout17.mail.aol.com> To: billb@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: muller Status: RO X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: muller Date: 96-06-19 19:39:46 EDT From: FZNIDARSIC To: Puthoff I called Bill Muller. I understand you are going up to see him. Good luck. If the thing works perhaps we can work together to bring it to the market. I tried to aquire an understanding of his machine over the phone. I asked, "Does the machine run itself or does windage slow it down in time" He told me something to the effect that it was just a teeter tooter with odd an even poles. He went on to say that it was a motor and and a generator. My question was never answered. I commented that all DC motors are generators. If the back EMF is higher than the line voltage it is a generator and if the back EMF lower than the line voltage it is a motor. He said his machine had no back EMF and that the back EMF was in the capacitors. He commented that all capacitors are over unity. I asked how much power was his machine producing and how was it dissipated. He said 450 HP. Is asked where does the 450 HP go, into a break or fluid clutch?. He said, "Into the circuit" In short I couldn't even determine what his claims were. He said we could have his technology for free and asked if I wanted to go fishing. I told him I didn't want his technology for free but I wanted it at a low enough cost so that I could make money for the both of us. He said he was old and didn't need the money but his daughter did. Good luck on you visit. Don't get you hopes up. Take a fishing pole. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 17:34:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA19421; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:28:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:28:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: John Schnurer To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Humor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Sense of: skeleton walks into the deli and asks; " Can you please give me a tall glass of milk .... and a mop?" one wall to the other: meet you at the corner :) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 17:38:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA19498; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:29:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:29:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael Randall wrote: [snip] > > >There are several units of the BG 1000 Brown's Gas (BG) Generators in >California priced at $5,500 still available while supplies last. > >My interest in BG was to fuel a car engine for ou stand alone operation. >There were reports in Australia back in the early '80's that Prof. Brown >drove a converted Ford auto on his gas for over a week on water and that his >said could have fueled the car for one year on one gallon of water. One >theory of how this could be accomplished is that the series electrolysis >unit acts like an orgone accumulator that once started, primed by input dc >pulsed current, continues to generate the stoichiometric gases of mon-atomic >H & O without depleting the water or without any additional current needed. > >In my watergas research, I noticed that the electrolysis process continued >for several minutes in a declining generation of gas production even though >the current was shut off. I tried several types of electrolyte and water >combinations to enhance this event without success. > [snip] > >Michael Randall This "heat after death" type phenomenon you describe is very strange and maybe warrants investigation. Do you still have the generator that did this? I have one suggestion for a source of such an apparent "heat after death" effect. It could be that there was so much electrolysis current that the plates were heated above boiling point. The electrolyte would be at boiling point. The evolved gas during the "heat after death" time would then be entirely steam. If this is the case, much of the gas in normal operation would be steam. The water vapor would be broken down into H and O and maybe H+ an O+ in the arc though, and would thus provide an extremely efficient heat transfer mechanism to focus the energy of the arc on a negative weld spot (or on a weld spot in the negative cycle if A/C welding current is used). In effect it would give the arc a higher specific heat in that each ion would carry both it's kinetic energy plus it's ionization potential energy directly to the weld surface. The steam would also have the very beneficial effect of cleaning the weld surface and keeping it clean. There would be no carbon contamination at all. This sounds like a pretty neat gadget. However, if the gas evolved after the current is shut off contains much H2 and there are no batteries or capacitors in the device, you have a really worthwhile anomaly to study. It seems especially worthwhile to measure the electrolysis plate and electolyte temperatures and to anaylze the "post current" evolved gas. I suppose the observed gas could be deadsorbing H2 but you would only see that coming from one plate and the diffusion coefficient would have to be astronomical! Michael, could you describe for us the device, especially the circuitry and electrolysis plates of the device, on which you observed this post current gas generation? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 17:34:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA19554; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:29:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:29:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606192302.QAA31728@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Adams motor X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 02:38 PM 6/19/96 -0700, you wrote: >A good description of the Robert Adams motor is at: > >http://www.iinet.net.au/~steveb/adams/m1.html > >There appears to be one common aspect to this motor and thoes of Muller, >Kwai, Tahaishti, and Newman. That is a permanent magnet armature and an >electromagnetic stator. This design is a remarkable source of consistancy >between the various inventors. > >Lawrence E. Wharton >NASA/GSFC code 913 >Greenbelt MD 20771 >(301) 286-3486 > > > One big difference is that only Muller has developed his own eddy-current free amorphous metals to construct the device out of. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 17:46:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA19695; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:30:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:30:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: St.Pete Science conference :Report from Volodya X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Please excuse the english in this report. It better that most of my own, but still... It was first day of the conference today. Most of the lectures are of theoretical nature. However, I expect some interesting lectures presented by Siberian scientists. The conference is arranged in such a way that the people can establish closer connections between each others. One Siberian physicist is going to present interpretation of Tesla famous experiments. He was working for military industry for more than forty years and now he is happy to speak freely all he wants. Prof. Zelinski who developed an idea of aether wind vertical to the Earth is here too. The people accepted his lecture with some scepticism. I think his main mistake is to create the theory of whole universe. It isn't possible to explain all the fact only by the aether wind. Yes, I will tell you about the conference. I would be happy to describe the conference for your magazine so if my messages will be interesting for you and your friends, please, edit and send these messages to them. As to me, I am at the conference due to financial support of Moscow firm where I am working now. The firm is called "Sirius" (transcription of one bright star on the sky) The conference has been opened by short speech of Prof. Smirnov (I hope you remember him), of official from Meria (that person is former theoreticians in physics) and of Prof. Zelinski from Germany. Then one person from Siberia told that he has been working for more forty years military industry so couldn't meet with any western person and now he is very happy to say to all people in the conference hall what he wants to say. I would like to say that his lecture is about Tesla experiments and is expected to be very interesting. Finally, one person from Russian Cosmic Agency held short speech in which he told how academic (the member of Academy of Science of Soviet Union; in opposite to the western world, Academy of Science in SU was official organization and always had great financial support from government) Logunov couldn't publish his paper with disproving of general Einstein theory. He was academic, deputy editor of the scientific journal where he was going to publish the paper, and moreover, was a member of Central Comettee of Communist Party and in spite such his power he couldn't push the paper into printing. The only cause was the paper is in extreme contradiction to Einstein theory. The paper was at edition of the journal without moving for two years. During that time one letter from his colleagues came into Central Comettee. It has been written in the letter that academic Logunov tempts the young men into dirty sexual actions etc. Fortunately, Logunov was a head of subcommittee for work with youth so the letter came into his hands and he lost the letter away from Party democratic. So the person from RCA said he hopes the times change. The conference is arranged in such a way that because of lack of time (more than 100 lectures during five days) the people establish a connection with the lecturer (the person who makes the lecture) and after they can discuss the problems they are interested in. So most of information I obtain while such discussions. At first day Prof. Zelinski told about his theory of 'ether wind'. He states that the experiments of Michelson and Morley yielded the negative result because the ether moves vertically to the surface of the earth (the interferometer of M-M has been placed horizontally). However, at the same time, he states that the magnetic field of the Earth is caused by rotation of the Earth around its axis, and therefore, the motion through the ether. To my point of view, it follows from Zelinski's state that some point of the Earth surface moves transversally to the flow of the ether so if we had the interferometer of very high accuracy we could detect the motion of the point of the Earth through the ether flow. I hope to ask Prof. Zelinski about it tomorrow or later. I would like to say that the discussion of Zelinski's lecture was very active. Zelinski noted that mathematical support of his theory is at embryonic stage, however, his idea is attractive to many people. Today's lectures are concerned of general theories (global concepts etc.). Because it is too difficult to check out such theories I omit their descriptions. However, one lecture of Prof. Veinik from Belarus was very interesting. He told about one simple experiment in which one can detect of changing of the flow (current) of the time. I am trying to show the scheme of the experiment: -xxxxx- ______ tube |target with Laser ------beam---______-----------|photo- |-detector -xxxxx- Here, -xxxxx- is a hydrophobic motor with frequency 25,000 r/min; the Ne-laser beam pass on a target with detector through the iron tube installed to avoid heat and other influence from the hyromotors. The diameter of the tube is about 18 mm. Two hyromotors are placed near the tube (the distance is about 25 mm). Firstly, the hyromotors are at rest. The laser beam is focused at the centre of the target (the beam is of Gaussian form). Then the motors begin to turn. Prof. Veinik states the hyromotors are the temporary (time changing) generators so the current of the time changes near the rotating bodies. Anyway, one can detect displacement of the beam after the data of the photo detector. The beam deviates from the axis which it passes along. He says it is very simple experiment. Of course, he performed that one in air atmosphere but not in vacuum. He says the latter is impossible under current conditions (it is difficult to find even a nail in Belarus Academy of Science now). At least, one can try to repeat it. If some details are unclear I can ask Prof. Veinik to clarify. So I am waiting for the questions. I continue to tell you about the conference. The subject of this conference day was "New Energetics. The practical results". However, to my point of view, only few practical results have been shown. The famous Filimonenko doesn't come at the conference. He is the old man and thinks his invention could be stolen. I heard these words from the organizers of the conference. I don't want to tell about theoretical works. Most of them, unfortunately, are too far from reality. One person tried to disprove even Newton. Although such lectures have been liked to one american man. He was happy that so many works on the foundations of the science are combined here. Such a thing is impossible in the US, he said and added he presents a group of american engineers. Here, I should explain where my certain scepticism arises from. At russian conferences we used to say a truth, at least, what we think, directly to face of lecturer. It is absolutely different to the western style where you can say what you want about the presented paper only after and in private discussion. I am explained if at the western conference you said the presented paper is a whole mistake the lecturer could lose his job. We have never feared to lose a job because of a public criticism. So when Prof. Zielinski stated that Michelson-Morley experiment yielded negative result because the interferometer had been placed not in right direction and then I described to him a situation which the aether flow can be detected in and he confirmed my claim I begin to have a some doubt in his theory. However, he says his theory (background of his ideas) should still be developed. One person showed a movie about russian UFO. Those UFO are made in Saratov city. They look like not real UFO but rather like a soldier cap. Green and dirty color. I think it is because they are made by military (green and dirty is their lovely color). Indeed, for the first time the UFO have been made by "ENERGIA". Now they are produced at another plant. Because the designers don't know the principles of operation of real UFO they decided to follow the principle of similarity. Let's repeat what we know. What we know? The form of the UFO. It will be a starting point. Now russian UFO flies but not so good, like the US Stealths. We were said that except the form another improving is the high frequency EM radiators which should destroy the air vortexes before the flying UFO created by turbulence. We saw too the movie about the . Because, however, tomorrow should be a day of 'levitation and antigravity' any explaining is postponed until the next day. An interesting lecture has been made by the editor of the magazine "The Journal of Russian Physical Think". He told about nonequilibrium heat systems: under certain conditions the heat could be transfer from a cool object to the warm one. For example, sometimes the dielectric layer of the charged condencer must radiate a heat, cooling itself, under applied alternating EM field. The same is true for the ferrite core of the coil. He cited the works of russian physicists lived in 19th centure. The physicist Lochenov had found that the dissociation of the water into oxigen and hydrogen in closed volume is independent of the pressure of the gases over the water surface. So it is possible to obtain the gases originally with high pressure. Another point. Prof. Avenarius in 1863 had shown that the electromotive force between object of different metal isn't a function of the difference of the object's temperatures but a difference of the functions of each temperature. It can be expressed as: EMF = f(T1-T2) : is wrong; EMF = f(T1) - f(T2) ; is correct; So for the systems of binary alloys, to push the system at the first time in such a way that the latter is involved into vibration process, we can get the energy from outside. Something like heat pump. The above state has been immediately disproved by the next lecturer, Prof. Rosenblum from St.Pete Polytechnical Institute. He showed how to describe the complex system involved into 'vibration' motion in frame of convenient thermodynamics. For example, there are the layers of the water of different temperature in the sea, besides there is no the heat exchange between the nearest layers. After the lecture I asked Rosenblum to give an estimate of Griggs machine. It was nice to me that he didn't say 'it is absurd!'. He tried to explain. He said the water inside the machine can separate onto some layers, besides each layer behaves like rigid body. He added it is important a prparation of the water. It is known fact that the water that circulated in the working loop of the heat engine becomes the 'dead' water. One must change the water! Moreover, he said most of the parameters in the thermodynamics handbooks are incorrect because they are overaged values. In reality, the thermo- dynamical dependences have singularities. Maybe the most interesting lecture had been made by one siberian physicist. He told about Tesla experiments. He said he repeated the famous Tesla experiment on transmission of the energy without the wires. He used 60 kHz frequency and transmited from one metal ball handled on 60 meters high 'rod' to the second ball handled as the first one and removed at 1 km the power 1 kWt. I will try to know more about the experiment tomorrow. That person claims the energy transfer is of longitudinal nature and the speed of the longitudinal EM waves is 1.16-1.20 c (the light velocity). He measured this magnitude. Finally, I would like to ask you a little help. I should make a lecture and need in perfect English text of the lecture. Below I give a text. Could you correct the mistakes? I know your English is perfect. "I would like to tell about one electrodynamical effect where we observe deviation from the convenient Einstein-Lorentz electrodynamics. It should be noted that the physical establishment knows that effect, however, refuses to accept that non-Lorentz forces cause the one. This effect is displaying in the experiments with the solenoid and the charged particle passes near the solenoid. It is close to well-known Aharonov-Bohm effect but differs from the latter. It is interesting that in the Aharonov-Bohm effect the vector potential of the solenoid can influence the electron even in the area where the magnetic field equals to zero. Despite this fact, the physicists claim all is correct with the Lorentz force because it is purely quantum effect and, therefore, there are no forces. However, now we are able to perform the similar experiments in the classical electrodynamics where there are no potentials but the forces only. Here, I should say that the experiment I propose is similar to that one of Marinov. Both he and I use Boyer's idea that the charged particle decelerates while approaches the solenoid and accelerates while moves away. However, there is an essential difference in our considerations: I try to arrange the experiment in such a way that there will be no any possibility to explain the results of the expriment if we don't accept that non-Lorentz forces are displaying here. Marinov doesn't make such an analysis. Now the description of the experiment..." to be continued.... ------------------------------------- Name: robert E-mail: robert@visor.com Date: 6/19/96 Time: 7:26:21 PM http://www.visor.com/info/ ------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- Name: dacha E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 6/19/96 Time: 7:37:27 PM No matter where you go, there you are. http://www.visor.com/info ------------------------------------- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 20:06:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA16671; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 20:01:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 20:01:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960620013230_100433.1541_BHG48-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Flames X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell comments: "In fact, I have never known anyone who literally "lacked a sense of humor," myself included, and I wonder whether such a condition is even possible in a structurally intact and functioning human brain." You should spend more time in Scotland. "I will say this, though: I have no idea what there is about the topic that I addressed in my post which you think is amusing." Quite. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 20:06:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA16915; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 20:02:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 20:02:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960619224518_221044647@emout16.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: overtime/fellow workers X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: If the new overtime policy stands and some are forced to work the outage schedule 6 days a week 10 hrs /day and sometimes sunday with no extra pay, I will take the lead and form a management union. I know right from wrong and will take the risk and go out of my way to do what I can to make things right. Thank you all for you words of support. I pray the Wagner Act protects me. Lead Engineer in more ways than just technical. Frank From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 19 22:18:10 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA07681; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 22:07:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 22:07:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606200315.UAA23512@mom.hooked.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Russ George" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Flames for the Brits X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: There are four kinds of people that live in Great Britian. First are the Scots, Who hold onto their children and anything else they can get their hands on. Next are the Welsh, Who pray on their knees and on their neighbors. Then there are the Irish, Who don't know what they want, but they'll fight anyone for it. and last are the English, Who consider themselves self made men, which relieves the Almighty of any responsibility! From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 15 21:26:05 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA11796; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 21:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 21:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31c2ab7c.48378491@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Meyer, water droplets X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:37:43 -0700 (PDT), Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >Wow! Thanks much Robin. I had no idea there were that many. It's going to >cost over $40 just for copies of the US patents. I don't know how that guy >has afforded all those patents unless he has produced *something* >worthwhile. Some look fairly old. I just renewed my one and only patent, >and the $500+ renewal fee was a significant expense to me - and the renewal >fees just keep getting bigger as the patent ages. [snip] IMO most of them are not worth the paper they are printed on. I think if you look at the microfilm first, you will find that only a few are worth getting copies of. 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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:54:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA05959; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:44:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:44:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960620084708_100433.1541_BHG76-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Flames for the Brits X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Russ writes: First are the Scots, Who hold onto their children and anything else they can get their hands on. Next are the Welsh, Who pray on their knees and on their neighbors. Then there are the Irish, Who don't know what they want, but they'll fight anyone for it. and last are the English, Who consider themselves self made men, which relieves the Almighty of any responsibility! Nice to see the place lightening up a little. However, it should be pointed out that the Almighty *is* English. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:49:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06015; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:44:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:44:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606200849.EAA19761@norway.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: 6/19/96, you wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >This "heat after death" type phenomenon you describe is very strange and >maybe warrants investigation.> There is no heat during or after death in this type of electrolysis device for generating Brown's Gas or the generic term water gas. Prof. Brown has been researching this technology for 25 years and still little is known of this stoichiometric mon-atomic properties of hydrogen and oxygen in both the production and uses of the gas. > Do you still have the generator that did this?> Yes and no. The larger unit, 1500 watts (15 amps and 110 volt ac), was destroyed by a ignition of gases in main unit (design was found to be the problem) . I still have the smaller units in pieces around collecting dust. >I have one suggestion for a source of such an apparent "heat after death" >effect. It could be that there was so much electrolysis current that the >plates were heated above boiling point. The electrolyte would be at boiling >point. The evolved gas during the "heat after death" time would then be >entirely steam.> The electrolyte and the plates were cool to the touch. This was interesting even with 1500 watts input for over 30 min. without heat. This was an endothermic reaction, so all of the electrical energy was absorbed in the hydrolysis process. >If this is the case, much of the gas in normal operation would be steam.> This wasn't the case >The water vapor would be broken down into H and O and maybe H+ an O+ in the >arc though, and would thus provide an extremely efficient heat transfer >mechanism to focus the energy of the arc on a negative weld spot (or on a >weld spot in the negative cycle if A/C welding current is used). I never got to ignite to gases for welding or other research at that stage. My progress ended at the generation of the water gas and learned of other electrolyzer designs that did work. Also, the electrical input current is pulsed dc via standard full wave bridge rectification of standard USA 60 hertz single phase wall electricity. It is believed that the dc pulse could be optimal at some frequency like 600 cps or 1200 cps, but at 120 cps it works so further research is needed here also. >In effect it would give the arc a higher specific heat in that each ion would carry >both it's kinetic energy plus it's ionization potential energy directly to >the weld surface. The steam would also have the very beneficial effect of >cleaning the weld surface and keeping it clean. There would be no carbon >contamination at all. This sounds like a pretty neat gadget. Yes it is a neat gadget. Prof. Brown demonstrated some of the flame properties from his unit as follows (ref 1.): 1. The Brown's Gas flame could subliminate tungsten which occurs at 5900C. Holes can be burned through refractory bricks, steel can be welded to brick. 2. The gas implodes from 1866.6 units to 1 unit of liquid water that creates a vacuum in the process. 3. A decrease of radiation from 1000 on the Geiger counter to a reading of 40 for nuclear radiation disposal. In other words, a transmutation of radioactive material. >However, if the gas evolved after the current is shut off contains much H2 >and there are no batteries or capacitors in the device, you have a really >worthwhile anomaly to study. It seems especially worthwhile to measure the >electrolysis plate and electolyte temperatures and to anaylze the "post >current" evolved gas.> I agree it was a worthwhile anomaly but I couldn't extend it so I discontinued. >I suppose the observed gas could be deadsorbing H2 but you would only see >that coming from one plate and the diffusion coefficient would have to be >astronomical! > >Michael, could you describe for us the device, especially the circuitry and >electrolysis plates of the device, on which you observed this post current >gas generation? For a complete description of the technology and how to make a simple unit see George Wiseman's "Brown's Gas, Book 1" ($10.00 ITS bookstore). For the advance design (higher gas output) see the following USA patents: No: 3,262,872, July 26, 1966, Apparatus for the Electrolytic Production of Hydrogen and Oxygen for the Safe Consumption Thereof, William A. Rhodes and Raymond A Henes, Phoenix, Arizona, assignors to Henes Manufacturing Co. Phoenix Arizona. No: 3,310,483, March 21, 1967, Multicell Oxyhydrogen Generator, William Rhodes, Phoenix, Arizona. Device Description: For small gas output unit see Wiseman's book and for large gas output unit see the USA patents above. Both have similar main features as follows 1. Water supply tank. 2. Electrolyzer unit and circutry 3. Flashback water reservoir 4. Torch with flame arrestor The series electrolyzer unit is best for both designs. The hard part is the manufacturing end on how to seal the individual cells. 80 cells for 1.5 volt cell design with 120 volt power with as close as possible spacing lowers resistance and increases efficiency. I used both pvc and acrylic for the side walls for the cells and stainless steel for the electrodes. A single plate electrode acts as a wall and in one cell it is positive and in the next cell a negative electode. So you have 80 plates in this design. The plate area is best at 1 amp per 6 sq. inches of plate. Circuitry Description: AC wall power is full wave bridge recified to pulsed dc 120 cps at 1 to 20 amps. Amperage and voltage is dependent on electrolyte (NaOH) concentration, cell spacing, plate area, available power ect.. A variac or a transformer can be used for any desired voltage and cell design. Summary: This is new technology and what has been done to date is not widely known due to many factors. I know of only a handfull of researchers that built a unit and manybe a dozen that even know how it works. The Chinese are manufacturing and researching this technology and are using it in their Navy ships while our scientists wont even believe their own observations from the demonstrations that Prof. Brown has given over the past 25 years. Because it is not in the text books and can not be explained by their current theories they refuse to believe their own observations. Reference: 1) International Tesla Society, Extraordinary Science Journal, Vol.V, Issue 3, Jul.Aug.Sep. 1993. Cheers Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:49:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06052; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606200958.CAA19249@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Flames X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 08:01 PM 6/19/96 -0700, you wrote: >Mitchell comments: > > "In fact, I have never known anyone who literally "lacked a sense of >humor," myself included, and I wonder whether such a condition is even possible >in a structurally intact and functioning human brain." > >You should spend more time in Scotland. > > "I will say this, though: I have no idea what there is about the topic that I >addressed in my post which you think is amusing." > >Quite. > >Chris > Practicing up here, are we, for how to crookedly swagger on the narrowest of fence tops right beneath the nose of the cat? Tut tut. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:48:56 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06088; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606201015.DAA20016@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 12:06 PM 6/19/96 -0700, you wrote: >>We are here because the type of discussion below is a waste of time. The >>minds here are hardly crybabies. We simply discern the intelligence of more >>productive pursuits. End of discussion. > >***{In my view, it is not a "waste of time" for those who have the capacity >to reason to hold their ground and participate in internet newsgroups, in >spite of the desires of hate-filled conformists to drive them out. The >appropriate way to deal with flames is with *reason*, not with flight into >hiding places such as this group, where an information daddy has been >appointed to protect the little kiddies who are afraid to protect >themselves. If such a statement seems unkind I am sorry, but I look upon >this type of flight behavior with the same disdain that blacks reserve for >members of their race who sit at the back of the bus. You guys are far >better, and far brighter, than the flamers who drove you out of >sci.physics.fusion. You have a better right to be there than they do. Why >should you let them drive you out, when you can use reason to drive *them* >out? I'll grant that responding to flames can be unpleasant, and that it is >difficult. It is a high art form that must be learned through practice. But >if you think it is a "waste of time" to have pride in what you are and, as >a consequence, to stand up for your rights, then I strongly disagree. >--Mitchell Jones}*** > >> Mitchell, I am failing to get my point accross. Nobody drives me anywhere, in or out, and I rather suspect that is true for most of those on Vortex. I am up to my earballs in work and I do not have the time to placate people who are so poorly skilled in thinking and doing that they indulge in utterly useless rhetoric to vent emotional reactions which they have confused with points of logic. If you have the time, more power to you, go for it. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:48:54 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06122; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606201127.GAA16518@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: St.Pete Science conference :Report from Volodya X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Good stuff, Robert....keep it coming, please. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:49:08 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06160; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: David Hildyard To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown's gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael Randall wrote, >There were reports in Australia back in the early '80's that Prof. Brown >drove a converted Ford auto on his gas for over a week on water and that his >said could have fuelled the car for one year on one gallon of water. Shades of Stan Meyer....! The story I heard was, "Yul Brown and I (said a speaker at ASTRO meeting) drove to Brisbane (from Sydney) on a pint of water". I questioned where the energy came from to dissociate the water and he replied, "The battery". This same person also claimed to have built an ou magnet motor. He told us at an ASTRO meeting that one model he built "blew up and put a hole in his wall". Recently, he was approached by a TV documentary maker with the intention of including his invention in their 'suppressed inventions' category for a program they were making to follow the X-files on CH7. One of the researchers told me that they failed to 'sight' a working unit. The program makers had to find someone who had patented an ou device, lived in either Melbourne or Sydney, and had been threatened or harassed by the 'opposition'. I assumed this strategy was to pull ratings. Any takers? I would be interested in hearing what Yul Brown has to say on these stories. Is someone in a position to ask him? Is he on the internet? >Air enters the end and gets energised inside the >orgone box and then exits the other side of the box thru a pipe to the carburator >to fuel the engine. Have you heard about the orgone fuel tank? The trick is to coat the fuel tank with alternate paper/metal layers. Its claimed to boost performance. David Hilldyard. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:51:33 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06210; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960620192752_100433.1541_BHG48-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Isotope abundances X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex While we await the safe arrival of the metals from Joe Champion, here is a list of the nuclides (stable and very long-lived) with their natural abundances. Note also the Delta-MeV realtive to C12 = 0. This was partly scanned, and partly hand input, so don't assume it is absolutely perfect. --------------------------------------------------------------------- (Note. This table has been spaced rather than tabbed) Abundances of the Isotopes. (Source - Britannica) Element Z Symbol A Abundance delta (MeV) Hydrogen 1 H 1 99.985 7.289 2 0.0151 13.136 (in atmosphere) Helium 2 He 3 1.38x10-4* 14.931 (in atmosphere) 4 99.99986 2.425 Lithium 3 Li 6 7.5 14.086 (Commercial sources may 7 92.5 14.907 have less Li6, more Li7) Beryllium 4 Be 9 100 11.348 Boron 5 B 10 19.9 12.051 11 80.1 8.668 Carbon 6 C 12 98.90 0 13 1.10 3.125 Nitrogen 7 N 14 99.634* 2.863 (in atmosphere) 15 0.367 0.102 Oxygen 8 0 16 99.762 -4.737 17 0.038 -0.809 18 0.200 -0.782 Fluorine 9 F 19 100 -1.487 Neon 10 Ne 20 90.51 -7.046 21 0.27 -5.734 22 9.22* -8.027 (in atmosphere) Sodium 11 Na 23 100 -9.531 Magnesium 12 Mg 24 78.99 -13.933 25 10.00 -13.192 26 11.01 -16.214 Aluminum 13 Al 27 100 -17.197 Silicon 14 Si 28 92.23 -21.492 29 4.67 -21.895 30 3.10 -24.433 Phosphorus 15 P 31 100 -24.441 Sulfur 16 S 32 95.03 -26.016 33 0.75 -26.587 34 4.22 -29.932 36 0.02 -30.664 Chlorine 17 Cl 35 75.77 -29.014 37 24.23 -31.762 Argon 18 Ar 36 0.337 -30.231 38 0.063 -34.715 40 99.600 -35.040 Potassium 19 K 39 93.2581 -33.807 40 0.0117* -33.535 (long lived radionuclide) Calcium 20 Ca 40 96.941 -34.847 42 0.647 -35.548 43 0.135 -38.409 44 2.087 -41.470 46 0.0043 -43.138 48 0.187 -44.216 Scandium 21 Sc 45 100 -41.070 Titanium 22 Ti 46 8.0 -44.126 47 7.3 -44.932 48 73.8 -48.487 49 5.5 -48.558 50 5.4 -51.426 Vanadium 23 V 50 0.250 -49.220 (long lived radionuclide) 51 99.750 -52.200 Chromium 24 Cr 50 4.35 -50.258 52 83.79 -55.415 53 9.50 -55.283 54 2.37 -56.931 Manganese 25 Mn 55 100 -57.709 Iron 26 Fe 54 5.8 -56.251 56 91.72 -60.604 57 2.2 -60.179 58 0.28 -62.152 Cobalt 27 Co 59 100 -62.226 Nickel 28 Ni 58 68.27 -60.225 60 26.10 -64.471 61 1.13 -64.220 62 3.59 -66.746 64 0.91 -67.098 Copper 29 Cu 63 69.17 -65.579 65 30.83 -67.261 Zinc 30 Zn 64 48.6 -66.002 66 27.9 -68.899 67 4.1 -67.879 68 18.8 -70.006 70 0.6 -69.560 Gallium 31 Ga 69 60.1 -69.323 71 39.9 -70.141 Germanium 32 Ge 70 20.5 -70.561 72 27.4 -72.584 73 7.8 -71.295 74 36.6 -73.423 76 7.8 -73.215 Arsenic 33 As 75 100 -73.035 Selenium 34 Se 74 0.9 -72.215 76 9.0 -75.254 77 7.6 -74.602 78 23.7 -77.028 80 49.8 -77.762 (long-lived radionuclide) 82 9.2 -77.596 Bromine 35 Br 79 50.69 -76.070 81 49.315 -77.977 Krypton 36 Kr 78 0.35 -74.152 80 2.25 -77.892 82 11.6 -80.591 83 11.5 -79.983 84 57.0 -82.431 86 17.3 -83.263 Rubidium 37 Rb 85 72.17 -82.164 87 27.85 -84.591 (long-lived radionuclide) Strontium 38 Sr 84 0.56 -80.640 86 9.86 -84.518 87 7.0 -84.875 (variable) 88 82.58 -87.916 Yttrium 39 Y 89 100 -87.702 Zirconium 40 Zr 90 51.45 -88.770 91 11.22 -87.893 92 17.15 -88.457 94 17.38 -87.268 96 2.80 -85.442 Niobium 41 Nb 93 100 -87.210 Molybdenum 42 Mo 92 14.84 -86.808 94 9.25 -88.413 95 15.92 -87.709 96 16.68 -88.792 97 9.55 -87.542 98 24.13 -88.113 100 9.63 -86.186 Ruthenium 44 Ru 96 5.52 -86.072 98 1.89 -88.226 99 12.7 -87.618 100 12.6 -89.220 101 17.0 -87.951 102 31.6 -89.099 104 18.7 -88.908 Rhodium 45 Rh 103 100 -88.027 Palladium 46 Pd 102 1.02 -87.902 104 11.14 -89.397 105 22.33 -88.419 106 27.33 -89.910 108 26.7 -89.523 110 11.8 -88.335 Silver 47 Ag 107 51.839 -88.407 109 48.17 -88.722 Cadmium 48 Cd 106 1.25 -87.133 108 0.89 -89.261 110 12.49 -90.352 111 12.81 -89.255 112 24.13 -90.582 113 12.22 -98.051 (long-lived radionuclide) 114 28.73 -90.023 116 7.50 -88.721 Indium 49 In 113 4.3 -89.367 115 95.7 -89.534 (long-lived radionuclide) Tin 50 Sn 112 0.97 -88.655 114 0.65 -90.557 115 0.36 -90.032 116 14.53 -91.523 117 7.69 -90.396 118 24.22 -91.652 119 8.58 -90.066 120 32.59 -91.102 122 4.63 -89.945 124 5.79 -88.237 Antimony 51 Sb 121 57.4 -89.591 123 42.8 -89.223 Tellurium 52 Te 120 0.096 -89.380 122 2.60 -90.309 123 0.908 -89.172 (long-lived radionuclide) 124 4.817 -90.525 125 7.14 -89.025 126 18.95 -90.067 128 31.69 -88.993 130 33.80 -87.348 (long-lived radionuclide) Indium 53 In 127 100 -88.984 Xenon 54 Xe 124 0.10 -87.660 126 0.090 -89.163 128 1.91 -89.861 129 26.4 -88.697 130 4.1 -89.881 131 21.2 -88.426 132 26.9 -89.290 134 10.4 -88.126 136 8.9 -86.432 Cesium 55 Cs 133 100 -88.094 Barium 56 Ba 130 0.106 -87.300 132 0.10 -88.454 134 2.42 -88.973 135 6.592 -87.874 136 7.854 -88.910 137 11.23 -87.737 138 71.70 -88.277 Lanthanum 57 La 138 0.089 -86.531 (long-lived radionuclide) 139 99.91 -87.238 Cerium 58 Ce 136 0.19 -86.500 138 0.25 -87.575 140 88.48 -88.089 142 11.08 -84.542 Praesodymium 59 Pr 141 100 -86.027 Neodymium 60 Nd 142 27.13 -85.959 143 12.19 -84.012 144 23.80 -83.757 (long-lived radionuclide) 145 8.31 -81.441 146 17.2 -80.935 148 5.76 -77.418 150 5.64 -73.694 Samarium 62 Sm 144 3.1 -81.974 147 15.0 -79.276 (long-lived radionuclide) 148 11.3 -79.346 (long-lived radionuclide) 149 13.8 -77.147 150 7.4 -77.061 152 26.7 -74.773 154 22.7 -72.466 Europium 63 Eu 151 47.9 -74.663 153 52.3 -73.379 Gadolinium 64 Gd 152 0.20 -74.719 (long-lived radionuclide) 154 2.18 -73.718 155 14.81 -72.082 156 20.47 -72.547 157 15.65 -70.835 158 24.84 -70.702 160 21.8 -67.943 Terbium 65 Tb 159 100 -69.544 Dysprosium 66 Dy 156 0.06 -70.537 158 0.10 -70.419 160 2.35 -69.683 161 18.9 -68.065 162 25.5 -68.190 163 24.9 -66.390 164 28.2 -65.977 Holmium 67 Ho 165 100 -64.908 Erbium 68 Er 162 0.14 -66.347 164 1.61 -65.952 166 33.6 -64.935 167 22.95 -63.299 168 26.8 -62.999 170 14.9 -60.118 Thulium 69 Tm 169 100 -61.282 Ytterbium 70 Yb 168 0.13 -61.578 170 3.05 -60.772 171 14.3 -59.315 172 21.9 -59.264 173 16.12 -57.560 174 31.8 -56.953 176 12.7 -53.502 Lutetium 71 Lu 175 97.41 -55.173 176 2.59 -53.395 (long-lived radionuclide) Hafnium 72 Hf 174 0.162 -55.849 (long-lived radionuclide) 176 5.206 -54.581 177 18.606 -52.893 178 27.297 -52.447 179 13.629 -50.476 180 35.100 -49.793 Tantalum 73 Ta 180 0.012 -48.860 181 99.988 -48.445 Tungsten 74 W 180 0.13 -49.648 182 26.3 -48.250 183 14.3 -46.370 184 30.67 -45.710 186 28.6 -42.517 Rhenium 75 Re 185 37.40 -93.826 187 62.60 -41.224 (long-lived radionuclide) Osmium 76 Os 184 0.02 -44.257 186 1.58 -43.007 (long-lived radionuclide) 187 1.6 -41.227 188 13.3 -41.145 189 16.1 -38.995 190 26.4 -38.717 192 41.0 -35.893 Iridium 77 Ir 191 37.3 -36.716 193 62.7 -34.543 Platinum 78 Pt 190 <0.02 -37.338 (long-lived radionuclide) 192 0.79 -36.311 194 32.9 -34.787 195 33.9 -32.821 196 25.3 -32.671 198 7.2 -29.930 Gold 79 Au 197 100 -31.165 Mercury 80 Hg 196 0.14 -31.851 198 10.02 -30.979 199 16.84 -29.571 200 23.1 -29.529 201 13.22 -27.687 202 29.80 -27.370 204 -6.85 -24.716 Thallium 81 Tl 203 29.52 -25.784 205 70.477 -23.846 Lead 82 Pb 204 1.4 -15.132 206 24.1 -23.809 207 22.1 -22.476 208 52.4 -21.772 Bismuth 83 Bi 209 100 -18.282 Thorium 90 Th 232 100 -35.447 (long-lived radionuclide) Uranium 92 U 234 0.0055 38.142 (long-lived radionuclide) 235 0.7200 40.915 (long-lived radionuclide) 238 99.275 47.306 (long-lived radionuclide) /ex From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:54:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06345; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:46:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:46:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Volodya :from St.Pete X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear electrodynamics Friends, I would ask all you one question. Siberian person explained me how he measured the velocity of transmission of the EM energy in Tesla experiment. I have some doubt in correctness of his calculations. I hope all you know a scheme of the famous Tesla experiment on transmission of the energy between two identical installations (the radiators had the form of the ball). He performed two repeating experiments, the first one with the distance between the antennas 100 metres, and the second one with the distance 500 metres. It was detected a signal in the receiving antenna's loop exactly at the frequency of the source antenna (135 kHz). To measure the velocity of the longitudinal EM wave, he compared the phase of the received radio signal to the phase of the basic (sincronizing) signal propagating through the optical fibre from the input generator of the source antenna to the receiving antenna. Because there is a certain time spending to match the signals, he compared the difference between phases shift phi(at 100 metres) - phi(at 500 metres). Since the delaying time will be identical in both cases, he can omit that time from comsideration. Now his calculations: Phases shift at 100 metres between the basic and radio signal: phi1 = 316 degr; ... at 500 metres....: phi2 = 9 degr; Delta(phi) = phi2 - phi1 = (360+9) - 316 = 53 degr; Expected relating phases shift if the velocity of the longitudinal EM wave is c = 3*10^8 m: Delta(phi) = [deltaL*360 degr]/lambda; lambda is the wave length Delta(phi) = 400*360/2214 = 64 degr; So he concluded the velocity of EM wave is bigger than c. However, I think he didn't take into account that the basic signal propagates through the optical fibre with the velocity less than c. So the basic signal reaches the receiving antenna in time: L1/v The radio signal....: L1/c ; here, v is the velocity of the basic signal in the optical fibre. Therefore, the radio signal will reach the receiver faster than the basic signal will do and it will seem that the velocity of the longitudinal EM radiation is bigger than of transversal one. Please, estimate the above methods and if possible, answer me until tomorrow morning. I would like to discussit with siberian person. Warm regards to all, Volodya ------------------------------------- Name: dacha E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 6/20/96 Time: 7:01:11 PM No matter where you go, there you are. http://www.visor.com/info ------------------------------------- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:50:36 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06454; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:46:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:46:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: velocity of longitudinal EM wave X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >X-POP3-Rcpt: hheffner@anc >To: Robert@visor.com >Cc: 100433.1541@compuserve.com, hheffner@anc.ak.net >Organization: Vladimir V. Onoochin, Private Account >Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 02:09:41 +0400 (MSD) >From: "Vladimir V. Onoochin" >Subject: velocity of longitudinal EM wave >Lines: 47 > >Dear electrodynamics Friends, > >I would ask all you one question. Siberian person explained me how he >measured the velocity of transmission of the EM energy in Tesla >experiment. I have some doubt in correctness of his calculations. > >I hope all you know a scheme of the famous Tesla experiment on >transmission of the energy between two identical installations (the >radiators had the form of the ball). >He performed two repeating experiments, the first one with the distance >between the antennas 100 metres, and the second one with the distance >500 metres. It was detected a signal in the receiving antenna's loop >exactly at the frequency of the source antenna (135 kHz). To measure >the velocity of the longitudinal EM wave, he compared the phase of the >received radio signal to the phase of the basic (sincronizing) signal >propagating through the optical fibre from the input generator of the >source antenna to the receiving antenna. Because there is a certain >time spending to match the signals, he compared the difference between >phases shift phi(at 100 metres) - phi(at 500 metres). Since the delaying >time will be identical in both cases, he can omit that time from >comsideration. >Now his calculations: >Phases shift at 100 metres between the basic and radio signal: >phi1 = 316 degr; >.... at 500 metres....: >phi2 = 9 degr; >Delta(phi) = phi2 - phi1 = (360+9) - 316 = 53 degr; >Expected relating phases shift if the velocity of the longitudinal EM >wave is c = 3*10^8 m: >Delta(phi) = [deltaL*360 degr]/lambda; lambda is the wave length >Delta(phi) = 400*360/2214 = 64 degr; >So he concluded the velocity of EM wave is bigger than c. > >However, I think he didn't take into account that the basic signal >propagates through the optical fibre with the velocity less than c. >So the basic signal reaches the receiving antenna in time: L1/v >The radio signal....: L1/c ; here, v is the velocity of the basic signal >in the optical fibre. Therefore, the radio signal will reach the receiver >faster than the basic signal will do and it will seem that the velocity of >the longitudinal EM radiation is bigger than of transversal one. > >Please, estimate the above methods and if possible, answer me until >tomorrow morning. I would like to discussit with siberian person. > >Warm regards to all, >Volodya > Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:50:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06510; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:47:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:47:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: velocity of longitudinal EM wave X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Volodya, You wrote and I forwarded to vortex-l: >Dear electrodynamics Friends, > >I would ask all you one question. Siberian person explained me how he >measured the velocity of transmission of the EM energy in Tesla >experiment. I have some doubt in correctness of his calculations. > >I hope all you know a scheme of the famous Tesla experiment on >transmission of the energy between two identical installations (the >radiators had the form of the ball). >He performed two repeating experiments, the first one with the distance >between the antennas 100 metres, and the second one with the distance >500 metres. It was detected a signal in the receiving antenna's loop >exactly at the frequency of the source antenna (135 kHz). To measure >the velocity of the longitudinal EM wave, he compared the phase of the >received radio signal to the phase of the basic (sincronizing) signal >propagating through the optical fibre from the input generator of the >source antenna to the receiving antenna. Because there is a certain >time spending to match the signals, he compared the difference between >phases shift phi(at 100 metres) - phi(at 500 metres). Since the delaying >time will be identical in both cases, he can omit that time from >comsideration. >Now his calculations: >Phases shift at 100 metres between the basic and radio signal: >phi1 = 316 degr; >.... at 500 metres....: >phi2 = 9 degr; >Delta(phi) = phi2 - phi1 = (360+9) - 316 = 53 degr; >Expected relating phases shift if the velocity of the longitudinal EM >wave is c = 3*10^8 m: >Delta(phi) = [deltaL*360 degr]/lambda; lambda is the wave length >Delta(phi) = 400*360/2214 = 64 degr; >So he concluded the velocity of EM wave is bigger than c. > >However, I think he didn't take into account that the basic signal >propagates through the optical fibre with the velocity less than c. >So the basic signal reaches the receiving antenna in time: L1/v >The radio signal....: L1/c ; here, v is the velocity of the basic signal >in the optical fibre. Therefore, the radio signal will reach the receiver >faster than the basic signal will do and it will seem that the velocity of >the longitudinal EM radiation is bigger than of transversal one. > >Please, estimate the above methods and if possible, answer me until >tomorrow morning. I would like to discussit with siberian person. > >Warm regards to all, >Volodya The CRC Handbook shows the index of refraction of glass between 1.497 and 1.945. The core of a fiber optic system has a lower index than the sheath, so would be near 1.5. Using 1.497 gives the fastest speed of light in glass, which is c/1.497 = 299792458/1.497 = 2.003 x 10^8 m/s. This is the fastest possible speed of light in glass. For a 135 kHz signal I get a wavelength of c/135,000 = 2220.68 m (not 2214 as above). Am I missing some kind of correction, like for speed of light in air? It's close enough for these purposes however. In glass the same 135 kHz signal has a wavelength of 2.003 x 10^8/ 135000 = 1484 m. Using: phi = L*360/2221 for longitudinal wave and: phi = L*360/1484 for fiber optic "wave" we have: Phase shift by distance: L=100 L=500 Long. 16.2 81.0 Fiber 24.3 121.3 Delta(phi) 8.1 40.3 (Net phase shift = 40.3 - 8.1 = 32.2) It is strange my number is half what was measured. Am I missing a round trip or maybe I am just all wrong? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:52:24 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06644; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:47:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:47:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606211332.aa06950@univ.sibiu.ro> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dan CHICEA To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortexers, I am Dan Chicea, a physicist working with the University Lucian Blaga" of Sibiu, Romania. I work for my PhD. thesis in the field of Cold Fusion, promoter Dr. Peter Gluck, ITIM, Cluj-Napoca. I am a constant reader of the Vortex discussions; this is my first posting. Reading Horace Heffner's posting I was pleasantly surprise to find out that there does exist a device that produces electron clusters << See US patents 5,018,180 and 5,123,039 by Ken Shoulders for a description of methods of generating condensed charge. >> In "COLD FUSION", Issue No. 14, December 1995, pp. 2-3. I presented a paper titled "Electron Screening and the Cold Fusion in Condensed Matter". The simple model I presented for computing the electron overconcentration on the "sharp peak" on the surface of a metal and the Thomas - Fermi model employed for computing the electron screening effect of the Coulomb barrier made me conclude that an electron concentration of 10^31 - 10^32 /m3 would provide a strong enough screening for the incident deuteron having an energy of about 1 Kev to penetrate the barrier at a high enough probability to produce a detectable fusion reaction ratio. The value of 10^11 electrons in a ball of 0.1 micrometer diameter would produce a comparable electron concentration. I am asking you if there does exist somebody being aware of a paper describing the existence of the electron clusters, as mentioned? Could I have the citation, please? My access to e-mail is not quite on line, so a delay in my answers will possibly occur. I would very much appreciate if somebody could provide my a photocopy of the US patents 5,018,180 and 5,123,039 by Ken Shoulders. Would it cost much to snail-mail it to me? If it will happen, as the summer holidays are coming closer, the mail inside the university will work rather slow; please use my home address, which is: Dan CHICEA Str. Ludos nr. 14, bl 27, ap.2 SIBIU, 2400 ROMANIA, EUROPE Thank you. All the best wishes ! -------------------------------------------------------- Dan CHICEA Private phone: 40-69-482388 University of SIBIU, Phone: 40-69-415732 Physics Dept. e-mail: chicea@sibiu.ro B-dul Victoriei nr. 5-7, Sibiu, 2400, Romania -------------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:52:41 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA06841; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: velocity of longitudinal EM wave X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Volodya, You wrote and I forwarded to vortex-l: >Dear electrodynamics Friends, > >I would ask all you one question. Siberian person explained me how he >measured the velocity of transmission of the EM energy in Tesla >experiment. I have some doubt in correctness of his calculations. > >I hope all you know a scheme of the famous Tesla experiment on >transmission of the energy between two identical installations (the >radiators had the form of the ball). >He performed two repeating experiments, the first one with the distance >between the antennas 100 metres, and the second one with the distance >500 metres. It was detected a signal in the receiving antenna's loop >exactly at the frequency of the source antenna (135 kHz). To measure >the velocity of the longitudinal EM wave, he compared the phase of the >received radio signal to the phase of the basic (sincronizing) signal >propagating through the optical fibre from the input generator of the >source antenna to the receiving antenna. Because there is a certain >time spending to match the signals, he compared the difference between >phases shift phi(at 100 metres) - phi(at 500 metres). Since the delaying >time will be identical in both cases, he can omit that time from >comsideration. >Now his calculations: >Phases shift at 100 metres between the basic and radio signal: >phi1 = 316 degr; >.... at 500 metres....: >phi2 = 9 degr; >Delta(phi) = phi2 - phi1 = (360+9) - 316 = 53 degr; >Expected relating phases shift if the velocity of the longitudinal EM >wave is c = 3*10^8 m: >Delta(phi) = [deltaL*360 degr]/lambda; lambda is the wave length >Delta(phi) = 400*360/2214 = 64 degr; >So he concluded the velocity of EM wave is bigger than c. > >However, I think he didn't take into account that the basic signal >propagates through the optical fibre with the velocity less than c. >So the basic signal reaches the receiving antenna in time: L1/v >The radio signal....: L1/c ; here, v is the velocity of the basic signal >in the optical fibre. Therefore, the radio signal will reach the receiver >faster than the basic signal will do and it will seem that the velocity of >the longitudinal EM radiation is bigger than of transversal one. > >Please, estimate the above methods and if possible, answer me until >tomorrow morning. I would like to discussit with siberian person. > >Warm regards to all, >Volodya The CRC Handbook shows the index of refraction of glass between 1.497 and 1.945. The core of a fiber optic system has a lower index than the sheath, so would be near 1.5. Using 1.497 gives the fastest speed of light in glass, which is c/1.497 = 299792458/1.497 = 2.003 x 10^8 m/s. This is the fastest possible speed of light in glass. For a 135 kHz signal I get a wavelength of c/135,000 = 2220.68 m (not 2214 as above). Am I missing some kind of correction, like for speed of light in air? It's close enough for these purposes however. In glass the same 135 kHz signal has a wavelength of 2.003 x 10^8/ 135000 = 1484 m. Using: phi = L*360/2221 for longitudinal wave and: phi = L*360/1484 for fiber optic "wave" we have: Phase shift by distance: L=100 L=500 Long. 16.2 81.0 Fiber 24.3 121.3 Delta(phi) 8.1 40.3 (Net phase shift = 40.3 - 8.1 = 32.2) It is strange my number is half what was measured. Am I missing a round trip or maybe I am just all wrong? To continue on this line of thought, to get a Delta(phi) of 64 deg. over a distance of 400 m, and to assume the longitudinal wave moves at the speed of light, the phase for the fiber at 400 m must be (81.0 - 16.2) + 64 = 128.8 This means: phi = 128.8 = (400)*(360)/lambda lambda = 1118 V = 1118 * 135000 = 1.509 x 10^8 So, the index of refreaction of the glass must be 299792458 / 1.509 x 10^8 = 1.986. This is very high, but maybe within the range of possibility. Unless I have made an error, it would be good to determine the index of refraction of the fiber used for the measurement. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:54:55 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07113; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:49:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:49:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Interesting "Free" Magazine.... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Interesting "Free" Magazine.... - I'll bet I've got people worried about that "Spam-scam" appearing again. - Nope, nope, nope, this is boni-fide. It's called "DeskTop Engineering" and it is dedicated to all the engineering/analysis/scientific software you could imagine. Helmers Publishing Co. 174 Concord St. PO Box 874 Peterborough, NH 03458-0874 - 603-924-9631 (Phone) - Email: DE-Editor@gold.mv.net - LOTs of demo software available to order to play (work) with, lots of good info on real applications. Good way to "stay up". - MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 23 00:01:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07361; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:50:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:50:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960621200621_72240.1256_EHB99-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Nothing from Joe Champion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex On Wednesday, June 19, Joe Champion called me on the phone and said that about a pound of sample material had been shipped out to me by Federal Express for delivery on Thursday. He faxed me a short paper and he said that he would later fax me copies of the shipping papers. It is now 4:00 p.m. on Friday. I have received no fax and no shipment. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:56:09 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07500; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:51:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:51:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: on velocity of the LEW X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear electrodynamics Friends, Unfortunately, I made an essential mistake at previous message. Today I spoke to siberian person about the details of the experiment, the details I couldn't find in his paper, and he explained that he used the optical fibre of nonchanged length, i.e. 500 metres in both experiments. Siberian person said only in this case the basic signal at first input of the phase analizer will have the same value of the phase for both experiments. As I understand, the optical signal passing in the fibre had been modulated by the frequency 135.5 kHz. The second input of the analizer was loaded by the signal excited in the loop of the receiving antenna. Both antennas have the identical Q = 135. I hope the scheme of the experiment I described is clear to you. However, taking into account the above correction, one must accept that the calculations of siberian person are OK. So the velocity of the longitudinal EM wave seems to be bigger than c. Now possible errors of the experiments. All the notes are made by my friends from St.pete. 1. It is questionable to define a value the velocity after the phases measurements because the signal was of sinusoidal form, i.e. non-modulated. It would be more correct to modulate the current signal. 2. Because of low frequency the wavelength (2214 metres) was comparable to the distance between the antennas. So it was possible creation of transformer-like link between the antennas, especially under condition of high Q. In this case, the calculations should be other. Because I think the experiment of Ignatiev (siberian person) is the most important amongs the ones presented at the conference I would like to know what you think about it. Warm regard, Volodya Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:56:24 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07548; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:52:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:52:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: From Volodya X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear electrodynamics Friends, Unfortunately, I made an essential mistake at previous message. Today I spoke to siberian person about the details of the experiment, the details I couldn't find in his paper, and he explained that he used the optical fibre of nonchanged length, i.e. 500 metres in both experiments. Siberian person said only in this case the basic signal at first input of the phase analizer will have the same value of the phase for both experiments. As I understand, the optical signal passing in the fibre had been modulated by the frequency 135.5 kHz. The second input of the analizer was loaded by the signal excited in the loop of the receiving antenna. Both antennas have the identical Q = 135. I hope the scheme of the experiment I described is clear to you. However, taking into account the above correction, one must accept that the calculations of siberian person are OK. So the velocity of the longitudinal EM wave seems to be bigger than c. Now possible errors of the experiments. All the notes are made by my friends from St.pete. 1. It is questionable to define a value the velocity after the phases measurements because the signal was of sinusoidal form, i.e. non-modulated. It would be more correct to modulate the current signal. 2. Because of low frequency the wavelength (2214 metres) was comparable to the distance between the antennas. So it was possible creation of transformer-like link between the antennas, especially under condition of high Q. In this case, the calculations should be other. Because I think the experiment of Ignatiev (siberian person) is the most important amongs the ones presented at the conference I would like to know what you think about it. Warm regard, Volodya From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:55:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07615; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: on velocity of the LEW X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Volodya, Concerning the following: > >Now possible errors of the experiments. All the notes are made by my >friends from St.pete. >1. It is questionable to define a value the velocity after the phases >measurements because the signal was of sinusoidal form, i.e. >non-modulated. It would be more correct to modulate the current signal. >2. Because of low frequency the wavelength (2214 metres) was comparable >to the distance between the antennas. So it was possible creation of >transformer-like link between the antennas, especially under condition of >high Q. In this case, the calculations should be other. > If possible, it would be good to have the optical signal go from the receiving antenna back to the vicinity of the transmitter, and have the optical signal modulated by the received signal. Again, the cable length would remain constant. This would make it easier to superimpose a pulse on the transmitter wave and detect it on the returned wave and display both traces simultaneously on an oscilloscope. The pulse return time should then change in proportion to distance when the recieving antenna is moved, and the delta d / delta t would represent a true measurement of velocity. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:57:15 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07688; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: third day X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Chris, I will try to tell you about third day of the conference concerning the gravitation and the possibilities of levitation. Unfortunately, there were no working models. I mean such models which lift and fly away. Most of lectures were of theoretical nature. As I understand, the main idea proposed by the lecturers is the following: if we cause a certain object to rotate with high speed around its axis the time changes its current at the area surrounding that object, besides the maximum of changing reaches at the axis of rotation. One person shown the hyroscopic motors which being made rotating, making something like Coriolis figures. He claimed such a traectory is due to anti-gravitation force. At the same time he said the hyroscopic motors are typical motors applied in airplanes. It seems strange that nobody before find levitation in the airplane hyro motors. The behavior of the anti-gravitator of another person is similar, i.e. the traectory was of Coriolis form. However, sometimes the motor began to moves after switching, and sometimes doesn't. However, there was a man, as Ignatiev from Krasnoyarsk, who said now he assembles not lab model but working anti-gravitator. At least, that man looked not like typical russian inventor of our times, i.e. poor and unlucky person, however as a person having succesive business. I am going to call to him in some time. After the gravity we were told about the time. We were explained Kozyrev theory. As the lecturer claimed Kozyrev observed the signals from the future and far-on-distance instant signals. Unfortunately, he observed only the stars from the future. However, despite Kozyrev's theory seems intriuestic nobody knows how to get a practical application of that theory. In contrast to the above theory, work of Mr Chernobrov from Moscow is emphirical. Chernobrov has biuld some time machines. The idea to win a time arises to Philadelphia Experiment. Chernobrov used strong electrical fields too. Unfortunately, during one test of his powerest machine when he was going to get the time delaying of order of some minutes in comparison to the common time current some guests from Cosmos came to him, came and said: stop your researches! Stop, otherwise you will be at the place where the vessel of Philadelphia Experiment was. The above paragraph is my translation to English from his book. I feel my description become too sceptic one. So I stop now too. I continue to describe the conference tomorrow. Tomorrow is the end of the conference and, so it is more important, a discussion on the electrodynamics. The real results presented here are more or less of el-dynamical matter. I hope to tell about something like MRA (russian MRA) and about Marinov's experiment. Unfortunately, he wasn't here. Of course, I hope to tell other interesting things. With warm regard, Volodya Another idea to win a weigth was to use strong electrical fields. Such an idea arises to Philadelphia experiment. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:56:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07787; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:53:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:53:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960622161121_100433.1541_BHG74-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Wildest speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex;internet:puthoff@aol.com Dr Puthoff says he welcomes speculation - and that puts me on the spot, because I don't like speculating. Newton refused to hypothesise (although I suspect this was a debating ploy), and what was good enough for Newton ... The only way to speculate about anomalies is, I think, either to invoke known processes as possible explanations - or to demonstrate that no known processes *can* explain them and then propose a new one. We here are addressing several *reported* anomalies: 1. Nuclear effects in 'CF' systems (and other 'low energy' processes). 2. Thermal effects in 'CF' systems. 3. Thermal effects in 'cavitation' systems. 4. 'Over-unity' electrical machines. I find the evidence for (4) entirely anecdotal - even if I think I've seen it myself. Call me a true believer if you like, but I am satisfied that all of 1-3 are real. I'll forget (4). OK, do the reported thermal effects in 'CF' follow a pattern? Seemingly yes. Both Pd/D and Ni/H systems have 'loading periods'. They both have 'heat after death', they both use hydrogen isotopes in/on metals. In fact, the big differences seem to be in the 'spasmodic' behaviour of Pd compared with Ni. They both have a strong relation between temperature and the strength of the effect. On the Compuserve Science forum, the Sysop (Dr LeCompte, who works at Fermilab) gave an excellent dissertation on why CF isn't fusion between any isotopes of hydrogen. I accept what he says (well, with almost total confidence). In view of the widely-reported host-metal 'transmutations', I'd bet (though with little confidence) on alpha-emission as the origin of the 4He. But where does the tritium come from? I've never heard of nuclei which emit tritons? Host-metal transmutations? Would that be the source of thermal energy? Ouch, we still have a problem. Fission/fusion of heavy elements is even more difficult (they tell me) than deuterium fusion, maybe as difficult as p-p fusion. Radiationless (effectively)? How? I think we have two separate problems - not one. The thermal energy is one, but that happens in the cavitation machines (which might just be nuclear, but there's even less evidence for 'nuclear' than we have in CF machines). The evidence (OK, anecdotal) is that metal isn't needed at all for the cavitation machines. Which might be 'accelerating mirrors' tapping the zpf. Let's therefore be difficult (one can, with practice, be impossible), and say we have two problems to solve - the thermal and the nuclear effects. So much for the 'logic' approach - gets us nowhere fast. So I really am reduced to speculation. How's this? Metals reflect light in a rather specific way, and that (we are told) is because they have a film of electrons on their surfaces. Even some graphite can look metallic, as can some of the other quasi-metal elements, I'm told that the reason is the same - certainly a perfect graphite plane *should* look metallic because of all the loose pi electrons (if memory serves me). And we 'know' that some metals and alloys (ferromagnetic ones) must have some kind of 'superconducting' electron flows in rings to make them into magnets. Heavily hydrogenated metals 'must have' highly stressed regions in their lattices. These we know can be constantly on the move, because otherwise heavily deuterated Pd would not outgas as it does. So, adding together several bits of arm-waving (no numbers), we have maybe highly distorted electron 'surfaces' (a bit like the bonds in thiotimoline!) which are constantly jumping and jerking as the hydrogen moves through the lattice. Seems to me that these might be the 'accelerating mirrors' which could be tapping the zpf? OK, what about the nuclear effects? Well, that bit's easy - innit? Er ... well ... what about the huge mechanical forces as these 'mirrors' are pulled together by the inverse fourth power zpf? What happens to any stray nuclei which happen to get in the way? Squashed flat, pushed into one another, fused, fissed - anything! The radiation? Well, very short wavelength EM might get through a normal 'electron mirror', but how much luck would it have in these weird conditions? Would it not get bounced about, losing some energy each time as the 'wall' of electrons absorbed the impact and transmitted that energy to the lattice? Or would this bouncing about mean that a very high energy - er - 'bit' of EM radiation 'trapped' bewteen the 'walls' eventually lose energy to some heavy nucleus trapped in there with it? Or fuse more nuclei trapped inside? Or might some quite feeble bit of EM radiation get its frequency steadily boosted by resonance with 'moving walls' until it had enough energy to make some poor nucleus get in a dither? (That last idea sounds even sillier than the others.) The problem with any (misguided) attempt to put any numbers to this is that the nuclear boyos only have to worry about two-body problems in a plasma. Trying to do the mathematics of electron surfaces in a lattice would (to me) seem insuperably difficult. The only ideas I can think of would be to work out what happens when a lattice site is 'full' and then suddenly 'empty' and vice-versa - then to estimate how fast that transition happens - like squeezing lemon pips between your fingers. Why should CF seem so oddly like metal-catalysis? Are such catalytic metals ones whose EM reflection characteristics mean that they are very good mirrors for the zpf? Pt and Pd are excellent reflectors of light, is Pt- or Pd-black an excellent reflector of the zpf? Is that kind of catalysis a zpf 'electron mirror' effect? Should we be looking for a metal which is especially good for those frequencies? Are the reflection characteristics of a metallic surface (on bulk, or ultra-fine powder samples) any indication of its 'internal' reflecting ability? Yes, everybody - I am *perfectly* aware that all this stuff is a tissue of nonsense. Disagreements most welcome, except that I'm not proposing an idea. I just let my half-senile brain off the leash, to go for a little scamper on its own for a few minutes - and look what happens! I blame Hal Puthoff for asking.... Chris /ex From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:56:55 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07851; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: the end of third day X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Chris, It is nice that you understand my impression of the conference. I continue to tell about the third day. At the end of it, we were told the lecture on 'Kozyrev-Dirac' radiation. The inventor Shakhparonov so calls the radiation which is assumed to go away off his device. Shakhparonov claimed that his radiation has many wonderful properties. He radiates vine, bread etc. and the food becomes more taste. He readiates the ill people in Moscow hospital and they feel themselves much better. He even helps to the people ill of cancer. The result is obvious. The inventor claimed his device radiates magnetic monopoles (therefore, it is named after Dirac), however, strange monopoles, I understand. The latters don't generate the electric fields while motion. During demonstration Shakhparonov radiated sigarets. He promised they will be better. At the same time, another inventor demonstrated his anti- gravitator. Someone said because both devices are precise what happens when the Kozyrev-Dirac radiation will act on anti-gravitator. (because anti-gravitator isn't so improved yet to fly it only makes the Lissagu or Koriolis figures now). Thus, Shakhparonov's device was directed onto anti-gravitator and both devices were switched on. My friend and I saw nothing, no motion. Although one man saw something. Then it is observed a little changing in gravitator motion occurs when Shakhparonov device switched off. However, both devices were supplied by el.power from one plug so some influence is possible due to sharp changing of the voltage. Maybe some idea presents in Shakhparonov's works. He researched so called Artifical Plasmoid Objects (APO). He created APO by his generator. The basic unit of the generator is model of Moebius belt (or leaf). The belt is produced of dielectric layer as a background and on the surface of the dielectric the metal film is made. As preparation stage, the belt is radiated by high frequency EM fields. Then the belt is loaded by voltage = 220 V, I = 6-10 A and f = 50 Gz. In some seconds APO is created at the distance 2 metre from the belt. If it is interesting I can give additional details. Of course, the details I know. Fourth day began from the lecture of Akimov on torsion fields. He claimed these fiels are much more wonderful even than Shakhparonov's radiation. However, because he links with businessmen he cannot tell many secrets. Unfortunately, one my friend spent two years to find such fields. He detected nothing. Because I made my lecture at that day too I would like to write separate letter. The lectures of me and my friends are concerned to correction of the convenient electrodynamics. All were waiting for Marinov. However, he called and said he has problems with the magazine 'nature' so he cannot leave Austria, Gratz. I should note that Einstein was illegal person at the conference. I think Einstein theory is wrong, however, the latter needs in strict proof. Nobody made it. So it was like cold rain for all when one person told how he made very precise interferometer based on Sanyak effect (optical hyroscops). The accuracy of the interferometer is 0.8 phase degree/ 1 meter per sec. So he can measure the velocities up to 30 meters/sec. He oriented his device at all range of the angles (vertically, horizontally) and he detect no aether wind! He repeat Michelson-Morley experiment with high accuracy. With warm regard, Volodya Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 22 23:57:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07899; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:53:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:53:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: From Volodya in St.Pete X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I would like to tell about russian analogues of Magnetic Resonans Amplifiers. First one has been designed by Chernevski who observed that in the powerful transformers the input current can reduce when the spark (el.arc) appears between the contacts, and at the same time the load power arises. It means the transformer get the energy from nowhere. A man called Frolov noted Chernevski effect in his lecture. My friend Sergei Petrov explained the effect in more details. The scheme of the device is very simple. __ ____xxx xxx--| the lower contact of transformer links to zero \|/ | potential wire, the upper one links to alternating /|\ transformer | however, + potential wire. It is important to \|/ | have the pulsed current of the one sign to create __/|\___(load)-----| the spark between the metal plates xxx and xxx in the scheme. The current and voltage are measured both in primary and secondary circuits. At a certain value of the length between the plates the el.arc appears. Changing this length, we can achieve such a point that the current in the primary circuit is close to zero, however, the power extracting in the load is great. In the original experiment of Chernevski, the primary current tends to zero, besides 5 el.lamps of the power 250 Wt give bright light. I forgot to say that the transformer arise the voltage value in the scondary circuit. Petrov noted that if the experiment is performed in vacuum the effect disappears. It is important to obtain elastic acoustik waves between the plates. Another experiment he told at the conference. Dr Shil'nikov from Domain found that if he put a piece of ferromagnetic into the chamber with strong constant magnetic field (some kiloOersted) the piece begins to radiate at at a certain frequency 3 GHz, and the power exceeds the expected one calculated after Reley-Gins law radiation in 10,000 times. The radiation doesn't reduce its power during one day. As in the above experiment, it seems the energy comes from nowhere. With warm regard, Volodya ------------------------------------- Name: dacha E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 6/22/96 Time: 6:46:46 PM No matter where you go, there you are. http://www.visor.com/info ------------------------------------- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 23 05:37:09 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA10172; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 05:33:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 05:33:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31cd2fa0.40529003@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: No neutrons because.... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Though posted on a public forum, this is primarily for you Russ. Last night I went to bed early, and of course woke up at 3 am. Now as often happens on these occasions, I lay awake thinking. For some time I have been troubled by the lack of neutrons in CF experiments. So this is what I was thinking about. And here is what I came up with. Suppose as a starting point that the Clustron Sciences model of the nucleus [1] is correct in as much as nuclei consist of clusters of NP (=D), NPN (=T), and PNP (=He3)(with the obvious exception of protium). Now let a low energy proton "arrive" at such a nucleus and fuse with one of the clusters. There are thus three possibilities (see below for the fourth): H + D -> He3 H + T -> He4 H + He3 -> Li4 (This has a negative energy of formation, thus either doesn't happen, or immediately falls apart again into He3 + H). This effectively reduces the possibilities to the first two. So either He3 or He4 are formed, and expelled from the nucleus, as the fastest means of de-excitation. Now why no neutrons? Perhaps because this would entail splitting one of the clusters, and low energy protons just don't have what it takes. Perhaps because it would entail a major rearrangement of clusters, and this usually doesn't have time to occur before the nucleus de-excites by expelling the initially formed particle. Now why more He4 than He3? Because more energy is released upon formation of He4. This implies that upon entering the nucleus, the proton is more strongly attracted to T than to D (actually T+ or D+, but I have used the symbols for atoms rather than nuclei, because I usually do mass calculations using atomic rather than nuclear masses). Now what happens when D is used for fusion rather than H? We now get the following possibilities: D + D -> He4 I D + D -> He3 + n II D + D -> T + H III ----------------- D + T -> He4 + n IV D + T -> D + T (no change) D + T -> H4 + H (energetically unfavourable - disintegrates, or doesn't form) D + T -> He5 (and as we all know isotopes with 5 nucleons are highly unstable) ----------------- D + He3 -> He4 + H V D + He3 -> Li4 + n (energetically highly unfavourable) D + He3 -> Li5 (another unstable nucleus with 5 nucleons) It should be appreciated that in the normal D + D reactions (outside of nuclei), two particles need to be created, to conserve momentum. This is why normally we get either: D + D -> He3 + n or D + D -> T + H despite the fact that they would "prefer" D + D -> He4 (energetically speaking). Now when one of these D's forms part of an existing nucleus, the constraint imposed by conservation of momentum can be satisfied by imparting the recoil to the remaining nucleus, thus the fusion is free to form the most energetically favourable particle, i.e. He4. Therefore of the reactions I, II, and III above, II and III just don't happen. For all practical purposes, the only product formed is He4. (I suspect that in fact the ratio of products will be a power of "e", with the difference in energy of formation in the power). The only other possible neutron forming reaction is IV, and given that this is energetically far less favourable than 1 (usually?), this is not to be expected. I say "usually", because there are examples of fusion which when looked at from the point of view of the nucleus as a whole result in the reaction that releases a neutron, being energetically the most favourable. However it may be that such reactions involve major rearrangements of clusters, which don't have time to happen. Now as for the fourth reaction involving a proton (as promised above), that is of course: H + T -> He3 + n However, like reaction IV, this is quite unlikely, and for the same reason. Reaction V, in fact also falls in the same boat as IV. Now of course this whole spiel collapses when one realises that the expulsion of the resultant particle needs to happen via tunnelling, and will thus normally be characterised by normal alpha decay times. This implies that there is usually plenty of time, for as much re-arrangement as any self-respecting nucleus could possibly wish for. So this is where some real speculation comes into play. Suppose that when the initial particle "tunnels" into the nucleus, the "tunnel" remains "open" as it were for a short period, during which it can also be used by the exiting particle that was created within the nucleus. The implication here is that the resultant alpha decay is in fact instantaneous, rather than subject to the normal delay. Or if viewed from a more QM standpoint, the chance of two particles exchanging places, where one is the in going proton, and the other is the outgoing alpha particle, are much better than the chance of a one-way passage into the nucleus. This because the exchange process is characterised by a net energy gain. (I must however admit, that I am not very happy with this; alternate suggestions welcome). I will add as a final note that while I find the three particle cluster concept interesting, IMHO Clustron Sciences have attempted to carry this too far, even resorting to the introduction of antimatter to balance the books. Which I might add, doesn't even work because antimatter, like normal matter has positive mass. (Were this not the case, then the annihilation of positron with electron would result in no energy at all, rather than the observed gamma rays). And thus, having positive mass, the lighter elements would if composed according to the CS scheme, be heavier than they in fact are. I would further add, that in order that the above proposal have any merit, it is not necessary that such clusters be "permanent fixtures" in a nucleus. They may well simply be continually shifting temporary affiliations. Reference: [1] "Correspondence of the Nucleon Cluster Model with the Periodic Table of the Elements", by R.A. Brightsen, Infinite Energy Vol. 1 No. 5 & 6, page 73. 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@eskimo.com Sun Jun 23 06:59:18 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA16194; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 06:50:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 06:50:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <01I68S9RAO0890SP5R@delphi.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: CETI cells are probabilistic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jed, just thought I'd throw this in. $1,000,000.00 sounds like a lot of money. Actually it is a a very small amount for a start up technology Co. There are large expenses in running a Co. especially one that has investors. Just the legal cost and accounting cost of setting a Co. with 'investors' is staggering. If the number of investors exceeds a certain No. and thus the SEC is involved the expense is even greater. Just patent work if foreign filing is involved could eat up more the 1/4 this amount. (one patent in several countries). The R&D would have to been planned, especially with CF, over several years before income could be expected for a return to investors. Most investors do not like investing in an under capitalized start-up concern, and their willingness to invest is based on the ability to raise sufficent funds at start-up to carry the company at least five years. Most startup co.'s fail, due to under funding at start up than for any other reason. If anyone has followed the new Microwave technology based lamp the inital funding was 26 million plus help from the DOE, and a commercially available product is not expected for three years. The lamp is based on proven technology. The cost of running a business, performing aggressive research, and manufacturing and marketing is high. If a company wants to set up and seriously go to market, big dollars are necessary. Joe Flynn From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 23 08:24:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA24100; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 08:21:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 08:21:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael Randall wrote: >6/19/96, you wrote: >>Horace Heffner wrote: >>[snip] > >>This "heat after death" type phenomenon you describe is very strange and >>maybe warrants investigation.> > >There is no heat during or after death in this type of electrolysis device >for generating Brown's Gas or the generic term water gas. Prof. Brown has >been researching this technology for 25 years and still little is known of >this stoichiometric mon-atomic properties of hydrogen and oxygen in both the >production and uses of the gas. > >> Do you still have the generator that did this?> > >Yes and no. The larger unit, 1500 watts (15 amps and 110 volt ac), was >destroyed by a ignition of gases in main unit (design was found to be the >problem) . I still have the smaller units in pieces around collecting dust. > It appears "heat after death" was a misnomer on my part - "electrolysis after power off", or the more brief "continued electrolysis" would be more descriptive. I hoped your observation might be related to the "heat after death" phenomenon observed in P&F type eletrolysis cells - which has been observed to continue for long periods (many hours). This effect is a clear sign that some energy generating process is going on. You stated earlier: >In my watergas research, I noticed that the electrolysis process continued >for several minutes in a declining generation of gas production even though >the current was shut off. I tried several types of electrolyte and water >combinations to enhance this event without success. I have another hypothesis for the source of the continued electrolysis. The cell itself is a capacitor. The ion concentration aligns itself with the voltage gradient during operation so as to make the electrolyte neutral at every point except the surface of the electrodes. When the power is switched off it takes a while for diffusion to balance out the potential/ion gradient. It would take some experimentation to determine if anything ou is going on. One would have to cycle the pulsed electrolysis current on and off every minute or so and measure the evolved gas and heat. It is very strange that you get this effect operating the cells at near 1.5 volts, though. It seems like the capacitor would discharge to below electrolysis potential very quickly. The cool operation also seems a bit strange. It would be possible to quickly check this hypothesis by simply putting a voltmeter on the main terminals of the electrolysis cell. If the voltage drops to the minimum electrolysis potential over a period of several minutes the effect is at least partially explained. Another possibility is that a pressure head develops in the cell. As the head drops more dissolved gas comes out of solution elongating the pressure drop time. Also, the potential rebalancing via ion migration might cause some gas to be evolved in the solution between the plates. Did you actually observe continued bubble evolution on the plates, or was the continued gas production observed at the torch? I guess the plates, being opaque and close together, would hinder observation considerably. The smaller units you have gathering dust - did/do they exhibit the continued electrolysis effect? Do you remember what concentration(s) of NaOH you used when you observed the effect? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 23 09:47:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA02778; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 09:44:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 09:44:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606231641.JAA10556@mom.hooked.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Russ George" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: the almighty is english X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Well being the son of a Liverpudlian and a Scot I knew that. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 23 09:48:10 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA02846; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 09:45:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 09:45:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dan Chicea wrote: [snip] > I would very much appreciate if somebody could provide my a >photocopy of the US patents 5,018,180 and 5,123,039 by Ken >Shoulders. Would it cost much to snail-mail it to me? [snip] I have 5,018,180 handy, which I will copy and send to you. I copied it directly from the microfilm. I made the mistake of copying the lower patent number first. When I then looked at the second patent on the microfilm, 5,123,039, I saw it was simply a continuation of the first, 5,018,180, so there was no change to the technical content or drawings. I did not copy 5,123,039 because it was a waste of time an money. I would have if it were small, but this patent is huge. There are 97 figures! Just the figures section is much larger than most patents. My copy is about 1 cm thick. I have no references available, or would send them. Does anyone else? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 23 15:50:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA19401; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 15:47:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 15:47:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960623223854_100060.173_JHB67-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: cavitation X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Can someone re-educate me on the latest explanation of the mechanics of cavitation? I was of the opinion that the bubbles caused by either ultra-sound waves or the disturbance of a fast-moving object (same difference) were the result of the separation of the water molecules by the action of the sound wave or the body. Another way of producing cavitation is to hit a rigid object with a fast-moving jet of water (object stationary water moving). If this is still the correct explanation, then the bubbles are filled with vacuum or water vapour at very low pressure. If they collapse then what mechanism is there to produce high pressure and heat. I can accept that rapid contraction can produce an impact on the surrounding materials and result in heavy damage, and also by friction result in electrostatic discharge with sparking or luminescence which might trigger some "Meyer" electrolysis locally, but what is the basis for the production of ultra-high temperature inside the collapsing bubble? Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 23 21:43:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA02873; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 21:29:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 21:29:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <01I69MPOLSQQ8YD9PU@delphi.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Wildest Spec......s X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:53:13 >From: Chris Tinsley >Subject: Wildest speculations >4. 'Over-unity' electrical machines. >I find the evidence for (4) entirely anecdotal Chris, 'anecdotal', please define in this context. A short account of an interesting or amusing event? or GR anekdota, things not published? More than likely an amusing tale. I find 1-3 more ancedotal (an amusing tale). >And we 'know' that some metals and >alloys (ferromagnetic ones) must have some kind of 'superconducting' >electron flows in rings to make them into magnets. It's statements like this that make me lean more toward 4. Especially when 4 relates to magnetics. Magnetic fields are real, and also are still explained with inadequate theorys (More to be discovered). The domain theory stinks! It expects you to not account for the equal number of myraid microscopic North and South poles that make up an entire magnet, but one or the other miracously disappears in the north or south pole area of a macroscopic magnet. What happened to all of the south poles of the domains in the north end of the magnet? I've read several long winded explanations that still end up saying 'golly, we don't know they just sort'a go into.. well somewhere.. or was it they took a nap. One thing that has always puzzled me....is assuming an electromagnet is identical to a permanent magnet. If this is the case then why is there not a permanent magnet field equivalent to a straight wire conductor's magnetic field, field direction but no fixed poles? If there were an equivalent then O/U would be easy....a permanent magnet with the field of a straight wire conductor would always move up through the field of an normal permanent magnet whose field always resembles a coil! Maybe if we could make use of only a portion of one of those superconducting atomic current loops it would look like a straight wire conductor in a microscopic system? Also remember all systems are electrical machines, at least if they are made of atoms. Perhaps Hal would like to speculate on this? It could be interesting. Joe Flynn From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 23 22:06:30 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA06022; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 21:54:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 21:54:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: cavitation X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > If this is still the correct explanation, then the bubbles are filled with > vacuum or water vapour at very low pressure. Actually, I seem to recall that degassed water did not produce any light. This means that the bubbles become filled with the gasses that are dissovled into the water. > If they collapse then what mechanism is there to produce high pressure > and heat. The specific answer is a matter of controversy. But "heat" just means the particles are agitated, and surely the collapse of the confinement wall is going to add energy to the particles trapped within. -- - 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 00:31:17 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA20473; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:11:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:11:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Wildest speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 22 Jun 1996, Chris Tinsley wrote: [...] > Metals reflect light in a rather specific way, and that (we are told) > is because they have a film of electrons on their surfaces. Even some > graphite can look metallic, as can some of the other quasi-metal > elements, I'm told that the reason is the same - certainly a perfect > graphite plane *should* look metallic because of all the loose pi > electrons (if memory serves me). And we 'know' that some metals and > alloys (ferromagnetic ones) must have some kind of 'superconducting' > electron flows in rings to make them into magnets. Heavily > hydrogenated metals 'must have' highly stressed regions in their > lattices. These we know can be constantly on the move, because > otherwise heavily deuterated Pd would not outgas as it does. So, > adding together several bits of arm-waving (no numbers), we have maybe > highly distorted electron 'surfaces' (a bit like the bonds in > thiotimoline!) which are constantly jumping and jerking as the hydrogen > moves through the lattice. > > Seems to me that these might be the 'accelerating mirrors' which could > be tapping the zpf? As Henry said, "It's not as simple as that". {:] As for accelerating mirrors etc, Claudia Eberlein described the process in her recent paper, and rather than give you lot hope, she dashed them, by showing that the light given off from these only mimick the spectrum of but do not produce very high temperatures. So if you invoke accelerating mirrors, be at least aware that they are evidence against anomalous "over unity" effects, not for. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 00:30:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA21919; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:24:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:24:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624071002_100433.1541_BHG101-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Wildest speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Joe Flynn asks me what I mean by anecdotal in the context of over-unity electrical machines. Well, I was being a bit loose with my language; that's a problem with letting your brain off the leash. What I mean is that I have not yet seen a good set of over-unity figures for any machine, figures which show a clear effect. Even then, I'd want to see them from somebody who I would take pretty seriously. And - like many here - I'd want to get my hands on one, or see the test results from somebody else in this group. That's because an o-u electrical device should be vastly easier to verify independently than a CF machine. As to the other categories being 'anecdotal', let's agree to disagree, eh? Thanks for the comments on magnetism. I think I disagree with those too, but they are interesting. I'll look more closely at them. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 00:27:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA21958; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:24:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:24:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606240714.AAA02511@switzerland.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: 6/23/96, >Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] > >It appears "heat after death" was a misnomer on my part - "electrolysis >after power off", or the more brief "continued electrolysis" would be more >descriptive. I hoped your observation might be related to the "heat after >death" phenomenon observed in P&F type eletrolysis cells - which has been >observed to continue for long periods (many hours). This effect is a clear >sign that some energy generating process is going on. I thought that in the P&F type electrolysis cells it was the "heat" that they are claiming to be the excess energy for ou and not the excess gas production. In the "water gas" (WG) type of cell unit that I built there are a couple of areas that could be excess energy. 1. The observed continued electrolysis process several minutes after power is turned off. 2. Large volumes of WG produced at little power input. >It is very strange that you get this effect operating the cells at near 1.5 >volts, though. It seems like the capacitor would discharge to below >electrolysis potential very quickly. The cool operation also seems a bit >strange. Yes, it is one of the unique features of this electrolytic cell (the combined atomic H & O gases) and pulsed dc circuit design. > Did you actually observe continued bubble evolution on the plates, or was the >continued gas production observed at the torch? I guess the plates, being >opaque and close together, would hinder observation considerably.> The stainless steel (SS) plates were 1/8" spaced apart and with the clear acrylic side and bottom walls it was easy to see the gases evolving from the SS plates. >The smaller units you have gathering dust - did/do they exhibit the >continued electrolysis effect? Yes. Even a simple single cell of two 1/32" SS plates at 1/4" spacing (nylon washer used for the spacing with nylon nuts and bolts) in a tank of water and electrolyte NaOH produced excess gas production and gas evolution after the power was cut off. Another maybe interesting observation for some, was the use of table salt, NaCl, for the use of the electrolyte, caused clorine gas evolution (typical) and the forming of green percipatate. The precipatate was studied by Dr. Andrija (Henry) Puharich in his research on the origin of life (Ref.1) and found to be the forming of amino acids! The key seems to be the pulsing of the dc current to the cells that is causing these unique reactions. Even Puharich in his hydrolysis USA Patent found that 600 cycles per second was the key water-splitting frequency for this cell design to achieve 146% efficency. The patent accounts for the ou gas production by absorbing the ambient eviornmental temperature around the cell. His cell design had side fins to absorb the evironmental heat and his gas was also the combined hydrogen and oxygen to be used for fuel for a car engine. At the 120 cps pulse in my WG circuit design, it worked fine but it could be that 600 or another frequency could be even better. I didn't have the time to further research this area. A constant dc current circuit design doesn't work and the cell will heat up like a conventional electrolytic cell with no extra gas evolving after power off. >Do you remember what concentration(s) of NaOH you used when you observed the effect?> The more concentrated the electrolyte the lower the voltage, so I tried different concentrations for different voltage combinations. The 1.5 volts dc was achieved at 50% concentration/saturation for the 1/4" plate spacing. A cell design with 1/16" spacing with 10% concentration also achieved 1.5 volts dc, both cell designs showed the continued electrolysis effect. Cheers, Michael Randall Reference 1) "The Origin of Life Experiments of Andrija Puharich, M.D., L.L.D.", Thomas Valone, M.A., P.E., Integrity Research Institute, 1984. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 00:28:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA22269; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:25:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:25:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 23 Jun 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: [...] > It appears "heat after death" was a misnomer on my part - "electrolysis > after power off", or the more brief "continued electrolysis" would be more > descriptive. I hoped your observation might be related to the "heat after > death" phenomenon observed in P&F type eletrolysis cells - which has been > observed to continue for long periods (many hours). This effect is a clear > sign that some energy generating process is going on. You stated earlier: [...] > > I have another hypothesis for the source of the continued electrolysis. > The cell itself is a capacitor. The ion concentration aligns itself with > the voltage gradient during operation so as to make the electrolyte neutral > at every point except the surface of the electrodes. When the power is > switched off it takes a while for diffusion to balance out the > potential/ion gradient. It would take some experimentation to determine if [...] You're absolutely correct, the electrodes are indeed capacitors. An electrode in an electrolyte forms an electrical double layer, which has a rather large capacity, around 20 uF/cm^2 (it is potential-dependent). Because of the electric shielding from the ions in the electrolyte solution, all parts of the solution volume further away from the electrodes than a few Angstroms are electrically homogeneous. It is a well known phenomenon in electrochemistry that if you interrupt the current, the electrode potential is sustained for some time afterward, and the electrochemical process continues, carried by the charge remaining in that capacitor. Actually, of course, the potential slowly declines in some manner. OK, some numbers now: That cell had a Pd wire end with an area, if I remember rightly, of 0.015 cm^2, or a capacity of about 0.3 uF. It would have been at a charge of about 1 V (we're a bit generous), so we have 0.3 microCoulombs to play with here. At 0.5 A, this gives us 0.6 microsecs of current after switch-off. A quick death. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 00:29:16 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA22341; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:26:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:26:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: cavitation X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >> If this is still the correct explanation, then the bubbles are filled with >> vacuum or water vapour at very low pressure. > >Actually, I seem to recall that degassed water did not produce any light. > >This means that the bubbles become filled with the gasses that are dissovled >into the water. The Scientific American articles discussed the need to thoroughly degass the water before beginning and attempt at sonoluminescence. Recommended steps included boiling and cooling in a refrigerator overnight in flask with vacuum forming stopper. By the approach described there a single bubble or small set of bubbles was formed (and automatically maintaind centered) by the accoustics in the focal point of the vibrating flask. Initially the bubble content would be steam, but the continually expanding and contracting bubble could reach a chemical equilibrium state involving H20, OH, OH-, H+, H, H2O2, H3O+, O, O-, etc. The heat was thought to be due to the compression ration for the trapped gas. The hign compression ratio is achieved due to the nearly spherical shape at which the bubble stablizes. > > >> If they collapse then what mechanism is there to produce high pressure >> and heat. > >The specific answer is a matter of controversy. But "heat" just means >the particles are agitated, and surely the collapse of the confinement >wall is going to add energy to the particles trapped within. > >-- > - 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 - Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 00:36:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA23181; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:33:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:33:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606240726.AAA02865@switzerland.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown's gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: 6/22/96 -0700, you wrote: >David Hildyard wrote, > > I would be interested in hearing what Yul Brown has to say on these stories. >Is someone in a position to ask him? Is he on the internet? Yull Brown is currently selling his Chinese made gas welders. For more information call PACE. As far as these stories, not much more info due to his concentration on the welder design. >Have you heard about the orgone fuel tank? The trick is to coat the fuel >tank with alternate paper/metal layers. Its claimed to boost performance. I haven't heard this one. Has anyone tried it? The air box is being tried by some researchers I know. I'll like this forum know the outcome. Cheers Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 00:41:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA23202; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:33:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:33:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 23 Jun 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > Dan Chicea wrote: > > [snip] > > I would very much appreciate if somebody could provide my a > >photocopy of the US patents 5,018,180 and 5,123,039 by Ken > >Shoulders. Would it cost much to snail-mail it to me? > [snip] > > I have 5,018,180 handy, which I will copy and send to you. I copied it > directly from the microfilm. I made the mistake of copying the lower > patent number first. When I then looked at the second patent on the > microfilm, 5,123,039, I saw it was simply a continuation of the first, > 5,018,180, so there was no change to the technical content or drawings. I > did not copy 5,123,039 because it was a waste of time an money. I would > have if it were small, but this patent is huge. There are 97 figures! > Just the figures section is much larger than most patents. My copy is about > 1 cm thick. This would seem to be important to Dan. Isn't it true that in the US, a copy of any patent can be bought for $1? Can't somebody buy it and send it to him? If I lived there, I'd do it. Here, we are not so lucky; the Hagelstein patent (complete with a letter to Sammy and Flo in the middle of it) cost me a packet, and I gave up ordering them at that point. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 00:45:10 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA23856; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:40:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:40:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624073652_100060.173_JHB83-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: cavitation X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: John, >> Actually, I seem to recall that degassed water did not produce any light. This means that the bubbles become filled with the gasses that are dissolved into the water. << Thats new to me, about the degassed water not fluorescing, but even if the dissolved gasses do come out of solution due to the *reduced* pressure inside the bubble, then >> But "heat" just means the particles are agitated, and surely the collapse of the confinement wall is going to add energy to the particles trapped within. << the high temp. supposedly produced, not by agitation of the particles, but by adiabatic compression of the gasses in the bubble, which is what I was taught way back in the dim distant past, hardly holds water if the starting point is a bubble full of adiabatically expanded and therefore cooled gas. The straightforward heating by the viscous disruption of the water molecules in the Griggs rotary cheese grater is nothing new. After all this is the original Joule experiment to prove the mechanical equivalent of heat. What is strange is that no one in the many years of re-proving this "law" with rotary stirrers and centrifugal pumps has noticed the ou effect which the Griggs stirrer seems to produce at up to 170%. The Meyer effect, according to Meyer's literature, is due entirely to some resonant forces causing disruption of the water molecules, could it be that Griggs has accidentally hit on the right frequency, generating ultrasound in the casing cavity by the mini-organ pipes drilled into the periphery of his disc, and this is giving some degree of ou? Its certainly safer than >10kV at 16kHz which is what Meyer prescribes. Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 00:56:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA25030; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624074926_100433.1541_BHG124-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: J J Thomson's X3 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: There's lovely little report in a very old Nature, about 1917 I think. J J Thomson had got a bit annoyed at claims of transmutation, so he set up some experiments and reported on them. His results were quite fascinating, yet nobody seems ever to have followed them up. What he did was to use a concave cathode to focus 'kathode rays' on metal samples, and then use his 'method of positive rays' (mass spectrometry) to study the gases emitted. He concluded that there was a gas of mass number 3, very firmly adhering to the metal. For example, he could boil lead (sic!!) for days and still get his "X3" to be emitted from a sample. He could get this result from a piece of metal (I think they were all very heavy elements like Pt or Pb), and gradually the effect would be reduced - as if the "X3" was being driven out of the sample. If anybody is interested, I could drag out the reference to this stuff. After all, ol' J J was no slouch at experimental physics, so what the hell was he seeing? Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 01:16:28 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA26788; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 01:14:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 01:14:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >On Sun, 23 Jun 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: > >> Dan Chicea wrote: >> >> [snip] >> > I would very much appreciate if somebody could provide my a >> >photocopy of the US patents 5,018,180 and 5,123,039 by Ken >> >Shoulders. Would it cost much to snail-mail it to me? >> [snip] >> >> I have 5,018,180 handy, which I will copy and send to you. I copied it >> directly from the microfilm. I made the mistake of copying the lower >> patent number first. When I then looked at the second patent on the >> microfilm, 5,123,039, I saw it was simply a continuation of the first, >> 5,018,180, so there was no change to the technical content or drawings. I >> did not copy 5,123,039 because it was a waste of time an money. I would >> have if it were small, but this patent is huge. There are 97 figures! >> Just the figures section is much larger than most patents. My copy is about >> 1 cm thick. > >This would seem to be important to Dan. Isn't it true that in the US, a copy >of any patent can be bought for $1? Can't somebody buy it and send it to him? >If I lived there, I'd do it. Here, we are not so lucky; the Hagelstein patent >(complete with a letter to Sammy and Flo in the middle of it) cost me a packet, >and I gave up ordering them at that point. >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >| 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 | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Uh, I just offered to send the info per the above. I said "I have 5,018,180 handy, which I will copy and send to you." Is there something wrong with my offer? The technical specifications are not changed from the one patent to the next, so I did not see any reason to copy the second patent for myself. If someone feels stongly that some revised claims legalease is worth the extra money have at it. I am broke. It's all I can afford to do to copy and mail until after August 1. I am lucky to be able to do that. I just fixed my copier, which has been down for a few months. I am eager to try to help Dan Chicea though, because others have helped me with copies of papers, and I want to return the favor. BTW, the USPTO upped the price to $3 per patent and it takes 5-6 weeks. You can also order via internet in the US and pay $6 per patent plus overnight shipping rates (within the US). This is a really good deal for long patents like this one, and not so good for the short ones. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 02:28:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA02568; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 02:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 02:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624091322_100433.1541_BHG145-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Wildest speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dieter, > As for accelerating mirrors etc, Claudia Eberlein described the > process in her recent paper, and rather than give you lot hope, > she dashed them, by showing that the light given off from these > only mimick the spectrum of but do not produce very high > temperatures. So if you invoke accelerating mirrors, be at least > aware that they are evidence against anomalous "over unity" > effects, not for. Hey, I was only speculating wildly! Two points here, though. I know that Eberlein suggests that accelerating mirrors will conserve zpf energy, but others are less sure. Both sides do exotic mathematics which outside my grasp, so I just gotta watch and accept that either might be right. The other point is that I was not suggesting super-high temperatures - I was very sceptical about the "2 million degrees" stuff in that New Scientist article. I was suggesting huge *forces*, not huge energies. And I know when I'm drivelling. I do that whenever I go beyond basic phys and chem. And even sometimes when I do not. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 02:30:22 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA03052; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 02:27:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 02:27:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlagarde@cyberaccess.fr (Jean_de_Lagarde) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Gap in the messages X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Can someone explain why there seems to have been a gap in the messages ? Having subscribed to vortex-L on June 13th, I immediately got between 20 and 30 messages each day dated from 14th to 19th of June and nothing for three days until Dieter Britz's post dated June 24 answering to a post of 22th that I never got. How should I interpret this ? Jean de Lagarde From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 02:41:16 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA04087; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 02:37:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 02:37:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 24 Jun 1996, Horace Heffner wrote: [...] > >> patent number first. When I then looked at the second patent on the > >> microfilm, 5,123,039, I saw it was simply a continuation of the first, > >> 5,018,180, so there was no change to the technical content or drawings. I > >> did not copy 5,123,039 because it was a waste of time an money. I would > >> have if it were small, but this patent is huge. There are 97 figures! > >> Just the figures section is much larger than most patents. My copy is about > >> 1 cm thick. > > > >This would seem to be important to Dan. Isn't it true that in the US, a copy > >of any patent can be bought for $1? Can't somebody buy it and send it to him? [....] > Uh, I just offered to send the info per the above. I said "I have 5,018,180 > handy, which I will copy and send to you." Is there something wrong with my > offer? The technical specifications are not changed from the one patent to I meant the one you say is not worth bothering with. For Dan, it may still be important background info. And you don't need to copy it if you (or someone who is not broke) can get it for $3. My apologies if I have ruffled some feathers, that was not what I intended. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 03:16:16 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA06410; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 03:11:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 03:11:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624060716_141494857@emout12.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: EclectiKat@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: J J Thomson's X3 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-06-24 03:55:46 EDT, you write: > >If anybody is interested, I could drag out the reference to this stuff. >After all, ol' J J was no slouch at experimental physics, so what the hell >was >he seeing? > >Chris > > Yes, that would be interesting, I would be interested in this. Jeff Golin From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 05:53:55 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA17519; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 05:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 05:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31ce8186.46872344@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Nothing from Joe Champion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:51:16 -0700 (PDT), Jed Rothwell wrote: >To: Vortex > >On Wednesday, June 19, Joe Champion called me on the phone and said that about >a pound of sample material had been shipped out to me by Federal Express for >delivery on Thursday. He faxed me a short paper and he said that he would >later fax me copies of the shipping papers. It is now 4:00 p.m. on Friday. I >have received no fax and no shipment. > >- Jed > > So either he didn't send it, or it got way-layed in between. Perhaps personal hand to hand delivery is in order? 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 05:51:57 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA17595; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 05:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 05:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31ce7b4c.45278693@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Isotope abundances X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:46:00 -0700 (PDT), Chris Tinsley wrote: >To:Vortex > > >While we await the safe arrival of the metals from Joe Champion, here is >a list of the nuclides (stable and very long-lived) with their natural >abundances. Note also the Delta-MeV realtive to C12 = 0. > >This was partly scanned, and partly hand input, so don't assume it is >absolutely perfect. [snip] This information is available for any isotope at: http://hpngp01.kaeri.re.kr/CoN/index.html or http://necs01.dne.bnl.gov/CoN/index.html Downloadable tables can be found at: http://isotopes.lbl.gov/isotopes/toi.html 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 05:57:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA18998; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 05:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 05:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31ce7d96.45864817@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: velocity of longitudinal EM wave X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 22 Jun 1996 23:48:35 -0700 (PDT), Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >To continue on this line of thought, to get a Delta(phi) of 64 deg. over a >distance of 400 m, and to assume the longitudinal wave moves at the speed >of light, the phase for the fiber at 400 m must be (81.0 - 16.2) + 64 = >128.8 > > > >This means: > >phi = 128.8 = (400)*(360)/lambda > >lambda = 1118 > >V = 1118 * 135000 = 1.509 x 10^8 > >So, the index of refreaction of the glass must be 299792458 / 1.509 x 10^8 >= 1.986. This is very high, but maybe within the range of possibility. >Unless I have made an error, it would be good to determine the index of >refraction of the fiber used for the measurement. > > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > Horace, I could well be mistaken, since it's 20 years since I looked at any of this, but I seem to remember that optical fibres actually are the other way around. I.e. a core of glass with a high index of refraction surrounded by a layer with a low index of refraction. You can actually test this with a glass of water. If you fill a glass, and set it on the table, then look up at the surface of the water from underneath, you will see that at a sufficiently low angle relative to the surface, the surface becomes a perfect mirror. This is an example of what happens to light passing through a dense medium (water), when it encounters a boundary with a less dense medium (air). It gets totally reflected at the boundary when the angle is less than the Brillouin angle (sp?). The angle is determined by the relative indices of refraction. It is this reflective principle that is used in fibre optics. So it is not surprising that the value you calculate above is close to the upper bound of the values you looked up. 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 08:46:12 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA15456; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 08:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 08:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624112128_223824662@emout14.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Puthoff@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Anyone know the patent number for Puharich's water-splitting device? Hal Puthoff From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 10:13:17 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA01647; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 09:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 09:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624124704_223883071@emout10.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Puthoff@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dan, A reference to the charge-cluster (EV) phenomenon in the physics literature can be found in the paper R. W. Ziolkowski and M. Tippett, "Collective effect in an electron plasma system catalyzed by a localized electromagnetic wave," Physical Review A, vol. 43, p. 3066 (15 March 1991). Although the main point of the paper is to propose a particular theory to account for charge clustering, the parameters of the charge-cluster phenomenon is spelled out in detail in the paper., with reference to Ken Shoulders' work. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 10:39:13 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA06909; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 10:16:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 10:16:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606241710.KAA07714@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Samples from Joe Champion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: The following samples were sent to Jed on Friday, June 21, 1996 via UPS Next Day Air from Bakersfield, CA tracking number UPS-N0026083114. The samples were as follows: Sample #1: Lead/Iron Bar - This was a 900oC conversion of 99.995% pure ARASCO Pb with regent grade Fe. Starting weight 12.0 kg. Metals physically recovered: Au and Pt. Sample #B1: Bismuth Bar - Similar to the above without the addition of Fe. Bi was 99.995% pure from ASARCO. Starting weight 15.0 kg. Metals physically recovered Au and Pt. Sample #2: 120 hour 900oC reaction of 99.995% pure ARASCO Pb. Starting weight 35.0 kg. New metals observed after process - Ca, Ba, Mg, Mo, +++ total production of new metals greater than 6.0 percent. Sample #2 Slag form Bar: A coating that formed on the bar after cooling. Sample #2 Oxides from Bar: >20% of the original bar weight converted to oxides during a thirty day period. ________________ Mineral Sample: ESM Head Ore: An alkaline earth mineral existing in a 5,000,000 ton deposit. This mineral assays at an average of 1.5 ppm of combined Ag and Au (note: no Pt detection). ESM Treated Ore: Is the ore after it has gone through an esoteric process at ~80oC. The ending results show an Au and Pt concentration of 108.8 ppm. [Note: Ending weight after treatment was equal to starting weight. Hence, no mechanical concentration occurred.] Refined precious metals samples from ESM Treated Ore: Various samples of physically recovered metals from the ESM Treated Ore. Process for recovery was fire assay and cuppelation. Purpose of providing this sample is to demonstrate by isotopic distribution that a transmutation occurred from the mineral based process. If the isotopic distribution is within the realm of normality, then one would have to assume that the process is only that of collection. This being said, one would then be able to say that the 5,000,000 ton deposit has a value (considering homogeneity) of 17,490,274 troy ounces of precious metals. However, if isotopic anomalies exist in the "after treatment" analysis and are not observed in the "before treatment" analysis, then one would have to say that this mineral may be a good catalyst for nuclear transmutation. _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 11:13:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA14390; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 10:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 10:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624155249_100433.1541_BHG88-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Sir J J Thomson and X3. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex In response to a flood of requests (well, one anyway) I dug this out of my archive: Recently I was fascinated to see a report (Nature, Feb 13 1913[sic!] p645, Vol 90) in the form of a letter from Sir J J Thomson, the discoverer of the electron, and pioneer of 'positive rays' - a type of mass-spectrometry - in which he thoroughly disposes of a claim of transmutation of metals into He and Ne. This claim was by none less than Sir Wm Ramsay, Prof Collie and a Mr Patterson. His primary object, he says, 'was to investigate the origin and properties of a new gas of atomic weight 3, which I shall call X[sub]3, which I discovered by the positive-ray method.' He comments on having often seen large quantities of (I'll call it) X3, and says that 'this gas appears to have escaped the notice of the readers of the paper at the Chemical Society.' (A splendid early example of physicist- chemist squabble, and quite a good put-down, too). He thought it might be a new triatomic molecule of hydrogen, it may be recalled that deuterium was not discovered for almost another twenty years, and He-3 is very very much less common in atmosphere than He-4. He says that the best way he found of getting X3 was to bombard metals etc with electrons ('kathode rays'), by discharge from a Wehnelt Kathode through a gas at low pressure, and by arc discharge in a gas at comparatively high pressure, the first way being the best. He used a curved focussing cathode, and zapped metal hard enough to make it glow bright red. he got X3 from iron, nickel, nickel oxide, zinc, copper, various samples of lead, platinum, two meteorites(!) and a bit of black mica from Sir James Dewar. Platinum was best. He got loads of X3 on the first day, washed out the tube, got the same on the second day and repeated on the third - much less - and on the fourth virtually no X3, and the neon line was scarcely visible. The helium, which must be He-4, he found was most quickly cleared out. He goes on, but his tentative conclusion is that the X3 is not from transmutation, but rather from a gas tightly bound by the metal. He tried boiling lead for some hours, without diminishing its capability to produce X3, none was given off, and the sample remaining still gave X3. As he says, it seems to have been 'surprisingly firmly held by the metal', only beating it for prolonged periods with electrons would shift the stuff out. He asks how it gets there. He says it's not in the atmosphere. So, what is this X3? Does anybody know the end to this tale? Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 12:58:43 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA04669; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 12:41:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 12:41:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1996Jun24.150222.1255.1010874@mspost.ic.gc.ca> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: steckly.gary@ic.gc.ca (Steckly, Gary: DGRB) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I have it in pdf if you want it Gary ---------- From: vortex-l To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf Date: June 24, 1996 08:34 Anyone know the patent number for Puharich's water-splitting device? Hal Puthoff From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 13:21:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA09288; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 13:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 13:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624200020_72240.1256_EHB146-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Samples from Joe Champion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Joe Champion writes: "The following samples were sent to Jed on Friday, June 21, 1996 via UPS Next Day Air from Bakersfield, CA tracking number UPS-N0026083114. The samples were as follows: Sample #1: Lead/Iron Bar - This was a 900oC conversion of 99.995% pure ARASCO Pb with regent grade Fe . . . Good. Thanks. I look forward to seeing the materials. Thanks for posting the shipping manifest. E-mail is easier than faxing, isn't it? - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 13:56:09 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA16856; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 13:42:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 13:42:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606242027.PAA04440@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Samples from Joe Champion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > The samples were as follows: > > Sample #1: Lead/Iron Bar - This was a 900oC conversion of 99.995% Jed, if the samples are sufficiently ample, you should consider splitting them and sending just enough to Japan, retaining the rest here for further investigation. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 14:13:23 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA20102; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 13:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 13:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael Randall wrote: >6/23/96, >>Horace Heffner wrote: >>[snip] >> >>It appears "heat after death" was a misnomer on my part - "electrolysis >>after power off", or the more brief "continued electrolysis" would be more >>descriptive. I hoped your observation might be related to the "heat after >>death" phenomenon observed in P&F type eletrolysis cells - which has been >>observed to continue for long periods (many hours). This effect is a clear >>sign that some energy generating process is going on. > >I thought that in the P&F type electrolysis cells it was the "heat" that >they are claiming to be the excess energy for ou and not the excess gas >production. In the "water gas" (WG) type of cell unit that I built there are >a couple of areas that could be excess energy. > >1. The observed continued electrolysis process several minutes after power >is turned off. >2. Large volumes of WG produced at little power input. I am sorry I can not seem to make clear this simple and almost trivial thought. I see Dieter did not totally catch what I was saying either. I need to improve my writing skills - just leave too many things "between the lines". "Heat after death" is a term already applied by others to the effect observed by various researchers on P&F type cells. I thought your effect might involve heat, (in fact boiling heat) so might be considered a "heat after death" phenomenon, so referred to it by that name in an earlier post. You have said there is no heat, so I backed off of that and said maybe it ("it" being your observed effect, i.e. as opposed to "heat after death") might better be called "continued electrolysis". This was not meant to imply that the well established "heat after death" phenomenon should be referred to as "continued electrolysis". On the contrary, I was attempting to establish a vocabulary to distinguish between the two effects. The "heat after death" effect clearly demonstrates a continuing and unexplained source of energy within the P&F type cell following the turn off of the electrolysis current. This has been well established, or at least thoroughly debated and discussed in s.p.f. Your "continued electrolysis" effect might also represent a source of unexplained energy, provided it is not fed by the capacitance of the many stainless steel plates involved or the cell electrochemistry. It is not likely there is enought capacitance in the cell to drive visible continued electrolysis for a couple minutes. I suggest a simple test of this. Operate the machine and then monitor the voltage on the plates after turn off and compare to the gas evolved. If the voltage drops faster than the gas evolution it seems to me you have something significant to study. Can you do this test Michael? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 15:06:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA00666; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 14:53:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 14:53:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606242148.OAA05017@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Samples from Joe Champion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 01:42 PM 6/24/96 -0700, you wrote: > >> The samples were as follows: >> >> Sample #1: Lead/Iron Bar - This was a 900oC conversion of 99.995% > >Jed, if the samples are sufficiently ample, you should consider splitting >them and sending just enough to Japan, retaining the rest here for further >investigation. > >Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Scott, what investigation. Not to be rude, but we have kilograms of this material available. The first thing to accomplish is -- are isotopic anomalies present? >From that point forward, what test(s) other than radiation studies can one accomplish, that is, short of selling the material? Present a point and I will have material sent directly to you, or your assignee for testing. _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 15:31:11 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA04103; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 15:10:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 15:10:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606242203.PAA10448@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Wildest speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 11:53 PM 6/22/96 -0700, you wrote: >To:Vortex;internet:puthoff@aol.com > >Dr Puthoff says he welcomes speculation - and that puts me on the spot, >because I don't like speculating. Newton refused to hypothesise >(although I suspect this was a debating ploy), and what was good enough >for Newton ... > > >Why should CF seem so oddly like metal-catalysis? ah so, a key insight, I do suspect...cf will become a branch of not "nuclear fusion" but of "transmutation", which occurs in conjuction with the "catalytic metals", which most likely is connected with their geometry and hence their electromotive capabilities. Geometry and electrons are the keys, and obviously the vigah and tempo of the weilu master's dance. There is also one other unsuspected, I suspect, field ingredient, which a year of post's here have failed to show any consideration, yet it is fundametal. Hint: take a look at Russell's magnetism. if Champion's demo is real and persausive (replicable) I would suggest that cf people take time out for a lateral switch in perspective in the search for a crystallizing idea. and re-examine Champion and cf from the point of view of Russell to find that cystallizing idea. The electrical field and the vortices it creates, underlaying the CETI and other stuff in the nominal cf arena, is only one half of the dance. The other half is the magnetic field, and the vortices which it creates. The CETI cell stuff discussed here on Vortex is two dimensional in its thinking. Zen master says, Weilu master dances on two legs in four dimensions. Rethink the geometry of the dance with two legs. Remember, all metals have causal and reactive properties nominally discussed as "magnetism", there being also diamagnetic and paramagnetic properties to consider. the crystallizing idea is not in the numbers, it is in the vision somebody is going to get about how this stuff dances around. Are such catalytic >metals ones whose EM reflection characteristics mean that they are very >good mirrors for the zpf? Pt and Pd are excellent reflectors of light, >is Pt- or Pd-black an excellent reflector of the zpf? Is that kind of >catalysis a zpf 'electron mirror' effect? Should we be looking for a >metal which is especially good for those frequencies? Are the >reflection characteristics of a metallic surface (on bulk, or >ultra-fine powder samples) any indication of its 'internal' reflecting >ability? > good questions. >Yes, everybody - I am *perfectly* aware that all this stuff is a tissue >of nonsense. Disagreements most welcome, except that I'm not proposing >an idea. I just let my half-senile brain off the leash, to go for a >little scamper on its own for a few minutes - and look what happens! > >I blame Hal Puthoff for asking.... > >Chris >/ex I blame you for this little giddy stroll. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 16:39:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA18067; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 16:28:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 16:28:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606242250.AA29047@echo.i-link.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (21st Century Logic) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >At 12:06 PM 6/19/96 -0700, you wrote: >>>We are here because the type of discussion below is a waste of time. The >>>minds here are hardly crybabies. We simply discern the intelligence of more >>>productive pursuits. End of discussion. >> >>***{In my view, it is not a "waste of time" for those who have the capacity >>to reason to hold their ground and participate in internet newsgroups, in >>spite of the desires of hate-filled conformists to drive them out. The >>appropriate way to deal with flames is with *reason*, not with flight into >>hiding places such as this group, where an information daddy has been >>appointed to protect the little kiddies who are afraid to protect >>themselves. If such a statement seems unkind I am sorry, but I look upon >>this type of flight behavior with the same disdain that blacks reserve for >>members of their race who sit at the back of the bus. You guys are far >>better, and far brighter, than the flamers who drove you out of >>sci.physics.fusion. You have a better right to be there than they do. Why >>should you let them drive you out, when you can use reason to drive *them* >>out? I'll grant that responding to flames can be unpleasant, and that it is >>difficult. It is a high art form that must be learned through practice. But >>if you think it is a "waste of time" to have pride in what you are and, as >>a consequence, to stand up for your rights, then I strongly disagree. >>--Mitchell Jones}*** >> >>> > >Mitchell, I am failing to get my point accross. Nobody drives me anywhere, >in or out, and I rather suspect that is true for most of those on Vortex. I >am up to my earballs in work and I do not have the time to placate people >who are so poorly skilled in thinking and doing that they indulge in utterly >useless rhetoric to vent emotional reactions which they have confused with >points of logic. If you have the time, more power to you, go for it. ***{Michael, I don't know you, and I am not about to dispute your statements about your character and personal motivations. Speaking in general, however, and not about any individual in particular, I do believe that most participants in this group are here because they are fleeing from the perceived unpleasantness of the situation on sci.physics.fusion (and on other "unmoderated" internet newsgroups), where they have discovered that hate-filled conformists stand ready to punish them for unconventional thinking, by showering them with sneers, contempt, and cruel personal invective. In my view, those who flee from the flamers are reacting emotionally rather than rationally. They fail to recognize that the technique of the counterflame, when developed through practice, can be an adequate form of self-defense on the net. The key strategy, where counterflaming is concerned, is to use what the flamer said as evidence, deduce from it his underlying character flaws, and expose those flaws to the world. A good counterflame is like judo: you use the flamer's force to take him down. It is important, however, both that you should not lower yourself to his level (e.g., by calling him names such as "scumbag," "liar," etc.) and that you should not treat him with respect. Moreover, you have to be very self-critical of what you say in a counterflame: any logical or factual error will be seized upon eagerly by your opponent. Thus it is important to severely criticize your own comments before you send them off. Those who learn to apply such principles soon discover that they have nothing to fear from the flamers, and can participate fully on the net. Why bother to learn such techniques? Simple: it is a matter of self-respect. People who reason well have at least as much right to express themselves on the net as do conformists, retards, and the hate-filled flamers who act as their enforcers. Why should the best and the brightest give up their cultural influence by fleeing into protected enclaves such as this, when they can use their intelligence to defeat those who want to run them off of the net? Indeed, what will happen to the world, if a medium such as this is given over, without a fight, to the control of the most vicious, mindless, and evil members of the human population? Think about it. --Mitchell Jones}*** >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm@aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 16:44:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA18188; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 16:28:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 16:28:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606242301.SAA16618@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Samples from Joe Champion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 14:53 6/24/96 -0700, Joe Champion wrote: > >Scott, what investigation. Not to be rude, but we have kilograms of this >material available. The first thing to accomplish is -- are isotopic >anomalies present? Right. Suppose the Japanese lab comes back with a distinct isotopic anomaly. That would stimulate me to fork over some bucks to have the tests repeated at some US labs...following the oft-ignored adage that "fantastic results merit fantastic measurement thoroughness". For that we'd need additional samples and it would just be convenient to have splits of the same samples that went to Japan...that's all. Thanks for the offer of samples. I'll try to dig up some local mass spec capability. I know there are several good systems in town...just need to call in some old favors, etc. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 16:46:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA18405; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 16:29:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 16:29:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Volodya :from St.Pete X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: There are several problems with the "velocity of light" measurement proposed by the "Siberian person": 1. Conventional physics claims that the GROUP VELOCITY can not exceed c. The phase velocity can exceed c, and many, many examples are known. The experiment described measures phase velocity. 2. The measurements described are taken in the near field of the antenna, that is, less than a few wavelengths from it. In the near field there is (a) substantial longitudinal field component, and (b) phase velocity different from c. However, these components of the wave decay faster than 1/r, hence they do not propagate over large distances. These effects are classical and are well known. 3. Phase shift of a tuned LC circuit is a sensitive function of tuning. Use of tuned circuits makes accurate phase measurements difficult. Therefore, the measurements described establish neither propagating longitudinal electromagnetic waves nor superluminal propagation. 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 17:44:36 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA00598; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 17:32:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 17:32:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >Yes it is a neat gadget. Prof. Brown demonstrated some of the flame >properties from his unit as follows (ref 1.): > >1. The Brown's Gas flame could subliminate tungsten which occurs at 5900C. >Holes can be burned through refractory bricks, steel can be welded to brick. >2. The gas implodes from 1866.6 units to 1 unit of liquid water that creates >a vacuum in the process. >3. A decrease of radiation from 1000 on the Geiger counter to a reading of >40 for nuclear radiation disposal. In other words, a transmutation of >radioactive material. To my knowledge, no one on this list has ever said what Brown's gas actually is; or else I missed the post. Anyway, I can offer a conventional explanation for item 2 stated above: When a stochiometric mixture of 2 H2 + O2 (or 2H + O) combines, the product is very hot H2O vapor. If the reaction occurs inside a container, and if no other gas is present, the vapor is free to condense rapidly on the cold walls. The energy of reaction is transferred to heat in the wall. However, because the wall mass is so large relative to the vapor's (in a lab bench top sized experiment), the final wall temperature is low. If, however, the same reaction occurs in the presence of more than a small amount of other gas(es), the hot water vapor can not condense rapidly on the wall, because the H2O molecules collide with the other gas. Then, the only way H2O can condense is by diffusing through the other gas. However, diffusion is a slow process, and long before significant H2O can condense, the hot gas mixture exerts a large pressure. I predict that if the stochiometric mixture ignition were repeated rapidly in a closed container, the wall temperature will increase with each ignition, as will the condensation pressure. Soon the chamber pressure will be dangerously large. 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 19:11:24 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA17689; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 19:04:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 19:04:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: dacha@shentel.net To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: From Volodya: Last Day X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I tell you about the end of the conference. I would like to tell about the electrodynamics additionally after some discussion with my friends. At the end day, the discussion took place. Because in times of stagnation such a conference was absolutely impossible in Russia many outsiders of science couldn't claim their points of view. So they are very happy to speak freely. However, it doesn't justify their mistakes. For example, as I told Einstein was illegal person there. However, nobody can give serious proof of incorrectness of Einstein theory. It was decided for a first time to concentrate on publishing of the proceeding of the conference. One person offered to arrange such conferences every year, however, it is impossible. Really, the people will make something new only in some years (three or more). I should say that scientific levels of the lectures were very different. We have heard excellent experimental work of Ignatiev (he didn't hide his secrets). The lecture of Belousov (interferometer) is very interesting too. Mr.Kashuba gave a simple explanation why the hyroscopic motor oriented at a certain direction creates levitation (anti-gravity) force. The lecture of Prof.Rosenblum was on high scientific level. At the same time, it follows from the lectures of some speakers that they made absolutely original theories. Ancient Egypet, Greese and then they are. And nobody else. Some guests from Japan were there. It seems they are spys. No one lecture, however, they made the photos of all the papers. Concerning the scientific worth, I should say that three main subjects could be extracted: - obtaining of anti-gravity by means of rotation with very high speed; - a possibility to get the energy from potential field, conserving that field as unchanged; How about the law of conservation of the energy I don't know. - mysterious transfer of the time into the energy (these works are based on Kozyrev's ideas) However, one person who is now like a historian of Kozyrev said Kozyrev created only the concept but the theory of transfer of the time into the energy should be developed yet. It was no one work on cold fusion. As I know, the conference in Dagomys on CF should be held now or around this time. Electrodynamical works are divided into two directions: researches and using the radiators made in form of Moebius belt; - longitudinal and non-Lorentz forces. I think it would be better if we extract these works from the common background. At least, they are close to reality than the other ones. There are some notes on perpetuum mobile. However, using new physical effects one can make such a perpetuum mobile that it is able to operate without the energy input for some years. Some people said me the same words that certain relaxation processes can go for few years and during whole this period of time the system will extract the energy, however, in very and very small values. Finally, I would like to state one el-dynamical problem which in spite its simplicity can have great consequences. Let's imagine, in frame of classical electrodynamics, two particles of + and - charges. The particles move uniformly at one straight line one to another. At a some time the partices will be at one point of the space and we assume they annihilate. Now we calculate the energy of the electrical fields of the particles. Because this energy is of a square form E*E it is always positive. When the particles approach one to another the energy tends to zero as linear function of the distance between the particles. So if we assume the particles move with identical velocities v the energy will be equal to zero over all the space at the time of annihilation (two symmetrical fields of Liennard-Wiekhert form coincide and annihilate each others). However, if we assume one particle is at rest and the other moves the electrical fields of the particles will be different. The moving particle has a field of L-W type, the particle at rest has Coulomb field. So at the time of annihilation some positive energy must still exist. It means the energy determines by the observer what is impossible fact! With warm regard, Volodya From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 19:56:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA24967; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 19:47:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 19:47:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960624223558_338523966@emout09.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Puthoff@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Gary, I want it! (Puharich patent) Hal Puthoff From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 23:00:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA21979; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 22:39:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 22:39:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606250533.WAA14192@hungary.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 08:34 AM 6/24/96 -0700, you wrote: >Anyone know the patent number for Puharich's water-splitting device? > >Hal Puthoff > USA Patent number 4,394,230, July 19 1983, "Method and Apparatus for Splitting Water Molecules", Inventor: Henry K. Puharich. Puharich also researched and had (deceased 1994) several patents on new ways to help the hearing impaired by transmitting sound through the skin that could be heard in the head thereby bypassing the ear canal. Patrick Flanagan also worked in this area for the past 36 years called his technology neurophone. Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 23:31:32 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA27371; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:11:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:11:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606250557.WAA15516@hungary.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >6/24/96, >>>Horace Heffner wrote: >>>[snip] >>> >I am sorry I can not seem to make clear this simple and almost trivial >thought. I see Dieter did not totally catch what I was saying either. I >need to improve my writing skills - just leave too many things "between the >lines". > Your "continued electrolysis" >effect might also represent a source of unexplained energy, provided it is >not fed by the capacitance of the many stainless steel plates involved or >the cell electrochemistry. It is not likely there is enought capacitance >in the cell to drive visible continued electrolysis for a couple minutes. >I suggest a simple test of this. Operate the machine and then monitor the >voltage on the plates after turn off and compare to the gas evolved. If >the voltage drops faster than the gas evolution it seems to me you have >something significant to study. > > >Can you do this test Michael? Not at this time. Some researchers over in Australia also found this "effect" and I'll find out if they have any numbers on their work. As per my simple research, the voltage dropped from 1.75 volt to 8 volts within 2 minutes and the gas evolution dropped (visual observations) at the same rate. What I was trying to acheive was a steady 1.5 voltage with steady gas production without any input power. I had heard that this could be done and had been done by some researchers (electrolytic cell running for hours without input power) that they were trying to find out how it could be reproduced for others. There were a number of problems to reproduce the "effect" and other approaches are currently being looked at. Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 23:50:36 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA01788; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Sir J J Thomson and X3. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 24 Jun 1996, Chris Tinsley wrote: > Recently I was fascinated to see a report (Nature, Feb 13 1913[sic!] > p645, Vol 90) in the form of a letter from Sir J J Thomson, the > discoverer of the electron, and pioneer of 'positive rays' - a type of > mass-spectrometry - in which he thoroughly disposes of a claim of > transmutation of metals into He and Ne. This claim was by none less > than Sir Wm Ramsay, Prof Collie and a Mr Patterson. His primary > object, he says, 'was to investigate the origin and properties of a new > gas of atomic weight 3, which I shall call X[sub]3, which I discovered > by the positive-ray method.' Ah! I'll go look that up; I was going to look at the 1917 lot. Thanks. > So, what is this X3? Does anybody know the end to this tale? I have no doubt that this has been followed up since, but here is my guess. Metals do accumulate some hydrogen due to surface corrosion. It has various mobilities in different metals, with diffusion coefficients differing by many orders of magnitude. Deuterium makes up a small fraction - 0.015%, says Emsley "The Elements" - of natural hydrogen. Hydrogen atoms exchange with each other rather easily, so most deuterium would be in the form of HD, or in water, HDO. So hydrogen sputtered off metals will have a fraction as HD or, in the case of e beams, HD+ ions. In fact, people who try to detect 3He or tritium by MS have to have good resolution to distinguish between three different sources of M3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Mon Jun 24 23:53:25 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA01854; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:42:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:42:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: P/D conductor to create condensed charge X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Begin quote of my prior post: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >On Sat, 15 Jun 1996 10:38:12 -0700 (PDT), Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >>I don't know if D conductors have been made, but creating actual fusion at >>the needle tip would be much more practical using D, because the D + D >>reaction should be much more probable than P + P fusion. > >This sounds a lot like a description of some of the glow discharge >experiments that have been done. > >[snip] > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk By this I assume you mean the glow discharge on Pd wire experiments by Claytor et al descirbed at: or maybe some of the various transmutation experiments as described in Infinite Energy, or maybe Piantelli? Also of interest might be the new ou "Pulsed Cold Plasma" devices invented by Paulo Correa, US Patents 5,416,391, 5,449,989, and 5,502,354. A press release can be found at: What I have suggested is very different from these experiments in that the source of ions is from conduction bands, which must be formed in a solid (or maybe liquid as Bill Page suggests). The ions issue forth from a solid, not a gas, a specific kind of solid, i.e. one which possesses the necessary proton or deuteron conduction band, that is positive and the surface of which is in a very high field gradient at a point. This suggestion is logical becuase there is evidence (i.e. US Patents) that suggest such a configuration can produce a very small version of ball lightning. If a negative electrode can do this with electrons, perhaps a positive electrode made of a suitable conductor can do this for ions. If it can produce a self containing very energetic ball of ions (i.e. 10 KeV), it is reasonable that fusion to some degree may occur. An interresting test of this, and maybe simultaneously Bill Page's proton conduction band hypothesis, might be to produce HV positive pulses in an electrolyte at the tip of a very fine glass capillary tube, i.e. one that is stetched down to a micron sized tip. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End Quote I see I owe an apology to Alexandra Correa who is pictured on the front cover of Infinite Energy No. 7, just out. She is co-inventor of the Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge system now ready for commercialization, and I failed to mention her name above. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 00:09:36 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA05719; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 00:05:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 00:05:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606250704.AAA18803@hungary.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 05:32 PM 6/24/96 -0700, you wrote: >>Yes it is a neat gadget. Prof. Brown demonstrated some of the flame >>properties from his unit as follows (ref 1.): >> >>1. The Brown's Gas flame could subliminate tungsten which occurs at 5900C. >>Holes can be burned through refractory bricks, steel can be welded to brick. >>2. The gas implodes from 1866.6 units to 1 unit of liquid water that creates >>a vacuum in the process. >>3. A decrease of radiation from 1000 on the Geiger counter to a reading of >>40 for nuclear radiation disposal. In other words, a transmutation of >>radioactive material. > >To my knowledge, no one on this list has ever said what Brown's gas >actually is; or else I missed the post. >From what I understand and read todate, Brown's Gas is a unique and unusual property of the production and flame charateristics of the stoichiometric mix of mon-atomic hydrogen and oxygen gas from hydrolysis. Little is known about his electrolyzer but from my previous posts there is enough info to recreate this gas. As for the flame, the implosion of the gas, that has properties (some listed above), it is well documented in several journals over the past 25 years. Currently you can buy a BG welding unit for $5,500 while supplies last by contacting The Planatary Association for Clean Energy (PACE). PACE has been writing about Brown's Gas and other alternative clean energy sources for over twenty five years. >Anyway, I can offer a conventional >explanation for item 2 stated above: > >When a stochiometric mixture of 2 H2 + O2 (or 2H + O) combines, the product >is very hot H2O vapor. If the reaction occurs inside a container, and if >no other gas is present, the vapor is free to condense rapidly on the cold >walls. The energy of reaction is transferred to heat in the wall. >However, because the wall mass is so large relative to the vapor's (in a >lab bench top sized experiment), the final wall temperature is low. If, >however, the same reaction occurs in the presence of more than a small >amount of other gas(es), the hot water vapor can not condense rapidly on >the wall, because the H2O molecules collide with the other gas. Then, the >only way H2O can condense is by diffusing through the other gas. However, >diffusion is a slow process, and long before significant H2O can condense, >the hot gas mixture exerts a large pressure. > >I predict that if the stochiometric mixture ignition were repeated rapidly >in a closed container, the wall temperature will increase with each >ignition, as will the condensation pressure. Soon the chamber pressure >will be dangerously large. > >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 > Maybe true. I don't know the answers but wish I had $5,500 to buy a unit and test it out on the welding features, transmutation of metals, and for fueling a car. The standard test Prof. Brown did to show that the ignition of the stoichiometric gas implodes verses explodes was the vacuum tank experiment (#2 above) as follows: 1. Tank vessel No.1 had water inside. When Prof. Brown pumped his Brown's Gas (BG) gas into the tank, the water was forced out into another tank No.2. 2. Tank No.1 now only had BG inside and tank No2. only had water. 3. Tank No.1 was ignited, by a spark plug (common auto plug). The BG gas imploded causing a vacuum that sucked in the water from tank No.2 back into into tank No.1. There was a small ping sound and a 4 degree C temperature rise of the water. 4. A variation was to measure the vacuum and the water alone, (by closing off tank No.2 water from returning to tank No.1 at ignition) such that the condensed gas, 1866.6 time larger than water, imploded to one unit of water after it was ignited. Most scientists to this day doesn't know of this implosion effect alone, let alone the other two effects listed above, item 1 and item 2, that have more importance to several of Man's energy and pollution problems. Michael Randall mrandall@earthlink.net From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 00:44:59 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA10980; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 00:40:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 00:40:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Michael Randall write: >Not at this time. Some researchers over in Australia also found this >"effect" and I'll find out if they have any numbers on their work. As per my >simple research, the voltage dropped from 1.75 volt to 8 volts within 2 I assume the 8 volts above is 0.8 volts. >minutes and the gas evolution dropped (visual observations) at the same >rate. What I was trying to acheive was a steady 1.5 voltage with steady gas >production without any input power. I had heard that this could be done and >had been done by some researchers (electrolytic cell running for hours >without input power) that they were trying to find out how it could be >reproduced for others. There were a number of problems to reproduce the >"effect" and other approaches are currently being looked at. > >Michael Randall OK, it looks like capacitance is the cause. I had high hopes you had a working anomaly demonstrating device for verification and replication. Thanks for bearing with me on this. This has been a dissapointing week for me. I designed what I thought was a really nifty transformer, but it turned out to have already been patented a few years ago. Shucks. No sleep, no cash, no success. 8^{ Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 01:50:54 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA18788; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 01:47:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 01:47:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <01I6BA9EF8CI90TIP7@delphi.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: wild speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:24:03 >From: Chris Tinsley >As to the other categories being 'anecdotal', let's agree to disagree, eh? No problem, My wife and I have an agreement like that, it seems to work most of the time. However if you ask my wife she would probably push for a, lets agree to agree with her sort of agreement. As to my statement of the other categories being 'ancedotal' it's mostly the semantics. I don't disagree to the possibilities of heavy metals and hydrogen, only to the reference to 'fussion'. Evidence does not suggest fussion, only heat production due to some unknown set of circumstances. >Thanks for the comments on magnetism. I think I disagree with those too, but >they are interesting. I'll look more closely at them. >Chris If you or anyone on vortex-l knows of a way to force a permanent magnet to produce the same magnetic field as a straight wire conductor, circular field with a direction and no fixed poles, I'd be willing to pay for the information, as well as work out a percent of the income I could produce with such a permanent magnet. Anyone with the blueprint reply privately via my email Joeflynn@dephi.com. Joe Flynn ** End of message ** From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 01:51:23 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA18843; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 01:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 01:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606251115.aa09217@univ.sibiu.ro> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dan CHICEA To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dear Vortexers, Thank you very much for your immediate help. Dr. Heffner and Dr. Britz, thank you for the offer to send me the copy of the pattent. I understood that Dr. Heffner will send it. I can hardly wait it to come. Mr. Puthoff, I thank you for the reference; I will try to get it. I wish you all the best! -------------------------------------------------------- Dan CHICEA Private phone: 40-69-482388 University of SIBIU, Phone: 40-69-415732 Physics Dept. e-mail: chicea@sibiu.ro B-dul Victoriei nr. 5-7, Sibiu, 2400, Romania -------------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 03:21:59 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA27539; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 03:18:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 03:18:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960625061204_142317774@emout13.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: EclectiKat@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: The utterly amazing thing about these group bickering sessions is that they seem to go on forever with little fuel added to the fire, with the result that they become deadly, incredibly boring to those who are trying to enjoy the information on the list. Around and around and around! I can't believe it! Please, everyone, just stop it, now. It's over. Enough. Jeff Golin From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 06:06:42 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA13750; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31cfb003.13615365@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 24 Jun 1996 12:41:29 -0700 (PDT), Steckly, Gary: DGRB wrote: > >I have it in pdf if you want it > >Gary > ---------- I would appreciate it too Gary. Is there a web site I could download it from (and others too presumably)? 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@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 06:07:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA13910; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:05:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:05:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31cfcaf6.20515837@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: From Volodya: Last Day X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 24 Jun 1996 19:05:11 -0700 (PDT), dacha@shentel.net wrote: [snip] >However, if we assume one particle is at rest and the >other moves the >electrical fields of the particles will be different. The >moving particle >has a field of L-W type, the particle at rest has Coulomb >field. So at >the time of annihilation some positive energy must still >exist. It means >the energy determines by the observer what is impossible >fact! > >With warm regard, >Volodya > > Well not really impossible. In fact energy is always determined by the observer. The amount of kinetic energy an object has depends completely on the frame of reference. 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@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 07:00:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA22317; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:52:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:52:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606251336.IAA17017@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: new beads! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Thanks to a fellow Vortexan*, our Patterson-style cell is full of brand new beads and running in the dual-method calorimeter right now. These beads were made by Kirk Shanahan (KS) and represent the second batch he made. Judging from the periodic reports that Kirk issued during his development, considerably more effort and know-how is required to get satisfactory platings of this type than is implied by the simple descriptions in Patterson's (P's) patents. KS's beads DO have a substrate made of a cross-linked copolymer of styrene and divinyl-benzene! However, his uncoated beads do not look like P's uncoated beads. KS's are a light tan color and are opaque. P's are quite clear and colorless. The KS bead substrate is described by the supplier as 'macroporous' and that may constitute the majority of the difference. The KS beads are formed from much smaller beads that are crosslinked together to create a larger porous bead. We think the structure of the beads makes the optical properties different from a large nonporous bead, in the same way that Styrofoam appears white because of its foamy structure. The KS beads have only a layer of Pd followed by a layer of Ni, although the Pd is not really in a layer in the P bead sense. Because the KS bead is porous, the Pd is distributed throughout the bead, not just on the surface. Optical photos of fractured KS beads show a Ni layer perhaps .1mm thick (varies somewhat), with the entire interior of the bead appearing charcoal black. KS has filed a patent disclosure about how he gets the Pd in/on the bead without the traditional Ni or Cu underlayer. The Ni overlayer was added via standard electroless plating. The metal content is estimated to be about 10-20% each, based on the weight gains, but this is only an estimate. Destructive analysis will be conducted later to try to pin the amount down more firmly. The first experiment is being run with 2cc's of these beads and 1M Li2SO4 solution. Following a protocol approved by Jim Reding himself, we are charging at 20mA and room temperature for >=24 hours then raising the electrolyte temperature to 50C. Stay tuned for the first results. (This posting was edited by KS and represents a joint posting.) *regional variations in spelling are permissible. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 07:07:25 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA22391; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1996Jun25.094159.1255.1014576@mspost.ic.gc.ca> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: steckly.gary@ic.gc.ca (Steckly, Gary: DGRB) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Tuesday, June 25, Robin wrote: with respect to the Puharich patent. >>I have it in pdf if you want it >> >>Gary >> ---------- > >I would appreciate it too Gary. Is there a web site I could download >it from (and others too presumably)? >Regards, It's a pretty big file Robin (1.12 meg) and I really don't have access to an FTP or web site where I could put it, but I can email it to anyone who wants to read it I guess, and can tolerate the download time. Compression with pkzip only saves 50k. The reason it's so large for a pdf is because I generated the pdf from a graphic file in an obscure format, so that I could share it with my brother in law, who also lurks here (Hi Rick). So it's not a "true" pdf in that the text does not retain it's ascii identity, but it treated just as a graphic, but the resolution is great, and since it's a pdf, you can print it to any printer that you have. It's an interesting patent, and orders of magnitude more useful than any of the information that Stan M. put in his patents. I would love to see some discussion of Puharich's ideas. regards gary From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 06:59:55 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA22445; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:53:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:53:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606251342.IAA17416@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: web page additions X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Vortexans, look again at: http://www.eden.com/~little I've added a result from the new dual-method calorimeter that shows BOTH the NLC data and the flow data agreeing with each other reasonably well....yay! Unfortunately, they both also agree with the input power, indicating that our original ersatz beads do NOT produce excess heat. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 07:19:11 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA27173; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 07:15:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 07:15:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960625140130_100433.1541_BHG97-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Sir J J Thomson and X3. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dieter, > I once tracked down the oft-quoted - but, I suspect, little-read - > paper by Fick, the original diffusion paper. I was tickled to find > him using the phrase "the electrical fantasies of Becquerel". The > Referee would not let us do that today. I just wish that peer-reviews were public and signed. That would be both educational and entertaining. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 07:24:18 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA27253; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 07:15:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 07:15:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960625140309_100433.1541_BHG104-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: wild speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Joe Flynn comments: > I don't disagree to the possibilities of heavy metals and > hydrogen, only to the reference to 'fussion'. Evidence does not > suggest fussion, only heat production due to some unknown set of > circumstances. Well, that depends. If you look at the radiation, it definitely isn't fusion. If you accept the 4-He results, then it is. Or part of it is some of the time. Or the 4-He comes from alpha emissions from the metal. About all we can say is that if the helium results are valid, a process resulting in helium takes place and may be related to the heat. The toruble with hypthesising (positively or negatively) is that your objectivity suffers. I am already quite fond of my idea that extreme *forces* occur in these metals, a kind of nano-piezo-nuclear effect. That is a bit of a mistake for me personally, I shall shake it off in an effort to regain whatever objectivity I may previously have had. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 08:25:55 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA07114; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 08:13:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 08:13:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov (Larry Wharton) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: From Volodya: Last Day X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: In re to Volodya's thought experiment: >Finally, I would like to state one el-dynamical problem >which in spite its simplicity can have great consequences. >Let's imagine, in frame of classical electrodynamics, two >particles of + and - charges. The particles move uniformly at one >straight line one to >another. At a some time the partices will be at one point >of the space and we assume they annihilate. >Now we calculate the energy of the electrical fields of >the particles. Because this energy is of a square form E*E it is always >positive. When the particles approach one to another the energy tends to >zero as linear function of the distance between the particles. So if we >assume the particles move with identical velocities v the energy will >be equal to zero over all the space at the time of annihilation (two >symmetrical fields of Liennard-Wiekhert form coincide and annihilate >each others). However, if we assume one particle is at rest and the >other moves the electrical fields of the particles will be different. The >moving particle has a field of L-W type, the particle at rest has Coulomb >field. So at the time of annihilation some positive energy must still >exist. It means the energy determines by the observer what is impossible >fact! >With warm regard, >Volodya There should be no problem when one considers the total energy. The work done in moving two charged particles from infinity to a distance r is: W = q1*q2 / r In the case where the two particles are moving together the work will be reduced by relativistic effects and will be: W = q1*q2*(1 - (v/c)**2) / r So in comparing the two cases the balance of energy is given by: q1*q2 / r + Int{ E*E/8Pi + B*B/8Pi} = q1*q2*(1 - (v/c)**2) / r or Int{ E*E/8Pi + B*B/8Pi} = -q1*q2*( (v/c)**2) / r Where Int{ E*E/8Pi} is the spatial integral over the LW and Coulomb field in the second case. Try this and it will work out if you do it right. Of course there is a problem with setting r to zero but the coeficient of the 1/r singularity should still cancel out. I have worked out the exact energy and momentum for any two particles moving with all possible velocities and spatial orientation and everything works out perfect. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 08:25:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA07197; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 08:13:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 08:13:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606251506.AA03902@gateway1.srs.gov> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Kirk L Shanahan To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: new beads X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Offically confirming co-authorship of Scott Little posting (below). Kirk Shanahan {My opinions...noone else's} (usually...) ----- ORIGINAL MESSAGE ------ new beads! Thanks to a fellow Vortexan*, our Patterson-style cell is full of brand new beads and running in the dual-method calorimeter right now. These beads were made by Kirk Shanahan (KS) and represent the second batch he made. Judging from the periodic reports that Kirk issued during his development, considerably more effort and know-how is required to get satisfactory platings of this type than is implied by the simple descriptions in Patterson's (P's) patents. KS's beads DO have a substrate made of a cross-linked copolymer of styrene and divinyl-benzene! However, his uncoated beads do not look like P's uncoated beads. KS's are a light tan color and are opaque. P's are quite clear and colorless. The KS bead substrate is described by the supplier as 'macroporous' and that may constitute the majority of the difference. The KS beads are formed from much smaller beads that are crosslinked together to create a larger porous bead. We think the structure of the beads makes the optical properties different from a large nonporous bead, in the same way that Styrofoam appears white because of its foamy structure. The KS beads have only a layer of Pd followed by a layer of Ni, although the Pd is not really in a layer in the P bead sense. Because the KS bead is porous, the Pd is distributed throughout the bead, not just on the surface. Optical photos of fractured KS beads show a Ni layer perhaps .1mm thick (varies somewhat), with the entire interior of the bead appearing charcoal black. KS has filed a patent disclosure about how he gets the Pd in/on the bead without the traditional Ni or Cu underlayer. The Ni overlayer was added via standard electroless plating. The metal content is estimated to be about 10-20% each, based on the weight gains, but this is only an estimate. Destructive analysis will be conducted later to try to pin the amount down more firmly. The first experiment is being run with 2cc's of these beads and 1M Li2SO4 solution. Following a protocol approved by Jim Reding himself, we are charging at 20mA and room temperature for >=24 hours then raising the electrolyte temperature to 50C. Stay tuned for the first results. (This posting was edited by KS and represents a joint posting.) *regional variations in spelling are permissible. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 09:49:54 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA23351; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 09:34:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 09:34:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: new beads X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/25/96 08:24 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: new beads WONDERFUL SCOTT AND YOUR PAL FROM KANSAS! Good work. I do think that trying to stick to the Ni-Pd-Ni formula may be important, however. (But it would seem with this process you should be able to do that.) Also: Re the Patterson versus your bead diff. There is some indication that you can buy the polystyrene beads SULFONATED, and that they appear white under that circumstance. I.e., Patterson sulfonates his own, thus his "raw" material appears clear. - Keep up the GOOD work, and let us know the result. - MDH (PS I'd recommend about 10 runs before you make a conclusion.) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 11:38:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA16208; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:30:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:30:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dan CHICEA wrote: > > Thank you very much for your immediate help. >Dr. Heffner and Dr. Britz, thank you for the offer to send >me the copy of the pattent. I understood that Dr. Heffner will send it. >I can hardly wait it to come. > Mr. Puthoff, I thank you for the reference; I will try to get it. I am going to Anchorage today to get a copy of the latest version of the Shoulders patent, 5,123,039, for you. Please call me Horace. I respect the title Dr. I don't have a PHD, or an MS, or even a BS. I do have a lot of BS though! Please be aware that much (maybe most) of what is written in the patent appears to never have been implemented. It is what some people call "vaporware", a lot of untested but possibly good ideas not yet deliverable. It appears to have been written to meet "full disclosure" requirements and to give the broadest possible coverage to the patent. As to the practicality of it - it's food for thought. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 13:24:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA07443; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606251859.LAA21284@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments from Russ George X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 04:28 PM 6/24/96 -0700, you wrote: >>At 12:06 PM 6/19/96 -0700, you wrote: >>>>We are here because the type of discussion below is a waste of time. The >>>>minds here are hardly crybabies. We simply discern the intelligence of more >>>>productive pursuits. End of discussion. >>> >>>***{In my view, it is not a "waste of time" for those who have the capacity >>>to reason to hold their ground and participate in internet newsgroups, in >>>spite of the desires of hate-filled conformists to drive them out. The >>>appropriate way to deal with flames is with *reason*, not with flight into >>>hiding places such as this group, where an information daddy has been >>>appointed to protect the little kiddies who are afraid to protect >>>themselves. If such a statement seems unkind I am sorry, but I look upon >>>this type of flight behavior with the same disdain that blacks reserve for >>>members of their race who sit at the back of the bus. You guys are far >>>better, and far brighter, than the flamers who drove you out of >>>sci.physics.fusion. You have a better right to be there than they do. Why >>>should you let them drive you out, when you can use reason to drive *them* >>>out? I'll grant that responding to flames can be unpleasant, and that it is >>>difficult. It is a high art form that must be learned through practice. But >>>if you think it is a "waste of time" to have pride in what you are and, as >>>a consequence, to stand up for your rights, then I strongly disagree. >>>--Mitchell Jones}*** >>> >>>> >> >>Mitchell, I am failing to get my point accross. Nobody drives me anywhere, >>in or out, and I rather suspect that is true for most of those on Vortex. I >>am up to my earballs in work and I do not have the time to placate people >>who are so poorly skilled in thinking and doing that they indulge in utterly >>useless rhetoric to vent emotional reactions which they have confused with >>points of logic. If you have the time, more power to you, go for it. > >***{Michael, I don't know you, and I am not about to dispute your >statements about your character and personal motivations. Speaking in >general, however, and not about any individual in particular, I do believe >that most participants in this group are here because they are fleeing from >the perceived unpleasantness of the situation on sci.physics.fusion (and on >other "unmoderated" internet newsgroups), where they have discovered that >hate-filled conformists stand ready to punish them for unconventional >thinking, by showering them with sneers, contempt, and cruel personal >invective. > >In my view, those who flee from the flamers are reacting emotionally rather >than rationally. They fail to recognize that the technique of the >counterflame, when developed through practice, can be an adequate form of >self-defense on the net. The key strategy, where counterflaming is >concerned, is to use what the flamer said as evidence, deduce from it his >underlying character flaws, and expose those flaws to the world. A good >counterflame is like judo: you use the flamer's force to take him down. It >is important, however, both that you should not lower yourself to his level >(e.g., by calling him names such as "scumbag," "liar," etc.) and that you >should not treat him with respect. Moreover, you have to be very >self-critical of what you say in a counterflame: any logical or factual >error will be seized upon eagerly by your opponent. Thus it is important to >severely criticize your own comments before you send them off. Those who >learn to apply such principles soon discover that they have nothing to fear >from the flamers, and can participate fully on the net. > >Why bother to learn such techniques? Simple: it is a matter of >self-respect. People who reason well have at least as much right to express >themselves on the net as do conformists, retards, and the hate-filled >flamers who act as their enforcers. Why should the best and the brightest >give up their cultural influence by fleeing into protected enclaves such as >this, when they can use their intelligence to defeat those who want to run >them off of the net? Indeed, what will happen to the world, if a medium >such as this is given over, without a fight, to the control of the most >vicious, mindless, and evil members of the human population? > >Think about it. > >--Mitchell Jones}*** > >>____________________________________ >>MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >>Michael Mandeville, publisher >>mwm@aa.net >>http://www.aa.net/~mwm > > > well, now indeed I see what you are trying to accomplish and I do admire your intent...and I imply no criticism whatsoever when I say I am still terribly concerned about the issue of time. and, my my, your comments concerning the legions of idiots seems like one of the most sweeping, generic flames I've ever read. not that I mind, mind you. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 13:40:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA07643; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:14:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:14:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606251851.AA50032@uu1611.prelude.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: d.powell@prelude.com (Don Powell) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: But Implosion makes sense. If you have a liter of a gas and you turn it into condensate it will occupy considerable less that a liter of volume as a liquid. This will cause a vacuum. Elementary Newtonian physics. >Most scientists to this day doesn't know of this implosion effect alone, let >alone the other two effects listed above, item 1 and item 2, that have more >importance to several of Man's energy and pollution problems. > >Michael Randall mrandall@earthlink.net > > > From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 13:30:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA07804; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:15:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:15:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606251852.AA42140@uu1611.prelude.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: d.powell@prelude.com (Don Powell) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: I would like to get this. Also I may be able to re-convert it to ASCII for re-distribution to the list. > >On Tuesday, June 25, Robin wrote: > >with respect to the Puharich patent. > >>>I have it in pdf if you want it >>> >>>Gary >>> ---------- >> >>I would appreciate it too Gary. Is there a web site I could download >>it from (and others too presumably)? >>Regards, > >It's a pretty big file Robin (1.12 meg) and I really don't have access to an >FTP or web site where I could put it, but I can email it to anyone who wants >to read it I guess, and can tolerate the download time. Compression with >pkzip only saves 50k. > >The reason it's so large for a pdf is because I generated the pdf from a >graphic file in an obscure format, so that I could share it with my brother >in law, who also lurks here (Hi Rick). So it's not a "true" pdf in that the >text does not retain it's ascii identity, but it treated just as a graphic, >but the resolution is great, and since it's a pdf, you can print it to any >printer that you have. > >It's an interesting patent, and orders of magnitude more useful than any of >the information that Stan M. put in his patents. I would love to see some >discussion of Puharich's ideas. > >regards > > >gary > > > > From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 13:34:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA07920; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:15:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:15:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: on the 'velocity of the light' X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Michael Schaffer, My friend Robert sent me your email on the 'velocity of the light'. To my point of view, your notes are worth. Yes, in the near field of the antenna the velocity can exceed c. Now I would like to explain some details. The siberian person performed the experiments for own money so he was too limited. His first aim was to repeat Tesla exsperiments as close as possible. He found that the transmitted power was 1% (1 kWt : 100 kWt) at the distance 500 m. Such an efficiency is possible due to high tuning of two circuits of the antennas. He is really a good engineer. However, the results he obtained are all he could do. Because he haven't email I am going to send him all the notes of your vortex group by usual mail. Maybe I will get additional explanation of his experiments (the conditions I omitted etc.). Anyway he hopes to continue the researches in this way. During discussion of some lectures one question appears. As I understand you are the adherent of the convenient electrodynamics. So it would be interesting to know your point of view on this problem. Thus, the particles having the + and - charges, identical at absolute value, moves uniformly one to another at the one straight line. In the real experiment there could be the beams of the electrons and the positrons. One observer, in one frame linked with him and where the particles moves with respect to the observer with identical velocitites v, detects that there are no electric and magnetic fiels surrounding the particles at a time of annihilation. However, another observer, in second frame where one particle is at rest, detects that at the time of annihilation, there is a magnetic field of moving particle and superposition of Coulomb and Liennard-Wiekhert electric fields of + and - charges. Since after annihilation there are no charges supporting stationarity of the fields obviously these fields transform into radiation. So the observer can detect, except the radiation due to annihilation processes, low-frequency component caused by radiation of surrounding fields. Formally, it is easier to consider only two classical particles, however, experimentally as a result we should expect additional radiation. However, the existence of additional radiation cannot depend on the observer. Yes, there is a law of conservation of relativistic invariant E^2 - c^2*P^2, however, the energy and momentum balance is usually taken into account in calculations of annihilation processes. I mean after annihilation the additional radiation will spread in any direction (isotropic) but not in the direction of input momentum. I must go to Moscow this Friday night so you can reply me or before this data to St.Pete or after to With warm regard, Volodya Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 16:54:32 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA20714; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 16:49:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 16:49:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: HELP! On understanding/translating..the Correa Device.. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: HELP! On understanding/translating..the Correa Device.. Is it me? I'm having a very DIFFICULT time understanding the "evidence" with regard the Correa claims? - I pressume many of you have the latest IE magazine. Correct me if I am wrong, but is all the data presented "processed"? Can someone lead me by the hand through the data presented? I am not feeling "secure" in reading this material that I am not getting the point because the results are put in such "technical jargon over kill" as to make them obscure at best. I have noticed this tendancy before in the work of other "foreign nationals" who insist on writing up their own technical work. It does not mean their work is invalid, it's just that sometimes I think these individuals translate many "literal" phrases from their mother tounge into English, and don't understand that they have radically altered their message from what they have intended. (Case in point---communicating with Patopov.) So any aid in deciphering this work would be appreciated. (You may have to resort to---"Mickey's big hand is on the..." MDH) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 17:00:55 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA20801; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 16:49:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 16:49:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960625213710_72240.1256_EHB77-3@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Got stuff from Joe Champion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Okay, the package from Joe Champion arrived here today. I have been busy cataloging, photographing, repacking and shipping it. I will report details here later. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 18:21:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA07037; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 18:15:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 18:15:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Got stuff from Joe Champion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/25/96 17:00 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Got stuff from Joe Champion Fantastic! Joe is ECCENTRIC to the nth degree, but as we all should aknowledge, FACT is FACT, and this "fact" will be testable....Congrats Joe, maybe you will be vindicated!!!! From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 18:22:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA07239; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 18:16:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 18:16:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: HELP! On understanding/translating..the Correa Device.. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/25/96 16:54 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: HELP! On understanding/translating..the Correa Device.. Oh SURE HAPPY IT'S TUESDAY (or S.H.I.T) I figured it out. As I had this suspicion, what we have here (to quote from the Warden in Cool Hand Luke) is a "classic failure to communicate". OK Mr. Correa---please, do the following. Charge your DP battery. Give us a graph of V and I during it's charge cycle (you may also want to discharge it first and certify that it is at "zero" before starting.) Then charge up batter CP with your "OU" device. Then discharge the CP battery into an appropriately sized resistor. Give us a V/I graph or V versus time (assuming the resistor stays fairly constant. - Supply THIS data and we will beat a path to your door step. In point of fact, can you perform this with any large, commercial radio station type triode? - What is the gas in the envelop? - Etc. MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 21:09:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA07989; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 21:04:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 21:04:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1996Jun25.232100.1255.1020035@mspost.ic.gc.ca> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: steckly.gary@ic.gc.ca (Steckly, Gary: DGRB) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: ---------- On June 25, Don Powell wrote: >From: d.powell@prelude.com (Don Powell) >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf >X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas > >I would like to get this. Also I may be able to re-convert it to ASCII for >re-distribution to the list. To simplify this, I found a site that will provide anonymous FTP access, and I placed it in the pub\tmp subdirectory. The address is 142.92.39.18 Anything in there self-destructs automatically within a week or so, so get it while you can. It's named 4394230.pdf I was going to try to run the text through an OCR to get the file size down too, but I didn't get around to it. It's certainly way to big to distribute via this list, so please don't even try. regards Gary > >On Tuesday, June 25, Robin wrote: > >with respect to the Puharich patent. > >>>I have it in pdf if you want it >>> >>>Gary >>> ---------- >> >>I would appreciate it too Gary. Is there a web site I could download >>it from (and others too presumably)? >>Regards, > >It's a pretty big file Robin (1.12 meg) and I really don't have access to an >FTP or web site where I could put it, but I can email it to anyone who wants >to read it I guess, and can tolerate the download time. Compression with >pkzip only saves 50k. > >The reason it's so large for a pdf is because I generated the pdf from a >graphic file in an obscure format, so that I could share it with my brother >in law, who also lurks here (Hi Rick). So it's not a "true" pdf in that the >text does not retain it's ascii identity, but it treated just as a graphic, >but the resolution is great, and since it's a pdf, you can print it to any >printer that you have. > >It's an interesting patent, and orders of magnitude more useful than any of >the information that Stan M. put in his patents. I would love to see some >discussion of Puharich's ideas. > >regards > > >gary > > > > From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 21:38:32 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA12508; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 21:34:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 21:34:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960626042929_76216.2421_HHB82-3@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Michael - > "...wish I had $5,500 to buy a unit and test it out on the welding > features, transmutation of metals, and for fueling a car." You can get a small unit made for jewelers called a "Hydroflux" from "Turbo Braze/OKAI" for just under $1000. I saw one in a demo. It's foreign made I think, but I don't remember where. Check in a jewelers catalog like Swest or ask a jeweler's supply house or lapidary if they've heard of it. It's a pretty low gas volume generator though. The smallest torch tip looks just like a small syringe needle, and makes a beautiful little blue-green pin flame an inch long and not more than 1mm in diameter at its base. I held my finger almost touching it and felt no heat, but watched it slice steel wire like it was made of butter. Great for use as a Jedi light sabre for some of the smaller Star Wars action figures where a great deal of realism is desired. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 23:03:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA27070; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 22:59:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 22:59:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606260553.BAA05129@norway.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace >OK, it looks like capacitance is the cause. I had high hopes you had a >working anomaly demonstrating device for verification and replication. >Thanks for bearing with me on this. Thanks for bearing with me also. As far as a "working anomaly demonstration device for verification and replication", Prof. Brown's BG gas welders are real and verifiable and have been doing working anomalies for many years. As far as o/u energy, self running operation, the jury is still out. >This has been a dissapointing week for me. I designed what I thought was a >really nifty transformer, but it turned out to have already been patented a >few years ago. Shucks. No sleep, no cash, no success. 8^{ Sorry to hear about your dissapointing week. It is only a week. Some inventors have disapointing years. Cheers Michael Randall mrandall@earthlink.net From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 23:39:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA01606; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:29:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:29:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960626061634_100060.173_JHB56-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Michael, The requirement to add some pollutant gas to Brown's gas in order to create an explosion explains Meyer's arrangement in his ic engine application where he introduces some exhaust gas/air into the combustion chamber to "improve" the performance of the H + O combustion. If he used pure H + O from his electrolysis gadget incorporated into his spark plugs it would implode. Whether or not Meyer is ou may be immaterial if he has a reliable and compact water based ic engine not requiring gas tanks. Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Tue Jun 25 23:42:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA02614; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606260633.CAA08653@norway.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Hi Don Powell, >But Implosion makes sense. If you have a liter of a gas and you turn it >into condensate it will occupy considerable less that a liter of volume as a >liquid. This will cause a vacuum. Elementary Newtonian physics. Correct. Now if you ignite a 20 to 60 psi gas sream to make a flame from this gas it implodes also and this is where most scientist duck for cover, because they don't believe it implodes and still believes it should explode. It is the flame properties that is "new science" and its not in any textbooks, like vaporizing tungstun and transmutating radioactive materials. Also the electrolysis is unique in which it generates a stoichiometric ratio of hydrogen and oxygen in mon-atomic form which is twice the normal mole volume of molecular gas moles, also not in the textbooks. Cheers Michael Randall mrandall@earthlink.net From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 01:14:41 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA11573; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 00:58:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 00:58:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31d0f7f1.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Peter Glueck" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Delay of travel. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dear Friends, Due to unexpected but insoluble problems with the airplane tickets (not OK on the Warsaw-Chicago route) the travel of Potapov Senior, Potapov Junior and myself to Los Alamos had to be delayed till July, 15. We have got tickets via Budapest--OKeyed. That means you will receive with two weeks delay the reports entitled "YUSMAR in LANLland". I apologize for this trouble, and friendly ask everybody to avoid misfounded interpretations; the experiment will take place and will demonstrate the o/u performances of Potapov's thermogenerators. I am ready to bet: my two months income against the opponent's one month income. See/hear/read you soon, Peter -- dr. Peter Gluck Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology Fax:064-420042 Cluj-Napoca, str. Donath 65-103, P.O.Box 700 Tel:064-184037/144 Cluj 5, 3400 Romania E-mail: peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro , itimc@utcluj.ro From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 01:04:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA11617; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 00:58:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 00:58:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960626035544_421977064@emout15.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: EclectiKat@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Kids don't try this at home, with or without the permission of your parents! "Dangerously large" pressures = EXPLOSION, of hydrogen in a closed cylinder By the way, are you describing an actual experiment, or are you brainstorming here? Jeff Golin In a message dated 96-06-24 20:39:09 EDT, you write: > >When a stochiometric mixture of 2 H2 + O2 (or 2H + O) combines, the product >is very hot H2O vapor. If the reaction occurs inside a container, and if >no other gas is present, the vapor is free to condense rapidly on the cold >walls. The energy of reaction is transferred to heat in the wall. >However, because the wall mass is so large relative to the vapor's (in a >lab bench top sized experiment), the final wall temperature is low. If, >however, the same reaction occurs in the presence of more than a small >amount of other gas(es), the hot water vapor can not condense rapidly on >the wall, because the H2O molecules collide with the other gas. Then, the >only way H2O can condense is by diffusing through the other gas. However, >diffusion is a slow process, and long before significant H2O can condense, >the hot gas mixture exerts a large pressure. > >I predict that if the stochiometric mixture ignition were repeated rapidly >in a closed container, the wall temperature will increase with each >ignition, as will the condensation pressure. Soon the chamber pressure >will be dangerously large. > > From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 01:58:48 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA15953; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 01:52:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 01:52:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >Michael, > >The requirement to add some pollutant gas to Brown's gas in order to create an >explosion explains Meyer's arrangement in his ic engine application where he >introduces some exhaust gas/air into the combustion chamber to "improve" the >performance of the H + O combustion. If he used pure H + O from his >electrolysis gadget incorporated into his spark plugs it would implode. > >Whether or not Meyer is ou may be immaterial if he has a reliable and compact >water based ic engine not requiring gas tanks. > >Norman Gee, I wonder if NASA could improve the performance of the shuttle's or other 2H2 + O2 burning rocket engines by pumping air into them when doing a burn in the atmosphere. It might increase the heat transfer to the engine walls though. It might also reduce the specific inpulse by decreasing the average temperature, and increasing the average mass of particle and thus lowering the average particle exhaust velocity. More volume, more mass, but less velocity. Another idea might be to use the old "thrust augmentation tubes". The idea is to put a shaped tube around a rocket exhaust to use the spent exhaust (the momentum was already transferred to the rocket engine walls) as a heat source for a kind of ramjet. The performance of augmentaion tubes was not very high, due to drag and low heat transfer, but it seems like they might be useful on a small craft using H2 + O2 rocket engines in the atmosphere. Maybe a small research rocket or something like that. Some kind of mixer blades should help heat transfer performance. All the above just some wild speculation. However, it is clear that the shuttle's engines do not "implode", even though burning pure H2 + O2. It's not because the H2 and O2 are liguid either - the H2 and O2 flowing without ignition does not produce much thrust. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 03:11:55 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA21723; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:04:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:04:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 25 Jun 1996, Don Powell wrote: > > But Implosion makes sense. If you have a liter of a gas and you turn it > into condensate it will occupy considerable less that a liter of volume as a > liquid. This will cause a vacuum. Elementary Newtonian physics. > > >Most scientists to this day doesn't know of this implosion effect alone, let > >alone the other two effects listed above, item 1 and item 2, that have more > >importance to several of Man's energy and pollution problems. This is taking the thermodynamic view; going from one state to another, final, state. Thermo doesn't care about the path taken. In this case, the path will first go through a vigorous EXplosion (such as you probably saw in school when the chem teacher put a lighted taper into the cylinder filled with a hydrogen air mixture), followed by that volume contraction as everything cools down. Andrew Riley was not killed by an implosion; one scenario for that accident is that a compressed mix of D2 and O2 was lit by exposure to a bit of Pd as he moved the cell. I know there are other suggestions but I find this one the most plausible. If you play around with water electrolysis, don't count on a harmless implosion if it goes off. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 03:11:56 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA21881; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:06:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:06:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31cfd4a5.22995602@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: wild speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 25 Jun 1996 01:47:16 -0700 (PDT), JOEFLYNN@delphi.com wrote: [snip] >If you or anyone on vortex-l knows of a way to force a >permanent magnet to >produce the same magnetic field as a straight wire conductor, >circular field with >a direction and no fixed poles, I'd be willing to pay for the >information, as well >as work out a percent of the income I could produce with such a >permanent >magnet. Anyone with the blueprint reply privately via my email >Joeflynn@dephi.com. > >Joe Flynn [snip] Actually, the properties you assign to a straight wire conductor are not strictly true. In order to conduct a current, the wire must form part of a closed conducting loop. This loop does have magnetic poles, by virtue of the current flowing through it. You measure the field you do, because you perform your measurements close to the wire, where the closed loop magnetic field lines have a small radius. Furthermore, every permanent magnet also comprises just such current loops, in the form of each atoms unpaired electrons. Hence the field you would like to see produced by a permant magnet, is in fact produced by every permanent magnet in existance. It is to be found "on the equator" of the magnet. However because many permanent magnets are constructed longer than they are wide, the field is usually very weak at that spot. Best results would be obtained with a very short fat magnet. Part of the "circular" magnetic field lies within the body of the magnet BTW. 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@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 05:31:56 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA04252; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 05:20:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 05:20:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31d121f6.46149953@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:37:26 -0700 (PDT), Michael Randall wrote: [snip] >Correct. Now if you ignite a 20 to 60 psi gas sream to make a flame from >this gas it implodes also and this is where most scientist duck for cover, >because they don't believe it implodes and still believes it should explode. >It is the flame properties that is "new science" and its not in any >textbooks, like vaporizing tungstun and transmutating radioactive materials. >Also the electrolysis is unique in which it generates a stoichiometric ratio >of hydrogen and oxygen in mon-atomic form which is twice the normal mole >volume of molecular gas moles, also not in the textbooks. > >Cheers > >Michael Randall mrandall@earthlink.net > > If true that mon-atomic gases are generated, this would explain much. First of all, normally when hydrogen or oxygen gas molecules are formed, a certain amount of energy is liberated as heat, when the atoms combine to form molecules (i.e. H2 and O2). If these molecules are not formed in a Brown's gas generator, then it would run cooler than one might otherwise expect. Furthermore energy balance equations for the combination of H2 and O2 are based on the reaction: 2 H2 + O2 -> 2H2O + energy Implicit herein is the assumption that the Hydrogen and Oxygen molecules need to be split. This means that the energy liberated by combining H and O atoms rather than molecular Hydrogen and Oxygen will be greater than a calculation according to the above reaction would yield. In short, this may be the source of the OU claims. It should however be noted that this in no way implies that there is any real OU involved. (Just that heat which would normally be generated during electrolysis, is in fact stored chemically, and not released until the gasses are burned). Also because the gasses are atomic and not molecular, one could expect the flame to be much hotter than normal. This would explain cutting through ceramics and tungsten etc. 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@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 06:30:35 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA13076; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 06:17:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 06:17:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606261312.AA27552@gateway1.srs.gov> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Kirk L Shanahan To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Some background on my beads X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Hi all, I thought you might like a little info on the beads I have prepared. They are significantly different from the Patterson beads, but perhaps they are significantly similar as well. Time will tell... Sulfonated divinylbenzene (DVB) crosslinked polystyrene (PS) is alternatively know as strong acid cation exchange resin in some circles. My beads start life a a macroporous, "third-generation" example of this. I used Diaion HPK-25, manufactured by Mitsubishi Chemical Industries Ltd., and distributed in the US by Dianex Systems, Lockport, NY, 716-433-1442 (at least in the 84-88 time frame when we acquired the material). (Similar materials could probably be obtained from Dow Chemical under the "Dowex" trade name, I used Lycos to find Dow's web pages.) The beads have a wide particle size distribution, and come with 40-50wt% water weight. The microstructure of the resin comes from the fact that the beads are made of myriads of polystyrene microbeads. These microbeads are then crosslinked with DVB to form the macroporous beads. These beads are then sulfonated. I am unsure of how many microbeads are in a typical bead, but there are a lot. The "Cu-flash" procedure Patterson uses is just ion loading the resin. Because Patterson restricts his sulfonation to just the surface, my beads will load up substantially more than his I would guess. Thus any coating process (excepting vacuum deposition?) appled to my beads should produce a metal coating of much higher surface area. As Scott and I noted, the Pd coating in my beads goes throughout the bulk of the bead. After forming the (pat. pending I hope) Pd layer, I used standard electroless Ni plating to overcoat the beads. This part of the process is still a little tricky for me as I have only been successful twice (Batch 1 and Batch 2). I have been unable to duplicate Pattersons process yet, but I have hopes that I may have learned something in making Batch 2 that will help, again we'll have to wait and see. As an aside, I believe that the electroless plating solution recipe in Patterson's patent is incorrect. The active ingredient is sodium hypophosphite, and the recipe is a standard textbook one. I believe I can appreciate the advantage of his plating apparatus tho... The Ni overlayer in Batch 1 was incomplete, I could still see Pd through 'holes' in the Ni. Batch 2 on the other hand may have too much Ni. Many of the beads have a 'wrinkled' appearance, caused I think by the Ni beginning to develop crystalline facets. I made about 5 grams of Batch 1 from unsieved resin. I used a magnetic stirring bar in a beaker to do the plating, and I think it beats up the beads pretty badly, leading to lots of bead fragments. Batch 2 was made from the resin's -18+20 (.85-1.0 mm) fraction, and was resieved after plating. I used a motorized paddle stirrer for Batch 2, and observed almost no bead fragmentation. I supplied Scott with sample from two fractions. One was the -18+20 and another was the +16, which was clumpy beacuase it hadn't dried completely (I am guessing), i.e. the +16 should be representative of the unsieved sample when (if) dried. I made up about 25 grams total of Batch 2, and most of that is spoken for at this time (sorry...it goes quick). I have been doing gas loading experiments in a hydrogen absorbtion apparatus, and a few other things to the beads in my lab. I will describe the results I have so far in a subsequent message, as this one is a little long, and that one will be long too. Kirk Shanahan (My opinions...noone else's) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 06:48:17 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA15466; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 06:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 06:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlagarde@cyberaccess.fr (Jean_de_Lagarde) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: HELP! On understanding/translating..the Correa Device.. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: I agree with Mark Hugo. From the IE text, the Correa device does not seem to be as crysral clear as Gene Mallove says in his editorial and I too, looked in vain through the 20 pages to find out what gas was in the enveloppe. but the thing is worth enquiring. Who will contact the inventors and arrange for a proper test ? Jean de Lagarde From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 07:29:25 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA23913; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606261415.AA06250@gateway1.srs.gov> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Kirk L Shanahan To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Preliminary studies and thoughts on my beads X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Hi again, I promised a description of my work so far, and here is what I can give. So far, all my work has been of the "quick and dirty"-type. That means it is all preliminary and subject to revision. Please don't take what I say as being "carved in stone". That said, I believe I have detected some interesting chemistry in my beads that might (or might not) be relevant to the Patterson Power Cell. To date, I have used only the Batch 1 beads in the H2 absorbtion studies. I am typically exposing the beads to about 6000 torr H2, and then do classical H2 desorbtion isotherms. If I were using pure Pd, I would be reaching loadings of .6 to .7 H/M, well out of the CF region. All my work has been conducted at room temp, which varies from 20 to 24C. I use MKS Baratrons for pressure measurement, coupled with a Pirani gauge in another part of the manifold for use during active pumping. Unfortunately I have no gas composition measuring device installed yet. I may add a residual gas analyzer soon. At the moment, all data recording is by hand. The beads clearly have a lot of water or ammonia content initially (the plating solutions are based on ammonium hydroxide mixtures). I had to pump on them for several days to get to my normal starting vacuum level (Below zero on the Pirani gauge, baseline value on the Baratron, with no noticeable pressure rise when active pumping stops.) Normally pumping out He or H2 from my system can be accomplished within a few minutes at most. Once the beads were "dry", I exposed them, and they absorbed H2. I observed a temperature rise immediately as well. As I don't know yet exactly how much Pd I have in the beads I can't say what loading I achieved, but I plan to destructively analyze them later to assess that. The next step was to try to do a desorbtion isotherm and compare it to bulk palladium's, but that has only partially worked. I was able to note the start of desorbtion, and estimate a plateau pressure of about 50-100 torr, which is where Pd has its plateau at room temp, but I also detected a nasty problem. For some reason the H2 exposure produces more offgassing. Once I get down in the <50 torr range, it becomes very difficult to pump out the beads again. I literally have to repeat the multiple day active pumpdown to clear out the manifold. I have noted this three times now (i.e. I have cycled the sample 3 times). What I suspect and am working on confirming, is that the gas coming off is not pure H2. I would guess that some of the plating chemicals that were trapped inside the bead during plating are being liberated in some form and are coming out of the beads. (For example NH3 jumps to mind as a candidate.) If this is true, it makes it next to impossible to compare my beads to pure Pd, because I need to know the actual offgas composition to do so. This may be significant to the PPC however. If the Patterson beads show similar chemistry, those bleed chemicals could be oxidizing at the Pt counterelectrode. There is an interesting paper in Science (271(1996)1560) by Goetsch and Schmidt where they flow mixes of alkanes and oxygen at room temp through a tube and past a Pt gauze or a Pt/10%Rh wire mesh, and observe oxidation of the alkanes. They do it fast enough that they only get partial oxidation, yet they observe that the mesh reached temps of 800-900C. IMO, this shows similar chemistry could occur on a much reduced scale in solution. I have suggested to Scott that if he sees any activity he should sample the electrolyte and look for possible oxidation products such as nitrate, phosphate, and carbonate ions. I have also suggested Scott may be able to produce/increase "excess heat" by raising the temperature of the cell to promote permeation/diffusion. Yesterday afternoon (Tues.) I removed the Batch 1 beads and have placed some Batch 2 beads in the manifold. Pumpdown is underway, report this AM is that they are still offgassing. I have separately done thermogravimmetric analysis on a few Batch 2 beads, and on the raw resin for comparison. The raw resin shows a typical water loss curve with increasing temperature. The Batch 2 beads showed a "hindered" weight loss, meaning that I had to hold them at 140C to observe the complete weight loss. The raw resin had completed this by the time the temp reached 130C. Interestingly the heated Batch 2 beads didn't look cracked, which suggests they may be quite robust. The Batch 1 beads I took out looked unchanged in the microscope, although I noted a little dust. That could have come from flaked-off Pd, or from the bead fragments in the sample breaking down. For those interested in CF, I have a couple of comments. My beads are radically different from Patterson's in important ways. I can safely say that they may or may not be CF-capable (I am being funny...). During the preparation of the initial Pd coating, I produce metallic Pd. One powder X-ray diffraction pattern showed significant lattice expansion as compared to bulk Pd (not quantified yet, sorry). Also, the peaks are quite broad, indicating microcrystallinity. I attribute this to a strong interaction with the sulfonated PS surface. Patterson's beads may not show this effect due the 'insulating' Ni sublayer. My intent was not to prove/disprove CF, and I won't get into arguments about that. I do believe that "running beyond chemistry" is very important with beads prepared from plating solutions. That's about it for now. My work is classical 'bootleg' stuff, done in my spare time. My work site isn't really interested in CF-type work, and I have a couple of other projects I must work on first. So, you all will have to bear with me and be patient. I welcome comments, suggestions, and criticisms. Kirk Shanahan {My opinions...noone else's} <- an 'official' disclaimer... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 07:41:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA26446; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Delay of travel. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/26/96 01:14 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Delay of travel. Peter, you are a clever old Fox! We are aware of the (existing for the moment) differential between incomes in the former eastern block countries and the west. I hope, and pray, dear friend that that WILL change in the next few years, and (maybe, someday) it would be a "win-win" proposition. Again, however, can I offer a few $$ if you could re-arrange your trip and stop in Minneapolis? Let me know. Mark Hugo From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 07:43:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA26653; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/26/96 00:13 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf CAN WE KILL "BROWN GAS FOR CF", the topic seems to have lost any value. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 07:46:56 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA26901; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/25/96 21:38 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf Again, "Brown Gas for CF" is getting tedious, worthless, almost like an obsession. Let's kill it. MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 09:40:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA18840; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 09:32:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 09:32:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960626161549_72240.1256_EHB69-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Confusion about Champion materials X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Joe Champion listed seven types of samples in his June 24 letter. These came to me not from Joe, but from someone named William Moreland, along with a letter. There is some confusion about which of these samples may have isotopic anomalies, and which are raw material. Joe's e-mail says one thing and Moreland's letter says another. Furthermore, it is not clear to me what the bismuth, lead, and lead iron samples are for, or whether they are supposed to be anomalous. Yesterday I sent Joe a series of questions about these issues. Not knowing what is what, I divvied up the samples and sent some to Japan. I hope that Joe responds before the materials get there. I plan to fax further instructions to Japan after Joe tells me what we should be looking for. Anyway, here is the list of the samples: 1. ESM head ore, 111 grams, sandy. Moreland's letter says this sample was treated, in which case I presume it should have anomalous isotopic ratios. Champion indicated that this has *not* been treated. 2. ESM treated, 71 grams, sandy. Presumably this holds the magic isotopes. I have told my contacts to look at this first. In his Vortex posting, Champion claims this has an Au and Pt concentration of 108.8 ppm. That's fine, but we don't care about mere precious metals. Gold is particularly useless since it has only one stable isotope. I would rather have 100 grams of carbon or silicon with peculiar isotopic ratios than 10 kilograms of gold. I am not sure what these other samples are for: 3. Bag #1, lead iron sample, 116 grams. Champion described this as "a 900 deg C conversion of 99.995% pure ARASCO Pb with reagent grade Fe. Starting weight 12.0 kg. Metals physically recovered: Au and Pt." I take it this means Au and Pt were created by transmutation and then extracted from the sample, so they should be depleted. So what else is there to look for? I note that one sample has a half melted nail sticking out of it. I do not think that constitutes reagent grade Fe. 4. Bag #2, lead sample, 221 grams. 5. Bag B1, bismuth sample, 353 grams. Lump of soft metal. Non-uniform, impure. 6. Oxides lead bar, 61 grams. Bag-o-rust. 7. Slag from lead bar, 68 grams. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 11:38:48 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA12591; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 11:31:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 11:31:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Steve Ekwall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Related(?) FYI hydrogen fuel X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: This newspaper story was in the 'Rocky Mountain News - under the SCIENCE section (pg 38A - bottom of page). I thought it might be of interest to some of those here that are looking in to hydrogen (whatever..)' rmNEWS Science Editor-Mike Anton (303)892-2327 - e-mail science@denver-rmn.com dateref:Wed.June 26,1996 ------------------- Verbatum NEWS story as follows: ------------------- headline: "New fuel from sugar discovered" "Clean, cheap, pure hydrogen could be future energy source" by Maggie Fox -------------------- Reuter LONDON--British and American scientists said Tuesday they had discovered a way to make a clean fuel from suger, which could rev-olutionize the energy industry. The process uses enzymes from bacteria that live near hot underwater vents to convert glucose into hydrogen and water. A clean and cheap way to produce pure hydrogen has been a holy grail for energy reseachers, who are seeking ways to replace pollution-creating fossil fuels and atomic reactors. Michael Danson, a biochemist at the University of Bath, western England, said the process could also use simple cellulose -- the basic component of plants including grass. "What we have done is taken glucose and we have oxidized it with an enzyme," Danson said. "It produced molecular hydogen." "Hydrogen is the fuel of the 21st century," said Jonathan Woodward of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, who co-authored the research. "The ultimate goal is to convert renewable resources into hydrogen gas." Woodward, an expert in enzymes at ORNL, run by Lockheed Martin Energy Research Corporation for the U.S. Department of Energy, said hydrogen could one day be to fuel cars. ------------------ end of file------------------- FYI only - No Reply Requested From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 12:44:36 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA24675; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 12:30:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 12:30:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960626151931_225572502@emout16.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: understanding the Correa Device X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I have read Hugo's comments about the Correa device and his comments reflect my views also. Where are the independent test results? What does all of the technical jargon mean? It is not clear if the device runs itself or if it needs to remain connected to the power mains. I called Muller. I felt the same way after talking to him. Does the device run itself? That's a simple question that does not need to be burried deep within the details. I did the same sort of experiments myself. I do not have such a lovely wife that is able to blow glass for me, so I had to do my experiments in a bell jar. I ran wires though the base of the bell jar. It tried: 1. Low pressure 2. Medium pressure 3. All sorts of electrode configurations 4. Different gases. 5. Radio frequency injection 6. Microwave injection. 7. Operation at elevated potentials with the help of 500 KV Vandegaff With Stenger's help I tried: 1. Microwave and arc injection 2. 100KV microwave and arc configurations. 3. Stenger tried..high current with a multitude of electrode configurations. We got nothing that appeared to to be excess energy! I read of: 1. The years of work that went into the development of the florescent lamp. 2. The development effort with the high pressure and low pressure Sodium and Mercury Lamps. 3. The years of study of spectrial lines emitted from plasmas. 4. The Tokamack and Stellerator efforts with RF and Microwave injection. No one noticed any excess energy. Isn't that strange? I don't believe the Correa's claims. I tried this sort of stuff myself. Joe Champion is sending his samples to Jed. Potapov is coming to Lanl at the end of the month. Miley says he has found isotopic shifts. This is the kind of stuff I can believe. It appears to me that high pressure or a seeding effect (like in a bubble chamber) are the only way to get the electron condensations required to produced the excess energy. Frank Z From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 12:45:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA24750; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 12:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 12:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960626152401_225575588@emout17.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: continued X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: per my last posting I also tried sine waves square waves pulsed waves triangle waves I got white sparks, orange glow, and sometimes very rare green glow. I got no excess energy. Frank Z From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 14:27:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA15454; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:12:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:12:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606262059.QAA02777@spectre.mitre.org> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Robert I. Eachus" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner (hheffner@anc.ak.net) said: > Gee, I wonder if NASA could improve the performance of the > shuttle's or other 2H2 + O2 burning rocket engines by pumping air > into them when doing a burn in the atmosphere. It might increase > the heat transfer to the engine walls though. It might also > reduce the specific inpulse by decreasing the average temperature, > and increasing the average mass of particle and thus lowering the > average particle exhaust velocity. More volume, more mass, but > less velocity. Uh, have you checked the gas mixture in the shuttle engines recently? The mix they burn has significantly more than twice as much hydrogen as oxygen. I forget the numbers offhand, but the average molecular weight of the exhaust gases is about 9. Part of this is due to incomplete combustion, but in any case the lower the molecular weight of the exhaust (and the higher the temperature) the higher the Isp. > Another idea might be to use the old "thrust augmentation tubes". > The idea is to put a shaped tube around a rocket exhaust to use > the spent exhaust (the momentum was already transferred to the > rocket engine walls) as a heat source for a kind of ramjet. The > performance of augmentaion tubes was not very high, due to drag > and low heat transfer, but it seems like they might be useful on a > small craft using H2 + O2 rocket engines in the atmosphere. Maybe > a small research rocket or something like that. Some kind of > mixer blades should help heat transfer performance. Again, it has been a while, and I'd have to check but both the SSMEs (space shuttle main engines) and the SRBs (solid rocket boosters) have engine bells optimized for atmospheric conditions around a couple hundred thousand feet, so they do use this effect. One of the little known, but duh! when you think of it, facts about the shuttle is that it burns most of its fuel flying horizontally. It mostly climbs for the first minute of flight, then heads downrange while slowly continuing to gain altitude. > All the above just some wild speculation. However, it is clear > that the shuttle's engines do not "implode", even though burning > pure H2 + O2. It's not because the H2 and O2 are liguid either - > the H2 and O2 flowing without ignition does not produce much > thrust. Actually, because the mix is not 2/1, the exhaust gases continue to burn as they mix with air, and the minimum volume occurs a couple hundred feet from the engine. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 14:54:12 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA21545; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:43:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:43:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606262134.OAA06648@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Robin, Michael: RE your posts below For personal experience building a generator and/or operating one of Brown's units from China, I have personally verified practically every empirical claim made by Brown. As an experimentalist, Brown conveys accurate information, with one exception (noted below). The stuff is intruiging as a big ice cream cone to lick at. BUT, Brown's theory off the wall. The mono-atomic stuff is just simply not so this side of God. The result is simply from the fact that the stuff is in perfect ratio for exact combination and is extremely well mixed when it goes fresh out of water and is about as pure as you are going to get out of a process (albeit with some water vapor and an occassionally stray ion (very very few if you are running clean, intelligently). There are a lot of chemists and some physicists who think there is something to so-called cf phenomenon. But not one who will buy the mono-atomic stuff as relates to explanation of Brown's gas. What they will tell you is that it takes nanoseconds for the mono form of hyrodrogen and oxygen to find their soul mates and become binary systems. They probably reform as binaries in situ before they even bubble out of the water. Reforming as binaries is probably a necessary part of the electrodynamic process of splitting out of water... I embarressed myself terribly by gullibly pushing Brown's theory on that for a few months before I wised up to the fact that (a) it is probably impossible and (b) it is not necessary for "explaining" the effects Brown observed. Lugging it around just confuses the issues. The only other bone I found to pick is that Brown was not precise about the issue of hydrogen embrittlement in the materials which were worked on. He tended to pooh-pooh it and argue that it couldn't be a problem (because of the perfect re-combination of the "combustion" (this is a lousy word to use for the reaction). I think that is because he was arguing as an electrical engineer, not as a materials scientist, in other words, I don't think he ever checked it out. We checked it out. Embrittlement is A BIG KAHUNA issue. If it were not, Boeing would be manufacturing the 777 today with Brown's gas type generators forming a "seamless" rivetless hull. I know because I induced a technical team at Boeing to check it out. They were interested in it for awhile, but gave up on it because of the embrittlement problem in aluminum. That deal would have made me a lot of money...sigh. One experimental sign to look for around your work area when running the generator. After working on some material for a few minutes, do you get a slight "sweet" smell in the air, after perceptively getting past some metallic smells? If so, could be excess oxygen, meaning, some hyrodgen is going into the materials. We thought that it was ionic rich air are from all of the water vapor, but it may have been the sign of the presense of pure oxygen. At 05:20 AM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >On Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:37:26 -0700 (PDT), Michael Randall wrote: >[snip] >>Correct. Now if you ignite a 20 to 60 psi gas sream to make a flame from >>this gas it implodes also and this is where most scientist duck for cover, >>because they don't believe it implodes and still believes it should explode. >>It is the flame properties that is "new science" and its not in any >>textbooks, like vaporizing tungstun and transmutating radioactive materials. >>Also the electrolysis is unique in which it generates a stoichiometric ratio >>of hydrogen and oxygen in mon-atomic form which is twice the normal mole >>volume of molecular gas moles, also not in the textbooks. >> >>Cheers >> >>Michael Randall mrandall@earthlink.net >> >> >If true that mon-atomic gases are generated, this would explain much. >First of all, normally when hydrogen or oxygen gas molecules are >formed, a certain amount of energy is liberated as heat, when the >atoms combine to form molecules (i.e. H2 and O2). If these molecules >are not formed in a Brown's gas generator, then it would run cooler >than one might otherwise expect. Furthermore energy balance equations >for the combination of H2 and O2 are based on the reaction: > >2 H2 + O2 -> 2H2O + energy > >Implicit herein is the assumption that the Hydrogen and Oxygen >molecules need to be split. This means that the energy liberated by >combining H and O atoms rather than molecular Hydrogen and Oxygen will >be greater than a calculation according to the above reaction would >yield. In short, this may be the source of the OU claims. It should >however be noted that this in no way implies that there is any real OU >involved. (Just that heat which would normally be generated during >electrolysis, is in fact stored chemically, and not released until the >gasses are burned). Also because the gasses are atomic and not >molecular, one could expect the flame to be much hotter than normal. >This would explain cutting through ceramics and tungsten etc. >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. >-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 14:55:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA21697; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:43:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:43:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606262134.OAA06656@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: BG Unit is available for use X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 09:34 PM 6/25/96 -0700, you wrote: >Michael - > > > > "...wish I had $5,500 to buy a unit and test it out on the welding > > features, transmutation of metals, and for fueling a car." > >You can get a small unit made for jewelers called a "Hydroflux" from "Turbo >Braze/OKAI" for just under $1000. I saw one in a demo. It's foreign made I >think, but I don't remember where. Check in a jewelers catalog like Swest or >ask a jeweler's supply house or lapidary if they've heard of it. It's a pretty >low gas volume generator though. The smallest torch tip looks just like a small >syringe needle, and makes a beautiful little blue-green pin flame an inch long >and not more than 1mm in diameter at its base. I held my finger almost touching >it and felt no heat, but watched it slice steel wire like it was made of >butter. > >Great for use as a Jedi light sabre for some of the smaller Star Wars action >figures where a great deal of realism is desired. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI > > If anyone is seriously interested in a serious BG unit from China, electrically completely re-built by a Boeing engineer and otherwise refurbished and checked out by him, I have a good friend who owns it and is not using it and would probably sell it for $2000 to a serious experimenter who is willing to share data about what he is doing with it. A loan of the unit is also very possible, under strict conditions. (It's heavy and will cost money to ship somewhere). ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 15:02:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA22031; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:45:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:45:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606262134.OAA06723@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Weilu Master Speaks On Brown's Gas To Deiter and Horace X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 01:52 AM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >>Michael, >> >>The requirement to add some pollutant gas to Brown's gas in order to create an >>explosion explains Meyer's arrangement in his ic engine application where he >>introduces some exhaust gas/air into the combustion chamber to "improve" the >>performance of the H + O combustion. If he used pure H + O from his >>electrolysis gadget incorporated into his spark plugs it would implode. >> >>Whether or not Meyer is ou may be immaterial if he has a reliable and compact >>water based ic engine not requiring gas tanks. >> >>Norman > > >Gee, I wonder if NASA could improve the performance of the shuttle's or >other 2H2 + O2 burning rocket engines by pumping air into them when doing a >burn in the atmosphere. It might increase the heat transfer to the engine >walls though. It might also reduce the specific inpulse by decreasing the >average temperature, and increasing the average mass of particle and thus >lowering the average particle exhaust velocity. More volume, more mass, >but less velocity. > >Another idea might be to use the old "thrust augmentation tubes". The idea >is to put a shaped tube around a rocket exhaust to use the spent exhaust >(the momentum was already transferred to the rocket engine walls) as a heat >source for a kind of ramjet. The performance of augmentaion tubes was not >very high, due to drag and low heat transfer, but it seems like they might >be useful on a small craft using H2 + O2 rocket engines in the atmosphere. >Maybe a small research rocket or something like that. Some kind of mixer >blades should help heat transfer performance. > >All the above just some wild speculation. However, it is clear that the >shuttle's engines do not "implode", even though burning pure H2 + O2. It's >not because the H2 and O2 are liguid either - the H2 and O2 flowing without >ignition does not produce much thrust. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > The difference here with NASA's stuff is: pure canned separate gases introduced together for iginition. Brown found that the ratio has to be well mixed within 5% of stocio ratio to get implosion. We know that that will happen from a generator. In NASA's situation, the atoms are put into a pellmell condition to recombine, and the electrodynamic molecular seeking is generating a mutual thrust (expansion, explosion) activity, the shock waves of which are greater than the mechanical implosions of the condensates. Think of the way of the Weilu master, not in terms of heat expansion. Weilu Master says, heat here in these reactions is in the first instance of the reaction simply an effect, not a cause of anything. THESE REACTIONS ARE ELECTRODYAMIC DANCES OF THE ATOMS AND MOLECULES re-arranging their structures. The force vectors are manyfold. Linear logic is pretty crappy in trying to even hint at it, which is why the formulas don't explain anything whatsoever, only a narrow band of the ultimate static physical end condition and some one-dimensional number given as the "energy released or used", which is an entirely bogus number because it masks an incredible dance and a multifolded universe of force vectors (a huge instantaneous geometric universe of phenomenon we are so miserably unlucky to be unable to directly perceive). Tweak those vectors, you get a different dance, a different outcome, even though the end state matter is the same and the bogus end number can still be the same. Mathematically inclined people tend to argue endlessly over the bogus end number. Weilu Master says, bogus end number is totally irrelevent. Get a different dance, get a different universe of additional phenomenon. Inventors accidentally discover new methods of tweaking by observing weird things and asking childish what/if questions That is my whole philosophy. In the NASA type application, it has to be the shockwaves generated from the sudden transistion from one energetic state to a higher energetic state (of physical motion of the molecules induced by the electrodynamic seeking) which provides the expansions/explosions. In the Brown application, the molecules just don't travel. They are all lined up perfectly filing past rows and rows of chairs in the auditorium. Add the ionic flux (light, match, spark whatever), bingo, they all sit down together and hold hands right there in the chairs right before them. There is no pellmell seeking, no thrusting, pushing and shoving electrodynamically to get the neutral stuff or wrong polarity stuff out of the way. This metaphor does not work for you to see the "contraction" but hopefully you get my point about the expansions. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 15:02:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA22257; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:46:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:46:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606262134.OAA06734@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 03:04 AM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >On Tue, 25 Jun 1996, Don Powell wrote: > >> >> But Implosion makes sense. If you have a liter of a gas and you turn it >> into condensate it will occupy considerable less that a liter of volume as a >> liquid. This will cause a vacuum. Elementary Newtonian physics. >> >> >Most scientists to this day doesn't know of this implosion effect alone, let >> >alone the other two effects listed above, item 1 and item 2, that have more >> >importance to several of Man's energy and pollution problems. > >This is taking the thermodynamic view; going from one state to another, final, >state. Thermo doesn't care about the path taken. In this case, the path will >first go through a vigorous EXplosion (such as you probably saw in school when >the chem teacher put a lighted taper into the cylinder filled with a hydrogen >air mixture), followed by that volume contraction as everything cools down. >Andrew Riley was not killed by an implosion; one scenario for that accident >is that a compressed mix of D2 and O2 was lit by exposure to a bit of Pd as >he moved the cell. I know there are other suggestions but I find this one the >most plausible. If you play around with water electrolysis, don't count on a >harmless implosion if it goes off. >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >| 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 | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > If you have the time, re-consider this post in light of the post "Weilu Master Speaks To Dieter And Horace". I am interested in your reactions. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 14:58:17 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA22377; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:46:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:46:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606262134.OAA06738@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 07:37 AM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >*** Reply to note of 06/25/96 21:38 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf >Again, "Brown Gas for CF" is getting tedious, worthless, almost like >an obsession. Let's kill it. MDH > > Not necessarily. Dieter has come back with a thermodynamic view and Horace has come back with a example, both as objections to the BG phenomenon. I came back with a post called "Weilu Master Speaks To Dieter & Horace", which is designed to provide a momentus clash between thermodynamic and electrodynamic points of view. A thrilling part of the sub-plot is the struggle between inventors and mathematicians for who rules the Universe. If nothing else, you will be able to dust off your sense of humor... ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 15:40:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA01758; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:33:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:33:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960626210419_72240.1256_EHB103-5@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Konfusion Korrected X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Okay, Joe called me up and we went over the list of materials. The letter from Moreland was a little confusing. I now understand what is what. Let's go down the list again. As you would expect, it starts with before and after samples: 1. ESM head ore, 111 grams, sandy. Virgin ore from the mine. Baseline material. 2. ESM treated, 71 grams, sandy. Treated with the special process. This should have enhanced concentrations of anomalous isotopes plus Au and Pt concentration of 108.8 ppm. This is ore that has been treated but the precious metals have not been removed from it. 3. Bag #1, lead iron sample, 116 grams. Champion described this as "a 900 deg C conversion of 99.995% pure ARASCO Pb with reagent grade Fe. Starting weight 12.0 kg. Metals physically recovered: Au and Pt." But he did not mean that the metals have been physically recovered from *this sample*. They are recoverable. This sample still has 'em. Maybe the Pt will have interesting isotopes? We'll toss out the gold. Who needs it? (Yawn) 4. Bag #2, lead sample, 221 grams. Joe described this clearly in his original message, which I should have read more carefully: "120 hour 900 deg C reaction of 99.995% pure ARASCO Pb. Starting weight 35.0 kg. New metals observed after process - Ca, Ba, Mg, Mo, +++ Total production of new metals greater than 6.0 percent." Again, this has been processed but the Ca, Ba, Mg etc. are still in there. This may have been pure Pb when it started but it is anything but pure now. It is an irregular, non-uniform chunk of metal with blotches of white, red and green as well as bright silvery chunks of metal left. It crumbles easily. 5. Bag B1, bismuth sample, 353 grams. Lump of soft metal. Non-uniform, impure. 6. Oxides from lead bar, 61 grams. I referred to this as a "Bag-o-rust." Joe points out that "rust" generally refers to ferric oxide, not lead oxide, but I note definition # 2 in American Heritage: 2. Any of various metallic coatings, especially oxides, formed by corrosion. Joe reports that some less-than-happy-camper (LTHC) from this forum sent him a private e-mail asking why he sent me this sample, which the LTHC refers to as a bag of "shit." Let me check that hypothesis . . . hold please. Nope! It isn't shit. 7. Slag from lead bar, 68 grams. Joe's notation: "A coating that formed on the bar after cooling." Might this too have interesting isotopes?!? Stay tuned -- we'll find out! Well now . . . of course we cannot draw any conclusions from this material yet. We must see what the instruments say. Joe says the anomalies are so pronounced that the analyses will decide the issue beyond any doubt. I must say, as a practical matter, I begin to suspect this stuff is for real. After all, if this material does *not* have any isotopic anomalies then Joe Champion is setting himself up for the biggest pratfall in the history of CF. What would be the point of mailing me two pounds of material when he knows that in a few weeks I am going to report here that X number of labs checked it and found it isn't the least bit out of the ordinary? The fact that he sent it to me at all must give us pause. Positive or negative, these test results will be a lot of fun! - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 16:16:17 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA09135; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:11:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:11:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606262304.TAA03272@spectre.mitre.org> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Robert I. Eachus" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Michael Mandeville (mwm@aa.net) said: > BUT, Brown's theory off the wall. The mono-atomic stuff is just > simply not so this side of God. The result is simply from the > fact that the stuff is in perfect ratio for exact combination and > is extremely well mixed when it goes fresh out of water and is > about as pure as you are going to get out of a process (albeit > with some water vapor and an occassionally stray ion (very very > few if you are running clean, intelligently). > There are a lot of chemists and some physicists who think there is > something to so-called cf phenomenon. But not one who will buy > the mono-atomic stuff as relates to explanation of Brown's gas. > What they will tell you is that it takes nanoseconds for the mono > form of hyrodrogen and oxygen to find their soul mates and become > binary systems. They probably reform as binaries in situ before > they even bubble out of the water. Reforming as binaries is > probably a necessary part of the electrodynamic process of > splitting out of water... Uh, I know some people who once experimented with single-H (monotomic hydrogen) as a rocket fuel. Their conclusion was that it might be all right in outer-outer space, the Asteroid belt and beyond. But you have to keep it very cold, preferably as slush, and it can and will go BOOM! when hit by even one cosmic ray. Better have good magnetic deflectors on that tank. They decided that for the few areas where it was workable, nuclear-electric propulsion was better. Anyway, as I remember, they made it by electrolysis in ammonia, and caught it with a cold trap. As for oxygen, I don't believe the monatomic form is stable at any temperature. But ozone (O3) is, and you can create it preferentially using catalysts. NASA even did a study of what happens if you use ozone instead of oxygen in the shuttle SSMEs. (Answer, not worth it at present prices, and pure ozone is a pain. But in the 20 to 40% ozone range, it might be a useful one shot boost, and should be considered for Shuttle-C. Shuttle-C is/was a project to build an expendable launcher using SSMEs that are no longer man-rated, or have one flight left in them.) So if the Brown's gas is being burned a few inches and milliseconds from formation, there could be some single-H and/or ozone involved. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 16:25:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA10623; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D1C3B8.47F9@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Robert I. Eachus wrote: >Snip: > Uh, have you checked the gas mixture in the shuttle engines > recently? The mix they burn has significantly more than twice as much > hydrogen as oxygen. I forget the numbers offhand, but the average > molecular weight of the exhaust gases is about 9. Part of this is due > to incomplete combustion, but in any case the lower the molecular > weight of the exhaust (and the higher the temperature) the higher the > Isp. > Yes! Which is why the "old" NERVA nuclear rocket would have worked so well if politics had let it fly. The NERVA pumped pure H2 through a fast reactor to gasify it, and then through a nozzle to expand it for rocket thrust. Molecular weight = 2. Who-boy, if we could only find a good way to make and store mono-atomic H in bulk form! We could all be running around on Mars! (Nice place to visit but-----) Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 16:44:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA12580; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: understanding the Correa Device X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/26/96 12:44 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: understanding the Correa Device Frank Z. and others... I initially sent this info to Jed and Gene this morning. I don't regard it as especially critical of Correa or for any reason proprietary. As the group may have seen, I have re-reviewed the IE article, and see that INDEED the Correa's may have GOOD empirical basis for claiming "excess" energy, even though the information is poorly stated or obscured by their method of presentation. - I have sent "Dr." Correa (no background on that Doctorate given from what I can see) a nicely generated graphic showing 3 traces on the same graph: 1. For charging voltage, 2. for charging current, and 3. Instantaneous power. I noted this would be the DESIRED form to assess the INPUT energy into the DP, or discharge power source. Commensurately I also provided a parallel graphic demonstrating a 1. Declining Voltage versus time, 2. declining current versus time, and monotonically declining instantaneous wattage versus time. NOW, if one were to provide these data for the DP battery and the CP battery (The DP is the rechargable battery used to run the Correa device, the CP is the battery receiving the "output" energy.) then we would have something really concrete. - The LAST point about this exercise however, is the most IMPORTANT point: - I.e., if this is the ONLY O.U. type testing Correa has done, there may be a problem with mis-attributed "cause/effect". I.e., there is some reason to believe that some CF effects may occur in NiCad or other "rechargable" systems. ERGO, the "excess" observed by Correa/Correa may be due to the CHARGING METHOD being provided to the "rechargable" cell. (This in itself may also be patentable.) - SO Frank, let's hold firm on the EVALUATION demands. But let's be careful in throwing stones!!!! MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 17:25:34 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA21992; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 17:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 17:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606270014.RAA24280@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 03:33 PM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >To: Vortex > > >Well now . . . of course we cannot draw any conclusions from this material >yet. We must see what the instruments say. Joe says the anomalies are so >pronounced that the analyses will decide the issue beyond any doubt. I must >say, as a practical matter, I begin to suspect this stuff is for real. After >all, if this material does *not* have any isotopic anomalies then Joe Champion >is setting himself up for the biggest pratfall in the history of CF. What >would be the point of mailing me two pounds of material when he knows that in >a few weeks I am going to report here that X number of labs checked it and >found it isn't the least bit out of the ordinary? The fact that he sent it to >me at all must give us pause. > >Positive or negative, these test results will be a lot of fun! > >- Jed > > I can't express how excited I am that you are particpating in this verification stage. Keep up the good work. Presumably I will get to meet you in August baking in the California summer sun. When the results are in, and Vortex and related begin to REALLY suspect that the Kat is out of the bag, I will post here and on the web an outline of the Russell work, which, 60 years ago, provided the conceptual basis (and verification) for all of this. Joe is using a thermodynamic chemical process. CF is noting side effects in electrodynamic wet cells. When you are convinced that it happens (radioactivity transmutation was my journey), you will be able to open the door into the new paradigm. Both result from the Weilu Master dancing in three dimensions on two legs through 4 dimensions. Russell pointed (and verified) a purely electrodynamical approach. Champion and I (no actual relationship or mutual involvment other than occassional email) both got onto this stuff via Monti, Keller and Bochris. Keller got into it from Homer Smith and Russell. Bochris is smiling in the background with a lot of cards close to chest, letting Champion and others take the heat. Keller, well, he is still around but diverted into making some serious money in other technology pathways, Monti is not at all communicative about what he is doing but is very busy with something alchemical, Champion went the precious metals route and I went the radioactivity route. I thought the radioactivity route would be so elementary to prove, you either got a count or you don't, expensive lab analysis really is not necessary to classicly demonstrate the transmutation, but "expert" people are both afraid of it and contemptous of anyone stupid enough to dare to demonstrate that the elementary decay rate is dependent upon the parameters of the electrodynamic enviroment. So Champion is preceding with momentum on the basis of feeding greed, whereas I wearied of lack of support on my path. I hope Joe is going to make the breakthrough here. When he demonstrates it, I will lay some more cards on the table and show the experimental, inventive route for mastery of at least some simple transmutations using purely electrodynamic principles. It was all laid out a long time ago. It is not a numbers game. It is a game of geometry, where the Weilu Master dances. Quantum, which is two dimensional, not three, doesnt even have the seeds within it for suspecting it, which has resulted in the complete impasse of establishment "nuclear" physics in dealing with the flood of data now emerging about ou and transmutation. None of this drivel is overtly technical, Mandeville sure carries on in his mystical stuff, you are laughing to youself, and you are right. Ah, but the new paradigm will not be grasped from a technical basis, only from a philosophically informed perceptual base. I smell it in the next room...I am trying to attune you to think laterally and get a whiff of clues to show you how to move beyond the impasse. You can not move technically in a linear path to get there. You have to "see" differently. That is my point. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 18:04:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA29982; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 17:58:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 17:58:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606270152.AA02116@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Michael Mandeville wrote: ----- I went the radioactivity route. I thought the radioactivity route would be so elementary to prove...but "expert" people are both afraid of it and contemptous of anyone stupid enough to dare to demonstrate that the elementary decay rate is dependent upon the parameters of the electrodynamic enviroment. ----- Michael---are you saying that you *have* succesfully, in a real, reproducible experiment, altered radioactive decay rates, but you abandoned it because of lack of interest from experts? If so, why not simply give out the recipe to Scott Little, or Dieter Britz, or myself, or Michael Schaffer, or any of several other ``experts'' who read this forum and would be willing to reproduce and promote a succesful demonstration of nuclear anomalies? Why are you complaining when you have the necessary audience? You list your profession as publisher---why not simple publish the necesary information here and on a web page, a la Joe Champion? From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 19:08:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA14068; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 19:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 19:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606270150.SAA00543@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 05:58 PM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >Michael Mandeville wrote: >----- >I went the radioactivity route. I thought the radioactivity route >would be so elementary to prove...but "expert" people are both afraid >of it and contemptous of anyone stupid enough to dare to demonstrate >that the elementary decay rate is dependent upon the parameters of >the electrodynamic enviroment. >----- > >Michael---are you saying that you *have* succesfully, in a real, >reproducible experiment, altered radioactive decay rates, but you > >abandoned it because of lack of interest from experts? If so, why >not simply give out the recipe to Scott Little, or Dieter Britz, >or myself, or Michael Schaffer, or any of several other ``experts'' >who read this forum and would be willing to reproduce and promote a >succesful demonstration of nuclear anomalies? Why are you complaining >when you have the necessary audience? You list your profession as >publisher---why not simple publish the necesary information > >here and on a web page, a la Joe Champion? > > > ah yes, well, er, check out http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexmrad1.html Scott Little has a complete copy of my log book an that: "Experimental Methods For Neutralizing Radioactivity" ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 01:36:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA12421; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:31:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:31:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: I am in Moscow X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dear Volodya, You wrote: >Dear Horace, > >I am in Moscow now. I am going to connect with some inventors (the people >in this city are more pragmatic than in St.Pete), for example, with >Avramenko who was absent at the conference. > >I am going to discuus ideas of Ignatiev on Tesla's antennas. To Ignatiev's >point of view, Tesla could suppress the transversal component of EM >radiation using special form of the antenna. > >What are the replies on the problem with + and - charged particles I >stated? I hope to present an exact solution of this problem. The main >obstacle is how to calculate the electric field creation by the point >particle. Everybody knows such a field is od finite magnitude, however, >nobody knows how to calculate it in correctway. > >Volodya >-- ># ># =CA=A1 =C3 =91=A1"'"=A6 =C0=8A =91=A1 =C0=A6=91=C0"=89'=91=A6=AB=A6= -=A6=C3=FF=8E=A6=D7=A1'=89=C3- ># > ># =C8=D5- -=A6=C3=FF=8E=A6=D7=A1'=89=C3- (=CE=D4=CC=9E). =B8'=A6= =DE=A1"'=FF =A1=9F"=89"=A1 =CE=D4=CC=9E@=CE=9E=94=B7 ># >USER=3Donoochin ># =94=A6=D5=A1=A4=91=8A "-"=A1=D7=A6=DE=91=8A=C0 -=A6=C3=FF=8E=A6=D7= =A1'=89=C3-, =C0'=9F=A1 "=8A"'=89=D5=A1 =AC'=9F=89' "=C0=C3=A1=9F=8D=D7=A1'= =FF ># -"=A6=DE=8A'=A1=91=91=8D=89 =8A "=A6=BB"=A1=91=89=91=91=8D=89= -=8A"=FF=D5=A1 =8A =D7 =C0=A6'=A6"=A6=D5 =8A=F0''"- =90=A1 =C3=8D= "'=A1=91=9F=A1"'=91=A6=20 ># -"=8A-=8A"=C0=8A =8A -"=A6=DE=8A=89 >HOME=3Dc:\onoochin ># =D2=8E=8D=C0 =9F=8A=A1=AB=91=A6"'=8A=C0 ># >MSG=3Dr I am not sure what is typed above between "Volodya" and "MSG=3Dr", the last line. Whatever it is it does not print on my machine. Hopefully you recieved Larry Wharton's reply which is repeated here: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There should be no problem when one considers the total energy. The work done in moving two charged particles from infinity to a distance r is: W =3D q1*q2 / r In the case where the two particles are moving together the work will be reduced by relativistic effects and will be: W =3D q1*q2*(1 - (v/c)**2) / r So in comparing the two cases the balance of energy is given by: q1*q2 / r + Int{ E*E/8Pi + B*B/8Pi} =3D q1*q2*(1 - (v/c)**2) / r or Int{ E*E/8Pi + B*B/8Pi} =3D -q1*q2*( (v/c)**2) / r Where Int{ E*E/8Pi} is the spatial integral over the LW and Coulomb field in the second case. Try this and it will work out if you do it right. Of course there is a problem with setting r to zero but the coeficient of the 1/r singularity should still cancel out. I have worked out the exact energy and momentum for any two particles moving with all possible velocities and spatial orientation and everything works out perfect. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I don't recall any others, but I'll look further. There has been much activity on vortex lately. Regarding the calculation of the field potential for a point particle, I guess you know I am not a theoretical physicist, just an uneducated amateur inventor. However, I will say what I believe about this as my unorthodox and unquantified thoughts may give you some ideas to pursue. The energy in the field of a point particle must be infinite. This can not be. Therefore point charged particles can not exist. For this reason, I think the charge must be distributed in the particle as per the Schroedinger Equation squared, i.e. the quantum wave function squared, or psi^2. I think a valid quantum interpretation is not the that the particle is a point with location determined probablistically, but that the seat of particle charge really is everywhere in the wave function simultaneously and distributed as the wave function. I think magnetism is an extension of the quantum stuff charged particles are made of. Every electron or other charge, with spin or orbital or angular momentum generates a magnetic line of flux. That line of flux, as with macro sized lines of flux, can not be cut by other lines of flux because it is fundamental quantum stuff. The lines of flux may merge for aligned electron spins, and thus the flux loop from individual atoms combine, stretch, superimpose, to enter the macro world, i.e. thay can become very large loops. I think magnetism is truly made of atom quantum stuff. It has mass, momentum and pressure. Lines of flux really aren't just lines but volume occupiers. This fact is clearly manifest when you bring two North poles of two identical magnets together, for example. If the flux were just "lines" they could mingle, slide right by each other, and there would be little repulsion. This is even more true if you take two magnets both pointing in the same direction and force them side by side. A strong repulsion results, even though the two sets of flux lines are compressed into parallel shape at a flat boundary. The "lines" are really compressable volumes. So what of the "breaking" of these lines by other flux lines. This is possible only in a quantized way, i.e. by the emission of a photon. The resulting cut field line, i.e. a still closed and separate field line, is a collapsing magnetic field which induces an electrostatic field and this electostatic field is in the regenerative form of a photon. However, the atom or electron from which such photon stuff eminated (is cut from) must be reduced in corresponding mass to account for the energy (magnetic field stuff mass) loss. In other words, the photon is created from the magnetic field mass of the charged particle. It is really just a mass to mass conversion. This is why radient energy and mass are synonymous, because they *are* one and the same. The photon is comprized of a snipped quantum of magnetic (i.e. and also therefor electrostatic co-field.) So where does this leave the annihilation of the + and - particle? It leaves it open to a continuum of photon spectra issued at the annihilation. Depending on the mechanincs of each individual collapse, different amounts of the mass of the particles may be radiated depending on the rotational acceleration developed, and how the flux lines get cut into quanta. The only requirement is that what is not annihilated ends up radiated, and vice versa. Should some quanta of one particle's magnetic field remain unmatched by atimatter due to the antimatter have been radiated away, it would then collapse and thus create an electrostatic field and be radiated away. Some might say it is the dance of the Weilu Master. How much does he radiate? As much as he wants of what he has before the extinction of self and the creation of enlightenment. So, this leaves the immediate question of qualitative agreement with experimental data, especially mass drop of atoms upon photon emission, and the existance of continuous spectra of + - annihilation gammas. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 01:46:08 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA13244; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:39:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:39:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960627083157_100433.1541_BHG130-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Cincinnati Group X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jean writes, > Infinite Energy should better follow up its informations. May I > ask to Gene Mallove (and to Jed Rothwell and Chris Tinsley who > were also quoted in this context) what happened to the Cincinnati > Group (of which we know nothing except that high temperatures were > involved) which was presented in IE #5 & 6 as a possible major > breakthrough, and which was not even mentioned in last issue #7 ? > Should we conclude that this ended up a a fiasco ? Hey, come on! You want an ongoing story to appear issue by issue as a kind of serial? Look, Gene visited the group. I did some replication work which *may* have shown anomalous behaviour - and certainly showed interesting effects - but I hadn't the money to proceed. And it is one of those things where we are stuck with non-disclosure agreements. We hate situations like that, and it's true we have a fair amount of information which we can't publish, but that's the world we have to operate in. It may simply be that the group wanted some publicity to attract funding and, having got commercial interest, are getting on with exploiting their technology. Or it may be that it 'ended up as a fiasco', but I doubt it. The process was interesting enough to be of some value even if the anomalies weren't anomalies - not that this is what I'm suggesting here. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 01:55:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA14485; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606270846.BAA02220@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Weilu Master Speaks On Brown's Gas To Deiter and Horace X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 12:31 AM 6/27/96 -0700, you wrote: >I would need some very strong evidence, before my own glazzies, to believe in >an implosion from the ignition of a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen, molecular >or atomic. I am sure it will explode, and rather violently at that. > >Could it be that this is the usual tendency of a propagator of something to >declare it "perfectly safe"? I remember, back in the 70's, I was one of a >team investigating the sodium/sulphur battery. We were part of a consortium, >including some industrial heavies. One of these came up with a rather nifty >new design for the battery. In their hype, they mentioned among other stuff >that this battery, if it breaks down (car collision etc) just quietly fizzles, >the Na and S combining benignly. We knew otherwise, as we had had an explosion >from just that (all safely contained, thank you); and we knew that these people >had had the same. > >That battery, by the way, has a fatal flaw that has not been eliminated yet; >the solid electrolyte membrane (beta-alumina) breaks down. Otherwise, we'd >have cars running on it today. Every so many years, someone announces a >breakthough, now they have a formula for a stable beta-alumina, hurray! And >then it is quietly forgotten, and a few years later... >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >| 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 | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > fair enuff, Dieter, but let me add that I operated a BG unit, one of my own construction, out of plexiglass, for, oh, some 80 hours or more in total over a few weeks and ran a whole lot of experiments including filling plastic bottles and metal cans with the gas and then capping it off, then opening a tiny little hole and holding up a match, then watching the plastic bottle and metal can crumple down into a small version of its former self, completely intact. what does that suggest? i can also supply a list of witnesses who you can talk to on the phone. fill them first with water and let the generator gas push the water out so you have pure stocio gases in the containers. pretty easy to check out. the jewelry industry has used some electrolysis units for a long time to make a tiny little flame for detailed handwork. that's enough to test the phenomenon out if you don't mind the time it takes. they cost $1000 or so and every university should acquire one if they don't already have a suitable unit for generating the gases but most likely somebody has something somewhere at nearly every major university. P.S. We did it publicly as well at a fair. (lucky for us the fire marshal never caught us). ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 02:24:17 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA16827; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 02:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 02:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Weilu Master Speaks On Brown's Gas To Deiter and Horace X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 27 Jun 1996, Michael Mandeville wrote: > At 12:31 AM 6/27/96 -0700, you wrote: > >I would need some very strong evidence, before my own glazzies, to believe in > >an implosion from the ignition of a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen, molecular > >or atomic. I am sure it will explode, and rather violently at that. [...] > fair enuff, Dieter, but let me add that I operated a BG unit, one of my own > construction, out of plexiglass, for, oh, some 80 hours or more in total > over a few weeks and ran a whole lot of experiments including filling > plastic bottles and metal cans with the gas and then capping it off, then > opening a tiny little hole and holding up a match, then watching the plastic > bottle and metal can crumple down into a small version of its former self, > completely intact. what does that suggest? i can also supply a list of > witnesses who you can talk to on the phone. As you say, fair enough; I take back what I said, half convinced {:]. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 03:53:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA23943; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 03:49:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 03:49:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960627064711.379f79a2@world.std.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Mitchell Swartz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: wild speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 07:16 AM 6/25/96 -0700, on vortex it was written: >Joe Flynn comments: > > > I don't disagree to the possibilities of heavy metals and > > hydrogen, only to the reference to 'fussion'. Evidence does not > > suggest fussion, only heat production due to some unknown set of > > circumstances. > >Well, that depends. If you look at the radiation, it definitely >isn't fusion. not totally correct. very few of these systems discussed here actually produces fusion, and ash is the correct thing for which to look, not ionizing radiation, anyway. and if you mean radiation, there is plenty of non-ionizing radiation. with ~50 millieV per phonon, and about 20 MeV for the transition from the first excited state of He4*, there is room for a significant number of quanta (ie. radiation), and a good explanation for the observed excess enthalpy. best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 03:52:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA23967; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 03:49:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 03:49:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960627064615.343fe9de@world.std.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Mitchell Swartz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Related(?) FYI hydrogen fuel X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 12:17 AM 6/27/96 -0700, Dieter wrote: >On Wed, 26 Jun 1996, Steve Ekwall wrote: > >> This newspaper story was in the 'Rocky Mountain News - under the SCIENCE >> section (pg 38A - bottom of page). I thought it might be of interest to >> some of those here that are looking in to hydrogen (whatever..)' >[...] >> Michael Danson, a biochemist at the University of Bath, western >> England, said the process could also use simple cellulose -- the basic >> component of plants including grass. "What we have done is taken glucose >> and we have oxidized it with an enzyme," Danson said. "It produced >> molecular hydogen." > >Newspapers are not known for their scientific accuracy; when you oxidise >glucose, you get carbon dioxide and water. That's what our bodies do all the >time. >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >| 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 | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > although Dieter is absolutely correct for most aerobic organisms, including our own bodies, in some "lower" life forms (e.g. plants), the oxidation of glucose removes hydrogen, some of which is then given (through molybdenum and sulfer and iron) an enzyme where it forms either diatomic hydrogen or ammonia. - a low temp low pressure natural born-haber process. best wishes. Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 04:02:40 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA24587; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 03:56:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 03:56:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960627064828.36371d2a@world.std.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Mitchell Swartz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Visit to EarthTech X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Bob Horst writes: >The most interesting part of his technique is the ability to perform >simultaneous flow and static calorimetry. how > (Be sure to check out the color >graphs from the erzatz beads on his home page.) One over-unity run in his >calorimeter could distinguish once and for all whether the energy is generated >or if there is some heat pump or phase change phenomenon involved. It is >incredible to me that no experiment of this type on a working cell has yet been >reported. good baselines exactly for the this reason have been stressed, and there have been working cells, in progress, reported, and published (or about to be) which demonstrate adequate baseline an have shown excess heat for the Pd-D2O and Ni-H2O systems. \ best wishes. Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 05:15:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA01394; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 05:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 05:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Related(?) FYI hydrogen fuel X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 27 Jun 1996, Mitchell Swartz wrote: [...] > although Dieter is absolutely correct for most aerobic organisms, including > our own bodies, in some "lower" life forms (e.g. plants), the oxidation of > glucose > removes hydrogen, some of which is then given > (through molybdenum and sulfer and iron) an enzyme where it forms either > diatomic hydrogen > or ammonia. - a low temp low pressure natural born-haber process. I'll admit that I didn't take this into account, but I will quibble with the term "oxidation" for this. The original glucose contains that hydrogen and, while the rest of the glucose might indeed be oxidised, the hydrogen is reduced in this process. It's a kind of disproportionation. When you talk of reducing something by adding hydrogen (the reverse process), the something does get reduced, but in this case, if you want to talk about oxidisation, you should not say of glucose, but "glucose, not including the hydrogen in it". I think I may be getting as pedantic as you, Mitch. But I have to grant that this reaction might take place somewhere, as they say, in the bowels of the Earth. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 06:31:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA12172; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 06:26:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 06:26:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606271320.IAA28031@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Neutralizing Radioactivity X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 19:01 6/26/96 -0700, Michael Mandeville wrote: >Scott Little has a complete copy of my log book an that: "Experimental >Methods For Neutralizing Radioactivity" Yes, and I've been so busy with new calorimeter's lately that I haven't studied it yet. However, we did perform a series of experiments in which we placed an Am-241 source inside the top sphere of a Van de Graff generator on several occasions for several hours each time over a period of two months and we could detect no change in the source's activity. We maintained a 2nd source that was not treated in the VdG as a control so the stability of the counting system would not affect the experiment. We did not attempt to count the sample while it was in the VdG sphere at operating voltage, as others have done. I would expect massive interference with most radiation counting systems under such conditions (i.e. 200kV corona). If Champion's Pb bar has detectable Pt in it, and if that Pt has significant isotopic ratio anomalies, I'll begin in earnest to explore this whole area. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 07:03:11 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA17357; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 06:54:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 06:54:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960627094326_144053457@emout17.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: RMCarrell@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: understanding the Correa Device X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Gentlemen, take a deep breath and slow down. I'm trying to wrap my wits about it also, and I had a head start since Gene sent me an advance copy of IE. Frank, performing lots of experiments with discharge tubes is not the same as the very carefully controlled conditions the Correas use. If one is going to check out an experiment, perform *exactly* that experiment, not something else that seems similar. Scott had the good grace to conclude that his failure ot get excess heat from his beads was another item on the long list of things that don't work. We all have them. The long discussions about Mitchell Jones' efforts to duplicate the PowerGen heat exchanger is a case in point. (Hi, Mitchell, glad your'e here). I have some distrust of calibrated batteries, but at least the Correas use rechargeable batteries so there is some repeatability. However, even rechargeables will show some changes with cycle history. The pulse nature of the energy generation requires some kind of integration. This is also a factor in the Newman machines, and a difficulty in making a quantitative evaluation of them. There is a lot of fine print in the articles in IE, and a very wide ranging list of references, and lots of data. The Correas obviously put a lot of work into this, and it warrants a careful study before making conclusions. Mike Carrell From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 07:01:11 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA17478; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 06:55:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 06:55:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960627135003_72240.1256_EHB101-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Excess heat in Patterson Patents X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Barry Merriman asks: "By the way: has anyone noticed that in Patterson's CETI cell patents, even though he presents a lot of experimental data for cell performance, that there is basically no hint excess heat observed? Yes. Years ago I asked Jim Patterson about that. I gather it is part of a patent ploy, or strategy. If he had claimed excess heat, they never would have given him the patent. Also, he wants to publish his least impressive data to avoid exciting interest in the product, and competition. "He has the odd system of tabulating power in (in Watts, as I*V) and 'heat out' . . ." Not just odd, screwy. That is why Tom Passell did not buy the results when he first went to Florida. "Another interesting point about the data presented in the patent is that his flow rates there are ~ ) 0.3 ml/min---thats amazingly minuscule....like a single drop per minute." Right. That was with a medical IV pump. Flow calorimetery does not work at that flow rate. I don't recall what the patent says, but in real life he did static calorimetry, depending on the cell temperature only. "So, Pattersons patent really shows no evidence whatsoever for excess heat generation (which is consistent with the patent title and abstract), and makes no claims about it either." Yes. That is deliberate. The later patents make slightly stronger claims. "So far, the only official, available evidence for excess heat generation seems to be the reports from Cravens." Correct. The other results are being kept secret. However, as shown in Infinite Energy #7, p. 14, they play peek-a-boo with the Motorola data from time to time. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 08:53:09 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA05245; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 08:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 08:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: some explanations to the problem X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dear Volodya, You wrote: >Dear Horace, > >Thank you for a fast reply. >The unclear part of my text is due to my PC has begun to insert one file >without my willing. Some letters are on Cyrillic so your PC doesn't >recognize it. I try to find this error. > >Now about the problem of two particles. Before the conference I have never >thought that special theory of relativity can find an application, at >least, when I alive. Do you remember I sent to Chris and copied to others >about the interferometer? If the inventor of that device detected 'an >aether wind' he could determine the coordinates of the device on Earth >without using the satellites. > >My problem arises form attempt to understand how will the fields propagate >after annihilation of the particles? Depending on the energy of the >particles, these fields can be described as in frame of quantum as in >frame of classical mechanics. For example, for the electron accelerated up >to 50 GeV its electrical field can spread up to 2 metres (phrase from >one physical paper), of course, which could be detected be the measurement >equipment. >If annihilation processes ar more or less studied now what will be with >such a spreaded field after disappearing of the particle supporting this >field?Annihilation process take place at an area comparative to the >'classical' or Compton radius of the electron (both latters are close >values). >Based on this fact, I am going to calculate the energies of the fields >namely in classical el-dynamics. I should say nobody can explain but >simple calculations in classical framework yield good correspondence to >the experimental data. > >Please, answer me did my PC insert unred file into this message? > >Warm regard, >Volodya The unred file is now gone. The electrostatic field and magnetic fields remaining are just two different parts of the same thing, true? The collapse of either will generate the other. If such fields exist at annihilation, then a photon or photons with the corresponding quanta of energy must be generated upon their collapse. However, if the phase angles of the magnetic and electrostatic fields remaining after annihilation of the supporting particles are out of phase with a normal electromagnetic wave, to the degree out of phase, cancellation will occur upon the first collapse of the fields. What remains after the first collapse must be in phase with an EM wave that can propagate. The phase angles of the fields remaining after the annihilation must be a function of the initial conditions of the particles prior to close interaction. These initial conditions, via Heisenberg, are unkwowable, i.e. have only a range of probabilities. This is why I think such annihilations must be incomplete, leaving a continuous distribution spectrum photon emission. It seems to me that your calculation must result in a distribution of photon energies, not a single value. This is further complicated by the fact that such collisions can result in the creation of completely new particles with a mass plus energy equal to that of the total kinetic plus mass energy of the incident particles. Does this idea of a continuous spectrum emission agree with the experimental annihilation data? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 09:17:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA12380; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606271545.LAA05933@spectre.mitre.org> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Robert I. Eachus" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: NERVA X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Sort of off topic but... Yes... There was a wonderful "two-stage" NERVA followup proposal which used direct thrust to get off the ground, then once in orbit used a low thrust plasma arc powered by the reactor to get Isp >> 10000. (The original NERVA as I remember had an Isp around 800, and there was talk of a "gaseous core" version with Isp around 2000.) The plasma arc--which was the part of the research I was interested in--was actually developed and tested, but couldn't be used in atmosphere. When you did, it formed significant amounts of HCN. (Hydrogen Cyanide.) We tested NASA's version in an enclosure, and bubbled the gasses through strong lye filters. It really liked to make cyanide, could have been a useful commercial source... Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 09:16:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA12497; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:08:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:08:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960627155309_72240.1256_EHB129-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Lonely calorimeters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Barry Merriman, Scott Little and Kirk Shanahan have described fine calorimeters. It seems all three machines are begging for good CF cathodes. The machines are idle, lonely, unfulfilled. Maybe y'all should ask Ed Storms for some of his latest IMRA palladium samples. He reports great success getting reproducible excess heat with them. Like most Pd - CF, the excess is not large in percentage terms, but it is large enough to be very easy to measure. He is publishing a paper about that in the next issue of our magazine. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 20:23:54 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA28388; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:13:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:13:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dan CHICEA wrote: > I would very much appreciate if somebody could provide my a >photocopy of the US patents 5,018,180 and 5,123,039 by Ken >Shoulders. Would it cost much to snail-mail it to me? If it will >happen, as the summer holidays are coming closer, the mail inside >the university will work rather slow; please use my home address, >which is: > >Dan CHICEA >Str. Ludos nr. 14, bl 27, ap.2 >SIBIU, 2400 >ROMANIA, EUROPE > Dan, You will be glad to know that US patents 5,018,180 and 5,123,039 by Ken Shoulders, all 188 pages, were sent to you at the above address via air mail today. Happy reading. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 20:22:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA28530; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:14:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:14:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Weilu Master Speaks On Brown's Gas To Deiter and Horace X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Michael Mandeville writes: [snip] >Inventors accidentally discover new methods of >tweaking by observing weird things and asking childish what/if questions >That is my whole philosophy. > Ah so, master. 8^) Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 20:33:39 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA00885; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Michael Mandeville writes: >A thrilling part of the sub-plot is the >struggle between inventors and mathematicians for who rules the Universe. >If nothing else, you will be able to dust off your sense of humor... Ah so again, Weilu master, he said, bowing deeply. 8^) Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 21:23:18 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA08035; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 21:07:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 21:07:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606270452.AA02236@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Excess heat in Patterson Patents X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: By the way: has anyone noticed that in Patterson's CETI cell patents, even though he presents a lot of experimental data for cell performance, that there is basically no hint excess heat observed? for example, see Patent Number 05372688 Appl. Number 160937 Appl. Date 1993 12 02 Title. System for electrolysis of liquid electrolyte He has the odd system of tabulating power in (in Watts, as I*V) and ``heat out'' (as flow rate x dT, with units of (degree C.ml/min)) in his experimantal data tables. If you convert his ``heat out'' to watts (using heat capacity of his 2 M solution as 4.13 J/ml.C as Scott Little reported experimentally in an old post) you get that of the many data points reported (for various combos of Pt, Pd, Au, coated beads, heavy and light water, room and high pressure) that only *1* of them represents excess heat (compared to I*V, and probably even compared to I*(V - 1.48) electrolysis corrected power in), and that 1 case is suspect, because it says various parameters like voltage were estimated (with no further explanation) and because it is an outlier---it is very deviant from other similar data points in the same data set. Another interesting point about the data presented in the patent is that his flow rates there are ~ ) 0.3 ml/min---thats amazingly miniscule....like a single drop per minute. Of course, this is why he sees 30 degree C temp increases. I would think that the best accuracy would be had by using 5--10 x that flow rate and dropping dT by 5--10 x accordinging, since T can be measured with great confidence, while I doubt the same is true of such a tiny flow rate. So, Pattersons patent really shows no evidence whatsoever for excess heat generation (which is consistent with the patent title and abstract), and makes no claims about it either. Nor does he really show that his method is even a particulalry useful or effective way to heat electrolytes, which makes one wonder why they granted the patent....the content of the patent really just says: here's this system I made (of course, there is an obvious ulterior motive on Patterson's part for getting this patent...but based on its content alone, as apatent officer I would have rejected it). So far, the only official, available evidence for excess heat generation seems to be the reports from Cravens. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 21:56:11 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA14485; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 21:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 21:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606270446.VAA15749@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Transmutations And The Weilu Master X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Well, I stand corrected on a miscellaneous point of heritage, one which I mis-stated in a previous post (Weilu Master Speaks...). In one of its disguises, Weilu Master spoke to me and then trumped me. Anyway, for the record, Champion was independently zeroing in on transmutations, and connected Monte to Keller, who both fell out from Champion for reasons which require a book to explain. Mainly because all of the work was at too early a stage and everybody was getting inconsistant results. Also for the record, Champion has abandoned a thermodynamics approach (his early approach, which I stupidly assumed he was still using) and is using electrolysis technology. He has, he claims, a very productive method, which is why he can be generous with samples. So I don't think I will be able to stimulate any thinking with Russell's work. No need, it is now Champion's work. I think we are going to learn a lot from him. Still, Russell's work will be very good primer background. He is threatening to send a dumptruck full of treated material to Jeb's front door if Jeb has difficulty with the samples he has been sent....8>) Concerning his motives, Champion I hope will speak plainly during the next few weeks. Underdogs will appreciate his motives. I predict that by the end of the year, the whole story, a very incredible one, much more than just technology, will begin to emerge... ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 22:21:25 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA18797; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 22:17:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 22:17:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606262212.AA10041@POST.TANDEM.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: HORST_BOB@Tandem.COM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Visit to EarthTech X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Tandem-QM Gateway: Version K4.5 T0: Vortex List [SMTPGATE@POST (vortex-l@eskimo.com)] Last week, I had a delightful visit with Scott Little at his lab in Austin. After following his work on Vortex, it was great to meet him and see his calorimeter in action (thanks Scott). The calorimeter is a very fine piece of work. Its accuracy is clearly much better than needed to prove over-unity of the magnitudes claimed in any of the CETI experiments. He told me that it is so sensitive that he had to stop shining a bright light through the window to check the experiment, because the radiant energy added could be seen in the measurements! It is a shame that he has not yet obtained any working beads. Lets hope the latest beads finally do the trick. The most interesting part of his technique is the ability to perform simultaneous flow and static calorimetry. (Be sure to check out the color graphs from the erzatz beads on his home page.) One over-unity run in his calorimeter could distinguish once and for all whether the energy is generated or if there is some heat pump or phase change phenomenon involved. It is incredible to me that no experiment of this type on a working cell has yet been reported. Scott has a well-equipped lab and a complete machine shop -- an inventors paradise. His back room is like a museum of CF memorabilia from his past attempts to replicate Piantelli, Potapov, P&F, CETI and other experiments. Scott has a unique combination of expertise, time (?), equipment and funding to try to replicate over-unity claims. Any experiment that passed his tests would take a giant leap in credibility with me. If someone or some company has a legitimate over unity device, they should be beating down Scott's door to have him test it. Why CETI would not cooperate with him is a mystery to me. If it is really over unity, they would have have nothing to lose, and lots to gain. Oh, and for those of you who remember the infamous Droege field trip, yes, Scott keeps very nice lab notebooks as well as computer records. -- Bob Horst From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 23:19:11 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA25522; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:09:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:09:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606270605.XAA26648@germany.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Hi Michael, >ah yes, well, er, check out http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexmrad1.html > >Scott Little has a complete copy of my log book an that: "Experimental >Methods For Neutralizing Radioactivity" >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm@aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm Good research work! Any responce from any of the radiation disposal companies to try out the methods for neutralizing radioactivity? Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 23:23:34 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA27043; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:19:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:19:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D21299.79B9@rt66.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Richard Thomas Murray To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Submit used ersatz beads to Rothwell for isotopic analysis X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Scott Little and others who have had many no excess power runs with various batches of ersatz beads may want to consider sending them to Jed Rothwell to be analyzed by his many labs for isotopic anomalies, Just In Case...absence of evidence may not be evidence of absence of something subtle and unexpected happening. Mizuno's paper in Infinite Energy indicates very subtle isotopic shifts can be proved. Does anyone have any scoop about Nova Resources Group in Denver, and their $ 25 million CF contract with mainland China, reported in Infinite Energy? What is their Electrolytic Thermal Cell? From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 23:56:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA02258; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:53:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:53:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlagarde@cyberaccess.fr (Jean_de_Lagarde) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Cincinnati Group X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Infinite Energy should better follow up its informations. May I ask to Gene Mallove (and to Jed Rothwell and Chris Tinsley who were also quoted in this context) what happened to the Cincinnati Group (of which we know nothing except that high temperatures were involved) which was presented in IE #5 & 6 as a possible major breakthrough, and which was not even mentioned in last issue #7 ? Should we conclude that this ended up a a fiasco ? Jean de Lagarde From vortex-l@eskimo.com Wed Jun 26 23:59:18 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA02309; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606270647.XAA28325@germany.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Hi Michael: RE your posts below > >For personal experience building a generator and/or operating one of Brown's >units from China, I have personally verified practically every empirical >claim made by Brown. As an experimentalist, Brown conveys accurate >information, with one exception (noted below). (snip) >The mono-atomic stuff is just simply not >so this side of God. The result is simply from the fact that the stuff is >in perfect ratio for exact combination and is extremely well mixed when it >goes fresh out of water and is about as pure as you are going to get out of >a process (albeit with some water vapor and an occassionally stray ion (very >very few if you are running clean, intelligently). Brown's published literature that says 1 liter of water would make 1866.6 liters of BG. I believe this detail to be wrong, because nornal H2/O2 is 1866.6 liters of gas per liter of water and Brown's Gas displaces more volume than normal. In my generator design I observed more volume of gas, 158% more. But without a mass spectrometer analysis I cannot be absolutly sure the over abundant gas was all mono-atomic or had some water vapor. Did your (or anyone who had a BG unit) generator displace more volume than normal? Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 00:26:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA05758; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:17:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:17:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Related(?) FYI hydrogen fuel X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 26 Jun 1996, Steve Ekwall wrote: > This newspaper story was in the 'Rocky Mountain News - under the SCIENCE > section (pg 38A - bottom of page). I thought it might be of interest to > some of those here that are looking in to hydrogen (whatever..)' [...] > Michael Danson, a biochemist at the University of Bath, western > England, said the process could also use simple cellulose -- the basic > component of plants including grass. "What we have done is taken glucose > and we have oxidized it with an enzyme," Danson said. "It produced > molecular hydogen." Newspapers are not known for their scientific accuracy; when you oxidise glucose, you get carbon dioxide and water. That's what our bodies do all the time. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 00:35:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA07328; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:31:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:31:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Weilu Master Speaks On Brown's Gas To Deiter and Horace X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: I would need some very strong evidence, before my own glazzies, to believe in an implosion from the ignition of a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen, molecular or atomic. I am sure it will explode, and rather violently at that. Could it be that this is the usual tendency of a propagator of something to declare it "perfectly safe"? I remember, back in the 70's, I was one of a team investigating the sodium/sulphur battery. We were part of a consortium, including some industrial heavies. One of these came up with a rather nifty new design for the battery. In their hype, they mentioned among other stuff that this battery, if it breaks down (car collision etc) just quietly fizzles, the Na and S combining benignly. We knew otherwise, as we had had an explosion from just that (all safely contained, thank you); and we knew that these people had had the same. That battery, by the way, has a fatal flaw that has not been eliminated yet; the solid electrolyte membrane (beta-alumina) breaks down. Otherwise, we'd have cars running on it today. Every so many years, someone announces a breakthough, now they have a formula for a stable beta-alumina, hurray! And then it is quietly forgotten, and a few years later... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 00:56:20 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA09327; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:52:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:52:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <01I6E10IU95E8X4KME@delphi.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: wild speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:06:03 >Robin van Spaandonk >Actually, the properties you assign to a straight wire conductor are >not strictly true. In order to conduct a current, the wire must form >part of a closed conducting loop. This loop does have magnetic poles, >by virtue of the current flowing through it. I agree partially with the point you make. However fact is with a straight wire conductor the field is exactly as I have described it and can be utilized as such. Take for instance the Faraday motor that has a conduction path thru a small portion of a disk, from the center to a point on the disk's periphery. This conduction path is placed between a N and S pole of a permanet magnet(s). The conduction path is closed outside the working field of the permanent magnets. The end result is an endless number of straight conductors moving up (or down) thru a magnetic field. continous motion from steady state fields. If the path (loop) were closed within the working field (area of interaction between the permanent magnet field and the electrically produced magnetic field) then a counter torque would be produced and rotation would cease. >Hence the field you would like to see produced by a permant >magnet, is in fact produced by every permanent magnet in >existance. It is to be found "on the equator" of the magnet. Not true. Don't confuse the current loop with the magnetic field loop, they are perpendicular to one another. The magnetic field of a straight wire conductor encircles the conductor and has magnetic direction without fixed poles and over the length of the conductor is tubular shaped. Every permanent magnet produces 3 'spherical' fields (not tubular, but a tube wraped into a circle forming a sphere). one sphere from N to equator, one sphere from S to equator, and these spheres are enclosed by a large sphere from N to S (think 3d not 2d). When a conductor is wraped into a coil the tube forms a sphere. No portion of a permanet magnet has the same field, even in a small section. you would have to cut the sphere from a point on it's periphery to its axis then grab the sphere at the incision and straighten it out until the cuts are adjacent. Picture this with a "slinky" toy...OR... we could remove all of the lines of flux except one and this would form the circular field of the SW conductor one half in the air and the other half through the permanent magnet material. My post was originally in response to Chris Tinsley choosing to disagree with my comments on magnetism (which is ok, not a slam, I like disagreement when I'm searching for an answer, Chris and I do agree on one thing, leave out the heavy math until you need it.) In my original post, and I still stand by it, I stated that there is not a permanent magnet field equivalent to a Sw conductors magnetic field, but since Chris chose to disagree I invited anyone who could produce this thing to bring it to me privately, I'll provide the upfront money, cause I know without a doubt that I would return my investment many times over. I also stated that the domain theory sucked. Two unpaired electrons provide a magnetic moment, thousands of these form a domain, which by theory is a miniture permanent magnet (with three spheres). Ain't no way you can stack these up and form the field pattern of a permanent magnet. The offer still stands. Joe Flynn From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 01:16:48 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA10934; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:11:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:11:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606270849.aa00644@univ.sibiu.ro> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dan CHICEA To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Electron clusters X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Thank you very much Horace. I appologise for my mistake. I have learned the lesson. Thank you for the correction, Robin. All the best. Dan CHICEA -------------------------------------------------------- Dan CHICEA Private phone: 40-69-482388 University of SIBIU, Phone: 40-69-415732 Physics Dept. e-mail: chicea@sibiu.ro B-dul Victoriei nr. 5-7, Sibiu, 2400, Romania -------------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 01:35:32 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA12388; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:31:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:31:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606270829.BAA01566@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 11:53 PM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >Brown's published literature that says 1 liter of water would make 1866.6 >liters of BG. I believe this detail to be wrong, because nornal H2/O2 is >1866.6 liters of gas per liter of water and Brown's Gas displaces more >volume than normal. In my generator design I observed more volume of gas, >158% more. But without a mass spectrometer analysis I cannot be absolutly >sure the over abundant gas was all mono-atomic or had some water vapor. Did >your (or anyone who had a BG unit) generator displace more volume than >normal? > >Michael Randall > > good question. I never checked that out. I was interested only in the results on materials. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 09:27:15 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA12582; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rl9721s@acad.drake.edu (Robert W. Lutz) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Hydrogen/Oxygen Reactions X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: The hydrogen/oxygen reaction is well studied by combustion scientists, chemists and others. The explosive reaction proceeds via a branching chain reaction. Initiation requires creation of a few atoms of either hydrogen or oxygen. Then the branching chain mechanisms takes over. Anything (molecular collision, spark, whatever) + H2 -> H + H + anything and/or Anything + O2 -> O + O + anything Then the branching chain reactions take over H + O2 -> OH + O O + H2 -> OH + H OH + H2 -> H2O + H Note that the net result of these three reactions is to turn one hydrogen atom into two and to create a water molecule. This is what creates a chain reaction. The final energy release occurs through three-body "recombination reactions" of the sort OH + H + anything -> H2O + anything where the anything just has to conserve energy and momentum in the reaction. These recombination reactions are where the energy (heat) is released into the system. These reactions are SLOW compared to the branching chain reactions since three-body collisions are improbable comparitively. -bob- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 10:07:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA21946; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1996Jun27.123735.1255.1030977@mspost.ic.gc.ca> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: steckly.gary@ic.gc.ca (Steckly, Gary: DGRB) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: In response to Mark Hugo's comments where he said: >Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf >Again, "Brown Gas for CF" is getting tedious, worthless, almost like >an obsession. Let's kill it. MDH I agree that the subject of Brown's gas, Puharich's overunity electrolysis patent and other "unusual electrolysis" phenomena likely don't fit the charter of this group, which was primarily to facilitate discussion and investigation of the Potapov and Huffman devices. However, before we officially kill this thread and prohibit further discussion on the topic, I would like to thank Larry Wharton for bringing it up on his now infamous posting of June 11. I think we learned quite a bit about tolerance from this little tangent that he sent us off on. Recall that Larry's post prompted the flame which almost resulted in our first on-line excommunication, and resulted in the proposed 1st and 2nd amendments to rule 2 (Bill's "zero tolerance" proposal and Jed's more liberal "3 strikes and yer out" suggestion). More significant for me however, is the fact that from this thread I discovered that PACE, here in Ottawa, is now distributing these "miracle welders" . Since PACE is just 2 blocks down the street from my office, I gave Andrew Michrowski a call to get some more info. There is a lot of confusing (disturbing?) suggestions in the information that he has already faxed over to me, aside from the very controversial implosion vs "explosion with quick condensation" ideas that have been circulated on vortex. For example, wrt the question of the potential of Brown's gas as a fuel in an IC engine, Andrew stated that Browns automotive conversions would take him over 1600 km on the gas produced from 1 litre of water (that's about 1,866 litres of Brown's gas). However, the specs for these Chinese made welding units suggest that you can dissociate 1.2 litres of water, producing 2000 litres of gas, in only 1 hour. And the maximum power consumption of that unit (BN-2000) is only 6.6 KW. I don't know what you guys pay for a kilowatt hour of electricity, but I think any way you look at it, that's pretty cheap driving. Add to that the claim that you can store these gases There really has to be a mistake in my opinion by I intend to clarify this point with Andrew on Friday, as he has generously offered to give me a demonstration of the Browns gas phenomenon this Friday at noon. So I hope we don't get too narrow in our focus here. Variety is the spice of life you know and a constant diet of the same two subjects can't be healthy (and might even give us a bad case of sonoluminesing cavitating gas bubbles:) In the interests of lowering the noise level on vortex, if anything interesting comes of my visit to PACE, I'll limit my comments to private emails to those individuals who by their postings seem to have expressed some interest in this subject. But if you guys don't hear back from me...maybe Browns gas doesn't implode after all ;-) regards Gary of Ottawa From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 11:02:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA05025; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:53:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:53:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606271703.AA05779@giasone.teseo.it> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Neutralizing Radioactivity X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >To: little@eden.com >From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) >Subject: Neutralizing Radioactivity > >>Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 06:26:13 -0700 (PDT) >>Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >>Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com >>Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com >>Precedence: bulk >>From: Scott Little >>To: Multiple recipients of list >>Subject: Neutralizing Radioactivity >>X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas >> >>At 19:01 6/26/96 -0700, Michael Mandeville wrote: >> >>>Scott Little has a complete copy of my log book an that: "Experimental >>>Methods For Neutralizing Radioactivity" >> >>Yes, and I've been so busy with new calorimeter's lately that I haven't >>studied it yet. >> >>However, we did perform a series of experiments in which we placed an= Am-241 >>source inside the top sphere of a Van de Graff generator on several >>occasions for several hours each time over a period of two months and we >>could detect no change in the source's activity. We maintained a 2nd= source >>that was not treated in the VdG as a control so the stability of the >>counting system would not affect the experiment. =20 >> >>We did not attempt to count the sample while it was in the VdG sphere at >>operating voltage, as others have done. I would expect massive= interference >>with most radiation counting systems under such conditions (i.e. 200kV=20 corona). >> >>If Champion's Pb bar has detectable Pt in it, and if that Pt has= significant >>isotopic ratio anomalies, I'll begin in earnest to explore this whole= area. >> >> >>Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. >>Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA >>512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little@eden.com (email) >> >Dear Scott.., >please inform me as soon as possible on the experiments you are performing= on >the subject of neutralizing radioactivity.As long as many years,some= evidences >have been obtained by quantum mechanics that the halftime of a radionuclide= may >be affected and modified by a measuring apparatus still at the non decay of= the >radionuclide.Thanking,I remain.Yours Sincerely.Elio Conte > --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 11:07:42 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA05143; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D2C08D.1878@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: wild speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com wrote: > > >Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:06:03 > >Robin van Spaandonk > > >Actually, the properties you assign to a straight wire > conductor are > >not strictly true. In order to conduct a current, the wire > must form > >part of a closed conducting loop. This loop does have magnetic > poles, > >by virtue of the current flowing through it. I (Frank Stenger) agree with Robin on this one. There is no such thing on Earth as an isolated straight conductor! There *are* current loops that have straight sections. > > I agree partially with the point you make. However fact is with > a > straight wire conductor the field is exactly as I have > described itNot quite! If you look with great precision at the flux lines near a straight *section* of a current loop, you will see that the lines are not quite circles - reflecting the fact that the straight section is really part of a closed loop (with a N & S pole). The center conductor of a coaxial cable *can* look as you say, but it too is part of a 3-D current loop (or loops). Ah, but where are the poles of the magnetic field within a straight section of coaxial conductor, shorted with disks at both ends, and with a straight EMF source in the inner conductor? (I'm almost ready to invoke The Weilu Master on this one!) > and can be utilized as such. Take for instance the Faraday > motor > that has a conduction path thru a small portion of a disk, from > the > center to a point on the disk's periphery. This conduction path > is > placed between a N and S pole of a permanet magnet(s). The > conduction path is closed outside the working field of the > permanent magnets. The end result is an endless number of > straight conductors moving up (or down) thru a magnetic field. > continous motion from steady state fields. If the path (loop) > were closed within the working field (area of interaction > between > the permanent magnet field and the electrically produced > magnetic > field) then a counter torque would be produced and rotation > would > cease. The Faraday disk dynamo works just fine if an electromagnet is used rather than a permanent magnet. Frank Z. and I used a Faraday disk dynamo to measure the magnetic field strength in the bore of an air-core electromagnet. > > >Hence the field you would like to see produced by a permant > >magnet, is in fact produced by every permanent magnet in > >existance. It is to be found "on the equator" of the magnet. > > Not true. Don't confuse the current loop with the magnetic > field > loop, they are perpendicular to one another. The magnetic field They don't have to be! An electromagnet can be constructed so that in a limited portion of the windings, the magnetic field is *parallel* to the winding current! This region of the winding would be "force-free" with J x B = 0. > of a straight wire conductor encircles the conductor and has > magnetic direction without fixed poles and over the length of > the > conductor is tubular shaped. Every permanent magnet produces This is only an approximation! > 3 'spherical' fields (not tubular, but a tube wraped into a > circle > forming a sphere). one sphere from N to equator, one sphere > from S to equator, and these spheres are enclosed by a large > sphere from N to S (think 3d not 2d). When a conductor is > wraped into a coil the tube forms a sphere. No portion of a > permanet magnet has the same field, even in a small section. > you would have to cut the sphere from a point on it's periphery > to its axis then grab the sphere at the incision and straighten > it out > until the cuts are adjacent. Picture this with a "slinky" > toy...OR... > we could remove all of the lines of flux except one and this > would > form the circular field of the SW conductor one half in the > air > and the other half through the permanent magnet material. > > My post was originally in response to Chris Tinsley choosing to > disagree with my comments on magnetism (which is ok, not > a slam, I like disagreement when I'm searching for an answer, > Chris and I do agree on one thing, leave out the heavy math > until you need it.) In my original post, and I still stand by > it, > I stated that there is not a permanent magnet field equivalent > to > a Sw conductors magnetic field, but since Chris chose to > disagree I invited anyone who could produce this thing to > bring it to me privately, I'll provide the upfront money, cause > I know without a doubt that I would return my investment > many times over. > > I also stated that the domain theory sucked. Two unpaired > electrons provide a magnetic moment, thousands of these > form a domain, which by theory is a miniture permanent > magnet (with three spheres). Ain't no way you can stack > these up and form the field pattern of a permanent magnet. > > The offer still stands. > > Joe Flynn Even a single electron has a magnetic dipole associated with it. This is one aspect of the "spin" of the electron. An electron in an atom has an orbital magnetic moment. Some atoms, taken as a whole, have magnetic moments. Some groups of atoms (crystals, domains, etc.) have magnetic moments. Some mountains have magnetic moments. The Earth has a magnetic moment. (Please, stop me before I expand again!)------. There is no *DC* magnetic field, electro or permanent, that can't be duplicated with current loops *if* you are prepared to use a zillion tiny loops to do the job! (I'm not!) When you get into time-varying magnetic fields, it's time to haul out Maxwell's equations and get to work - whether you like mathematics or not. Anyone with a permanent magnetic fetish should learn more about electromagnets - they are all the same, way deep down under the skin. (As you can see, I have an electromagnet fetish!) Longing-to-be-magnetized, Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 12:51:45 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA26536; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 12:38:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 12:38:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D2CEF9.6BF5@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NERVA X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Robert I. Eachus wrote: > > Sort of off topic but... > > Yes... There was a wonderful "two-stage" NERVA followup proposal > which used direct thrust to get off the ground, then once in orbit > used a low thrust plasma arc powered by the reactor to get Isp >> > 10000. (The original NERVA as I remember had an Isp around 800, and > there was talk of a "gaseous core" version with Isp around 2000.) The > plasma arc--which was the part of the research I was interested > in--was actually developed and tested, but couldn't be used in > atmosphere. When you did, it formed significant amounts of HCN. > (Hydrogen Cyanide.) We tested NASA's version in an enclosure, and > bubbled the gasses through strong lye filters. It really liked to > make cyanide, could have been a useful commercial source... > > Robert I. Eachus > > with Standard_Disclaimer; > use Standard_Disclaimer; > function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... Very interesting, Robert. Hmmmmm, the biomass on this planet keeps getting in the way of some great physics ideas! Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 17:01:15 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA18191; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 16:51:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 16:51:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960627190417_72240.1256_EHB95-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Don't forget the Farnsworth Fusor! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Frank Z. writes: "I read of: 1. The years of work that went into the development of the fluorescent lamp. 2. The development effort with the high pressure and low pressure Sodium and Mercury Lamps. 3. The years of study of spectrial lines emitted from plasmas. 4. The Tokamack and Stellerator efforts with RF and Microwave injection. No one noticed any excess energy. Isn't that strange? I don't believe the Correa's claims." The suggestion here seems to be that there are no reports of cathode ray tube devices that produced excess energy. That's not so! Philo T. Farnsworth -- the granddaddy of modern television CRTs and Great American Scientist -- invented one. I presume it was a hot fusion reactor, but in any case it reportedly worked. In 1994, G.Vassilatos submitted a marvelous article to Gene about this. I do not think we ever got around to publishing it. Various Russians have also made claims like this. I don't recall the names. I think Frank's fundamental point is flawed. To say that we have worked for years on florescent lamps and the like and they have not produced energy is a little like saying that I have been cooking omletts for years but I have never yet come up with eggs Benedict by coincindence. Or: I have written 200,000 random lines of Pascal to solve an engineering problem but the darn thing will not even compile. Nobody could stumble on the right design for the Correa device (assuming it works), or the Patterson beads, or anything of that nature. Not when the original workers spend years in the lab working like dogs to make the first devices, drawing on all of their knowledge and experience. Invention, research and discovery are preeminentaly concious activities directed towards specific goals, unlike, say, fine arts, moviemaking or writing a novel. Subconsious inspiration and serendipity do play an important role in technology, but it is a subordinate role. At least, it is in most successful reasearch. I know researchers who flounder around chasing things at random, but I have never seen one get anywhere. At the first stages of a discovery people are sometimes prompted by an accidental discovery or an acute observation, like the guy who found a melted chocolate bar in his pocket after he stood to close to a radar set, who went on to develop the microwave oven. It is possible, I suppose, that CRTs and the like have been producing minute levels of excess heat for a long time. I'll bet nobody has ever looked for it, or if they have, they have shrugged it off as experimental error. There are, of course, some activities that require both types of skill. Things like architecture or designing a Windows program for end users require both technical and artistic skill. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 17:02:00 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA18708; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 16:54:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 16:54:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606272049.QAA08706@spectre.mitre.org> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Robert I. Eachus" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NERVA X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: > Very interesting, Robert. Hmmmmm, the biomass on this planet keeps > getting in the way of some great physics ideas! Are you referring to the cyanide, or to the nuclear rockets? Actually the H2 plasma torch for propulsion only works well in space anyway--the thrust is too low for initial takeoff. Unless, of course, someone comes up with a very cheap and lightweight power source. 2 to three Megawatts per kilo would do just fine. ;-) Yes, I am serious. The ten-kilowatt unit I was testing produced less than a pound of thrust, but with an Isp of about 15000. The nuclear rockets were killed by political scheming that had nothing to do with safety or nuclear proliferation. As I am sure you know, running H2 through a nuclear reactor produces deuterium, but the deuterium is very unlikely to soak up a third neutron. In fact n + d --> 2n + p is more likely in a fast reactor. In any case, you need to compare the effects of a crash on takeoff with the effects of a shuttle explosion on the pad. Turns out that some of the NERVA designs do a lot less to the environment in that scenario. (And a successful launch or even a mid-air explosion is a lot less likely to harm the environment than the equivalent with a shuttle. Those SRBs are very dirty enviromentally, and really should be replaced. For example, the shuttle SRBs are a significant source of clorine in the ionsphere.) For reference purposes, the Soviets had a Saturn class booster blow up during its first launch in the mid-sixties. The figures I heard put it around 40 to 60 kiloton equivalent, which is two to three times the Hiroshima bomb. The Russians have still not released all the details but we do know that several of their key rocket scientists were killed, and they were in a bunker several miles from the blast. The military ran several nuclear tests during the fifties and sixties with people closer to the device than the three miles people are kept from a shuttle launch. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 20:20:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA28573; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:12:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:12:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Konfusion Korrected X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/26/96 15:40 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Konfusion Korrected Once again, Jed Rothwell SCORES on the practical, level headed realm. I am in AWE of your treatment of the "flamer" who whined to Joe about sending you a bag of "Sure Happy Its Thursday". Good response Jed. Yes, keep us posted. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 20:31:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA28737; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:13:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:13:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606280130.AA02838@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Merriman's Erzatz bead pre-report v. 1 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Well, I just finished my first run of Scott Little's erzatz beads in my flow caloriemter. My set up is pretty similar to the one used by Miley's group at SOFE'95. I'll give full details of it and my experiments in a future report. This is just a brief introduction. In my simplest set up, I have in series a peristalic pump (10 ml/min stable flow), a glass graham condenser (for good heat exchange with a const temp bath, or atmoshperic air), an inline filter ( 6 micron filter paper), the cell ( 2 ml beads, pt meshes & leads, and a separator made from nylon mesh filter holder), a dual digital thermistor thermometer with teflon coated probes ( delta T accurate to 0.1 c, with max/min capture), a dispensing pipet (i.e. Cravens style, for measuring flow rate, 25 ml cylinder), and a graduated cylinder reservoir which also has a precision glass thermometer in it for check on T. It is all linked with tygon and glass tubing, with a thin exhaust tube in the pipet to release electrolysis products. Nothing but tygon tubing, several chemically resistant plastics, filter paper, glass, platinum and the beads touch the electrolye. My flow calorimeter, without any external insulation, is 75--80% efficient (based on test runs with an inline, glass & teflon enclosed heater filament) so I'll certainly see it if anything interesting happens. (Note this efficiency is about the same as in cravens demo flow calorimeter---no surprise; its a few percent lower than his, because I have the inline filter after the inlet temp probe, so that the last thing fluid sees before it enters the cell is the filter, not the T probe. As a result, my T probes across the cell are 6'' apart, and this lowers the efficiency a bit.) My cell is a 1'' diam plastic tube, loaded with 2 ml of Scotts beads (and other contents as noted above), with green neoprene lab stoppers in the ends for containment. It is very similar in dimensions to Miley's cell shown on Nightline (I got the dimensions off the TV screen). *Everything* that touches electrolyte was thoroghly cleaned with lab glassware cleaner (Alconox) and filtered, deionized water and assembled wearing rubber disposable lab gloves to avoid contamination. After the system was assembled, I ran 1 L of filtered water through it to further flush out contaminants, then left it pumping for 24 hours with filtered water in it (no electrolysis, cell resistance ~ infinite), which was discarded prior to loading with electrolyte. First run was at room temp, with 250 ml of 2 Molar Li2So4 solution (with multiply filtered, deionized water, well exceeding the turbidity limits in Pattersons patent, 0.2 NTU)). Ph measured at 8.9. My system uptakes about 90 ml of fluid to ``fill up'' (most of that due to the graham condeser), leaving ~150 ml in the reservoir. Before adding electrolyte, and at all times when electrolyte is present, I keep a voltage bias across the cell of 3--10 v, directed so that Ni++ will not come off the beads (i.e. the beads are held at a the low potential). Current to the cell is controled by a digital current control power supply (set at 0.02 A for charging ), double checked by an inline multimeter measuring current mre precisely. The basic result is this: Run parameters during the entire ~36 hour run remained quite steady at roughly: V: 3.2 volts I: 18.8 mA flow rate: ~10.0 ml/min delta T: ~0.1 C Baseline temp: room temp, varies from ~23--~25 C. In particular, I saw no sign of cell resistance changing, and obviously no excess heat. It charged at 18 mA much longer than should have been required to load the system. There was clearly plenty of electrolysis occuring---zillions of tiny bubbles were exiting the cell. There was no visible bubble formation on the bead surfaces, which Cravens says is good (indicated H uptake). No sign of bead splitting, but many of the beads ( ~ 50 % ?) did become dicolored, darkened after a day. The run terminated due to the repeated development of several severe leaks in the system, and a slow down in flow. I think this is a sign the system is getting plugged up somewhere, so I need to break it down and see what is going on inside. I still have 8 ml of fressh beads left, so I'll be trying many more experiments, after a 1 week downtime for a vacation... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 20:25:56 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA28851; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:14:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:14:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960628004734_72240.1256_EHB128-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: NERVA X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Robert Eachus writes: "For reference purposes, the Soviets had a Saturn class booster blow up during its first launch in the mid-sixties. The figures I heard put it around 40 to 60 kiloton equivalent, which is two to three times the Hiroshima bomb." I don't think so. Yeah, it may have had the energy of 60 thousand tons of TNT, but not the power. I bet it went off slowly compared to a bomb. At least, the rocket explosions I have seen, like the Challenger, went at a sedate pace. I believe there is evidence that the challenger crew survived the blast and began re-arranging equipment in preparation for a crash landing. Valves were found turned to the emergeny position. The remains of the bodies were recognizable. If they had been that close to a conventional or nuclear bomb they would have been blown to atoms. "The Russians have still not released all the details but we do know that several of their key rocket scientists were killed, and they were in a bunker several miles from the blast." My guess is they got soaked by flaming liquid fuel, or asphixiated. I doubt they were killed by a shock wave. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 20:22:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29021; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:15:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:15:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D32C36.44E2@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NERVA X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Robert I. Eachus wrote: > (Frank Stenger wrote:) > > Very interesting, Robert. Hmmmmm, the biomass on this planet keeps > > getting in the way of some great physics ideas! > > I meant the above crack as a wistful joke, Robert! As an old propulsion engineer with LeRC (NASA) I was sad to see our advanced thruster ideas put in suspended animation as the cold war coasted to a stop. With some of that old technology, we could be skipping across the dunes of Mars right now! Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 22:35:39 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA23226; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280458.VAA21246@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Hydrogen/Oxygen Reactions X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 09:08 AM 6/27/96 -0700, you wrote: >The hydrogen/oxygen reaction is well studied by combustion scientists, >chemists and others. The explosive reaction proceeds via a branching chain the use of explosive in sentence above in a general sense creates mistaken thinking. eliminate the word explosive to be correct. it is simply: The reaction, which is implosive under certain conditions and explosive in other conditions blah blah is the correct way to state this as a general principle. >reaction. Initiation requires creation of a few atoms of either hydrogen >or oxygen. Then the branching chain mechanisms takes over. > snip >-bob- > > > > > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 22:35:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA23425; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:23:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:23:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280458.VAA21248@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 09:53 AM 6/27/96 -0700, you wrote: > >In response to Mark Hugo's comments where he said: > >>Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf >>Again, "Brown Gas for CF" is getting tedious, worthless, almost like >>an obsession. Let's kill it. MDH snip of Brown's gas). However, the specs for these Chinese made welding units >suggest that you can dissociate 1.2 litres of water, producing 2000 litres >of gas, in only 1 hour. And the maximum power consumption of that unit >(BN-2000) is only 6.6 KW. I don't know what you guys pay for a kilowatt >hour of electricity, but I think any way you look at it, that's pretty cheap >driving. Add to that the claim that you can store these gases There really >has to be a mistake in my opinion by I intend to clarify this point with >Andrew on Friday, as he has generously offered to give me a demonstration of >the Browns gas phenomenon this Friday at noon. > >So I hope we don't get too narrow in our focus here. Variety is the spice >of life you know and a constant diet of the same two subjects can't be >healthy (and might even give us a bad case of sonoluminesing cavitating gas >bubbles:) In the interests of lowering the noise level on vortex, if >anything interesting comes of my visit to PACE, I'll limit my comments to >private emails to those individuals who by their postings seem to have >expressed some interest in this subject. But if you guys don't hear back >from me...maybe Browns gas doesn't implode after all ;-) > >regards > >Gary of Ottawa > > Gary, I vote to see your posts on Vortex. The real motivator of Vortex is ou, with special emphasis or focus on cf, especially via Patterson cells, which in my opinion is closely related, by the evidence of the field, to transmutation, and surprisingly, BG is related because of reports that BG applications can cause transmutation, including radioactivity neutralization, and it is also electrolysis, like cf, so what the hell. So by all of the give and take and push and pull of various posts, even if they seem somewhat chaotic, the people here are getting familiar with the basics of what is beginning to smell very strongly of a new wave of activity which will bring the new paradigm eventually of a new comprehension of how cosmos operates. This is too much fun and better than TV and the circus combined. Make sure you get signed affidavits of "implosion" for faxing to Dieter. He needs evidence before his eyeballs. I never checked out the energetics of the auto cross country on a gallon of water or whatever, but let me tell you, you just can't get that far on one gallon of water with a BG unit. You can go through a gallon of water in a fairly short time, few hours max. BG2000 means that it is outputting 2000 liters of gas in an hour, that is a little more than one liter of water. You figure from there. In my opinion, never having checked it out, there is no promise here of some sort of ou to sustain an auto engine. Brown never claimed that. Boy, if he could have, I strongly suspect he would have. Brown claimed that he could convert some types of auto engines to run on Brown's gas quite effectively, to get pollution free and cheaper operation. That is all I ever heard him claim. And I've talked with him on the phone several times, and seen six hours of video tapes of his demos, which included shots of him talking about his converted vehicle in Australia. You should realize that the Chineese have "bought" into Brown in a big way, and if they could be running around China in ou vehicles, don't you think they would be making a lot of noise about it, getting ready to export ou vehicles to the Third World, which would buy such ou handicrafts, even while holding nose over the shoddy workmanship? For more interesting of pursuit is the reported transmutations and neutralization of radioactivity, the later reported by Brown, confirmed by others, reportedly demonstrated to Bochris, and confirmed by Champion, through the application of BG to the materials. I wonder how they do it? Can radium be plated? Say on a Patterson type bead? Beads be put into a Patterson cell which in fact works? Does radium geiger reading change when ou occurs? Does geiger reading change when BG applied? How are these the same? Beats me, but answers to those questions could result in a nobel, or money, take your pick. The evidence people are reporting seems to indicate that the primary answers are yes yes yes yes yes and who knows? ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 22:28:42 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA23502; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:23:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:23:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280458.VAA21257@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 11:09 PM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >Hi Michael, > >>ah yes, well, er, check out http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexmrad1.html >> >>Scott Little has a complete copy of my log book an that: "Experimental >>Methods For Neutralizing Radioactivity" >>____________________________________ >>MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >>Michael Mandeville, publisher >>mwm@aa.net >>http://www.aa.net/~mwm > >Good research work! Any responce from any of the radiation disposal >companies to try out the methods for neutralizing radioactivity? > >Michael Randall > > no. I believe that they consider it too much trouble to check out because they a priori are pretty certain it won't work. I gave up marketing the idea quite a while ago. I offered it to the U.W. Physics department, who told me that point blank. Recently, a friend of mine made the claims on behalf of Keller to a European group which is soliciting proposals for handling radioactive wastes in the Ukraine. three word response from Ph.d. in charge: no way possible. In the meantime, I have to earn a buck so after awhile, the negative reinforcement gets to even a usually patient, perservering man. Things may be changing though, and recently there is a California University department which has expressed interest in doing some experiments, and if so, they could legitimize this whole field, so I am sending them my logbook. I am not into doing it professionally, I just wanted evidence to support a patent claim by Keller...which is in limbo along with the cold fusion claims. When this stuff finally is institutionally legit, and the patent system has to bow, I think inventors all over the place should hit the U.S. government for a trillion dollar class action suit. It just isn't their position to decide which group of scientists is more knowledgeable about what is going on. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 22:31:45 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA23567; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:23:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:23:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280458.VAA21271@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: I am in Moscow X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 01:31 AM 6/27/96 -0700, you wrote: snip > >Regarding the calculation of the field potential for a point particle, I >guess you know I am not a theoretical physicist, just an uneducated amateur >inventor. However, I will say what I believe about this as my unorthodox >and unquantified thoughts may give you some ideas to pursue. > snip > >So where does this leave the annihilation of the + and - particle? It >leaves it open to a continuum of photon spectra issued at the annihilation. >Depending on the mechanincs of each individual collapse, different amounts >of the mass of the particles may be radiated depending on the rotational >acceleration developed, and how the flux lines get cut into quanta. The >only requirement is that what is not annihilated ends up radiated, and vice >versa. Should some quanta of one particle's magnetic field remain >unmatched by atimatter due to the antimatter have been radiated away, it >would then collapse and thus create an electrostatic field and be radiated >away. > >Some might say it is the dance of the Weilu Master. How much does he >radiate? As much as he wants of what he has before the extinction of self >and the creation of enlightenment. > >So, this leaves the immediate question of qualitative agreement with >experimental data, especially mass drop of atoms upon photon emission, and >the existance of continuous spectra of + - annihilation gammas. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > some amateur! I wish I had your degree of uneducation ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 22:33:42 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA23644; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280459.VAA21304@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Transmutations And The Weilu Master X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >At 09:29 PM 6/26/96 -0800, you wrote: >> >> >> >>The road to true enlightenment is arduous. >> >>So what do you know of the incredible story beyond technology? >> >> >>Regards, >> PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >>Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 >> >> >> > >indeed! I may be able to serve a communications role in respect to the >larger dimensions of the story when the time is right. But I cannot tell it >in the fullness that it deserves at this time and besides, what people talk >to me over the phone is stuff I hold privately unless they intend otherwise. >The two guys who know and can tell the most about the story are Bochris and >Champion, and they will in their good time. At some point, they are going to >have a really good time telling their stories. > >I will say this, I have suspected a larger picture of involvement by active >players in transmutation for some time through the bits and pieces of info >which I have received over the years from Bochris, Monte, Chipman, Keller, >Champion, Infinite Energy, and some others. I now think the rubber hits the >road on all of this really where Champion is. I read Champion's early >stuff, and he didn't appear to know more than what Monte and Keller had >surmised, but Champion is now far beyond where his early stuff was, at least >it seems so with what he is saying about what he is doing and the type of >technology he is now using. Mind you, this assessment is based on indirect >information, not actual experience, which I will not obtain until Champion's >August demo. I will also say this, if you have investments in precious >metals I would get into something else. The supply is hmmm more dynamic than >the securities industry knows. Through certain other sources of info, >directly connected to cold fusion conferences, I had tacitly accepted the >probabiility that substantial commercial transmutation (secretly naturally) >has been real for several years. I would also suggest that the rumours of >transmutation occuring through the application of BG units should be checked >out - it so so easy to do and have verified. > >And I think the same thing is true now in the OU field. Recently I have had >a lot of virginia-based .coms and some military installations look at the >Muller pages (I have a watchdog on my pages which accesses my ISP's logbook >so that the vebmeistro knows all, even the "anonomous" posts which people >leave - no such thing on the internet). > >This leads me, along with a ton of other experiences, to believe that these >two phenomenon, transmutation and ou are in the early stages of acceptance >and investigation by "early adapters" all over the place. There must be >actual production going otherwise I cannot make sense of what certain people >are doing. The royal road to both is in electrodynamics - don't forget the >magnetic component, it is very important, it is not just the juice. Unless >you are doing coils, most scientists ignore magnetism or fend it off as a >nuisance. Unless I've missed something, (which happens often) nobody doing >Patterson bead cells even suspects magnetism. Big gaping oversight. > >The old paradigms no longer have power. Not even in the institutions. Not >even among American physicists. Early adapters are sorting out for >themselves which approaches have the most potential. You guys here are just >a few of them. Nobody can explain any of this stuff. But it does work even >if that fact is confused by a lot of people who haven't clued in yet to how >to make it work. What we are seeing through the newsgroups and in such >magazines as Infinite Energy are only the very tip of a very few of the >icebergs...I think that the situation is expanding so rapidly that Infinite >Energy's beat is going to suffer information overload and meltdown by this >time next year. But if Gene can hold out another year, his mag will live >for a very long time, quite profitably, because within a year, every library >in the world is going to want to subscribe. > >Let me add this personal experience. Three years ago there was zip interest >in transmutation of anything, let alone radioactivity, even though two >patents had already been granted in the field to a physicist. I had a >Uiversity President snear at me (I am not kidding). People laughed about ou, >yeah perpetual motion, ha ha. Today, I've got a top engineer from a major >European conglomerate who just committed to flying in to see Muller, a >multi-millionare drove up to see him, and a University Professor wants to >verify through experiments the possibility of altering the decay rate of >radioactivity so he wants to look at my logbook. You see what I mean? This >is just today! You see what I mean? The times they are a changin'. > >Well, for Vortexians the truth of all of this can hinge on Jed's results >with Champion's samples and Champion's demo in August. I wouldn't miss it >for the world, hmm, well if you put it THAT way maybe I would, but then >maybe it is the gateway to a world! > >BTW, I have consistantly found Champion to be fairly open about who he is >and what he is doing. Sure, he has cards he isn't showing, but he has layed >out techniques, precisely, on his webpages. Is anyone doing any of that >stuff? Champion is goading you guys, and he isn't charging a dime for the >info, that is not his game. It is a strange world, what with Newman charging >$50 or so for his plans, with lots of takers from people trying his >circuits. Champion's giving it away. > >P.S. I do know the whereabouts of an unused BG unit. > >Talk about sleep deprivation...ouch, and I have a full page color ad layout >which I was supposed to mail today to meet deadlines and I haven't even >designed the graphics for it yet. This is my last post on Vortex for awhile. >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm@aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm Michael, It is difficult to tell these days when we get a *private* email from a regular vtx contributor. I miss the vtx prefix on the topics. Anyway, the email you quote above was a private email to you. Your response did not end up on vortex, it just came back to me. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 Thanks, Horace, the late hour makes it harder to notice certain things. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Thu Jun 27 23:11:26 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA01325; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 23:06:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 23:06:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D3758B.5B56@loc100.tandem.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Bob Horst To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Visit to EarthTech X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz writes: > Bob Horst writes: > >The most interesting part of his technique is the ability to perform > >simultaneous flow and static calorimetry. > > how > Scott could give you the details, but the short answer is that he has build thermisters right into the CF cell for flow calorimetry, and put the entire apparatus including pump in a temperature-controlled box for static calorimetry. His graphs show how closely the results match. > > (Be sure to check out the color > >graphs from the erzatz beads on his home page.) One over-unity run in his > >calorimeter could distinguish once and for all whether the energy is generated > >or if there is some heat pump or phase change phenomenon involved. It is > >incredible to me that no experiment of this type on a working cell has yet > been > >reported. > > good baselines exactly for the this reason have been stressed, and there > have been working cells, in progress, reported, and published (or about > to be) which > demonstrate adequate baseline an have shown excess heat for the > Pd-D2O and Ni-H2O systems. \ > Has anyone published both flow and static calorimetry for the same experiment? If so, I missed it. Does anyone know if Mills still believes in the Hydrino theory? As far as I know, he has not withdrawn it. If that was the cause of excess heat, it should show a much different signature in Scott's calorimeter than if fusion/fission or ZPE was the cause. If the hydrinos in the output flow absorb heat from the envirnonment and transition back from the subground state to the normal ground state, then the flow calorimeter would indicate excess, but the static would not. If the transformation back does not take place, then the excess should stop after there is no normal H left. -- Bob Horst From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 01:02:57 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA14917; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:57:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:57:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Michael Mandeville wrote: > >I never checked out the energetics of the auto cross country on a gallon of >water or whatever, but let me tell you, you just can't get that far on one >gallon of water with a BG unit. You can go through a gallon of water in a >fairly short time, few hours max. BG2000 means that it is outputting 2000 >liters of gas in an hour, that is a little more than one liter of water. >You figure from there. You could go on a gallon indefinitely by re-condensing the vapor and channeling it back into the electrolyte. The problem is the source of the electrolysis current. You should not be able to get enough energy back out of the condensed Brow's gas to re-electrolyse it to complete the cycle. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 01:02:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA14945; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:57:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:57:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280748.AAA25254@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Brown=92s?= Gas - Untold Story X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: In today's world it does not matter weather you are a scientist, technician, observer, recorder, or just interested, it sometimes becomes hard to put all the pieces of a puzzle together. I state this from the reality that each has their own disciplines and many times events cross the lines into areas outside the realm of interest. No more philosophy from the unlearned, just some interesting facts. Brown sells generators. Does anyone know to whom and why? To save you grief from trying to figure this one out, allow me to assist -- the esoteric mining industry. After I started making ripples in 1991-92 Brown in an attempt to duplicate my work, tried his gas in late 1992 on mineralized ore at a cement plant in Los Angeles. One of his prime believers is a good friend of mine who was impressed with certain demonstrations. Forget CF and OU for a minute. When you pass this flame over select mineralized samples over a hundred unhappy people have found that their worthless rock produced enormous amounts of precious metals. Yes, I said unhappy, but I will explain why in a minute. In analytical determination, we have a multitude of instrumentation available. However, the best test is when one is able to produce the results in a pure form. From Brown's Gas, one can take a 30 gram sample and reclaim upwards to 1.0 grams of precious metals from ore that analyzed by conventional techniques says impossible. Furthermore, the ore produces no significant quantities of precious metals by extraction, that is, without the Brown Gas. Now one would apply the normal logic by saying, if this is true, why sell the system. Why not sit back quietly and produce precious metals and become rich! Trust me, Brown has and is attempting to unlock Pandora's Box, but a dark cloud prevents him from upscaling the "transmutive qualities" of his flame. For those questioning, without a doubt the process does not and will not upscale. Since he could not develop commercial production of precious metals, he did the next best thing -- he started selling his units to others who wanted to produce macro quantities of precious metals from a micro sample. >From analytical results of Brown's Gas and similar appartuses in the accelerated transmutation of geological formations it is estimated by Federal and State Mining Authorities that over $1,000,000,000.00 has been spent during the past years by investors into this unknown. Of course, I have hedged my bet before posting, for I have personal knowledge of the location of numerous of his machines (including Cincinnati) and for those coming to the unveiling in August, a Brown's Gas machine will be present and bring your reagent grade chemicals (forget the mineral) and you can operate the machine yourself and produce magic. Not being learned, I should not make claims, but if you tell me what's in your reagent grade chemicals I can tell you which new elements (and exact isotopes) will be found after the Brown Gas treatment. Come one, come all (black robes and conical hats accepted, but not required). For the location on the Brown's Gas Generator nearest you, email the following: _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 01:02:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA14981; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:57:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:57:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280748.AAA25264@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Hedging the Odds X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Before Jed's results start to be tallied, allow me to state that the geological transmutations presented were validated by an independent study (not the same samples, but exact mineral) by Dr. Kogan from the Institute of Mineralogy, Geochemistry and Crystal Chemistry of Rare Elements of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow. Yes the Russians have been to the exact location of the August party twice in the past two years. Taking their own samples, with their own equipment and using their own hands! Why would someone fly around the World for a rock unless there was meaning? I have on file the complete report +20 page report and can share it on a limited basis with interested parties. No, they are not a part of this forum, but Kogan can be found by email at: imgre@sovam.com My caveat, nowhere in their report do they mention transmutation. However, they do show a thoroughly sampled ore body which yield in excess of 600 ounces per ton of precious metals (silver not included). Folks, it don't take to many tons to become rich and/or famous. _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 01:02:54 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA15050; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:57:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:57:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280753.AAA12148@colombia.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas demonstration X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Hi Robin, >If true that mon-atomic gases are generated, this would explain much. (snip) > Also because the gasses are atomic and not >molecular, one could expect the flame to be much hotter than normal. >This would explain cutting through ceramics and tungsten etc. That is the theory of explaination and what is unique about this electrolysis device, that has been observed over the past 25 years by many scientists and engineers all over the world. Gary Steckly has offered to witness a demonstration of the above and what has been posted to date. If true, then we have an anomaly that is demonstrable and cheaply buildable. Cheers Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 02:41:32 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA23630; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 02:36:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 02:36:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606280930.AA11465@giasone.teseo.it> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:23:35 -0700 (PDT) >Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Precedence: bulk >From: Michael Mandeville >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected >X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas > >At 11:09 PM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >>Hi Michael, >> >>>ah yes, well, er, check out http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexmrad1.html >>> >>>Scott Little has a complete copy of my log book an that: "Experimental >>>Methods For Neutralizing Radioactivity" >>>____________________________________ >>>MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >>>Michael Mandeville, publisher >>>mwm@aa.net >>>http://www.aa.net/~mwm >> >>Good research work! Any responce from any of the radiation disposal >>companies to try out the methods for neutralizing radioactivity? >> >>Michael Randall >> >> > >no. I believe that they consider it too much trouble to check out because >they a priori are pretty certain it won't work. I gave up marketing the= idea >quite a while ago. I offered it to the U.W. Physics department, who told me >that point blank. Recently, a friend of mine made the claims on behalf of >Keller to a European group which is soliciting proposals for handling >radioactive wastes in the Ukraine. three word response from Ph.d. in >charge: no way possible. > >In the meantime, I have to earn a buck so after awhile, the negative >reinforcement gets to even a usually patient, perservering man. Things may >be changing though, and recently there is a California University= department >which has expressed interest in doing some experiments, and if so, they >could legitimize this whole field, so I am sending them my logbook. I am >not into doing it professionally, I just wanted evidence to support a= patent >claim by Keller...which is in limbo along with the cold fusion claims. = When >this stuff finally is institutionally legit, and the patent system has to >bow, I think inventors all over the place should hit the U.S. government= for >a trillion dollar class action suit. It just isn't their position to= decide >which group of scientists is more knowledgeable about what is going on. >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm@aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm > > --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 02:42:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA23711; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 02:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 02:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280932.CAA08679@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas demonstration X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 12:57 AM 6/28/96 -0700, you wrote: >Hi Robin, > >>If true that mon-atomic gases are generated, this would explain much. >(snip) >> Also because the gasses are atomic and not >>molecular, one could expect the flame to be much hotter than normal. >>This would explain cutting through ceramics and tungsten etc. > >That is the theory of explaination and what is unique about this >electrolysis device, that has been observed over the past 25 years by many >scientists and engineers all over the world. > >Gary Steckly has offered to witness a demonstration of the above and what >has been posted to date. If true, then we have an anomaly that is >demonstrable and cheaply buildable. > >Cheers > >Michael Randall > > it's all true enough. have at it. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 02:42:44 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA23760; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 02:37:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 02:37:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280933.CAA08706@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for cf X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 12:57 AM 6/28/96 -0700, you wrote: >Michael Mandeville wrote: >> >>I never checked out the energetics of the auto cross country on a gallon of >>water or whatever, but let me tell you, you just can't get that far on one >>gallon of water with a BG unit. You can go through a gallon of water in a >>fairly short time, few hours max. BG2000 means that it is outputting 2000 >>liters of gas in an hour, that is a little more than one liter of water. >>You figure from there. > >You could go on a gallon indefinitely by re-condensing the vapor and >channeling it back into the electrolyte. The problem is the source of the >electrolysis current. You should not be able to get enough energy back out >of the condensed Brow's gas to re-electrolyse it to complete the cycle. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > i agree ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 02:49:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA24384; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 02:44:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 02:44:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606280938.CAA08902@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Brown=92s?= Gas - Untold Story X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 12:57 AM 6/28/96 -0700, you wrote: > >>From analytical results of Brown's Gas and similar appartuses in the >accelerated transmutation of geological formations it is estimated by >Federal and State Mining Authorities that over $1,000,000,000.00 has been >spent during the past years by investors into this unknown. Of course, I >have hedged my bet before posting, for I have personal knowledge of the >location of numerous of his machines (including Cincinnati) and for those >coming to the unveiling in August, a Brown's Gas machine will be present and >bring your reagent grade chemicals (forget the mineral) and you can operate >the machine yourself and produce magic. > >Not being learned, I should not make claims, but if you tell me what's in >your reagent grade chemicals I can tell you which new elements (and exact >isotopes) will be found after the Brown Gas treatment. > >Come one, come all (black robes and conical hats accepted, but not required). > >For the location on the Brown's Gas Generator nearest you, email the following: > >_______________________________ >Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com >http://www.netzone.com/~discpub > oh my, you are certainly hanging it all out there...WOW ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 03:35:15 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA27828; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 03:30:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 03:30:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31d3ad5d.22580663@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: wild speculations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:52:26 -0700 (PDT), JOEFLYNN@delphi.com wrote: [snip] > >Not true. Don't confuse the current loop with the magnetic I haven't confused them, I just wasn't clear enough in my description, leaving the direction of the field lines up to your imagination. I see now that I shouldn't have done that. >field >loop, they are perpendicular to one another. The magnetic field >of a straight wire conductor encircles the conductor and has >magnetic direction without fixed poles and over the length of >the >conductor is tubular shaped. Every permanent magnet produces >3 'spherical' fields (not tubular, but a tube wraped into a >circle >forming a sphere). one sphere from N to equator, one sphere >from S to equator, and these spheres are enclosed by a large >sphere from N to S (think 3d not 2d). When a conductor is I think this may be where your problem lies. The spheres from N to equator and from S to equator don't exist. There is only one "sphere" (actually more of an apple shape, with holes at the poles ). The Earth itself is a good example. If the fields were as you describe, then compasses would go nuts, and be useless, especially around the equator. Whereas in fact compasses work very well, if not best on the equator. >wraped into a coil the tube forms a sphere. No portion of a > permanet magnet has the same field, even in a small section. >you would have to cut the sphere from a point on it's periphery >to its axis then grab the sphere at the incision and straighten >it out >until the cuts are adjacent. Picture this with a "slinky" >toy...OR... >we could remove all of the lines of flux except one and this >would >form the circular field of the SW conductor one half in the >air >and the other half through the permanent magnet material. I think this is a description of what I was originally trying to say. When I said on the equator, I meant that if you "stood on the equator", you would find the field you were looking for. This is because magnets also "leak" some field lines out of the sides of the magnet. In this sense a better representation might be a cross between an apple and an onion. > >My post was originally in response to Chris Tinsley choosing to >disagree with my comments on magnetism (which is ok, not >a slam, I like disagreement when I'm searching for an answer, >Chris and I do agree on one thing, leave out the heavy math >until you need it.) In my original post, and I still stand by >it, >I stated that there is not a permanent magnet field equivalent >to >a Sw conductors magnetic field, but since Chris chose to >disagree I invited anyone who could produce this thing to >bring it to me privately, I'll provide the upfront money, cause >I know without a doubt that I would return my investment >many times over. Consider a permanent magnet 1 mm long, by 10 cm square. That is, the large flat square faces of the magnet are the poles. It's equator lies 1/2 mm from each pole. Imagine now a SW running along the edge of this magnet. If the wire were to carry a current, it's magnetic field would have the same form as that of the permanent magnet in the same place. Therefore this magnet can replace your SW magnet. 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@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 04:08:34 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA00549; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 03:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 03:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606281053.AA12218@giasone.teseo.it> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: the experiment on the Neutron X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: It was the aim of a debate some month ago that,according to the biquaternion quantum mechanics,as due to a new kind of interaction existing in nature and due to the mutual overlap of the wavefunctions, we should have the cold fusion of a proton and an electron to form a neutron.In the course of the debate,repeadetly,it was suggested by me that also the general results obtained in this years on the cold fusion should be explained by the biquaternion quantum mechanics and also by the nuclear fusion p + e =3D n. We have executed some experiments now:electrolysis in water plus Na2SO4 with Pt and Al electrodes respectively with an applied voltage of 12 Volts and about 100mA of current was performed.During the electrolysis we conveied a beam of electrons (obtained from a source of 90Sr+90 Y)with proper energy directly on the Al electrode having dimensions about 1mm for 1mm.The basic result was that,using a BF3 detector for neutrons connecetd to a multichannel analyzer,we measured about 100 neutrons/h emitted and respect to two or three neutrons measured in condition of background.In=20 addition, about one hour of experimentation,we observed the complete fusion of the= catode. This result appears of great interest and confirming the biquaternion= quantum mechanics as of course the anomalies observed by Kamada(Please,consider that this author,not having a direct knowledge of the biquaternion quantum mechanics,in the past hypothized a like "electron capture"process in order to explain his results.Now he knows the biquaternion quantum mechanics owing to I sended him the papers regardind this subject). In consideration of the importance of the obtained result,I ask to all the vortexians an help based on the following points: -to open a debate on the performed experiment and to repeat the same experiment in order to confirm reproducible results; -to obtain to publish this result as soon as possible in all the possible ways in order to determine the highest level of diffusion of this new knowledge in the scientific community.To this regard,any offered possible form of publication of this information will be gratefully acknowledged.=20 Sincerely.Elio Conte --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 04:09:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA00578; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 03:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 03:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606281058.AA12219@giasone.teseo.it> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >To: mwm@aa.net >From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) >Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected > >>Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 22:23:35 -0700 (PDT) >>Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >>Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com >>Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com >>Precedence: bulk >>From: Michael Mandeville >>To: Multiple recipients of list >>Subject: Re: Konfusion Korrected >>X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas >> >>At 11:09 PM 6/26/96 -0700, you wrote: >>>Hi Michael, >>> >>>>ah yes, well, er, check out http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexmrad1.html >>>> >>>>Scott Little has a complete copy of my log book an that: "Experimental >>>>Methods For Neutralizing Radioactivity" >>>>____________________________________ >>>>MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >>>>Michael Mandeville, publisher >>>>mwm@aa.net >>>>http://www.aa.net/~mwm >>> >>>Good research work! Any responce from any of the radiation disposal >>>companies to try out the methods for neutralizing radioactivity? >>> >>>Michael Randall >>> >>> >> >>no. I believe that they consider it too much trouble to check out because >>they a priori are pretty certain it won't work. I gave up marketing the= idea >>quite a while ago. I offered it to the U.W. Physics department, who told= me >>that point blank. Recently, a friend of mine made the claims on behalf of >>Keller to a European group which is soliciting proposals for handling >>radioactive wastes in the Ukraine. three word response from Ph.d. in >>charge: no way possible. >> >>In the meantime, I have to earn a buck so after awhile, the negative >>reinforcement gets to even a usually patient, perservering man. Things= may >>be changing though, and recently there is a California University= department >>which has expressed interest in doing some experiments, and if so, they >>could legitimize this whole field, so I am sending them my logbook. I am >>not into doing it professionally, I just wanted evidence to support a= patent >>claim by Keller...which is in limbo along with the cold fusion claims. = When >>this stuff finally is institutionally legit, and the patent system has to >>bow, I think inventors all over the place should hit the U.S. government= for >>a trillion dollar class action suit. It just isn't their position to= decide >>which group of scientists is more knowledgeable about what is going on. >>____________________________________ >>MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >>Michael Mandeville, publisher >>mwm@aa.net >>http://www.aa.net/~mwm >> >Dear M.Mandeville, >please,may you inform me in detail on your "experimental methods....for=20 neutrali- >zing radioactivity"?.May you inform me on your theoretical basis if you=20 formulated >it? >I must say that from many years it is well known in quantum mechanics that= the >halftime of a radioactive source may be modified if one accounts for the=20 action of >the measuring apparatus on the radioctive source itself.Calculations,as=20 example,have been performed accounting for the action of the electron cloud= in=20 >atoms in the case of the beta decay and also for alpha decay;still,it is=20 well known >in nuclear astrophysics that radioactive nuclei do not decay with the same= =20 features >as on the earth,as example,since in astrophysical conditions we have true= =20 ionized >radioactive elements instead of radioactived atoms.Also hypothizing the=20 role of a >measuring apparatus that performs continous measurements on a radioactive= =20 source,one arrives in quantum mechanics to the so called Zeno paradox that >accounts for the break of the decay for the considered radioactive= source.For >completness,we must add that often the Zeno paradox has been obtained by no >truly ortodox quantum mechanical formulations.However,we may consider that= the >question is posed on the theoretical ground:also at experimental level,in= =20 the past, >verifications were performed with positive results,starting with Emilio=20 Segr=E9 a nobel >physicist of E. Fermi group.So,It is of regard to know your experimental=20 ideas to this purpose and we are interested as research field in our=20 institute.Unfortunately, >I have not followed previous discussions on vortex-l on this subject since= =20 i did not receive the messages,so I should appreciate if you could inform= =20 me in detail on the >theoretical and experimental ideas. Sincerely.Elio Conte > --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 06:36:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA17207; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 06:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 06:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1996Jun28.091720.1255.1036332@mspost.ic.gc.ca> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: steckly.gary@ic.gc.ca (Steckly, Gary: DGRB) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Thursday June 27, Michael Mandeville wrote: (snip) > For more interesting of pursuit is the reported transmutations and > neutralization of radioactivity, the later reported by Brown, confirmed by > others, reportedly demonstrated to Bochris, and confirmed by Champion, > through the application of BG to the materials. I wonder how they > do it? > > Can radium be plated? Say on a Patterson type bead? Beads be put into a > Patterson cell which in fact works? Does radium geiger reading change when > ou occurs? Does geiger reading change when BG applied? How are these the > same? Beats me, but answers to those questions could result in a nobel, or > money, take your pick. The evidence people are reporting seems to indicate > that the primary answers are yes yes yes yes yes and who knows? I am a bit leery about the claims of nuclear processes going on in a Brown's gas flame, but considering all the other evidence pointing to it in Champions work and all the CF stuff I have to keep an open mind. As a simple test, I wonder what would happen to a thorium impregnated gas lantern if you burned Brown's gas in it? If the decay rate was altered in some way, would that affect the spectral output of the visible light from the glowing mantle ash? How important is the thorium to the light emissions from a Coleman lantern anyway? I realize the only real test would require that steps are taken to ensure that your radioactive materials are not lost to the environment, but this might be a cheap and dirty check. I feel another trip to the sporting goods section of Canadian Tire coming on... comments? Gary _ From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 07:14:14 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA24559; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 07:05:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 07:05:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D3816F.13DB@introtech.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Henry Eisenson To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown's Gas - Untold Story X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Joe Champion wrote: > > In today's world it does not matter weather you are a scientist, > technician, observer, recorder, or just interested, it sometimes > becomes hard to put all the pieces of a puzzle together. > Not being learned, I should not make claims *********************************************************************** >From the myriad of miracle workers and get-rich-quick projects there emerges a voice of reason. After reviewing my notes on Mr. Champion, and reading the message from which the above was extracted, I'm beginning to believe that there might be a certain reality behind this specific endeavor. Henry Eisenson, arch-skeptic ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| INTROTECH A path to the world's largest market 6336 Greenwich Drive San Diego, CA 92122 (619) 453-7600, fax 552-9050 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 08:18:22 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA05904; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 08:03:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 08:03:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960628104219_566002608@emout09.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: mot X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: I seems like we have just picked up a lot of new members, good. I own 500 shares of Motorola. I just signed my proxy. On the rear of the Proxy I put the comment, "Develop the CETI technology. Its the future." I'm waiting to see what I get back if anything. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 09:43:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA23617; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the experiment on the Neutron X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dear Prof Conte, Congratulations on your success! I had hoped to hear about your presentation at St. Pete, but was disappointed to hear your did not make it. I am glad to hear you were not washed away in the recent torrents and floods in Italy! Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 09:42:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA23894; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:32:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:32:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606281623.JAA26897@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 06:24 AM 6/28/96 -0700, you wrote: >I am a bit leery about the claims of nuclear processes going on in a Brown's >gas flame, >but considering all the other evidence pointing to it in Champions work and >all the CF stuff >I have to keep an open mind. As a simple test, I wonder what would happen >to a thorium >impregnated gas lantern if you burned Brown's gas in it? If the decay rate >was altered >in some way, would that affect the spectral output of the visible light from >the glowing >mantle ash? How important is the thorium to the light emissions from a >Coleman lantern >anyway? I realize the only real test would require that steps are taken to >ensure that >your radioactive materials are not lost to the environment, but this might >be a cheap >and dirty check. I feel another trip to the sporting goods section of >Canadian Tire >coming on... > >comments? > >Gary >_ > Gary, Your concept has merit, but the results of such a test will not yield any form of transmutation. For transmutation to occur in the presence of Brown's Gas three things are required: the Gas, the element to be transmuted and the CATYLST. The catalyst is a certain isotope of a single element. I will be addressing this in more detail in August. In conjunction with the above, all three components must be placed in close proximity with each other. If you accomplish these steps the process will work, but repeatability is a bitch. It's like anything, one must develop a technique. Is Brown's Gas necessary to effectuate transmutation? No. Any gas that reaches similar temperatures which is HIGHLY OXIDIZED will do the trick. The first problem with such is -- an large amount of energy is required to see a small change. The second problem being -- when you increase the size of your starting matrix by an order of magnitude, all you accomplish is melting your sample, no transmutation is observed. _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 10:15:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA01153; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 10:07:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 10:07:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Neutron detection cheaply? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Professor Conte's experiment should be very cheap and easy to perform, except for the neutron detection. This is maybe an excellent opportunity to raise this as a vortex issue. I have some other exeriments, as well, that I would benefit from the addition of low level neutron counting. I have simply dismissed this as unaffordable, but maybe it is not. I have a couple of geiger counters. One is the old yellow civil defense type that runs on 6 "D" cells. The geiger tube is in a removable wand. The other is a prospecting counter, Hayes HGC-1, which has the counting tube internal to the case, but on a corner of the box. The HGC-1 was cheap enough to cannibalize to rig something up. The other counter, well, it's gradually gaining the antique status of my MITS, Altair. So, one question is, is there any way to use these to do low level neutron counting? The only thing I can think of is to put a boron barrier in front of the counter. However, too few neutrons would be converted to alphas to permit low level counting, I think. So, the next question is, is there a low cost BF3 counter, or similar, available or buildable? Is there a cheap way to count neutrons? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 10:47:12 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA01270; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 10:08:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 10:08:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: > >I am a bit leery about the claims of nuclear processes going on in a Brown's >gas flame, >but considering all the other evidence pointing to it in Champions work and >all the CF stuff >I have to keep an open mind. As a simple test, I wonder what would happen >to a thorium >impregnated gas lantern if you burned Brown's gas in it? If the decay rate >was altered >in some way, would that affect the spectral output of the visible light from >the glowing >mantle ash? How important is the thorium to the light emissions from a >Coleman lantern >anyway? I realize the only real test would require that steps are taken to >ensure that >your radioactive materials are not lost to the environment, but this might >be a cheap >and dirty check. I feel another trip to the sporting goods section of >Canadian Tire >coming on... > >comments? > >Gary >_ CAUTION CAUTION CAUTION! Vaporizing radioactive material and ingesting it into your lungs is hazardous in the extreme! Even though thorium oxide melts at 3300C, the BG flame might be hot enough to relase some into the local atmosphere. 232Th has a half life of 1.4 x 10^10 years, but it goes through a number of decay steps before becoming lead, so some of the decay series isotopes will always be present. This is also something to consider when vaporizing mineral ores. Many contain trace radiactive material. On another note, BG seems to get it's kick from applying the energy of it's flame almost entirely at the mineral/metal surface. This seems to be due to the delivery of monatomic and/or ionized gas to the mineral/metal surface. One way to enhance this would then be to run a DC current through the flame, making the mineral/metal surface the anode. In addition, using a superimposed HF current, or microwaves, should increase the ionization level in the flame. In this manner, considerably more energy could be applied directly to the surface layer of atoms on the mineral/metal. This technique might also be useful in scaling up the process. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 11:22:18 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA13310; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 11:07:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 11:07:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >Dear Horace, > >Your consideration is very interesting to me and coincides to my >understanding of the problem. > >I don't know about the energy measurements in complete space angles. I >think nobody didn't it especially in low frequency range, i.e. that one >I am interested in. > >Because at high velocities of the particles the electric and magnetic >fields of LW potentials obey the equation: >B = [vxE] >where [_x_] is the vector product and v the velocity of the particles; >most of these fields will be in a phase with a normal EM wave. However, it >doesn't mean the remaining fields begin to propagate as usual EM wave. >I don't know what will be a form of the EM waves created after stationary >fields. Despite these fields are generated by the moving particle it >doesn't mean the fields really move. Real motion of the fields must always >occur with the velocity of the light. >Because the energy of that fields is too low to create the photons in >optical range I expect for creating of convenient EM wave. However, in >a book of Panovski and Filipps the electrical and magnetic fields of LW >potential of uniformly moving charge are traeted as virtual photons. So >according to those authors, convenient photons must be created. >Of course, a cetain amount of the electric field cannot transfer into >the transversal wave and, to my point of view, it transfers into the >longitudinal waves. > >However, my first goal is to show that the behavior of the remining fields >doesn't obey theory of relativity. I sent to Larry Wharton email with the >question what he means the correct relativistic description of the energy >in different frames. He didn't reply yet. > >With warm regard, >Volodya Along these lines I have a thought for what is maybe an unusual experiment. It is interresting to me that magnetic field lines seem to be stretchable without bounds, yet are not easily cut by other field lines. It should be possible to build a very large major diameter, small minor diameter, iron core torus wrapped with a coil of wire, or even permanently magnetized using permanent magnets periodically in the torus. At least some of the magnetic flux lines could then be expected to completely circle around the torus, even if it is miles in diameter. Call this the big torus. Suppose that there are small torus inductors orthogonal to and surrounding the big torus, with their coils to the outside of the big torus, but their cores circling the core of the big torus. This would look something like a tokamak I suppose. However the iron core of the big torus would be made so as not to conduct electricity - the objective is not to induce a current in the big torus. The objective is to pulse the small inductors so as to chop through the big torus transversely with the field lines induced in the small inductors. Given sufficient magnetic pressure applied to the small inductors, all at the same instant, they should push the field lines in the big torus out of the high mu iron core and drive them to the inside of the big torus ring. Since there is no longer a high mu material to support these very long field lines, they should collapse, cutting across the center of the big torus at the speed of light. The field line motion should induce a purpendicular electrostic field in the centers of the collapsing flux lines. All such collapsing magnetic flux lines should initially share the center point of the big torus, so the electrostatic field so generated should be maximum at the center of the big torus. It is possible to generate very large gradient fields at the center of the torus. This could present opportunities for various types of investigations. Of interest is the question of whether the increasingly long collapse times, due to the lightspeed limitation, could facilitate flux cutting and corresponding anomalies in the vicinity of the small inductors. It is also of interest how the field rise times of the small inductors are affected as the big torus is increased in size to the point where the speed of light is important. Various relativistic investigations might be perfomed due to the fact the field line stretching places a quantum phenomenon into a much larger macro world. Of technical difficulty is getting the timing right so as to focus the collapse effects (if they exist) in the center of the big torus. Also of interest are the effects at the center of the big torus, which might be increased to extremes. This might be useful for studing various electromagnetic pulse phenomena. The center of such a torus might be a site for plasma investigations. A sufficiently high field gradient might be able to extract + - particles from the vacuum sea. Who knows what might happen as the fabric of space-time is torn asunder at the center of the big torus. This idea is built on a long chain of logic and assumptions. Do you think it has any merit? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 12:59:11 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA03166; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606281826.LAA20267@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 10:08 AM 6/28/96 -0700, you wrote: > >> >>I am a bit leery about the claims of nuclear processes going on in a Brown's >>gas flame, >>but considering all the other evidence pointing to it in Champions work and >>all the CF stuff >>I have to keep an open mind. As a simple test, I wonder what would happen >>to a thorium >>impregnated gas lantern if you burned Brown's gas in it? If the decay rate >>was altered >>in some way, would that affect the spectral output of the visible light from >>the glowing >>mantle ash? How important is the thorium to the light emissions from a >>Coleman lantern >>anyway? I realize the only real test would require that steps are taken to >>ensure that >>your radioactive materials are not lost to the environment, but this might >>be a cheap >>and dirty check. I feel another trip to the sporting goods section of >>Canadian Tire >>coming on... >> mantles no longer have thorium in them. use element out of smoke detector - cheap and easy to find, plus the stuff has a hot signal, easy to detect even in minute quantities. >>comments? >> >>Gary >>_ > > >CAUTION CAUTION CAUTION! Vaporizing radioactive material and ingesting it >into your lungs is hazardous in the extreme! Even though thorium oxide >melts at 3300C, the BG flame might be hot enough to relase some into the >local atmosphere. 232Th has a half life of 1.4 x 10^10 years, but it goes >through a number of decay steps before becoming lead, so some of the decay >series isotopes will always be present. > let us not be coy, you absolutely will vaporize some of the stuff and it will get into your lungs, unless you can rig it up to apply the flame under water to catch the ions, or use some other setup which insures that the stuff is properly trapped AND the guy with the torch is not breathing the stuff in. >This is also something to consider when vaporizing mineral ores. Many >contain trace radiactive material. > >On another note, BG seems to get it's kick from applying the energy of it's >flame almost entirely at the mineral/metal surface. This seems to be due >to the delivery of monatomic and/or ionized gas to the mineral/metal >surface. One way to enhance this would then be to run a DC current through >the flame, making the mineral/metal surface the anode. In addition, using >a superimposed HF current, or microwaves, should increase the ionization >level in the flame. In this manner, considerably more energy could be >applied directly to the surface layer of atoms on the mineral/metal. This >technique might also be useful in scaling up the process. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > maybe you should have been working in this field three years ago. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 13:02:35 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA03248; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:45:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:45:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dear Volodya, Earlier I wrote: "Along these lines I have a thought for what is maybe an unusual experiment. It is interresting to me that magnetic field lines seem to be stretchable without bounds, yet are not easily cut by other field lines. It should be possible to build a very large major diameter, small minor diameter, iron core torus wrapped with a coil of wire, or even permanently magnetized using permanent magnets periodically in the torus. At least some of the magnetic flux lines could then be expected to completely circle around the torus, even if it is miles in diameter. Call this the big torus. Suppose that there are small torus inductors orthogonal to and surrounding the big torus, with their coils to the outside of the big torus, but their cores circling the core of the big torus. This would look something like a tokamak I suppose. However the iron core of the big torus would be made so as not to conduct electricity - the objective is not to induce a current in the big torus. The objective is to pulse the small inductors so as to chop through the big torus transversely with the field lines induced in the small inductors. Given sufficient magnetic pressure applied to the small inductors, all at the same instant, they should push the field lines in the big torus out of the high mu iron core and drive them to the inside of the big torus ring. Since there is no longer a high mu material to support these very long field lines, they should collapse, cutting across the center of the big torus at the speed of light. The field line motion should induce a purpendicular electrostic field in the centers of the collapsing flux lines. All such collapsing magnetic flux lines should initially share the center point of the big torus, so the electrostatic field so generated should be maximum at the center of the big torus. It is possible to generate very large gradient fields at the center of the torus. This could present opportunities for various types of investigations. Of interest is the question of whether the increasingly long collapse times, due to the lightspeed limitation, could facilitate flux cutting and corresponding anomalies in the vicinity of the small inductors. It is also of interest how the field rise times of the small inductors are affected as the big torus is increased in size to the point where the speed of light is important. Various relativistic investigations might be perfomed due to the fact the field line stretching places a quantum phenomenon into a much larger macro world. Of technical difficulty is getting the timing right so as to focus the collapse effects (if they exist) in the center of the big torus. Also of interest are the effects at the center of the big torus, which might be increased to extremes. This might be useful for studing various electromagnetic pulse phenomena. The center of such a torus might be a site for plasma investigations. A sufficiently high field gradient might be able to extract + - particles from the vacuum sea. Who knows what might happen as the fabric of space-time is torn asunder at the center of the big torus." I would like to add the idea that a metallic sphere could be placed in the center of the big torus. The collapsing flux rings would penetrate the sphere. The EM pulse generated inside the sphere could then reflect off the walls of the sphere and create a standing wave. This might be useful for generating much more lasting effects for plasma studies. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 13:03:54 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA03380; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:45:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:45:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606281911.PAA05921@spectre.mitre.org> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Robert I. Eachus" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NERVA X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Jed said: > I don't think so. Yeah, it may have had the energy of 60 thousand > tons of TNT, but not the power. I bet it went off slowly compared > to a bomb. At least, the rocket explosions I have seen, like the > Challenger, went at a sedate pace. I believe there is evidence > that the challenger crew survived the blast and began re-arranging > equipment in preparation for a crash landing. Valves were found > turned to the emergeny position. The remains of the bodies were > recognizable. If they had been that close to a conventional or > nuclear bomb they would have been blown to atoms. Uh, let's define a few terms here. Brisance is the measure of how "sharp" an explosion is. Another typical measure (in the nuclear field at least) is overpressure, how much additional pressure an explosion puts on a flat surface on the ground. In any case, any explosion involving LOX (liquid oxygen) is likely to be quite brisant, more so than a nuclear weapon, TNT, or nitroglycerine. LH2 plus LO2 is nasty...see the branching change discussion here...but AFIAK methane and LOX is the worst. (Well, not quite the worst, that honor is reserved for Xenon trioxide, but close. ;-) Second, the Challenger disaster and the one in the USSR were very different. In the Challenger disaster, it seems clear that the lox tank was destroyed by the blast, but little H2/O2 mixing occurred, if any, before the blast. The H2 tank ruptured, the H2 mixed with air and exploded as soon as the H2 concentration was low enough. Since the explosion front propagated away from the Challenger, the Challenger suffered relatively little blast damage. In the Soviet disaster, the tanks ruptured on or near the ground, and the liquids mixed and were then ignited by the rocket engines. It almost certainly resulted in most of the energy in a concentric shock wave with very little radiation. (In the sense of Visual and IR, not gammas and neutrons.) The brisiance and overpressure were probably much higher than from typical 100 kT thermonuclear device, even though the total energy involved was lower. You may have heard about the "Daisy cutter" fuel air bombs used in Viet Nam (and to some extent in the Gulf War). The Soviet disaster was probably close to this--the initial disaster/explosion spread the explosive mixture over a fairly wide area, mixing it in the process, then it exploded. When you do this "right" almost all the energy is in the shock front. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 12:54:24 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA03629; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:46:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:46:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rl9721s@acad.drake.edu (Robert W. Lutz) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Hydrogen/Oxygen Reactions X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Just a brief response to this note: >At 09:08 AM 6/27/96 -0700, you wrote: >>The hydrogen/oxygen reaction is well studied by combustion scientists, >>chemists and others. The explosive reaction proceeds via a branching chain > >the use of explosive in sentence above in a general sense creates mistaken >thinking. >eliminate the word explosive to be correct. it is simply: The reaction, >which is implosive under certain conditions and explosive in other >conditions blah blah >is the correct way to state this as a general principle. [snip] >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm@aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm At risk of further propagation of this thread, when hydrogen and oxygen gas react in a closed volume to form water, energy is released. If energy is released, the temperature of the gases go up and the pressure goes up. This is why people talk about an explosion. Now, if all the H2 and O2 react to form water and the resulting HOT water vapor condenses on cold walls, clearly the pressure will go back down. I think you would need to look at phase diagrams to determine the exact final state of the system. So, first it explodes, then the water can condense on the cold walls and the final pressure can be less than that of the initial H2 and O2 that you started with. If you want to call the whole process an "implosion" I guess you can. -bob- From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 13:10:59 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA03739; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:47:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:47:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dear Volodya, Apologies, but yet another afterthought. If two concentric big tori were built, thy could be moved to various angles with respect to each other and pulsed in different relationships to explore EM pulse phase angles. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 14:40:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA23433; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:24:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:24:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606281945.PAA06107@spectre.mitre.org> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Robert I. Eachus" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: NERVA X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Yeah, and you touched a nerve. I remember thinking (during Apollo 10) that we were going to have a huge problem after the moon landing. I was (relatively) a young kid, but most of the older technicians, scientists and engineers were already looking forward to retirement. George Low did a great job as President of RPI, but we needed people like George to stay in place to prevent the bureaucrats from taking over. And take over they did. I'd love to see someone energize all those retirees and do the moon right, and Mars and onward. Orbital Technologies and the Delta Clipper efforts seem to come close, but they really need a few more people with vision. (And of course the other thing that they would need is a country. Maybe one of the the Pacific island countries like Tonga would like the business.) Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 14:40:44 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA23540; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: williams michael j To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Neutron detection cheaply? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Horace, wrap several G-M tubes with silver foil and mount them in a polyethylene block as a moderator. It is a standard silver-activation counter method of measuring pulsed neutrons. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 14:40:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA23676; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:25:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:25:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606282122.AA03500@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Merriman's Erzatz bead pre-report v. 1, cont. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Well, I disected my cell last night, after its run (which consisted in total of 36 hours in purified water + 36 hours electrolysis in 2Molar Li20SO4 (at 3.2 V, 18.8 mA), all at romm temp, ~ 24C.). Two major observations: (1) Many of the bead coating were indeed split. This had looked like bead discoloration when viewed from outside the in situ cell, but closer inspection of the beads shows that this was an optical effect from the split coatings. I'm doing a detailed count, but preliminary estimate is about 30--40% of the beads had split coatings. Another ~10% have intact coatings with lines of discoloration, which may be a precusror to actually splitting. Interesting that the beads had split, since they were not exposed to high current (current never exceeeded 19 mA) nor high temp (temp never exceeded 26 C), and I always treated them gently mechanically (transported in a vial of water, and not compressed much in the cell). Perhaps it is the loading itself that caused the splitting....Commenst, Scott? (2) My 6 micron filter ( Watman Filter paper #3) which immediately preceeded the cell was quite noticably gray on its upstream side (i.e. the side that would catch incoming debris), and still pristine white on the downstream side and in the portions covered by the Nitrile O rings that seal it in place. It was about the color of a classical gray sweat suit. This means that it was filtering something---but what? The water I use is obtained from a commercial water store that uses a 12 step filtration and deionization process, and provides a detailed lab analysis of their product, which shows it to be of high quality....so that is not a likely source. After all, only a total of about 2 L of liquid was ever even put into the system...it couldnt have that much contamination in it. The only things gray--black colored in the system are the nitrile O rings in the filter holder, yet these left no stains on the filter, and nitrile is quite chemically resistant (much more so than rubber, which is why I am using it). All I can imagine now is that either Li or Li2So4 crystalls were trapped in the filter, or that it was microscopic fragments from the metal coating that had disintegrated off the beads. The latter seems most likey, since the filter color roughly mathces the dull gray color of the beads. On the positive side, as I said ~ 60% of the beads were not obviously split (I'll try microscopy this weekend to see how they really look), so that is good. But perhaps that just means those beads were not loading? Certinly that is enough intact beads (> 1 ml) to have made an observable heat signal if they had ``worked'', so its not the end of the world to have 40% casualties if the remaining beads would function. I'm trying to thing of how to proceed. I think I may salvage the unsplit beads and do a few further runs with them, before I try a new run with 2 ml fresh beads. These beads may not work, but I can use them to test a few other things, like the meaning of the gray filter, effect of various operating and treatment regimes, etc. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 15:19:15 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA02156; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 15:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 15:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields, Reluctant Torus X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dear Volodya, Suppose we call that gadget I suggested a Suddenly Reluctant Torus (SRT). In a sense that is what it is - a torroidal core that has its reluctance suddenly inreased everywhere simultaneously by the cutting flux of the orthogonal inductors. Perhaps a means of creating a standing longitudinal wave in the center of the interior metallic sphere which is in the middle of the SRT would be to wrap the big torus into a helix around the sphere. This would give a kind of wavefront and 3 dimensional quality to the collapsing flux lines. This would be a suddenly reluctant spherical envelope helix. It would be less than perfect because of the need to connect the ends of the helix, and many lines of flux would have paths outside the core. Perhaps a better idea is creating 3 mutually orthogonal co-centered big tori, timed so the 3 collapsing wavefronts form a single front. There the problem is induction and delay on the apparatus of the 2 inner big tori. Another problem is the need to avoid overall conductivity of the sphere so Lenz's law doesn't result too much slowing of the field collapse. On the other hand good reflectivity is needed to create the standing wave. Perhaps the interior sphere should be made of layers of small overlapped metal panels that are mutually insulated. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 15:54:28 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA09691; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 15:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 15:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields, Reluctant Torus X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Dear Volodya, Apologies for the flood, but the dam has broken. I am standing here beside myself jumping up and down with excitement! A very good shape to test for the big torus is saddle shape. The suddenly ejected flux lines would then be saddle shaped. As each line collpses to it's point or origin on the big torus, assuming that flux lines have momentum, They will entagle the flux lines coming from the opposite direction. The result should be increasing entanglement and increasing angular momentum as flux line wraps around flux line. The flux lines should begin to spin around each other with increasing angular velocity and increasing entanglement as the threads are pulled tight. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 18:10:52 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA01562; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: the experiment on the Neutron X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/28/96 04:08 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: the experiment on the Neutron Holy Cow! Does anyone make the connection here with the "Ying" device out of Florida of about 3 years ago? (Pd cathode, Pt anode, and external alpha and gama sources up against the glass container.... - MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 18:11:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA01595; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:05:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:05:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Hedging the Odds X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/28/96 01:02 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Hedging the Odds Just to put some things in perspective....Good, rich, strong Silver ores produce about 10 oz per ton, the BEST Gold claims in the world about 1 oz per ton (typical .1 to .4 oz per ton), Pt I'm not familiar with directly, but I think is .1 to .2 oz per ton max...this are real, observed figures. (I.e., not theoretical limits or the like.) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 18:16:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA02313; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:11:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:11:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Merriman's Erzatz bead pre-report v. 1 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/27/96 20:31 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Merriman's Erzatz bead pre-report v. 1 Are these the glass beads or the new (Kansas source) polystyrene beads? From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 18:24:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA03384; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:20:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:20:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960628224510_100433.1541_BHG62-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Transmutations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: There's something curiously refreshing about Joe Champion's writing, and his general approach and candour. Somebody else here today said much the same thing (my apologies for my bad memory, put it down to old age). That story about the process not scaling up - oh, I dunno, but it sort of sounded right. I too have been more than dubious about the reality of this transmutation stuff - outside a Mizuno cell haha, that there Mizuno guy seems pretty impressive, first with his proton conductors and now this cathode transmutation paper in IE#7. Now I'm just dubious. I await with considerable interest - and now maybe even with hope - for the results of the lab tests. And I hope Joe will go on posting here. Chris PS Since the Mizuno paper pretty much settles this low-energy nuclear stuff for me, it does raise a rather terrifying prospect. Clearly the whole business is monstrously complex compared with normal nuclear physics. I'd hate to have to try to untangle that puzzle. Or do things always look like this before the ground rules are discovered? From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 18:24:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA03448; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:20:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:20:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Bully Electrons... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Bully Electrons... Article published in Discover Magazine, September, 1996. What happens to molecules stuck to a metal surface when the surface is heated? If you heat it long enough, the metal atoms begin to vibrate, jostling the stuck-on molucules so much that they pop off the surface. But that, it turns out, happens only to molecules that have not already been knocked loose by a different culprit -- one that IBM physicists have just discovered. Dennis Newns and his colleagues at IBM's Watson Research Center in New York stuck nitric oxide or oxygen to the surface of half- inch-wide palladium disks. Then they zapped the disks with laser pulses lasting less than a thousandth of a billionth of a second. The laser pulses heated the palladium to 900 degrees -- but not for long enough to allow the palladium atoms to shake loose any oxygen or nitric oxide. Yet some of those molecules broke free anyway. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 18:45:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA05913; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:37:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:37:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields, Reluctant Torus X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Volodya, A less likely to work, but simpler, idea to consider is a simple torus of ferromagnet material wrapped with numerous evenly spaced coils in parallel bearing high frequency current, all in phase. Each coil would have a supply line, maybe coaxial, the same length from the oscillator so all is in phase. This configuration would be made into a saddle shape to fit around a flask like the lining of a basball. Some interesting things to put in the flask might be D2 or D2O. It seems like the problem would be getting the frequency high enough. Maybe the ferromagnetic material would not even be necessary. There is also the missing fast ejection of the flux to the inside an EM reflective sphere. What do you think? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 19:07:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA09247; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 19:03:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 19:03:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D48DAC.6817@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields, Reluctant Torus X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > Dear Volodya, >Snip: > Apologies for the flood, but the dam has broken. I am standing here beside > myself jumping up and down with excitement! > I am trying to picture the above, Horace, but my E-mail video is out of wack! Forget the Reluctant Torus, go get those rolls of silver foil you have hidden away, and build a neat neutron detector like williams michael j says! I-want-what-Horace-is-having, Frank Stenger > Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 > Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 23:51:15 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA11344; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 23:44:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 23:44:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606290642.XAA29820@colombia.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Hi Joe, (snip) >For transmutation to occur in the presence of Brown's Gas three things are >required: the Gas, the element to be transmuted and the CATYLST. The >catalyst is a certain isotope of a single element. I will be addressing >this in more detail in August. Thanks for sharing the information on your transmutation research and with use with Brown's Gas, it was all new to me and look forward to hearing more! Cheers Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 23:57:14 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA12290; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 23:53:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 23:53:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960629064325_76216.2421_HHB53-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations... X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Joe Champion wrote: > "The second problem being -- when you increase the size > of your starting matrix by an order of magnitude, all > you accomplish is melting your sample, no transmutation > is observed." Should we suppose that the opposite is true then? Why wouldn't scaling up work by going smaller but "massively parallel"? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l@eskimo.com Fri Jun 28 23:58:29 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA12325; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 23:54:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 23:54:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960629064326_76216.2421_HHB53-2@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Transmutations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Chris Tinsley wrote: >>> "And I hope Joe will go on posting here." I do too. But doesn't it make you a little suspicious that for all the candor and such, there's still an ingredient "X" (the catalyst), and other details that mask the true nature of the process? Isotope reports would be nice, but duplicability, by someone like Scott Little or others - even _you_ Chris if there's room in your basement to set up a kiln or reactor or whatever it's called, would be really fine. And I'm still a little vague on this point too Joe - what exactly is your end in this? Are you selling reactors, formulas, or interest shares? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 00:25:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA14967; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 00:22:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 00:22:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields, Reluctant Torus X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: > >> Apologies for the flood, but the dam has broken. I am standing here beside >> myself jumping up and down with excitement! >> > >I am trying to picture the above, Horace, but my E-mail video is out of wack! > >Forget the Reluctant Torus, go get those rolls of silver foil you have >hidden away, >and build a neat neutron detector like williams michael j says! > >I-want-what-Horace-is-having, Frank Stenger > Sorry, Frank, but I think you might be disappointed. My only remaining vices are caffein, sugar, and fat, oh, and gluttony I suppose, based on my weight. At the moment it's genuine strawberry ice cream I'm having. BTW, "I am standing here beside myself" is a line adapted from the movie "Short Circuit". I felt like jumping up and down, but didn't want to stop typing. Maybe it was a friend of Neddie's jumping up and down screaming it's not all that simple! BTW, where is Neddie, anyway? Since we share an interest in ball lightning, I think you'll understand my interest in continuing this line of thought for a while. Besides, if I had a reluctant torus working the *first* thing I would want is a neutron detector and then some D2. Since you are one of the EM experts/experimenters here I was hoping you might have something a little more specific in your critique. You keep'n something up your sleeve, or just trying to be nice? I have several criticisms and worries about the idea myself, but I thought it would be good to see what others might have to say. Looking-for-input-even-the-conventional-kind, Horace Heffner From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 00:52:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA16191; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 00:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 00:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlagarde@cyberaccess.fr (Jean_de_Lagarde) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Transmutations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Talking of transmutations, has anybody heard about a recent experiment with the ARATA double cathode powder cell, which, after delivery of several kw x hours of energy over a long period, showed a substantial helium production (more than accounted for the enrgy delivered) and several interesting metal transmutations in the elestrodes ? Who could confirm and give more details ? Jean de Lagarde From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 01:30:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA19971; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 01:24:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 01:24:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31d49db1.16228955@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Neutralizing Radioactivity X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 27 Jun 1996 06:26:13 -0700 (PDT), Scott Little wrote: [snip] >However, we did perform a series of experiments in which we placed an Am-241 >source inside the top sphere of a Van de Graff generator on several >occasions for several hours each time over a period of two months and we >could detect no change in the source's activity. We maintained a 2nd source But was the sample placed near the wall of the dome, and was there a small hole in the wall? [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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 01:33:05 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA20024; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 01:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 01:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31d4c1f9.25518417@mail.netspace.net.au> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Brown=92s?= Gas - Untold Story X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:57:17 -0700 (PDT), Joe Champion wrote: [snip] > >Not being learned, I should not make claims, but if you tell me what's in >your reagent grade chemicals I can tell you which new elements (and exact >isotopes) will be found after the Brown Gas treatment. OK Joe, Lets say I were to bring along pure Al27. What would I end up with? > >Come one, come all (black robes and conical hats accepted, but not required). > >For the location on the Brown's Gas Generator nearest you, email the following: > >_______________________________ >Joe Champion 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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 01:42:13 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA21041; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 01:38:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 01:38:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606290831.BAA20924@colombia.it.earthlink.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Randall To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Brown gas for car fuel X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 12:57 AM 6/28/96 -0700, you wrote: >Michael Mandeville wrote: >> >>I never checked out the energetics of the auto cross country on a gallon of >>water or whatever, but let me tell you, you just can't get that far on one >>gallon of water with a BG unit. You can go through a gallon of water in a >>fairly short time, few hours max. BG2000 means that it is outputting 2000 >>liters of gas in an hour, that is a little more than one liter of water. >>You figure from there. > >You could go on a gallon indefinitely by re-condensing the vapor and >channeling it back into the electrolyte. The problem is the source of the >electrolysis current. You should not be able to get enough energy back out >of the condensed Brow's gas to re-electrolyse it to complete the cycle. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 Hi Horace, A couple of thoughts of how to power a car for self running condition on BG. 1) It could be that only a small amount of the BG gas mixed with air is all that is needed. As was reported, Brown said the source of electrolysis current was the battery. Maybe he found a right mixture of a small amount of fuel to air ratio for self-running operation. The photo in the ITS journal shows Brown standing next to a Brigs and Straton engine powered by his gas. 2) Much is not known of how the BG generator works or how it is constructed. Very little independent research in the new electrolysis mechanism has been done. There is speculation that a unique way of charging the water, that once the electrolysis starts it continues for prolong periods of time without further input current. Could the water act as a gate to tapping ZPE, ether, space energy? In my hydrolysis research unit I noticed anomalies that are not found in conventional electrolyzers. 3) The design in Brown's patent and the Rhodes/Hene's patents are multi-layered of metal and water, similar to Reichs multi-layered orgone accumulators of metal and organic material. The water could act as the organic material and the the device as a water orgone accumulator tapping into the orgone energy as a source of the electrolysis current. The orgone blanket I made, worked for my headaches and muscle aches while a standard blanket or Bayer aspirin didn't work. Little is known where it comes from and what the orgone energy is- chi, the life force, bioenergy? Maybe a "water accumulator" could tap into this energy as an energy source. Cheers Michael Randall From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 02:31:14 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA24214; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 02:26:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 02:26:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606291219.AA01182@giasone.teseo.it> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: conte@teseo.it (Elio Conte) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: The Experiment on the Neutron X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortexians, thank you very much for the consideration to the experiment on the neutron.Please,consider that we must obtain REPRODUCIBLE Results.The result in itself is so important that we cannot permit to ourselfes to obtain questionable results.Also having an adeguate laboratory of nuclear physics in our Institute,we have had some difficulty to detect neutrons indirectly(alpha measurements and other...).We need to have results with unquestionable discrimination and so the only way is to use neutron detectors as we have made.Please,consider that we=20 have used BF3 detectors connected to a multichannel analyzer since we have intended to study also the energetic spectrum of the emitted neutrons, but,repeating the experiment,I see that a multichannel analyzer is not an instrument easy to find in any laboratory and so also a rate meter may be sufficient. Finally,please debate the results.Sincerely.Elio Conte =20 --- Prof Elio Conte Centro Studi Radioattivit=E0 e Radioecologia Libero Istituto Universitario Internazionale Bari, Italia From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 05:24:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA03692; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 05:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 05:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960629121244_100433.1541_BHG32-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Transmutations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Rick writes: > But doesn't it make you a little suspicious that for all the > candor and such, there's still an ingredient "X" (the catalyst), > and other details that mask the true nature of the process? > Isotope reports would be nice, but duplicability, by someone like > Scott Little or others - even _you_ Chris if there's room in your > basement to set up a kiln or reactor or whatever it's called, > would be really fine. I have to disagree here. Replication is just not an issue in this specific case. Take an example. If there is Pt in Jed's samples, and that Pt has virtually no 194Pt or 195Pt, then something 'interesting' has happened because those two should each be present as about 1/3 of the metal. Yes, I'm giving a hypothetical case here, let's pursue that specific one. Slightly different arguments would apply if the element were - say - copper. Why would this Pt be 'interesting'? I read up on the various methods of isotope separation, and they aren't too good. To pull that stunt, you would have to use a mass-spectroscopy technique. In the case of 235U and 238U (which were separated for the Manhattan Project primarily by that method) the isotopes have a mass difference of 3 (OK on a baseline of 235 not 194), which they wouldn't have in this case. And you'd need a lot of Pt to start with, and the process is damned expensive. The other methods are (effectively) forms of chemistry, and are very difficult if you want to drive the separation very far. And chemical methods with Pt are obviously a pig anyway. Right, so if the samples are screwy that way - and the various labs/methods confirm their screwiness - then the only possibility is that they had been prepared at vast expense. The only remaining test which would be required then would be to see a VERY large sample (like, a big heap of the stuff on the ground) and take a sample at random. If that sample was the same then, except to a vanishingly small probability, they were screwed up by transmutation. Or by a completely new form of isotope separation. Either would be 'interesting'. What I'm saying is that the samples are 'silent witnesses'. Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 06:22:46 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA07693; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 06:17:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 06:17:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606291315.IAA14914@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Neutralizing Radioactivity X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: At 01:24 AM 6/29/96 -0700, Robin wrote: >But was the sample placed near the wall of the dome, and was there a >small hole in the wall? NO! I have seen two descriptions of this experiment now. In the first one, the material is simply placed inside the dome. In the second, as you imply, you are supposed to put the material near a hole in the dome... At least there you'd have an electric field...but I haven't tried that yet. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 08:18:22 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA22673; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 08:14:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 08:14:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: magnetic fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Volodya, You wrote: >Unfortunately, because of my not so good English I cannot estimate your >magnetic tori soon. I should think some time. >In some weeks my friend who works with the magnetic sources of high power >should come here. I ask him to estimate your scheme. >'Magnetic sources of high power' mean that the magnetic fields are >generated by explosion of the coil in which the current flows in. Because >of short time of explosion the magnetic field is squeezed up to critical >value and then the field begin to spread. >However, the energy of the magnetic field isn't sufficient to create the >elementary particles from vacuum sea, even the field is squeezed to >critical point. > >I would like to say that my area of interest is very short pulses and the >antennas (as a practical application). >Could you say me what is the area of your interest in practice? Thanks for considering the idea. I look forward to your friends comments. I am just an amateur, a retired person just beginning seriously this past year to explore physics, cold fusion, free energy devices, and wierd science. My main interest is in helping to solve the world energy crisis, and therefore the global warming problem. I believe there is a good chance these problems will be solved more by amateur inventors than by rigorous science, more by the interactive synergism of scientists and inventors working together on internet than through the dry stuffy censored journals. My career was in software, computer operating systems in particular. I have also done some original but amateur work in the field of graph theory, and have developed various transformations, proofs, and computer programs for constructing/deconstructing random planar graphs of various kinds. Since retirement, I have been granted US Patent 5,130,983 for a computer polling method, and I have also designed and simulated methods for parallelizing various operating system functions, showing the feasibility of implementing on-chip functions for unit time queueing and dequeueing, linear time sorting, and unit time table lookups, lock free table updating, fast system lock mechanisms, etc., and generalized these functions to simultaneously support concurrent task requests in multi-cpu multi-tasking systems. I have been searching for the thing to do with my retirement that feels right and fits my budget. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 08:39:39 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA27357; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 08:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 08:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: The Experiment on the Neutron X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/29/96 02:31 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: The Experiment on the Neutron Dr. Conte: SOME detectors can pick up false signals if other electrical devices are operated near by. It may be worth while to run the "electrical driving" part of your experiment WITHOUT the "active" parts of the experiment being set up. If this does not cause an increase in counts, then the observed increase has futher validation as a real experimental effect. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 08:54:48 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA01672; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 08:44:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 08:44:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D54DD2.4E0@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Hi Horace, Pardon my paraphrase from "When Harry Met Sally" but it seemed to fit! What really caught my eye in your postings was the following: > site for plasma investigations. A sufficiently high field gradient might > be able to extract + - particles from the vacuum sea. Who knows what might > happen as the fabric of space-time is torn asunder at the center of the big > torus." > > > Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 > Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 A while back, some of my meager theoretical efforts to model ball-lightning seemed to point to a configuration in which a lightning-sized current (perhaps 200 -> 400 Kamp or more) was flowing in a thin filament along a diameter of the lightning ball. At one pole the filament would join the spherical shell and, the current would fold back along the surface of the sphere to complete the circuit to the other end of the filament. There were a *few* problems with this configuration: 1. What kind of plasma filament of microscopic thickness could carry 300 Kamp currents? 2. To satisfy the boundary conditions for a force-free (J X B = 0) current configuration, the filament would also need to contain a core of magnetic lines of enormous intensity (B). This magnetic filament core would exit and re-enter at the poles, flaring out outside the sphere to form an external dipole field around the sphere. 3. If such a filament exists, how was it formed? A simplified scenario might be as follows: 1. Start with a nice thundercloud build-up so we have about 100 million volts available to drive our process. 2. Setting up for a nice 5 km long return stroke, we have a typical 4 X 10^9 joules of energy available in the cloud- capacitor. 3. Let the strike begin! The current builds towards 300 Kamp. 4. Now, the long lightning channel has a linear inductance like any other straight conductor. However, it's inductance varies with it's diameter, so the counter emf along a section of the stroke is given by: delta V = L di/dt + I dL/dt 5. If a section of the return stroke starts to pinch, it's inductance increases, so it adds some I dL/dt to the counter emf. 6. When a plasma current pinches, the plasma current carriers get squeezed out the ends of the pinch and the current path goes unstable and the current bipasses the pinch area. 7. But, suppose the pinch is unusually long - and the magnetic lines around the pinch are very intense due to the very large current! 8. If a section of the pinch pinches further, we might set up a super switch which tries to switch off the lightning bolt in a matter of microseconds. Here we have it. A huge block of inductive energy who's life depends on the huge current that sustains it! Here also we have a super switch who's one purpose in life is to stop the huge current in microseconds! My theory was that the switch loses! As the current carriers get squeezed out of the filament, the voltage drop grows large enough to begin electron-positron pair formation! Now, it takes about 1.02 Mev to form such a pair. I suppose this may mean that the mean-free-path of the carriers in the filament, X the local voltage gradient would have to permit the carriers to reach more than 1.02 Mev energy level. So, there it is Horace! As per your thought, we have in effect "torn asunder" the fabric of space-time to form current carriers to feed the huge current hunger of my inductive-energy beast! In this state can the filament be super-conductive? A core of raw magnetic energy surrounded by a tornado of electron-positron current, trapped in some QM stability mechanism! As the return stroke starts to decay, this guy says "I'm outa here" and breaks out of the stroke to become a ball-lightning element, feeding on its large meal of inductive energy. I'll see your Reluctant Torus and raise you one ball-lightning model! (You gotta love this Horace guy!) With-head-in-a-thundercloud, Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 09:58:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA15264; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Transmutations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Chris writes: > Right, so if the samples are screwy that way - and the various labs/methods > confirm their screwiness - then the only possibility is that they had been > prepared at vast expense. I don't have the book handy, but the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics says that isotopic ratios vary depending upon what part of the world the minerals were originally extracted. That is to say, the mixing is not homogenous. So the values given in the CRC represent averages, but the actual ratios can vary from sample to sample. -- - 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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 09:59:35 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA15323; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:55:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:55:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Neutralizing Radioactivity X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Scott writes: > NO! I have seen two descriptions of this experiment now. In the first one, > the material is simply placed inside the dome. In the second, as you imply, > you are supposed to put the material near a hole in the dome... At least > there you'd have an electric field...but I haven't tried that yet. There wouldn't be much of an electric field gradient in the hole, especially if the diameter of the hole is << than the diameter of the sphere. -- - 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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 10:00:45 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA15429; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:55:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:55:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960629164639_72240.1256_EHB157-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: ka-BOOM! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Robert Eachus writes: "The Challenger disaster and the one in the USSR were very different. In the Challenger disaster, it seems clear that the lox tank was destroyed by the blast, but little H2/O2 mixing occurred, if any, before the blast. The H2 tank ruptured, the H2 mixed with air and exploded as soon as the H2 concentration was low enough." I see . . . I gather I was right in thinking that the Challenger explosion was a sedate affair compared to a bomb. I guess you are saying the H2 had to mix with air before exploding because it is stored separately from the O2, and it takes time for the two to come together, whereas other types of rocket fuel have the oxidizers pre-mixed, so the entire mass of rocket fuel can ignite simultaneously. Still, you'd think it would take a special build-in fuse or timed ignition circuits to get that giant mass of fuel to go off simultaneously, like a fission implosion bomb. "You may have heard about the "Daisy cutter" fuel air bombs . . ." Yes, I have seen pictures of them on TV. How do they get all of the fuel to go off at the same moment (the same millisecond, or nanosecond)? Another thing I do not understand is how they prevent solid rocket fuel from all igniting at once. In early tests, some of those SLBM did explode, as I recall. A lump of coal will burn a little at a time because oxygen cannot reach the entire mass, but solid rocket fuel includes an oxidizer. - Jed From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 09:59:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA15519; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:56:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:56:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Frank Stenger writes: > A while back, some of my meager theoretical efforts to model > ball-lightning seemed to point to a configuration in which a FYI Paul Koloc has a nice theory on ball lightning. If you read the stuff on my web page about his hot fusion concept, you will see that it is based upon his ball lightning model. -- - 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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 11:37:07 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA01402; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 11:33:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 11:33:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: [snip] >>This is also something to consider when vaporizing mineral ores. Many >>contain trace radiactive material. >> >>On another note, BG seems to get it's kick from applying the energy of it's >>flame almost entirely at the mineral/metal surface. This seems to be due >>to the delivery of monatomic and/or ionized gas to the mineral/metal >>surface. One way to enhance this would then be to run a DC current through >>the flame, making the mineral/metal surface the anode. In addition, using >>a superimposed HF current, or microwaves, should increase the ionization >>level in the flame. In this manner, considerably more energy could be >>applied directly to the surface layer of atoms on the mineral/metal. This >>technique might also be useful in scaling up the process. >> >> >>Regards, >> PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >>Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 >> > > >maybe you should have been working in this field three years ago. >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm@aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm Thanks. Maybe I wouldn't be making so many mistakes now if so. For example, one critical sentence above should read: "One way to enhance this would then be to run a DC current through the flame, making the mineral/metal surface the *cathode*." Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 12:00:51 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA03764; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 11:51:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 11:51:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960629183838_100433.1541_BHG37-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Transmutations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: John, > I don't have the book handy, but the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and > Physics says that isotopic ratios vary depending upon what part of > the world the minerals were originally extracted. That is to say, > the mixing is not homogenous. > > So the values given in the CRC represent averages, but the actual > ratios can vary from sample to sample. Worth a recheck, I would suggest - actually, I hope somebody will recheck. I've been into this, and it appears clear that H and He have pretty variable ratios and so do Li - all for excellent reasons. Then, it is true that one or two others do as well. Obviously Pb found in U ore will have distorted isotope ratios - any situation where big accumulations of a long-lived occur will produce distorted ratios in the daughter products. These form the basis of dating techniques; the decay of 40K is a case in point. However, and it is a big however, these are specified in that list I got from Britannica, which says that there is virtually zero variation in isotope ratios among the vast majority of the elements. So much so that they can be quoted to four-decimal accuray. If anybody knows differently, I hope they will post their information here - or if they can confirm the above that will help too. It seems to me to be pretty important that we should get some kind of baseline agreement *in advance* of the test results on the Champion samples. Any offers of help here? Chris From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 13:04:58 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA12943; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:01:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:01:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: John Schnurer To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Neutralizing Radioactivity X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vor, To do this work, one HAS to get a copy of the 1990 patent by Wm. A Barker. First. Some points from patent: a) electic field exposure is a one time thing, 10 to 20 hours. b) measurable results take a LONG time, weeks or months, full effect is a year. c) sample is VERY near a hole in the sphere [get the patent !!!!] d) gradient is across the inside/outside of sphere [0.10" wall ..0.10" gradient] this is pretty big time if you are at 50 to 150 KV. e) GET PATENT f) see E g) very hard to do this work, or get meaningful results if you proceed on the basis of hearsay experimental protocol .... see E. Barker's work has been duplicated by at least one group. Barker has all the math and so on. This is NOT neutralization, it is simple, straight forward acceleration of decay by manipulation of coulomb barrier conditions. h) see e, f, g No hype, no mystery, no magic. JHS On Sat, 29 Jun 1996, John Logajan wrote: > Scott writes: > > NO! I have seen two descriptions of this experiment now. In the first one, > > the material is simply placed inside the dome. In the second, as you imply, > > you are supposed to put the material near a hole in the dome... At least > > there you'd have an electric field...but I haven't tried that yet. > > There wouldn't be much of an electric field gradient in the hole, especially > if the diameter of the hole is << than the diameter of the sphere. > > -- > - 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@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 13:49:17 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA17976; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D59458.4D52@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Neutralizing Radioactivity X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: John Schnurer wrote: > Snip: > d) gradient is across the inside/outside of sphere [0.10" wall > ..0.10" gradient] this is pretty big time if you are at 50 to 150 KV. Here I go again - spouting off in complete ignorance! What was the idea behind this patent? To place a sample in an electric field (E)? Was the idea a *high* electric field? Most high voltage machine terminals are designed to have low E's at their outer surface to keep it well below 3 megavolts per meter in air. Why use a 50 or 150 Kv machine? Why not use a 10 or 20 Kv machine connected to a conductor of proper diameter to give the desired surface field strength? In this case, the potential (V) doesn't mean a thing, does it? I would think it would be E = dV/d(length) that counts. Could not the sample just be attached to the conductor's surface? Frank Stenger From bilb@mail.eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 15:41:18 1996 Received: from eskimo.com (bilb@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA02547; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 15:41:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id PAA10611; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 15:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 15:41:07 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: freenrg-l@mail.eskimo.com cc: William Beaty Subject: Natural Philosophy Alliance: A New Scholarly Scientific Society Challenging Popular Dogmas Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Status: RO X-Status: Orgone Biophysical Research Lab http://id.mind.net/community/orgonelab/index.htm Forwarded Announcement ********** A N N O U N C E M E N T=20 The Natural Philosophy Alliance The Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) was organized in 1994 by a few dozen physical scientists and other scholars who had gathered in June of that year in San Francisco, in conjunction with the annual meeting of the Pacific Division of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). Several special sessions were organized on the theme "Problems in Contemporary Views in Physics and Astronomy". The NPA has since organized further meetings, including two in 1995; in Norman, Oklahoma in May, in Vancouver, B.C. in June, along with the Southwestern and Rocky Mountain (SWARM) and Pacific Divisions of the AAAS, respectively. This latter meeting, held in Flagstaff on the campus of the University of Northern Arizona in June of 1996, was focused upon "New Frontiers in Physics and Cosmology" (more about this most recent meeting below). The NPA has tried to organize symposia for the much larger and more prominent AAAS national meetings, but has so far been denied this opportunity, being opposed by the adherents of scientific concepts which NPA members are generally critical of (such as "relativity" and the "Big Bang" cosmological theories). The NPA has also held a few small local meetings, and has encouraged participation by its members at recent international meetings, in Russia and in Italy. Also, the NPA has plans to publish a Proceedings from its various meetings.=20 Foremost among the guidelines by which the NPA operates is a wide-ranging tolerance of a great variety of ideas -- of course assuming a certain level of scientific competence on the part of those offering the ideas. We insist on avoiding the narrow and dogmatic approach that prevails in academic physics, and instead wish to emulate the more open-minded and diverse scholarship in such fields as geology and biology. We also heavily discourage political, religious, ethnic, and racial bias. We are quick to point out, for example, that our criticisms of special and general relativity do not involve criticism of Einstein as a person, or of his social or philosophical ideas, or at least in most cases, of the bulk of his wide-ranging scientific work. "Natural Philosophy" is the name by which "physics" was known in the time of Isaac Newton, and well into the 19th century. We return to it mainly in order to emphasize that a deeper, more profound, more philosophical approach to studying nature needs to be revived, to help escape and to move beyond today's errors. Many such errors are based on explicit contempt for philosophy, in favor of a "scientism" that has tried to apply the scientific approach beyond its legitimate range -- such as in the attempt to monopolize the understanding of time and space, which are present in every field. HOW WILL THE WORLD BE BETTER IF WE ACHIEVE OUR AIMS? Besides restoring a proper measure of realizm, objectivity and validity to physical science, and of tolerance to the way its work is done, we believe that major practical applications of science, thus far only glimpsed in limited ways, will be made possible -- rather than mythical applications such as nuclear energy, which in reality does not depend on relativity theory. Physics has been at an impasse for most of the 20th centiry, as even a few frank critics within its midst -- e.g., Joseph Schwartz and Rob Oldershaw -- have argued. Once this is overcome, new technology, such as new energy sources that depend largely on the electromagnetic aether that today's relativists deny exists, can help to meet the pressing human needs. We might also go beyond our current very limited knowledge of the nature of electricity, magnetism, and gravity, perhaps enabling us to develop new, more varied and effective, means of transportation. The possibilities are immense. Maybe even more important, once the flaws in special relativity (SR) are revealed, the relativism and associated subjectivism that has spread so widely throughout the world of ideas, from Nietzsche's iconoclasm to Derrida's recent "deconstructionism", will lose its most impressive scientific support -- as SR is despite not being well understood in most disciplines. Thenceforth it will be more difficult to maintain that truth and values are not absolute, objective, eternal, and/or rationally based; even as remote as it seems from physics, ethical relativsm will be weakened, and the concept of lasting moral standards will be strengthened.= =20 (This is not to say, of course, that any particular set of moral standards will thereby be supported.) Also once the emptiness of big bang cosmology is revealed, those religious sects who have been offering it as proof of some part of their own theology -- as it never really was -- will have to depend again on the strength of that theology itself; and concede that science and religion each have their own realms, religion dealing with issues extending well beyond what science can learn. -- John E. Chappell, Jr. (1996) ********** The Natural Philosophy Alliance is composed of over 100 scientific and scholarly members from 14 nations. At the recent Flagstaff NPA meeting, hosted by the Southwestern and Rocky Mountain (SWARM) Division of the AAAS in Flagstaff, Arizona, there were 81 papers presented; 47 in direct connection with the official meeting, and 34 in independent sessions. Among the current theories being questioned by NPA members are the big bang theory and special relativity theory (SR). Most NPA members maintain that no evidence cited on behalf of either theory is more than equivocal in meaning, and that the meanings now taught often result from invalid logic and math. SR is only one of many types of relativism that have flourished throughout academia in the 20th century. As those other relativisms imply, the evidence claimed for SR can be interpreted differently, depending upon the viewpoint of the interpreter. In his famous analysis of change in scientific thought, Thomas Kuhn shows that even in hard science, choice of paradigm often depends on such varying views -- often non-scientific ones.= =20 In physics, the motivating bias seems to be a preference for bizarre and irrational ideas, while distaining common sense and philosophy, including basic logic. Many NPA members also strongly support a resurection of the older idea of aether, which was prematurely discarded, on questionable experimental grounds. Thus, the fact that nearly all academic physicsts support SR proves nothing about its validity, but only that a clique of "true believers" has had enough power to keep its critics at bay through unrelenting intolerance: doubting students are forced into other majors, dissident papers are excluded from mainline journals and meetings, etc. As part of the NPA program, there are regular special sessions on "Suppression of Innovative Thought" in academia, citing other disciplines as well as physics. Here are a few of the presenters at the recent Flagstaff meeting: Grote Reber -- the principal founder of the science of radio astronomy, who built the world's first radiotelescope. Long a critic of big bang theory, he came from Australia to speak. Ron Hatch -- internationally honored expert on the GPS satellite system. Domina Eberle Spencer -- Univ. of Connecticut mathematician and most widely published living critic of today's electromagnetic theory. Half Fox and Dan Davidson, leading representatives of the "new energy" movement, discussing practical examples of new energy sources which depend upon the idea of an energetic aether. Francisco M=FCller -- NPA President, who has produced experimental evidence contradicting SR. Meetings of this type began in Europe in the 1980s, and some have been much larger than the Flagstaff meeting. Two weeks of dissident physics sessions will be held in Sept. 1996 in St. Petersburg, Russia (for details, ask Neil Munch, address below). ********** For more information about the Natural Philosophy Alliance, contact any one of the individuals below. Or, become a supporter and member of the NPA now, and send your check of $15 membership dues (made out to "Natural Philosophy Alliance"): - Lee Shimmin (NPA Membership Chairman), 7110 Tickner St., Houston, TX 770= 55 email: lee_shimmin@msn.com - Neil Munch (NPA Assistant Director), 9400 Five Logs Way, Gaithersburg, MD= =20 email: 70047.2123@compuserve.com - John Chappell (NPA Director), 1212 Drake Circle, San Luis Obispo, CA 936= 05 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 19:09:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA14856; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 19:05:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 19:05:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606300159.SAA12415@mail.eskimo.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Ron McFee To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Yoshiaki Arata Pd-black work. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 00:42:46 -0700 (PDT) >From: jlagarde@cyberaccess.fr (Jean_de_Lagarde) >Subject: Re: Transmutations > >Talking of transmutations, has anybody heard about a recent experiment with >the ARATA double cathode powder cell, which, after delivery of several kw x >hours of energy over a long period, showed a substantial helium production >(more than accounted for the enrgy delivered) and several interesting metal >transmutations in the elestrodes ? Who could confirm and give more details >? > > Jean de Lagarde Jean Yoshiaki Arata presented a seminar in Albuquerque, New Mexico last Monday with his colleague Yue-Chang Zhang, from Shanghai(?) University. I believe he was returning from a trip to Washington, DC after a visit to the US Naval Research Laboratory. He is a member of the Japan Academy and Emeritus Professor of Osaka University. (He is now 72 years old.) He discussed his work which includes strong evidence that helium was being produced along with considerable amounts of thermal energy in his DS (double structure) cathodes which contained Pd powder, "Pd black." One of the papers that I received a copy of was Yoshiaki Arata and Yue- Chang Zhang, A New Energy caused by "Spillover-Deuterium," Proc. Japan Acad., 70, Ser B (1994) p. 106. "Abstract: It is verified that a new kind of energy is caused by "Spillover-Deuterium" generated in a double structure (DS)-cathode with "Pd-black." Using this cathode, the authors confirmed the sustained production of a significantly abnormal amount of energy over a period of several months that could not be ascribed to chemical reaction energy. The chemical reaction energy of 0.1 [mol] Pd-black used is only 4[kJ], but more that 200[MJ] of excess energy was continuously produced for over 3000[hr] at an average rate of 50-100[kJ/hr] using a DS-cathode with a same quantity of Pd-black. Intermittent operation over a period of two years using this struction proved the complete reproducibility of the results." I suggest you contact Prof. Arata at his office in Arata Hall of Osaka University, 11-1 Mihogaoka Ibaraki Osaka Japan #658; Tel: 06 879- 8698; Fax: 06 878-3110 for copies of his papers. In my opinion the Japanese ministry in charge of their so called New Hydrogen Energy would do well to attempt to reproduce Arata and Zhang's work if they haven't already done so. They should also devote considerable resources to quantify both the energy and helium produced. Regards, Ron From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 19:15:44 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA15383; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 19:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 19:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960629220227_145809123@emout15.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: RMCarrell@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Transmutations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-06-28 21:21:29 EDT, Chris wrote: << PS Since the Mizuno paper pretty much settles this low-energy nuclear stuff for me, it does raise a rather terrifying prospect. Clearly the whole business is monstrously complex compared with normal nuclear physics. I'd hate to have to try to untangle that puzzle. Or do things always look like this before the ground rules are discovered? >> Since when did you expect the world to be simple? The world is simple only in carefully constructed experiments which isolate one factor in a linear approximation of the real world. In that simple, reductionist world the superposition theorm applies and the rules are the same with time running forward and backward. The macroscopic world is nonlinear and recursive, so the "simple" rules conspire to create monstrously complex things like Mandelbrot sets and ant colonies, not to mention people. See Hofsteder (Godel, Escher, Bach) or Coveny & Highfield (Frontiers of Complexity) It rather appears we are confronted with nuclear chemistry -- which would be a good umbrella term if it were't already used in another sense by the nuclear industry. You cram metal lattices with enough surplus protons and Lo! stuff happens. All kinds of stuff. Surprise, surprise! Toss chemicals in a vat, and anything that can happen, will happen. The job of the chemical engineer is to maximize what you want and filter out the junk. We should not be surprised at the long delay between confirmation of excess heat and emergence of commercial devices. The researchers are probably up to their eyeballs with puzzles. Mike Carrell From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 21:42:47 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA03823; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 21:34:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 21:34:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9606300529.AA04388@ arnold.math.ucla.edu.ucsd.edu > Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: barry@math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Merriman's Erzatz bead pre-report v. 1 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Merriman's Erzatz bead pre-report v. 1 >Are these the glass beads or the new (Kansas source) >polystyrene beads? These are the original Ni-Pd-Ni-Glass beads Scott Little had created. As for the glass substrate....conversations I had with various folks who could know, around the time Scott commissioned the beads, suggested the glass substrate was known to ``work'', or at least be ``workable'', by CETI....of course, that has never been made official by anyone...just a rumor. So I don't think Scots beads should be ruled out just because they happen to use a glass core. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sat Jun 29 23:42:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA19723; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 23:38:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 23:38:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Transmutations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Chris writes: > However, and it is a big however, these are specified in that list I got from > Britannica, which says that there is virtually zero variation in isotope > ratios among the vast majority of the elements. So much so that they can be > quoted to four-decimal accuray. Okay. I was working from memory, and believe that you are right that the ratio variation applied to *specific* elements. -- - 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@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 00:01:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA23613; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 23:57:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 23:57:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Neutralizing Radioactivity X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: John Schnurer writes: > d) gradient is across the inside/outside of sphere [0.10" wall > ..0.10" gradient] this is pretty big time if you are at 50 to 150 KV. Since the "sphere" is conductive metal, there really is no gradient between the inside surface of the sphere and the outside surface of the sphere. (If there was a gradient, the electrons would flow in the metal to neutralize it.) Drilling a hole in the sphere simply removes some of the charge carriers. However, the resultant field gradient within the hole has influences from every charge carrier within the sphere. Though the removal of the nearest charge carriers implies, through the inverse square law, the greatest gradient change, there are many more numerous distant charge carriers to make up (mostly) for the missing close ones. So there is a gradient induced by drilling the hole, but it is very small due to the aggregate influence of all the other nearby charges. -- - 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@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 00:17:49 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA25754; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 00:13:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 00:13:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Frank Stenger wrote: > Unless Paul can show that his plasmoids are truly force-free current > configurations, they must be contained by atmospheric pressure; and > a 14.7 psia magnetic field just can't contain enough energy density to > explain the long-lived lightning balls. As I understand Koloc's model, the inner kernel is in the form of a torus of plasma. The kernel plasma has large electron currents sustained by the energy storage of the previously induced magnetic fields in and around the torus. The natural tendency of this torus is to contract, but the high plasma temperature tends to expand it. An equilbrium is reached at a certain dimension. A second component is also induced -- the outer mantle, which is a thin skin of conducting plasma. The benefit of this skin is that it provides a magnetically coupled wall which prevents air ingress into the vacuum swept out between the mantle and the kernel. Air pressure presses on the mantle, which compresses the kernel still more, which is resisted by the kernel plasma pressure which pushes on the mantle (via magnetic forces.) So there is some atmospheric pressure helping to contain the ball lightning energy, but it is mostly self-contained in the torodial magnetic plasma currents/fields. The trapped vacuum/atmospheric interface provides its main benefit as a thermal transport barrier. -- - 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@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 01:28:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA03293; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 01:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 01:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Hello Frank, I shouldn't play poker with you. You seem to have aces up your sleeve! It appears Volodya has had enough of the Suddenly Reluctant Torus, me, etc. I don't blame him! At least I did warn him that I was an amateur. There, that salves my conscience a bit. Looking at the idea more thoroughly it appears now that only the saddle shape (or what ever shape you call the shape of baseball seams) might have any merit. It still appears to me that it might be possible to entangle and spin flux lines around each other in the center, the only significant chance to generate ball lightning from this gadget. In all cases getting both sufficient speed plus overall size are the problems. The flat relucant torus is a maybe good idea for concentrating current in a plsma, but is not good for generating voltage gradients unless a collapsing current loop can be generated. Also, achieving the operating frequency plus large sphere size to achieve resonance looks difficult. Looking at this more carefully, maybe an air core version would work. The idea for building the big torus is to build it something like a snake skeleton. The "backbone" of the snake would be two parallel copper bars running the complete length of the saddle shape, i.e. along the seams of the basball. Off this, directed inward, would be the ribs, i.e. single round conducting loops connecting one side of the backbone to the other. I don't know if it would be necessary to include the flux cutters because the backbone current would create purpendicular pressure on the back side of the long flux lines in the center of the "ribs" and drive the flux out. The ejection flux timing looks bad though, it's too soon. It might be better to put the backbone on the inside and drive the flux through the backbone separation space with purpendicular flux cutting inductors. It would take a pretty whopping discharge to make the thing work, maybe from capacitors and triggers positioned periodically around the device. Maybe setting it up in a tank oscillator circuit would work better. I have a few observations about your BL model, but they will have to wait till tomorrow. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 03:39:40 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA12216; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 03:36:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 03:36:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606301031.DAA22220@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 11:33 AM 6/29/96 -0700, you wrote: >[snip] >>>This is also something to consider when vaporizing mineral ores. Many >>>contain trace radiactive material. >>> >>>On another note, BG seems to get it's kick from applying the energy of it's >>>flame almost entirely at the mineral/metal surface. This seems to be due >>>to the delivery of monatomic and/or ionized gas to the mineral/metal >>>surface. One way to enhance this would then be to run a DC current through >>>the flame, making the mineral/metal surface the anode. In addition, using >>>a superimposed HF current, or microwaves, should increase the ionization >>>level in the flame. In this manner, considerably more energy could be >>>applied directly to the surface layer of atoms on the mineral/metal. This >>>technique might also be useful in scaling up the process. >>> >>> >>>Regards, >>> PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >>>Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 >>> >> >> >>maybe you should have been working in this field three years ago. >>____________________________________ >>MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >>Michael Mandeville, publisher >>mwm@aa.net >>http://www.aa.net/~mwm > >Thanks. Maybe I wouldn't be making so many mistakes now if so. For example, >one critical sentence above should read: "One way to enhance this would >then be to run a DC current through the flame, making the mineral/metal >surface the *cathode*." > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > it was reported a long time ago, I don't remember the citation, that you can get tranmutation simply from a high voltage arc across a gap. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 07:01:04 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id GAA26184; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 06:57:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 06:57:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D685A7.63A@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > Frank Stenger wrote: > > Unless Paul can show that his plasmoids are truly force-free current > > configurations, they must be contained by atmospheric pressure; and > > a 14.7 psia magnetic field just can't contain enough energy density to > > explain the long-lived lightning balls. > > As I understand Koloc's model, the inner kernel is in the form of a > torus of plasma. The kernel plasma has large electron currents > sustained by the energy storage of the previously induced magnetic > fields in and around the torus. The natural tendency of this > torus is to contract, but the high plasma temperature tends to > expand it. An equilbrium is reached at a certain dimension. > > A second component is also induced -- the outer mantle, which is a thin > skin of conducting plasma. The benefit of this skin is that it provides > a magnetically coupled wall which prevents air ingress into the vacuum > swept out between the mantle and the kernel. Air pressure presses on > the mantle, which compresses the kernel still more, which is resisted > by the kernel plasma pressure which pushes on the mantle (via magnetic > forces.) > > So there is some atmospheric pressure helping to contain the ball > lightning energy, but it is mostly self-contained in the torodial > magnetic plasma currents/fields. The trapped vacuum/atmospheric > interface provides its main benefit as a thermal transport barrier. > > -- > - 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 - Forgive me, John, but I get all emotional where ball-lightning is concerned! There are classical solutions to standard electromagnetic equations that show that toroidal current fields, very much like Paul K. proposes, *can* exist inside of a diamagnetic pressure sphere. For example, a suitable pressure vessel might be a superconducting spherical shell. Circulating wall currents would automatically restrain the toroidal current and its associated magnetic field to the inside of the sphere. If I had a scanner I could show a picture of this solution - which looks very much like the inner portion of Paul's plasmoid. However, even though the toroidal current is force-free, the containing sphere is not! A magnetic field, B, contains an energy density, um, given by: um = 6.522 B^2 joules/cubic inch (I like inches, darn it!) for B given in teslas. A 0.5 tesla (5000 gauss) magnetic field has an equivalent "pressure" of about 14.4 psi - about atmospheric pressure. This is about the strength of field that could be supported by a vacuum bubble in the atmosphere. The energy density of a 0.5 tesla field is (from my equation) about 1.63 joules/cubic inch. A cubic foot of 0.5 tesla magnetic field (1728 cubic inches) would, thus, contain about 2817 joules of energy - a pretty good chunk of energy at that! But**, it's still not enough to explain many of the reported ball-lightning sightings. It may, it seems to me, be plenty to accomplish the kind of fusion devices that Paul seems to be interested in! He can't patent ball lightning, anyway, it's a natural phenomenon. He can patent a machine for generating it, or using it in a useful way, of course. I hope some of my other postings to Vortex do not give the impression that I think I have a good ball-lightning model - I don't! Toroidal currents are, however, my thing. I have looked for a force-free one for a long time and have not found one yet. Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 07:25:02 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA28745; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 07:21:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 07:21:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960630101925_145992198@emout10.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: RMCarrell@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: ka-BOOM! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Jed, the fuel-air bombs aren't simple at all. They are timed to disperse the fuel into a large volume of air and then ignite it. It seems simultaneous, but isn't. It's a high-tech murder device, since the whole sequence has to happen before the bomb actually penetrates the earth or is otherwise destroyed; they may have a proximity fuze. I'm not an explosives expert, but I expect that rocket fuel is formulated so that there is a burning face which sweeps through the fuel in a controlled way -- this happens in fireworks. An explosive is unstable enough to come unglued by a shock wave propagating at the speed of sound, so it ka-BOOMs instead of FOOOMPFing. Mike Carrell From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 07:40:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA01022; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 07:38:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 07:38:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606301434.JAA06752@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: transmuted Pb X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Jed, I received my 14g sample of the transmuted Pb. Thanks. Joe, do you have either an estimate or, better yet, an analysis of this material which indicates how much total Pt it now contains? I'm just looking for an approximate value to guide my investigations. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 07:48:59 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA01879; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 07:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 07:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606301439.JAA06931@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: KS beads X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: First of all, Toto, these beads do not come from Kansas. KS, in this case, are Kirk Shanahan's initials. The results of my first run on these beads are now on my web page for all to see: http://www.eden.com/~little For those of you who don't want to look at the picture or wade thru the written explanations, there was not even a hint of excess heat observed during a 9 day run using electrolysis currents ranging from 20 mA to 150 mA...all conducted at 50 degrees C except for the initial 27 hour charging period at room temperature. Suggestions for future experiments with these beads would be appreciated. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 07:55:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA02541; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 07:52:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 07:52:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Frank Stenger wrote: > However, even though the toroidal current is force-free, the containing > sphere is not! > Toroidal currents are, however, my thing. I have looked for a > force-free one for a long time and have not found one yet. These two statements seem to contradict each other. :-) Let me address the first one, though. Why would the containing sphere need more than the 14.7 psi equilibrium if it is the torodial plasma that is doing all the pressure cooking? The role of the containing sphere is to keep out air ingress and hold the vacuum layer in place. Therefore it only has to balance air pressure, since it is not the primary compression agent (the inner torus is self-compressing -- the more energy stored and wanting to expand, the more contraction force -- hence an equilibrium across a range of BL powers.) Let me add that I am merely repeating Koloc's general claims, as I have no independent knowledge to add to this discussion. -- - 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@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 08:18:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA05790; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 08:16:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 08:16:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Michael Mandeville wrote: > >it was reported a long time ago, I don't remember the citation, that you can >get tranmutation simply from a high voltage arc across a gap. OK, so this is confirmation that combining a HF stimulated DC arc with a BG flame should increase the transmutation process. The BG and arc should be synergistic. The arc should serve to increase the effect which BG is very good at, namely delivering much of the flame energy directly to the material surface. On this basis, making the material the anode may not be a such a bad idea for transmutation purposes, or maybe only the HF ionizing component is all that is needed. For standard purposes of cutting or heating, I think making the work material the cathode is a good idea, or maybe even using 60 Hz. A fairly low voltage should work. The arc should sustain the flame and the flame the arc. It might make the flame harder to direct. However the spreading effect of an arc on the flame might be exactly the effect needed fo scaling up the transmutation process. I would make it easier to create a kind of "burner" instead of a torch. Just food for thought. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 08:33:50 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA07624; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 08:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 08:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D69C56.3096@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > Snip: > Looking at the idea more thoroughly it appears now that only the saddle > shape (or what ever shape you call the shape of baseball seams) might have > any merit. Snip: > idea for building the big torus is to build it something like a snake > skeleton. The "backbone" of the snake would be two parallel copper bars > running the complete length of the saddle shape, i.e. along the seams of > the basball. Off this, directed inward, would be the ribs, i.e. single > round conducting loops connecting one side of the backbone to the other. > Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 > Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 Horace, you should get a job with the Princeton Plasma Physics Lab! I know I have seen a picture of a huge (railroad car size?) baseball seam shaped magnet used in early hot fusion reactor work! I can't remember its name or its exact application. Also, I am sitting here beside myself looking at a picture in the Encyclopedia of Physics. The picture shows an early "stellarator" built in the 1950's. It is like a torus, twisted once to form a figure eight. In the picture, it looks like a snake skeleton with small, spaced coils around the core - where the snake ribs would be! I know these things I mention are not electromagnetically identical to the Reluctant Torus concept, but if these ideas are coming to you in dreams, ?????????? No joke though, most of my work has been with static (or near static) magnetic fields so I am on shaky ground with dynamic electromagnetic things like cutting and re-connecting flux lines. You may need to show me some pictures of your concepts for me to "get the picture" of your ideas. Reluctant-to-Suddenly-claim-Toroidal-expertise, Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 08:46:31 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA08334; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 08:38:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 08:38:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606301533.IAA14338@mom.hooked.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Russ George" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Yoshiaki Arata Pd-black work. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: MITI has attempted 45 times to reproduce Arata's experiment and failied. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 09:24:01 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA13636; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 09:18:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 09:18:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D6A85B.759@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: John Logajan wrote: > > Frank Stenger wrote: > > However, even though the toroidal current is force-free, the containing > > sphere is not! > > > Toroidal currents are, however, my thing. I have looked for a > > force-free one for a long time and have not found one yet. > > These two statements seem to contradict each other. :-) > > - 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 - You'r right, John! I was not too clear in my story. What has not been done yet is to find a current torus that is force-free WITHOUT SOME EXTERNAL FORCE-BEARING STRUCTURE TO CONTAIN IT. I disagree with Paul that the inner torus can crush in on itself. True, with a helical winding geometry, the parallel portions of the currents will tend to "pinch" together, but the net result is that the torus will expand under hoop stress a bit like a smoke ring in free air expands to a larger hoop. If the inner portion of Paul's current torus acted as he says, he could make a fortune by winding a superconducting coil in the same shape and use it for energy storage for driving autos! People like Scott Little who are interested in flywheel energy storage should throw in the towel and start winding coils! By a force-free current we just mean a current that is parallel to its own magnetic field. A coil set CAN be wound that's like that in PART of it's volume, but the set as a whole will be under a net stress to blow apart. However, I do not want to start a fight with Paul Koloc because I think his concepts are ingenious. I just disagree with him that his plasmoids are the final word in ball-lightning models. Frank Stenger From server@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu Sun Jun 30 10:03:29 1996 Received: from atlantis.cc.uwf.edu (atlantis.cc.uwf.edu [143.88.1.202]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA18815 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 10:03:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from server@localhost) by atlantis.cc.uwf.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id MAA24722; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 12:06:18 -0500 Received: from axp0.hep.anl.gov (axp0.hep.anl.gov [146.139.116.14]) by atlantis.cc.uwf.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA24629 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 12:04:55 -0500 Message-Id: <960630115954.20400115@hep.anl.gov> Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 11:59:54 -0500 (CDT) Reply-To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu Sender: owner-phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu Precedence: bulk From: "JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439" To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu Cc: JLU@hep.anl.gov Subject: RE: Multiple dimensions... X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2 -- ListProcessor by CREN Status: O X-Status: Hi all- David Bowman writes: ************************************************************ Actually, the geometry of phase space is symplectic, not Euclidean. ******************************** David is (in part) making the technical observation that it doesn't make sense to add a spatial vector to a momentum vector. At a deeper level his comment gets us into differential geometry, a topic that I was attempting to gloss over. So take my comments as being mathemaatically precise in a vague, poetic sense that is addressed only to "intuitive understanding" rather than anybody's need to calculate anything. Regards, Jack From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 10:10:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA19348; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 10:08:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 10:08:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960630170405_100433.1541_BHG52-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Silly idea. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: With the Casimir effect you can clearly exchange energy between 'reality' and the zpf. You can extract energy from 'nowhere' and put it back afterwards. That has been shown to be an exact analogy with the way boats in close proximity get pushed/pulled together. I wonder if there is a trick one could dream up which would give *demonstrable* net energy from the waves in the sea - in the sense of using some derivation of the boat idea - which would be translatable into zpf terms. That would be - er - quite a nice little trick. Prizes are available for doing this experimentally. Chris (I take 10% for suggesting the approach) From server@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu Sun Jun 30 10:16:50 1996 Received: from atlantis.cc.uwf.edu (atlantis.cc.uwf.edu [143.88.1.202]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA20397 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 10:16:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from server@localhost) by atlantis.cc.uwf.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id MAA24981; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 12:16:59 -0500 Received: from axp0.hep.anl.gov (axp0.hep.anl.gov [146.139.116.14]) by atlantis.cc.uwf.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA24833 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 12:14:58 -0500 Message-Id: <960630120957.20400115@hep.anl.gov> Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 12:09:57 -0500 (CDT) Reply-To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu Sender: owner-phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu Precedence: bulk From: "JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439" To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu Cc: JLU@hep.anl.gov Subject: dark matter and other esoterica X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2 -- ListProcessor by CREN Status: O X-Status: Hi all and especially Jim Green- Many may be interested in Rowan-Robinson's review of 5 cosmology books in "Nature", Jan 16.'96, p. 309. Joseph Silk's "A Short History of the Universe" seems to be at the top of the list for the "general reader", although we are warned that it is a "demanding book". The reviewer is in the astrophysics group at Imperial College, London. Regards, Jack From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 11:58:05 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA03066; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 11:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 11:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606301850.NAA06760@natashya.eden.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Scott Little To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Silly idea. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 10:08 6/30/96 -0700, Chris wrote: >I wonder if there is a trick one could dream up which would give >*demonstrable* net energy from the waves in the sea - in the sense of >using some derivation of the boat idea - which would be translatable >into zpf terms. OK, Chris: The sea-wave device is simply a float attached to the input arm of generator. The arm is equipped with a ratchet so it will freewheel in one direction. Waves come along and raise the float which turns the generator. When the wave passes, the arm ratchets allowing the float to drop without turning the generator backwards. The key element here, as far as tapping the sea wave energy goes, is the ratchet. If we had a similar device that could allow us to ratchet Casimir plates back apart again without fighting the zpf, we'd be golden! Unfortunately, I can't think of any way to turn off the Casimir force on an object. An electrical ratchet: If one could produce a diode with virtually zero forward drop, wouldn't zpf induced fluctuations in the electrons cause them to flow in the "forward" direction (damn you, Ben Franklin) in a circuit containing such a diode? Another approach: I keep thinking there should be some kind of antenna structure that will absorb high energy photons from the zpf, convert some of their energy into usable form, and the radiate "waste energy" as low energy photons. In other words a photon engine that works a bit like a heat engine. Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 11:58:48 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA03103; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 11:55:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 11:55:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606301854.LAA14416@big.aa.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Michael Mandeville To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: At 08:16 AM 6/30/96 -0700, you wrote: > Michael Mandeville wrote: > >> >>it was reported a long time ago, I don't remember the citation, that you can >>get tranmutation simply from a high voltage arc across a gap. > >OK, so this is confirmation that combining a HF stimulated DC arc with a BG >flame should increase the transmutation process. The BG and arc should be >synergistic. The arc should serve to increase the effect which BG is very >good at, namely delivering much of the flame energy directly to the >material surface. On this basis, making the material the anode may not be a >such a bad idea for transmutation purposes, or maybe only the HF ionizing >component is all that is needed. For standard purposes of cutting or >heating, I think making the work material the cathode is a good idea, or >maybe even using 60 Hz. A fairly low voltage should work. The arc should >sustain the flame and the flame the arc. It might make the flame harder to >direct. However the spreading effect of an arc on the flame might be >exactly the effect needed fo scaling up the transmutation process. I would >make it easier to create a kind of "burner" instead of a torch. Just food >for thought. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > you have quite a supply of food for thought. is it the ionic air up your way? From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 15:37:27 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA00986; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 15:22:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 15:22:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D6FD2F.1B81@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Methane CF a-la Heffner X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: How about using the Heffner arc in a *safe* rig, in a methane atmosphere, with Ni or Pd cathodes as a cheap way to load the metals with hydrogen? I'm sure the arc would "crack" some of the CH4 and I wonder if some monatomic hydrogen would move from arc to metal? I have CH4 piped to my house, but no hydrogen! This sounds like a mess for a calorimeter, but perhaps Horace's new silver-wrapped neutron detector could be used to look for CF? Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 15:27:19 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA01052; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 15:23:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 15:23:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960630221647_100060.173_JHB54-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: ka-BOOM! X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Mike said: >> but I expect that rocket fuel is formulated so that there is a burning face which sweeps through the fuel in a controlled way << Yes - when I was playing with solid fueled rocket boosters for my ram-jets the rate of burning, and therefore the thrust of the rocket was made to be constant by giving the inner hollow core of the solid propellant tube a X-section like a very coarse cookie-cutter with about 8 or 12 lobes for an outside diameter of some 12 ins. As the fuel burned from the inner corrugated surface and consumed the solid fuel the inside diameter increased but the convoluted shape made the area of burning remain more or less constant, so did the rate of combustion and the thrust. Norman From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 15:41:53 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA02924; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 15:37:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 15:37:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960630183421_228276386@emout12.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: fwd mag from the uk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: From: 101544.702@CompuServe.COM (Richard Hellen) To: Fznidarsic@aol.com (Frank Znidarsic (home)) Date: 96-06-30 09:46:43 EDT Frank How are Motorola's shares doing? They are not quoted in the UK papers. I hope to talk to the researcher at Bath University who is working on hydrogen production using the hot water vent bug enzyme. His funded work includes "Glucose dehydrogenase from thermophilic Archaea" - or ancient bug (Archea) production of hydrogen from glucose. Bath is just down the road from my place. If anything significant arises, I will let you know. Richard From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 16:22:13 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA08401; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 16:17:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 16:17:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >> Michael Mandeville wrote: > >you have quite a supply of food for thought. is it the ionic air up your way? Must be the HAARP project - generating a lot of hot air. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 16:48:54 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA11837; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 16:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 16:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960630233039_100433.1541_BHG31-1@CompuServe.COM> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Silly idea. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Scott, > OK, Chris: The sea-wave device is simply a float attached to the > input arm of generator. The arm is equipped with a ratchet so it > will freewheel in one direction. Waves come along and raise the > float which turns the generator. Hey? The Casimir effect isn't - er - 'transverse', it's longitudinal. What use is anything which moves transverse to the waves? OK, a ratchet. Except I don't think that any possible device could be small enough to display anything but a constant force - unless it was of atomic size and maybe not then. The antenna idea looks nice, and I would have though that electrons are certainly small enough to play Casimir games with. Where does the Correa device get its extra electrons from? (not my q, Chris Morriss asks that interesting question). But if you are right and the Casimir effect is displayed 'transversely' then I have been seriously confused. Wholly off topic, but you know all the tabloid flak they (with a lot of justification) hand out to the Brit Royals? I saw one comment which makes up for a lot (in my humble opinion). Apparently the present incumbent showed fair talent as a mechanic in the army towards the end of WWII. So much so that when recently there was a crisis with a busted lavatory, she was the only one around who could fix it. I like that in a woman - especially since I hate plumbing. Chris (She can come and fix mine any time) From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 17:16:41 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA14889; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 17:11:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 17:11:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Silly idea. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >At 10:08 6/30/96 -0700, Chris wrote: > >>I wonder if there is a trick one could dream up which would give >>*demonstrable* net energy from the waves in the sea - in the sense of >>using some derivation of the boat idea - which would be translatable >>into zpf terms. > >OK, Chris: The sea-wave device is simply a float attached to the input arm >of generator. The arm is equipped with a ratchet so it will freewheel in >one direction. Waves come along and raise the float which turns the >generator. When the wave passes, the arm ratchets allowing the float to >drop without turning the generator backwards. > >The key element here, as far as tapping the sea wave energy goes, is the >ratchet. If we had a similar device that could allow us to ratchet Casimir >plates back apart again without fighting the zpf, we'd be golden! >Unfortunately, I can't think of any way to turn off the Casimir force on an >object. How about tunneling? Suppose after the plates stuck together you started chopping them up, first into the thin "bound piece of foil, then into smaller and smaller squares. Eventually you would get down to individual atoms. Does the Casimir force resist the purpendicular sheering of the bound plane? If the Casimir force is generated when the planes of electron shells come together between two metal plates, maybe it is possible to generate two near planar collding surfaces which would post-collision break apart into individual "stuck together" atoms, which could then be separated via ionization, or maybe spontaneously via collisions and/or tunneling. A double cyclotron gives the gist. The four D's would be combined into one vacuum chamber with two ionization points the D's for the two different ionization points would be separated by a gap where no further ion cceleration takes place. The two wavefronts would accelerate spiraling outwardly clockwise until meeting head on. Then it's just smack, smack, smack. A little far-fetched, but maybe it'll generate another idea. > >An electrical ratchet: If one could produce a diode with virtually zero >forward drop, wouldn't zpf induced fluctuations in the electrons cause them >to flow in the "forward" direction (damn you, Ben Franklin) in a circuit >containing such a diode? Along those lines, it seems like it might be possible to manufacture a chip with very thin very small piezoelectric crystals on the surface connected to integrated fullwave diode bridges. The output of all the tiny bridges would be collected together. Then place the chip into a gas of the heavyest possible gas, maybe radon? Suppose the chip is placed in a compartment adjacent to which is another compartment at the same temperature. The chip drives a joule heater in the second compartment. At *some* operating temperature the chip should convert kinetic energy from one compartment to electrical energy, which is then transferred to the kinetic energhy of the second compartment. The trick is making the chip so it will not be destroyed by the operating temperature and the piezoelectric crystals small enough in area compared to the size of the impinging gas molecule, so that the voltage generated by the piezo-compression is sufficient to make it through the diode bridge. The peizo must have a small surface area to prevent the Q being spread over a wide plate, thus reducing the voltage. *Some* kinetic energy (operating temperature) should be sufficient to make this happen. The keys are heavy molecule still in gaseous form, high operating temperature, small piezo area, integrated fulwave bridge, and low forward bias. There goes thermodynamics if this works! I think this one might. Practical, I am not sure, but can you imagine the cost of all those rewrites! > >Another approach: I keep thinking there should be some kind of antenna >structure that will absorb high energy photons from the zpf, convert some of >their energy into usable form, and the radiate "waste energy" as low energy >photons. In other words a photon engine that works a bit like a heat engine. > > >Scott Little EarthTech Int'l, Inc. >Suite 300 4030 Braker Lane West Austin TX 78759 USA >512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little@eden.com (email) Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 17:33:35 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA17631; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 17:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 17:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "MHUGO@EPRI" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: KS beads X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 06/30/96 07:48 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: KS beads Scott, I know we are trying to be really helpful here. But are these beads from Kirk S. then? I would like to know that! MDH From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 17:34:06 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA17734; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 17:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 17:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199607010024.RAA17043@nz1.netzone.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Joe Champion To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: New Transmutation Site Operational in Boston X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: For almost four months a transmutation site has been under development in Boston. This is somewhat of a sleeper for the system operator is a member of this forum. For reference his name is Jim Uban . Technical procedures used are not being disclosed However, yesterday Jim was able to seperate several grams of newly produced metal in a quasi-pure state. I called in a favor from Mithchell Swartz who offered a long time ago to test product from my system. As always, I wait for results. Whatever the case, if we do not have precious metals it is confirmed that we produced greater than 50 grams of new metals from 1.0 kg of 99.95% pure Pb. At this time, systems are in operation in MA, CA, NV and AZ. A new system is under construction in TX. The novelity being, each system employs a different form of excitation. For those who feel that I may be collecting, in lieu of transmuting, please stay quiet and do not tell ASARCO for if its collection that means thier 99.95% lead is rich in precious metals and they may start charging me more. The operators of the NV and TX system can speak for themselves in this forum as soon as Bill adds them to the list. _______________________________ Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 18:13:21 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA22534; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 18:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 18:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <960630210520_228348296@emout07.mail.aol.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: RMCarrell@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Silly idea. X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-06-30 13:09:09 EDT, Chris Tinsley wrote: << I wonder if there is a trick one could dream up which would give *demonstrable* net energy from the waves in the sea - in the sense of using some derivation of the boat idea - which would be translatable into zpf terms. That would be - er - quite a nice little trick. Prizes are available for doing this experimentally. >> I don't remember the details, but there have been a number of proposals for extracting energy from the sea, ranging from locks at the Bay of Fundy to systems of floats linked together to extract energy from waves. There have also been proposals for trubines to extract energy from the temperature difference between the surface of the the ocean and a few tens of feet down. Chris's silly ideas, as usual, aren't so silly. Mike Carrell From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 19:09:39 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA28904; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 19:03:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 19:03:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: the remining fields X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Frank: I think a successful ball lightning model must certainly involve the use of angular momentum. Electrons have momentum, but it is difficult for me to believe the vast majority of natural sightings do not involve balls with atoms. Every natural occurance involves atmosphere, high humidity, rain, and very often, metal vaporization. There is very good evidence that there may be at minimum three types of ball structure and maybe more. There is the structure obesrved and created artifically in the vicinity of or using HF techniques. There is the very small structure created by pulse or DC in RC tuned tracks, observed by Ken Shoulders. There are the numerous accounts of those large structures created by nature. A very good acount of all this is, except Shoulder's work, is given in the book "Ball Lightning and Bead Lightning, Extreme Forms of Atmospheric Electricity", by James Dale Barry, Plenum Press, 1980. Barry goes into analysis of the physics (and veracity) of the better available observations, considering mass density, energy density, energy interpretations, temperature, radiation, magnetic field, and other physical parameters, which he attempts to bracket from the observations. Some of the observations quoted provided good oppotunities to quantify energy. A very interresting example is the case reported my Morris in 1937 (p. 47), where a red ball about 10 cm. in dia. landed in a barrel cantaining 18 l. of water, heat some to boiling, and left the barrel at about 60 C. This gives about 3 MJ of energy, and and energy density of about 5700 J/cc. How convenient for nature to perform static calorimetry for us! And I though it was so difficult. Reminds me of the nuclear reactor nature made in France, but I digress. On page 66 is a table of abll diameter, energy, and energy densities for the cases analyzed. These include the balls generated by Powell and Finkelstein* (a much referenced name on s.p.f!). Here you go,in floating notation for economy: NATURAL: J, CM, J/cc 4E9 30 2.8E5 3E6 10 7.3E3 9E5 10 1.7E3 3E3 2 8.7E2 1E5 15 85 3E6 60 26 1.9E4 12 21 530 14 0.4 EXPERIMENTS: J, CM, J/cc 4E4 15 23 1E3 5 15 0.25 4 7E-3 10 15 5E-3 * 0.07 4 2E-3 There have been various observations of internal structure in natural sigtings. I think all this adds up to the likelyhood that there must be a pretty good variety of viable structures. I have a pet theory regarding one possible type of natural ball lightning. I think it involves a rotating but conducting torus of plasma that precesses so fast that it looks like a ball. This belief is founded on the nature of bead lightning, and some observations of it. Many photos of bead lightning show multiple beads or knots in the stroke at evenly spaced intervals. One possible explanation is that atmospheric sheer is distorting the stroke at regualr intervals. I prefer to think there is some kind of longitudinal wave in the stroke, and the knots are occuring at nodal points. Regardless the cause, it think the stroke is warping into a loop which then closes (twists) on itself, shorting istself out, and creating a collapsing conducting ring of rotating plasma. There have been actual observations of a bead lightning stroke spitting out ball lightning where the beads had previously been. I think the angular momentum is both around the short and the long axis of the torus. The short axis momentum begins when the stroke ionizes the air and builds up a circular magnetic field. Some of the electrons and ions travelling through the circular magnetic field are then diverted follow a spiral path around it. This causes and additional longitudinal secondary field to build. When the secondary field collapses in the presence of the ions it generates a vortex of ions around the center of the stroke. In addition, the collapsing field generates longitudinal motion. When the precesssing knot connects to itself and "shorts out" the angular momentum continues. A torus is thus created which resists collapse due to the increase in angular velocity brought about by collapse. It also fights expansion due to the vacuum at the small core, and the large current circulating about the small diameter, electrons one direction, ions the other. This circulating current generates magnet field lines which follow parallel to the inner (small radius) axis around the torus, and, (the propensity to collapse of) which tend to compress the torus on it's major diameter. All that is needed for balance is a much larger current on the small axis than around the large. This torus can exert some inward pressure (resist outward) pressure on anything within its major diameter. In addition it creates a magnetic field around itself which will cause a central current to follow it. The pencil thin vertical core you refer to should expand to follow the field lines right around this torus, kind of like HARRP or the solar wind around the earth. I have attempted artificially to produce such a torus, but do not have the capacity ;) :) to pull it off. I have several potential methods in mind for doing this which I hope to test and refine using high voltage DC arcs, and the appropriate warping fields, to experimentaly model and videotape prior to a high power attempt. Maybe you would be willing to hook up a gadget to your capacitor bank if I shipped it to you? It will be a little while, though. I am waiting on my cash flow to catch up with my wish list for the calorimeter and a couple of other projects. That's your BL model and I'll raise you a small vortex model test. 8^) Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 21:23:55 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA16682; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 21:18:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 21:18:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D7517D.76D7@interlaced.net> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Horace on ball-lightning X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO X-Status: Good stuff, Horace! This will take some thought. The capacitor jolt sounds doable if we could match your input to my output! Frank Stenger From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 21:35:38 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA17822; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 21:26:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 21:26:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <31D7540C.4C2F@rt66.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Richard Thomas Murray To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [Fwd: 1913 paper on X3 by JJ Thomson] X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: Message-ID: <31D224DD.5AED@rt66.com> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:06:21 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: 547, Franklin, Avenue, Santa, Fe, NM, 87501, USA Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b4 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: 1913 paper on X3 by JJ Thomson Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I looked up this letter by J.J. Thomson at LANL in Nature, February 13, 1913, pages 645-7, "On the Appearance of Helium and Neon in Vacuum Tubes". I mailed a copy to Thomas Claytor via LANL mail, since the experiment is similar to his production of tritium via glow discharge at 2,000 volts in deuterium gas on palladium, a regime designed to keep temperatures low enough to prevent gross dehydriding of the wire and plate electrodes. Incidentally, we talked on the phone, and he reports no gamma anomalies from his electrodes, and plans soon to test for elements in the ppb range (not isotopes) with the Pixie apparatus at LANL. Returning to 1913, it may be, as Dieter Britz suggested on 6-24, that, since .015% of H is D, and both are absorbed on and in metals, that J.J. Thomson was finding HD ions in his "method of positive rays" mass spectograph, producing photographic spectrums. Thomson describes rather generally a low gas pressure bulb with aluminum electrodes and powered by an induction coil [10 to 20 KV, I guess?]. "There seems to be no obvious connection between the appearance of either of these lines [mass 3, ? = X3, and mass 20, neon?] and the nature of the gas used to fill the tube; the 3 line has appeared when the bulb was filled with hydrogen, with nitrogen, with air, with helium, or with mixtures of hydrogen and oxygen in various proportions; the 20 line when the bulb contained hydrogen, nitrogen, air, hydrochloric acid gas, mixtures of hydrogen and oxygen...Indeed, in the great majority of cases in which I have observed the appearance of traces of helium and neon these gases have been accompanied by larger quantities of X3...along with neon of atomic weight 20 there is a line in these circumstances corresponding to an atomic weight 10 or thereabouts." Thomson goes on to summarize experiments with 220 volt arc discharges, and other experiments on focusing a powerful electron beam for "five or six hours at a time" on metals, producing a "bright red heat" in "a patch only about 2 mm. in diameter". "The most abundant supply of X3 came from platinum..." Claytor's success suggests that Thomson might have produced tritium: "We...observed a small rate [of tritium production] with nickel-hydrogen (0.0012 nCi/h). Both of these samples deserve further investigation." It would be easy to replicate Thomson's three main experiments, and determine the sources of any X3, helium, mass 10, and neon found. From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 23:12:57 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA02185; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 23:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 23:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <01I6JIJ39GNM91WG24@delphi.com> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: SWC's X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: >Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:54:26 >From: Francis J. Stenger >The Faraday disk dynamo works just fine if an electromagnet is used >rather than a permanent magnet. Seems like you might have missed the point. A *coil* of wire *would* replace the permanent magnet just fine, that was my point, they are the same! Try replacing the disk with copper wire wrapped in a coil. Tell me what happens? To identify the field I speak of, take a piece of cardboard and a three foot piece of copper wire and a battery and iron filings. Run the wire thru the center of the cardboard put some iron filings on the cardboard close to the wire. Hook the ends of the wire to the battery (quickly, the wire will heat up) tap the cardboard to align the fillings, observe the circular field. Put a compass next to the wire. No matter where you place it. it will point in the direction of the circular field, determined by the direction of the current flow. The field of a straight wire conductor is utilized in squirrel cage motors. Just read up on these motors or a good book on Electromagnetics and you won't have to bother Mr. Maxwell. Most Physics books also will refer to SWC's, and how their circular field forms the field of a permanet magnet when wrapped into a coil. I have no preference of permanent over electromagnets except when I need the field of a SWC for a motor design, as many have utilized before me. Joe Flynn From vortex-l@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 23:33:37 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA04601; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 23:28:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 23:28:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Neutron detection cheaply? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: You might not like my saying this, but the expert in low level neutron detection is Steve Jones, and if there is a chaep way, he'd know about it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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@eskimo.com Sun Jun 30 23:59:15 1996 Received: from mail (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07988; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 23:55:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 23:55:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Originator: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sender: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: bulk From: Dieter Britz To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Transmutations X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 29 Jun 1996, Jean_de_Lagarde wrote: > Talking of transmutations, has anybody heard about a recent experiment with > the ARATA double cathode powder cell, which, after delivery of several kw x > hours of energy over a long period, showed a substantial helium production > (more than accounted for the enrgy delivered) and several interesting metal > transmutations in the elestrodes ? Who could confirm and give more details I have the latest paper by Arata & Zhang, and will add it to the biblio soon. It is in Koon Gakkaishi 21(6) (1995) 303, in Japanese but you can follow it. I am not sure I believe the results, and the pair never do give many details or define their peculiar symbols; but this paper will make many people happy. They used repeated mass spec scans over a narrow mass range around 4 and, for those systems where they expected "cold fusion" they do have a clear 4He peak appearing next to the D2 peak, other experimental conditions being consistent with this being indeed 4He and not due to contamination. Despite one's doubts, this has to go into my little list of "quality positives". ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 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 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------